Bookmark & Share

Favorites	Digg
Del.icio.us	Google
MySpace	Facebook
Reddit	Newsvine
Live	More …

To:
From:
Note:

Bookmark & Share

Favorites	Digg
Del.icio.us	Google
MySpace	Facebook
Reddit	Newsvine
Live	More …

To:
From:
Note:

Bookmark & Share

Favorites	Digg
Del.icio.us	Google
MySpace	Facebook
Reddit	Newsvine
Live	More …

To:
From:
Note:

Bookmark & Share

Favorites	Digg
Del.icio.us	Google
MySpace	Facebook
Reddit	Newsvine
Live	More …

To:
From:
Note:

This is a collection of published news and opnions on the above subject:

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Friday/Letters/2346939/Article/index_html

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/12

Teaching Science/Math in English: Qualified teachers a key factor

By : AZMAN UJANG, Batu Caves

THIS is a plea to the government not to back out on its policy to teach Science and Mathematics in English. In deciding on a very important matter such as this, narrow-minded, jingoistic and even hypocritical views from whatever quarters should be ignored for the sake of Malaysia’s future.

What is obvious is that the policy, like many others, has been deemed a “failure” by some quarters because of implementation weaknesses.

To begin with, to successfully teach these two subjects or any subjects in English, there must be parallel, concerted and deliberate efforts to improve the students’ command of the language.

While RM5 billion was reported to have been spent on its implementation, how much was spent, as a separate programme, to enable students to master English?

It is a national problem, simply because of our dire shortage of teachers competent enough to teach English and to teach in English.

Do we have colleges just to produce the much-needed English-language teachers?

Please address this weakest link in the implementation chain. If this is done, English could even be used to teach a few other subjects.

Almost two generations of Malay-sians have been prevented from mastering this language of global knowledge and business. How much longer must we wait before we see the political will to reverse the rot?

In the meantime, we must not put the reverse gear on the Science-and-Mathematics-in-English policy. We must move forward if we want to produce human capital all Malaysians can be proud of.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/12

Teaching Science/Math in English: Reverse this flawed policy

By : S.S.H., Kuala Lumpur

IT was shocking to see the overwhelming response in favour of continuing the policy of teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

No one focused on what Science and Mathematics classes in schools are supposed to be about: Science and Mathematics.

Surely, that should be the primary criterion in considering whether computers should be used instead of blackboards, if calculators should be allowed to replace the abacus and, certainly, if English should be the medium of instruction.

Ultimately, we must set our priorities right. If improving the level of English is our concern — as it should be — it must be done through other channels that do not adversely affect an equally important agenda: providing fair “access” to Mathematics and Science to all.

Middle-class urban-dwell- ing Malaysians — me included — are mostly wary of developing elitist tendencies, especially when it comes to education. That a study revealing the flaws in the policy could be so readily ignored and doubted, however, indicates a state of denial among many whose children may be comfortable with things as they are.

But nobody can escape the fact that if there is sufficient evidence showing that the policy is leading to a poorer understanding of Science and Mathematics, with geographical and class underpinnings involved, it is really not the implementation of the policy that needs fixing.

Instead, it is the flawed policy that requires reversal, if for nothing else, in the spirit of fairness.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/12

Teaching Science/Math in English: Students’ needs come first

By : C.T. LIM, Kuala Lumpur

THE debate regarding the language of instruction for Mathematics and Science has been focusing mainly on issues of bias towards or against certain races, ability to cope with different languages and even national unity. But two factors have not been addressed sufficiently: the choices available for parents and students, and what is best for the students in the long run.

My opinion as a father and businessman (and hence, employer), is that students need to be proficient in English in mathematical and scientific studies. Their chances of securing employment or careers of their choice would greatly improve. Unless that student is keen on venturing into employment in China or Taiwan, learning Mathematics and Science in Mandarin is not going to be of any use. In any case, we already see many students in China learning English today and that should tell us something.

It would be good if the people debating this issue would put the interests of the students first for a change. And for those students who are going to find it difficult learning Mathematics and Science in English, and would rather be instructed in Bahasa Malay-sia, my frank opinion is that they would be better off getting Cs in Mathematics/Science in English than As in the same subjects in Bahasa Malaysia.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/12

Teaching SCIENCE & MATH IN ENGLISH: Survey conclusions may be flawed, not policy

By : NORAINI YAACOB, Petaling Jaya

YOUR publication of a study supposedly revealing flaws in the Mathematics/Science-in-English policy should come under scrutiny. Based on the results published, Malay students did worse in the survey when answering the mathematical questions in Malay (37.3 per cent correct) rather than in English (39.6 per cent correct).

I am not a market research analyst or statistician, but the methodology and sampling for the survey is very important — the size and demographics of those surveyed is key to the study. Too few details of the study were shown but the conclusions were prominently published, leading many to believe what may not be.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/12

Teaching SCIENCE & MATH IN ENGLISH: Don’t give up, our children deserve better

By : LEEYA ALI, Kuala Lumpur

ON one hand, member of parliament for Rembau, Khairy Jamaluddin, said we failed because the policy of teaching Mathematics and Science in English was half-baked, etc. Yet he acknowledged that “English… is a basic requirement for students and job-seekers… undisputed lingua franca” (“It’s high time we ditched this policy — NST, Sept 9).

So settle for a “quick-fix band aid” policy. Improve the programme now that the shortcomings have been identified. The policy’s weaknesses are no excuse for jeopardising our children’s future.

As a politician educated overseas and who would be able to send his child to international school, Khairy is the last person to understand the helplessness ordinary parents feel when their child, a product of the local education system, graduates but fails to land a good job or any job at all because he/she cannot speak good English.

So, at best, these Malay graduates can only work in government agencies.

Not much chance for those who speak broken English, if any. Not as in our days when the job field was open to all. Everyone had a chance. We had a level playing field.

When it was announced then that Science and Mathematics were to be taught in English, my children were very happy with the news. Even my 85-year-old mother commented that in the first place, the government should not have changed the medium of instruction from English to Malay. She, a kampung granny who studied till Year Six in a Malay school, has so much foresight.

And now when we face problems teaching only two subjects in English, our politicians and educationists want to give up! Miracles do not happen overnight.

If the teachers are not capable, train them well and give them incentives. During this transition period, even if it is going to take another 10 years, recruit former teachers, retirees or those fluent in English and good in Mathematics and Science, give them some training, then send them to schools that need help.

I am a mother of five. I sent all of them to a government Malay school. I could afford to send them for extra English tuition. Despite this, their English is nothing like ours. So how about those who cannot afford tuition?

Is the government going to ditch its policy when the importance of English far outweighs all reasons the nay-sayers can muster?

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/08

USE OF ENGLISH: Let’s continue with the policy

By : SAMUEL YESUIAH, Seremban

THE news report, “Wrong to learn language this way” (NST, Sept 4), on the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English highlighted the belief by some educationists that the deteriorating standard of English could not be arrested by teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

It was also suggested that if the intention was to improve the standard of English, then the government should start with arts subjects and also increase the number of English periods in schools.

While there is truth in this, it should be remembered that the move to teach Science and Mathematics in English from 2003 was not to improve the standard of English.

The main reason was that we did not want to be left behind in global economic competition and participation.

The English language is the language of the sciences and arts.

It is the lingua franca of numerous disciplines in the education world.

Many books, journals, reference materials and research papers are written by the Western world in English.

The government hopes that children will have a strong foundation in Science and Mathematics by teaching basic terminology and concepts of Science and Mathematics in English in primary and secondary schools.

A strong foundation will enable them to read science reference books and journals in English at universities.

It will also enable them to contribute research papers in the international arena.

Apart from that, there is an information overload as students can access information and knowledge from all over the world through the Internet.

Many students have access to the Internet and they can access the latest scientific knowledge if they have a strong foundation in Science and Mathematics in English.

The medium of instruction of the language of Science and Mathematics on the Internet is English.

Because of the rapid pace of information overload in the scientific field, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka has been unable to cope with translating the information from English to Bahasa Malaysia.

Before it can translate the information into books, it is out of date.

It is, therefore, a waste of money, resources and manpower to translate.

Another problem in translation is that the true and intended meaning of the original message is lost.

It is the intention of the government that students access the information in the language in which it was transmitted first hand.

Many developing countries have reverted to teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

It is the global trend and even China is engaging teachers from England to teach English in its schools.

All around us, much prominence is given to the English language, especially in Science and Mathematics

However, we in Malaysia are still debating whether to continue teaching the subjects in English.

It is time that we think global and act local.

Therefore, let us embrace the change that is taking place all over the world with regard to the prominence of English in the fields of education and science.

The possibility of reverting to teaching Science and Mathematics in the national language and the mother-tongue language stems from the finding that many primary rural schoolchildren face problems learning Science and Mathematics in English.

This is because many of them come to school without any knowledge of English.

Without the ability to read and understand simple English, it is impossible for rural children to understand the concepts and content of Science and Mathematics in English.

Rural primary school teachers have to go back to basics and teach the children the alphabet, the sound system, syntax, grammar and the mechanics of writing the English alphabet.

As suggested by the National Union of the Teaching Profession, pupils from Year 1 to Year 3 should be given a thorough grounding in English with simple Science and Mathematics terms and concepts integrated into the English lesson.

Pupils from Year 4 to Year 6 will be gradually introduced to Science and Mathematics in English.

This idea mooted by the Curriculum Development Centre of the Education Ministry is called the ELiTE (Early Literacy Through English) programme, which is being implemented in trial stages in selected rural primary schools.

The programme, if implemented nationwide next year, will see Year One, Two and Three children using a curriculum that has Science and Maths elements integrated into the English language module.

English language teachers and Science and Maths teachers will use the same module to teach early literacy skills so that the children can read, understand and write simple English words and instructions.

There has been positive feedback on ELiTE from rural schools that have run the programme.

Many rural children who have come through the 2003 batch have shown much improvement in their English-language proficiency.

It is common to hear the children speaking English in the classroom with their friends.

Even teachers have shown marked improvement in their linguistic competence and display greater confidence in teaching the two subjects.

However, the government has said that it will decide whether to revert at the end of the year after taking into consideration the findings of educationists and the results of the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah examination, which comprises the first batch of children who went through the language policy change.

I hope the government will receive positive feedback so that it can continue the policy of teaching Science and Maths in English.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/08

USE OF ENGLISH: Let’s continue with the policy

By : SAMUEL YESUIAH, Seremban

THE news report, “Wrong to learn language this way” (NST, Sept 4), on the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English highlighted the belief by some educationists that the deteriorating standard of English could not be arrested by teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

It was also suggested that if the intention was to improve the standard of English, then the government should start with arts subjects and also increase the number of English periods in schools.

While there is truth in this, it should be remembered that the move to teach Science and Mathematics in English from 2003 was not to improve the standard of English.

The main reason was that we did not want to be left behind in global economic competition and participation.

The English language is the language of the sciences and arts.

It is the lingua franca of numerous disciplines in the education world.

Many books, journals, reference materials and research papers are written by the Western world in English.

The government hopes that children will have a strong foundation in Science and Mathematics by teaching basic terminology and concepts of Science and Mathematics in English in primary and secondary schools.

A strong foundation will enable them to read science reference books and journals in English at universities.

It will also enable them to contribute research papers in the international arena.

Apart from that, there is an information overload as students can access information and knowledge from all over the world through the Internet.

Many students have access to the Internet and they can access the latest scientific knowledge if they have a strong foundation in Science and Mathematics in English.

The medium of instruction of the language of Science and Mathematics on the Internet is English.

Because of the rapid pace of information overload in the scientific field, Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka has been unable to cope with translating the information from English to Bahasa Malaysia.

Before it can translate the information into books, it is out of date.

It is, therefore, a waste of money, resources and manpower to translate.

Another problem in translation is that the true and intended meaning of the original message is lost.

It is the intention of the government that students access the information in the language in which it was transmitted first hand.

Many developing countries have reverted to teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

It is the global trend and even China is engaging teachers from England to teach English in its schools.

All around us, much prominence is given to the English language, especially in Science and Mathematics

However, we in Malaysia are still debating whether to continue teaching the subjects in English.

It is time that we think global and act local.

Therefore, let us embrace the change that is taking place all over the world with regard to the prominence of English in the fields of education and science.

The possibility of reverting to teaching Science and Mathematics in the national language and the mother-tongue language stems from the finding that many primary rural schoolchildren face problems learning Science and Mathematics in English.

This is because many of them come to school without any knowledge of English.

Without the ability to read and understand simple English, it is impossible for rural children to understand the concepts and content of Science and Mathematics in English.

Rural primary school teachers have to go back to basics and teach the children the alphabet, the sound system, syntax, grammar and the mechanics of writing the English alphabet.

As suggested by the National Union of the Teaching Profession, pupils from Year 1 to Year 3 should be given a thorough grounding in English with simple Science and Mathematics terms and concepts integrated into the English lesson.

Pupils from Year 4 to Year 6 will be gradually introduced to Science and Mathematics in English.

This idea mooted by the Curriculum Development Centre of the Education Ministry is called the ELiTE (Early Literacy Through English) programme, which is being implemented in trial stages in selected rural primary schools.

The programme, if implemented nationwide next year, will see Year One, Two and Three children using a curriculum that has Science and Maths elements integrated into the English language module.

English language teachers and Science and Maths teachers will use the same module to teach early literacy skills so that the children can read, understand and write simple English words and instructions.

There has been positive feedback on ELiTE from rural schools that have run the programme.

Many rural children who have come through the 2003 batch have shown much improvement in their English-language proficiency.

It is common to hear the children speaking English in the classroom with their friends.

Even teachers have shown marked improvement in their linguistic competence and display greater confidence in teaching the two subjects.

However, the government has said that it will decide whether to revert at the end of the year after taking into consideration the findings of educationists and the results of the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah examination, which comprises the first batch of children who went through the language policy change.

I hope the government will receive positive feedback so that it can continue the policy of teaching Science and Maths in English.

NST Online » Local News

2008/09/07

TEACHING OF MATHS AND SCIENCE IN ENGLISH: The story on thinking Science and speaking English

MAY 10, 2002 marked a momentous turning point in the country’s education history.

The move came in response to complaints over the decline in the language and was, at the same time, meant to enhance knowledge in Science and Mathematics.

This instantly stirred a passionate debate, which remains to this day.

The government allocated RM5 billion to implement the programme over the following five years.

Small schools and those without electricity were given generator sets and a 34-inch digital television set in place of LCD projectors.

Teachers were trained and given courseware and guides. The Education Ministry also set up hotlines for queries.

The teaching of Mathematics and Science in English for Year One, Form One and Lower Six students began on Jan 5, 2003.

In the early stages, the ministry reported that everything was smooth sailing.

Even the National Union of the Teaching Profession said the feedback it had received showed that most students were keen to learn Mathematics and Science in English.

But within the first month of its enforcement, teachers in some schools reported that students who were weak in English were struggling with the lessons.

Teachers were often forced to revert to Bahasa Malaysia to ensure students understood the basic concepts.

And by April, Education Minister Tan Sri Musa Mohamad was threatening to discipline teachers who conducted Mathematics and Science classes in Bahasa Malaysia.

Yet in June 2003, just six months after the programme began, Musa reported that students’ performance in Science and Mathematics had improved significantly.

Quoting a study by the ministry’s school inspectorate division, he said average scores in Science, Mathematics and English had improved.

About 85 per cent of teachers in 1,031 schools covered in the study said they were inspired and confident in implementing the policy.

Despite this, and figures presented in Parliament over the years showing improvements in the average Mathematics and Science scores, questions continued to dog the new policy.

In January 2006, four students sought a declaration from the High Court that the policy of teaching Science and Mathematics in English was unconstitutional.

They wanted the subjects to be taught again in Bahasa Malaysia in national primary and secondary schools, and in Mandarin and Tamil in vernacular primary schools.

At the end of that year, the ministry reported a nine per cent drop in the number of students who answered PMR Mathematics and Science papers fully in English.

Though there have been numerous examples of students, teachers and schools doing well with the new policy direction, there were also those that had not adapted well.

This spurred Johor Umno chief Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman to hit out against the policy during debates at the party’s General Assembly last year.

Ghani, who is also Johor menteri besar, said the move widened the divide between urban and rural schools.

His criticism dragged the debate back into the limelight, tailed by a chorus of calls for a policy reversal.

Even the MCA Youth, at its convention last August, called for Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah test papers in the two subjects to be written in Mandarin in Chinese schools.

Education Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said that studies on the issue were being carried out by his ministry.

DOWN FULL COPY OF THE REPORT (PDF-2.3MB)

NST Online » Columns

2008/09/10

ZAINUL ARIFIN: This is no time to mess with our kids’ future

By : Zainul Arifin

OBVIOUSLY, opinions are varied on the contentious issue of the teaching of Mathematics and Science in English. People are divided, as they should be, and so let the debate begin. It is better than the latest political shenanigans.

There are, ladies and gentlemen, as they say, statistics and statistics. Now depending on what strokes one’s fancy, the glass is either half empty or half full. Hence, the policy is either serving or failing our kids.

Last week, I alluded to the danger of making the right decision based on flawed conclusions. I think this might be the case here, especially when it is widely admitted that one of the main problems is that many teachers lack proficiency in the language. As a result, many seek the easy way out and teach in languages they are comfortable in.

When it was first introduced in 2002, the idea was to have teaching aids, mainly computer software and hardware, which would help teachers and pupils familiarise themselves with the language. Reports now suggest that many of the computers are used for many things but that.

Blaming the previous administration for introducing this policy is disingenuous. Surely, given the situation we find ourselves in vis-a-vis the English language, the idea has merit. These are desperate times, requiring radical ideas without slinking into our comfort zones.

Everyone talks about the need to improve the teaching of English in schools, which surely is our collective wish. But this is something that is nowhere near the horizon now.

If we now are lamenting some teachers’ problem with the language even when conducting fact-based subjects, pray tell where are we going to get the teachers who can teach our kids grammar and syntax, not to mention double negatives and alliterations?

English is taught not as a language, but a subject, which one needs to study and cram for examinations. It is even referred to as BI, short for Bahasa Inggeris, which emphasises its alien-ness.

It is only when the medium of instruction of Mathematics and Science is English that it becomes alive as a language.

Now consider this possibility, too: the level of comprehension or comfort in English among Year Six pupils — those who have lived through six years of the policy — is better than those before them who had less exposure to the language.

Have there been studies on the state of English proficiency arising from the policy, studies as thorough as the one on the level of achievements in Science and Mathematics?

If my hunch is correct, then obviously, the policy, having met its English language objective, cannot be deemed a failure.

And if that is the case, then we should not ditch it but instead work towards improving it to serve our Science, Mathematics and English objectives better.

Are we using linguists or English experts in developing our children’s curriculum to structure a gradual, orderly and pedagogically sound entry into Mathematics, Science and English?

There are arguments that rural, poor children are at a disadvantage when Science and Mathematics are taught in English. This is, of course, a bogey, since who among us would want to deprive our rural, poor brethren of a better future.

Are the rural poor, now working or studying, and having lived through the previous policy, better served by it?

Are their abilities to score in Mathematics and Science, taught in Bahasa Malaysia, Mandarin or Tamil, an advantage when pitted against those slacker urban kids whose only salvation is being glib-tongued in the imperialist language?

Perhaps someone should look at the borrowing habits in our local universities and see how many English reference books, where most knowledge resides, are checked out. Someone should also see whether there is an economic correlation between socioeconomic achievements and English language proficiency.

These are also studies worth doing. Statistics and damned statistics, eh?

Let us look at this issue beyond our obsessions on the number of A’s our children get, which is now to be the guiding principle for our decision on the policy. The nation’s fate and future cannot be gambled based on our 12-year-olds’ results.

Most supporters of the policy are not blind to the fact that it is not perfect and neither are they rabid Anglophiles. Mostly, they are likely to be practical people, parents and employers, who see a problem.

They care about the future of our children, and our country. Parents are rightly emotional on the issue, but they harbour no political agenda and thus need not test the pulse of the electorate to decide. Their constituents are their children.

NST Online » NewsBreak

2008/09/09

This year’s UPSR results to determine if Science and Mathematics will be taught in English

BERNAMA

PUTRAJAYA, TUES:

The results of a total of 518,616 pupils sitting for the Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) examination this year will be one indicator for the continuation of teaching science and mathematics in English.

“However, the questions for the two subjects would be bilingual,” he told reporters after visiting Sekolah Rendah Kebangsaan Putrajaya Persint 11 (1) here today.

Alimuddin said determination of continuing the policy was not limited to the results the UPSR pupils will obtain this year.

“The results will only be a part of the determination. Many other factors wil be considered including views and suggestions from various quarters through round-table discussions,” he said.

The discussions involve teachers and students of primary and secondary schools in both urban and rural areas.

“Discussions with politicians are scheduled for October,” he said.

On examinations centres in flood-affected states, Alimuddin said everything was going smoothly although three Kedah schools experienced minor flooding.

They are Sekolah Kebangsaan (SK) Bidong, SK Teroi, Yan and SK Kuala Muda. There are 8,171 exam centres this year.

Meanwhile, Alimuddin said begining this year students picked for fully-residential schools have to sit for an aptitude test to determine their disposition and readiness.

“The pioneer test will be conducted by the Malaysian Examinations Board in 600 schools after the UPSR exam,” he said, adding that there were 6,000 places in 54 fully-residential schools and 750 more places would be available if five more such schools are completed next year. “Applications are open from Sept 1 till Oct 31 and results will be known by Dec 15,” he said.

Alimuddin reminded parents that offers were final and any change of school or subjects stream was not permitted and no appeal will be entertained.

Meanwhile, Alimuddin said begining this year students picked for fully-residential schools have to sit for an aptitude test to determine their disposition and readiness.
“The pioneer test will be conducted by the Malaysian Examinations Board in 600 schools after the UPSR exam,” he said, adding that there were 6,000 places in 54 fully-residential schools and 750 more places would be available if five more such schools are completed next year.
“Applications are open from Sept 1 till Oct 31 and results will be known by Dec 15,” he said.
Alimuddin reminded parents that offers were final and any change of school or subjects stream was not permitted and no appeal will be entertained.

NST Online » Local News

2008/09/04

Teaching Science and Mathematics in English: ‘Wrong to learn language this way’

KUALA LUMPUR: It is wrong to use subjects to teach English. This is the consensus of educationists on the deteriorating standard of the language among Malaysian students.

“They are hoping that by some magic, the pupils will learn the language in this way,” said Royal Professor Ungku Aziz.

“For people to learn the language properly, they must be taught grammar and syntax from the primary, secondary and even up to first year of university.

“The tragedy of our time is that most of those in their 20s have no idea what grammar is all about. You have to learn English according to the grammar rules in order to use the language correctly. You have to learn language as a language first,” he said.

“If the intention is to improve the pupils’ English, then they should start with the arts subjects such as moral studies and also increase the number of English periods,” he said.

“Science involves a lot of thinking while Mathematics does not use too much language and vocabulary.

“It goes against the principles of education and does not achieve any objective,” Pang stressed.

Both Ungku Aziz and Pang agreed that more should be done to improve the standard of English — but by having proper English classes.

They were commenting on the on-going debate and study being conducted by the Education Ministry to review whether it should continue using English to teach Science and Mathematics in primary schools.

The National Union of the Teaching Profession (NUTP) also argued for young pupils to be taught the basics of English before it was used as the medium of instruction for Science and Mathematics.

“Pupils in Year 1 to 3 should be given thorough grounding in English before they are exposed to the concepts and terms in the two subjects (Science and Mathematics),” said NUTP secretary-general Lok Yim Pheng.

“Under stage two (of NUTP’s proposal to improve the standard of English), pupils from Year 4 to 6 should gradually be introduced to the terms.

“At our delegates’ conference in Penang from Aug 24 to 27, we resolved that Science and Mathematics should not be taught directly at stage one (Year 1 to 3).

“We are suggesting that more English periods be added to build up the pupils’ foundation in English. They should be taught grammar,” she said. At the moment, there are only eight English periods per week.

Only after they have achieved a strong foundation should they be taught the two subjects in English, Lok added.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/10

Teaching of science and maths in english: Persevere with policy

By : WAN MOHD HILMI WAN AHMAD, Kuala Terengganu

I WAS truly upset by your reports on the effectiveness of the campaign to teach Science and Mathematics in English (“Study reveals policy’s flaws” — NST, Sept 7).

I am neither a Mathematics nor a Science teacher, but I feel some students and teachers find it hard to cope with English to begin with, let alone learn and teach Mathematics and Science in that language.

Both teachers and students need to possess a good standard of English to get the momentum going in the classroom but, in most cases, they are struggling to master even the basics of the language.

However, that is not to say we must scrap what we have adopted for so many years and invested so much time and effort in.

Students, and our teachers, too, have been learning English since kindergarten days. So we should persevere with teaching Science and Mathematics in English.

What we need to do is to muster enough determination to carry on while also rectifying the mistakes in implementation that have worked against the success of the teaching programme. Where there’s a will, there’s a way.

NST Online » Letters

2008/09/05

USE OF ENGLISH: Language policy has my vote

By : CHENG YI, Kuala Lumpur

I REFER to Zainul Arifin’s “Let parents decide on English policy” (NST, Sept 3).

When Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad announced the decision to teach Mathematics and Science in English, it rekindled my hope in the local education system.

As it is, most of my peers had opted to send their kids to either Chinese or private schools. But with the teaching of Mathematics and Science in English, I thought there was perhaps a spark of hope in our national schools.

I am sure that many pupils from the rural areas will suffer initially but, as Zainul says, kids are better adapters and adopters than adults. I am sure that many of our English-speaking elite did not hail from English-speaking families. I have many Malay friends who speak perfect English although their parents did not.

To children from English-speaking backgrounds, it doesn’t make much difference.

When I was doing my matriculation in Australia, although I studied in Bahasa Malaysia-medium schools, I had no problem coping with the sudden switch to English when learning Mathematics and Science.

However, my peers who did not speak English (this includes those of Chinese descent) did have problems adapting. As a result, most of their High School Certificate scores were compromised.

At the end of the day, it is better to suffer a bit in primary school than to struggle learning a language later in life.

It is this same rationale that persuades many Malaysian Chinese parents to send their children to Chinese schools. “Although we don’t speak Chinese at home, the kids can cope”, I often hear them say. Children do pick up much more easily than adults.

I have yet to meet anyone who says, “Oh, I am so glad we did not study Mathematics and Science in English during our school days”.

Extra knowledge is a good thing. I look at the pullouts in the NST like Didik, and am impressed by the Mathematics and Science questions in English. It gives our syllabus an international feel. And it gives me no qualms to send my children to a national school.

Zainul’s suggestion for a referendum within each school is a great one. I am almost sure that parents in my children’s school will vote to retain the policy of teaching Mathematics and Science in English.

The government should look into proper training of teachers. Don’t deprive the children of Malaysia of a brighter, international, global future because of bad implementation of a good policy.

NST Online » Frontpage

2008/09/07

TEACHING OF MATHS AND SCIENCE IN ENGLISH:
Study reveals policy’s flaws

By : Elizabeth John and Aniza Damis

TANJUNG MALIM: Five years after schools began teaching Mathematics and Science in English, tests on thousands of students have revealed poor scores in these subjects.

The tests and surveys, part of a study of that policy, have also shown that the majority of students still find it hard to follow Mathematics and Science lessons in English.

Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris (UPSI) put over 3,000 Year Five pupils and about 2,800 Form Two students around the country through short Mathematics, Science and English language tests between February last year and January.

The schoolchildren were from a mix of urban, rural and vernacular schools in Peninsular Malaysia.

The tests were made up of modified past-year examination questions. Some were taken straight out of textbooks.

Some 1,700 Year Five pupils tested this January had a mean score of 7.89 out of a maximum 20 for Mathematics.

The results were not much better for Science: a mean of 4.08 out of 14. English proficiency was not good either: a mean of 11.87 out of 31.

The mean scores of Malay and Orang Asli pupils were also much lower than those of the Chinese and Indians, said study leader Professor Emeritus Datuk Isahak Haron.

Isahak has called the policy a failure, particularly in terms of its impact on Malay students in national schools (Sekolah Kebangsaan), and is asking for a return to the teaching of Mathematics and Science in Bahasa Malaysia.

In the survey, many Year Five pupils told researchers they found it hard to learn Mathematics and Science in English, saying they did not understand the lessons.

In one sample, less than a fifth of the Year Five Malay students surveyed considered it easy to learn Science in English and only about a third thought it was easy to learn Mathematics in English.

When a sample of 1,300 Malay students were asked how well they understood the Mathematics and Science lessons when it was taught in English, over 60 per cent said they only understood the lessons “sometimes”.

The policy had even failed in its aim of improving the pupils’ command of English, said Isahak, a lecturer at the Faculty of Cognitive Science and Human Development.

Students struggled to correctly complete even simple sentences, he said, citing the following sentence in a passage taken out of a school textbook: “He ….. to bed” (The answer is “went”.)

An average of 14 per cent and 19 per cent (two different groups) got the answer right.

Even the highest score according to racial breakdown — 41 per cent of Chinese students in one group answered correctly — did not speak well of the policy’s aim of improving English.

Isahak suggested that it would do more good to allocate more time, staff and money to the teaching of English at the primary school level.

He urged a change in how the language was taught in schools. He said the standardised syllabus should be scrapped in favour of lessons tailored to suit the abilities of different students.

The UPSI study also incorporated findings from other surveys of secondary school students that pointed to similar problems.

Shortly after the policy was implemented in 2003, Associate Professor Hashima Jalaluddin of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia interviewed 43 teachers and 971 Form One students from six schools in the central and southern states of Peninsular Malaysia .

Most of the teachers said students had problems following Mathematics and Science lessons in English, while 70 per cent of the students said they would be more interested if the two subjects were taught in Bahasa Malaysia.

Only a quarter said they had no problem following the lessons in English.

In 2004, Zainuddin Bikum surveyed 229 students in two schools in Kuala Kubu Baru, Selangor, for his dissertation at UPSI and found that more than half of the group was facing difficulties.

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s Professor Juriah Long found that about half the students in both urban and rural schools were worried because they found it difficult to follow Mathematics and Science in English. This was one of the results of her 2005 survey of over 7,000 Form Two students nationwide.

Her study, which also looked at the location of schools and the socio-economic background of students, found the concern was greater among Malay students, those in rural schools, and poor students.

Isahak said Malay students in national schools, mostly in rural areas and from lower socio-economic backgrounds, had lost out the most as a result of the decision to teach Maths and Science in English.

The ones who gained from the policy were a small percentage of Malay students from upper middle class families who went to good schools, he said.

However, UPSI’s own test results showed Year Five Malay students from rural schools scored highest in nine out of 10 Maths questions and two out of seven Science questions compared with Malay students in big town and city schools.

Meanwhile, Malay students in city schools consistently fared the lowest.

Isahak believes the difference in the percentages is marginal and because there are more Malay students in rural areas, it is these students who will be most affected.

Give your two cents after having read the above. Should we teach Maths and Science in languages other than English? Talk to us!

NST Online » Local News

2008/09/07

TEACHING OF MATHS AND SCIENCE IN ENGLISH: ‘Revert to teaching in our national language’

’Revert to teaching in our national language’
THE teaching of Mathematics and Science in English was controversial when it was introduced five years ago, and it still is. Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris lecturer Professor Datuk Dr Isahak Haron says the change to English was an ’irresponsible move’, and many students lost out because of the policy. So, it’s time to cut our losses and go back to teaching these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia, he tells ELIZABETH JOHN and ANIZA DAMIS

Q: From your study, would you say Malay students have lost the most because of this policy?
A: Yes, rural Malays — 70 per cent of them. But we found it’s not only Malay students outside towns who are suffering, it’s also the poorer Malay students in towns — those of lower socio-economic status, even in Ipoh and KL.

Q: Why do non-Malays do better?
A: When it comes to Mathematics, Chinese students have traditionally done better, because they have more practice. But first, they learn it in their own language. The emphasis in Chinese schools is to understand and practise until you get it right. So they will drill knowledge first in Chinese, and then have a Mathematics lesson in English, just to get a grasp on the terminology. That means mastery of the content first. When the fundamentals are strong and you move to Form One and Form Two, you are much better. There’s less of this in Sekolah Kebangsaan.

Q: Is it the same case then for Indian students?
A: A bit like that. And they now have extra coaching through tuition and they’re better at English than the Malay students, so they perform better.

Q: Is the system being used in Chinese schools a better way to go if the government wants to continue with this policy?
A: If you want to continue with this, you have to do what the Chinese schools do. You teach in Bahasa Malaysia and later learn the terminology in English. And if you want to improve the level of English, first, the number of periods of English lessons has to be increased. During the English lesson, you can put in elements of Science and Mathematics. In this way, you increase your vocabulary and learn in a more joyful way. English must be taught by people who are good in English, not by a Maths teacher who is not so good in English. When the students are good in Mathematics and Science, they will be able to understand the concepts of the subjects in English or any other language. The mix in these languages is the worst thing happening now. The teachers cannot teach properly. They are confused and their foundation is weak.

Q: Would it have made a difference if the teachers had had a better command of English?
A: That will take 10 or 20 more years then.

Q: Isn’t it possible to have a concurrent system? Because if you abandon things because they don’t work within five years, then you can never start anything.
A: This is what Dr Mahathir’s (former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad) people are talking about. They don’t care about the 70 or 80 per cent of the children. All they care about is that their agenda is correct. It doesn’t matter if it takes 20 years; you see his gamble?

Q: What’s your position at Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka?
A: I’m a board member. But I am first of all an educationist. I care about the children and what they learn.

Q: When students go to university, they suddenly find that almost all the textbooks are in English, so they have difficulty studying. Some students then pay to have some chapters translated into Bahasa Malaysia, but how many of them can afford this?

A: Once upon a time, Malay students were already quite good in Mathematics and Science. Teachers and students were quite confident to teach and learn these subjects in Bahasa Malaysia. In fact, all teachers, Chinese and Indian too, were confident about it. What was lacking was a good command of English. It had nothing to do with Mathematics and Science. The way things are now, you’ve disadvantaged Malay students in all three subjects. My problem was with the way English was taught. The way it is taught to rural children. You don’t have to bring in foreign teachers. What you need to do is study what students need to know, and provide suitable programmes. This has never been done by anyone here. They borrowed programmes from abroad and called it “Communication English” which hasn’t been successful, especially in the rural context. You need another programme. I’ve been demanding for one. I will challenge any TESL (Teaching of English as a Second Language) professor to devise a programme that can, in three months, teach 300 new words to students in a Sekolah Kebangsaan in a rural area and have them enjoy the experience.

Q: So the money and time should be spent on the way English is being taught?
A: Yes. It should be taught differently to everybody. If you are at level two, go for a level two English module. If your English is better, why not start at level four? You do it thoroughly. I’ve been proposing this for the past three years. When children start schooling, each has different abilities, so they all go for a screening test. Then you stream them into classes that fit their level of understanding. The classes should be specialised for all subjects. If a child is good at Bahasa Malaysia and poorer in English, they go for level 2 Bahasa Malaysia and level 1 English. In such classes, you have the right teacher, the specific course materials and undergo the appropriate exercises suited to the child’s needs. Once they pass one level, they can go to the next. Now, if a student is very good at one thing and poor in others, the marks get averaged and they get placed at the bottom of the class. I don’t like averaging. If they are good at something or poor at it, they should be allowed to proceed at their own pace in each subject. But at the same time. there will have to be classes that they enjoy together like art, physical education and music.

Q: Are schools now equipped for these kinds of lessons?
A: They spent RM5 billion for this project. Just give me RM2 million, I can convert classrooms for this purpose.

Q: How will the exams work if they are all at different levels?
A: It doesn’t matter. You take the exam when you are ready. Anytime you want.

Q: Then the exam system will have to change?
A: Yes. Its not so much about getting the certificate, its about knowing what level you are at. It should be more open.

Q: How do students get promoted to the next class then?
A: They’re being promoted according to age, not ability. At seven, you’re in Standard One, at eight, in Standard Two, whether you’re good or not. Whereas, you could be in Standard Three at the age of eight. We can encourage students and develop them according to their ability and interest. If they are weak, we can quickly address it and not average it out.

Q: What about students who just want to complete SPM and get a job that requires that as a minimum?
A: There’ll be no such thing as an SPM certificate. There will be different certificates for different subjects and if you want to do 10 subjects at SPM level, you can do it at different times.

Q: Coming back to the whole issue of teaching Mathematics and Science in English, what do we do next?
A: Go back to Bahasa Malaysia. Everyone knows Bahasa Malaysia and it’s not a loss to anyone. Teachers also feel more comfortable with it.

Q: What about the students who have been through four years under this policy?
A: They can do it in Bahasa Malaysia.

Q: Aren’t they going to be even more confused?

A: As it is, 70 per cent of students cannot follow. So, nobody is likely to lose. Those who can follow are already quite good in Bahasa Malaysia now.

It’s not a new language for them as it is already used widely in school. There will be the least negative effect on the teachers and students.

Q: What about the students who have been taught Mathematics and Science really well in English?
A: That’s just a few per cent. But even they have done Bahasa Malaysia. I don’t think they’ll lose their command of English and since they’re good at Mathematics and Science in English, they won’t lose that either.

Q: Could the system be converted immediately or would schools need a few years to phase it out?
A: Immediately.

Q: Including the ones who have to sit for exams the next year?
A: The exam papers are already in two languages. Only the textbooks are in English. I’ve always asked why they’ve deprived rural children of textbooks in two languages. That’s what they need.

Q: What if we teach English your way, but maintain Science and Mathematics in English?
A: If you want to learn a subject, the first foundation years must be taught in the mother tongue. Seventy per cent of students cannot do it in English.

Q: You presented the findings of your study to the prime minister. What was his reaction?
A: He said we should do it — convert (back to Bahasa Malaysia). He said he’d been thinking about it for a long time already.

Q: You also presented it to the education minister at a symposium. What was the reaction from the other people at that briefing?
A: They asked many questions about methodology. We could have done a study on the whole country, if we’d had a million ringgit. But we did this study for zero ringgit.

And we took many samples. We analysed test questions individually. There is no point doing an average achievement analysis.

You need to show where the student did well and where he didn’t. It has to be item-by-item, so that we know where the total is.

Then, some people from the Education Ministry’s Curiculum Development Centre said, ‘Some rural schools did well’.

So I said, ‘Which rural schools? I want to know which ones. And how many is some?’

In this situation, we’re not talking about the exceptional students. You are talking about the majority. I’m not doing the study to find out why seven per cent of Orang Asli kids can do it.

Q: So, there might be exceptions, but they don’t represent the rest?
A: Of course not.

The logical thing is to go back (to teaching Science and Mathematics in Bahasa Malaysia).

Q: So, why are people hanging on to this policy?
A: There are a few reasons. One of which is that they spent RM5 billion.

But I say, what is RM5 billion? What happened to the RM5 billion? It was spent on computers. It’s not like the computers are going to vanish if you switch to Bahasa Malaysia. The computers can still be used.

And all that training for the teachers is helpful to them, so let it be.

You don’t lose out in anything.

The second issue is that, “If we start using English now, eventually we will be good at it.”

I want to know how long do we have to wait? 20 years? An educationist doesn’t even want to see one child being destroyed by any foolish act.

If a person is sick, do you experiment on that person? To experiment with a few hundred thousand or millions is irresponsible.

Dr Mahathir’s policy was irresponsible.

But nobody questioned him. I questioned him, and he scolded me.

Q: Irresponsible because?
A: Because he knew that it couldn’t be done.

He may have been good in asking for the Petronas Twin Towers or highways to be built.

The physical development of the country is not a problem. But (with this policy) you ruin children’s lives.

And poor Malay students thought they could do it, but suddenly education has no meaning to them.

http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/20080907091953/Article/index_html

NST Online » Frontpage

2008/09/14

Give schools option to teach in English

By : Nisha Sabanayagam and Ili Liyana Mokhtar

KUALA LUMPUR: Schools are expected to take a stand on whether to support the continued use of English as the medium of instruction for Science and Mathematics.

It obtained a mandate from its members at a meeting yesterday to appeal to the Education Ministry to continue with the use of English.

At present, English is used in the teaching of the two subjects from Year One to Year Six.

SK Bukit Damansara PTA vice-chairman Noor Azimah Abdul Rahim said members of the committee would be meeting PTAs from other schools next Saturday to enlist their support. A report will be submitted to the ministry.

The on-going debate among parents, educators, students and government officials on the use of English as the medium of instruction for the two subjects was sparked by a report in the New Sunday Times.

The report, based on a survey by Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, said the policy introduced by former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 2003 was flawed and should be scrapped.

SK Bukit Damansara PTA committee member Roz Mawar Zain said there were limitations in using English to teach Mathematics and Science. However, reverting to the national language would be too drastic. Roz Mawar added that more time was needed to gauge the results of the existing policy.

Noor Azimah said the Education Ministry should consider alternatives such as improving the current syllabus and the training of teachers instead of taking a step backwards.

“We have no intention to degrade the importance of the national language. What we want is for the younger generation to be well equipped to compete on a global level,” she said.

Should the government decide to revert to using the national language in the teaching of Science and Mathematics, the PTA committee members informed parents at yesterday’s meeting that they would suggest another option to the ministry.

“If the policy is changed, schools should be given the choice to teach both the subjects in English,” said Noor Azimah.

In the long run, these schools might be considered as cluster schools of excellence for English, she said.

Director-General of Education Alimuddin Mohd Dom said earlier last week that the results of this year’s 518,616 Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah candidates would be one of the factors that would decide whether or not the policy would be continued.

“Many other factors will be considered, including the views and suggestions from various quarters through round-table discussions,” he said.

Two round-table discussions were held in July and August on the issue. Two more discussions would be held this month.

Alimuddin said the first two discussions, which included the participation of teachers, community leaders, PTA members and professional bodies, had brought forth three views.

One was that the policy should continue and its implementation be strengthened.

The second view was that it should only be implemented at a higher level, either at the secondary level or Year Two in primary school.

The third view was for the government to scrap the policy and revert to teaching the subjects in Bahasa Malaysia.

WHAT THEY SAY:

Professor Emeritus Tan Sri Dr Ismail Hussein, president, Federation of National Writers Association

In those days, when the medium of instruction was English, we were reduced to a “minority race”. We need Bahasa Malaysia to unite, or it will widen the divide between the urban and rural folks.
But we are not rejecting the English language. It should be upheld, but teaching these subjects in English is not the answer. I give 200 per cent support to use English as an additional language. However, it will not benefit my grandmother who lives in the kampung.

Datuk Abdul Raof Husin:,
Pemuafakatan Badan Ilmiah Nasional

I find teachers are less articulate in class because they are unable to illustrate as well as they could in Bahasa Malaysia. This affects the ability of students to absorb because there is less interaction and discussion.
Studies showed that 30 per cent of UPSR students in national and vernacular schools fared poorly in Maths and Science when taught in English.
Do you think there is hope for these children to improve when they go to secondary schools? They are not going to make it if this policy continues.

Professor Emeritus Datuk Isahak Haron:, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
Just look at how the policy came to be. The decision was made because they found that students were weak in English, Maths and Science and so they decided the remedy was to teach these subjects in English!
Among Malay students, more than 87 per cent say that it is tough to learn Science in English. Science is more difficult to learn in English because you need a good command of the language to understand concepts and procedures compared with Maths.
Teachers find it difficult to teach in English and students find it difficult to understand — it is double jeopardy. The conclusion from our analysis is that the policy has brought about negative results.

Professor Dr Idris Zakaria: deputy dean, Islamic Faculty, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Due to our haste to bring progress to the country, we put into effect the English policy. But countries like China, Japan, Germany and France do not use English but they have progressed so much compared to countries where English is widely used, such as Philippines and India.
During the 7th and 14th centuries, Islam was at its golden era and there was much progress. The scholars did not use English then.
The solution is to streamline the use of English according to the field of study for tertiary education.

Goh Hin San:, president, Translation and Creative Writing Association (Perspektif)

The policy now is like operating on the leg when someone is having stomach problems.
There is no country that purposely puts aside its mother tongue to teach in another foreign language in the main school system.
A majority of the Chinese community want the policy to be reverted.

Dr Yap Sin Tian:, chairman, United Chinese School Committees Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong)

We urge the government to find effective means to improve the standard of English in schools. The government should accept the negative effects of Maths and Science being taught in English and allow us to revert to teaching in our native language.
In this way, our mother tongue is kept alive and our multiculturalism continues to thrive.

Professor Datuk Dr Abdul Latiff Abu Bakar:

This is a national issue. We must revert to Bahasa Malaysia for the sake of unity and gaining knowledge.
We must understand our history and government policies, and uphold our Constitution. The issue should not be politicised.

WHAT THE PARENTS SAY:

Anita Menon:, accountant
Both my husband and I are products of the national school system. When I was growing up, my parents did not speak English to me.
The teachers who taught us English were proficient in the language and, as a result, we are both fluent in English. The emphasis on English is now lost in the national schools.
The teachers who teach Mathematics and Science are not able to teach these subjects in English. If the educators themselves are not proficient, how are they supposed to teach students? We are now considering alternative schools for our children.

Rajini M.:, lecturer
I teach graduates and undergraduates. Most of the reference books are in English. They struggle to understand even the basic terms in English.
I do not blame them. It is the teachers who need to be trained properly. It is no use sending them for courses. Examiners should go into classrooms and see what the teachers are doing and correct them.
The situation at my workplace is such that colleagues who are not proficient in English have asked me to give them English lessons. This shows that they are interested in learning the language.
One should focus on improving the teachers’ language skills instead of switching from one language to another.

Wan Intan Ahmad:, housewife
All parents want their children to go to university, either locally or overseas. Most of these institutions use English as the medium of instruction. How are our children going to catch up?
If you want to teach something, teach it well. If we revert to Malay, how much are we going to spend this time? That is taxpayers’ money we are talking about.

Dr Mohd Ezani Md Taib, medical doctor
We need to strengthen the command of English among our students. It seems that teachers these days cannot teach the language. If we have a good command of English, we can learn anything in the language, let alone Science and Maths.
I suggest we leave the policy as it is, as it gives our students an advantage to compete better on a global scale.

WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO SAY TO THESE? TALK BACK!

NST Online » NewsBreak

2008/09/12

Video :Teaching MATH & SCIENCE IN ENGLISH: Debate is healthy – Hishamuddin

PUTRAJAYA, FRI: