Read this article in the Star about a question directed to Nazri in parliament in regard to JPA scholarships. I'll reproduce it in full below since it has a lot of numbers in it. My comments follow.
68% of merit scholarships went to non-Bumiputra
KUALA LUMPUR: Nearly 68% or 280 of the Public Service Department (PSD) scholarships under the 20% merit-category were awarded to non-bumiputras, said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz.
He said only about 32% or 135 scholarships were awarded to bumiputra in the latest round of applications for the PSD's overseas degree programme.
"This proves that the award was not based on skin color, that the Government is fair in the selection of the 20% without looking at race, culture or religion but based on academic excellence," he told Lim Kit Siang (DAP - Ipoh Timur) in Parliament Tuesday.
He also said that PSD scholarships looked at academic excellence based on nine subjects chosen by the student relevant to the degree of their choice.
"This limit was set to ensure all students were on an equal playing field because not all schools had the same facilities and teaching manpower," he said in reply to Tan Ah Eng (BN - Gelang Patah).
At the Parliament lobby, Nazri said: “We do not do things without referring to the Federal Constitution, which means that we cannot give all for merit,” he said.
Out of 2,100 PSD scholarships for students to study abroad this year, 20%, which is 417, was reserved for those with merit, regardless of race and religion, he said.
Of the 417, almost 68% were given to non-bumiputras based on merit and only 32% for bumiputras, he said.
On complaints by those with 13As and 14As and did not get scholarships, he said he could not give them because it was not fair since some schools did not allow students to take more than 10 subjects.
That was why the Government wanted to base it on 10 subjects only, he said.
Inside the dewan, Nazri said for year 2009, PSD offered 1,176 scholarships to Bumiputras and 924 to non-Bumiputras.
He also said that more than RM2.8bil in Public Service Department (PSD) sponsorships for overseas degree courses were given out between 2000 and 2008.
The sum was given to 12,485 recipients where 9,160 were bumiputera and 3,325 were non-bumiputera.
The breakdown of table showed that allocation for scholarships increased from RM109mil in year 2000 to RM659mil last year.
Similarly, the number of students also increased from 748 in year 2000 to 2,000 last year, while 598 Bumiputra students getting scholarships in 2000 and increased to 1,100 last year.
For non-Bumiputra, number of students in year 2000 was 150 and had increased to 900 last year.
From Jan 14, 2009, the awarding criteria of the Overseas Degree Programme was divided into four categories, he said.
The first was based on academic excellence without counting race and socio-economic backgrounds where selection was based on academic results (85%), co-curriculum (10%) and interviews (5%).
The category was based on current racial population ratios where one race's allocation would be divided to others if it was not used.
"Selection is also made based on academic excellence with at least A2 in all core and elective subjects.
"At the same time, the candidates were also selected based on their secondary school co-curriculum participation, families' socio-economic backgrounds and interviews," he said.
The third category, he said, were for Sabah (5%) and Sarawakian (5%) bumiputra.
The last category was given to socially disadvantaged students from rural areas with limited facilities and from low-income families.
Nazri added that applicants in categories three and four also had to have at least A2s in all subjects relevant to their degree of choice, which made up 65% of the selection criteria.
He said students under the programme were sent for first degrees in the US, UK, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, South Korea, Russie, Germany, France, Czech Republic, Poland, Egypt, Jordan, India and Indonesia.
Some general comments:
According to Nazri, 1176 out of 2100 overseas JPA scholarships were given to Bumiputra students while the rest went to non-bumi students. This is very close to the 55 / 45 ethnic quota which the government promised in June 2008.
The composition of these scholarships is as follows:
60% allocated based on 'excellence' as well as the racial composition of the country.
20% allocated purely on merit without considering any ethnic quotas.
10% allocated to students from Sabah and Sarawak (which is not the 20% promised earlier)
10% allocated to students from disadvantaged backgrounds (no ethnic quota specified).
If 280 non-bumi students were allocated the JPA scholarship from the purely merit based portion, this would mean that a balance of 644 non-bumi students were given the JPA scholarship from the other two allocations i.e. the 60% allocation based on 'excellence' and racial composition of the country and the 10% allocation based on the background of a student.
Questions of ethnic quotas aside, this kind of reply from Nazri doesn't really give me any more confidence in the way in which these JPA scholarship recipients are chosen. For example, how is the pool of 20% purely merit based students selected? How are they different from the group of 'excellent' students from which the 60% allocation is given? How is a 'disadvantaged' background determined?
Unless there is more transparency in regard to the criteria for giving out these scholarships, beyond the superficial information of 60%, 20%, 10%, 10% allocated to whom and what, the questioning of the JPA scholarship allocation will continue to rage on and on.
Making an English SPM 'pass' compulsory
Selasa, 16 Juni 2009
Much has been made of the fact the DPM and Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin, did not know that it was not compulsory have a 'pass' in English at the SPM level. Later UMNO Youth came out to support making an English pass compulsory at the SPM level, subject to some caveats. I have some reservations about making a change to the current policy and here's why.
Firstly, this proposed policy change (making an English SPM pass compulsory) is premised on the false assumption that the standard of English will increase as a consequence of this policy change. Without any changes in the quality of teachers who teach English, especially those in the rural areas, or other resources aimed at improving the standard of English in our schools, all things being equal, this policy will only result in an increase of those who will fail their SPM because of failure to pass the English exam.
Secondly, this proposed policy change will increase the incentives to make the English exam even easier than it already is as well as to decrease the passing mark for the same exam. The bureaucrats at the MOE do not want to have political heat on their backs as a result of the protests of many parents whose children did not manage to pass their SPM English exam. The path of least resistance would be to either make the English SPM exam easier or to decrease the passing mark or to do both!
Thirdly, this proposed policy change presupposes that every SPM holder requires a passing level of English to get on with life. Sure, it would be difficult to read English textbooks and articles at the university / college level without a proficient understanding of English. But if the medium of instruction in our public universities continue to be in BM, then I see no reason why not having an English SPM pass should be the basis for denying a student entry into one of the public universities or a matriculation program. Furthermore, there are many career paths which are open to Malaysians which require only a minimal level of English proficiency. I don't see why Malaysians who choose to pursue these career paths should be denied an SPM certificate just because they fail to pass their English exam at the SPM level.
This is in no way an argument to diminish the importance of English. Most of the top jobs in the private sector require a high proficiency in English. Most of the top jobs in the civil service require at least a decent level of spoken English. But I think having this policy change distracts from the more important and pressing objective of improving the standard of English in Malaysia. Making an English pass compulsory at the SPM level is the easy part. Making substantive changes to the way English is taught in our schools in the much harder and more important challenge.
Firstly, this proposed policy change (making an English SPM pass compulsory) is premised on the false assumption that the standard of English will increase as a consequence of this policy change. Without any changes in the quality of teachers who teach English, especially those in the rural areas, or other resources aimed at improving the standard of English in our schools, all things being equal, this policy will only result in an increase of those who will fail their SPM because of failure to pass the English exam.
Secondly, this proposed policy change will increase the incentives to make the English exam even easier than it already is as well as to decrease the passing mark for the same exam. The bureaucrats at the MOE do not want to have political heat on their backs as a result of the protests of many parents whose children did not manage to pass their SPM English exam. The path of least resistance would be to either make the English SPM exam easier or to decrease the passing mark or to do both!
Thirdly, this proposed policy change presupposes that every SPM holder requires a passing level of English to get on with life. Sure, it would be difficult to read English textbooks and articles at the university / college level without a proficient understanding of English. But if the medium of instruction in our public universities continue to be in BM, then I see no reason why not having an English SPM pass should be the basis for denying a student entry into one of the public universities or a matriculation program. Furthermore, there are many career paths which are open to Malaysians which require only a minimal level of English proficiency. I don't see why Malaysians who choose to pursue these career paths should be denied an SPM certificate just because they fail to pass their English exam at the SPM level.
This is in no way an argument to diminish the importance of English. Most of the top jobs in the private sector require a high proficiency in English. Most of the top jobs in the civil service require at least a decent level of spoken English. But I think having this policy change distracts from the more important and pressing objective of improving the standard of English in Malaysia. Making an English pass compulsory at the SPM level is the easy part. Making substantive changes to the way English is taught in our schools in the much harder and more important challenge.
Compulsory Pass for English in SPM?
Senin, 08 Juni 2009
This is an open letter written by Mr Philip Yong on whether a pass in English language must be made compulsory at SPM level. I'm publishing it in full.
Open Letter to Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Y.A.B. TAN SRI DATO' HAJI MUHYIDDIN BIN MOHD. YASSIN
Dear Tan Sri,
I am writing this letter in regard to your question thrown to the public to discuss. The question on whether a pass in the English language should be made mandatory to pass the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM).
Before I pursued my higher education at a private institution, for the whole of my schooling life I was enrolled in a local public school. Therefore with my eleven (11) years of experience in public institutions I think I am qualified to give my point of view of this what I would call as a highly significant issue.
Tan Sri,
Whenever I had an English language examination in school, I would score the subject with flying colours and I was indeed very proud of myself. But that was not until I pursued my higher education at a private institution. When I was told that I am required to take the subject in college, I was very reluctant to thinking that my proficiency of the language is above standard. I was furious but had to comply in the end. During my very first lesson, I finally understood why the institution insisted on us taking the subject. In simple words, the standard of English in public schools is definitely not on par with those in private institutions. Therefore, the first thing your Ministry should do is to review the standard of the language taught in public institutions.
In my opinion, I do not think that the English language is hard to master. If we go by the Malay proverb, ‘Melentur buluh biarlah dari rebungnya’ I believe it is achievable. In this state of reality, we should never teach our children to avoid the problem but should instead teach them tackle the problem. If their proficiency of the language is not up to par then their parents or even the government should do something to help improve it and not just lower the standard of language in the public institutions.
I would say that I am fortunate to be born into an English speaking family. If not I seriously think that my proficiency of the language would be much worse than how it is today. Although I agree that this is the role of the parents but the government is also accountable for this issue. Until this very moment, I do not agree that a pass in English should be made mandatory to pass SPM for a matter of fact that the level of English of many Malaysians are still not up to standard even for the very easy SPM. The government should first tackle the root of the problem which again is the proficiency of the English language of the citizens of Malaysia.
My point of view may seem very common but I believe it is what many ordinary Malaysians share. Until today, many of the issues mentioned above have been raised but still no actions were taken. Even if there were actions taken, I do not think those actions were of much help. Let me raise a point that we are a developing country. If as a developing country, our citizen’s proficiency of the English language is not up to par with the developed countries then how will we actually be able to achieve Tun Dr Mahathir’s Vision 2020?
Tan Sri,
Last but not least, I sincerely hope that your ministry will look into these matters seriously. I thank you for your patience in reading this letter. My sincere apology if I had made any mistakes in my above writings. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Philip Yong Kee Chung
www.philipyong.net
Open Letter to Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Y.A.B. TAN SRI DATO' HAJI MUHYIDDIN BIN MOHD. YASSIN
Dear Tan Sri,
I am writing this letter in regard to your question thrown to the public to discuss. The question on whether a pass in the English language should be made mandatory to pass the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM).
Before I pursued my higher education at a private institution, for the whole of my schooling life I was enrolled in a local public school. Therefore with my eleven (11) years of experience in public institutions I think I am qualified to give my point of view of this what I would call as a highly significant issue.
Tan Sri,
Whenever I had an English language examination in school, I would score the subject with flying colours and I was indeed very proud of myself. But that was not until I pursued my higher education at a private institution. When I was told that I am required to take the subject in college, I was very reluctant to thinking that my proficiency of the language is above standard. I was furious but had to comply in the end. During my very first lesson, I finally understood why the institution insisted on us taking the subject. In simple words, the standard of English in public schools is definitely not on par with those in private institutions. Therefore, the first thing your Ministry should do is to review the standard of the language taught in public institutions.
In my opinion, I do not think that the English language is hard to master. If we go by the Malay proverb, ‘Melentur buluh biarlah dari rebungnya’ I believe it is achievable. In this state of reality, we should never teach our children to avoid the problem but should instead teach them tackle the problem. If their proficiency of the language is not up to par then their parents or even the government should do something to help improve it and not just lower the standard of language in the public institutions.
I would say that I am fortunate to be born into an English speaking family. If not I seriously think that my proficiency of the language would be much worse than how it is today. Although I agree that this is the role of the parents but the government is also accountable for this issue. Until this very moment, I do not agree that a pass in English should be made mandatory to pass SPM for a matter of fact that the level of English of many Malaysians are still not up to standard even for the very easy SPM. The government should first tackle the root of the problem which again is the proficiency of the English language of the citizens of Malaysia.
My point of view may seem very common but I believe it is what many ordinary Malaysians share. Until today, many of the issues mentioned above have been raised but still no actions were taken. Even if there were actions taken, I do not think those actions were of much help. Let me raise a point that we are a developing country. If as a developing country, our citizen’s proficiency of the English language is not up to par with the developed countries then how will we actually be able to achieve Tun Dr Mahathir’s Vision 2020?
Tan Sri,
Last but not least, I sincerely hope that your ministry will look into these matters seriously. I thank you for your patience in reading this letter. My sincere apology if I had made any mistakes in my above writings. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Philip Yong Kee Chung
www.philipyong.net
How Many JPA Scholars Serve Their Bond?
Minggu, 07 Juni 2009
I've been meaning to post this for the longest time, but somehow never got around to do it. Anyway, there has been plenty of talk on the JPA scholarship (again) recently, and one of the related issues which keep cropping up is whether the talents of our returning(?) scholars are actually being fully "exploited" by the Government.
I have addressed the following question to the Prime Minister in parliament:
No wonder everyone wants the JPA scholarship, while you sign up with a bond, in practice, you'd rarely have to serve a single day of the contract.
I have addressed the following question to the Prime Minister in parliament:
...berapa ramai pemegang biasiswa yang telah selesai pengajian pada 5 tahun yang lepas, antara mereka, berapakah yang telah berkhidmat untuk Kerajaan mengikut syarat perjanjian biasiswa, berapakah yang enggan menunaikan perjanjian dan yang telah dilepaskan daripada tanggungjawab mereka.We obviously know that many of the scholars never served in Government but even I was a little taken abacked by the number who has been released incognito.
Bagi tempoh 5 tahun lepas iaitu 2003-2007, seramai 30,832 pelajar tajaan JPA telah menamatkan pengajian di dalam dan luar Negara. Jumlah ini meliputi pelajar-pelajar yang tamat pengajian di peringkat diploma, ijazah sarjana muda dan sarjana.Yes, that means that only 16% of JPA scholars actually serve their bonds upon return to the country over the last 5 years. The remainder? Your guess is as good as mine.
Sepanjang tempoh tersebut, seramai 4,920 orang telah berkhidmat dalam pelbagai skim perkhidmatan lantikan SPA. Terdapat juga pelajar-pelajar ini yang sedang berkhidmat di bawah skim perkhidmatan yang dilantik oleh Pihak Berkuasa Melantik yang lain seperti Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Pelajaran (SPP), Badan-badan Berkanun dan Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan.
Manakala, seramai 314 bekas pelajar tajaan JPA telah memohon dan dilepaskan daripada kontrak.
Pemegang-pemegang biasiswa yang tidak menunaikan kewajipan mereka, tidak akan dilepaskan dari tanggungjawab dengan sewenang-wenangnya. Tuntutan gantirugi melalui penguatkuasaan syarat perjanjian Biasiswa akan dikenakan ke atas mereka yang ingkar terhadap perjanjian yang telah ditandatangani.
No wonder everyone wants the JPA scholarship, while you sign up with a bond, in practice, you'd rarely have to serve a single day of the contract.
USM 'glitch'
Senin, 01 Juni 2009
This is not a good start for USM as the country's first and so far, only, APEX university. A technical 'glitch' resulted in admission 'approvals' being sent to all 8173 students who applied for entry into USM instead of the 3599 who had been accepted into USM. When this error was revealed, many students who at first, had thought that they had been accepted, had to suffer the anguish of disappointment.
I don't really want to put too much heat on USM given that this kind of technical glitch can be easily rectified. I think that the anguish suffered by the students who at first thought that they had been accepted into USM but later found out that they have been rejected is sad but the bigger issue is whether their chances of getting into one of the other public universities will be jeopardized by their USM rejection.
From what I've read, the application process to USM is handled by USM themselves because of their status as the apex university. Of a total of 22,000 applicants, 8173 were 'pre-qualified' to enter USM presumably because of their academic excellence. Out of these 8173 students, only 3599 were admitted.
The process for the students who did not 'pre-qualify' to enter USM (out of the initial 22,000 applicants) seem simple enough. Their applications are submitted to the UPU together with the other applications to gain entry into the other public universities in Malaysia (other than USM). But I'm not so sure if the 4574 students who were rejected by USM (out of the 8173) would be given the same 'fair' shot an getting into the program of their choice in the other public universities especially given the short window span between when USM announces its list of successful entrants and when the other public universities announces theirs (a window of approximately 3 weeks). Higher Education Minister, Khaled Nordin, has made assurances that those rejected by USM will be processed by UPU for consideration for entry into the other public universities but I'm not sure if UPU can do so fairly in a short period of time.
I'm sure these glitches will be ironed out in due time but this is no consolation for those 4574 students who are affected by this. I think more transparency in the process is needed. (I would appreciate any of our readers who are more familiar with the application process for USM as well as for the other public universities to enlighten us)
Perhaps a similar system such as that adopted by Cambridge and Oxford can be used by USM. Those who are interested in applying to Cambridge or Oxford at the undergrad level (you cannot choose both) have to apply directly to either university. At the same time, most students also submit another general application to UCAS to apply to the non-Cambridge / Oxford universities. I don't see why something like that cannot be used in the Malaysian context. Those who want to apply to USM should do so directly. But they should not be prevented from applying to the other public universities through UPU. Once the results are announced by USM as well as the other public universities, applicants can choose which offer to accept. I don't see why it is necessary for the USM 'rejectees' to be subjected to some uncertainty just because they choose to apply to USM. They should be allowed a separate UPU application that is processed together with all the other UPU applications. Sounds reasonable?
I don't really want to put too much heat on USM given that this kind of technical glitch can be easily rectified. I think that the anguish suffered by the students who at first thought that they had been accepted into USM but later found out that they have been rejected is sad but the bigger issue is whether their chances of getting into one of the other public universities will be jeopardized by their USM rejection.
From what I've read, the application process to USM is handled by USM themselves because of their status as the apex university. Of a total of 22,000 applicants, 8173 were 'pre-qualified' to enter USM presumably because of their academic excellence. Out of these 8173 students, only 3599 were admitted.
The process for the students who did not 'pre-qualify' to enter USM (out of the initial 22,000 applicants) seem simple enough. Their applications are submitted to the UPU together with the other applications to gain entry into the other public universities in Malaysia (other than USM). But I'm not so sure if the 4574 students who were rejected by USM (out of the 8173) would be given the same 'fair' shot an getting into the program of their choice in the other public universities especially given the short window span between when USM announces its list of successful entrants and when the other public universities announces theirs (a window of approximately 3 weeks). Higher Education Minister, Khaled Nordin, has made assurances that those rejected by USM will be processed by UPU for consideration for entry into the other public universities but I'm not sure if UPU can do so fairly in a short period of time.
I'm sure these glitches will be ironed out in due time but this is no consolation for those 4574 students who are affected by this. I think more transparency in the process is needed. (I would appreciate any of our readers who are more familiar with the application process for USM as well as for the other public universities to enlighten us)
Perhaps a similar system such as that adopted by Cambridge and Oxford can be used by USM. Those who are interested in applying to Cambridge or Oxford at the undergrad level (you cannot choose both) have to apply directly to either university. At the same time, most students also submit another general application to UCAS to apply to the non-Cambridge / Oxford universities. I don't see why something like that cannot be used in the Malaysian context. Those who want to apply to USM should do so directly. But they should not be prevented from applying to the other public universities through UPU. Once the results are announced by USM as well as the other public universities, applicants can choose which offer to accept. I don't see why it is necessary for the USM 'rejectees' to be subjected to some uncertainty just because they choose to apply to USM. They should be allowed a separate UPU application that is processed together with all the other UPU applications. Sounds reasonable?
Contribute to Recom Wiki
We always complain that there's nothing we can do to change the education system in Malaysia. I don't think we are as powerless as we think we are. Knowledge empowers us to do more than we think we can. An initiative, the Recom Wiki project, 'relaunched' by Chen Chow is a project that aims to create an online Malaysian Education Encyclopedia. I think it's a really worthwhile project that regular readers of this blog can contribute to especially in their own areas of expertise. Check it out and contribute!
Abolish JPA Undergrad Scholarships?
Check out Bakri Musa's latest post on the JPA undergrad scholarships. Well worth a read. I wouldn't go so far as to call for the JPA undergrad scholarships to be abolished but I wouldn't mind if the numbers were cut down drastically to only those who gain admission into the best universities overseas and if steps are taken to ensure that these students come back to serve in the public service.
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)