Researcher ORCID Identifier

https://orcid.org/0009-0006-6861-1555

Graduation Year

2025

Document Type

Open Access Senior Thesis

Degree Name

Bachelor of Arts

Department

Humanities: Interdisciplinary Studies in Culture

Reader 1

Andrew Aisenberg

Reader 2

David Kawalko Roselli

Terms of Use & License Information

Terms of Use for work posted in Scholarship@Claremont.

Rights Information

2025 Katherine S Cherney

Abstract

Examining the divergent educational systems of Finland and Singapore, two nations achieving consistently high PISA rankings, reveals how distinct governmental philosophies and recognition methods cultivate different forms of subjectivity in students. Recognition is how individuals, including students and educators, are acknowledged and valued within educational systems, influencing self-perception and identity. Subjectivity pertains to how individuals understand themselves and their existence within the academic and national order, encompassing agency, beliefs, and sense of self relative to norms and power structures. Analysis utilizes theoretical frameworks from Judith Butler, Paulo Freire, Jacques Rancière, Henry Giroux, and Michel Foucault to explore power dynamics, subjection, critical pedagogy, and the shaping of individuals within institutional contexts. Finland's decentralized system prioritizes autonomy, holistic development, and trust in educators and students, aiming to cultivate empowered subjects connected to national values. In contrast, Singapore's highly centralized system emphasizes performance, discipline, and national standardization, using standardized testing and meritocracy as key recognition mechanisms to shape disciplined, high-achieving subjects for economic and political stability. Exploring beyond mere performance metrics like PISA highlights how these contrasting approaches reflect national values, philosophical orientations, and the complex interplay of policy, pedagogy, and power in shaping students' lived experiences and identities. It reveals challenges within both systems, such as well-being concerns and inequality. It raises questions about the purpose of education in a globalized era influenced by neoliberal pressures, particularly whether it aims to produce compliant economic subjects or critically engaged citizens. The continuous evolution of these systems suggests an ongoing conversation about the fundamental aims of education.

Share

COinS