Should a pass in English be made compulsory to pass SPM?
KUALA LUMPUR: Should a pass in the English language be made compulsory for the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) Certificate?
Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin threw this question to the public to discuss, and for the government to obtain feedback.
He said he was informed that many rural students would fail the SPM if English was made a compulsory subject to pass.
"Then, I do not think it (not making English a compulsory subject to pass) serves any purpose because English is a very important language that we use in daily life," he said when officiating the setting up of the new Kirby College Alumni Association here .
To improve the quality of English language proficiency among students, qualified teachers must be involved in teaching English, he said.
"Maybe, it is a good idea to revisit the Kirby College concept, sending teachers to learn English in an English-speaking environment," Muhyiddin said.
Meanwhile, Muhyiddin paid a glowing tribute to Kirby College-trained teachers in the 1950s and 1960s, as they brought changes to the education system despite the country not being fully developed and the schools lacking the necessary facilities.
He said, Kirby College was multiracial and multi-religious, likening it to a 'miniature Malaysia' where, at the time, the '1Malaya' and 'Malaya Boleh' concepts were imbibed by society.
Kirby-trained teachers became a yardstick of excellence in the profession and this was proven when four eminent teachers (tokoh guru) between 1988 and 1998 were from the college.
They were Harith Laiki, Idris Tain, Lau Hut Yee and Dr Yahya Ibrahim.
Earlier, Muhyiddin launched a book, 'Kirby College-A Heritage' written by Dr Shaari Isa and opened the Kirby College Exhibition organised by the Education Muzium of the Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
The Kirby College was operated between 1952 and 1956 in Kirby, Liverpool. It trained 1,500 Malaysian teachers and 405 teacher-trainers. - Bernama
Friday, June 12, 2009
How to get back on track with grammar
FINALLY, we have an Education Minister who is thinking along the same lines as most supporters of English language in this country. Make English a subject that has to be passed and you will see that every student and parent will sit up and pay more attention to this subject.
Teachers of English would also be more responsible when they know that a child’s future is in their hands.
On the issue of grammar not being taught in schools, I would like to differ here with our minister. Grammar can be taught via Communicative English but the unfortunate thing is, the teachers entrusted to teach Communicative English have completely ignored the teaching of English Grammar because they are themselves weak in it.
To make matter worse, they do not use grammatically correct sentence structures when they teach and therefore, the children pick up sentences with grammatical mistakes and use them as if it is the normal way to express themselves.
How often I hear working people who have a good command of English when it comes to subject matter making simple grammatical errors like: “He don’t want to go!” or “You has to go.” This is shocking!
If our minister wants grammar to be taught separately, I think it would be a backward step in the teaching of the language. Most modern approach to the teaching of English has grammar incorporated into the various elements of reading, listening, speaking and writing.
To help teachers and students get back on track, maybe the textbooks could incorporate a section devoted to basic grammar for each lesson, thereby covering all aspects of grammar within the first six years of primary English lessons.
Most textbooks do have this but the stress should be on primary schools rather than secondary schools. At secondary schools, more difficult aspects of grammar should be taught, with all the exceptions that are so commonly found in English. Please do not go back to the days when I had to learn things like adverbial clauses, conditionals, subordinate clauses, etc.
Such aspects are for those who want to specialise in teaching English and for undergr aduates who want to master English completely to be competent teachers of the English, not for students taking English as a second language.
I am sure officials in the Ministry of Education can identify the basic areas that all primary school children should know in English grammar and ensure that all primary teachers are familiar with them and that all primary English textbooks highlight them throughout the primary years!
VICTOR CHEW, Ipoh.
Teachers of English would also be more responsible when they know that a child’s future is in their hands.
On the issue of grammar not being taught in schools, I would like to differ here with our minister. Grammar can be taught via Communicative English but the unfortunate thing is, the teachers entrusted to teach Communicative English have completely ignored the teaching of English Grammar because they are themselves weak in it.
To make matter worse, they do not use grammatically correct sentence structures when they teach and therefore, the children pick up sentences with grammatical mistakes and use them as if it is the normal way to express themselves.
How often I hear working people who have a good command of English when it comes to subject matter making simple grammatical errors like: “He don’t want to go!” or “You has to go.” This is shocking!
If our minister wants grammar to be taught separately, I think it would be a backward step in the teaching of the language. Most modern approach to the teaching of English has grammar incorporated into the various elements of reading, listening, speaking and writing.
To help teachers and students get back on track, maybe the textbooks could incorporate a section devoted to basic grammar for each lesson, thereby covering all aspects of grammar within the first six years of primary English lessons.
Most textbooks do have this but the stress should be on primary schools rather than secondary schools. At secondary schools, more difficult aspects of grammar should be taught, with all the exceptions that are so commonly found in English. Please do not go back to the days when I had to learn things like adverbial clauses, conditionals, subordinate clauses, etc.
Such aspects are for those who want to specialise in teaching English and for undergr aduates who want to master English completely to be competent teachers of the English, not for students taking English as a second language.
I am sure officials in the Ministry of Education can identify the basic areas that all primary school children should know in English grammar and ensure that all primary teachers are familiar with them and that all primary English textbooks highlight them throughout the primary years!
VICTOR CHEW, Ipoh.
Poor English will affect tourism
JOHOR BARU: Malaysia’s tourism industry will suffer if English proficiency among tour guides is not improved.
Malaysian Tourist Guides Council president Jimmy Leong said that people from traditionally non-English speaking countries were moving ahead of Malaysia.
In fact, guides from China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are speaking better and grammatically-correct English compared with us, he said in an interview.
"From a tourism perspective, English should be made a compulsory pass subject in the SPM," he said.
He added that the Education Ministry should revise its syllabus and teach grammar.
He also said that native English speakers could be engaged to complement the local teachers in teaching the subject, as Malaysia may not have enough teachers qualified to teach the subject.
"This is because there has been a lapse of two to three generations since our children were taught completely in English in schools," Leong explained.
"When we source for potential guides we realise that the standard of English among the candidates has dropped tremendously over the years," he said.
He added that the industry players were now forced to accept those with a lower level of proficiency.
"This is also a huge setback for the services sector in Malaysia as we may not have people who are proficient in English to handle projects involving multinational companies."
Leong said that besides tourist guides, people working in hotels and theme parks should also be able to speak good English.
Malaysian Tourist Guides Council president Jimmy Leong said that people from traditionally non-English speaking countries were moving ahead of Malaysia.
In fact, guides from China, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan are speaking better and grammatically-correct English compared with us, he said in an interview.
"From a tourism perspective, English should be made a compulsory pass subject in the SPM," he said.
He added that the Education Ministry should revise its syllabus and teach grammar.
He also said that native English speakers could be engaged to complement the local teachers in teaching the subject, as Malaysia may not have enough teachers qualified to teach the subject.
"This is because there has been a lapse of two to three generations since our children were taught completely in English in schools," Leong explained.
"When we source for potential guides we realise that the standard of English among the candidates has dropped tremendously over the years," he said.
He added that the industry players were now forced to accept those with a lower level of proficiency.
"This is also a huge setback for the services sector in Malaysia as we may not have people who are proficient in English to handle projects involving multinational companies."
Leong said that besides tourist guides, people working in hotels and theme parks should also be able to speak good English.
Umno Youth all for English as a must-pass subject in SPM
KUALA LUMPUR: Umno Youth supports the idea of making English a must-pass subject for the SPM, its chief Khairy Jamaluddin said.
However, he said the movement’s backing was on condition that the Government implemented several measures first.
He said retired teachers who were proficient in teaching English should be recruited, adding that language teachers from Britain, Australia and New Zealand should also be engaged to help in the effort.
Khairy also urged the Education Ministry to increase the time allotted for teaching English in schools, and wanted students to pass the Malaysian University English Test before they could enter local universities.
“Our recommendations will give the authorities more urgency in the issue of improving the teaching of English in schools,” he told reporters after chairing the movement’s meeting here yesterday.
Khairy said Umno Youth did not want a repeat of the confusion and disagreement from various quarters following the government’s earlier move to introduce the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English at primary level.
On another matter, he said he would hold a dialogue session with eight Universiti Malaya Chinese students associations next week to expand knowledge on the 1Malaysia concept. He said
MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong would also hold similar sessions with Malay NGOs such as 4B Youth and Malay student groups.
On PAS’ call for Sisters in Islam (SIS) to be banned, Khairy said the party was contradicting its own so-called democratic principles.
In Muar, Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman said the state government supported the call for English to be made a compulsory pass subject for the SPM.
He said although the state had protested against the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English, the subject was important for Malaysians to master.
“We support the plan but students should first be given proper lessons.”
However, he said the movement’s backing was on condition that the Government implemented several measures first.
He said retired teachers who were proficient in teaching English should be recruited, adding that language teachers from Britain, Australia and New Zealand should also be engaged to help in the effort.
Khairy also urged the Education Ministry to increase the time allotted for teaching English in schools, and wanted students to pass the Malaysian University English Test before they could enter local universities.
“Our recommendations will give the authorities more urgency in the issue of improving the teaching of English in schools,” he told reporters after chairing the movement’s meeting here yesterday.
Khairy said Umno Youth did not want a repeat of the confusion and disagreement from various quarters following the government’s earlier move to introduce the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English at primary level.
On another matter, he said he would hold a dialogue session with eight Universiti Malaya Chinese students associations next week to expand knowledge on the 1Malaysia concept. He said
MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong would also hold similar sessions with Malay NGOs such as 4B Youth and Malay student groups.
On PAS’ call for Sisters in Islam (SIS) to be banned, Khairy said the party was contradicting its own so-called democratic principles.
In Muar, Johor Mentri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman said the state government supported the call for English to be made a compulsory pass subject for the SPM.
He said although the state had protested against the teaching of Science and Mathematics in English, the subject was important for Malaysians to master.
“We support the plan but students should first be given proper lessons.”
Let’s just stick to English
Question TimeBy P. GUNASEGARAM
Whether Science and Maths should be taught in English should be decided solely by considering the welfare of the students and the country.
Our people should know how to read, write and speak the national language but, at the same time, to gain knowledge, they should learn and use English – Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
In 2003, before he stepped down as Prime Minister in 2004, Dr Mahathir made a major policy change in terms of education.
It was considered drastic at that time and made over the opposition of both Malay and vernacular language advocates.
He basically decreed that Science and Mathematics should be taught in English simply because that was the fastest way for Malaysians to access the rapidly changing developments in those fields.
It was a major change of position for Dr Mahathir himself, who as education minister in the mid-70s and subsequently prime minister from 1981 pushed through major reforms which saw the education system being transformed from English-based to Malay-based.
The parallel development was the evolution of vernacular education systems in Chinese, mainly, and in Tamil as well as Islamic religious schools, leading basically to four separate educational systems in the country.
But the edict by Dr Mahathir was a bold one and cut across all the educational systems to make it compulsory to teach Science and Maths in English in all of them.
Six years later, a generation of students have passed through the system and the vast majority of them have preferred to answer questions in English even though they were given options to answer in other languages.
Now, six years later, one wonders why there is even a need to re-think this process – the students have spoken by opting to answer in English, and there have been noticeable improvements in the quality of English. The infrastructure has been built. Why destroy all that now?
Have we not already suffered enough through a widespread decline of English among our students to the extent that many of our graduates from local universities are unemployable because of the poor quality of their English?
Now there is a proposal to make a pass in English compulsory before a candidate gets the Sjil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian certificate of education) or SPM certificate. The ministry has invited public comments on this.
The proposal only adds confusion to the issue. Let’s settle the outstanding issue of whether Science and Maths should be taught in English, and then we can talk about another.
It’s vitally important to keep the two separate and not link them together in an attempt to come to some sort of compromise solution.
A pass in English should only be made compulsory after there is a huge effort to improve the quality of English taught in schools. Otherwise it would needlessly penalise.
It helps to state the underlying problem with respect to English: the quality of English has deteriorated so much that students can’t speak, read or write English and therefore are also unable to plug into the avenues which increase knowledge and competence in all areas.
Dr Mahathir’s solution was simple, elegant and practical – teach science and maths in English. That improves usage of the language, gives students the key necessary terms, and the tools to plug into the unfolding developments in the area.
The language purists, being purists and in many cases language extremists, insist that English can only be taught by teaching English such as grammar and literature and that subjects must be taught in the mother tongue.
But they pointedly ignore the practical aspect: language must be used if competence is to be gained.
Teaching Science and Maths in English ensures that English is used and not just learned, which will be the case if you increase the time for teaching English. That is a crucial difference.
None of this will be at the expense of the national language, Malay, or even Chinese or Tamil. All the other subjects are being taught in these languages, and students will gain more than sufficient proficiency in them.
Vitally, with the change already in place for six years, the students have also had an avenue to improve their English skills. It will be cruel to take that away from future generations. Give them the local languages but give them English, too.
There must come a time when we make decisions based on what is best for our children and our country – nothing and no one else matters more.
Our children will benefit immensely from a good command of English, while a good command of English will help the country connect to the world and access all the knowledge and attendant benefits.
To clinch the argument, let’s quote Dr Mahathir again. This is what he said at an international conference on English last year in Kuala Lumpur: “Our people should know how to read, write and speak the national language, but at the same time, to gain knowledge, they should learn and use English.”
Narrow, parochial considerations of language lobbyists and extremists have no place. A pragmatic decision must be made. Not only must Science and Maths continue to be taught in English, more measures must be devised to improve English usage and capability.
A pass grade in English to get an SPM qualification may be a bit premature in the absence of concrete measures to improve English quality.
Certainly such a measure should not be used to barter away the teaching of Science and Maths in English.
Managing editor P. Gunasegaram is very wary of lobbyists because they are only interested in their own agendas to the exclusion of everything else.
Whether Science and Maths should be taught in English should be decided solely by considering the welfare of the students and the country.
Our people should know how to read, write and speak the national language but, at the same time, to gain knowledge, they should learn and use English – Former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
In 2003, before he stepped down as Prime Minister in 2004, Dr Mahathir made a major policy change in terms of education.
It was considered drastic at that time and made over the opposition of both Malay and vernacular language advocates.
He basically decreed that Science and Mathematics should be taught in English simply because that was the fastest way for Malaysians to access the rapidly changing developments in those fields.
It was a major change of position for Dr Mahathir himself, who as education minister in the mid-70s and subsequently prime minister from 1981 pushed through major reforms which saw the education system being transformed from English-based to Malay-based.
The parallel development was the evolution of vernacular education systems in Chinese, mainly, and in Tamil as well as Islamic religious schools, leading basically to four separate educational systems in the country.
But the edict by Dr Mahathir was a bold one and cut across all the educational systems to make it compulsory to teach Science and Maths in English in all of them.
Six years later, a generation of students have passed through the system and the vast majority of them have preferred to answer questions in English even though they were given options to answer in other languages.
Now, six years later, one wonders why there is even a need to re-think this process – the students have spoken by opting to answer in English, and there have been noticeable improvements in the quality of English. The infrastructure has been built. Why destroy all that now?
Have we not already suffered enough through a widespread decline of English among our students to the extent that many of our graduates from local universities are unemployable because of the poor quality of their English?
Now there is a proposal to make a pass in English compulsory before a candidate gets the Sjil Pelajaran Malaysia (Malaysian certificate of education) or SPM certificate. The ministry has invited public comments on this.
The proposal only adds confusion to the issue. Let’s settle the outstanding issue of whether Science and Maths should be taught in English, and then we can talk about another.
It’s vitally important to keep the two separate and not link them together in an attempt to come to some sort of compromise solution.
A pass in English should only be made compulsory after there is a huge effort to improve the quality of English taught in schools. Otherwise it would needlessly penalise.
It helps to state the underlying problem with respect to English: the quality of English has deteriorated so much that students can’t speak, read or write English and therefore are also unable to plug into the avenues which increase knowledge and competence in all areas.
Dr Mahathir’s solution was simple, elegant and practical – teach science and maths in English. That improves usage of the language, gives students the key necessary terms, and the tools to plug into the unfolding developments in the area.
The language purists, being purists and in many cases language extremists, insist that English can only be taught by teaching English such as grammar and literature and that subjects must be taught in the mother tongue.
But they pointedly ignore the practical aspect: language must be used if competence is to be gained.
Teaching Science and Maths in English ensures that English is used and not just learned, which will be the case if you increase the time for teaching English. That is a crucial difference.
None of this will be at the expense of the national language, Malay, or even Chinese or Tamil. All the other subjects are being taught in these languages, and students will gain more than sufficient proficiency in them.
Vitally, with the change already in place for six years, the students have also had an avenue to improve their English skills. It will be cruel to take that away from future generations. Give them the local languages but give them English, too.
There must come a time when we make decisions based on what is best for our children and our country – nothing and no one else matters more.
Our children will benefit immensely from a good command of English, while a good command of English will help the country connect to the world and access all the knowledge and attendant benefits.
To clinch the argument, let’s quote Dr Mahathir again. This is what he said at an international conference on English last year in Kuala Lumpur: “Our people should know how to read, write and speak the national language, but at the same time, to gain knowledge, they should learn and use English.”
Narrow, parochial considerations of language lobbyists and extremists have no place. A pragmatic decision must be made. Not only must Science and Maths continue to be taught in English, more measures must be devised to improve English usage and capability.
A pass grade in English to get an SPM qualification may be a bit premature in the absence of concrete measures to improve English quality.
Certainly such a measure should not be used to barter away the teaching of Science and Maths in English.
Managing editor P. Gunasegaram is very wary of lobbyists because they are only interested in their own agendas to the exclusion of everything else.
Quick decision needed on English
Plain Speaking - A weekly column by Yap Leng Kuen
No place for ego in promoting English
TO know some of the horror stories on the deteriorating standard of English, ask any human resource manager who has to pour over application letters.
One should always look beyond the cover letters which may contain well-crafted lines but come to the impromptu essays, that’s when the true picture emerges.
Not all jobs require mastery of the English language. For technical jobs, it is more of the skills, basic knowledge of technical terms and the ability to communicate.
However, in the modern world of international business, a fluent command of English is important not just from the aspect of style but also substance. A wide vocabulary and high standard of linguistic skills can carry a person far in his career which of course, does not rely solely on the gift of the gab.
But it enables him to articulate and communicate his thoughts to another person in as vocal and as resourceful a manner that is required. Together with his deep technical knowledge, a person’s ability in this respect will help a long way in ensuring his employability.
Businessmen in emerging countries and economic powerhouses like China are taking up English lessons in a big way, reflecting the high priority they place on the language that has gone beyond the status of just mother tongue to native British speakers.
They realise there is no place for egoistic or backward thinking in promoting the vibrant use of English in everyday commerce.
For many of us who were educated solely in English, listening to the current debate on whether it should be made compulsory in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) examination seems rather odd. There was even an observation from someone who had lived abroad for a number of years that it is like asking if a person needed lungs to respire.
Equally strange was the idea to send teachers abroad to assimilate the language in a native-speaking country. That just means throwing away more money when the whole rigmarole of English learning can be fixed back home.
Suddenly, grammar is being singled out. The learning of a language comes in a package of skills and even if we include grammar, we still have to evaluate if that package is of sufficiently high standard to put us ahead of our competitors.
Many have wondered how some countries like Japan can be so economically advanced while sticking to the usage of their mother tongue. Perhaps it has to do with decades of intensive development or as observed by some, many Japanese actually know English well but prefer to use their mother tongue.
In many instances, it is also seen as a tactical move to confine speech and writing to a language that is not well-understood by many. But it does not mean that this group of people does not understand what the rest of the world is saying in the common language!
In our case, it may be a good idea to obtain feedback on the status of English as a core subject but frankly, that could be a waste of time. Instead, a quick decision should be made on the urgency of restoring the English language to its eminent place in the education system and allow our students maximum exposure to it via as many subjects as possible.
We should set the standards as we move forward to further transform our services sector and build linkages with the international community.
Those who cannot meet the standards should be given the tools to strive higher via intensive training programmes, which should enlist the support of professionals, retirees and even non-governmental organisations with expertise in the teaching of English.
Senior business people and ministers are all aware that problems with writing and speaking in English are not just experienced in Malaysia. There are overseas students studying in countries like Britain who have similar problems but that does not mean we can follow them and let our guard down.
No place for ego in promoting English
TO know some of the horror stories on the deteriorating standard of English, ask any human resource manager who has to pour over application letters.
One should always look beyond the cover letters which may contain well-crafted lines but come to the impromptu essays, that’s when the true picture emerges.
Not all jobs require mastery of the English language. For technical jobs, it is more of the skills, basic knowledge of technical terms and the ability to communicate.
However, in the modern world of international business, a fluent command of English is important not just from the aspect of style but also substance. A wide vocabulary and high standard of linguistic skills can carry a person far in his career which of course, does not rely solely on the gift of the gab.
But it enables him to articulate and communicate his thoughts to another person in as vocal and as resourceful a manner that is required. Together with his deep technical knowledge, a person’s ability in this respect will help a long way in ensuring his employability.
Businessmen in emerging countries and economic powerhouses like China are taking up English lessons in a big way, reflecting the high priority they place on the language that has gone beyond the status of just mother tongue to native British speakers.
They realise there is no place for egoistic or backward thinking in promoting the vibrant use of English in everyday commerce.
For many of us who were educated solely in English, listening to the current debate on whether it should be made compulsory in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) examination seems rather odd. There was even an observation from someone who had lived abroad for a number of years that it is like asking if a person needed lungs to respire.
Equally strange was the idea to send teachers abroad to assimilate the language in a native-speaking country. That just means throwing away more money when the whole rigmarole of English learning can be fixed back home.
Suddenly, grammar is being singled out. The learning of a language comes in a package of skills and even if we include grammar, we still have to evaluate if that package is of sufficiently high standard to put us ahead of our competitors.
Many have wondered how some countries like Japan can be so economically advanced while sticking to the usage of their mother tongue. Perhaps it has to do with decades of intensive development or as observed by some, many Japanese actually know English well but prefer to use their mother tongue.
In many instances, it is also seen as a tactical move to confine speech and writing to a language that is not well-understood by many. But it does not mean that this group of people does not understand what the rest of the world is saying in the common language!
In our case, it may be a good idea to obtain feedback on the status of English as a core subject but frankly, that could be a waste of time. Instead, a quick decision should be made on the urgency of restoring the English language to its eminent place in the education system and allow our students maximum exposure to it via as many subjects as possible.
We should set the standards as we move forward to further transform our services sector and build linkages with the international community.
Those who cannot meet the standards should be given the tools to strive higher via intensive training programmes, which should enlist the support of professionals, retirees and even non-governmental organisations with expertise in the teaching of English.
Senior business people and ministers are all aware that problems with writing and speaking in English are not just experienced in Malaysia. There are overseas students studying in countries like Britain who have similar problems but that does not mean we can follow them and let our guard down.
English can help breach ‘international barrier’
AFTER reading the articles available online from www.thestar.com.my about making English compulsory in SPM exam, it struck me that this issue needs to be addressed with rational thinking as it could affect the future of Malaysian youths significantly.
I am a Malaysian and have lived abroad for many years due to my father’s work overseas. Currently, I am enrolled in a Masters in Pharmacy programme in the School of Pharmacy, University of London.
In my experience from studying and living abroad, I found the level of English in universities in Britain is high. So by objecting to make English as a “must pass” subject will definitely cause problems to our youths.
I completed the IB programme in a British international school in Thailand which has provided me a good foundation in the English language, However I find many of my cousins and friends in Malaysia have minimum level of English and I find it strange since English is taught from Year
One in primary schools until SPM level.
By making English a ‘must pass’ subject, it will definitely help those who wish to further their studies in the universities since courses are taught in English.
We Malaysians need to breach international “barrier” in whichever way possible in order to help develop our country, and English is the core link that will help us achieve this.
We need to be an international player to attract investments or help develop our tourism industry. Furthermore, local universities will gain more by having exposure internationally. Thus, by making English a “must pass” subject in SPM, it is the first step which will help shape our future.
I am a Malaysian and have lived abroad for many years due to my father’s work overseas. Currently, I am enrolled in a Masters in Pharmacy programme in the School of Pharmacy, University of London.
In my experience from studying and living abroad, I found the level of English in universities in Britain is high. So by objecting to make English as a “must pass” subject will definitely cause problems to our youths.
I completed the IB programme in a British international school in Thailand which has provided me a good foundation in the English language, However I find many of my cousins and friends in Malaysia have minimum level of English and I find it strange since English is taught from Year
One in primary schools until SPM level.
By making English a ‘must pass’ subject, it will definitely help those who wish to further their studies in the universities since courses are taught in English.
We Malaysians need to breach international “barrier” in whichever way possible in order to help develop our country, and English is the core link that will help us achieve this.
We need to be an international player to attract investments or help develop our tourism industry. Furthermore, local universities will gain more by having exposure internationally. Thus, by making English a “must pass” subject in SPM, it is the first step which will help shape our future.
Even China banking on English
EVEN a big self-sufficient country like China is encouraging its people to learn the English language to advance themselves in this competitive world and what are we compare with them?
We should go for English unless we have decided to go backwards instead of forward, and all government efforts of attracting FDI will go to waste if this was the case.
We do not need to be specialised or to speak like the white men, but at least a proficiency in the Englsih language should be a must.
Customer service officers become redundant if they can speak Bahasa Malaysia only. I have dealt with many such cases. It is well and fine if they are just dealing with our own people who are mostly multi-lingual. But what with a foreign enquiry?
No wonder we are losing out to others like India for FDI.
For the sake of our future generations and the coutnry’s progress, discard our “katak dalam tempurong” mentality and embrace what is now a universal language that is English in our education system.
We should go for English unless we have decided to go backwards instead of forward, and all government efforts of attracting FDI will go to waste if this was the case.
We do not need to be specialised or to speak like the white men, but at least a proficiency in the Englsih language should be a must.
Customer service officers become redundant if they can speak Bahasa Malaysia only. I have dealt with many such cases. It is well and fine if they are just dealing with our own people who are mostly multi-lingual. But what with a foreign enquiry?
No wonder we are losing out to others like India for FDI.
For the sake of our future generations and the coutnry’s progress, discard our “katak dalam tempurong” mentality and embrace what is now a universal language that is English in our education system.
Why English is very important
I AM a third-year medical student studying in Universiti Malaya. As we read and hear about the endless debate over the issue of the English language and our education system, I would like to offer my perspective as a student on this issue.
I come from an SJK primary school, attended a government secondary school and completed the local matriculation course before entering university.
I realise that those who want less English in the education system are afraid that the Malay language will suffer. However, as a student, our official language, the status or importance of Bahasa Malaysia, has never been threatened.
It will always be our national language and I am proud of that, but it is not sufficient to only learn Bahasa Malaysia and neglect the other languages. And English is becoming a necessity if a country wants to ride the wave of globalisation.
Taking a walk down memory lane, we have Za’aba (Tan Sri Dr Haji Zainal Abidin Ahmad) who was known as the “peneroka tatabahasa Melayu” or the founder of Malay grammar. The Malay literature that he wrote is being used till this very day. His museum (Teratak Za’aba) in Bahau is a memorial of his contribution to this nation.
As we look at his education background, we discover that he was the first Malay from Negri Sembilan to have completed his Senior Cambridge. The museum contains beautiful letters between him and his children, written in English, Malay and Arabic.
Tunku Abdul Rahman, in his fight for Independence would not have made it had he not mastered the English language. Ambassadors and diplomats to foreign countries have to be able to speak English in order to communicate with people from other nations. The tourism industry in Malaysia would collapse without the English language.
Do we consider Za’aba or Tunku less of a Malaysian, less patriotic, or less united?
They were among the many reasons that Malaysia exists today. I daresay that the English language was one of the key tools to our Independence and our development right till today. To neglect the English language will only push us backward.
We must realise that Malaysia is a multi-cultural country with than over a hundred ethnicities and is therefore a multi-lingual country. Trying to unite races with one language alone is like trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. It will never work.
Entering first-year in university, we were shocked to see students mixing according to their ethnicity and the main dividing factor being our language of communication. Only a small group of students who spoke more than one language fluently was made up of students of different races. We all know the importance of inter-cultural understanding in unity; but how are we going to achieve that by only learning one language?
I say all this not to bring down the Malay language but to remind us that it is our duty as a responsible Malaysian citizen to improve ourselves in every way we can - including learning the other languages. To make English compulsory to pass SPM; to teach Science and Mathematics in English - is a step in the right direction.
TIMOTHY CHENG,
Director of the Unity and Community Affairs Bureau,
Student Representative Council 2008/2009,
Universiti Malaya.
I come from an SJK primary school, attended a government secondary school and completed the local matriculation course before entering university.
I realise that those who want less English in the education system are afraid that the Malay language will suffer. However, as a student, our official language, the status or importance of Bahasa Malaysia, has never been threatened.
It will always be our national language and I am proud of that, but it is not sufficient to only learn Bahasa Malaysia and neglect the other languages. And English is becoming a necessity if a country wants to ride the wave of globalisation.
Taking a walk down memory lane, we have Za’aba (Tan Sri Dr Haji Zainal Abidin Ahmad) who was known as the “peneroka tatabahasa Melayu” or the founder of Malay grammar. The Malay literature that he wrote is being used till this very day. His museum (Teratak Za’aba) in Bahau is a memorial of his contribution to this nation.
As we look at his education background, we discover that he was the first Malay from Negri Sembilan to have completed his Senior Cambridge. The museum contains beautiful letters between him and his children, written in English, Malay and Arabic.
Tunku Abdul Rahman, in his fight for Independence would not have made it had he not mastered the English language. Ambassadors and diplomats to foreign countries have to be able to speak English in order to communicate with people from other nations. The tourism industry in Malaysia would collapse without the English language.
Do we consider Za’aba or Tunku less of a Malaysian, less patriotic, or less united?
They were among the many reasons that Malaysia exists today. I daresay that the English language was one of the key tools to our Independence and our development right till today. To neglect the English language will only push us backward.
We must realise that Malaysia is a multi-cultural country with than over a hundred ethnicities and is therefore a multi-lingual country. Trying to unite races with one language alone is like trying to fit a round peg into a square hole. It will never work.
Entering first-year in university, we were shocked to see students mixing according to their ethnicity and the main dividing factor being our language of communication. Only a small group of students who spoke more than one language fluently was made up of students of different races. We all know the importance of inter-cultural understanding in unity; but how are we going to achieve that by only learning one language?
I say all this not to bring down the Malay language but to remind us that it is our duty as a responsible Malaysian citizen to improve ourselves in every way we can - including learning the other languages. To make English compulsory to pass SPM; to teach Science and Mathematics in English - is a step in the right direction.
TIMOTHY CHENG,
Director of the Unity and Community Affairs Bureau,
Student Representative Council 2008/2009,
Universiti Malaya.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)