WanSaiful.com

10 Responses

1. Enma Ai says:

   November 17, 2006 at 5:13 pm

   You have a done good job in clarifying some doubts about the possibility of private education and on that point, I congratulate you. There are nonetheless, a few issues that I hope you care to address.

   First, you thesis is premised upon the belief that if the parents are given choice, they would send their children to the best school. What you omitted however, is that even if the financial constraints are removed, how would they know which is the best school? Don’t bother about the typical, educated middle-class parents, we are talking about those poor people living in the remote corners of the country, those peasants in fishing villages and paddy fields. Most of these people would have barely the slightest idea of what education entails, much less quality education. Added to this the fact that there are many schools competing for customers, the parents might end up sending their gifted children to mediocre schools. At least when there is a centralized state-sponsored schooling system, the government can recognize and accordingly place the students to the best schools that match their abilities.

   I note that you propose a ranking system that might on the surface seems to be the solution to this problem. Yet in reality how on earth would they know about this ranking in the first place? Top universities like Oxford, Cambridge and Harvard have all been ranked and rated throughout the years but go and ask the ‘kampungites’ in the ‘pedalaman’ and ‘ulu’ areas and you would probably draw blank stares. The response that you would get goes something like “‘Okspot’ tu menatang apa?” This is not to presume any stupidity on their part, merely to highlight the problem that arises when we presume that the parents are always equipped with the best possible knowledge when making a decision, leaving them gullible and susceptible prey to private schools that appear to be so attractive in their leaflets and brochures yet a far-cry from the reality. We already have similar problems as regards private colleges, so there is no reason why the same won’t happen to schools.

   This is further exacerbated by the nature of the ranking system itself. How do we rate the schools? On what basis? What are the criteria? As you well aware of, there isn’t just one ranking system but many, each using different criteria and standards to assess the best schools, leaving parents left with one list saying that school X is the best while another saying its school Y and yet another school Z. Often this list would fluctuate, adding just confusion to the turmoil.

   Second, you assume that the only reason parents wouldn’t send their children to schools far away from home is due to financial constraint. This is only part of the picture. If you look at Malaysia’s educational history, particularly during colonial times, there were many English schools around which were in many ways much better than the traditional local schools but parents chose not to send their children there – why? It has a lot to do with culture and religion. Malay parents, for example, feared that the secular education offered by the British system would lead their children astray from the path of Islam. It’s the same reason why many Malaysians experience “culture shock” when they go abroad, namely that when individuals have lived and grew up among people of their own kind, it becomes difficult to accept what is “foreign” and unfamiliar. That is why parents keep sending children to nearby schools and it happens not just in the villages and the outskirts but also in cities, even when these higher quality schools that exist some distance away from home are easily accessible via public transport. This is not a desirable scenario, I agree, but if we are really serious about putting your proposal to work, it’s a fact that we must either deny or deal with.

   There is yet another explanation for this, which cannot be understood within the commercial context of your proposal. Your argument rests upon a simple capitalistic perspective on education, i.e. supply more quality goods (education) and the demand will come. The problem with this approach is that ignores the social function of the school within the context of rural setting. I don’t know how the situation works in other countries but in Malaysia, schools in rural areas are more than just to educate students in the professional, capitalistic sense as we understand it. Teachers in these areas are well respected figures, and are known personally to the parents. They do not meet each other just on Report Card’s Day, Registration Day or Open Days. The teachers are part of the “family” of this close-knit local community. Often the teachers become the counsellor to whom people turn to – when illiterate parents receive letters from their children away from home, when they just forked out a big loan just to buy a PC and don’t know how to use it, when they they want to seek for scholarships for their children and don’t know what to do. I even mentioned earlier about the problem of choosing the best universities in relation to the rating and ranking system, and this is where the teacher comes in useful. The teachers are always there for them, not as a professional discharging his professional duties but as member of the community. Can you see the picture now? Can you see the reality on the ground? Private schools are servants of companies, representing the interest of the company. State schools, on the other hand, are servants of the government, representing the interest of the whole community.

   Third, you propose that this Tabung Pendidikan Kebangsaan be funded solely by the private sector which receives tax exemptions in return. Actually we already have the National Higher Education Funding Corporation (PTPTN), although it only funds higher education and is sponsored by the government. I have two questions in this regard: first, should this be by way of a loan or without anything in return? Second, if many parents decide to send their students to schools abroad or international schools locally, wouldn’t this pose a threat to the country’s economy since money is flowing out of the national circular flow of income?

   And just a minor point, the Malay word for “policy” is not polisi, but “dasar”. In our neighbour country Indonesia, “polisi” means the police! If Indonesians read your article, they would have been shocked at your mention of “polisi awam” (“public police”!), which means there would have been such thing as “private police”!

   Reply
2. Enma Ai says:

   November 17, 2006 at 5:14 pm

   Apologies for the verbosity. Can’t help it.

   Reply
3. wansaiful says:

   November 22, 2006 at 4:02 pm

   Enma Ai: You will find the answers to many of your questions if you visit http://www.ncl.ac.uk/egwest/research/privateschools.html and scroll down to the bottom where you will find a list of articles and reports.

   I disagree with your belittling of the poor, or, as you call them, “those peasants in fishing villages and paddy fields”. I was brought up in that environment and I cannot agree with your condescending presumption that they “would have barely the slightest idea of what education entails”.

   On the contrary, I trust parents as I believe they would want only the best for their children. Someone sitting behind a big desk in Putrajaya would not know what is best for the child whom he has never even met.

   Reply
4. munirah hayati says:

   November 23, 2006 at 7:46 am

   en. wan saiful,
   i don’t think enma ai meant to demean those kampung folks with that remark.. hmm. anyway this is a good website, i hope u’ll update more often!

   Reply
5. Enma Ai says:

   November 23, 2006 at 9:26 am

   My deepest and sincerest apologies, Mr. Wan Saiful, if my comments have hurt, mortified, injured or in any way offended you. It is not my intent to belittle or denigrate any person or group of persons whether I call them peasants, kampungites or any associated terms, much less engage in ad hominem criticisms against your kind self. Far from it, I have only but the greatest respect and admiration for the poor people who struggle day and night just to scrap a decent living and raise their children to become honourable human beings. The word “peasant” as I used it has no derogatory or negative connotation whatsoever but simply to designate one’s economic function within society (please check the dictionary if you don’t believe me). I wrote what I wrote because I cannot see anything “belittling” about living or growing up in “fishing villages and paddy fields”. The fact that these words may now bear a humiliating connotation is only indicative, if anything, of society’s prejudice towards these people. Therefore to take these words as insults is to do no more than affirm and reinforce this prejudice. If at a time when there is great societal prejudice against , say, Asians, would it be “belittling” to call oneself an Asian? It is likewise with the terms “kampungites”, “ulu”, etc. These are not meant to convey any sense of inferiority on their part but to accept them for who they are and I do not see anything particularly “belittling” about this. In fact, Dr Azly Rahman had even once propose a school of thought called “kampongism” for Malaysians to espouse.

   Lest we stray away from the original discussion, let me reiterate my point once again. The fact that I assumed that the parents in those rural areas might not be in the best position to make choices about their children has nothing to do with “condescendence” as you called it. I perfectly concur with you that parents “would want the best for their children”. All parents would want that and this is a universal truth that none can deny. Yet the point I was trying to make is not that parents do not know what’s best for their children, rather how to get the best for their children. One might want to send one’s children to a top university in the UK, for example, but that does not necessary mean one knows about the UCAS system, the clearing system, where to get the prospectus, etc. I penned my thought based on my own observation of many of my friends who are of such background. If you ask them what they want to do after school, many would have not the slightest clue of what, say, engineering entails, i.e. what are the subjects required to gain admission, what are the skills necessary, what do you study, what are the career propects, etc. True, this is as much true in the city life as it is in the rural areas. But in the former there is no excuse as sources of information are plenty. Look up the internet, go to the libraries, talk to education consultants, etc. but this is not necessarily the case with those in the rural areas. That is why I have a lot of sympathies for “those peasants in fishing villages and paddy fields”. They want more information but the sources are not available within reach, either structurally or institutionally. Please don’t think this is necessarily any condescendence on my part. I have personally met with such people and they are genuinely clueless about many aspects of education. How can we possibly solve the problem by denying them? If I am a doctor, it would be great help if you would tell me where your child is injured rather than denying it and insisting that you have taken care of your child so well that he could not possibly get injured.

   If I may propose a solution, I think we can have sort of like an educational representative working at various rural areas to attend to such queries. This is already being done as regards foreign education, for example, British Council (British education), Alliance Francaise (French education), Goethe-Institut (German education) or MACEE (American education). The services in these institutions are provided free of charge but people who wish to engage this service has to make appointments in advance so as to avoid congestion, etc. I have already mentioned earlier about the social functions of teachers in rural areas. Having an educational representative might provide a useful alternative for that. This may be incorporated in to the MP or State Assemblyman’s office so they are accessible to all people in the “pedalaman” areas who need help.

   Again, sincere apologies if this might offend you.

   Reply
6. Enma Ai says:

   November 23, 2006 at 9:27 am

   PS: Thank you for the link. I’ll definitely have a look at it.

   Reply
7. Enma Ai says:

   November 23, 2006 at 9:28 am

   Thank you for the link, will definitely have a look at it.

   Reply
8. wansaiful says:

   November 23, 2006 at 10:56 am

   Isy….. sapa pulak kecik hati?

   I said, I disagree with your presumption (in your first comment) that the poor are ignorant.

   Yes, there may be problems when choice and competition is first introduced. But if you agree with the basic principle that choice and competition would improve education in the long haul, then methods must be developed to assist people in making informed choices. You have roposed some possibilities in your second comments.

   Hiccups at the beginning must not deter us from aiming to improve the system in the longer term.

   To include your comments in my proposal, perhaps we can say that the strategy must be two-pronged. On one side we must introduce choice and competition. Parallel to that we must also ensure parents can make *informed* choice.

   Reply
9. Sai Fool says:

   November 27, 2006 at 12:12 pm

   wansaiful,

   Your post on choice and competition looks good but can you tell us how you are going to implement it? If you are not afraid of the truth, I challenge you to tell us which political party do you vote for? Is the racist PAS and PKR that advocate the Muslim race? Or is it the multi-racial Barisan Nasional? Or is the Socialist DAP?

   Reply
10. wansaiful says:

    November 27, 2006 at 1:12 pm

    I vote Conservative.

    If you think the idea “looks good”, perhaps you should tell me how WE can ensure its implementation.

    Why shift responsibility to me only? Is it not your country too?

    .

    Reply