The New Straits Times Online......

Saturday, November 22, 2008, 10.49 PM

Search NST :

OPINION: Do the math, keep it in English

CHOK SUAT LING
Send to a friend | Printable Page

THE decision six years ago to teach Science and Mathematics in English stirred up turbulent emotions.

The tempest has since subsided but talk of a review of the policy has, once again, roiled up sentiments and heated discussions.

The Education Ministry will make a decision by year-end and is now seeking feedback from various quarters. It held its first roundtable discussion with academics and examination board officials last month.

But minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein's assurance that changes will only affect a new batch of pupils has not calmed increasingly anxious educators, parents and students.

Their concern is not without basis, for a reversion at this point would mean six years of hard work going practically "down the drain".

National Union of Teaching Profession secretary-general Lok Yim Pheng puts it in stark perspective: "It will be extremely painful for everyone. Billions of ringgit would have been wasted in teacher training, reprinting textbooks, and formulating courseware and teaching aids. It would all have been a sheer waste of money and time."

The NUTP will have its executive council meeting and conference this month and is expected to issue a strong collective statement on the matter later.

The union points out that for teachers who have been sent for training and retraining, going back is not an option. Even those in rural areas, who faced extreme difficulties when the policy was first introduced, have gradually become used to teaching in English.

"But now, we don't know what is going to happen. Teachers do not appreciate being made guinea pigs. It is disturbing when programmes implemented are reversed just because politicians disagree with them," says Lok.

Going back to using the mother tongue in the teaching of the two subjects is, however, a move keenly anticipated by many Chinese educationists, who had adamantly been against the move from the start.

They had vociferously protested the switch from Mandarin to English, and have continued to speak up through the years.

Educationist Goh Kean Seng hopes the teaching of Science and Mathematics will revert to Mandarin in Chinese schools:

"If the policy is reversed, the government will be rectifying the mistake it made in 2003."

As primary and secondary education is "foundational", it is imperative that the subjects be taught in the pupil's mother tongue, says Goh.

"Many students think in their mother tongue. They would need to be adept in the language used in teaching in order to be able to learn content-oriented subjects like Science, Mathematics and geography. If they cannot grasp the language, they cannot master the subjects," says Goh who has more than 20 years' experience as an educator.

"Only a handful of pupils can overcome this language barrier. This is not right as education should apply for all, not just this specific group of pupils," says the headmaster of the Confucian Private Secondary School in Kuala Lumpur.

As it is, Goh points out that many students from Chinese primary schools already find the going tough when they have to learn everything in Bahasa Malaysia in secondary school: "Many have dropped out because they cannot cope with the language."

And he claims "Malay pupils, especially those in the rural areas, are worse off."

Most others, however, do not agree and insist that a major change now is grossly premature and unjust.

The argument is that it will take between 10 and 15 years for the impact of any policy change to be felt. A cohort or two of students need to "graduate" under the framework of a new policy before any measure of efficacy can be made. Six years may be an appropriate time for a review but it should only involve fine-tuning, not an abrupt about-turn.

Education consultant Anushia Senthe stresses that a review should not in any way be used as an opportunity to revert to the old system as it will only create upheaval in schools. She says it is more prudent to just refine the policy: "If children in rural schools are struggling, maybe we should allocate more time for the teaching of Mathematics, Science and also English to allow them to gain confidence in this medium of instruction.

"A one-size-fits all implementation model, especially with regard to textbooks and teaching aids, may not be appropriate given the differing competency levels between urban and rural children," says the master trainer for the Cambridge International Diploma for Teachers and Trainers in Malaysia.

She calls for a thorough competence evaluation of teachers to weed out ineffectual teaching practices and facilitate more effective training. "Attention towards these types of issues will be better than a complete policy reversal."

Educators themselves also demand continued attention. In many schools, teaching is hampered by teachers with a poor command of English. This predicament is faced by many rural and vernacular schools.

In Tamil schools, for example, there is a dearth of teachers who can teach in English.

"Of the 7,800 teachers in Tamil schools, fewer than 500 are trained to teach in English. If ministry officials go to the ground, they will see that teachers are teaching the subjects in Tamil," says a Tamil educationist.

"In one school, of the 28 teachers, only two are graduates. But even then, both cannot string two sentences together in English without making a mistake.

The results of pupils for the two subjects in school tests have also declined. He claims that before the policy was introduced, 70 to 80 per cent of pupils passed their Science and Mathematics but after 2003, there has been a precipitous drop with only an average 30 per cent passes.

Nevertheless, he concedes that the problem is with implementation, not the policy itself.

"The government should stick with it. English is an essential language now and this policy is beneficial. The ministry just needs to implement it properly."

But in focusing energy and resources on the training of teachers, it is integral that pupils are not neglected.

Schoolchildren who lag behind in Science, Mathematics and English should be given remedial classes or made to undergo special programmes similar to the KIA2M intervention course introduced recently to ensure all pupils in school master reading and writing.

Lok says: "This is true for schools in rural areas. If pupils are left far behind, they will not be able to catch up no matter how good the teachers are."

The consensus, however, is that more thought should have been given to all aspects of the policy before introducing it half a dozen years ago.

Education policies need to be especially well thought out to prevent flip-flops, as these will have long-term adverse consequences.

"There should be dialogues and feedback from all concerned parties -- parents, teachers and experts -- before effecting a change. Discussions should come before a major policy change, not in between or after," says Lok.

Indeed, constant changes and inconsistent policy messages have caused many parents to lose confidence in the education system.