Dong Zong’s reply to the one school system

I’m posting this as it appears in The Sun today:

KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 17, 2009): A number of Chinese groups are against the Education Ministry’s proposal for vernacular primary schools to adopt the same syllabus used in national schools for the Bahasa Malaysia (BM) language subject, the Chinese press reported today.

Currently, the BM textbooks used in Chinese and Tamil primary schools are different from that used in national schools. So are the UPSR (Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah) BM examination papers.

Yap Sin Tian

Responding to a report in Sin Chew Daily, which broke the story on standardising the BM syllabus on Monday, Dong Zong (United Chinese School Committees Association) president Dr Yap Sin Tian sees the move as burdening pupils from vernacular schools who have to grapple with three languages.

He pointed out that for Chinese schools, where BM is taught as a second language, to adopt the same syllabus as that used in national schools, where BM is taught as a first language, goes against the principles of the national education philosophy.

He said Chinese school pupils have to learn three languages and cannot be expected to follow the same syllabus and the same way of learning BM as their peers in national schools.

To force Chinese schools to adopt the same syllabus will also affect the character of these schools, he said.

He urged the ministry not to resort to all means to change the syllabuses in Chinese schools. National Union of Heads of School president Pang Chong Leong echoed Yap’s concern on the possibility of an added burden on Chinese schools pupils.

He was worried that Chinese schools pupils might not be able to catch up as they have one more language to learn than national school pupils.

Pang, who said he had made clear the union’s stand at a meeting with the ministry, hoped that it would think thrice on the proposal.

Pheng Yin Huah

Hua Zong (Federation of Chinese Associations in Malaysia) president Tan Sri Pheng Yin Huah said instead of raising the standard of BM in vernacular schools, the move may backfire as the pupils, because of the medium of instruction in their schools, may have problems coping with syllabus of a higher standard.

He said pupils may end up with an aversion to the language, and “worse still for Chinese schools, parents seeking better environment to learn the national language may decide to send their children to national schools where Chinese language is already made a subject”.

United Chinese School Alumni Association of Malaysia said in a statement that Chinese schools cannot accept the proposal as it is a roundabout way of reducing the number of classes for subjects taught in Mandarin.

It has been reported that the ministry proposed that along with the change in syllabus, vernacular schools will have to teach BM an additional 90 minutes a week, at the expense of other subjects.

Wee Ka Siong

On Monday, Education Director-General Datuk Alimuddin Md Dom told Nanyang Siang Pau that the government is considering adopting national school BM syllabus in vernacular schools beginning with Year One in 2012.

He said if the pilot project proves successful in Year One, it would be extended to other classes.

He said the move is aimed at bring the standard of the language in vernacular schools to be on par with national schools.

However, he said it is still at the conceptual stage.

Deputy Education Minister Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said the ministry needs in-depth studies on the proposal and has yet to make a decision.

He said he had objected to the proposal in at least three internal meetings. – The Sun

Few questions come to mind-

1) When you have to grapple with three languages, then as Orang Malaysia, which language should be the priority?

2) In this blessed nation called Malaysia, why does its national and official language be taught as the second language in  these schools? Why is Mandarin, which is the official language of another country being used as the number one language  and the main medium of instruction in these particular schools?

3) What is the character of these schools? Safe to say, it is certainly not a Malaysian character. How can the students truly become Orang Malaysia if they are taught using the characteristics of a foreign country’s education system?

4) Why would this chauvinistic group want to keep our children segregated from each other?  Don’t you want to embrace racial harmony? What is worse, they FEAR that their own children will go and mix around with other races in national schools!

5) Why is our own deputy minister of education of the majority elected government acting as a mouthpiece of a minority group? Have you gotten your priority right? Gunning for a higher post in MCA are you?

As a conclusion, the people above are extreme racist. They look down on other races because they do not want their own children to mix around with other children of different colour just because they fear that their own ‘character’ will be diluted.

As the result, the Ministry of Education together with the racist group above are the only people to be blamed when racial polarisation that begins in primary schools worsen as time goes by.

Reread the article above please. You can see the racist among us are those who support vernacular schools.