Change our education system
Alam Faizli bin Mohd Zain
Change our education system
Revolutionist
3:53pm Fri Feb 20th, 2004
I think it is time for us to revolutionise our education system. We
cannot keep sticking to a system that our colonisers had left us
In my schooling years, I had to learn about Malaysian rubber, oil
palm, mining, fishing from Standard Three up until Form Six. What a
waste of time. Do we really need this kind of education?
I studied Malaysian history from Standard 3 to Form Six. But how many
of us can remember what we have studied? This is one reason why we
lack real expertise, because our education system encourages
memorisers but not thinkers.
The problem is common for Asian cultures, where thinking for yourself
and making mistakes is forbidden. For example, when a newborn child is
given a bath, Indians use the smoke to dry the hair of the child. Even
today, with the invention of the hair dryer, new parents are still
made to use the old method to dry their baby’s hair. This shows that
our parents are so soggy in their thinking.
Below is the kind of education system that I would suggest:
Age 5 to 10: Primary school
Age 11 to 15: Secondary school
Age 16 to 18: Diploma
Age 19 onwards: Degree education
This way, we can eliminate the kindergarten stage and Form
Six/matriculation. We are able to produce technical people at an
earlier age and start teaching our youngsters job-oriented education,
focussing their minds on one thing.
It is better to be the master of one rather than a jack of all.
Students will also have more time not just to do pursue a degree
program but produce products that many of our so called engineers
cannot produce, but which the Thais produce in their kitchens!
Flying Tigers
and lay off the restriction of the setting of private universities.
Johnson Luqaz
memoriser system has produced the greatest leaders not only in Malaysia
but in other countries as well.
The USA was at similar crossroads decades ago. Basically the new
generations were becoming fat, lazy, over-protected children, lacking
discipline and most of all entirely lacking in the frontier spirit of
their forefathers. Basically, the well meaning parents and liberals also
wanted to spare the new generations the embarassing poor grades they were
earning.
Well the liberals won and they re-designed their education system to
emphasize creativity and produce thinkers. In some states all children
whether male or female must learn quiltting. As it turned out the
education system that should have "emphasize creativity and produce
thinkers" only served to poofterize entire generations. Today the USA is
entirely dependent on imported / immigrant intellectuals and scientists to
keep their economic engine going.
Studies have shown that successor generations of these imported /
immigrant intellectuals and scientists, having gone thru the USA
"emphasize creativity and produce thinkers" education system came out
poofterized as well.
And now the well meaning liberals have reached Malaysia...
thanks.
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 23:29:28 +0800, Alam Faizli bin Mohd Zain
<afa...@tm.net.my> wrote:
> http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/200402200036259.php
>
> Change our education system
>
> Revolutionist
> 3:53pm Fri Feb 20th, 2004
>
> I think it is time for us to revolutionise our education system. We
> cannot keep sticking to a system that our colonisers had left us
>
> In my schooling years, I had to learn about Malaysian rubber, oil
> palm, mining, fishing from Standard Three up until Form Six. What a
> waste of time. Do we really need this kind of education?
>
> I studied Malaysian history from Standard 3 to Form Six. But how many
> of us can remember what we have studied? This is one reason why we
> lack real expertise, because our education system encourages
> memorisers but not thinkers.
>
--
Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
ck_in_sf1
> get the racist quota restriction off first, then only think about it.
And then what? Removing the racist quotas in unversity intake would
not solve anything. Come to think of it, the quotas in recent years
have guaranteed the ethnic chinese a disproportionate numbers of seats
when more qualified Malays are left out. So what gives?
And would you go to the local U when funding is poor, and the quality
of the curriculum is dubious? The ethnic chinese flight from the local
higher institutions of learning these days has little to do with
quotas but quality of education. If you can afford it, you go for one
of those twinning programs or better yet, overseas. Globalization has
forced the most progressive sector of the population, namely the
middle class Malaysians (who are disproportionately ethnic chinese and
now substantial numbers of Malays) to call for quality in education,
and when that call failed, moved their sons and daughters overseas.
No, the issue isn't about quotas anymore ... it was true some 8-10
years ago but not now. Your argument is really out of touch with the
present social dynamics.
>
> and lay off the restriction of the setting of private universities.
Indeed. But then you have Monash Malaysia operating happily along side
the government universities. As is TAR U and a number of other private
colleges.
Once again, you are off base.
CKSF
Pan
<jlu...@pc.jaring.my> wrote:
[snip]
>In some [U.S.] states all children
>whether male or female must learn quiltting.
Oh really? Please name some.
Your critique of U.S. educational problems is in some measure
accurate, but you overreach.
Michael
If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the TRASH, so to speak. Please do not email me something which you also posted.
ck_in_sf1
*crapping removed*
Nice to know you are rewriting history of the American elementary
education system.
By and by ... are you sure you KNOW the american system, other than
simply voicing misconception propagated by fools?
CKSF
Flying Tigers
engineering and scientific posts came from Chinese nationals.
Flying Tigers
make me laugh. Chinese are given crappy courses in govt uni like
agriculture or basic science courses while the good courses like med,
engineering, law are given to malays.
qualified malays? go ask MNCs on why they don't employ malays. most
can't even perform and write in English. those who get emplyed are due
to pressure from the govt.
> And then what? Removing the racist quotas in unversity intake would
> not solve anything. Come to think of it, the quotas in recent years
> have guaranteed the ethnic chinese a disproportionate numbers of seats
> when more qualified Malays are left out. So what gives?
talk cock again. u sure help your own people. how many Chinese can
afford to send their children to overseas? only a small minority. many
can't even afford to send kids to budget colleges like Systematic or TARC.
> And would you go to the local U when funding is poor, and the quality
> of the curriculum is dubious? The ethnic chinese flight from the local
> higher institutions of learning these days has little to do with
> quotas but quality of education. If you can afford it, you go for one
> of those twinning programs or better yet, overseas. Globalization has
> forced the most progressive sector of the population, namely the
> middle class Malaysians (who are disproportionately ethnic chinese and
> now substantial numbers of Malays) to call for quality in education,
> and when that call failed, moved their sons and daughters overseas.
ya right. to u i think
> No, the issue isn't about quotas anymore ... it was true some 8-10
> years ago but not now. Your argument is really out of touch with the
> present social dynamics.
>
Monash is for richie rich ones. TARU has only 3 facualties. and that
is only after an election pledge from Mahathir to repay the Chinese for
saving BN's butt in the last election. Malay organistion can easily get
uni status but not when comes to Chinese org. there's only UCSI and
Limkokweng. plainly speaking it's just dengki and jealousy and racism.
Go to TARC and see how pathetic the condition there. 4 years course
only gives the grad an advanced diploma. malay uni gets bachelor's
degree. and what about the recent imposition of minimum 5 credits in
SPM for entrees to private colleges. what kind of fucked up racism rule
is this.
Flying Tigers
make me laugh. Chinese are given crappy courses in govt uni like
agriculture or basic science courses while the good courses like med,
engineering, law are given to malays.
qualified malays? go ask MNCs on why they don't employ malays. most
can't even perform and write in English. those who get emplyed are due
to pressure from the govt.
> And then what? Removing the racist quotas in unversity intake would
> not solve anything. Come to think of it, the quotas in recent years
> have guaranteed the ethnic chinese a disproportionate numbers of seats
> when more qualified Malays are left out. So what gives?
talk cock again. u sure help your own people. how many Chinese can
afford to send their children to overseas? only a small minority. many
can't even afford to send kids to budget colleges like Systematic or TARC.
> And would you go to the local U when funding is poor, and the quality
> of the curriculum is dubious? The ethnic chinese flight from the local
> higher institutions of learning these days has little to do with
> quotas but quality of education. If you can afford it, you go for one
> of those twinning programs or better yet, overseas. Globalization has
> forced the most progressive sector of the population, namely the
> middle class Malaysians (who are disproportionately ethnic chinese and
> now substantial numbers of Malays) to call for quality in education,
> and when that call failed, moved their sons and daughters overseas.
ya right. to u i think
> No, the issue isn't about quotas anymore ... it was true some 8-10
> years ago but not now. Your argument is really out of touch with the
> present social dynamics.
>
Monash is for richie rich ones. TARU has only 3 facualties. and that
is only after an election pledge from Mahathir to repay the Chinese for
saving BN's butt in the last election. Malay organistion can easily get
uni status but not when comes to Chinese org. there's only UCSI and
Limkokweng. plainly speaking it's just dengki and jealousy and racism.
Go to TARC and see how pathetic the condition there. 4 years course
only gives the grad an advanced diploma. malay uni gets bachelor's
degree. and what about the recent imposition of minimum 5 credits in
SPM for entrees to private colleges. what kind of fucked up racism rule
is this.
>
Pan
wrote:
>where did u get your crap arguments from. 'qualified malays'? don't
>make me laugh.
[snip]
Keep laughing. They're a lot smarter than you are, fool.
Johnson Luqaz
happen...
But there are minions of "Kulit-fied Malays".
In a land where "Technical know-how" is junk and "Technical know-who" is
supreme,
are u surprised that "Kulit-fication" is worshipped than "Qualification"??
thanks.
--
ck_in_sf1
Woohoo ... posting from germany ... Intruder?
Time to put up the kill-file ...
A note of advice ... next time, learn to read and comprehend before
going off a tangent.
CKSF
intruder
wrote:
Next time, learn and read more about network fundamentals and
comprehend that my postings do not originate from Germany.
Clearly your a not only a pseudo scientist but also a computer
illiterate.
Pan
<jlu...@pc.jaring.my> wrote:
>This phenomenon called "qualified Malays" is a strange one but it does
>happen...
You'd better believe it happens!
>But there are minions of "Kulit-fied Malays".
>
>In a land where "Technical know-how" is junk and "Technical know-who" is
>supreme,
>
>are u surprised that "Kulit-fication" is worshipped than "Qualification"??
I understand your point here.
Part of the reason why quotas are wrong except in extreme cases is
that even when a member of the "scheduled castes" achieves something
on his/her own, people will question whether it was really because of
his/her ethnicity, etc.
Best,
Mr_Magoo
> This phenomenon called "qualified Malays" is a strange one but it does
> happen...
>
> But there are minions of "Kulit-fied Malays".
>
> In a land where "Technical know-how" is junk and "Technical know-who" is
> supreme,
>
> are u surprised that "Kulit-fication" is worshipped than "Qualification"??
>
And what kulit is Ananda, Vincent etc?
Try to take off your racist spectacle and you will be able to see more clearly.
Rgds,
Mr Magoo
ajali
interest to participate in such an important topic. Unfortunately,
none of you have any basic understanding about our educational
history. Let me suggest a book or two so you can make a better
arguments from that. First a book written by Ibrahim Saad, printed in
late 80's and it discussed about education in Malaya during British
colonial era, simple reading and a very thin book. Second, read Abu
Zahari "Perkembangan Pendidikan di Malaysia". Also a simple reading
and a thin book. Ask your former teacher/s. Probably, some of them
still have it in their collection. Thats they way to see or measure
progress where we were before and where we are now. There is no
question your experience in school was a history but it is your
history and no one else. And if you like to compare it with other
country, make sure you compare apple with apple and have real
understanding on both countries. Without it, you will only writing
nonsense.
Second, have a clear definition what constitute success. Is having 30%
of the population having a college degree is a success? Or having
people who hold the top job, like doctor, engineer etc. that reflect
the society is a success? Whatever you choose for you definition, make
sure it can be measure in some sort of measurement. Then make your
argument why you think that our education system need a "revolution"
change.
As someone who has read the book and compare it with our current
system, I don't see any need for "revolution" change. Sure our system
is not perfect, it has flaws but it doesn't not need revolution. What
it need is "reform". Reform in term on how we teach our students,
reform our curriculum from time to time so its always up to date with
the lastest knowledge, and probably we need to add extra universities
for more students the opportunity for tertiatry education and more
grad school so we can learn and do a lot more research in various
field to our (country) needs. We already have exams to measure our
students achievement.
Let look at success. Well, this is the tricky area. The best is by
using merits. Those who are the best among us should have better
opportunity for college education and hold the better job.
Unfortunately, we cannot use this system in our country. Why? We all
know why.....we live in multiethnic/ multicultural society, we live in
a society where we have people who have everything and those who have
nothing, we live in a society where race relation is still fragile and
can explode anytime like the 13 May 1969 or we can see what happened
in Indonesia during the economy crisis 1998/1999. We also got to
understand about students achievement. If you look at every
educational studies that are related to students achievement, you will
find that there is a direct correlation between parents socioeconomic
status and students achievement. Those who came from higher
socioeconomics status have higher achievement than those who came from
lower economics status. Taking all these things into account we make
the compromise, we use the quota system for university entrance and we
do a lot of other measure to close the gap between those who have and
those who have not. Sure, not everybody happy about it but we do
achieve some level of satisfaction among every race in Malaysia. Every
race get something from the country. We never have the intention to
kill each other. Its not perfect, but we do have some progress. So are
we successful with our education system? If you look around, we do
have some success. We have universities students that mirror the
society, we have the work force that mirror the society although not
100 %. Looking at the economy, we can see a lot of activities that
taking place now. We have a lot more companies that can produce a lot
of thing that we can't do before. We have advance in various
technology area. We have advance in many fields. We haven't reach the
level that we want to go, but taking everything into account, one
cannot say that we are not successful. Don't forget that, we are still
a very young country. 47 years of independent is not a long period if
you use history as a measurement. One should be proud of what we have
achieve within that time period.
Flying Tigers
educationlists in Malaya.
We should emulate a mass education strategy as in US. China is now
shiftting to mass education policy from the previous elite education.
To be a modern nation, we must have learned people from vairous fields.
> Second, have a clear definition what constitute success. Is having 30%
> of the population having a college degree is a success? Or having
> people who hold the top job, like doctor, engineer etc. that reflect
> the society is a success? Whatever you choose for you definition, make
> sure it can be measure in some sort of measurement. Then make your
> argument why you think that our education system need a "revolution"
> change.
just compare with Taiwan and Korea. We were better off than both
countries in the 60s with higher GDPs. but due to racism policy on
education, Malaysia slagged behind both countries. Now both countries
have signoificantly higher GDPs than us. One must compare with stronger
and more competitive nations in order to be more competitive.
Flying Tigers
world, the are hopeless case.
everyone knows Malays are just kaki lepak and only want face and branded
stuff. when comes to work, it's just besok lusa and relaks la.
Flying Tigers
perspective, go ask the angmoh matsalleh and the Japanese expats. they
will tell you which community is working hard and which is lepak maut
and depends on the dole money from the govt.
Flying Tigers
compare with HK, Korea and Taiwan, we are really shitty. All three were
trailing us in GDP during the 60s. but with our racist quota system in
place, these 3 countries just kick our ass now in GDP terms.
Flying Tigers
ya right. in Bolehland right. what's the use. no matter how smart one
is, if he/she is lazy and lacks initiative, it's back to the Third World
status also.
ajali
I would like to challenge you to make a real academics case for your
contention. If you think GDP is the one and only indicator as a
measuring stick to measure success, so be it. Show me or us, that you
are not racist and objective in making your case. Anybody can
ramblings and talk nonsense, but not many can write objectively. Show
me that you are man enough to accept the challenge. If not there's an
adage that say " Put up or shut up".
ck_in_sf1
>
*post modern rambling removed*
The problem with your position is that you are basing it on the
premise of a past that no longer apply to present Malaysia. And thats
for starters. I do not deny the historical facet of the Malaysian
education and would say it is darn good up to elementary level.
However it has failed at the tertiary level for a variety of reasons.
Now, we can discuss all we want about secondary/elementary education.
But the issue at hand is more than that, isn't it?
CKSF
Flying Tigers
students who have been denied of govt higher education ,and those that
are given crappy courses due to this racist quota.
tell it to the Malays who need not study and still will get medicine,
law, engineering, acc ay govt uni.
Flying Tigers
Malaysian govt is racist. only that Malays are still exercising
self-denial from day one. well continue dreaming lor. soon the roof
will fall on your flat face.
GDP is one of the main factors, Mr. Self Denial.
just look at our proton car project also suffice already. cars made by
u know who are plain shoddy and overpriced. but mau muka jugak to
continue. industrialisation is not only about machinery and computers
and electronics and canggih maut. it's about people and hardwork. if u
have all the technologies but still with the current attitude "lepak le"
"boleh le" "proton, biasa le" then all the high tech canggig stuff will
not help Malaysia.
larry kim
I think in this case, just shut up! This is just lies, damed lies, to
justify racist policies. We have gone thru argument with this type of
crap long time ago and that's why Malaysia is stuck where it is now
when others have moved way ahead of you. How objective can you be when
malaysia is still stuck in the mud. This is like two beggers arguing
how smart they are!
A CUP IS HALF FULL OR HALF EMPTY IS STILL NOT FULL.
There is only one top job on the top and it is always occupied by the
best and qualified person.
The communist tried to make everyone equal and they ended up screwing
up the whole country!
May be I am not being objective!
Ahmad Sayuthi
> tell it to the Malays who need not study and still will get medicine,
> law, engineering, acc ay govt uni.
Okay, cibai: Tell it to *me* then that I need not study.
ajali
Question : Do we need to "revolution" change our education system? If
yes, why? and if not, why?
My answer is that we don't need "revolution" change. But surely, we
need to do some reform in the area that need to update or in area
where we are not successful.
Then, we have to ask, why not?
1. Well, the word "revolution" is completely overhaul everything like
start from the beginning, totally different from grade school to
tertiary education. Or, the words "revolution" might be a very drastic
change. We already make changes over time, from Fenn Wu report to
Razak Report to Cabinet Committee Report etc.
2. Our current system has serve us well. The concept of "Jeri" -
Jasmani,Emosi, rohani, and Intellect. It serve our goals as a nation:
1. nation building
- provide work force as our country continue to progress.
- united the society or citizen. through one curriculum, opportunity
for all race from grade school to tertiary education. Taking into
account the explosve nature of race relation. Taking political
consideration. Thats why, we maintain monther-tongue school, Quota
system. So, every citizen gets something from the system. NOT PERFECT
but nobody really left behind.
- etc. can't think of it right now, need some refereance to do it.
3. Then you have to measure success.
a. you measure it through the progress of history. Where were you
before and where are you now. Ask the question , are we better of now
then before?
b. you measure with other very similar country/ies to be fair to you.
But this is the tricky part. There is no one country that has the same
demographics and history. Is it fair to measure Malaysia to Singapore
for example. Is it fair to measure Malaysia to Indonesia. Is it fair
to measure Malaysia to Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China, USA?
The closet you can do is Singapore. Same history, almost same
demographics. But then again, they began their history as a city
state. They already has a strong economy at that time with a well
established port. They already have several higher education
institutions. Remember, Mahathir went there for medical school. What
do we have at that time.....Only one, university malaya. Beside, the
population was different. They start with about 1 millions people. We
began probably around 10 or 11 millions - after independence. You can
only build your education system as your money allow you to do so. We
also have a long struggle with Communist Party of Malaya for a long
long time (CPM)
Lets, look at our friend, Flying Tigers suggestion.
1. He suggest look at the history of Chinese School (monther tongue
school) and their struggles.
Well, the books that I have pointed out do look/discussed at this type
of school. Its was called Vernacular school. Look at it first before
just rambling to express your dissatisfaction and frustration. It is
understandable you love your own race. But then again who doesn't.
2. He suggest, to compare it with Korea, Taiwan, and Hong Kong which
in his mind have achieve more successful?
Sure we can. Make the case. But then again, if you want to compare to
them is it fair. All these countries have one single important factor
that we don't have that is "race". So the challenge to build the
society is totally different. Beside other factors such as history
etc. He understand how race is important to him. So do others. But if
you want to compare it for the purpose to improve yourself and look at
the area where you can improve, I don't see any problem. Its a good
thing. If you want to compare it as a measure of success in term of
material success alone, thats different thing.
3. He suggest drop the "racist" quota system.
Well, anybody in the right mind will know what will happen. The state
(govenment) universities will be flood gate by only Chinese students.
That will be the reality, at least for the time being. I don't know
how long, probably 50 years, probably more. Just look at the United
state if it can be used in some indication (probably not). Every top
universities today (2004)like Harvard, Yale, Princeton are full of
white students. Why? The one most important factor is "money". In
every study, you will find students from" affluent" parents will have
higher students achievement. Thats the fact. In the contact of
Malaysia, who has the money. Don't we have a responsibility for the
children of the farmers, fishermen etc who happen to be mostly from
the Malay race. So, to deny them the opportunity is a "RACIST".
The best way to serve everybody is by setting up more universities. We
don't have problem at grade school. Everybody can get education
(almost free). But setting up univerisities is not an easy task. It
need work force, it need planning, and the bottom line it need
"money". With limited resouces, you do what you can to invest in
education. You also do what you can to satisfy every race. This is
where the politics comes in. You talk, you discuss, you make
compromise. The result might not always satisfy everybody, but in
general people can live with this. And as often happen in politics, if
you are the majority, you have better advantages. Even in America who
claim about their openness, you can see white people will always have
advantages in every aspect, economy, education, culture, politics etc.
And the rich always have better advantage against the poor. Males have
better opportunity than females.
So, how do you solve education issue in Malaysia at the tertiary
education. You allow more private colleges. Now, after almost 50 years
of independence, we have more than every before. Sure its a struggle,
but its a progress in a right direction. And this struggle will
continue. It happen everywhere, every nations. It just the way it is.
4. He suggest using the GDP.
Well, I am not an economist. So its difficult for me to explain in
this area. Thats why I have challenge him to make the case. He
probably can do it better than me.
But I can compare simple fact about money earned and quality of life.
Lets just pick, New York City and Columbus, Ohio. Or if you want to
take Malaysia, lets compare, Kuala Lumpur and Batu Pahat. Is it the
same quality of life if you earn $30,000 per year if you live in Kuala
Lumpur and Batu Pahat? $30,000 is still $30,000 right. But taking
everything you need in your life like housing, education,
entertainment etc. the quality of life is not the same.
He try to compare Malaysia GDP versus Hong Kong, Korea, Taiwan for
that matter. By number, yes, the other three countries is better than
us. But I never live there. The closest I came is their airport,
flight transit. So let him explain or discuss about it, I am looking
forward to read it.
Bottom line is, if you want to make comparison, change or whatever, do
it objectivitely, inform yourself, get the facts right, level headed.
Don't let your race, your citizenship, your own personal experience
color your judgement. General observation is often flawed. If you just
want to ramblings about your dissatisfaction, you just talking
nonsense. By the way, I came from a Malay race and I am proud of that.
If I want to ramblings from my race perspective, I can also do the
same. We are not totally happy too. I guess, if you ask the Indians,
they can also do the same. What we should be thinking is how to make
it better? Its more productive doing that and it make more sense.
ajali
Objective writing is about writing the way it is. Use the facts.
Recognize the realities. Put personal bias aside. Also recognize that
in social sciences, there is no TOTAL objective. Same facts but may
result in different conclusion.
In term of our nation, Malaysia, we have to recognize that it is not a
dream world. Its NOT perfect. We have issues, we have problem, we have
a lot of weaknesses. We have race relation problem, we have rich and
poor problem, and many others. It is a challenge and it is a struggle.
The question is how you deal with it to move forward?
Now lets go to University Quota System, thats seems to be of your
interest. Yes, looking objectively, there is no question race element
is put into it. Why? Because race matter. As a Chinese, Chinese as a
race do matter to you. So to other people too. Race matter to them,
race matter to me. So what we do about it? Ignore? Or find a way to
deal with it. Well, we find a way to deal with it. We compromise. But
compromise is NOT perfect. Sometimes it goes a lot more to one
direction than the other. Thats the reality, thats the real world. If
I follow my emotion and not brain, I want everything. I want
everything to be mine. I would like to see Chinese and Indian schools
close, I would like to question their loyalty to the nation that they
live now. I would like to send them back to their family's countries
of origin. But, we all have to be grateful that we have pass that kind
of emotion. We now recognize that we live in multiracial and
multicultural society. With that come challenges. So, the quota system
is about overcoming this type of challenges. You get some slice of the
pie, we get some slice of it. If you think taking that quota out solve
the problem, well look no further. Look at what happened in Indonesia
when our market crashed. What the malay Indonesians do......they
killed the rich chinese over there. Ask yourself, is that what you
want. That is the realities in German when they kill the jews during
world war 2, or any other part of the world where race relation is
involved. If protected and defend your own race and the quota system
as racist, to demand it to be abolish so your race can dominate the
whole universities is racist at the highest level. Its totally
disregards other people race interest and selfish.
By the way, I am not challenging you like I put a challenged on Flying
Tigers. At the very least, you admit that you maybe not sound
objective. For Flying tigers, judge for yourself the quality of
arguments that he make. For what ever it worth, it is what it is.
lalu
> face the reality mister, even when the truth hurts.
...the reality is that there are good hardworking Malays and the not so
good one...similarly I have come across lazy but good in pretending
non-Malays and also some very good and honest one....
u want any real
> perspective, go ask the angmoh matsalleh and the Japanese expats.
they
> will tell you which community is working hard and which is lepak maut
> and depends on the dole money from the govt.
......I am quite used to the non-Malays tactics of bad mouthing the Malays
in an international based company and rest assured that the
matsalleh/Japanese/expats have their own perception of the non-Malays and it
is not quite nice to write here bcoz it might not be true too....
lalu
> yups in Bolehland they are really smart. once out in the competitive
> world, the are hopeless case.
......care to elaborate..
>
> everyone knows Malays are just kaki lepak and only want face and branded
> stuff. when comes to work, it's just besok lusa and relaks la.
.....I am quite used to the non-Malays labeling Malays as kaki lepak or
lazy and the more I think the more about it the more I realize this is the
only way for the non-Malays to protect the 'notion' that only the non-Malays
are the hardworking lot......this is just like someone trying to look good
by saying others are bad..same like John Dykes repeatedly saying that
English football is the best in the world even after a boring 0-0 draw or a
scrappy 2-2 draw....the fact is that they are many hardworking Malays and
they are many not so hardworking non-Malays too....
Ahmad Sayuthi
> "Flying Tigers" <tig...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:c1d507$1g4sm3$2...@ID-186143.news.uni-berlin.de...
> > yups in Bolehland they are really smart. once out in the
> > competitive world, the are hopeless case.
>
> ......care to elaborate..
Don't hold your breath waiting. This Flying Tiger/Golden Snake or whatever
is the same... just a two-bit and ball-less twerp who'd make racist-tinted
comments and then run. "Running Dog" would be a more appropriate handle:)
ajali
>
> CKSF
Answering CKSF.
1. First of all I don't know if you respond to my post. But I like to
respond to your conclusion saying it has failed at the tertiary
level.
I don't know what you mean as "failed". But that is highly subjective
thing. For me, "fail" mean that you set a standard. If you don't reach
that standard, then it can be said as failer. Just like in exam. If
you get 60 for example, as a passing mark. Then if you reach that
level, you pass. If you get 80 even better. If you get 100 %, thats
the best.
If you mean failed is by looking at the product or students who came
from that education level into work force, and can do or produce
everything as a standard, then we have failed. But there is no one
university in the world can do that. Thats why, there is internship
program, work-training program etc. The university can only do so much
to a student. When the student enter the work force, he enter with
enough basic skills to do the job. In order to get better, he has to
continue to learn whether through work-training program or through
professional development etc. Then if he think he want to get even
better, he go to graduate school...doing masters, p.hd or whatever
specializing that he want.
If you expect, our universities graduates have to be able to produce
rokets,or cars or whatever high tech, then we have failed. But you
have to look thing in perspective. Advance countries like united
states, japan, german, take years and a lot of investment to reach
that level. It take billions and billions of dollar to get a
successful product. Even then, it not guarentee success. We as a
nation is not there yet. But I think in a lot of field, we are taking
baby steps.
Just remember your school days, most of your teachers were the product
of local universities. And your achievement was directly related to
your teachers. Sure they cannot get everyone pass with flying colors,
but they can do a decent job. Can they get better? sure, I think we
all got to believe that we can get better. Then look at our workforce,
in administration, management, business, law, or whatever field. If we
failed, then we will be in shamble now. Most efficient? No. Are we
satisfied with a lot of things, no. Can we get better, sure. The same
is true to every country. But over times, things get better and
better. Our capabilities improve over time. Some take longer to reach
there. Thats why I mentioned, that we are NOT perfect. Thats why I
mentioned about history. Just remember, up to 1970, we only have one
university. Thats is University Malaya. Then around 1970, we add a few
more, Universiti Kebangsaan and universiti Sains. But universities is
not like magician. Set up a universities, you can produce whatever you
want. Its not working like that. It takes time, it takes more
research, it takes more investment. Its a learning thing, its a work
in progress. Check what we have in 1980, then compare it what we have
in 2000. There is a lot of thing that we can do now than what we
cannnot do before. Check US universities, a lot of them was build
around 1800s. That is more than 100 years before we have our first
university around 1950s. They take their baby steps long before we
do. Because of that, they have deeper body of knowledge. With
knowledge come expertise. So, lets give fair evaluation before we can
judge that we have failed. Don't take one thing and compare to
another. Lets remember, our universities produce students in various
field. Some field we are far behind, some field, we do a lot better.
Lets look at the totality. Its NOT perfect, but its getting better.
ir. hj. othman bin hj. ahmad
> happen...
>
> But there are minions of "Kulit-fied Malays".
>
> In a land where "Technical know-how" is junk and "Technical know-who" is
> supreme,
>
> are u surprised that "Kulit-fication" is worshipped than "Qualification"??
>
> thanks.
and to a certain extent with Western nations.
In Japan and many European nations, technical knowhow is a must because their
lives are filled with technical toys. To them, technical knowhow is an
enjoyment just like sports and even in sports you should notice their
tendencies to incorporate technical innovations.
It is not true for Malaysia and many Asian countries where the enjoyment of
sports preclude the understanding and utilisation of technology, to the point
of ridiculing technology in sports.
Technicality here does not mean technology but the correct ways of doing things,
but here we don't enjoy doing things the right way, we enjoy human relationships
more than anything else. It is not worth striving to do the right things if
it disturbs human relationship.
Anthropologically human relationship is important for human survival but
technical competence will make a society more dominant. E.g. Anchor Wat
society was poor in technicalities but was so advanced in cultures and
standard of living of their inhabitants as judged by the chinese diplomats
in Anchor Wat.
It is all a question of choice, but for me it is technicalities that matter
the most. It may not lead to a better quality of life, but it will ensure
our survivial. We may be at peace now, but this will not last forever.
ir. hj. othman bin hj. ahmad
> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:29:31 +0800, Johnson Luqaz
> <jlu...@pc.jaring.my> wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >In some [U.S.] states all children
> >whether male or female must learn quiltting.
>
> Oh really? Please name some.
>
> Your critique of U.S. educational problems is in some measure
> accurate, but you overreach.
No. This guy is excellent. He went to the guts of the matter.
He even introduced better words to summarise the situation in USA.
You may like to give MIT , UCB as examples of the excellent creativity of
USA, but why don't you study who these people are. USA may have Bill Gates,
Ellison, etc, but why don't you try to find out about their educational
backgrounds. Bill Gates, Stephen Jobs are certainly not the product of USA
education system.
ck_in_sf1
>
> Question : Do we need to "revolution" change our education system? If
> yes, why? and if not, why?
Indeed, thats how I approached it too. But then I came down with a
very different answer than you do.
What I fear most is exactly what you have done ... basing your entire
argument on a political view point and making assumptions and
comparisons about and on, respectively, collorary systems without
thinking aloud as to the basic tenet of the education system we have
at hand.
No two system is the same, and whats more, Malaysia does not need a
major reform in its secondary or elementary education system but
reform or even a revolution in its tertiary education is required.
Learn to discern the arguments and not argue on all fronts. It might
serve you better.
CKSF
ck_in_sf1
> no longer applies eh. tell it to the millions of Malaysian Chinese
> students who have been denied of govt higher education ,and those that
> are given crappy courses due to this racist quota.
>
> tell it to the Malays who need not study and still will get medicine,
> law, engineering, acc ay govt uni.
What a racist idiot you are.
The problems isn't solely on Malays who need not study - but a wider
problem. Please don't go around making stupid conclusions based
entirely on your racist view point.
And about the crappy courses, a tertiary education isn't entirely
about becoming an engineer or accountant, but it should be more, much
more. You limited view of the tertiary education is simply a means to
an end to which a graduate would not serve his or her civil duty as a
citizen with higher learning.
Simply put, you have no idea what tertiary education is all about
other than your limited view of race and quotas that is now protecting
disproportionately the ethnic chinese numbers.
CKSF
jay
hj. ahmad) wrote:
>
>You may like to give MIT , UCB as examples of the excellent creativity of
>USA, but why don't you study who these people are. USA may have Bill Gates,
>Ellison, etc, but why don't you try to find out about their educational
>backgrounds. Bill Gates, Stephen Jobs are certainly not the product of USA
>education system.
just jumpin' in here blindly. but bill gates is not a product of usa
education system????
haji, what have you been smoking?
Pan
hj. ahmad) wrote:
>Pan <panNO...@musician.org> wrote in message news:<42gf30tvh8mhmnimk...@4ax.com>...
>> On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:29:31 +0800, Johnson Luqaz
>> <jlu...@pc.jaring.my> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>> >In some [U.S.] states all children
>> >whether male or female must learn quiltting.
>>
>> Oh really? Please name some.
>>
>> Your critique of U.S. educational problems is in some measure
>> accurate, but you overreach.
>
>No. This guy is excellent. He went to the guts of the matter.
Do you know any states where all children must learn quilting?
>He even introduced better words to summarise the situation in USA.
>
>You may like to give MIT , UCB as examples of the excellent creativity of
>USA
[snip]
That isn't the point. I see educational problems twice a week, when I
teach at a community college. But when criticizing, accuracy is best.
Flying Tigers
course for the Malays, this is already a reality as most Malays are
obtaining easy access to higher govt education. For the Chinese, only
the elites will get into govt uni. For less achieving Chinese, they
will obtain crappy courses from govt uni or an option at the private
colleges and uni which charge astronomical sums.
for a country to prosper, we need many grads in diverse fields and not
only traditional ones like med, law, acc.
>
> And about the crappy courses, a tertiary education isn't entirely
> about becoming an engineer or accountant, but it should be more, much
> more. You limited view of the tertiary education is simply a means to
> an end to which a graduate would not serve his or her civil duty as a
> citizen with higher learning.
who is racist here?
>...limited view of race and quotas that is now protecting
> disproportionately the ethnic chinese numbers. <snip>
Flying Tigers
league of best universities in Asia in the 60s. However today, it is
ranked 49. Why the drop?
the problem lies in the quality of teaching heads at the UM. Many
talented Chinese lecturers are given the cold shoulders and instead
substandard Malay lecturers are raised to professorship.
There's one local Chinese professor who was given the cold shoulder and
furstrated he went to HK University and is the figure responsible for
making HKU one of the best university in Asia.
Flying Tigers
>
>
>
> I think in this case, just shut up! This is just lies, damed lies, to
> justify racist policies. We have gone thru argument with this type of
> crap long time ago and that's why Malaysia is stuck where it is now
> when others have moved way ahead of you. How objective can you be when
> malaysia is still stuck in the mud. This is like two beggers arguing
> how smart they are!
yups for MNCs and big companies only. just look at University Malaya.
pathetic case.
>
> There is only one top job on the top and it is always occupied by the
> best and qualified person.
in China now, to be rich is glorious. You are still stuck with the 60s
british propanganda.
continue with your self-denial lor.
Flying Tigers
exercising the teaching and usage of mothertongues in this world.
that's why the govt conveniently ignores the recent UN 's World
Mothertongue day celebrations. wake up to your self-denial senses.
try to close lor. see ur Malay chauvisnist ass in court then.
>I would like to see Chinese and Indian schools
> close, I would like to question their loyalty to the nation that they
> live now.
try to do that lor. China 's warships will be at your doorstep the next
day.
>I would like to send them back to their family's countries
> of origin.
Even if the Chinese dominates the govt universities, the Chinese do it
by hardwork. u mean u advocate apathy and laziness among the Malays by
the racist quota thingy. just take alook at the govt uni and u know
who is racist and selfish and dengki here.
Flying Tigers
Flying Tigers
whether who is telling the truth and who is still in self-denial.
ajali
> > yes, why? and if not, why?
>
> Indeed, thats how I approached it too. But then I came down with a
> very different answer than you do.
>
I don't have any problem with your approach or conclusions. Its always
great to have different approaches and perspectives to look at things.
In educations, its always great to put politics out of the window. But
politics has always been the first hurdle that you have to overcome
first before you can talk about programs, curriculum etc. Especially
in an area where the resources are limited.
You mentioned in your earlier post about quotas. Well, whether to keep
or abolish it requires political will. However you do it, it will
always upset one group to another. It just the reality that we as the
people have to deal with it. The question on how to deal it is a
political in itself.
Ahmad Sayuthi
> try to close lor. see ur Malay chauvisnist ass in court then.
A running dog who doesn't even dare to use his name talking about courts
and inferring legal suits?! Ptui!!
Ahmad Sayuthi
> continue with your self-denial lor. ask anybody in Malaysia, and see
> whether who is telling the truth and who is still in self-denial.
You are.
ajali
> who is racist here? the United NAtion Charter guarantees the right of
> exercising the teaching and usage of mothertongues in this world.
> that's why the govt conveniently ignores the recent UN 's World
> Mothertongue day celebrations. wake up to your self-denial senses.
>
> try to close lor. see ur Malay chauvisnist ass in court then.
>
> >I would like to see Chinese and Indian schools
> > close, I would like to question their loyalty to the nation that they
> > live now.
Cheap shots. Taking out of contacts. Reading the following sentences.
" We have to be thankful that we have passed this kind of emotions. We
recognized that we are multi culcural, multi ravial society."
>
>
>
>
> try to do that lor. China 's warships will be at your doorstep the next
> day.
>
> >I would like to send them back to their family's countries
> > of origin.
Cheap shots. Same as above. Taking out of contacts.
>
>
> Even if the Chinese dominates the govt universities, the Chinese do it
> by hardwork. u mean u advocate apathy and laziness among the Malays by
> the racist quota thingy. just take alook at the govt uni and u know
> who is racist and selfish and dengki here.
Not going to happen. Nothing wrong to keep on dreaming.
ck_in_sf1
> our aim should be in mass education instead of elite education.
discarded since the late 80s.
>Of
> course for the Malays, this is already a reality as most Malays are
> obtaining easy access to higher govt education. For the Chinese, only
> the elites will get into govt uni.
Not true at all. many of the ethnic Chinese "elite" would go off to an
overseas institution for their tertiary education.
> For less achieving Chinese, they
> will obtain crappy courses from govt uni or an option at the private
> colleges and uni which charge astronomical sums.
LOL!! Well, seems to me that you have no idea what you are talking
about!
>
> for a country to prosper, we need many grads in diverse fields and not
> only traditional ones like med, law, acc.
>
And yet you make the other argument. What are you really arguing
about? Or are you simply making noise just to be heard? You cannot
have it both ways ...
>
> >
> > And about the crappy courses, a tertiary education isn't entirely
> > about becoming an engineer or accountant, but it should be more, much
> > more. You limited view of the tertiary education is simply a means to
> > an end to which a graduate would not serve his or her civil duty as a
> > citizen with higher learning.
>
>
>
> who is racist here?
>
You are.
CKSF
ck_in_sf1
> > However it has failed at the tertiary level for a variety of reasons.
>
> >
> > CKSF
>
> Answering CKSF.
>
> 1. First of all I don't know if you respond to my post. But I like to
> respond to your conclusion saying it has failed at the tertiary
> level.
>
> I don't know what you mean as "failed". But that is highly subjective
> thing. For me, "fail" mean that you set a standard. If you don't reach
> that standard, then it can be said as failer. Just like in exam. If
> you get 60 for example, as a passing mark. Then if you reach that
> level, you pass. If you get 80 even better. If you get 100 %, thats
> the best.
>
Metrics should not be nor must it be the only measure in something as
subjective and broadly defined as tertiary education. The aim of
tertiary education in Malaysia should have morphed from the current
day production number game to that of creating a more rounded
graduate. This is not to say that all graduates are inept, far from
it. But the system of teaching, curriculum development, and resources
for teaching and research, must be made available. You simply cannot
have a state of the art curriculum in say, a technical science course
(which I have reviewed for MUST and UTM a while back) and tell the
administrators/faculties that there is little or no money in the
budget for the implementation. And yet the implementation must be had
just because it was in the "pelan".
The graduates who study the course work will only be versed in the
abstract, if they are bright enough (typically they are and they will
soon lose interest) but not the practicalities.
Indeed, in this instance, the graduates will score "100%" by your
metrics, but in my mind, they are failures for the purpose of that
coursework.
> If you mean failed is by looking at the product or students who came
> from that education level into work force, and can do or produce
> everything as a standard, then we have failed.
Nice of you to acknowledge that.
>But there is no one
> university in the world can do that.
The west does it very well, as do many other institutions in Asia.
India for all its warts and weaknesses are producing highly qualified
engineers and technical specialists that keep many high tech companies
viable in the US and increasing the EU. Similarly, Russia for all its
horrible lean years since the downfall of USSR is now a leading
supplier of brain power in biophysics and optics for the US
universities and companies. And China is providing a cadre of well
trained basic degree graduates who excel in PhD and Masters level
education in the US and many other developed nations. One may argue
that it is by sheer numbers that graduates from these countries are
making an impact on the developed world, but honestly, in a brutal
world of intense economic and technical intellect competition, the
more likely outcome is that these graduates have what it takes to work
on the leading edges of the economy and academic pursuit.
> Thats why, there is internship
> program, work-training program etc. The university can only do so much
> to a student. When the student enter the work force, he enter with
> enough basic skills to do the job. In order to get better, he has to
> continue to learn whether through work-training program or through
> professional development etc. Then if he think he want to get even
> better, he go to graduate school...doing masters, p.hd or whatever
> specializing that he want.
Or she wants. Training programs for new graduates do exist for most
companies, But you are digressing.
> If you expect, our universities graduates have to be able to produce
> rokets,or cars or whatever high tech, then we have failed.
I would never want that - afterall it would be a failure of
mismatching education with the needs of the economy.
>But you
> have to look thing in perspective. Advance countries like united
> states, japan, german, take years and a lot of investment to reach
> that level. It take billions and billions of dollar to get a
> successful product. Even then, it not guarentee success. We as a
> nation is not there yet. But I think in a lot of field, we are taking
> baby steps.
But you also failed to note that the Malaysian economy is a mix of
both worlds. High technology, cutting edge service industry products,
with a demand on technical know how, AND that of the most fundamental
agrobusinesses. Malaysia must make up its mind whether it wants to be
the sweat shop for the world or move on to higher wage and higher
technical skill base industries. We are at the cross roads.
>
> Just remember your school days, most of your teachers were the product
> of local universities. And your achievement was directly related to
> your teachers. Sure they cannot get everyone pass with flying colors,
> but they can do a decent job. Can they get better?
Irrelevant issue.
> Our capabilities improve over time. Some take longer to reach
> there. Thats why I mentioned, that we are NOT perfect.
Never claimed that we are either.
>Thats why I
> mentioned about history.
And I do know the history of education in Malaysia and the policies
set forth. My qualms are that those policies are politically driven
and have no place in a globalized world we live in. We only kid
ourselves and have been doing so since the early 70s forsaking quality
for quantity, and ethnic mix for meritocracy.
>Just remember, up to 1970, we only have one
> university. Thats is University Malaya. Then around 1970, we add a few
> more, Universiti Kebangsaan and universiti Sains. But universities is
> not like magician. Set up a universities, you can produce whatever you
> want. Its not working like that. It takes time, it takes more
> research, it takes more investment. Its a learning thing, its a work
> in progress.
I do understand that. Read my previous response above. The checkered
past of Malaysian university system needs to be looked into. The
education system is a political system of patronage and one should
never lose sight of it.
>Check what we have in 1980, then compare it what we have
> in 2000. There is a lot of thing that we can do now than what we
> cannnot do before. Check US universities, a lot of them was build
> around 1800s.
That is not true. The university system in the US in the pre WWII
years was not too different from what Malaysia is now - an elite
system of sorts. If you care to find out, America went through a huge
university building phase in the 1950s and the 60s. They built in
advance of the baby boom and the need to churn out science graduates
that feed into its national security programs.
>That is more than 100 years before we have our first
> university around 1950s.
This is a fallacious argument. Are you suggesting then we in Malaysia
need to reinvent the wheel so that we can progress at the same tedious
rate as others? This model is wrong. If you believe this is true, then
many of the current universities in South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and
indeed Australia or even the UK, that were built in the 60s and 70s
should be lagging something like 300 years behind Harvard. And indeed
if anything, University of Pisa should be way ahead of everyone else
... and the grand-dame of it all, the Alexandria would be the centre
of all learning? Please give me a break on illusory reasoning.
> They take their baby steps long before we
> do. Because of that, they have deeper body of knowledge.
That is not true. Baby steps can be taken but resources for teaching
and research, and academic freedom are two other major ingredients. As
for deeper body of knowledge, its a red-herring, of sorts.
> With
> knowledge come expertise.
Of course. But knowledge can be had for a price, and often than not,
with a right mind set of those who govern and administer the
university system.
> So, lets give fair evaluation before we can
> judge that we have failed. Don't take one thing and compare to
> another. Lets remember, our universities produce students in various
> field. Some field we are far behind, some field, we do a lot better.
> Lets look at the totality. Its NOT perfect, but its getting better.
I wish you were right. But in my mind, you are far from it.
CKSF
ajali
You make some good arguments. You are entitle to your opinions and I
respect that. Unfortunately, I don't have enough time to rebut that
but I stand by my own opinions. At least for now.
>
> CKSF
ajali
- the metrics above is just an example to measure something. You can
always set a different kind of goals or standards as a way for
evaluation of your programs.
- agree on your second part.
>
> The graduates who study the course work will only be versed in the
> abstract, if they are bright enough (typically they are and they will
> soon lose interest) but not the practicalities.
- probably in some courses.
>
> Indeed, in this instance, the graduates will score "100%" by your
> metrics, but in my mind, they are failures for the purpose of that
> coursework.
- I think, I did just fine when I became a teacher after attending one
of the local universities program.
>
> > If you mean failed is by looking at the product or students who came
> > from that education level into work force, and can do or produce
> > everything as a standard, then we have failed.
>
> Nice of you to acknowledge that.
>
> >But there is no one
> > university in the world can do that.
>
> The west does it very well, as do many other institutions in Asia.
> India for all its warts and weaknesses are producing highly qualified
> engineers and technical specialists that keep many high tech companies
> viable in the US and increasing the EU. Similarly, Russia for all its
> horrible lean years since the downfall of USSR is now a leading
> supplier of brain power in biophysics and optics for the US
> universities and companies. And China is providing a cadre of well
> trained basic degree graduates who excel in PhD and Masters level
> education in the US and many other developed nations. One may argue
> that it is by sheer numbers that graduates from these countries are
> making an impact on the developed world, but honestly, in a brutal
> world of intense economic and technical intellect competition, the
> more likely outcome is that these graduates have what it takes to work
> on the leading edges of the economy and academic pursuit.
- I think we produce some too. Probably not at the level where the
impact can be seen everywhere. And I am not proud for where we are now
too. I alway believe that we can always do it better.
>
> > Thats why, there is internship
> > program, work-training program etc. The university can only do so much
> > to a student. When the student enter the work force, he enter with
> > enough basic skills to do the job. In order to get better, he has to
> > continue to learn whether through work-training program or through
> > professional development etc. Then if he think he want to get even
> > better, he go to graduate school...doing masters, p.hd or whatever
> > specializing that he want.
>
> Or she wants. Training programs for new graduates do exist for most
> companies, But you are digressing.
- not intent to be gender bias when I make that point. I don't see it
as digressing at all. I see continuing education is being part of
being professional.
>
> > If you expect, our universities graduates have to be able to produce
> > rokets,or cars or whatever high tech, then we have failed.
>
> I would never want that - afterall it would be a failure of
> mismatching education with the needs of the economy.
- nothing to argue further
>
> >But you
> > have to look thing in perspective. Advance countries like united
> > states, japan, german, take years and a lot of investment to reach
> > that level. It take billions and billions of dollar to get a
> > successful product. Even then, it not guarentee success. We as a
> > nation is not there yet. But I think in a lot of field, we are taking
> > baby steps.
>
> But you also failed to note that the Malaysian economy is a mix of
> both worlds. High technology, cutting edge service industry products,
> with a demand on technical know how, AND that of the most fundamental
> agrobusinesses. Malaysia must make up its mind whether it wants to be
> the sweat shop for the world or move on to higher wage and higher
> technical skill base industries. We are at the cross roads.
- You correct. Rightly or wrongly done, I think, we as a country has
and continue to address this issue. We have set up several new
universities like uniten, univ multimedia, etc for knowledge-base
economy etc. Now we also have enter the biotechnology stuff.
>
> >
> > Just remember your school days, most of your teachers were the product
> > of local universities. And your achievement was directly related to
> > your teachers. Sure they cannot get everyone pass with flying colors,
> > but they can do a decent job. Can they get better?
>
> Irrelevant issue.
>
>
> > Our capabilities improve over time. Some take longer to reach
> > there. Thats why I mentioned, that we are NOT perfect.
>
> Never claimed that we are either.
>
> >Thats why I
> > mentioned about history.
>
> And I do know the history of education in Malaysia and the policies
> set forth. My qualms are that those policies are politically driven
> and have no place in a globalized world we live in. We only kid
> ourselves and have been doing so since the early 70s forsaking quality
> for quantity, and ethnic mix for meritocracy.
- I don't know if you can take political out of the equation. Even the
idea to pull out political hand is political itself.
> >Just remember, up to 1970, we only have one
> > university. Thats is University Malaya. Then around 1970, we add a few
> > more, Universiti Kebangsaan and universiti Sains. But universities is
> > not like magician. Set up a universities, you can produce whatever you
> > want. Its not working like that. It takes time, it takes more
> > research, it takes more investment. Its a learning thing, its a work
> > in progress.
>
> I do understand that. Read my previous response above. The checkered
> past of Malaysian university system needs to be looked into. The
> education system is a political system of patronage and one should
> never lose sight of it.
- probably true. I have seen a lot of social sciences make this kind
of point.
>
> >Check what we have in 1980, then compare it what we have
> > in 2000. There is a lot of thing that we can do now than what we
> > cannnot do before. Check US universities, a lot of them was build
> > around 1800s.
>
> That is not true. The university system in the US in the pre WWII
> years was not too different from what Malaysia is now - an elite
> system of sorts. If you care to find out, America went through a huge
> university building phase in the 1950s and the 60s. They built in
> advance of the baby boom and the need to churn out science graduates
> that feed into its national security programs.
>
- you probably correct. Haven't had enough time to check the fact. But
don't forget, they already have the base before they make that leap
jump. Beside the cold war with Russia just added to their motivation,
beside economics depression in 1920s. Even the setup of NASA was
through 'political will' of JF Kennedy to get it pass through congress
and senate.
> >That is more than 100 years before we have our first
> > university around 1950s.
>
> This is a fallacious argument. Are you suggesting then we in Malaysia
> need to reinvent the wheel so that we can progress at the same tedious
> rate as others? This model is wrong. If you believe this is true, then
> many of the current universities in South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and
> indeed Australia or even the UK, that were built in the 60s and 70s
> should be lagging something like 300 years behind Harvard. And indeed
> if anything, University of Pisa should be way ahead of everyone else
> ... and the grand-dame of it all, the Alexandria would be the centre
> of all learning? Please give me a break on illusory reasoning.
- Nope. I am just saying we need time and there will be a learning
curve to it. Once we past that, we can make a jump a little
faster/higher.
>
>
> > They take their baby steps long before we
> > do. Because of that, they have deeper body of knowledge.
>
> That is not true. Baby steps can be taken but resources for teaching
> and research, and academic freedom are two other major ingredients. As
> for deeper body of knowledge, its a red-herring, of sorts.
- agree with your added ingredient. But I don't know how much you can
pull that resources out of the GDP without affecting our other need.
Academic freedom, sure. But there's always limitation to it. Even in
USA who preached for Free speech, still have limitation for stem cell
research (cloning thing), for esample.
> > With
> > knowledge come expertise.
>
> Of course. But knowledge can be had for a price, and often than not,
> with a right mind set of those who govern and administer the
> university system.
>
- agree.
> > So, lets give fair evaluation before we can
> > judge that we have failed. Don't take one thing and compare to
> > another. Lets remember, our universities produce students in various
> > field. Some field we are far behind, some field, we do a lot better.
> > Lets look at the totality. Its NOT perfect, but its getting better.
>
> I wish you were right. But in my mind, you are far from it.
- I can only reply to the best of my knowledge and experiences. I
realized my limitations. And I can only answer within that
limitations.
>
> CKSF
ck_in_sf1
> > > thing. For me, "fail" mean that you set a standard. If you don't reach
> > > that standard, then it can be said as failer. Just like in exam. If
> > > you get 60 for example, as a passing mark. Then if you reach that
> > > level, you pass. If you get 80 even better. If you get 100 %, thats
> > > the best.
> > >
> >
> > Metrics should not be nor must it be the only measure in something as
> > subjective and broadly defined as tertiary education. The aim of
> > tertiary education in Malaysia should have morphed from the current
> > day production number game to that of creating a more rounded
> > graduate. This is not to say that all graduates are inept, far from
> > it. But the system of teaching, curriculum development, and resources
> > for teaching and research, must be made available. You simply cannot
> > have a state of the art curriculum in say, a technical science course
> > (which I have reviewed for MUST and UTM a while back) and tell the
> > administrators/faculties that there is little or no money in the
> > budget for the implementation. And yet the implementation must be had
> > just because it was in the "pelan".
>
> - the metrics above is just an example to measure something. You can
> always set a different kind of goals or standards as a way for
> evaluation of your programs.
But you missed my point entirely ... one should not find metrics just
because one needs to measure something. The metrics are probably
correlative, in some instances, but never causative or even directive.
> > Indeed, in this instance, the graduates will score "100%" by your
> > metrics, but in my mind, they are failures for the purpose of that
> > coursework.
>
> - I think, I did just fine when I became a teacher after attending one
> of the local universities program.
But the problem with your stance is that you are merely an incident.
An n=1. Never objectify yourself as the mean or standard issue for all
in formulating arguments. As such, the argument does not hold.
> - I think we produce some too. Probably not at the level where the
> impact can be seen everywhere. And I am not proud for where we are now
> too. I alway believe that we can always do it better.
Of course we can do better, and there are many who are product of the
system that are doing VERY well in many parts of the world. That being
said, we can and should tinker with our system at the elementary
system. However it is at the tertiary level that we failed to produce
what is needed to drive the economy to higher heights based on
service-related industries, and the more technical fields.
What I am trying to convey is that Malaysia does produce high quality
pre-tertiary education graduates. Perhaps we can do better by
streaming less and encourage students to follow their aptitude with
large doses of say, long term incentives for those who take on the
sciences and maths. That being said, we need to revamp the tertiary
education system, but not the the extent of trimming on the edges.
That being said, there are other non tangible factors that lead to our
current morass too.
> >
> > Or she wants. Training programs for new graduates do exist for most
> > companies, But you are digressing.
>
> - not intent to be gender bias when I make that point. I don't see it
> as digressing at all. I see continuing education is being part of
> being professional.
No. Continuing education does not mean internship or rehasing of ideas
that should have been taught as fundamentals by the
universities/colleges. Continuing education is an extension of what
one does at work, either by enhancing productivity through newer ways
of performance or introducing new ways of controlling for
externalities.
> >
> > But you also failed to note that the Malaysian economy is a mix of
> > both worlds. High technology, cutting edge service industry products,
> > with a demand on technical know how, AND that of the most fundamental
> > agrobusinesses. Malaysia must make up its mind whether it wants to be
> > the sweat shop for the world or move on to higher wage and higher
> > technical skill base industries. We are at the cross roads.
>
> - You correct. Rightly or wrongly done, I think, we as a country has
> and continue to address this issue. We have set up several new
> universities like uniten, univ multimedia, etc for knowledge-base
> economy etc. Now we also have enter the biotechnology stuff.
But it is all words. There is nothing else to back such lavish ideas
up, is there? We need a venture capital system similar to that seen in
the Silicon Valley or the Boston area. And along with that, the
patience to nuture ideas and ability to appreciate failed ventures.
What I am alluding to is the culture of risk taking, married to strong
and independent tertiary education institutions. You can have all the
MUSTs or UTMs or what nots but if all you do is induce political
affliation as a means for upward academic mobility (as we now have in
nearly all Malaysian universities - UMNO membership is a near must for
upward mobility for most ethnic Malay academicians), then such
institutions are for nought.
> > And I do know the history of education in Malaysia and the policies
> > set forth. My qualms are that those policies are politically driven
> > and have no place in a globalized world we live in. We only kid
> > ourselves and have been doing so since the early 70s forsaking quality
> > for quantity, and ethnic mix for meritocracy.
>
> - I don't know if you can take political out of the equation. Even the
> idea to pull out political hand is political itself.
If so, you are paralyzing your analysis. Afterall the very idea of
dissent or even assent is an act in political will. Please get out of
such a rut in intellectual laziness.
The issue at hand is beyond political outcomes, but more to do with
how best Malaysia as a nation state survive the incoming onslaught
brought forth by East Asian economic integration and the increasingly
punishing global economy.
> >
> > >Check what we have in 1980, then compare it what we have
> > > in 2000. There is a lot of thing that we can do now than what we
> > > cannnot do before. Check US universities, a lot of them was build
> > > around 1800s.
> >
> > That is not true. The university system in the US in the pre WWII
> > years was not too different from what Malaysia is now - an elite
> > system of sorts. If you care to find out, America went through a huge
> > university building phase in the 1950s and the 60s. They built in
> > advance of the baby boom and the need to churn out science graduates
> > that feed into its national security programs.
> >
> - you probably correct. Haven't had enough time to check the fact. But
> don't forget, they already have the base before they make that leap
> jump.
That is not true either. The American base though stronger than what
we would claim as equivalent to current day Malaysia, it was however
invigorated and extended to what it is today, by forward thinkers, and
above all else the European intellectual emigration in the pre WWII
years. The Jewish intellectual class formed the solid foundation on
which current day American tertiary education was based on. It is
Germanic in nature, but with strong pragmatism and elitism offered by
the French and Anglo models.
>Beside the cold war with Russia just added to their motivation,
> beside economics depression in 1920s.
What has the economic depresion in the late 20s gotta do with the
argument premises?
>Even the setup of NASA was
> through 'political will' of JF Kennedy to get it pass through congress
> and senate.
>
Not true at all. NASA and its many earlier incarnations were formed in
the mid 50s when space represented the next military frontier. JFK
merely bundled the disparate agencies into one. If you call that
political will, so be it. I call it better administration.
> > >That is more than 100 years before we have our first
> > > university around 1950s.
> >
> > This is a fallacious argument. Are you suggesting then we in Malaysia
> > need to reinvent the wheel so that we can progress at the same tedious
> > rate as others? This model is wrong. If you believe this is true, then
> > many of the current universities in South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and
> > indeed Australia or even the UK, that were built in the 60s and 70s
> > should be lagging something like 300 years behind Harvard. And indeed
> > if anything, University of Pisa should be way ahead of everyone else
> > ... and the grand-dame of it all, the Alexandria would be the centre
> > of all learning? Please give me a break on illusory reasoning.
>
> - Nope. I am just saying we need time and there will be a learning
> curve to it. Once we past that, we can make a jump a little
> faster/higher.
We have some 50+ years of history ... and still counting. What went
wrong? Too many baby steps or does the baby has any legs? Or did
someone amputate the legs?
I would agree that resources may be a key factor, but by the mid to
late 60s University of Malaya was a renowned Asian institution. It is
now a political shell trying to live off its false public image as the
doyen.
> > > They take their baby steps long before we
> > > do. Because of that, they have deeper body of knowledge.
> >
> > That is not true. Baby steps can be taken but resources for teaching
> > and research, and academic freedom are two other major ingredients. As
> > for deeper body of knowledge, its a red-herring, of sorts.
>
> - agree with your added ingredient. But I don't know how much you can
> pull that resources out of the GDP without affecting our other need.
> Academic freedom, sure. But there's always limitation to it. Even in
> USA who preached for Free speech, still have limitation for stem cell
> research (cloning thing), for esample.
What has Free Speech gotta do with Stem Cell Research? Ajali, do get
your arguments straight and not raise red herrings. I never assume
that academic free to be limitless. Those limits are set forth by
tradition of inquisitive intellectual exercises, and social nurturing
for the quest of the unknown.
The resources argument is another fallacy. When the nation runs
surplusses from trade, and have historically low tax rates, I would
say we are misguided in our social good goals. Then again, that goes
back to the issue of resources. Malaysia was never and is not a poor
nation. We can afford a decent level of public spending on research
and development, and nurture our best and brightest in many fields of
intellectual endeavours. It is our culture and political patronage
system that kill the goose that lay the golden eggs. For many, and
there are thousands, we fled and vow never to return to a system that
favors not intellectual honesty nor a research culture that promotes
social good.
And that I fear is one of many horrendous issues that Malaysia face.
CKSF
ajali
Should I continue the debate?
My early intention to participate on this topic was to ensure some
real debate and not talking nonsense. You have brought up some good
arguments and thats great. But to debate with you is like a never
ending quest. I guess I have to stop somewhere. Thanks for your great
insights and counter arguments. I appreciate this kind of debate, open
and honest. See you in other topics.
Ajali
ck_in_sf1
> Should I continue the debate?
It is up to you.
>
> My early intention to participate on this topic was to ensure some
> real debate and not talking nonsense.
And???
>You have brought up some good
> arguments and thats great. But to debate with you is like a never
> ending quest.
Because the matter is never settled. You raised more issues than you
can handle. I fear only a few of us in this NG can and will engage you
on all fronts. And tell you if your arguments are flawed on some
reasonable premise(s), or better yet, blatantly wrong.
> I guess I have to stop somewhere. Thanks for your great
> insights and counter arguments. I appreciate this kind of debate, open
> and honest. See you in other topics.
Like wise.
CKSF