This emphatic decision apparently will stay despite an online poll result (updated by 1650 GMT+8; Jul 13 2009) that shows 86% of 81,370 votes goes against the decision. This poll is initiated by none other than one of the strongest supporters of PPSMI, former PM Dr. Mahathir who disappointedly said:

Seems to me like the Government is not listening to the voices of the people. Perhaps a blog poll might enlighten the Government as to the opinions of the people.

This issue has undoubtedly taken a great emotional toll on all key stakeholders: influential lobby groups that momentarily declared victory, confused students, tired parents and teachers, and citizens who are generally concerned about education progress in the country. So is it a decision that reflects on objectivity or political pressure?

Wong Chun Wai, group chief editor of The Star newspaper commented in his personal blog that it is a rare political consensus that unites lobby groups, opposing parties to revert to Malay, Chinese and Tamil in teaching science and mathematics.

So, it's pretty clear that these political and education groups must know what they are talking about, politically, that is.

Twitter is not left out with the ongoing discussion on the decision. @Asohan wryly put it as a political shocker, an unusually rare occasion where an opposition chief will support PM Najib on a divisive issue.

Despite the stress on objectivity by the Education Minister, it will be hard to ignore political sentiments and interests that feature prominently in this issue. As Ibnu Hasyim commented:

Semuanya adalah angkara BN, maka kerajaan BN perlu dihukum kerana sudah membazirkan wang negara, masa dan anak-anak rakyat miskin yang menjadi korban. Hukumlah dengan menolak BN dalam PRU 13 akan datang bermula dengan pilihan raya kecih Manek Urai yang akan diadakan beberapa hari lagi.

National Association of Malaysian Islamic Students (PKPIM) said:

Keputusan itu merupakan satu tafsiran komitmen kerajaan untuk mempertahan dan mendaulatkan bahasa Melayu sebagai bahasa kebangsaan.

There continues to be a challenge to justify the objectivity of the decision. There is a consensus that the government decision is too shorted-sighted and not well-developed to consider the future of students and nation overall.

As the prominent social activist, Marina Mahathir put it:

Sad, because the leadership that we have do not have the spine to stand up to minority interests. Sad, because our children are sacrificed because the BN wants to win one by-election.

When rural schools are not as well equipped as urban ones, is that not to be expected? If you look at performance overall, doesn't that hold true anyway? Why should English be made the excuse for unequal distribution of resources between rural and urban schools? Surely when you see poor results from rural schools, what needs to be done is to improve the teaching in those schools. Not reverse an entire policy and bring urban kids down along with everyone else.

Some commentators on Twitter lamented on the rationality of the decision:

@jay_baharin after 6 yrs +RM4 billion of expenditure they abandon PPSMI easily…my sympathy toward all young students who will be more confused than ever….

@waski69 PPSMI - One small political step for UMNO/BN, one giant leap backward for the future of Malaysia-kind…

There will be a lot of interpretation on whether this is a political decision or an objective decision and only the decision makers will truly know. But what cannot be denied is the fact that Malaysia will need a few more years of experimentation to improve the command of English among students and the methodology in teaching science and mathematics. Sadly, the waiting time adds more uncertainty to the unanswered question of what is really the best practical solution to serve the nation and students. As one confused student aptly put in:

Two words: I'm shocked.

All the Science and Math terms in English, I've learnt and applied them for six years. And now I'll have to go back to square one in Form Four (10^th grade)?

Now one question remains: What now?

Image Source: flickr by albanna83

We may rightly ask why is there still such great resistence 6 years after its implementation? Besides, Ministry of Education has clearly stipulated the objectives of PPSMI in raising future competitiveness of students and the nation overall. Does the intent not warrant collective effort to overcome challenges and obstacles that may be encountered during its progress? The mainstream media has been highlighting the dominant views of various lobby groups, what about the views of neglected key stakeholders - parents and students who will be strongly impacted by the decision?

A group of concerned Malay parents established a platform to lobby for the support of PPSMI:

kita tidak boleh nyatakan bahawa guru kurang kompeten dalam menyampaikan mata pelajaran Sain dan Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris sebagai satu alasan untuk memansuhkan dasar tersebut. […] Jadi biar pun susah untuk kita mendidik anak-anak kita Sains dan Matematik dalam Bahasa Inggeris, kita harus laksanakannya supaya mereka lebih berdaya saing di arena antarabangsa pada masa depan.

Another parent, Nuraina A Samad said:

We all benefited from learning English. So many rural Malays benefited from having a good command of English.

Student Bobby Ong reflected on his personal experience in Chinese medium school:

It took the government such a hard time making English the medium of instruction for Science and Maths in schools and now you want to revert the policy? And your argument is to protect Chinese culture? […] Being in a Chinese environment with Chinese subjects is not good enough to learn Chinese eh? Not all Chinese kids are good in English too, ok? I see so many students from Chinese schools graduating with poor speaking and writing skills.

Noor Ainulfahim, an ethnic Malay student delivered a blunt critique that more time is needed to judge the progress of PPSMI and it should not be construed as neglecting the significance of Malay language:

Memperjuangkan BAHASA MELAYU? […] Are you denying the fact that most science books are in English? […] We are still teaching BAHASA MELAYU in SEJARAH, GEOGRAFI, PENDIDIKAN ISLAM […] dan ini belum termasuk semua subjek elektif […]

However, not all students are fully supportive of PPSMI. Mohamed Idris delivered a stinging attack on English and the illusion of competitiveness and internationalism:

The truth of the matter is that English does not make us international. It can help us know more about English-speaking countries like the US, UK and Australia. It could help us connect with some Davos people who do not have much to tell about their own culture.

John Lee proposed:

What seems likely right now is that the government will switch back to the old policy for primary schools, while maintaining English in secondary schools; I think this is maybe the best compromise we can hope for. […] Ideally, since students have six years of exposure to Malay and English in primary school, they would be able to use either language in secondary school.

And Poobalan, an online social activist supported the move for the Indian community but with a special condition:

Proponents of Tamil as the medium can argue that materials are available in Tamil, and the possibility of those subjects being taught by non-Tamil teachers (less jobs for Indians). However, I think a clause can be included that the teachers of Science and Math must be bilingual so that when necessary the teachers can provide explanation in either Tamil or English.

Parents and students of various ethnic backgrounds highlighted here are fairly supportive of PPSMI, but is it a bias that because they are proficient in English? What about those from rural community who are struggling with English and whose opinions are not represented at all in social media platform? As the core argument revealed from above, it incessantly centers on the debates of ethnic language and cultural preservation, future competitiveness for students and the nation, along with implementation obstacles and recommendations. So the title sums up the dilemma here, does globalization progress can only be attained at the expense of our unique ethnic identity in a multi-ethnic country? Let us anticipate how Malaysia tackles and balances the core of this issue.

Tony Fernandes acknowledges that it is a start that should lead to greater transformation:

The removal of NEP¹ requirements for 27 service sub-sectors represents a great start. […] But I hope more importantly, that the entire domestic economy is reformed. […] My wish is that Datuk Seri Najib does a Margaret Thatcher. At present, there is too much vested interest, conflict and red tape that kill creativity, discourage innovation and provide little incentive for entrepreneurs to start and grow businesses.

M. Bakri Musa offers similar conclusion that it is merely a beginning but not a total solution, he reasons that:

For Najib to have an excellent and comprehensive solution would require him to address the more difficult underlying issue of what prompted the instituting of quotas in the first place […] Ameliorate it and Najib would be able to liberalize not only the whole service sector but also the entire economy, if not every facet of Malaysian life. That would bring his “1Malaysia” aspiration that much closer.

Chua Soi Lek also acknowledges this is a positive move and ethnic Malays should not think their rights have been compromised:

I am sure this will attract more investment and also attract more professionals and technology into the country and hopefully it will be a boost to the service sector. […] The Bumiputra special rights are entrenched in the constitution. Nobody can take that away. So, a review of the NEP should not be construed by some Bumiputra as a challenge to their special rights as this is enshrined in the constitution.

Malaysia-Finance says the move is highly commendable and will attract more foreign direct investment (FDI) to the service sector:

While the country may not see an immediate benefit, the cumulative goodwill will ensure a more competitive landscape for Malaysia in attracting foreign investments.[…] The move is very crucial in moving our reliance on services to at least 60 percent, and which would then lessen our reliance on electronics exports and commodities.

However, not all are in the consensus that this move will lead to greater changes on the existing policies. Tony Pua thinks it is nothing more than official announcement for policies that are already in place and questions its supposedly impact:

Deputy Minister for International Trade and Industry (MITI), Datuk Mukhriz Mahathir has officially confirmed that it's all just hot air, no more, no less. […] Mukhriz not only stated his intent to “defend and promote” the New Economic Policy, he said that the recent liberalization measures announced by Najib was a move to synchronize what was already happening in the service industry. […] So it was all pretty much a public relations sham. These sectors were in reality already unimpeded by ownership restriction constraints. Hence what Najib announced will have very, very little real impact on the industry, if any at all.

Straight Talk confirms this view with this assessment:

I said that some of the initial reactions are too emotional and knee-jerk. Some of these sectors are already quite open even before the liberalization. Take computer and related services as an example, this sub-sector is already quite liberalized since the implementation of MSC² status. […] But as usual, a number of parties, analysts and stakeholders are trumpeting compliments of the PM's move.

So given the level of skepticism and general acknowledgement that more need to be done, Najib will need more time to prove that he is indeed a market reformer.