History syllabus and textbooks: The non-Malay fig leaf and more serious matters

The Ministry of Education has finally replied to concerns raised by many Malaysians that the teaching of Malaysian history has been debased through changes in the syllabus and textbooks. However the letter by the Corporate Communications Unit of the Ministry totally ignores the allegations and makes no attempt to address the specific and general concerns articulated in the media and the internet.

Instead, the reply is a public relations job detailing non-Malay participation in the writing of text books and referrals made in recommending text book writers. This is insufficient to allay concerns or refute the allegations made of the political bias, crass nationalism and blatant Islamization that have come to dominate the history syllabus and textbooks.

Now that various names have been made available to the public, the onus is on these individuals identified in the Ministry letter to step out of the shadows and to vouch for the high standards and integrity of the syllabus and textbooks process put in place by the Ministry.

One of these select experts, Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi, has already spoken out. What do the others – presumably paid for their services by public funds – have to say in response to the charges of a racialized, politicized and religiously propagandistic process that has infiltrated and subverted the history textbook and syllabus system?

The history syllabus is presently undergoing revision. This is the right time for those named in the Ministry’s letter, as well as others that have been participating in these expert panels and textbook work, to come clean and provide some feedback to the public on what is wrong with the current system and what should be done to ensure that the Malaysian history taught in schools has a truly balanced perspective of the contributions of all ethnic communities and civilizations.

Besides Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi, those mentioned in the Ministry’s roll of honour owe the hundreds of thousands of students, who will be required to spend many hours memorizing and regurgitating what the Ministry decrees to be the true history of Malaysia and the world, no less than their full and honest disclosure and appraisal of the system, its products and probable outcomes – a system that the Ministry is imputing has not only their full participation but also their endorsement.

There are larger issues as well that we need to debate vigorously in the public sphere. Will the teaching of history, especially in its current form, foster patriotism and national unity? Or will it result in greater racial and religious polarization? There have been no studies as well as empirical evidence showing that the enhanced teaching of history will bring about the wildly optimistic ends that the Minister of Education has publicly pronounced.

Should history be made a compulsory pass subject? And does this imply that more hours in the schools and greater attention should be given to the teaching of history?

How useful is the emphasis on history, Malay studies and Islamic studies to the student population in schools and in the universities?

The outcome of the emphasis on cultural and religious learning and knowledge (including history) in our national schools and universities has been disastrous, especially for Malay students. It has resulted in poorly trained, low quality human capital unable to meet the needs of a competitive global market and lacking the flexibility, open-mindedness and adaptive knowledge to contribute to economic development and national productivity.

Does the Government not see that this misguided move to strengthen the teaching of a racially and religiously bigoted history may in fact reinforce the culture of alienation and poverty that is at the root of many of our social and economic problems?

Instead of emphasizing the importance of history and other narrowly cultural-religious subjects in the schooling system (religious learning has a place but it should be in the private sphere of the home, and not in the public sector), the government should prioritize the teaching of science, mathematics, computing, communications, English and other related subjects that are internationally acknowledged as the main drivers of innovation and intellectual capital.

If the Minister of Education is hell bent on making his mark in history the wrong way – and at the expense of our precious young minds – it is incumbent on his cabinet colleagues to put him right. But perhaps they do not give a damn since their children and grand-children are studying in private schools and abroad. - CPI