Proper knowledge needed to build understanding
Politicians do not know anything but they like the races to be divided because it will benefit them. They try to create problems between the races so they can get the support of one ethnic group. But they will blame segregating the races on the British.
Excerpts from an interview with Tan Sri Professor Khoo Kay Kim.
Excerpts from an interview with Tan Sri Professor Khoo Kay Kim, who explains how history is written, published and taught these days:
Q: Your name appears on the panel of people consulted in the writing of school history textbooks.
A: Many, many years ago, I was put on a panel. I gave my views on what should go in but they were not valued and included when the textbook was published.
Q: In the latest books, which the NST referred to when we did our special on history April 11, your name still appears as a panellist.
A: Yes, my name is there. But no one called me to sit on any panel.
Q: In your view, how are the textbooks supposed to be written?
A: Anyone can be commissioned to write the textbooks, whether they are historians or not. But in the end, they must be vetted by experts. Now experts are not even commissioned to write. The books are written by the publishers' friends.
Q: But some of these writers are actual professors of history.
A: But the fields they studied are limited. When I was studying history, we had to learn constitutional law. Nowadays you don't have to. They do not know law. The historians these days narrow their studies to a limited field and they do not look at history holistically.
For instance, the term "bangsa" does not mean race. It is funny because we do not have the term "nasion" (nation) when we have "internasional" (international), "nasionalisasi" (nationalisation).
We call the United Nations, "Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu". So bangsa does not refer to race.
It is confusing unless it is explained properly, but the teachers themselves are confused. Teacher training these days is defective. We used to have world-class training centres such as Sultan Idris Training College and Cheras Specialist Teachers' Training Institute.
Q: Those in charge of drawing up the curriculum and writing the books say they want to move from a Eurocentric view of history to a Malaysianised view.
A: That's what they think they're doing. You cannot write a Malaysian-centric view of history but ignore historical facts. My generation had started to break away from the Eurocentric view in the 1950s, but when it came to the 1970s generation, they thought wrongly.
Just because the British called something black, it does not mean that it has to become white. You must have proof.
Q: How should they revamp the history syllabus?
A: The history of Malaysia must be based on proper research. Not on secondary sources. I do not know what books they are using. We must have the facts, otherwise we don't answer crucial questions and interpretations will cause people to fight. History should be taught from primary school as a subject by itself.
Q: The politicians question the lack of emphasis in the textbooks when it comes to contributions of different races.
A: Politicians do not know anything but they like the races to be divided because it will benefit them. They try to create problems between the races so they can get the support of one ethnic group. But they will blame segregating the races on the British.
When I teach my students, I would not use the word "contribution" because the word implies fishing for compliments. I use the word "peranan" or role, as in what did they do.
Q: What do you think of the examination format for history in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia?
A: The exam does not test their understanding, only their memory. Even if they score As, when they go to university they still don't know what the subjects are all about.
Teachers nowadays teach history as a collection of facts. The most crucial parts, like what a "kerajaan" even means, is not explained — it refers to kingdom, not government — and why we are a country with nine kings. History is actually how you explain the present.
