NUTP’s Siva Subramaniam should justify his somersault from his stand a month ago that there is no study to show that  teaching  mathematics and science in English is more effective than in Bahasa Malaysia or any  other languages  to full support and accusing those who oppose it as  unprofessional and politicizing the issue

(Petaling Jaya, Tuesday): The National Union of Teaching Profession (NUTP) secretary-general N. Siva Subramaniam has made a somersault on the issue of the use of English to teach mathematics and science in primary schools  when he called on Malaysians to look towards the future and support the government’s decision to  introduce the proposal from Std. One next year.

Siva told Malaysiakini yesterday that  there was a lot of criticism against the Education Ministry's decision but the people should be realistic about the era of globalisation that they are living in.

He said: “If they want their children to be of world-class standard, they must support the move. They should know what is good for the future"

Is Siva seriously suggesting that parents, teachers, governors and patrons of Chinese primary schools who object to the use of English to teach mathematics and science from Std. One next year are selfish and short-sighted who do not want their children and Chinese primary school pupils to be of “world-class standard”?

In fact, Siva should know that the drive of parents, teachers, governors and patrons of Chinese primary schools for the Chinese primary school  pupils to be of  “world class standard” is no less strong than their counterparts in national primary schools or even that of the government  – a fact which is acknowledged by Barisan Nasional leaders from the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad downwards, though unfortunately only  during the approach of general elections to woo votes.

It is this drive of Chinese primary schools to produce students of “world class standard” – which the Prime Minister  publicly praised before the 1999 general elections when he admitted that  the teachers and students in Chinese primary schools and Chinese Independent Secondary Schools were  “more dedicated and committed” -  which is the reason why there are some 60,000 non-Chinese, mostly Malay, pupils in  Chinese primary schools.

It is also this drive for “world class standard”, coupled with the government’s  short-sighted policy,  that has created a serious brain drain every  year when more than  500 of the "best and brightest" school-leavers from the 60 Chinese Independent Secondary Schools  are directly recruited into Singapore universities, as the Malaysian Government  continues to refuse to recognize the Unified Examinations Ceritificate (UEC) of the Chinese Independent Secondary Schools despite its international  recognition by universities of world repute.

It is most shocking that the NUTP secretary-general should make such an unprofessional statement, when only a month ago, he said that the NUTP which represents 106,000 teachers, have not come across any study which states that teaching mathematics and science in English is more effective than in Bahasa Malaysia or other languages.  (NST 5.7.02)

This was why the NUTP sent a memorandum to the Education Ministry expressing its concern that teaching mathematics and science in English may make it difficult for the government to achieve its 60:40 target ratio of maths/science to arts students, as students with an average command of the language would avoid taking the subjects.

Siva Subramaniam was full of conviction at the time that rural students, who do not live in an English-speaking environment, would find it difficult to understand the mathematics and science  syllabi.

He even made the point that many countries  use English as a medium of instruction in schools but they are less developed than Malaysia. 

I do not know what are these countries which Siva Subramaniam was referring to, but I am interested in finding out what had happened to make him change his mind overnight, as he told Malaysiakini yesterday that the  NUTP met with Education Ministry officials “regarding the matter early last month and agreed to the proposal then as on behalf of all teachers".

As NUTP had been in the forefront calling for transparency, open government and good governance, Siva Subramaniam should justify his somersault from his stand a month ago that there is no study to show that  teaching  mathematics and science in English is more effective than in Bahasa Malaysia or any  other languages  to full support and accusing those who oppose it as  unprofessional and politicizing the issue in his interview with Malaysiakini yesterday. 

It is Siva Subramaniam who was being unprofessional when he went along to accuse those who oppose the use of English to teach mathematics and science in Chinese primary schools from Std. One next year as politicizing the issue. 

Can Subramaniam  explain what is the  educational justification to use English to teach mathematics and science in Chinese primary schools from Std. One   when  even three decades ago, when there were English primary schools, Chinese primary schools had better results in these two subjects when compared to English primary schools? 

This is borne out by the following results from the Std. V Assessment Test in 1971 for mathematics and science for English and Chinese primary schools:  

Pass  rates  for Chinese and English  primary school pupils in 1971 Std. V Assessment Test for mathematics and science

From these data, which was given by the then Education Minister, Hussein Onn in reply to my parliamentary question in May 1972, out of the 11 states, Selangor  was the only state where the English primary schools had a marginally better result in mathematics  but not in science – while in all the other states, the Chinese primary schools scored better than English primary schools in both subjects.  

In the past three decades, the  Chinese primary schools’ performance in these two subjects had improved considerably,  nationally averaging  over 90% pass rate  for mathematics and over 80% pass rates for science in the UPSR, as illustrated from the following UPSR results for 2000 and 2001:  

What is Siva Subramaniam and NUTP’s response to  the legitimate concerns and fears of parents and educational bodies that the use of English to teach mathematics and science in Chinese and Tamil primary schools from Std. One  would lead to a decline in academic attainments in these two subjects – views shared by educationists like former University of Malaya Vice Chancellors, Royal Professor Ungku Aziz, Professor Dr. Syed Hussain Alatas and the President of Malaysian Islamic Science Academy (Asasi) Dr. Shaharir Mohamad Zain even for national primary schools?  

Does he agree with the views of Ungku Aziz  that the   use of a pupil's mother tongue is the most effective and direct way for a pupil of any race to acquire knowledge and to reason - that English is a comparatively difficult language and in  trying to use English to learn Science and Mathematics at the elementary level, pupils may run into problems arising from the use of the language?  

As Subramaniam has said that the issue should be addressed professionally and educationally, and not be politicized, does the NUTP agree that there is no disagreement whether among political parties in government and opposition, or in the Malaysian civil society, including Chinese and Tamil educational bodies, on the urgent need for a special programme to check the decline in the standard of English in schools and universities, and the Government should be seeking a national consensus instead of trying to force a political showdown on the issue? 

Instead of focusing solely on the proposal to  use  English to teach mathematics and science from Std. One as the only means to raise English proficiency in the primary schools, the NUTP should be adding  its voice to the call  for reason to prevail and to eschew emotionalism by  urging   the Cabinet to think of more effective ways to raise the standard of English not only in Chinese primary schools, but also for national and Tamil primary schools to meet the challenges of globalization, liberalization and ICT – instead of joining the chorus of vilifying legitimate dissent about the move.  

(6/8/2002)