Critic to "The Good Old Days?" Part 1

PART 1

Dr. Tarcisius mentioned that mission school will revive "the good old days", of superior education standards, possibly with English as a medium of instruction, besides promoting character development and extracurricular activities

In response to the article here, I wish to ask Dr. Tarcisius, what were the superior “benefits” that you gain from the former education system that we can't get it today, and is there any proven studies or fact that the changes in the national education system throughout the years were towards decline?

Considering that the democratization of education to the rakyat especially to the lower rungs of the society in the rural areas and East Malaysia, with increased opportunity (thus easier entry requirement, liberal intake) of tertiary education, with was only something that can only be dreamt of in the past? Wouldn’t it be a lop-sided view to claim that the national education policy of educating the masses, reducing illiteracy and opening doors to tertiary education was an utterly waste of effort?

While I do not have the privilege of living during the ‘old good days’, even if I was born during that time, I doubt that I would even had the opportunity of education, considering VI, St. Johns, and the other so called elite schools are too far from my home in Kampung Terengganu. These schools teach education that are irrelevant to my family trade (my family run bicycle repair shop), in a foreign cultural context (eg: teaching English to my local fisherman community) and in a medium that I might not even understand (my family speaks Hokkien and Malay only).

Looking at from a social class perspective, did the English medium education did better than Malay or vernacular schools, in reducing illiteracy rate of Malaysians? Did the English medium education bring about social mobility to the poor and marginalized (materially, socially and geographically)? Did English medium education bridge social and ethnic inequalities? Is English education the cure-all elixir in addressing social and economic issues that we face in a multicultural Malaysia?

While I do not have problems with English as a second language, I think that it is naïve and biased to blame vernacular education as the scapegoat to current societal and economic issues, such as unemployment. Many other countries like China, India and South Korea would face the same problems, if not worse. And not everyone is privileged enough to migrate overseas for better job opportunities. If the current education system is as bad as it is accused to be, then as a product of the “nationalistic” system, I wouldn’t be here blogging here in English, nor to be engaged intellectually and critically with the issues of the day. Oops, I might be one of the unemployed single mothers who do not have anything better to do than to blog!

Is character development and curricular activities not emphasized in the current education system? I doubt so. Moral, Civic and Islamic education, together with the increased Islamic ethos in national schools are actually certainly not doing less in character building, though it is debatable in its effectiveness. The recent increase of funding for curricular activities by the Ministry of Education, was certainly not suggesting that curricular activities are less emphasized today. The National Service was introduced few years back. All these shows that icharacter and extracurricular development, is not unique in mission schools alone.

The problem doesn’t lie in declining standards of school to promote character and values, but rather an honest reflection of the changing values in the society and youth culture today, or even probably stems out from the declining religious and family values in our increasingly secularised world.

Instead, I propose that instead of going back to the “good old days”, like theology and biblical exegesis, education must be contextual. It is no point going down memory lane five decades ago, lamenting about the lack of Shakespearean plays in schools or complain about the lack of this and that in our system today. But education should stem out from local social, cultural, political and economic realities, reflecting the vision, struggles and aspiration of the local grassroot community.

Look at the brighter side. Many poor families were brought out of poverty from both English and vernacular education. Illiteracy is not heard of today. Societal values on education and life-long education change (from ignorance to acquisition). Non-Malay students begin to understand their Malay neighbours better through national education compared to their parents in the past. Islamic religious values and ethos are increasingly playing big role in developing the character and values of Malay-Muslim schoolchildren (at the expense of neglect to non-Muslim religious and moral education). Science-based education is being emphasized, and the indigenizing of scientific inquiry and knowledge to Bahasa Malaysia (aka to the masses) was monumental.

Compared to issues like unemployment, racial segregation and institutionalized affirmative-based policies, I think that the national education system has done reasonably well to develop a national education worthy of its calling to serve Malaysians in its local contexts. Christians that are involved in nation-building, I believe must come out of personal preoccupations and bias, come to the society (text) in its own context, and draw out our strategies (exegesis) that is not only faithful to God’s truth, but also relevant to the context of the day.

If we truly wish to change and impact the education system, I believe that it is far more practical to change the system from the inside rather than creating a new wheel altogether. Afterall, (from a typical Chinese calculative mentality, hehehe) why pay more for private education when you have already pay taxes to fund public schools?

"Education must be contextual, not copy-and-paste."

Comments welcomed,
kerepok lekor