I APPLAUD the Deputy Prime Minister’s recent statement that the Government would look into the salary scale of university lecturers.

It’s a high time that lecturers get fair attention from the Higher Education Ministry as their counterparts, teachers did from the Education Ministry.

Little has been said about the workload and pay scale of lecturers.

Lecturers have their fair share of the workload. Besides teaching, marking assignments/examinations papers etc., lecturers who are non PhD holders have to obtain their PhDs, conduct research, writing books/journals and get them published. They are also required to attend conferences and present papers, research findings, etc.

On top of this, the lecturers most important task is to ensure the quality of their students because the marketability of students is also taken into consideration.

Lecturers are also burdened with administrative work and all work done is subjected to stringent quality audit from the respective qualifying agencies such as MQA (Malaysian Qualifying Agency), AACSB (The Association of Advance Colligiate School of Business) accreditation, COPA (Council on Postsecondary Accreditation) and etc.

In a nutshell, it’s the right time that the Higher Education Ministry proactively initiate a salary review for lecturers to make it more competitive and in line with the nation’s aspiration to transform Malaysia as a hub for higher education studies.

Competitive salaries will also benefit the nation in terms of luring the best talent to serve in the local institutions of higher learning.

S.C. TAN, Sintok, Kedah.
Source: The STAR Online Home News Opinion Friday May 25, 2012

THE high-level Education Revamp Committee will review and deliberate on nine areas in our education system.

"Curriculum and assessment" is one area. It is appropriate and right that they are grouped together for discourse purposes since they are very much intertwined.

Students' mastery of what is being taught to them (the curriculum) needs to be evaluated from time to time (the assessment).

The results of the assessment in turn influence the further development of the curriculum.

In this letter, it is intended to touch on two issues which I believe are dear to all educators and merit the attention of the committee.

Firstly, the practice of streaming students after Form 3 into Arts and Science needs a re-look. We should instead consider having a single General stream for all.

At this early stage of their education, students should be exposed to a more general and broader curriculum rather than a compartmentalised and narrow one.

Streaming them academically into Arts and Science should be done only in Form Six/Matriculation/Foundation classes.

Lest we fear that our Form Four and Five students may lose their edge in the pure sciences, we may take cognisance of the fact that much of the "preparatory materials for higher learning" now being taught to Form Four and Five pure science students can be carried forward to Form Six/Matriculation/Foundation science courses.

Moreover, the introduction phase of these courses always repeats or revises materials presently taught to the Form Four and Form Five pure sciences students.

On the other hand, Arts stream students need to learn more science than they are doing now.

All students in Form Four should go into a single General stream where the science syllabus is broader than the present science subjects in the Arts stream.

At the same time, the General stream science syllabus will be spared the "preparatory materials for higher learning" found in the present pure science syllabus. This way, everybody gets to learn enough science and there is still sufficient teaching-learning time left for other subjects.

With the General stream in place, students would be able to gain a better understanding of the different subjects before they make the decision to specialise.

With the impending abolition of the PMR (Penilaian Menengah Rendah) examination, the curriculum people in the ministry can begin to redesign and upgrade the whole curriculum and syllabus for secondary General Science from Form 1 to Form 5.

Secondly, the Education Ministry is set to introduce school-based assessment (SBA) at all levels of schooling.

It is a policy in the right direction and, therefore, should be supported. However, teachers must be assured of the practicality and effectiveness of SBA.

A prominent aspect of SBA is for students to carry out individual and/or group projects that culminate in report writing. This is part of the innovative approach to drive students to think creatively and critically.

If the subject specialists at the ministry plan separately for their subjects, the tendency is they will come up with each subject having its own requirement for projects and reports.

It results in students and teachers having a very heavy load of projects and reports to do and to supervise and assess respectively.

Ironically, this sheer abundance of projects or reports may be the very thing that would kill the zeal and interest for innovation and creativity in both students and teachers.

This may also lead to plagiarism and plenty of last-minute slipshod work just to complete the projects or reports before the school term closes.

Shouldn't projects or reports be across the curriculum?

I would propose that projects be optimally divided into three categories: languages-literature, sciences-mathematics and arts-humanities.

This way, a student needs only do at most three projects, either individually or in groups per school term or per school year.

This will make SBA practical and effective.

Let's work towards a common curriculum and an optimal assessment.

By Liong Kam Chong, Seremban, Negri Sembilan
Source: New Straits Times Letters to the Editors 24 May 2012  

SIDANG Meja Bulat Kajian Semula Sistem Pendidikan Kebangsaan yang diadakan di Memorial Tun Hussein Onn, Kuala Lumpur pada 19 Mei lalu telah meluluskan 13 resolusi.

Ia diluluskan secara sebulat suara oleh para hadirin yang terdiri daripada wakil-wakil pertubuhan bukan kerajaan (NGO), kesatuan guru, persatuan ibu bapa dan guru (PIBG), bekas pegawai kanan Kementerian Pelajaran dan cendekiawan Melayu.

Resolusi berkenaan menggariskan perkara-perkara yang perlu dipatuhi oleh kerajaan apabila melaksanakan sebarang pindaan terhadap sistem pendidikan kebangsaan dan cadangan-cadangan baru bagi memantapkannya.

Berikut adalah inti pati resolusi-resolusi yang diluluskan pada persidangan anjuran Pertubuhan Pribumi Perkasa Malaysia (Perkasa) berkenaan.

1. Sebarang pindaan sistem pendidikan kebangsaan hendaklah selaras dan tidak bertentangan dengan Fasal 152 Perlembagaan Persekutuan mengenai bahasa kebangsaan dan Akta Bahasa Kebangsaan 1963/1967 yang antaranya menggariskan bahasa Melayu adalah bahasa rasmi dan digunakan di peringkat kebangsaan.

Istilah bahasa Melayu mesti dikembalikan dan dinobatkan penggunaannya dengan rasmi menggantikan perkataan bahasa Malaysia.

Pengajaran dan pembelajaran di sekolah rendah, menengah, prauniversiti dan peringkat tertiari hendaklah menggunakan bahasa Melayu sebagai pengantarnya.

Mahasiswa institusi pengajian tinggi swasta (IPTS) dikehendaki mengambil bahasa Melayu sebagai subjek wajib lulus dan tuntutan untuk mengembalikan sekolah aliran Inggeris tidak wajar dilayan.

2. Perlu dipelihara dan dikekalkan hak istimewa orang Melayu dan bumiputera Sabah serta Sarawak seperti yang termaktub dalam Fasal 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan dalam bidang pendidikan tanpa tolak ansur oleh kepentingan mana-mana pihak dan tekanan politik.

Sehubungan itu, kuota biasiswa Jabatan Perkhidmatan Awam (JPA) bagi melanjut pelajaran melalui Program Ijazah Luar Negara (PILN) dan Program Ijazah Dalam Negara (PIDN) wajar dikembalikan kepada nisbah asal 90 peratus Melayu dan bumiputera serta 10 peratus bukan bumiputera seperti sebelum 2008.

Dasar meritokrasi hanya dilaksanakan sesama atau dalam kalangan Melayu dan bumiputera sahaja, sementara kaum-kaum lain bertanding sesama mereka.

3. Kerajaan tidak seharusnya dari semasa ke semasa meminda atau memperkenalkan dasar baru pendidikan dengan sewenang-wenangnya tanpa merujuk kepada akta dan dasar pendidikan yang sedia ada.

Ini termasuk Penyata Razak 1956, Laporan Rahman Talib 1960, Akta Pelajaran 1961, Laporan Jawatankuasa Kabinet Mengkaji Pelaksanaan Dasar Pelajaran 1979, Falsafah Pendidikan Negara 1988, Akta Pendidikan 1996 dan Pindaan Akta Pendidikan 1997.

4. Kementerian Pelajaran digesa memperkukuhkan dan memperluaskan kurikulum pendidikan agar sejajar dengan keperluan semasa dan tuntutan antarabangsa.

Perlu dikaji semula dasar penggredan Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) yang dimulakan pada 2010 berasaskan A+, A dan A- bagi memilih pelajar tercemerlang daripada kalangan cemerlang kerana ia menimbulkan perlumbaan tidak sihat di kalangan pelajar, ibu bapa, guru dan sekolah.

5. Kementerian Pelajaran digesa mengambil langkah serius, drastik dan pragmatik supaya matlamat memartabatkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan, bahasa rasmi, bahasa ilmu dan bahasa perpaduan yang digunakan dalam pentadbiran awam dan swasta tercapai dengan jayanya.

6. Mengakui bahawa bahasa Inggeris sebagai bahasa kedua di negara ini wajib diajar dan dipelajari oleh semua murid.

Sehubungan itu, perlu digembleng semula tenaga guru-guru bahasa Inggeris yang mendapat latihan di luar negara sejak awal 1970-an bagi mengurangkan kos perbelanjaan membawa masuk tenaga pengajar asing.

7. Kerajaan perlu memperkasakan sekolah kebangsaan sebagai sekolah aliran perdana dengan memberikan peruntukan kewangan, lain-lain perbelanjaan berulang tahunan (LPBT), peruntukan penyelengaraan dan peruntukan mata pelajaran, 100 peratus lebih banyak berbanding Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) dan Tamil.

Harus diperbanyakkan kelas bahasa Cina dan Tamil sebagai bahasa ketiga di sekolah kebangsaan.

Pelaksanaan kurikulum dan pengajaran sekolah kebangsaan perlu lebih fleksibel dan bijak, bukan birokratik dan mengongkong supaya anak-anak daripada semua kaum boleh belajar dengan kreatif di bawah satu bumbung.

8. Sekolah Berasrama Penuh (SBP) perlu terus memainkan peranan bagi melahirkan golongan intelek yang bakal menjadi pemimpin dan golongan profesional Melayu serta bumiputera dalam pelbagai bidang.

Kementerian Pelajaran digesa meneruskan dasar memberi keutamaan kepada pelajar Melayu dan bumiputera cemerlang dari keluarga miskin terutama dari luar bandar dalam pengambilan pelajar SBP.

9. Perlu dipastikan nisbah murid yang mengikuti mata pelajaran sains khusus tidak tergelincir daripada sasaran.

Menggesa Kementerian Pelajaran menyemak semula dasar nisbah 60:40 bagi subjek sains dan sastera yang sehingga kini didapati sukar untuk dicapai.

10. Harus dikawal pembukaan sekolah antarabangsa yang kini berkembang pesat akibat liberalisasi pendidikan swasta kerana ia hanya memberi manfaat kepada golongan berada dan boleh menghakis semangat patriotik terhadap negara.

Perlu dipastikan sekolah antarabangsa dan sekolah swasta yang mempunyai aliran antarabangsa mengajar bahasa Melayu kepada pelajar tempatan.

11. Menggesa kerajaan menarik balik pengiktirafan sijil Peperiksaan Gabungan Sekolah Cina (UEC) kerana ia bertentangan dengan dasar pelajaran kebangsaan.

Pengiktirafan ini akan menebalkan lagi polarisasi kaum kerana ia menggalakkan murid Cina bersekolah di SJKC dan meneruskan pelajaran di Sekolah Menengah Bantuan Cina dan Sekolah Persendirian Gabungan Cina yang kini berjumlah 60 buah dengan 60,481 pelajar.

12. Perlu ditambah bilangan pusat matrikulasi bagi menampung permohonan pelajar cemerlang lepasan SPM yang gagal mendapat tempat di universiti tempatan.

Kerajaan digesa mengekalkan nisbah kuota pengambilan pelajar di pusat matrikulasi iaitu 90 peratus kaum Melayu dan bumiputera serta 10 peratus bukan bumiputera.

13. Subjek Pengetahuan Agama Islam perlu dijadikan mata pelajaran wajib lulus bagi pelajar Islam dalam peperiksaan Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR), Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) dan SPM.

Murid harus memahami bacaan dalam solat dan boleh membaca serta menulis asas-asas jawi pada akhir tahun dua.



Oleh NIZAM YATIM nizam.yatim@utusan.com.my
Sumber: Utusan Malaysia Online Rencana 23/05/2012

PENGUMUMAN Timbalan Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Pelajaran, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin pada sambutan Hari Guru baru lalu disambut meriah oleh kebanyakan guru di sekolah.

Namun keceriaan tersebut tidak dirasai oleh pensyarah-pensyarah di Institut Pendidikan Guru (IPG). Pensyarah-pensyarah di IPG bagaikan tidak mendapat perhatian. Ini kerana, pada 16 Mei 2011 sempena Sambutan Hari Guru, Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak telah mengumumkan bahawa semua pengetua akan menikmati kenaikan daripada DG 48 kepada DG 52. Penolong Kanan DG 44 akan diberi kenaikan DG 48.

Sebelum itu semua guru yang mengajar Tingkatan Enam Satu dinaik pangkat sebagai Penyelia Tingkatan Enam Satu dan diberi kenaikan DG 48.

Persoalannya di sini, di manakah kedudukan pensyarah IPG? Adakah pensyarah IPG hanya setaraf guru-guru mata pelajaran biasa sahaja? Jika dilihat beban tugas dan tanggungjawab, pensyarah IPG melahirkan pelajar tahap diploma dan ijazah.

Bukan bermaksud mempersoalkan rakan-rakan yang mengajar di Tingkatan Enam. Tetapi dalam aspek memperkasakan Tingkatan Enam, kerajaan memberikan suatu anugerah yang baik kepada rakan-rakan kami yang mengajar di Tingkatan Enam. Tetapi perkara sama tidak berlaku di IPG.

Dalam usaha kerajaan memperkasakan IPG menjadi 'The New IPG', para pensyarah tidak mendapat apa-apa kenaikan, malah 'dianugerahkan' dengan tempoh waktu kerja 8 pagi hingga 5 petang.

Kami pensyarah IPG memohon agar pihak kerajaan 'menjengah' sedikit dan mengiktiraf pensyarah-pensyarah yang bertugas di IPG. Pengiktirafan terhadap pensyarah IPG harus sekurang-kurangnya setaraf dengan Penyelia Tingkatan Enam dengan diberi kenaikan DG 48 apabila seseorang itu dilantik sebagai pensyarah.

Ini kerana proses permohonan menjadi pensyarah itu sendiri amat ketat berdasarkan temuduga. Dari segi tahap akademik, hampir 90 peratus pensyarah IPG memiliki Sarjana dan hampir 30 peratus mempunyai Ph.D. Tahap kelulusan akademik yang tinggi ini secara tidak langsung dapat menaikkan imej IPGM setanding dengan institusi pendidikan tinggi lain.



PENSYARAH TERKILAN Perak
Sumber: Utusan Malaysia Online Forum 23/05/2012

BIASANYA tokoh guru adalah mereka yang telah bersara. Selain sejarah perkhidmatan di sekolah sebagai guru, maka sebahagian besar biodatanya memaparkan pelbagai jawatan yang disandang sebagai pentadbir di sekolah, pejabat, jabatan atau Kementerian Pelajaran serta sumbangannya dalam pendidikan dan khidmat masyarakat.

Elok juga jika kriteria pemilihan tokoh guru menekankan nilai-nilai inovasi yang diamalkan semasa mereka menjadi guru dahulu. Namun anugerah khas kepada guru yang keunggulan mereka begitu terserlah sebagai guru berinovasi amat wajar diberi keutamaan, khususnya dalam majlis sambutan Hari Guru peringkat daerah.

Pengiktirafan ini bukan sahaja sebagai lambang penghargaan kepada kegigihan ribuan guru yang sedang mengajar di sekolah tetapi memberi penekanan bahawa tugas utama guru ialah mengajar di bilik darjah.

Dalam ucapan di majlis sambutan Hari Guru peringkat kebangsaan pada 16 Mei lepas, Timbalan Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Pelajaran, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin memperincikan ciri-ciri guru berinovasi.

Guru berinovasi tidak semestinya dapat menghasilkan pelajar yang meraih 10A dalam peperiksaan. Yang penting keberhasilan pengajaran mereka mendorong murid seronok dan minat belajar kerana mereka mudah memahami pelajaran. Pengurusan bilik darjah terkawal, murid menumpukan perhatian di kelas dan pencapaian murid semakin meningkat.

Guru sentiasa berusaha agar objektif pengajaran tercapai. Mereka berjaya menghasilkan murid yang berakhlak mulia, menguasai kemahiran berfikir dan memiliki daya saing yang tinggi.

Kita sering mendengar guru muda yang baru tamat latihan perguruan berinovasi tinggi dan begitu bersemangat mengajar. Perkara penting ialah bagaimana untuk mengekalkan semangat inovasi guru? Bagaimana jika tahap disiplin pelajar di sesebuah sekolah tidak terkawal, ibu bapa tidak memberi perhatian kepada pelajaran anak, pelajar bebas keluar rumah dan terlibat dengan pelbagai gejala negatif?

Keadaan ini bukan sahaja boleh menjejaskan hasil pengajaran bahkan mungkin tahap inovasi guru. Pentadbir sekolah juga perlu bijaksana mengurus sumber manusia agar wujud gaya kepimpinan yang mesra guru.

Kita boleh berkata guru berinovasi sepatutnya gigih menghadapi kerenah pelajar dalam melaksanakan tugas profesional dan tugas tambahan. Persoalannya adakah kita yakin guru yang sibuk dengan kerja pentadbiran dan perkeranian serta kerap bertugas di luar sekolah maka keberkesanan pengajarannya di bilik darjah tidak terjejas?

Oleh itu, semua pihak perlu memainkan peranan sewajarnya agar wujud persekitaran sekolah yang dapat menyuburkan tahap inovasi guru.



ZIN MARKAM Pontian, Johor
Sumber: Utusan Malaysia Online Forum 23/05/2012

ANOTHER case of a teacher making a derogatory statement against students of a particular race has emerged, this time at SMK George Town in Penang.

There seems to be no end to such incidents involving teachers.

Why does the Education Ministry not take stern action against such teachers?

The ministry should not allow anyone to cover up these matters. It should tackle the issue head on and, once and for all, resolve it.

Officers who are carrying out the investigation on the cases must be competent and fair.

I am surprised to read that National Union of the Teaching Profession president Hashim Adnan had declined to comment on the matter as he had not read any report on it.

Does he realise that we are now living in the Internet era?

IT is good to hear that teachers are getting a salary upgrade again ("Promotions for 60,000 teachers and heads" -- NST, May 17). But what about lecturers?

We are developing human capital such as graduates and postgraduate students as well as generating new knowledge through research and development.

Those in medical schools are training future doctors and specialists. Just because we are too involved in what we do, it does not mean we are happy with our current salary.

Singapore pays their lecturers 10 times more than ours.

There is no point in sending Talent Corp abroad to persuade Malaysians to come home when the ones back home are not taken care of.

I hope the Higher Education Ministry looks into this.

If the decision to make history a compulsory pass for the SPM from next year is final, at least ensure that the curriculum is done right.

THE other day I ran into an old friend. Such off-chance meetings are nice and give you the chance to recollect some things together. For those with children, inevitably it leads to talk about what the children are doing.

Her child is 16 now and studying in Form Four. And yes, history is a compulsory subject in school and from next year, you need to get at least a pass in it to obtain your Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) certificate, our equivalent of the O-Levels.

All right, I knew about that one. The Educa­tion Minister had announced that in 2010 after an Umno annual general assembly. But here is the shocker, her son was told by his school that there will a three-hour practical for history.

I was flabbergasted. No kidding, I said.

What are they going to do for the practical, I asked. This is unheard of. I have not managed to get independent confirmation yet, but if it is, imagine the possibilities.

Now what kind of practical would it be? Can we build a time machine and go into the past and ask Hang Tuah whether he really existed and whether all those tales they told about him and Jebat were true even though tall? The mind boggles.

But for now, the idea of a practical exam for history has to be mere conjecture unless the ministry chooses to clarify. Perhaps it is not a practical, maybe just a project.

Back to more serious stuff – this decision to make history not just a compulsory subject for the SPM but to require that from next year you need at least a pass in it to get the SPM certificate.

The only other subject that enjoys such a requirement is Bahasa Malaysia and up to now calls to make English a compulsory pass have not been implemented.

The Education Minister had cited lack of patriotism and lack of knowledge of the Federal Constitution as part of the reasons for the decision.

A committee was subsequently appointed to deal with the syllabus and curriculum in the wake of allegations that the history curriculum has changed over the years to place a lot more emphasis on Islamic civilisation and downplayed the achievements of non-Malays in contributing towards the nation and economy.

It is inevitable therefore that there will be lingering questions over what will constitute the history curriculum and what will be decided as facts and how the facts will be presented in a balanced manner to give a true and fair view of how events actually happened.

It is an unfortunate fact that our education system is highly politicised.

Take, for instance, the flip-flop over using English to teach Science and Maths. This was reversed after some five years and it is back to the old status quo.

And now history is to be made a compulsory pass for SPM.

That is a rather strange decision. It would have been adequate just to have made it a compulsory subject for the SPM instead of requiring that every student gets a pass in that subject to get the SPM.

Two questions arise over this issue.

First, is it really necessary to make a pass in history compulsory to ensure better understanding of how this country developed?

Two, who is going to ensure that the history that is taught in schools will be a real reflection of what happened shorn of all considerations?

The answer to the first question must surely be no because what politicians feel the public should feel about the way a country developed is seldom in touch with reality.

Students should not be forced to accept everything at face value without a healthy scepticism as to whether the so-called facts are right not.

Education is not about accepting wholeheartedly what someone else lays out as facts but the building up of the ability to assess critically facts and figures to reach an informed opinion about how things really happened.

Things are seldom black and white even in history except for (usually) dates of birth and death, wars, treaties and the like. Value systems play a huge role in what is considered to be wrong and right and part of the challenge is to discard values to be objective about what happened.

A true study of history uses facts and figures to ascertain intent and draw conclusions. Many things are simply not cast in stone. In history, most people are not completely bad or completely good – they are human and they make mistakes just like everybody else.

The second question relates to how to keep history objective and free of personal judgment and bias.

We can’t start from a viewpoint that one civilisation is superior to another but must state the facts as best as that can be ascertained and which is in line with historical scholarship, not the whims and fancies of what politicians want their wards to believe.

This is not about propaganda or brainwashing but about history. So let unbiased, fair academics come up with the truth as unvarnished as that can be. But before the curriculum stands, let it be open to the public and to public scrutiny and criticism and correction if necessary.

If the decision to make history a compulsory pass in the SPM is final, then at least properly address these two questions that have been raised so that there can be no question that history will be politically tainted or that it will be retold falsely.

Independent consultant and writer P. Gunasegaram likes this quote from Mark Twain: The very ink with which history is written is merely fluid prejudice.

Question Time By P. GUNASEGARAM

THE national education dialogues that are ongoing have called for the reintroduction of English-medium schools to improve students' command of English as a communication and knowledge tool. The report, "Still seeking views on English schools" (NST, May 8) has the Education Ministry studying the legal implications of reintroducing them.

Parents as the major stakeholders in the education of their children can decide on the school of their choice for their children. The preamble of the Education Act of 1966 states that pupils are to be educated according to the wishes of their parents. Parents, parent- teacher pressure groups and Parents Action Group For Education have been calling for the reintroduction of English-medium schools.

The report, "National Union of the Teaching Profession supports English-medium schools move" (NST, May 9) has the NUTP in favour of bringing back English-medium schools.

There seems to be a strong case for the reintroduction of English-medium schools.

English-medium schools are the answer to arresting the declining standards of the English language in the country. English-medium schools were in existence before the 1970's.

Today our education system has national and national type schools that cater for children whose mother tongue is Malay, Chinese and Tamil.

However, there is a growing minority of Malaysians of diverse ethnic backgrounds whose mother tongue or first language is English. These are the children of the 1960s and 1970s era whose parents were schooled in English-medium schools.

Many of the people of this era regard the English language as their first language and communicate to their children in English. And it is these minority groups that have not been catered to in the present education system. These children are proficient and competent in the English language because the language is widely spoken in their homes by their parents. Many of these children are put in national or national type schools and have difficulty understanding the language of instruction.

Disadvantaged by the language of instruction, some children drop out of school. Many parents have lost confidence in schools because of the medium of instruction. Therefore, it is not surprising to see many parents sending their children to private and international schools which use English.

Though these schools are expensive, their business is booming and such schools are mushrooming and flourishing, especially in Kuala Lumpur.

Many parents in Johor Baru are sending their children to schools in Singapore. For a start, the government can utilise the services of foreign English language teachers from Britain, Australia, Canada and the United States who are based in selected schools nationwide to monitor English-medium schools.

The decision to reinstate English medium schools should rest on the vision, mission and development of individuals and the nation for the information age.

Hopefully, policymakers will look beyond short-term results as a knowledge-based economy can only thrive with the language of knowledge.

TEACHING is more than a noble calling.

For an education system to thrive and produce the kind of future the nation hopes for, this fact needs to be recognised and acted upon accordingly. For far too long, the teacher's contribution to national development has often been blindsided by a focus on economic growth and an emphasis on riding the fast track.

In recent years, given the abundance of grouses, it has become clear that respect and appreciation due to the profession must be restored so that the national education system does not suffer. The announcement by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the promises of 2012 Budget  to teachers are being kept is testimony that the government is listening and responding appropriately to ensure the delivery of quality human capital.

In Malaysia's drive to make the quantum leap to a status that had taken the developed world several centuries, the teaching profession is being given a boost. Firstly, the aim is to make it more economically attractive to the next generation as remuneration packages are revised upwards and workloads streamlined. Secondly, the job should be relieved of time-consuming and soul-destroying drudgery.

Thus, for example, data entry should be clerical and not professional. Time would thereby be released for the core competency of attending to students and pupils, as well as for self-improvement, an area which has become crucial. For example, teachers cannot resign themselves to being less computer literate than their charges, which takes us to the third point: the proposed condition of a university degree for entry into the profession from the lowest level. Accordingly, teaching the higher classes will require even better qualifications.

However, much has been said about students in local universities not having the desired intellectual wherewithal and blame is squarely laid at the door of school teachers. But schoolchildren are products of homes, too. Parents cannot shirk their responsibility.

They must give their children the home environment that would complement the efforts of teachers. Homes and schools should find the right balance so that those who have deigned to prepare young minds will not be left facing an uphill battle.

After all, good teaching is an art and, yes, a good teacher can bring out the best in their charges under most conditions, but the numbers needed nationally cannot but force a reliance on teachers whose teaching methods are mechanical. Nevertheless, if the profession is given due recognition, Teachers Day notwithstanding, even this latter group will be motivated to earn the rewards and esteem given.