[lg policy] Malaysia: National science policy matters in the education blueprint

[Harold Schiffman]

National science policy matters in the education blueprint
September 10, 2012

FMT LETTER: From Tunku Munawirah Putra, via e-mail

Muhyiddin Yassin, the Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister
said in February this year that a total review of our national
education system is expected, to zero in on the weaknesses and find
ways to rectify them. He was also addressing the declining interest in
Science and Mathematics.  The manner in which Science and Mathematics
are taught and learned is also to be evaluated, on top of the best
language to be used, since it is a comprehensive review. The science
buzz word is now enquiry-based learning.

But to discover at one of the national dialogue sessions that some
schools are not equipped with laboratory facilities, yet still get
their not-being-able-to-use lab materials and left with not-even-able
to pass it on to other schools, is it any wonder there is a declining
interest in Science. The blueprint must be thorough in its analysis of
the current situation, the strengths and weaknesses to prescribe the
best education to propel us into the 21st century.

At the national education dialogues sessions held in 16 cities
recently, there were 11,800 people nationwide who attended the town
hall sessions. However in a recent NST report on Sept 2, 2012, it was
stated that only 153 proposals and memorandum or 1.3% of total
attendees’ feedback was considered, which includes all the duplicates
or similar suggestions. This is rather perplexing.  As to whose
feedback was considered is also in question.

With reference to the report, we are concerned that “the use of the
students’ mother tongue as the medium of instruction for Science and
Mathematics in all vernacular and national schools” is still being
bulldozed through despite the agreement and the repeated calls at the
national education dialogue sessions for the option to maintain the
teaching and learning of Science and Mathematics in English (PPSMI).

This somewhat explains why some schools which opt for PPSMI are still
facing the problem of inadequate resources, and inability to proceed
with PPSMI as per previous years. Evidently, the ministry is forcing
the use of mother tongue for the two subjects.

Must the students wait nine to 12 months for the blueprint to be
announced in order to ascertain the direction of Science and
Mathematics as a medium of instruction? The fate of suffering students
caught in the web of waiting and uncertainties are ignored while the
ministry deliberates on the issue.

What is needed is a vision in its Science policy, but the outline
reported is heavily skewed towards language policy by prioritising
mother tongue education. The other related question is, will removing
PPSMI while focusing on mother tongue education help national
integration in national schools?

Careful steps must also be taken so that it does not impede on the
national science policy’s attempt in “Intensifying efforts to increase
S&T language competence to facilitate the flow of information.”

State of the art information and collaboration efforts on science and
technology are done in our second language, English, the language for
science and technology in the 21st century.

It is reckless to let our language policy cloud our judgment over a
science policy that is needed to grow the country’s wealth. The growth
rate for ideas and innovations is dependent on our science and
technology policy.

Even Unesco recently agreed with the choice of English as the medium
of instruction for Science and Mathematics as it realised the decision
to abolish PPSMI was a political decision. This was information
conveyed at one of our roundtable meetings.

It is unlikely that the Education Review Panel and the National
Education Dialogue Panel would agree to this plan of somewhat not
being truthful with PPSMI. At least we are aware that the review panel
unanimously agrees to maintain PPSMI and most members of the national
education dialogue panel also agree with PPSMI.

PPSMI must be addressed thoroughly in the blueprint. It too, deserves
a comprehensive review, without prejudice or being selective. The
public has the right to know that the RM5 billion invested in this
policy over a period of 10 years since its inception is not for
nothing.

Therefore, a thorough post analysis evaluation of this policy must be
made public or the ministry risks being perceived as not being
transparent.

We cannot afford to slack and fall behind in global competitiveness
anymore. Moreover, what would become of our reputation globally when
we speak of achieving the world’s best but in reality always
over-promising and falling short?

We must be able to tap the world of knowledge in its best form to get
ahead in the 21st century.

The writer is Hon Secretary, PAGE Malaysia

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/09/10/national-science-policy-matters-in-the-education-blueprint/

-- 
**************************************
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,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list