Volume 29, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1461-0213
  • E-ISSN: 1570-5595
  • oa Academically elite students in Singapore

    A collective moral stance toward aspirations and trajectories

  • Author(s): Luke Lu 1
  • View Affiliations Hide Affiliations
    1 Centre for Language, Discourse and Communication, King’s College London
  • Source: AILA Review, Volume 29, Issue 1, Jan 2016, p. 141 - 172
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.29.06lu
    • Version of Record published : 30 Jan 2017


This paper draws on a Linguistic Ethnography ( Blommaert & Rampton 2011 ) of a group of academically elite students in Singapore. The group comprises locals born in Singapore, as well as immigrants from China and Vietnam. My informants all attended a top-ranked secondary school in Singapore. I present data from interviews and a focus group discussion with them about their aspirations and educational pathways. These academically elite students describe a conventional aspiration amongst their peers involving transnational mobility and attending top-ranked universities in the US and UK. My informants discursively construct this aspiration as preferred, with a sense that they are expected to conform to such a trajectory. I argue that their consistent orientation toward the ideal trajectory and production of discourse about it denotes a collective moral stance ( Ochs & Capps 2002 ), and hence a disposition embedded in a social field ( Hanks 2005 ). In response to Archer’s (2012) theorisations that dominant modes of reflexivity have changed, my informants’ relatively stable orientations and ways of acting demonstrate how Bourdieu’s notion of habitus continues to be relevant in late-modernity. In practical terms, this study also shows a clear link between elite schools, and the aspirations and resultant trajectories of individuals. This has direct implications for policy-makers in Singapore where the Ministry of Education has been attempting to curb elitism in the education system.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Archer, M.
    2010 Routine, reflexivity and realism. Sociological Theory28 (3): 272–303. doi: 10.1111/j.1467‑9558.2010.01375.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9558.2010.01375.x [Google Scholar]
  2. 2012The Reflexive Imperative in Late Modernity. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139108058
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139108058 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bauman, Z.
    2000Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Baynham, M.
    2011 Stance, positioning and alignment in narratives of professional experience. Language in Society40: 63–74. doi: 10.1017/S0047404510000898
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404510000898 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2013 Narrative analysis. InThe Bloomsbury Companion to Discourse Analysis, K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (eds), 69–84. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Beck, U.
    1992The Risk Society. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Benton-Short, L. & Price, M.
    2008 Introduction. InMigrants to the Metropolis: The Rise of Immigrant Gateway Cities, M. Price & L. Benton-Short (eds), 1–22. Syracuse NY: Syracuse University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Blommaert, J. & Rampton, B.
    2011 Language and superdiversity. Diversities13 (2): 1–82.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bourdieu, P.
    1986 The forms of capital. InHandbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, J. Richardson (ed.), 241–58. New York, NY: Greenwood Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 1991Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Chia, S. & Toh, K.
    2012 Scrapping PSLE not the solution: Lawrence Wong”. The Straits Times, September12.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dawson, M.
    2010 Bauman, Beck, Giddens and our understanding of politics in late modernity. Journal of Power3 (2): 189–207. doi: 10.1080/17540291.2010.493698
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17540291.2010.493698 [Google Scholar]
  13. Du Bois, J.
    2007 The stance triangle. InStancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 164], R. Englebretson (ed.), 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  14. Gee, J.
    2005An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. New York NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Giddens, A.
    1990The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. 1991Modernity and Self-Identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gumperz, J.
    1982Discourse strategies. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511611834
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611834 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gumperz, J. & Hymes, D.
    1972Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Gumperz, J. & Levinson, S.
    1996Rethinking Linguistic Relativity. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hanks, W.
    1995Language and Communicative Practices. New York NY: Westview Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2005 Pierre Bourdieu and the practices of language. Annual Review of Anthropology34: 67–83. doi: 10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143907
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.33.070203.143907 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jaffe, A.
    1999Ideologies in Action: Language Politics on Corsica. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110801064
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110801064 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2009 Introduction: The sociolinguistics of stance. InStance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, A. Jaffe (ed.), 3–28. Oxford: OUP. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331646.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331646.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kiesling, S.
    2011 Stance in context: Affect, alignment and investment in the analysis of stancetaking. Presented atthe iMean conference, 15 April 2011. The University of the West of England, Bristol, UK. www.academia.edu/1037087/Stance_in_context_Affect_alignment_and_investment_in_the_analysis_of_stancetaking
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Koh, A.
    2010Tactical Globalisation: Learning from the Singapore Experiment. Bern: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0050‑1
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0050-1 [Google Scholar]
  26. Labov, W.
    1997 Some further steps in narrative analysis. Journal of Narrative and Life History7 (1–4): 395–415. doi: 10.1075/jnlh.7.49som
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jnlh.7.49som [Google Scholar]
  27. Lim, L.
    2012 Meritocracy, elitism and egalitarianism: A preliminary and provisional assessment of Singapore’s primary education review. Asia Pacific Journal of Education33 (1): 1–14. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2012.711294
    https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2012.711294 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lu, L.
    Forthcoming. ‘Designer immigrant students’ in Singapore: Challenges for linguistic human rights in a globalizing world. InEngaging Superdiversity, K. Arnaut , M. Karrebæk & M. Spotti eds Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education 2012 MOE removes Secondary School Banding and revamps school awards. Press release. https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/press-releases/moe-removes-secondary-school-banding-and-revamps-school-awards
  30. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education 2013 Direct School Admission (DSA) – Method and review processes. Parliamentary reply. www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2013/09/direct-school-admission-dsa-methods-and-review-processes.php
  31. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education 2015 Choosing your secondary schools for admission to Secondary One in 2016. Singapore: Ministry of Education. https://www.moe.gov.sg/admissions/secondary-one-posting-exercise/information-booklet
  32. Ministry of Education
    Ministry of Education 2016 Changes to PSLE scoring and Secondary One posting. Press release. www.moe.gov.sg/news/press-releases/changes-to-psle-scoring-and-secondary-one-posting
  33. Ministry of Education website a
    Ministry of Education website a. Secondary Education. www.moe.gov.sg/education/secondary/
  34. Ministry of Education website b
    Ministry of Education website b. Integrated programme. www.moe.gov.sg/education/secondary/other/integrated-programme/
  35. Ministry of Education website c
    Ministry of Education website c. Every school a good school. https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/education-system/every-school-a-good-school
  36. National University of Singapore website
    National University of Singapore website. Students and graduate statistics. www.nus.edu.sg/registrar/statistics.html
  37. Ng, J. Y.
    2013 August19. PSLE scores to be scrapped, students to be given grades. www.todayonline.com/singapore/psle-scores-be-scrapped-students-be-given-grades
  38. Ng, P. T.
    2013 The global war for talent: Responses and challenges in the Singapore Higher Education system. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management35 (3): 280–292. doi: 10.1080/1360080X.2013.786859
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2013.786859 [Google Scholar]
  39. Noble, G.
    2013 ‘It is home but it is not home’: Habitus, field and the migrant. Journal of Sociology49 (2–3): 341–356. doi: 10.1177/1440783313481532
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1440783313481532 [Google Scholar]
  40. Ochs, E. & Capps, L.
    2002Living Narrative: Creating Lives in Everyday Storytelling. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Ong, A.
    2006Neoliberalism as Exception: Mutations in Citizenship and Sovereignty. Durham NC: Duke University Press. doi: 10.1215/9780822387879
    https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822387879 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2007 Neoliberalism as a mobile technology. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers32 (1): 3–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1475‑5661.2007.00234.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2007.00234.x [Google Scholar]
  43. Pérez-Milans, M.
    2013Urban Schools and English Language Education in Late Modern China: A Critical Sociolinguistic Ethnography [Routledge Critical Studies in Multilingualism]. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. QS website
    QS website. Top Universities. www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings
  45. Rampton, B.
    2006Language in Late-Modernity: Interaction in an Urban School. Cambridge: CUP. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511486722
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486722 [Google Scholar]
  46. Singapore Management University website
    Singapore Management University website. Student Statistics. www.smu.edu.sg/about/university-information/student-statistics/student-statistics
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Stroud, C. & Wee L.
    2010 Language policy and planning in Singaporean late modernity. InEnglish in Singapore: Modernity and Management, L. Lim , A. Pakir & L. Wee (eds), 181–204. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. doi: 10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.5790/hongkong/9789888028436.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  48. Swartz, D.
    2002 The sociology of habit: The perspective of Pierre Bourdieu. Occupation, Participation and Health22 (1): 61S–69S. doi: 10.1177/15394492020220S108
    https://doi.org/10.1177/15394492020220S108 [Google Scholar]
  49. Tan, C.
    2008 Tensions in an ability-driven education. In Thinking Dchools, Learning Nation, J. Tan & P. T. Ng (eds), 7–18. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
  50. Tan, J.
    2008 Whither National Education?InThinking Schools, Learning Nation, J. Tan & P. T. Ng (eds), 72–86. Singapore: Prentice Hall.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Tan, K. P.
    2008 Meritocracy and elitism in a global city: Ideological shifts in Singapore. International Political Science Review29 (1): 7–27. doi: 10.1177/0192512107083445
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512107083445 [Google Scholar]
  52. Thompson, G. & Hunston, S.
    2005 Evaluation: An introduction. InEvaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds), 1–26. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Thompson, J.
    1991 Editor’s introduction. InLanguage and Symbolic Power, P. Bourdieu , 1–31. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Vertovec, S.
    2001 Transnational social formations: Towards conceptual cross-fertilization. Working Paper 01–16. Transnational Communities Programme, Oxford University. www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20papers/Vertovec2.pdf
  55. Warde, A.
    2004 Practice and field: Revising Bourdieusian concepts. Discussion Paper no 65. Centre for Research on Innovation and Competition, University of Manchester. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238096928_Practice_and_Field_Revising_Bourdieusian_Concepts
  56. Yang, P.
    2016a ‘Eliteness’ in Chinese Schooling: Towards an ethnographic approach. InElite Education: International Perspectives, C. Maxwell & P. Aggleton (eds), 135–47. New York NY: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 2016bInternational Mobility and Educational Desire: Chinese Foreign Talent Students in Singapore. New York NY: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑59143‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59143-2 [Google Scholar]
  58. Yeoh, B.
    2007 Singapore: Hungry for foreign workers at all skill levels. Migration Information Source. www.migrationinformation.org/article/singapore-hungry-foreign-workers-all-skill-levels
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Yeoh, B. & Yap, N.
    2008 ‘Gateway Singapore’: Immigration policies, differential (non)incorporation and identity politics. InMigrants to the Metropolis: The Rise of Immigrant Gateway Cities, M. Price & L. Benton-Short (eds), 177–202. Syracuse NY: Syracuse University Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): aspirations; elite students; habitus; stance; trajectories
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error