Malaysia: English: An outsider's perspective

[Harold Schiffman]

COMMENT: English: An outsider's perspective
By : James Campbell





The problem with current language policy is not one of denying the
importance of learning English per se in Malaysian educational
institutions


IT appears that a final decision on the future of teaching Mathematics
and Science in English in Malaysian schools is close to being made.

The then Education Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has said
that he has completed the cabinet paper on this issue and is
distributing it to the relevant ministries for feedback and opinion.

Clearly, the stakes are high in the debate over English language
curriculum and education in Malaysia.

For some the battle lines are clearly delineated: Linguistic
nationalists versus global internationalists, language nationalism
versus developmental nationalism and, for others, its nationalism
versus nationism.

No matter how we frame the issue it is generally agreed that much heat
has been generated in the debate over the status of Bahasa Malaysia,
English and their respective places in the teaching of Science and
Mathematics and by inference in educational institutions in general.

Yet while it is generally agreed that heat certainly has been produced
in this debate, has much light also been a result?

As an outsider to this debate and with no particular axe to grind it
seems that, some basic observations are in order.

One of the interesting ways that this debate is framed is between
those who seem to argue that some sort of objective way of viewing
this issue is possible versus what is referred to somewhat
condescendingly as "emotional" responses.

For the most part, "objective" views on this debate appear to
correspond to one side of it. English is necessary for development and
engaging globalisation and that is an end to it.

Those who oppose or are uncertain of this basic proposition are
characterised as emotional or implicitly somehow unable to accept the
"objective" necessity of language reform and the way it has been done.

Yet such a way of putting the debate oversimplifies the diverse and
often deeply held objections to current policy.

Significant research for example exists which analyses the importance
of learning complex ideas in a student's first language.

Imagine if you will, for a moment, what it is like as a child to be
taught subjects that are for many quite difficult in a language which
is not your mother tongue?

Does anyone truly believe that there would be a rapid understanding of
scientific and mathematical principles by such children?

Or, more likely would subjection to such a curriculum compound
academic problems and learning difficulties with Maths and Science
rather than ameliorate them.

Asking these questions is not "emotional" nor are such questions
irrelevant to the broader goals of social equity that education must
also confer.

Yet there is more to the debate even than this.

The way we discuss this issue also reveals how we view cultural
identity and how we respect it.

If we implicitly frame one language as representing "modernity",
"progress" and "knowledge" in a globalised world, what implications
will students and indeed the broader society draw about the value and
place of languages not constructed or presented in such glowing terms?

The way English language reform is being argued for in Malaysian
society implicitly affects perceptions of cultural dignity and
identity.

This may produce "emotional" responses from Malaysians who see this
way of articulating the respective significance and place of language
in the Malaysian education system as downgrading their national
language and by inference downgrading their sense of dignity and
identity.

But is this "emotional" response irrational?

My view is that it is entirely rational and that the emotion and heat
involved in this discussion is produced precisely because many
Malaysians perceive behind the façade of "objectivity" and
"globalisation" a diminution and marginalisation of their cultural and
historical being.

The problem with current language policy is not one of denying the
importance of learning English per se in Malaysian educational
institutions.

Rather the challenge in front of Malaysians is how to do this in a way
that avoids two basic problems.

Firstly, that the policy will not in fact exacerbate inequality and
educational exclusion rather than resolve it.

Secondly, that the policy will not be applied in a fashion that
implicitly downgrades and disrespects cultural and national identity.

Critics of current English language reform in schooling point to these
two fundamental issues.

A policy framework must take seriously and engage the potential
unintended consequences of educational inequality and the sense of
cultural marginalisation that can result from the implicit way this
policy is enacted.

Emotion may characterise many of the contributions to this debate, but
for many Malaysians this feeling is based on deeply held rational
objections and reservations that should be taken into account.

I hope that the arguments of those who are "framed" as "emotional"
will be taken into account on this issue, and the reason that informs
their views considered. Malaysia's national growth, stability and
development rely on it.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Dr James Campbell is a Lecturer in Education Australia and is
currently working on a collaborative book project with Universiti
Sains Malaysia on sustainability and education. He can be contacted at
jamesca at deakin.edu.au

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/20090418150729/Article/index_html


-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************