公平性、效率性、保障性与自由性：探讨新加坡双语政策的政治悖论 = Equity, efficiency, security and freedom : examining the political paradox of the bilingual policy in Singapore

• Main Author: 杜宏明 Toh, Hong Ming
• Other Authors: Yow Cheun Hoe
• Format: Final Year Project
• Language: Chinese
• Published: 2012
• Subjects: DRNTU::Humanities
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10356/48183
• Institution: Nanyang Technological University

双语政策乃新加坡社会和经济发展的基础。然而，经过多年来的发展，双语政策现在处于“英语为主，母语为辅”的失衡状态。这是因为双语并重的方案并不符合大众的能力，因此政府提倡 “英语为第一语言，母语为第二语言”的方案以解决双语并重的繁重负担。现在中学、初级学院和理工学院的升学条件并不强制母语作为计分的科目，面对小六会考仍保持双语并重的制度，前任教育部长黄永红在2010 年宣布教育部考虑减少小六会考母语比重的消息。这项改革方案遭到母语群体的极力反对，因为他们坚信母语仍在新加坡社会里扮演着一个举足轻重的角色。为了分析这个现象，本文以公平性、效率性、保障性和自由性的理论探讨政府与人民之间在这起事件上的立场分歧。这项改革是否有以这四个理论概念为基点，或者当中存在着悖论的性质？这就是本文所要回答的问题。The Bilingual policy is Singapore’s corner stone for social and economic development. However, the policy has developed into one that places the English language into a position of priority and precedence over the Chinese language over the years. This aspect can be justified from the view that the Education Ministry took into consideration the social reality and incapability of the masses on a dual language learning workload. This form of bilingual unevenness eventually led to the dominance of the English language and Chinese being de-emphasized as an examination subject. This spurred then-Education Minister Ng Eng Hen to accord this form of bilingualism to the primary schools（Mother tongue is not required for calculation of results for junior college entry, polytechnic entry and university entry but constitutes 25% for the Primary School Leaving Examination）by announcing that the Ministry of Education was considering whether to lower the weighting of Chinese in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). This resulted in an uproar from the Chinese community as they believe that the Chinese Language remains an integral component to Singapore’s society. This paper serves to address this issue from a policy standpoint; the concepts of Equity, Efficiency, Security and Freedom will be used to examine the difference in perspectives of the Government and the masses and whether elements of political paradox exist in the government’s recent review of the policy.