‘We ought to be careful not to confuse academics and culture. The Education Ministry should not be held accountable for going against the national language.’

On 'English not a prerequisite for success'

Jason LKH: The writer has valid points pointing out that rural students are losing out because of their background and that young students do not need to refer to scientific journals out there which are in English.

Nonetheless, I would like to point out that this is hardly related to the national language and the deterioration of identity but does indeed go against the Education Act. GMP, I suspect, has confused academics with culture.

PPSMI has many flaws in its implementation and favours the strong and resourceful only.

I would appreciate GMP’s movement more if they explicitly fight for the rural people – that they have not received sufficient attention from the government to improve learning and teaching conditions.

However, they have roped in the federal constitution, especially the national language, for a stronger anchor of their case, of which I do not understand the need to do so.

All anak-anak bangsa Malaysi a learn and know Bahasa Malaysia. It is not as though Bahasa Malaysia is optional.

I think we ought to be careful not to confuse academics and culture. For if we were to be tied down to culture at the expense of advancement in science and mathematics, then obviously the results are:

1. Brain drain – the urbanites, being more resourceful, further their studies overseas and never come back because they are in favour of English as their instruction medium.

2. Stagnant development in local academics – this is already observable in our local university standards; our ranking has just been free-falling over the years.

Failing to train our generation to study mathematics and science in English would spell doom for them in their tertiary years if they seek to pursue in the field of academics.

Again, this is because the wealth of knowledge is in English, and I doubt Malaysia has sufficient resources to effectively translate the journals into Bahasa Malaysia, to help our scientists make new discoveries.

Therefore, PPSMI is important for our country’s advancement. However, the Education Ministry must be responsible for its poor implementation which resulted in the sidelining of the rural groups and poor performance in the subjects.

The ministry should not be held accountable for going against the national language - the two issues are not related at all.

Education First: The use of English for teaching maths and science is being debated using reasons of 'identity’ in preserving the Malay language and 'being competitive’ in using English as the lingua franca.

Both arguments are as valid as are they insufficient reasons to decide on the matter at present moment

We have to acknowledge the fact that the present use of English to teach maths and science is a bad implementation for both arguments. ie, this policy does not do much to either threaten or preserve the use of Malay, nor does it improve the use of English.

What it does do is to make it even more difficult for a big majority of Malaysians who already have trouble grasping the language.

You need to learn a language early on in education and then use that language to learn other things.

This silly policy should be stopped, not because of issues relating to identity, but for the purpose of enhancing education.

As usual, education policies are made by politicians who don't seem to understand or know educational issues. One wonders if they even have, as their priority, an interest in educating Malaysians.

Dr Syed Alwi Ahmad:

I have read the comments of some readers regarding the teaching of science and maths in English. Quite a few are not even aware of the main issues involved.

Firstly - the usage of English is not about scientific proficiency or daily usage at all. It is about the transfer of state-of-the-art technology from the vast scientific literature written in English.

If one is not fluent in English, then how does one hope to internalise and assimilate new technology from the advanced nations, that is written in English in the scientific literature ? Where, then, is the transfer of technology?

As I have said previously , the amount of scientific literature in Bahasa Malaysia is negligible. Dewan Bahasa simply cannot translate the huge existing scientific literature into Bahasa Malaysia.

Consequently, I urge Malaysians to think about the transfer of technology. I certainly agree that STPM or SPM physics can easily be taught in Bahasa Malaysia.

No doubts about that at all. But that is definitely not why we should teach science and maths in English.

In a technology-driven world, successful nations must be able to handle state-of-the-art developments in the scientific field. They must be able to transfer and assimilate new technologies as they arise.

But the transfer of technology can only take place if your scientists and engineers can read the vast scientific literature in English! And that is the real issue behind the language switch.

Neo: I am a lawyer trained in an Australian university in the 1980s.I went to a Chinese primary school. I did Remove Class and my year was the second year the government secondary schools (‘sekolah kebangsaan’) started teaching science and maths in BM in 1976.

In fact, all subjects were in Bahasa. I only learned English and Chinese as language subjects in secondary school. I went to Australia after I finished my Lower 6 and did Year 12 - the equivalent of HSC/STPM there. I speak Chinese at home .

I took maths, physics, chemistry, Chinese and English in Year 12, because I wanted to do medicine at uni. My first year in Australia, doing Year 12 there, was spent learning how to study and pass exams in English for the uni entrance exam.

I won the prizes for chemistry and physics in my school and my score for the uni entrance exam was in the top 1% of the state that I studied in.

These days, not many people realise I am from a ‘Chinese school’ but it was not an easy year that year when I did my year 12 - 1983 - in Australia. I could have scored even higher if I were more proficient in answering the Year 12 exam questions in English.

The trend continued when I ended up not doing medicine but law in Australia and my first year in law school was again spent - not on learning the legal principles - but mastering English the way lawyers judges write it, what is called ‘legalese’.

It sounded like Martian to me at that time as I was a science student after Form 3. My English was too poor to understand all that legalese.

It may not be relevant here but I do find that if I had studied science and maths in English in secondary school, it would have improved my English greatly.

And not necessarily just for the purpose of mastering the science and maths subjects. I was handicapped when I did my Year 12 in Australia.

My older siblings did science and maths in English and their mastery of English, both spoken and written, was better than me when at the same age. Even so, my English was considered ‘very good’ for someone coming from a Chinese secondary school at that time.

This because I had private tutor in my teens, a British gentleman, long dead now, to help me brush up on my English. Not many young people have this kind of opportunity to hone their English skills.

Has anyone considered ‘teaching science and maths’ from this angle?

Genius-At-Work: I don’t know why we cannot resolve this on-going issue about whether maths and science should be taught in English or Bahasa Malaysia.

In my opinion, the solution is a very simple one but the question is whether there is a will to implement it or whether there are more hidden agendas to it.

If we can logically separate the issue of languages and the medium of instruction into two, we will be able to see the solution to this problem.

I think the arguments for and against the use of English for Maths and Science in schools are real and valid for not only the students but also for the teachers.

So we need to address the issue very seriously without any hidden agendas. This is about education and it is a basic necessity for every child in this country. The main issue here is whether the ‘medium of instruction’ should be in English or BM.

The solution to this - ‘why not both?’ We need only two type of national schools - the English-medium and the BM-medium schools. Let the families and children determine which they want.

We will be producing two types of citizens - one that will be proficient in BM and the other proficient in English.

BM being the national language and the lingua franca of our government service, these BM proficient students can look for more national level job opportunities while the English-proficient students can explore a more global outlook for their careers.

The choice can be made from the beginning but, of course, it can be altered in between if anyone is willing to change their medium and put-in the extra effort to master the other language.

The question many will be bringing up will be the implementation issues. I think that is the least of problems if you remove the hidden agendas and racial bias.

The issue of not having enough teaching staff for English-medium schools can be overcome if we open up more training places to more non-Malay citizens.

Or we can bring in foreign teachers for the short to medium-term until we train our own teachers.

The problem on the non-availability of English teachers was a problem created by our system over the last 20-odd years or so and if do not begin to rectify it now, we will not be able to change in the next 20 years.

Of course, the other parties who will be up in their arms to champion the vernacular schools. But how often do you see students from Chinese-medium schools going to China or Taiwan for their higher education in Mandarin? Or Tamil school children going to Chennai to do their undergraduate studies? Ironic isn't it?

All of them are struggling to score well in their English-medium UK or Australian-based undergraduate courses. These linguistic enthusiasts can be satisfied with every school having its own language departments to promote mother tongue languages.

The national curriculum can be streamlined to have three languages - BM as the first language, English as the second language, and Mandarian/Tamil/Arabic and other mother tongue languages as the third language.

It will always be a big asset to the nation to produce citizens who are tri-lingual and we can assure that no one will lose their identities.

The solutions are there for everyone to see. Let the market forces determine the success of the nation and not people who have hidden agendas. Let our children's futures be decided by their parents and not be blocked by bureaucratic decision-makers.

Netizen: We are wasting our time arguing over what subjects to teach in English. What we should seriously be looking at is how we can do a better job in helping children become more proficient in this language.

What I can say is that we cannot run away from the fact that command of this language has really declined and it does affect this country's ability in the global market place.

I'll give you a glaring example. I went to a well-known local bank to get a statement for my account. I filled out the form and then asked about the fees.

The clerk showed me the fee structure at the bottom of the page, which read: RM5 for current year + RM1/copy, RM10 for each previous year + RM1/copy. Upon more questioning, I discovered that ‘copy’ actually meant page. So it's RM1/page.

That makes a tremendous difference in the fees I would have to pay. I was not amused to say the least. The word ‘copy’ when used to refer to a transcript means a reproduction of a written/ printed record. It is not a synonym for ‘page’.

Now, can you imagine that a bank like this cannot get important terminology like this correct on its forms and the English on the form is very misleading?

Let's face it. If we just want to stay inside our borders and not interact with the rest of the world, then don't worry about English. Otherwise, we better do something about this problem because we are already in trouble.