Math and Science back to BM. Another protectionist move?
I was browsing the net when I came across this article. I was furious when I saw this. How can one be as irresponsible as this? The ones in bold are my replies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teaching of Maths and Science in English: 'Revert to teaching in our national language'
Sunday, 07 September 2008 09:47am
©New Sunday Times
• Study reveals policy's flaws
• The story on thinking Science and speaking English
THE teaching of Mathematics and Science in English was controversial when it was introduced five years ago, and it still is. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris lecturer Professor Datuk Dr Isahak Haron says the change to English was an ’irresponsible move’, and many students lost out because of the policy. So, it’s time to cut our losses and go back to teaching these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia, he tells Elizabeth John and Aniza Damis
Q: From your study, would you say Malay students have lost the most because of this policy?
A: Yes, rural Malays -- 70 per cent of them. But we found it's not only Malay students outside towns who are suffering, it's also the poorer Malay students in towns -- those of lower socio-economic status, even in Ipoh and KL.
Me: Then how is it that Rural Chinese and Indians manage to score? And even poorer Malays in towns failed to score? Are you suggesting that there are no poor Chinese and Indians in town? I have seen Malays, Chinese and Indians alike who are poor and from rural areas score well. How did they do that? Maybe this should be the focus of your next study. Don’t blame it on English.
Q: Why do non-Malays do better?
A: When it comes to Mathematics, Chinese students have traditionally done better, because they have more practice. But first, they learn it in their own language. The emphasis in Chinese schools is to understand and practise until you get it right. So they will drill knowledge first in Chinese, and then have a Mathematics lesson in English, just to get a grasp on the terminology. That means mastery of the content first. When the fundamentals are strong and you move to Form One and Form Two, you are much better. There's less of this in Sekolah Kebangsaan.
Me: There are Chinese and Indians who are poor and live in rural areas and study in Sekolah Kebangsaan. How do they fair when compared to Malays who are in a similar situation? Do they score any worse than an average Chinese or Indian from a Chinese/Indian National School? They don’t. So stop blaming the system. Something is wrong here. But it is not the system.
Q: Is it the same case then for Indian students?
A: A bit like that. And they now have extra coaching through tuition and they're better at English than the Malay students, so they perform better.
Me: Please stop giving excuses. It makes you look sore. Find the real problem and stop the blame game.
Q: Is the system being used in Chinese schools a better way to go if the government wants to continue with this policy?
A: If you want to continue with this, you have to do what the Chinese schools do. You teach in Bahasa Malaysia and later learn the terminology in English. And if you want to improve the level of English, first, the number of periods of English lessons has to be increased. During the English lesson, you can put in elements of Science and Mathematics. In this way, you increase your vocabulary and learn in a more joyful way. English must be taught by people who are good in English, not by a Maths teacher who is not so good in English. When the students are good in Mathematics and Science, they will be able to understand the concepts of the subjects in English or any other language. The mix in these languages is the worst thing happening now. The teachers cannot teach properly. They are confused and their foundation is weak.
Me: Yes, make English lessons more interesting by incorporating elements of Science and Math. It’s a good idea. Also increase the study time for English. But that doesn’t not warrant the stop of educating Math and Science in English. Many have suggested that we hire pensioners who command good English to teach. And many are willing. Have you listened? Yes the current teachers cannot teach properly. And guess who’s fault is that? If you revert the system now, you won’t ever be able to have teachers who are good enough to teach in English simply because they were never educated in English in the first place. Cause and effect. It’s very simple. So somebody have to break the cycle. And the time is now!
Q: Would it have made a difference if the teachers had had a better command of English?
A: That will take 10 or 20 more years then.
Me: You’re not answering the question. The answer is a simple “Yes, it would have made a difference if the teachers had a better command of English”. As for the 10 to 20 years that you answered, Do you mean that after 10 to 20 years of educating our current generation in English, we would have produced enough teachers who are able to teach in English well? If that’s what you meant, I think it’s worth it. If you meant that after 10 to 20 years of educating our current generation in BM (now that we abolished the system), we would have produced enough teachers who are able to teach in English well, then you are dreaming. Go fly your kite and stay away from education.
Q: Isn't it possible to have a concurrent system? Because if you abandon things because they don't work within five years, then you can never start anything.
A: This is what Dr Mahathir's (former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad) people are talking about. They don't care about the 70 or 80 per cent of the children. All they care about is that their agenda is correct. It doesn't matter if it takes 20 years; you see his gamble?
Me: Obviously, you don’t even care about the 70 to 80 percent of the future generations coming. This is not gambling. It’s is a plan to improve our national education. And Yes, it doesn’t matter if it takes 20 years because people keep improving themselves. If this does not work well improve, improvise. But if you revert back to the old system, you’ll never see light, you’ll only be stagnant while the world moves on. The world does not stop and wait for Malaysia, we’ll have to buck up to keep ourselves competitive.
Q: What's your position at Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka?
A: I'm a board member. But I am first of all an educationist. I care about the children and what they learn.
Me: Yes, I’m sure.
Q: When students go to university, they suddenly find that almost all the textbooks are in English, so they have difficulty studying. Some students then pay to have some chapters translated into Bahasa Malaysia, but how many of them can afford this?
A: Once upon a time, Malay students were already quite good in Mathematics and Science. Teachers and students were quite confident to teach and learn these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia. In fact, all teachers, Chinese and Indian too, were confident about it. What was lacking was a good command of English. It had nothing to do with Mathematics and Science. The way things are now, you've disadvantaged Malay students in all three subjects. My problem was with the way English was taught. The way it is taught to rural children. You don't have to bring in foreign teachers. What you need to do is study what students need to know, and provide suitable programmes. This has never been done by anyone here. They borrowed programmes from abroad and called it "Communication English" which hasn't been successful, especially in the rural context. You need another programme. I've been demanding for one. I will challenge any TESL (Teaching of English as a Second Language) professor to devise a programme that can, in three months, teach 300 new words to students in a Sekolah Kebangsaan in a rural area and have them enjoy the experience.
Me: Let’s not waste in your “Once upon a time” stories. That was then. This is now. Please grow up. You can demand and challenge all you want, but I suppose you’re one of those NATO (No Action Talk Only) members. Challenge all you want, but in the end, you do nothing, gain nothing, and yield nothing for our children, and children to come. The system has been change, and it was changed for a good reason, to correct past wrongs, to improve our system, improve our students and future. This is the challenge, if we can continue to endure these difficulties until the new system bear fruit. Now, tell me what have you done to help.
Q: So the money and time should be spent on the way English is being taught?
A: Yes. It should be taught differently to everybody. If you are at level two, go for a level two English module. If your English is better, why not start at level four? You do it thoroughly. I've been proposing this for the past three years. When children start schooling, each has different abilities, so they all go for a screening test. Then you stream them into classes that fit their level of understanding. The classes should be specialised for all subjects. If a child is good at Bahasa Malaysia and poorer in English, they go for level 2 Bahasa Malaysia and level 1 English. In such classes, you have the right teacher, the specific course materials and undergo the appropriate exercises suited to the child's needs. Once they pass one level, they can go to the next. Now, if a student is very good at one thing and poor in others, the marks get averaged and they get placed at the bottom of the class. I don't like averaging. If they are good at something or poor at it, they should be allowed to proceed at their own pace in each subject. But at the same time. there will have to be classes that they enjoy together like art, physical education and music.
Me: Are you stupid or retarded? Why don’t you go find the manpower to start all these classes? You’re slapping yourself, you mentioned that you don’t like averaging, but you said that students can enjoy classes like art, PE and music together? Last I heard, there are difference in talents such as art and music, and physical abilities as well. Are you going to stream all the flat-footed kids to one class and the asthmatics to another during PE? Besides, having students of different levels in the same class will drive the weaker students to work harder, it also promotes students to help one another in class. The problem here is not about the levels, it’s the standard of examinations. Examinations have a passing mark for a reason. When a student obtains a “pass” means that the student has adequate understanding of the subject. The pass mark should be upheld with a minimum(e.g. 50marks). Also the paper should also be adequate to elicit the student’s understanding of the subject. Should the paper be too easy, the pass mark could be moved up, but it should never be below 50. Should students fail too many subjects, we retain them and teach them again.
Q: Are schools now equipped for these kinds of lessons?
A: They spent RM5 billion for this project. Just give me RM2 million, I can convert classrooms for this purpose.
Me: We’ll see.
Q: How will the exams work if they are all at different levels?
A: It doesn't matter. You take the exam when you are ready. Anytime you want.
Me: Right. Some student needs to be pushed to complete things. If this is the system you suggest, I can imagine the lazy students never ever taking a single exam. But then again, it also concerns the passing mark issue I mentioned previous. If the exam is too easy to pass, there is no point in examining in the first place isn’t it?
Q: Then the exam system will have to change?
A: Yes. Its not so much about getting the certificate, its about knowing what level you are at. It should be more open.
Me: The society doesn’t not function that way.
Q: How do students get promoted to the next class then?
A: They're being promoted according to age, not ability. At seven, you're in Standard One, at eight, in Standard Two, whether you're good or not. Whereas, you could be in Standard Three at the age of eight. We can encourage students and develop them according to their ability and interest. If they are weak, we can quickly address it and not average it out.
Me: Say if a student is at STPM level in BM, and Form 5 level in biology (because he liked nature) taught in BM and standard 2 level in English. He’s Math and other science subjects remain at standad 5 level. He is 19 years old now. What is he suppose to do? Apply for university? Or brush up his English or science? Say he comes from a background where English is hardly spoken, hence he develops no interest and the system does not give him the slightest bit of pressure to improve his level of English or any subject for that matter. I can imagine many students like this. They’re not here nor there. They are not good enough to enter university and do not possess the minimum standard for even clerical work. I can hardly see any future for them.
Q: What about students who just want to complete SPM and get a job that requires that as a minimum?
A: There'll be no such thing as an SPM certificate. There will be different certificates for different subjects and if you want to do 10 subjects at SPM level, you can do it at different times.
Me: Please refer to my previous point.
Q: Coming back to the whole issue of teaching Mathematics and Science in English, what do we do next?
A: Go back to Bahasa Malaysia. Everyone knows Bahasa Malaysia and it's not a loss to anyone. Teachers also feel more comfortable with it.
Me: And we’ll be forever stagnant. You’re not doing anything to help.
Q: What about the students who have been through four years under this policy?
A: They can do it in Bahasa Malaysia.
Me: You just got high and mighty saying that no students should be forsaken. Now, these students can be forsaken. Make up your mind.
Q: Aren't they going to be even more confused?
A: As it is, 70 per cent of students cannot follow. So, nobody is likely to lose. Those who can follow are already quite good in Bahasa Malaysia now.It's not a new language for them as it is already used widely in school. There will be the least negative effect on the teachers and students.
Me: What makes you so sure “Those who can follow are already quite good in Bahasa Malaysia now”? So about the 30% who can follow, please refer to my previous point.
Q: What about the students who have been taught Mathematics and Science really well in English?
A: That's just a few per cent. But even they have done Bahasa Malaysia. I don't think they'll lose their command of English and since they're good at Mathematics and Science in English, they won't lose that either.
Me: You are basing a lot on what you think. Then have you listened to what others thought?
Q: Could the system be converted immediately or would schools need a few years to phase it out?
A: Immediately.
Me: You had a really bad knock on your head didn’t you?
Q: Including the ones who have to sit for exams the next year?
A: The exam papers are already in two languages. Only the textbooks are in English. I've always asked why they've deprived rural children of textbooks in two languages. That's what they need.
Me: The exams should have only been in English in the first place. What the rural children need are good teachers who are able to teach adequately in English. Also, they need good English language teachers. If we do not follow-through with the system now, we’ll never get these teachers.
Q: What if we teach English your way, but maintain Science and Mathematics in English?
A: If you want to learn a subject, the first foundation years must be taught in the mother tongue. Seventy per cent of students cannot do it in English.
Me: Singapore is doing it. And they’re doing really well.
Q: You presented the findings of your study to the prime minister. What was his reaction?
A: He said we should do it -- convert (back to Bahasa Malaysia). He said he'd been thinking about it for a long time already.
Me: Two heads isn’t always better than one.
Q: You also presented it to the education minister at a symposium. What was the reaction from the other people at that briefing?
A: They asked many questions about methodology. We could have done a study on the whole country, if we'd had a million ringgit. But we did this study for zero ringgit.
And we took many samples. We analysed test questions individually. There is no point doing an average achievement analysis.
You need to show where the student did well and where he didn't. It has to be item-by-item, so that we know where the total is.
Then, some people from the Education Ministry's Curiculum Development Centre said, 'Some rural schools did well'.
So I said, 'Which rural schools? I want to know which ones. And how many is some?'
In this situation, we're not talking about the exceptional students. You are talking about the majority. I'm not doing the study to find out why seven per cent of Orang Asli kids can do it.
Me: How touching :’( Then publish the full paper in English and let the rest of the educated world know what you’ve really done.
Q: So, there might be exceptions, but they don't represent the rest?
A: Of course not. The logical thing is to go back (to teaching Science and Mathematics in Bahasa Malaysia).
Me: Of course they don’t. But it does not mean the rest cannot perform averagely well. Look at Singapore.
Q: So, why are people hanging on to this policy?
A: There are a few reasons. One of which is that they spent RM5 billion.
But I say, what is RM5 billion? What happened to the RM5 billion? It was spent on computers. It's not like the computers are going to vanish if you switch to Bahasa Malaysia. The computers can still be used.
And all that training for the teachers is helpful to them, so let it be.
You don't lose out in anything.
The second issue is that, "If we start using English now, eventually we will be good at it."
I want to know how long do we have to wait? 20 years? An educationist doesn't even want to see one child being destroyed by any foolish act.
If a person is sick, do you experiment on that person? To experiment with a few hundred thousand or millions is irresponsible.
Dr Mahathir's policy was irresponsible.
But nobody questioned him. I questioned him, and he scolded me.
Me: Money isn’t the issue I believe. It’s the future these people are concerned. If a person is sick, doctors treat their patients with the best they can. And currently our education system is sick. And the current prescribed treatment is a possible cure. It’s a lot better that what you’re doing, which is doing nothing at all. You’re just asking to revert to old system (which is sick in the first place) and shout if anyone could help (as in devise some plan to educate the children in English). What you’re missing is, the current system was a plan to improve English. By the way, you’re analogy with sick people is very poor. If any medical professional heard that you would’ve gotten a good sounding.
Q: Irresponsible because?
A: Because he knew that it couldn't be done.
He may have been good in asking for the Petronas Twin Towers or highways to be built.
The physical development of the country is not a problem. But (with this policy) you ruin children's lives.
And poor Malay students thought they could do it, but suddenly education has no meaning to them.
Me: Let me ask you another question. Is what you are doing the responsible thing to do?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Teaching of Maths and Science in English: 'Revert to teaching in our national language'
Sunday, 07 September 2008 09:47am
©New Sunday Times
• Study reveals policy's flaws
• The story on thinking Science and speaking English
THE teaching of Mathematics and Science in English was controversial when it was introduced five years ago, and it still is. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris lecturer Professor Datuk Dr Isahak Haron says the change to English was an ’irresponsible move’, and many students lost out because of the policy. So, it’s time to cut our losses and go back to teaching these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia, he tells Elizabeth John and Aniza Damis
Q: From your study, would you say Malay students have lost the most because of this policy?
A: Yes, rural Malays -- 70 per cent of them. But we found it's not only Malay students outside towns who are suffering, it's also the poorer Malay students in towns -- those of lower socio-economic status, even in Ipoh and KL.
Me: Then how is it that Rural Chinese and Indians manage to score? And even poorer Malays in towns failed to score? Are you suggesting that there are no poor Chinese and Indians in town? I have seen Malays, Chinese and Indians alike who are poor and from rural areas score well. How did they do that? Maybe this should be the focus of your next study. Don’t blame it on English.
Q: Why do non-Malays do better?
A: When it comes to Mathematics, Chinese students have traditionally done better, because they have more practice. But first, they learn it in their own language. The emphasis in Chinese schools is to understand and practise until you get it right. So they will drill knowledge first in Chinese, and then have a Mathematics lesson in English, just to get a grasp on the terminology. That means mastery of the content first. When the fundamentals are strong and you move to Form One and Form Two, you are much better. There's less of this in Sekolah Kebangsaan.
Me: There are Chinese and Indians who are poor and live in rural areas and study in Sekolah Kebangsaan. How do they fair when compared to Malays who are in a similar situation? Do they score any worse than an average Chinese or Indian from a Chinese/Indian National School? They don’t. So stop blaming the system. Something is wrong here. But it is not the system.
Q: Is it the same case then for Indian students?
A: A bit like that. And they now have extra coaching through tuition and they're better at English than the Malay students, so they perform better.
Me: Please stop giving excuses. It makes you look sore. Find the real problem and stop the blame game.
Q: Is the system being used in Chinese schools a better way to go if the government wants to continue with this policy?
A: If you want to continue with this, you have to do what the Chinese schools do. You teach in Bahasa Malaysia and later learn the terminology in English. And if you want to improve the level of English, first, the number of periods of English lessons has to be increased. During the English lesson, you can put in elements of Science and Mathematics. In this way, you increase your vocabulary and learn in a more joyful way. English must be taught by people who are good in English, not by a Maths teacher who is not so good in English. When the students are good in Mathematics and Science, they will be able to understand the concepts of the subjects in English or any other language. The mix in these languages is the worst thing happening now. The teachers cannot teach properly. They are confused and their foundation is weak.
Me: Yes, make English lessons more interesting by incorporating elements of Science and Math. It’s a good idea. Also increase the study time for English. But that doesn’t not warrant the stop of educating Math and Science in English. Many have suggested that we hire pensioners who command good English to teach. And many are willing. Have you listened? Yes the current teachers cannot teach properly. And guess who’s fault is that? If you revert the system now, you won’t ever be able to have teachers who are good enough to teach in English simply because they were never educated in English in the first place. Cause and effect. It’s very simple. So somebody have to break the cycle. And the time is now!
Q: Would it have made a difference if the teachers had had a better command of English?
A: That will take 10 or 20 more years then.
Me: You’re not answering the question. The answer is a simple “Yes, it would have made a difference if the teachers had a better command of English”. As for the 10 to 20 years that you answered, Do you mean that after 10 to 20 years of educating our current generation in English, we would have produced enough teachers who are able to teach in English well? If that’s what you meant, I think it’s worth it. If you meant that after 10 to 20 years of educating our current generation in BM (now that we abolished the system), we would have produced enough teachers who are able to teach in English well, then you are dreaming. Go fly your kite and stay away from education.
Q: Isn't it possible to have a concurrent system? Because if you abandon things because they don't work within five years, then you can never start anything.
A: This is what Dr Mahathir's (former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad) people are talking about. They don't care about the 70 or 80 per cent of the children. All they care about is that their agenda is correct. It doesn't matter if it takes 20 years; you see his gamble?
Me: Obviously, you don’t even care about the 70 to 80 percent of the future generations coming. This is not gambling. It’s is a plan to improve our national education. And Yes, it doesn’t matter if it takes 20 years because people keep improving themselves. If this does not work well improve, improvise. But if you revert back to the old system, you’ll never see light, you’ll only be stagnant while the world moves on. The world does not stop and wait for Malaysia, we’ll have to buck up to keep ourselves competitive.
Q: What's your position at Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka?
A: I'm a board member. But I am first of all an educationist. I care about the children and what they learn.
Me: Yes, I’m sure.
Q: When students go to university, they suddenly find that almost all the textbooks are in English, so they have difficulty studying. Some students then pay to have some chapters translated into Bahasa Malaysia, but how many of them can afford this?
A: Once upon a time, Malay students were already quite good in Mathematics and Science. Teachers and students were quite confident to teach and learn these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia. In fact, all teachers, Chinese and Indian too, were confident about it. What was lacking was a good command of English. It had nothing to do with Mathematics and Science. The way things are now, you've disadvantaged Malay students in all three subjects. My problem was with the way English was taught. The way it is taught to rural children. You don't have to bring in foreign teachers. What you need to do is study what students need to know, and provide suitable programmes. This has never been done by anyone here. They borrowed programmes from abroad and called it "Communication English" which hasn't been successful, especially in the rural context. You need another programme. I've been demanding for one. I will challenge any TESL (Teaching of English as a Second Language) professor to devise a programme that can, in three months, teach 300 new words to students in a Sekolah Kebangsaan in a rural area and have them enjoy the experience.
Me: Let’s not waste in your “Once upon a time” stories. That was then. This is now. Please grow up. You can demand and challenge all you want, but I suppose you’re one of those NATO (No Action Talk Only) members. Challenge all you want, but in the end, you do nothing, gain nothing, and yield nothing for our children, and children to come. The system has been change, and it was changed for a good reason, to correct past wrongs, to improve our system, improve our students and future. This is the challenge, if we can continue to endure these difficulties until the new system bear fruit. Now, tell me what have you done to help.
Q: So the money and time should be spent on the way English is being taught?
A: Yes. It should be taught differently to everybody. If you are at level two, go for a level two English module. If your English is better, why not start at level four? You do it thoroughly. I've been proposing this for the past three years. When children start schooling, each has different abilities, so they all go for a screening test. Then you stream them into classes that fit their level of understanding. The classes should be specialised for all subjects. If a child is good at Bahasa Malaysia and poorer in English, they go for level 2 Bahasa Malaysia and level 1 English. In such classes, you have the right teacher, the specific course materials and undergo the appropriate exercises suited to the child's needs. Once they pass one level, they can go to the next. Now, if a student is very good at one thing and poor in others, the marks get averaged and they get placed at the bottom of the class. I don't like averaging. If they are good at something or poor at it, they should be allowed to proceed at their own pace in each subject. But at the same time. there will have to be classes that they enjoy together like art, physical education and music.
Me: Are you stupid or retarded? Why don’t you go find the manpower to start all these classes? You’re slapping yourself, you mentioned that you don’t like averaging, but you said that students can enjoy classes like art, PE and music together? Last I heard, there are difference in talents such as art and music, and physical abilities as well. Are you going to stream all the flat-footed kids to one class and the asthmatics to another during PE? Besides, having students of different levels in the same class will drive the weaker students to work harder, it also promotes students to help one another in class. The problem here is not about the levels, it’s the standard of examinations. Examinations have a passing mark for a reason. When a student obtains a “pass” means that the student has adequate understanding of the subject. The pass mark should be upheld with a minimum(e.g. 50marks). Also the paper should also be adequate to elicit the student’s understanding of the subject. Should the paper be too easy, the pass mark could be moved up, but it should never be below 50. Should students fail too many subjects, we retain them and teach them again.
Q: Are schools now equipped for these kinds of lessons?
A: They spent RM5 billion for this project. Just give me RM2 million, I can convert classrooms for this purpose.
Me: We’ll see.
Q: How will the exams work if they are all at different levels?
A: It doesn't matter. You take the exam when you are ready. Anytime you want.
Me: Right. Some student needs to be pushed to complete things. If this is the system you suggest, I can imagine the lazy students never ever taking a single exam. But then again, it also concerns the passing mark issue I mentioned previous. If the exam is too easy to pass, there is no point in examining in the first place isn’t it?
Q: Then the exam system will have to change?
A: Yes. Its not so much about getting the certificate, its about knowing what level you are at. It should be more open.
Me: The society doesn’t not function that way.
Q: How do students get promoted to the next class then?
A: They're being promoted according to age, not ability. At seven, you're in Standard One, at eight, in Standard Two, whether you're good or not. Whereas, you could be in Standard Three at the age of eight. We can encourage students and develop them according to their ability and interest. If they are weak, we can quickly address it and not average it out.
Me: Say if a student is at STPM level in BM, and Form 5 level in biology (because he liked nature) taught in BM and standard 2 level in English. He’s Math and other science subjects remain at standad 5 level. He is 19 years old now. What is he suppose to do? Apply for university? Or brush up his English or science? Say he comes from a background where English is hardly spoken, hence he develops no interest and the system does not give him the slightest bit of pressure to improve his level of English or any subject for that matter. I can imagine many students like this. They’re not here nor there. They are not good enough to enter university and do not possess the minimum standard for even clerical work. I can hardly see any future for them.
Q: What about students who just want to complete SPM and get a job that requires that as a minimum?
A: There'll be no such thing as an SPM certificate. There will be different certificates for different subjects and if you want to do 10 subjects at SPM level, you can do it at different times.
Me: Please refer to my previous point.
Q: Coming back to the whole issue of teaching Mathematics and Science in English, what do we do next?
A: Go back to Bahasa Malaysia. Everyone knows Bahasa Malaysia and it's not a loss to anyone. Teachers also feel more comfortable with it.
Me: And we’ll be forever stagnant. You’re not doing anything to help.
Q: What about the students who have been through four years under this policy?
A: They can do it in Bahasa Malaysia.
Me: You just got high and mighty saying that no students should be forsaken. Now, these students can be forsaken. Make up your mind.
Q: Aren't they going to be even more confused?
A: As it is, 70 per cent of students cannot follow. So, nobody is likely to lose. Those who can follow are already quite good in Bahasa Malaysia now.It's not a new language for them as it is already used widely in school. There will be the least negative effect on the teachers and students.
Me: What makes you so sure “Those who can follow are already quite good in Bahasa Malaysia now”? So about the 30% who can follow, please refer to my previous point.
Q: What about the students who have been taught Mathematics and Science really well in English?
A: That's just a few per cent. But even they have done Bahasa Malaysia. I don't think they'll lose their command of English and since they're good at Mathematics and Science in English, they won't lose that either.
Me: You are basing a lot on what you think. Then have you listened to what others thought?
Q: Could the system be converted immediately or would schools need a few years to phase it out?
A: Immediately.
Me: You had a really bad knock on your head didn’t you?
Q: Including the ones who have to sit for exams the next year?
A: The exam papers are already in two languages. Only the textbooks are in English. I've always asked why they've deprived rural children of textbooks in two languages. That's what they need.
Me: The exams should have only been in English in the first place. What the rural children need are good teachers who are able to teach adequately in English. Also, they need good English language teachers. If we do not follow-through with the system now, we’ll never get these teachers.
Q: What if we teach English your way, but maintain Science and Mathematics in English?
A: If you want to learn a subject, the first foundation years must be taught in the mother tongue. Seventy per cent of students cannot do it in English.
Me: Singapore is doing it. And they’re doing really well.
Q: You presented the findings of your study to the prime minister. What was his reaction?
A: He said we should do it -- convert (back to Bahasa Malaysia). He said he'd been thinking about it for a long time already.
Me: Two heads isn’t always better than one.
Q: You also presented it to the education minister at a symposium. What was the reaction from the other people at that briefing?
A: They asked many questions about methodology. We could have done a study on the whole country, if we'd had a million ringgit. But we did this study for zero ringgit.
And we took many samples. We analysed test questions individually. There is no point doing an average achievement analysis.
You need to show where the student did well and where he didn't. It has to be item-by-item, so that we know where the total is.
Then, some people from the Education Ministry's Curiculum Development Centre said, 'Some rural schools did well'.
So I said, 'Which rural schools? I want to know which ones. And how many is some?'
In this situation, we're not talking about the exceptional students. You are talking about the majority. I'm not doing the study to find out why seven per cent of Orang Asli kids can do it.
Me: How touching :’( Then publish the full paper in English and let the rest of the educated world know what you’ve really done.
Q: So, there might be exceptions, but they don't represent the rest?
A: Of course not. The logical thing is to go back (to teaching Science and Mathematics in Bahasa Malaysia).
Me: Of course they don’t. But it does not mean the rest cannot perform averagely well. Look at Singapore.
Q: So, why are people hanging on to this policy?
A: There are a few reasons. One of which is that they spent RM5 billion.
But I say, what is RM5 billion? What happened to the RM5 billion? It was spent on computers. It's not like the computers are going to vanish if you switch to Bahasa Malaysia. The computers can still be used.
And all that training for the teachers is helpful to them, so let it be.
You don't lose out in anything.
The second issue is that, "If we start using English now, eventually we will be good at it."
I want to know how long do we have to wait? 20 years? An educationist doesn't even want to see one child being destroyed by any foolish act.
If a person is sick, do you experiment on that person? To experiment with a few hundred thousand or millions is irresponsible.
Dr Mahathir's policy was irresponsible.
But nobody questioned him. I questioned him, and he scolded me.
Me: Money isn’t the issue I believe. It’s the future these people are concerned. If a person is sick, doctors treat their patients with the best they can. And currently our education system is sick. And the current prescribed treatment is a possible cure. It’s a lot better that what you’re doing, which is doing nothing at all. You’re just asking to revert to old system (which is sick in the first place) and shout if anyone could help (as in devise some plan to educate the children in English). What you’re missing is, the current system was a plan to improve English. By the way, you’re analogy with sick people is very poor. If any medical professional heard that you would’ve gotten a good sounding.
Q: Irresponsible because?
A: Because he knew that it couldn't be done.
He may have been good in asking for the Petronas Twin Towers or highways to be built.
The physical development of the country is not a problem. But (with this policy) you ruin children's lives.
And poor Malay students thought they could do it, but suddenly education has no meaning to them.
Me: Let me ask you another question. Is what you are doing the responsible thing to do?
posted by Kain Sicilian at 8:10 AM
0 comments
