Revamping our schools
The government's rationale is to make our schools comparable to the west. But in America, two years of college following high school (P-14) is now the norm, in recognition of the need for a highly educated work force.
Additionally, American schools offer courses that are traditionally taught in the freshman (first) year of college. As a result, more and more students, especially at the leading universities, are now entering with ''advanced standing.''
Teaching introductory college courses at high school is not only cheaper but also more effective. Students entering with advanced standing are better prepared and less likely to drop out; they also graduate sooner. We can never overprepare our students.
Bard College, a highly regarded degree-granting institution, expanded on this idea and recently started an accelerated programme in co-operation with New York City public schools where highly motivated students are selected to pursue their final two years of school integrated with the first two years of college. They would then graduate with both their high school diploma as well as an associate degree, and then proceed to the junior (third) year of university.
Simplifying the system
Malaysia had a comparable programme in the 1960s where students who performed well at Sixth Form were admitted as 'super-freshies', skipping their first year. Since then we have emasculated Sixth Form, putting those who performed well at Fifth Form in the much more expensive and highly inefficient matrikulasi (matriculation) programme (which is mostly reserved for bumiputra students).
I propose simplifying the present system into elementary (P-6), middle (7-9), and high school (10-13), with a standardised national test at the end of each level. Thus only three such tests, eliminating the present Form Five examination (SPM). These tests should assess not only the students but also equally important, their schools.
Further, such tests would be limited only to the core subjects of Bahasa Malaysia, English, science, and mathematics. Students would be promoted based on such national tests as well as their individual assessment by the school. Such evaluations, as in the American system, should be based on the student's performance throughout the year instead of a single end-of-year examination.
With the consequent marked reduction in load, our Examination Syndicate would be able to process the results in weeks instead of the present months.
Four types of schools
My proposal would not radically change the first P-9 years, except that all schools must follow the minimal core curriculum of the four subjects. These subjects would be taught daily. Each school would be allowed to experiment with various electives to fill in the rest of the school day. The last four years (high school) would see the most changes. Essentially I would classify high schools into academic, general, vocational, and specialised (vernacular and religious).
The academic stream would prepare students for universities. The vocational stream would equip them with technical skills like carpentry and auto repairs, as well as general office skills like bookkeeping. Such schools could be combined with industrial apprenticeship programmes so that when students graduate they would be well on their way to earning their journeymen's certificate. From the general stream would come our future nurses, policemen, and non-graduate teachers.
This streaming must be flexible so that students could switch during the first two years to accommodate late-bloomers as well those who discover their technical aptitude later. In all, our young would have 13-plus years of schooling, and be fluently bilingual, science literate, and mathematically competent, regardless of their final career goals.
Graduates of vernacular and religious schools would in addition be effectively trilingual (Arabic with Islamic schools, and their mother tongue with vernacular schools), an added bonus.
Schools should be allowed to chart their own course. I envisage some emphasising the performing arts, others, foreign languages or the sciences. Students would be free to choose the school that would meet their particular needs. To eliminate obvious disadvantages based on geography, each school must have adequate hostel facilities to cater for rural students.
Specialised schools
Our universities could propose model curricula for the academic schools. Similarly, industries could help design specific vocational syllabi. Proton, for example, could establish a vocational school preparing students to be car mechanics and auto body repairers. A consortium of construction companies could sponsor schools to train future plumbers, electricians and masons.
We should allow private sector participation. Such private schools must meet strict enrolment guidelines to prevent racial and social segregation as well as the one-teacher school or the giant educational factories. Or there could be joint ventures, with industry providing the facilities, and the ministry, the teachers.
Big companies would want a school on their premises for their workers' children. This would boost employees' morale and productivity knowing that they would be close to their children during working hours. One such model is a public elementary school in Florida, a joint project with the giant truck rental company, Ryder.
To encourage social integration, we could have generous financial grants for schools whose student body reflects our society. With such incentives, these schools would be able to offer enhanced programmes that would in turn attract students of various races. Given such encouragement, most Malaysians would prefer their children to attend integrated schools.
Flexible systems
Again we should be flexible so that schools in Klang Valley would have different enrollment requirements than those in Kelantan. We can use grants to reward superior performance and to compensate schools in disadvantaged areas.
Administratively our schools should be decentralised and freed from micro management by the ministry. They should be judged solely on results. The ministry's role is restricted to selecting the managing board and monitoring the quality and performance.
To ensure accountability the board must be made up of sufficient number of teachers and parents. We are fortunate to have many well-educated citizens even in small communities who would make excellent board candidates.
There are plenty of role models. We can look to Germany and Switzerland for examples of superior trade schools. For academic schools we can emulate the finest British public or American magnet schools.
The headmastership of our schools must be a terminal appointment, with salary increases dependent solely on performance. Thus headmasters need not be transferred to get their promotions. The days when they are nothing more than seat warmers on the way to be undersecretary for procurement at the ministry should be over.
Such a decentralised system would result in greater competition. Inevitably, some would be perceived as superior and competition for enrollment would be intense. These schools must have a fair, objective and transparent mechanism for admission to prevent favouritism. Poor-performing schools would be under intense pressure to improve. The ministry would then concentrate on them.
Freeing our schools (and also universities) from the rigid control of the ministry enables them to grow and find their own level. Educational wisdom is never the exclusive preserve of civil servants and politicians.
