Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 20:3 (2021) ► pp.383–406

How is structural inequality made fair in a meritocratic education system?

Equalising opportunities through metaphorical transfers within and across sub micro-meso-macro movements in policy discourse

ORCID logo | University of Queensland Australia
This paper examines how, within the context of meritocracy, a highly differentiated education system can coexist with assertions of equal opportunity. Drawing on the example of Singapore’s education policy texts from 1991 to 2012, the paper exemplifies and expands the analytical potential of a micro-meso-macro movements framework with which to critically engage the discursive role of neo-liberal metaphors in ameliorating the tension of providing ‘equal opportunities’ between students who will undertake the university pathway and those who will have to undergo vocational training. Based on the interconnected discourses of opportunity-choice and opportunity-skills through a more flexible system, the analytical development of these two simultaneous sub micro-meso-macro movements demonstrates how the playing field is levelled, and competition for society’s occupations and academic progression is fair even for Vocational and Industrial Training Board Act (VITB) trainees.
Keywords: critical discourse analysis, valuation, political economy, education policy, inequality, metaphor, meritocracy, Foucault, Nietzsche, data-led methodology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Micro-meso-macro movements
    • 2.1Mining the esoteric depths of metaphors in policy discourse
  • 3.Examining forms of e/valuations through data-driven analysis
  • 4.Flexible system for VITB trainees
    • 4.1Discourses of opportunity and choice
      • 4.1.1Sub micro-meso movement: Opportunity and choice for VITB students in relation to manpower demands
      • 4.1.2Sub meso-macro movement: Transitioning towards creating opportunities for junior college/upper secondary/university students
        • Choice and opportunities through MOE policy texts 1991b–2006
        • Diversity and opportunities through MOE policy texts 2002–2012
    • 4.2Discourses of opportunity and skills
      • 4.2.1Sub micro-meso movement: Skills for better opportunities
      • 4.2.2Sub meso-macro movement: Expansion of skills for opportunities and developing the ability of the brightest children
        • Skills and opportunities through MOE policy texts 1991b and 2002
  • 5.Summary
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 December 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.20012.tal
References
Chomsky, Noam
2013 On anarchism. New York: New Press.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1992 Discourse and social change. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.Google Scholar
2001 Language and power. 2nd ed. Language in Social Life Series. Harlow, Eng.: Longman.Google Scholar
2006 “Metapragmatics, hidden assumptions, and moral economy”. Accessed Oct 15, 2019. [URL]
2010 Critical discourse analysis: Critical study of language. 2nd ed. Longman Applied Linguistics. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman, Phil Graham, Jay Lemke, and Ruth Wodak
2004 “Introduction”. Critical Discourse Studies, 1(1): 1–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Foucault, Michel
1972 The archaeology of knowledge; and the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
1980 Power/knowledge: Selected Interviews and other writings, 1972–1977. Brighton, Sussex: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
1982 “The subject and power.” Critical Inquiry 8(4): 777–95. [URL]
1987 “The ethic of care for the self as a practice of freedom: An interview with Michel Foucault on January 20, 1984.” Interview by Raúl Fornet-betancourt, Helmut Becker, Alfredo Gomez-müller, and J. D. Gauthier. Philosophy & Social Criticism 12 (2–3): 112–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goh, Chor Boon and Saravanan Gopinathan
2008 “The development of education in Singapore since 1965”. In Toward a Better Future: Education and Training for Economic Development in Singapore since 1965, edited by Lee Sing Kong, Goh Chor Boon, Birger Fredriksen, and Tan Jee Peng. 12–38. Herndon: World Bank Publications 2008 Accessed Oct 15, 2019. [URL]
Graham, Philip
1999 “Critical systems theory.” Communication Research 26(4): 482–507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001 “Space: Irrealis objects in technology policy and their role in a new political economy.” Discourse & Society 12(6): 761–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Phil
2002 “Predication and propagation: A method for analyzing evaluative meanings in technology policy.” Text & Talk 22(2): 227–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005a “Analysing policy values in a knowledge economy”. In Handbook on the Knowledge Economy, edited by David Rooney, Greg Hearn, and Abraham Ninan, 118–28. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005b Hypercapitalism: New media, Language and Social Perceptions of Value. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
2007 “Critical discourse analysis and evaluative meaning: Interdisciplinary as a critical turn”. In Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity, edited by Ruth Wodak and Gilbert Weiss, 110–29. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Graham, Phil, and Allan Luke
2011 “Critical discourse analysis and political economy of communication: Understanding the new corporate order.” Cultural Politics 7(1): 103–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lemke, Jay L.
1995 Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics. Critical Perspectives on Literacy and Education. London; Bristol, Pa.: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
1998 “Resources for attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientations in text semantics”. Functions of Language 5(1): 33–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Education
1991a Upgrading vocational training/ Vocational and Industrial Training Board. Singapore: The Board.Google Scholar
1991b Improving Primary School Education: Report of the Review Committee. Singapore: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
2002 “Report of the Junior College/Upper Secondary Education Review Committee”. Accessed Jan 8, 2015. [URL]
2006 “Report of the Polytechnic-School Review Committee”. Accessed Jan 8, 2015. [URL]
2008 “Report of the Committee on the Expansion of the University Sector. Greater Choice, More Room to Excel: Final Report”. Accessed Jan 8, 2015. [URL]
2012 “Report of the Committee on University Education Pathways Beyond 2015 (CUEP). Greater Diversity, More Opportunities: Final Report”. Accessed Jan 8, 2015. [URL]
2018 “Secondary School Education. Shaping the Next Phase of Your Child’s Learning Journey”. Accessed Oct 11, 2020. [URL]
Mulderrig, Jane
2003 “Consuming education: A critical discourse analysis of social actors in New Labour’s education policy”. Journal of Critical Education Policy Studies 1(1): 96–123. [URL]
2007 “Textual strategies of representation and legitimation in New Labour policy discourse”. In Renewing Dialogues in Marxism and Education: Openings, 1st ed., edited by Anthony Green, Glenn Rikowski, and H. Raduntz. 135–50. Marxism and Education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US: Imprint: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008 “Using keywords analysis in CDA: Evolving discourses of the knowledge economy in education”. In Education and the Knowledge-based Economy in Europe. Vol. 241, edited by Bob Jessop, Norman Fairclough, and Ruth Wodak. 149–70. Educational Futures. Rotterdam [u.a.]: Sense Publ.. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 The Language of Education Policy: From Thatcher to Blair. Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag.Google Scholar
2012 “The hegemony of inclusion: A corpus-based critical discourse analysis of deixis in education policy.” Discourse & Society 23(6): 701–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicoll, Katherine
1998 ““Fixing” the “facts”: Flexible learning as policy invention.” Higher Education Research & Development 17(3): 291–304. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 Flexibility and Lifelong Learning: Policy, Discourse and Politics. London; New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nietzsche, Friedrich
1967 The Will to Power. Translated by Walter Kaufmann and Reginald John Hollingdale. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Sen, Amartya
1992 Inequality Reexamined. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; Oxford England: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Talib, Nadira
2019 “Creating the conditions for human division and structural inequality. The foundation of Singapore’s education policy.” Journal of Language and Politics 18(5): 739–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2020 Is it time to let meritocracy go? Examining the case of Singapore. Abingdon, Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talib, Nadira, and Richard Fitzgerald
2015 “Inequality as meritocracy. The use of the metaphor of diversity and the value of inequality within Singapore’s meritocratic education system.” Critical Discourse Studies 12(4): 445–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Micro-meso-macro movements; a multi-level critical discourse analysis framework to examine metaphors and the value of truth in policy texts.” Critical Discourse Studies 13(5): 531–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018 “Putting philosophy back to work in critical discourse analysis.” Critical Discourse Studies 15(2): 123–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, Aline
2000 Keynote address by Dr Aline Wong, Senior Minister of State for Education, Ministry of Education, Singapore, at the International Baccalaureate (IB) Asia-Pacific 16th annual regional conference on curriculum, assessment and cultural equity to be held on Friday, 24 November 2000, at 9.15 am at the Raffles City Convention Centre: Education in a multicultural setting—The Singapore experience. Accessed Jan 15, 2019. [URL]