With each additional year more levels of schooling are being switched to an English medium. I wonder how the students are coming along learning maths and science in English? How are they coping? More importantly who will benefit?

I've read what a sample of educationists has to say about this policy. While I agree that it seems abrupt and piecemeal, students don't have any excuse to stay within their comfort zone, which is bordering on, or well within the realms of mediocrity.

I was brought up in an English speaking household and Bahasa Malaysia was alien to me. How did I respond? I coped, I struggled. I burned the midnight oil.

When my Chemistry teacher Ms Subramaniam threatened to beat me, because I failed to memorise the table of elements in Bahasa Malaysia, the furthest thing from my mind was how it was so unfair for me to learn everything in a language that I wasn't comfortable with.

I just wanted to make it past the SPM. I took the challenge in whatever language the powers that be dictated. Rising to the occasion meant that the net results would not just be language proficiency but the ability to think on my feet regardless of language.

What I am arguing is that students and educators will have to stop whining and cope in the short to medium term. Exactly how long that time frame is, is something I don't know. That is why economists use nebulous terms like short, medium and long term.

Malaysia's language quandary

Going to the root of the problem, it is clear that if we had started out with a sound education policy, which promoted equal rights, perhaps Bahasa Malaysia would have truly united us (just as one language has united say, France) and the minority races would not need to cling to their cultures through their mother tongues.

This would have been a nice counterfactual or 'what if'. But we have flip-flopped, unsure of the language will truly unite us, promote pride and bring us into the future. We have ended up being vulnerable to the domination of English as the lingua franca.

It is absolutely pointless to argue that we can be like the Japanese and the Russians and not let the English language invade our shores. They can afford not to compromise.

Japan took steps to realise its economic potential during the generation following the Meiji restoration (1868) and, after its cities were reduced to ashes in WWII, its full might was regenerated. It never looked back.

As for Russia, during WWII it built such a superior military complex that it was leaps and bounds ahead at the scientific frontier. With that much human capital, they can communicate in their language of choice. Malaysia doesn't have such human capital. We're just not in the same league.

So what can we do, except to soldier on? Sure it would be nice to have an overhaul of the syllabus at each level of school. This would be ideal if the education system was being designed for ambitions that capture our collective imagination and take our breath away, ie to propel a man to the moon without the help of cosmonauts or to triumph in the stem cell research game.

However, this policy isn't about achieving the highest intellectual standards. This is a trap that educationists have us walking into. Not all countries have the luxury or pedigree of having an education policy that is at the knowledge frontier. Some have more practical concerns (parents, stop thinking that your child is the next Einstein!).

In 2002, according to the government, the plight of 44,000 unemployed or unemployable citizens, mostly Malays, was attributed to their poor English skills.

This logic is faulty as suggested by Lim Kit Siang and I agree with him. There is no such thing as direct causation between unemployment and the lack of English skills. Unfortunately we do not live in a land of causation and rationality. Apparently all we need is a mythical silver bullet.

Competitive workforce

It seems that the government just needs to stock manufacturing plants with workers who can take technical instructions in English and foreign direct investment (FDI) will magically come pouring in. This may explain why students in Lower Six (starting 2003) and Upper Six (starting 2004) have been targeted by this policy.

While it may seem counterintuitive to educationists, this may be a way to kill two birds with one stone politically . First it addresses the issue of immediate unemployment. Second and more importantly it addresses Malaysia's weakening trade competitiveness.

Unfortunately Dr Mahathir may have had his eureka moment too late. In the 80s, he had his hands full with the implementation of the NEP, the sudden drop in world commodity prices and the nascent heavy industry policy.

Later commodity prices rebounded and more generous FDI conditions worked in Malaysia's favor. We were on the up and up and it didn't matter if we had a shop floor full of workers who hardly spoke English. While we are now finally choosing to confront the language issue, it may be non sequitor.

Consider in the 80s and 90s, we had less competition in the manufacturing sector. Now thanks to rapid modernisation, more countries are joining the fray. These countries are aggressively 'racing to the bottom' to see who can offer the lowest production costs for low value goods.

We are not winning that race. Sure, we can try to provide incentives such as throwing in a free hammer to get that sales contract. Or better yet, we can try to provide an English-speaking labor force.

However, unless we can win the cost race, we won't be able to attract more FDI. Look at all those English speaking workers on the shop floor in the Philippines and one wonders where that has got them.

So which way do we go but up? This refers to making higher value added goods and services. This requires curiosity of mind and innovation. This is where the policy is correctly targeting Standard 1 (starting 2003), Standard 2 (starting 2004), Form 1 (starting 2003) and Form 2 (starting 2004).

Innovation doesn't happen overnight. Our best hope will come from our seven and eight year olds and we can forget about those who keep crying that the government isn't finding them nice jobs. Since when did we have a socialist government (wink, wink)?

While I normally do not like making wholesale cross-country comparisons, I do like what the economist Robert Barro has to say. On average, countries with a sound primary school education policy that builds on science, maths and reading, will enjoy greater long-term economic growth. His econometric analysis specifically points out that the combination of science and reading will be especially potent.

Perhaps Dr Mahathir and I have been reading the same economic literature. Hopefully our seven and eight year olds will be proficient in Bahasa Malaysia and English and grow up to be scientists and economists(!) We can certainly do better than the current overkill of Malaysians with business and law degrees. A 'personal injury' lawyer joke, anyone?

TREENA WU is an economist and public policy analyst pursuing her PhD. She is currently residing in New York.