THE Education Ministry deserves to be commended for being resolute in its decision to abolish the Teaching of Science and Mathematics in English policy (PPSMI). Considering that there has been criticism and opposition against it, the decision to revert to teaching the two subjects in Bahasa Malaysia must require a great deal of political will.
Many reasons have been submitted in favour of PPSMI. In essence, these centre on the importance of English as an international language, the language of science and technology, and language of leadership and advancement.
Many reasons have been submitted in favour of PPSMI. In essence, these centre on the importance of English as an international language, the language of science and technology, and language of leadership and advancement.
Most Malaysians would agree that English is indeed an important language. However, to relate the teaching of Science and Mathematics, especially at the primary level, to success 20 years down the road is misleading. This is because only a small percentage of these children will reach tertiary education. I would like to shift to pedagogical reasoning instead.
Pedagogical reasons against PPSMI appear to have been margi-nalised. First, when a teacher teaches Science and Mathematics, or any subject, the goal should be that children learn and understand or acquire the scientific and mathematical concepts. At the primary level, especially, should children be taught concepts using a language foreign to them?
Clearly, teaching and learning are more effective using the language of the learner. In this context, it is worth noting that former Unesco director-general Dr Irina Bokova cited years of research showing that children who began their education in their mother tongue made a better start, and continued to perform better, than those who started with a new language ("Better to teach in mother tongues, says Unesco" -- NST, May 13).
Clearly, teaching and learning are more effective using the language of the learner. In this context, it is worth noting that former Unesco director-general Dr Irina Bokova cited years of research showing that children who began their education in their mother tongue made a better start, and continued to perform better, than those who started with a new language ("Better to teach in mother tongues, says Unesco" -- NST, May 13).
Second, teachers know that they have to make their teaching interesting; they have to motivate their pupils to learn by making their lessons stimulating.
But look at the Maths and Science teachers. A parent complained that she went to meet her daughter's Science teacher when her daughter's performance declined. However, the teacher could barely speak English. So, how could he teach in English?
Your columnist, Chok Suat Ling, too, cited a Science teacher at a smart school in Kuala Lumpur who assigned her students to "list out the verity way how plants protect themselves" (NST, April 21).
A qualitative research, involving classroom observation, would furnish us with information on the high percentage of Maths and Science teachers rendered incompetent because they are asked to teach in a language unfamiliar to them.
They are not to be blamed, for they had studied the subjects throughout school and the tertiary level in Bahasa Malaysia.
PPSMI was introduced in 2003 based on the erroneous idea that it would lead to a better command of English.
There has been no research to indicate that Maths and Science, confined mostly to numerals and symbols, will help in language learning. We should look at the reality in the classroom.
