As we are all aware, the local education system is a very centralised one, as opposed to say the American system. One pertinent reason this is so, is historical, the need to unite the people quickly as a nation in the face of pro-China feelings, threats of communism and a majority Chinese state existing in a Malay-Muslim neighbourhood.
This has managed to see us through the turbulent years as English became the main, neutral language which economic reasons has certainly helped to push this reform through the vernacular system that existed during the British rule and Malay being made the National Language.
In the context of curriculum however, this centralised control has resulted in gaps in the institutional, programmatic and classroom practices with policies being carried out in some cases on a superficial basis, for example in the integration of National Education across subject areas with some teachers struggling to find connections.
One of course sees the benefit of having a centralised system. It helps to ensure standards are achieved and that we produce a certain quality of graduates. However, to a degree this is being served by the existence of high stakes education. I am still trying to figure out why then are our schools still being subjected to such control and a top-down approach of reforms?
The past decade or so however has seen the ministry giving greater freedom to schools with the introduction of independent, autonomous and integrated programmes. However, we are still bound to the regular curriculum that has always existed, just that now we can have some frills, as we need to make the grades in high stakes examinations and we need to attract the right students and get the right rankings so that our schools remain competitive institutes of excellence.
I am now going to bury myself in history books on education and contemporary writings on the system to find out why. But first we have to homeschool, which by the way I am grateful for having the choice to carry out here.
No comments:
Post a Comment