Search

Elder statesman Lee Kuan Yew maintains that a society ruled by elites is necessary to provide for high growth and social progress. Elitism conjures a class divide; an ongoing concern is a disconnection between elite and the citizens it has to represent. In the tradition of political socialization, and using the case study approach, this article reports on how a group of 22 elite students understand civic participation, and are prepared to undertake their role as citizens. Findings reveal that students are prepared to undertake their responsibility as future leaders to serve the community. Their discourse however is system-confirming and maintains class interests. With globalization and widening income inequalities, this is an inadequate response to the ideals of “justice and equality” laid out in the national pledge. A more just and equal society requires a participation characterized by greater awareness of the surrounding, empathy, and a sense of social justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the challenges of teaching citizenship is that it can be understood in a variety of quite different ways. Singapore has a centralized education system, where political leaders wield direct influence over citizenship education. Social studies is a major vehicle for citizenship education, with a focus on nation-building. The official discourse on citizenship, while clearly articulated, has still to be implemented by teachers. In a context made complex by globalizing forces, how do teachers understand citizenship? This article reports on social studies teachers' understandings of citizenship in Singapore schools. The study utilized a qualitative case study approach of eight teachers to provide depth and insight into their understanding. Findings revealed four themes, namely identity, participation, awareness of the nation's past, and thinking citizenry, located within the nationalistic, socially concerned and person oriented stances. This reflected a citizenship education landscape in Singapore that, despite tight controls, was not rigid, prescriptive or homogenous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]