Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim recently made two significant remarks related to education and language.
On the former, he said the rich must pay for their children’s education in top government-subsidised schools (most schools are subsidised in one way or another). This move, he explained, was intended to be fair and not to deprive underprivileged groups.
He added that the wealthy, including senior civil servants, politicians, and top business leaders who send their children to top schools, were enjoying unreasonable benefits.
This marks a shift from the policy of non-discrimination in educational opportunities for all, irrespective of social, religious, or ethnic backgrounds. It counters the principle of equity in educational access.
Recently, the government assured students scoring 10As and above in the SPM examination a place in the matriculation programme, irrespective of their social background, race, or religion. This is based solely on the merit of academic excellence.
The current practice of open admission for all, especially for primary schooling, should be continued without any form of discrimination. Likewise, the government’s responsible efforts in prioritising aid to needy children in various educational institutions should be maintained.
As for tertiary education, the same fees should be levied on all students based on their fields of study. Entry should be based on academic excellence as well as consideration of social and cultural disparities, particularly for marginalised rural students. In this way, the principle of equitable educational opportunities, taking these disparities into account, would be achieved.
No one should be penalised, whether they are rich or poor, disadvantaged or underprivileged. The current government educational policy should continue, and effort, time, and money would be better spent on further enhancing excellence in our educational system.
The other significant remark the prime minister made was regarding the English language, specifically criticising the elite group for prioritising English over Bahasa Melayu. He argued that it is a fallacy to believe that success and intelligence (knowledge) can only be achieved through mastery of English.
In some ways, the prime minister is correct if we consider technologically advanced countries like Germany, France, Switzerland, Japan, China, Iran, India, and Egypt, which have prospered using their own languages in education, commerce, governance, and the literary arts. Why not Malaysia?
The main difference is that these countries have a long history of developing a vast corpus of knowledge (scientific, economic, literary, and all other areas of knowledge) in their own national languages.
For example, theses of Islamic scholars on mathematics, medicine, astronomy, and philosophy are in Arabic. Philosophical works by Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and dramatic plays by Molière are in French. Works by Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger are in German.
Shakespeare’s plays and American dramatic literature are in English. These areas of knowledge have also been developed and are available in Russian, Chinese, and Indian languages.
Except for the Hikayats, kitab tibs (traditional medicine), and Islamic kitabs, all in the Malay Jawi script, and a host of oral traditions of local wisdom, there are no scientific or literary works, nor philosophical theses, comparable to those in Middle Eastern or Western countries.
Scientific papers, books, and literary works only began to be written in Malay after the shift in the medium of instruction from English to Malay in institutes of higher learning, especially universities. Even so, universities today still place a high premium on articles published in scientific journals such as ISI, Scopus, and prestigious journals like Nature. However, these articles must be in English.
Furthermore, over 90 per cent of books in university libraries are in English. Most medical schools in public universities also have a significant portion of their courses in English. Private universities and branch campuses of foreign universities use English as their medium of instruction. We even attempted to implement the teaching of science and mathematics in English.
The other reality is that English remains dominant in the commercial sector, such as banking, multinational corporations, and government-linked companies, including government ministries, particularly the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of International Trade and Industry.
The use of English in commerce, governance, and education is a legacy of the British colonial government.
The prime minister lamented the fact that Bahasa Melayu is being sidelined. But the stark reality is that we missed the opportunity to establish Bahasa Melayu in all aspects of life immediately after Merdeka. There was no political will to address this matter, only piecemeal efforts.
The proliferation of vernacular schools compounded this issue, segregating the population based on their mother tongues and undermining efforts to foster Bahasa Melayu in all areas of life.
Clearly, the existing ecosystem is not conducive to promoting Bahasa Melayu as the dominant language. Even today, a large segment of the non-Malay population cannot converse, let alone write, in Bahasa Melayu, the national language.
There is a legitimate and moral need to develop and promote Bahasa Melayu in all areas of life. At the same time, mastery of English as a second language is imperative as it allows for global engagement and facilitates the development and transfer of knowledge, which will benefit the country.
This is the personal opinion of the writer and does not necessarily represent the views of Twentytwo13.
