For the education system to recover, be pragmatic

Malaysian education has always been seen as being constantly in the doldrums. Regardless of the reforms that have taken place or that have been planned, and said to be done, it is the bottom-line results that matter. The public deserves to know that the reform and improvement measures undertaken are effective and/or whether remedial action is needed to keep it on the right track.

When the Malaysia Education Blueprint (MEB) 2013-2025 was introduced, we were concerned about how the reforms were going to be achieved, given the state of resources. We knew that the plans of the MEB were ambitious based on the track record of the Ministry of Education (MoE). At the time, one could only hope for the best and remain unwaveringly optimistic.

Apart from the policy of the Teaching and Learning of Science and Mathematics in English and the Dual Language Programme, the MEB is one of the best creations under the charge of MoE. The report is the most comprehensive, fact-based plan for the country’s education, with strategies and supporting data to give us an outlook and where we are heading with regard to the nation’s education goals. It was a needed development that gave rise to meaningful dialogues, with the expectation that our country would get the quality education it deserved. The life cycle of the MEB is coming to an end, however, and the bottom-line education outcome still leaves much to be desired.

There have been numerous locally produced as well as international reports over the course of the MEB to keep us on track with regard to the development of education. International reports such as that by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the World Bank and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization serve as reference points vis-à-vis the targets of the MEB. After all, the objective of our education system is to be in the top tier of high-performing countries in education attainment, as measured by the triennial Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test.

The PISA 2022 results, announced in December 2023, came as no surprise. We are still underperforming, same as where we started on PISA in 2009, which is at the lower tier, though we saw the best performance in PISA 2019. Overall, in the span of 12 years, however, we are still performing lower than the OECD average and not advancing as planned.

The country was again jolted by the World Bank report announced in April 2024, which stated once more the glum news about the state of the nation’s education. MoE, on the defensive, responded that it had a few plans and reforms in place.

Late last month, the SPM 2023 cohort results were published. Bottom-line results revealed that this cohort performed better than previous cohorts in terms of the national average grade achieved, which was the best performance since 2016. The concern, however, is not only the number of those absent from SPM exams, which was about 10,000 students and considered the norm each year, but also the number who do not perform in mathematics. More than half of the cohort failed: 29% scored D and E in mathematics and 23% obtained an F. The trend of poor performance in mathematics — where more than half of the cohort scored D, E and F — was evident in the batches affected by Covid-19, the cohorts since SPM 2021. What is also observed is that the best-performing SPM subject in 2023, with the highest percentage of A’s, is Al Quran and Al Sunnah studies. While it is well and good to see good performance in any subject, one cannot avoid thinking — are we emphasising religion too much? What impact does it have on the country when apparently our SPM graduates can read the Quran and Sunnah very well but cannot do meaningful counting? The World Bank in its recent report prescribed several measures to improve quality and access: more access to quality early childhood education; a better-performance tracking system; and quality teacher training and development. Learning problems and dropout issues need to be addressed at an early stage.

Instead, what we get is more religious and nationalistic rhetoric coming from the prime minister himself. It is indeed worrying and of concern that he talks of artificial intelligence and the concept of Islamic heritage in the same breadth. It is such an irony to be progressive but simultaneously weighed down by a traditionalist view.

This does not bode well in multiracial, multi-religious Malaysia, with such a strong determination to progress, and with a high dependency on foreign trade and investments.

What is glaringly obvious is the danger such rhetoric poses of harnessing religion for popular appeal. It can be misconstrued by some factions that regard Western civilisation or modernisation as a threat to the survival of Islam. It could certainly stir hardline Muslims, who are against anyone who does not share their views, to step out of the shadows.

We should be very careful in taking the religious view, especially in matters where it is not appropriate. Instead, a more acceptable approach would be universal values, to serve as the guiding principle for such engagement.

Get our education system on the right track; enough of the rhetoric of language and religion. If this country wants to progress, let us be practical and pragmatic. We are optimistic that without a political agenda, rhetoric or social engineering, and instead by focusing on corrective measures, a recovery process can take place to salvage our education system.

The Edge