When Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, invited the public to give their views on whether a pass in English should be made compulsory for the SPM, I decided to dig up a letter I had sent to the media on the issue and other related matters on 5 August 2002.
In that letter I had raised some questions about the Ministry of Education’s newly announced policy of Teaching Science and Mathematics in English (TSME). One of my concerns was that since the majority of students entering standard one have very little pre-school exposure to English, learning a basic skill like arithmetic in that language may prove to be a formidable challenge.
Since the implementation of the policy in 2003— and especially in the last two years or so— there has been a great deal of debate and discussion on the issue. The ‘pros’ of studying Science and Mathematics in English are perhaps as persuasive as the ‘cons’ — which is why making a decision on the matter is an onerous responsibility.
After weighing the arguments on both sides, I remain unconvinced that TSME is the right thing to do. Apart from the problem of limited pre-school exposure to English, there are perhaps four other compelling reasons why TSME may not be a good policy. One, the last six years have shown us that there are a lot of teachers who just cannot teach the two subjects in English because of their own woefully inadequate understanding of the language. Two, there is some evidence to suggest that learning Science and Mathematics in English has not had a significant impact upon the proficiency of the students since the two subjects, by their very nature, cannot enhance their knowledge of the language. Three, there are countless examples of undergraduate and post-graduate students from all over the world who were not taught Science and Mathematics in English at primary or secondary school and yet are able to comprehend complex ideas in scientific journals in English because they have acquired a working knowledge of the language. Four, some of the world’s leading ‘powers’ in Mathematics such as Vietnam, Russia and China, teach Science and Mathematics in school and university in their own native languages.
This does not mean that English is not important. No other language is as pivotal as English in accessing knowledge in all its manifestations in the contemporary world. That is why we have to take immediate and urgent steps to improve the standard of English in our schools and universities. Present teaching techniques should be reviewed. Communicative English which has been emphasized in our schools for about 30 years—an example of blind imitation of a technique developed for foreign students studying the language in English speaking societies such as the United Kingdom— should be replaced with approaches that are more conducive to our socio-linguistic environment. An alternative proposed by educationist, Professor Isahak Haron, which he calls “English in Context for Content” accords priority to grammar, vocabulary and the cultural ethos of language usage. It is an idea that is worth considering.
Consideration should also be given to the quality of English language trainee teachers. My sister who for many years was an English Language lecturer at a local Teachers’ Training College before her retirement often lamented the poor command of English among those who were recruited to teach English in schools. Only those with a reasonable command of the language should be trained as future primary and secondary school English teachers.
In my 2002 letter, I had also observed that radio, television and the new communication technologies could play a major role in language learning. Since radio and television have such a wide reach in our country there is no reason why they cannot be used more effectively to expand opportunities for learning English. Students from disadvantaged rural and urban backgrounds in particular would benefit from language learning programs over radio and television.
Focusing upon a variety of measures to improve the teaching and learning of English in our schools is far more important at this stage than making it compulsory for students to pass the English paper in order to obtain the SPM. In fact, such a requirement would be detrimental to the well-being of a huge chunk of our student population today who cannot cope with the language.
After at least five years of sustained, intensive efforts to enhance English in our schools, we should undertake a thorough evaluation of the situation before embarking upon other steps.
——————————————————————————————————————————
Dr. Chandra Muzaffar is Noordin Sopiee Professor of Global Studies at Universiti Sains Malaysia.
14 June 2009.