I refer to the government's decision to reverse the controversial/confusing education policy in the use of English for the teaching of Science and Math (or the use of Science and Math for the teaching of English?) Once again, our hapless children are made the guinea pigs of our government's flip-flopping policy.

Prior to the policy reversal, the government has allowed (instigated?) an increase of discussion on the subject of using English as the language of instruction in teaching Science and Mathematics.

The educational policy has been implemented since 2003 and the lack of progress is causing many to clamour for the return of the old ways. The deputy PM says the policy has failed in achieving its goal. I must say I am not a bit surprised and already predicted this outcome six years ago.

I am all for improving our students’ command of English, or whatever subject for that matter. However, the policy has to be well thought out and the implementation has to follow the guideline to the letter.

Unfortunately, the government has the habit of implementing haphazard policy without consulting the people, hence the failure to improve students’ standard is a foregone conclusion. I am for scrapping this hare-brained, half-baked scheme but for different reasons from the language protectionists.

Now that the baby has been thrown out along with the bath water and our children given a chance for a fresh start, allow me to offer a little food for thought.

The only difference in switching from Bahasa Malaysia to English is the pool of victim has been enlarged to include the Malays. For the non-Malays, it was just a switch from one second language to another second language, but for the Malays, the switch is more traumatic. Hence the adverse effect is more keenly felt by the Malays.

During the years when Malay or BM was the paramount lingua franca, all subjects were taught in BM. Even so, it was never forced on the non-Malay students who attended vernacular schools until they reach secondary schools. It was simply unthinkable to force the non-Malay students to start learning every subject from day one with a language alien to them.

I therefore empathize with the Malay students, especially those who came from rural areas, who had this policy shoved down their throats. Forcing a Malay student to learn Science and Math in English will more likely succeed in making her hate all three subjects rather than improve her command of the subjects. How can one expect for someone who has been walking with a crutch for the last 40 years to immediately drop the crutch and run like an able-body person?

The non-Malays were given ample time to learn BM in the primary schools before embarking on a full-fledge BM-oriented education. They were even required to attend an extra year of education after finishing primary education and before beginning secondary schools to prepare them for an education conducted in BM only. The year was commonly referred to as Remove Class or ‘Kelas Peralihan’.

A similar scheme may be employed to implement the language switch while at the same time gentle enough to minimise the impact on the students. The students, regardless of attending vernacular or national schools, should be allowed to learn in their own language. At the same time, English lessons are given to them from year one.

Instead of supplying three teachers who must be fluent in English to each class (Science teacher, Math teacher, and last but not least, the English teacher), the government need only provide one good English teacher per class.

By the time they finish primary school, the students should have at least six years of exposure to English. If that is not enough, an extra year of remedial class is mandated on anyone who did not score an A in English in the UPSR exam. Those who score an A in English may elect to skip the remedial class.

However well thought out an education policy, its success is not guaranteed unless qualified and dedicated teachers are tasked to implement them. Before teaching the students, we should teach the teachers.

As most of the current batch of teachers was brought up in the BM environment, they will have to undergo intensive English lessons and pass the exams before entrusting them to teach in English. In the meantime, the government should consider hiring foreign or retired teachers who are fluent in English.

There are no shortcuts to educating the next generation. As the proverb says, haste makes waste. We don't need experts to tell us how to best teach our children, least of all, retired loud-mouth politicians. A little common sense and a dose of wisdom from our forefathers go a long way.