The long-awaited decision about Teaching of Mathematics and Science in English (TSME) has been announced. After implementing the policy for the past six years, the policy will be revert back to the usage of Malay language and vernacular languages respectively in teaching of Science and Mathematics. I share my observation about this "expected outcome" from several perspectives.
Firstly, the U-turn in the policy, without much doubt, has been driven largely by political influence. Retrospectively, TSME was one of the last legacy of the longest serving Prime Minister of Malaysia. The revert is certainly a way to dismantle that legacy, to make way for new legacies of the current government. On top of that, with the rating of the current government at an all-time low, it came as no surprise to adopt this decision, simply because the voices to abolish have been more vocal and even took to the streets in protest. Without much doubt, political influence has been one of the major forces to change.
Secondly, from policy implementation perspective, it seems to me there isn't much implemented for the past six years. Looking at the UPSR 2008 statistics, the policy has certainly failed in terms of implementation, especially in Chinese schools. No wonder, the Chinese educationalists have been advocating the abolishment of TSME, or rather, it seems like the policy has not been implemented at all.
The Minister of Education in explaining the decision to revert to the old system revealed that only 19.2% and 9.96% of secondary and primary teachers respectively who were sufficiently proficient in English. Again, this relevation came as no surprise, due to the fact that the implementation of TSME six years ago was carried out in a rather haphazard way. However, is this a good reason to revert?
Today we realise that less than 20% of our teachers are proficient in English and therefore we abolish TSME. What if tomorrow, we realise that less than 20% of our teachers are proficient in Mathematics? Will the government, then, propose to scrap Mathematics in the schools? To me, such reasoning should not be used as an excuse for poor implementation and abolishment of the policy, but rather look at the positiveness, that more initiatives should now be targetted towards the remaining 80% of teachers.
Thirdly, is it ethical that this change will only be implemented from 2012 onwards. In other words, another 3 batches of students will have to undergo this "flawed" policy. Isn't that unethical? If the government is so certain that TSME has failed, why not immediately revert the policy?
Fourthly, I strongly felt that the educational perspective in the policy has been severely neglected. Many quarters have been using the policy as a "proxy war" to fight for their respective interests, but sadly, the core educational issue in the policy has not been addressed accordingly. What have both governments, the one in 2002/3 and now, based their decision on? Were the decisions to implement or abolish TSME based on solid educational research or merely based on "pre-conceived" ideas and hearsay.
There is a huge amount of educational research, especially in the teaching of Science and Mathematics as well as linguistic application, both in Malaysia and overseas, that have vast potentials to inform policy-making. However, not much attention has been given to understand these research, or at least cite a few of them, in consideration of implementing or abolishing this education policy. Sadly, TSME is an educational policy that has no educational aim and inputs!
Lastly, a fellow colleague and Professor in Linguistics once told me, after the implementation of TSME in 2003, our neighbouring country, Indonesia, has been inviting Malaysian linguistic experts over to help with a similar initiative. Six years down the road, Indonesia's initiative is flourishing, but Malaysia has just abolished the policy.
This post is also available in The Malaysian Education Debate
Firstly, the U-turn in the policy, without much doubt, has been driven largely by political influence. Retrospectively, TSME was one of the last legacy of the longest serving Prime Minister of Malaysia. The revert is certainly a way to dismantle that legacy, to make way for new legacies of the current government. On top of that, with the rating of the current government at an all-time low, it came as no surprise to adopt this decision, simply because the voices to abolish have been more vocal and even took to the streets in protest. Without much doubt, political influence has been one of the major forces to change.
Secondly, from policy implementation perspective, it seems to me there isn't much implemented for the past six years. Looking at the UPSR 2008 statistics, the policy has certainly failed in terms of implementation, especially in Chinese schools. No wonder, the Chinese educationalists have been advocating the abolishment of TSME, or rather, it seems like the policy has not been implemented at all.
The Minister of Education in explaining the decision to revert to the old system revealed that only 19.2% and 9.96% of secondary and primary teachers respectively who were sufficiently proficient in English. Again, this relevation came as no surprise, due to the fact that the implementation of TSME six years ago was carried out in a rather haphazard way. However, is this a good reason to revert?
Today we realise that less than 20% of our teachers are proficient in English and therefore we abolish TSME. What if tomorrow, we realise that less than 20% of our teachers are proficient in Mathematics? Will the government, then, propose to scrap Mathematics in the schools? To me, such reasoning should not be used as an excuse for poor implementation and abolishment of the policy, but rather look at the positiveness, that more initiatives should now be targetted towards the remaining 80% of teachers.
Thirdly, is it ethical that this change will only be implemented from 2012 onwards. In other words, another 3 batches of students will have to undergo this "flawed" policy. Isn't that unethical? If the government is so certain that TSME has failed, why not immediately revert the policy?
Fourthly, I strongly felt that the educational perspective in the policy has been severely neglected. Many quarters have been using the policy as a "proxy war" to fight for their respective interests, but sadly, the core educational issue in the policy has not been addressed accordingly. What have both governments, the one in 2002/3 and now, based their decision on? Were the decisions to implement or abolish TSME based on solid educational research or merely based on "pre-conceived" ideas and hearsay.
There is a huge amount of educational research, especially in the teaching of Science and Mathematics as well as linguistic application, both in Malaysia and overseas, that have vast potentials to inform policy-making. However, not much attention has been given to understand these research, or at least cite a few of them, in consideration of implementing or abolishing this education policy. Sadly, TSME is an educational policy that has no educational aim and inputs!
Lastly, a fellow colleague and Professor in Linguistics once told me, after the implementation of TSME in 2003, our neighbouring country, Indonesia, has been inviting Malaysian linguistic experts over to help with a similar initiative. Six years down the road, Indonesia's initiative is flourishing, but Malaysia has just abolished the policy.
This post is also available in The Malaysian Education Debate
No comments:
Post a Comment