Posts Tagged ‘Education’

Blame is on the bridge

December 1st, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


The government’s version of the investigation report is out, well in a way. A statement was issued:

The suspension bridge which collapsed near SK Kuala Dipang in Kampar, Perak, did not meet required engineering codes and specifications.

A statement issued by Education director-general Tan Sri Alimuddin Mohd Dom Tuesday revealed that the structure was only able to take the weight of eight pupils (each weighing 35kgs).

The tragedy occurred on Oct 26 when pupils from 60 schools in the state tried crossing the bridge in groups of 14 to 17. [tried? why? was the person(s) supervising the movement aware?]

Alimuddin added that the collapse was caused by a faulty concrete block connection.

“The investigation committee found that the concrete block connection in Pylon A could not handle the uplift force from the back-stayed cable.

“Additionally, the private contractor involved had not submitted a plan of the structure or received any approval from authorities such as the district council and Drainage and Irrigation department,’’ he said.

In the tragedy, three primary school pupils attending a 1Malaysia camp drowned after the suspension bridge they were on collapsed into the Kampar river.

At around 10.30pm after an ice-breaking session at the campsite, the organising teachers allowed pupils in groups of 14 to 17 to cross the bridge for their meal at the school. [so, does it mean the teachers were not informed about the weight limit or there was no info?]

Meanwhile, some pupils returned to the campsite to retrieve their water containers and cutlery.

According to Alimuddin, under the weight of pupils crossing from both directions, the bridge began to collapse.

Additionally, heavy rainfall earlier in the evening had increased the river level and current, causing the bridge to sway.

Some of the pupils who were swept away by the current were saved by the camp commandant, trainers, teachers and workers who had jumped into the river after them, he said.

Firemen, rescue workers and the police showed up later to continue the search for missing pupils.

The Education Ministry, he said, would take into account the views of the Public Works Ministry and Department, the Construction Industry Development Board, and the Attorney-General’s Chambers in deciding the appropriate measures to be taken against the involved parties.

There is also an ongoing police investigation into the incident, he said.

Read the alternative reports here, here, and here.

Nothing was mentioned about teachers, supervisors, and the various departments. How can a bridge be built and these people were unaware? Does it mean, you will allow anyone to just come and built something on your land? Sure, the bridge was faulty. But why was it there in the first place?

SPM subject limit standoff

December 1st, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


MIC is adamant to get 11 or 12 subject limit. The Education Ministry is not budging from its stand. So, how long is MIC going to try talking before giving up? Would it go to extreme measure and quit from BN since it is unable to fulfill the community demand? Radio, newspaper, Internet group, Facebook – most comments is for 12 subject limit. The Education DG proposed the below idea, which was rejected by MIC’s Dr Subra:

To overcome this, the education ministry today suggested that schools conduct their own vernacular examinations for students who were unable to sit for it at SPM level.

Director-General of Education Alimuddin Mohd Dom said, by doing so, school teachers could gauge the ability of the students concerned and issue certificates based on their efficiency and proficiency in vernacular languages.

“I suggest students take school-based vernacular examinations if they are not able to sit for it when the 10-subject limit for candidates sitting for SPM begins next year.

“Learning is an ongoing process and students intending to take vernacular subjects can always continue, upon completing their school,” he told reporters today.

He also said this:

Alimuddin clarified that certain elective subjects could be dropped.

“For instance, if students are interested in pursuing medicine, they have to take mathematics, biology and chemistry but can drop physics.

“So, they can pick any other elective of their choice to replace physics,” he explained.

Would a student risk dropping physics in hope that he will surely get place for medical studies? If forced to chose between physics and chinese/tamil language, what would the student do?

I think this will be a failure for MIC. There’s one other alternative – postpone the implementation until 2011 (similar for the religious stream students). In the meantime, merge the two Tamil subjects into one.  Another extreme possibility is to remove Moral as core subject and replace it with vernacular language (but will be a problem since for Punjabis, Thais etc, their vernacular language is not Tamil or Mandarin). Anyhow, removing Moral won’t be considered by government even though its an useless subject. A case of failing to admit one’s mistake.

Or, this could be some sort of drama, and later the approval will be given so that MIC gets some brownie points. You never know. 🙂

I asked myself, why would a student take language and literature subject for SPM?

1. If Science stream background, then most likely for the love of the language, and obviously, if the students is good, then to gain an extra A or two.

2. If Arts stream student, then its to apply for education line (teaching) or social studies/media. However, since the places for these courses are extremely limited (I checked with UM and there’s only 3 programs that list Tamil as one of the subjects at STPM level. I’m sure you know non-bumiputeras cannot enter UM using SPM results), the students also need to take other subjects like Accounts, Economy, English Literature, Arts, etc so that can have more choices at IPTAs (diploma programs) politeknik and private colleges. So, if a student takes Tamil at SPM level, most likely he/she will take it at STPM level too, if the results are good.

For case (1), the students may accept to take the language as non-examinable subject, maybe subject to school level accreditation (or even from a reputable organisation).

For case (2), the subject must be in SPM certificate in order to apply for certain courses in tertiary education (teaching courses).

For me, as more students enter Tamil schools nowadays, they will be deterred in taking both the Tamil subjects at secondary school level since it will affect their career options. Sooner than later, interest and love for the language will give way for need to score good results in examinations.

But to develop students with more capability, i like to reiterate my suggestion: have a combination of core, elective, and “interest” subjects. It can be 5+4+2 or 4+4+2 (dropping Moral and Agama – if the students are interested in these subjects, can take it under “interest category.).

MIC to talk about SPM subject limit in cabinet again

November 30th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Tamil School Action Committee organised a forum today. Can read about in in MIC Info chief P.Kamalanathan’s blog. Below is Bernama version:

Human Resources Minister S Subramaniam said he would request the Cabinet to again allow Indian students to take a maximum of 12 SPM subjects.

“I will also continue to hold talks with deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin (on this),” said the MIC vice-president after meeting with 20 Indian NGOs today.

Muhyiddin, who is also education minister, announced last June that students would be allowed a maximum of 10 subjects in the SPM from next year.

Subramaniam said the MIC wanted the education ministry to allow Indian students to take the Tamil Language and Tamil Literature subjects, along with the 10 subjects as decided by the ministry.

He said he had been asking for a review of the ruling at Cabinet meetings for the past three to four months, and would continue to engage in consultations with the education ministry until a reasonable solution was found.

He said his priority now was to work out a solution that would ensure Indian students took 12, instead of 10 subjects.

“We are working towards that. This is what the (Indian) community wants,” said Subramaniam.

In a related matter, Subramaniam said there was no point in getting emotional over the issue as it would not solve the problem.

He was referring to reports that some Indian NGOs wanted to protest over the issue.

He urged the NGOs and other interested parties to work with “one voice and one determination” to find an amicable solution to the problem.

“It was for this reason we held the meeting with the NGOs today to get their feedback and then submit it to the cabinet and the MIC education committee,” he said.

Protest against 10 subject limit

November 29th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


Somewhere in early June this year, the Education Minister came up with an idea to limit the number of subjects a students can take for SPM examinations in 2010. The reasons given:

– help to reduce teacher shortage

– 90% of students take 10 subjects

– many students take elective subjects not offered in schools, just to score more As. [Note: Tamil and Tamil Literature usually not offered in secondary schools]

– ease burden on students to excel

– reduce parents’ cost for tuition

– students will be able to focus on other activities

– easier to select students for scholarships

– to create a level playing field: students in fully residential schools were only allowed to take a maximum of nine subjects and those in rural areas too had to take fewer subjects due to a lack of facilities.

The Education Ministry then set up a communication channel to gather public feedback (I gave mine too) within a week, but not sure about the results of the feedback.

Interested parties can send their views on the Education Ministry’s plan to cap the number of subjects taken in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) by the end of this week.

Education director-general Datuk Alimuddin Mohd Dom urged them to send by e-mail or facsimile their views to him.

“The views will be taken into consideration when I prepare a paper for the minister,” he told reporters after opening the Government Integrated Telecommunications Network Learning in Schools Programme schools’ convention.

Alimuddin can be reached at alimuddin.dom@moe.gov.my or fax: 03-8889 4548.

He was asked about complaints from students who were already studying for more than 10 subjects in Form Four this year.

Alimuddin said he would prepare the paper by next week, adding that the limit on the number of subjects for the SPM examination had not been finalised yet.

“We want to hear feedback from various organisations including teachers. I will also meet with ministry-level professionals.”

He said he would then discuss the matter with the Malaysian Examinations Syndicate before Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin makes a final decision.

The abrupt proposal caused parents and students to fume since students in Form 4 have already started classes for their subjects. However, DPM Muhyiddin said he was open for suggestions and clarified that any decision would not affect the students:

“Whatever decision made will not affect the people negatively.”

I’m not sure which professionals were consulted, but the decision (proposal) remained and the DPM said this:

“There are many who agree and they come from the education system.”

It seems that the core subjects may be reduced in order to allow more elective subjects. Currently, the core subjects are BM, English, Maths, History. Islam/Moral, and Science (for Arts stream students). However, DPM Muhyiddin mentioned recently that the core subjects will remain, so its back to square one in terms of solving the problem.

Note that it was a cabinet decision, so MIC representative Dr Subra have no choice but to support the decision, even though MIC is protesting the move (even made a resolution during the AGM).

You may want to read what two parents had to say on this limitation here to get some insight as well.

Back in June, this is what MIC rep Dr Subra said:

The MIC has asked the Education Ministry to allow Indian students to take 11 SPM subjects, including Tamil language and Tamil literature.

Party deputy president Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam said he had submitted the request to Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin before the Government’s recent proposal to limit the number of subjects to 10 from next year.

“If they are not allowed 11 subjects, some (those in the Science stream) will have to miss the Tamil language or Tamil literature subjects. With the 10-subject limit, they have to choose either one, as they already have nine compulsory subjects,” he told reporters in Pagoh yesterday.

Dr Subramaniam said that if Indian students were not allowed to take Tamil language and Tamil literature, some parties might exploit the issue.

He said for those in the Art stream, the new ruling would not pose a problem as they could take both the subjects and two others besides the six core subjects.

And this is what I heard him say last Sunday on TV2 in the interview show by Pandithurai:

MIC is still holding discussions with the ministry. For science stream students, they have to decide which two science subjects they want to take (meaning student already have an ambition or career in mind) if they want to take both Tamil subjects. For Arts stream students, he said not a problem, as there’s four elective places, meaning there two left after taking Tamil subjects.

Clearly, the stakeholders not very happy at the progress being made by MIC, until some guy from PKR wanted to burn an effigy of Dr Subra. There’s also a big protest planned on the 12th December at Wisma Peladang, Old Klang Road by various NGO groups:

More than 20 national Indian NGOs will stage a protest on Dec 12 at the Wisma Peladang in Petaling Jaya against a perceived grand plan to purge the Tamil language from the education system through the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM).

The protest is over the government’s elimination of Tamil language and Tamil literature under the 10-subject SPM package system from next year.

The joint NGO group organizing chairman A. Thiruvenggadam (left) said because of the restrictive ruling, Indian students whose mother tongue is Tamil would not be able to sit for subjects in their language and this is not what 1 Malaysia is all about.

“The problem has arisen because the package is restricted to only 10 subjects. If an Indian student sits for nine subjects, he has only one more subject which can be used up for Tamil language, and will not be able to sit for Tamil Literature.

“And if the Indian student takes all 10 subjects there is no option at all for both the subjects,” he said in an interview with Malaysiakini.

The system of the 10 SPM Subject System, he said was a grand plan to eliminate Tamil as a vernacular language in Malaysia and this is not keeping with the 1Malaysia concept the government is propagating.

“It is totally unfair and an abuse of the education system to discard Tamil as a language spoken by a major component race of Malaysia. This is a ruling that will mark the progressive closure of Tamil schools in the country.

“Eventually, Tamil students will not be able to take Tamil as a language in STPM and university. This is another plan to eliminate Tamil totally out of the system,” he said on behalf of Indian NGOs.

Some of the NGOs jointly participating in the protest are the Malaysian Hindu Sangam, Malaysian Tamil Literature Association, Malaysian Dravidian Association, Hindu Dharma Maha Madhuram and several other Indian NGOs.

Most of the these NGOs constitution provides for the protection and propagation of the Tamil language and Tamil Literature in the community.

“When students are unable to take Tamil language there will not be enough Tamil teachers to teach Tamil in schools in future,” he added.

While it may not be just to eliminate Tamil language (I wondered if it got anything to do with BM borrowing heavily from Tamil and Sanskrit), I think the state has a responsibility to provide education of vernacular language to its citizen. We can’t be only interested on promoting multi-cultural aspect of our country, but not willing to invest on building those multi-cultural identities.

What I feel is also not right is this:

The only exceptions would be students in the joint science and religious stream who will be allowed to take 11 subjects next year until the curriculum is streamlined by 2011, after which they too will be able to take a maximum of 10 subjects.

Such leeway should be given to other students tamil vernacular language as well, while a proper solution is devised.

I’m also unhappy with these two fellows: Dr Ramasamy and MP Kapar Manikavasagam because was quiet all this while. Now, there’s a posting on MP Kapar’s blog and also Malaysiakini article featuring Dr Ramasamy. Where was the noise before this? Looks like cheap publicity for me.

Dr Subra claims that such protests and actions may jeopardise the effort of MIC, but I beg to differ. The NGOs and public should also voice out their unhappiness in some way, which will help MIC to promote its cause. And, the reality is, people not really trusting MIC now. Perhaps MIC could have started a poll or survey or mobilized its various branches to gauge feedback from parents. But no, its still in processing of changing, so no proactive effort there.

Even in Minnal FM program call-in session recently, parents and teachers also opposed the move, saying it will deter students from taking Tamil subjects.

As for current status, Dr Subra says this:

Dr Subramaniam said he had on Monday met officers from the Education Ministry, including its director-general Datuk Alimuddin Mohd Dom, on the matter.

“We proposed that the Indian students be allowed to take 11 subjects, which would include Tamil and also Tamil Literature.

“However, the officials counter-proposed that the students wanting to sit these two papers could drop a subject, such as moral education or one of the four science subjects. We are not agreeable to this and this is why we are still in talks with the authorities.

I’m all for dropping Moral. Its a pathetic excuse for a subject!  Just take out Moral, and make it 4 core subjects (5 for Arts students). Or increase the subjects limit to 11 or 12. Is it so difficult? Another options is to allow student take language subjects separately (without SPM grading). A simple pass should be enough to provide the prerequisite for entering language related courses in IPTA or maktab, a workaround if you may. Something like MUET.

I have to repeat here: The state has a responsibility to ensure the multi-cultural heritage of the country is nurtured. One of the core elements is language. Instead of promoting growth of language, its seems to be the opposite. Its myopic to view language subjects as purely for examinations. In fact, why not make vernacular language as compulsory subject as well?

I hope Tamil proponents, ex-Tamil school students, NGOs, MIC’s 530,00 members, PKR’s members, DAP’s members, etc. all will turn up at Old Klang Road next weekend in a show of  force as voters of next general elections. That will be better than any discussion MIC can initiate.

BTN course supporters

November 26th, 2009
|  Subscribe in a reader | Subscribe to poobalan.com by Email


I’ve been reading about the Selangor government’s decision to bar its employees, and students of state-own institutions from attending the Biro Tatanegara camp/course. Those going overseas under government scholarship, civil servants, and others related to government are required to attend the camp.

I remember reading some anonymous letters and emails that pop up time to time, saying the camps are degrading other communities. Of course, being anonymous, you can’t really put any worth on it.  Probably the participants not able to come forward since their rice bowl or chance will be jeopardized.

As usual, the proponents of the camp comes from one particular group. So, I wonder if the our Chinese and Indian participants did enjoy the camp or have positive comments to say.  Their words will have more effect in promoting the camps.