Dong Zong repeats criticism of education blueprint, says vernacular schools in jeopardy
(TMI) – Malaysia’s main Chinese educationist group has repeated its criticism about the country’s latest education blueprint, saying it was devoid of policies and measures to ensure the continuity and development of vernacular schools.
The United Chinese Schools Committees’ Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong) said the gist of the National Education Blueprint 2013-2025 is to implement the “ultimate objective” – monolingual educational policies.
“And there appears to be an absence of policies and measures by the authorities to continue and develop vernacular schools,” it said, reiterating its contention that the government intended to sideline vernacular education.
Dong Zong was responding to Deputy Education Minister Datuk Mary Yap Kain Ching’s statement in the Dewan Negara that the group had not understood the blueprint and that this was the reason for their protest.
“I think the Dong Zong does not quite understand the education development blueprint. In fact, the elimination of mother-tongue schools does not exist in Malaysia. On the contrary, there is a section in Chapter 7 of the Blueprint that mentions about the continuation of mother-tongue schools. Therefore, I think this is a misunderstanding,” Yap was quoted as saying.
The deputy minister had previously also claimed that the Dong Zong had misinterpreted the blueprint, saying that the proposal to increase the number of teaching periods for Bahasa Malaysia is not intended to kill off other languages.
In a statement today, Dong Zong insisted that it had not misunderstood the blueprint, but had instead revealed policies and measures which are unfavourable to the survival and development of vernacular education.
Yap, the group said, should attain better understanding of the “oppression and threats” against vernacular schools imposed by several education legislations, reports, policies and measures.
“We wish to point out the fact that various mother-tongue schools have constantly been under the threat of ‘elimination’ since the 1950s is a historical fact that cannot be disregarded,” it said.
It cited the Barnes Report 1951, the Education Ordinance 1952, the Razak Report 1956, the Education Act 1961 and the Education Act 1966 and said they all had clauses and sections which point to the threats against vernacular education.
“The Barnes Report 1951 advocated the implementation of a national school system in which English or Malay language is the main medium of instruction while abolishing the schools of other language streams.
“Section 21(2) of the Education Act 1961 stipulates that ‘if at any time the Minister is satisfied that a national-type primary school can suitably be converted into a national primary school, he may order that such primary school be converted into a national primary school,” Dong Zong said.
