Whither the much vaunted education reforms in Malaysia if
the Ministry of Education (MoE) does not stay focused on more important and
urgent matters? Should not the Minister of Education and his deputy dispense
their time and effort to designing long term plans and strategies to reform the
school curriculum to foster national unity, and meet the challenges of globalization
and Industry Revolution 4.0? Why bulldoze and introduce Khat that most
Malaysians intuitively know will stir up unnecessary controversies, with no help
to national unity in any way? Did they not engage in lengthy discussions with
their MoE curriculum officers to clarify issues about learning objectives and
learning outcomes? Obviously not, because the press statements published in
media headlines-- after they claimed to have reached a compromise with Dong
Zhong-- border on absurdity! How can one attain a real “appreciation” of Khat
without learning the Jawi alphabet? Only “appreciation” and no “learning” is rather
meaningless from a strictly education point of view.
As an education specialist who has served in schools, the
Curriculum Development Center of the MoE and the Education Faculty of a public
university for many years, I feel compelled to write this letter to raise pertinent
questions to seek answers, and to appeal to the Cabinet to re-consider their
decision. The decision to go ahead with implementation is insidious, as more
controversies will certainly arise in the years to come, when Year 4 pupils
progress to years 5 and 6. What then? More rounds of altercation, protest, and negotiation?
Promises made now about “no compulsion”, “no learning”(?) and “no examinations”
are for the present, not cast in stone for the future. This is a reality in
Malaysian politics as we have witnessed thus far.
For the sake of real education reforms and nation building,
please mull over the following
1) Time and again, it has been pointed out that the
school curriculum is already overloaded as it is. There are a thousand and one important
things we want the kids to learn. We need to be pragmatic and select the most
essential and urgent. The MoE should focus on how to trim the overloaded
curriculum to make learning fun and enjoyable for the schoolchildren,
especially those in primary schools. The dismal revelation by Dr Sivachandralingam (The Sun, 8th August 2019) should
certainly raise an alarm and deep concerns: A recent study has shown that as many as 30% of pupils
from Tamil schools consistently fail in Bahasa Melayu (BM)! Will the
introduction of Khat improve their learning and mastery of BM? Very unlikely, it
can only make things worse, because the inclusion of this new language element
-- whether three or six pages in the textbook -- will only dilute the original
BM curriculum, taking up precious teaching time that should rightly be devoted to
helping these under-performing pupils read and write BM
2) As it is, pupils in the vernacular primary
schools, at such a young and tender age, already have to grapple with the learning
of three languages: two using the Roman alphabet – English and BM—and the third using an
entirely different language form and writing system, be it Chinese or Tamil. And now, they have to learn a third, the Jawi
alphabet. In this context, statements such as “appreciation” and “no learning”
seem baffling, to say the least. How will teachers present Khat/Jawi calligraphy
in class without teaching the pupils the individual letters in the Jawi alphabet?
Unless it is simply copying the Khat as a pretty drawing or pattern. If so, how
does this kind of “drawing” activity enrich and enhance the learning of BM?
3) An article in Sin Chew (8th August 2019)
by Dato Wu Hen Can ( 吴恒灿 ) who attended a special meeting held by the Minister
and his deputy on Aug 1, has drawn my attention to more curricular concerns. It
was mentioned that in the DSKP (Dokumen Standard Kurikulum dan Pentaksiran),
the learning outcomes as reflected there (4.4.2 and 4.4.2) clearly indicate
that the Khat activity is NOT limited to mere superficial recognition and
“appreciation”. They actually require pupils to be able to identify and
pronounce individual letters in Simpulan Bahasa written in the seni Khat; and in
addition, to be able to write the same! Not easily attainable learning outcomes,
and a lot of learning, I must say. So, unless these expected learning outcomes have
been removed from the said document and curriculum plan as proposed by Dato Wu
in that meeting, I do not see how Khat can be used in class as an activity for
learning BM, no matter how creative the teachers are, without the need for
pupils to learn all the letters in the Jawi alphabet. My main concern now is: Will
such an added burden of learning another alphabet help our Year 4 pupils read
and write better BM? Is there a need for them to learn Jawi to read and write
better BM?
4) Are all BM teachers in vernacular schools
equipped with the knowledge and skills to teach Khat? Some people go to the
extent of suggesting that we do have many unemployable graduates who can fill
the void in such skills. This is beside the point, for now. More important
questions are: Is Khat really “optional”, and teachers or pupils can choose not
to teach or learn it, especially when it is not included in examinations? What will
happen in subsequent Year 5 and Year 6 after this? For those teachers who are
overly zealous in striving to attain those learning outcomes as reflected in the
said DSKP, will they end up spending too much time teaching the new alphabet,
at the expense of honing pupils’ reading and writing skills in BM, which should
be a priority in our curriculum reform effort?
Let us heed the scathing criticism of past Cabinet ministers,
as well as the learned views of scholars, well-versed in Jawi and its history.
These people do not think there is a need for kids in vernacular schools to
learn Khat, and they said so with no hidden agenda. Why not just focus on real
education reforms and avoid diversions that court controversies or provide
fodder for opportunistic politicians to create disharmony. To give due credit,
the existing Year 5 BM textbook already includes adequate and very appropriate content
to create awareness and impart basic knowledge about Khat/Jawi, and even much
more. “Don’t fix it if it ain’t broke”, we should just keep this status quo. Let
us move on and focus on real education reforms by:
1) continuing to channel efforts and resources to narrow
the gap between the haves and have-nots, between urban and rural schools; in terms of IT infrastructure,
physical amenities and facilities in schools. Make ALL schools truly conducive
for learning, reduce class size and improve instruction to make teaching and
learning more effective and fun
2) laying a
strong foundation to develop in our students STEM skills, higher-order thinking
skills, and proficiency in English and other languages that will help them meet
the challenges of Industrial Revolution 4.0 and globalization, and last but not least
3) laying due attention to the holistic development
of individual students much emphasized in the Malaysian National Philosophy of
Education (1988) which is so eloquently articulated and yet often overlooked or
slighted in our often blinkered – or politicized? – views of education reforms.
The current furore over the inclusion of Khat in the
vernacular primary school Year 4 curriculum is NOT going to blow over soon. It
is of public interest that answers to questions raised above, and the rationale
behind the Cabinet decision to doggedly proceed with implementation, must be
made crystal clear without ambiguities, to address the concerns of all
stakeholders, and allay their misgivings. More importantly, all
decision-makers, especially the MoE must have the young pupils’ best interest
at heart, bearing in mind that a good curriculum for learner-centered instructional approach is one that is planned by
taking into consideration the needs of learners and input from all
stakeholders, including the parents, teachers and the community at large.
Dr Gan Siowck Lee
12 August 2019
