Government should consider increasing  the present  teaching hours for English in Chinese and Tamil  primary schools by  two, three or four times to enhance English proficiency instead of teaching mathematics and science in English

(Penang, Wednesday): The Minister for Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said yesterday when on a visit to  Singapore that the Singapore Deputy Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong was of the view that Malaysia had taken the correct step when it encouraged its people to master the English language and information technology as it could  create an open society which is not easily influenced by political extremism. (Utusan Malaysia) 

There is no need for UMNO Ministers to quote Lee Hisen Loong or Singapore Ministers to convince Malaysians  on the need to enhance English proficiency in Malaysia, as there is no  disagreement in Malaysia 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. 

The dispute is whether the government is taking  the right and proper steps to enhance English proficiency, as in the use of English to teach mathematics and science  in Chinese primary schools from Std. One, when the government has not been able to make out a sound educational case to convince Malaysians that it would not lead to a deterioration of the high academic performance of Chinese primary schools in these two subjects as compared to national primary schools.

I am still waiting for the Education Minister, Tan Sri Musa Mohamad or the Education director-general Datuk Abdul Rafie Mamat to 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 results from the Std. V Assessment Test in 1971 for mathematics and science for English and Chinese primary schools, as follows:  

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 Musa’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?  

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 time has come for 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.

For a start, the Government should consider increasing  the present  teaching hours for English in Chinese and Tamil primary schools by  two, three or four times to enhance English proficiency instead of teaching mathematics and science in English. 

At present, pupils in Chinese and Tamil primary schools are not taught English until Year Three, while pupils in national primary schools are taught English from Year One. 

In Year Three, pupils in Chinese and Tamil primary schools are allocated 45 minutes per week or three hours a month for English lessons.  For Stage 2 (from Year Four to Six), the number of hours for English lessons in Chinese and Tamil primary schools are increased to six hours and 15 minutes per month. 

In contrast, national primary schools pupils are allocated four hours a week or 16 hours a month of English lessons for the six years from Year One to Year Six – as compared to an average of about three-and-a-half hours a month of English lessons for the six years of primary education in Chinese and Tamil primary schools. 

The government and educationists should consider as one way to enhance English proficiency in Chinese and Tamil primary schools the increase of the present teaching hours for English for the six years by two, three or even four times – which is still less than the quantum of time allocated to the teaching of English for the six years of primary education in national primary schools. 

If this proposal is accepted, there should be adjustments and changes  in the school time-table, including the possibility of lengthening the school hours – which is why it is important that Chinese primary schools should not be excluded from the government programme to build single-session schools.

(7/8/2002)