| A mighty heart |
| By Megha Pai |
| Friday, January 27, 2012 |
Sharjah resident Abdul Mannan Jamaluddin wasn’t exactly rolling in money when he started a free school in his hometown in Bangladesh but, as he says, when your heart is set on doing good, help is never far away. Student strength today: 200 and counting…
It is perhaps much
easier to be giving and charitable when you have a cool six figure in your bank balance and your next seven generations are taken care of (unless, of course, you are the progeny of Ebenezer Scrooge). But starting a free school in your hometown when you are a security guard living on a Dh1, 200 per month salary, is something to marvel about. So when we heard the story of Abdul Mannan Jamaluddin, we knew we had to meet him and hear his story.
 Al Qasba is a well-to-do locality in the plush Buhaira Corniche in Sharjah. Not well-versed with the area and relying mainly on a somewhat malfunctioning GPS (at one point it instructed us to go off the road and drive into the water!), we decided to seek the help of a shopkeeper for directions to Bulbul Apartments, where Abdul is a security guard.
“Oh! You want to meet Abdul!” came the reply. Surprised as we hadn’t mentioned his name, we asked him how he guessed. “He is a bit of a local hero,” the shopkeeper smiled. “After all, how many watchmen do you know who start a free school from their savings?”
 Good point. Following the much more reliable directions of the kindly shopkeeper — no need to jump into the Corniche, we were assured — we reached our destination, passing through the graffiti-riddled by-lanes. Abdul was standing at the gate, dressed in casuals, as it was his day off. He invited us to his office, which also serves as his living room and bedroom and offered us tea. A Bangla channel ran on mute on the television. On a shelf above his bed was a small stack of books in Bengali.
After some casual banter and lovely chitchat and tea, we came down to discussing Abdul’s extraordinary feat. He tells wknd. the story — from being a high school dropout to starting a free school in his native village, Belchura, in Bangladesh, where he has educated 200 children in the last six years.
|
Memaparkan catatan dengan label sekolah. Papar semua catatan
Memaparkan catatan dengan label sekolah. Papar semua catatan
Isnin, Januari 30, 2012
A mighty heart
As a child, I used to dream of becoming a lawyer but I wasn’t able to continue my studies after the tenth grade as my father couldn’t afford it. After my father passed away, the burden of my entire family fell upon my shoulders. I came to the UAE in 1989 at the age of 26. The only job that I could find was as a watchman. Due to my lack of education, I was not able to move up in life. That’s when I decided that I didn’t want the same fate for my next generation.
Every time I saw the excellent lives of the children here in Sharjah, I couldn’t help but wish that the children in my hometown could also have such opportunities. Education is the first step to development. So when I visited home in 2001, I decided to start a free school and I had a few months to do it in before returning to Sharjah.
When you have set your mind on doing good, help is never too far away. One day, I happened to mention my intention to one of the village elders. He very generously offered to donate a piece of land that belonged to his family. Amazed at how easily the situation was resolved, I got cracking on building the school.
The elder who had donated the land hadn’t asked all the family members before making the decision. Out of spite, the family members demolished the school building and there was nothing that I could do. I was back to square one.
After the villagers had had tea and snacks, I told them that I had bought land where I intended to build the school and also told them that I didn’t expect them to contribute monetarily. However, I was surprised when a few of them offered whatever they could. Some gave money, while others gave sacks of cement, and some others simply put in hours of labour for the construction.
Since we started in 2005, we have been adding one grade to the school every year. The number of students has grown from 70 to 200. This year we begin Grade 7. My aim is to see that the school expands all the way to Grade 12. Also, I intend to buy a bus for the school so the children from the village and the surrounding villages can be fetched easily. The day we have 100 per cent literacy in my village, I will have achieved my purpose.
Isnin, Januari 16, 2012
Integrasi dalam pengetahuan
Fikrah:
Apakah yang dikatakan sebagai 'integrasi pengetahuan' (integration of knowledge)?
a) belajar ilmu fardhu kifayah pada waktu persekolahan rasmi, kemudian belajar ilmu fardhu ain pada waktu petang?
b) belajar ilmu fardhu kifayah dan ilmu fardhu ain pada waktu persekolahan rasmi?
c) belajar ilmu fardhu kifayah diserapkan ilmu fardhu ain pada waktu yang sama?
Dalam sistem pendidikan KBSM hari ini, pelajaran agama Islam disisipkan dalam satu mata pelajaran yang wajib diambil oleh semua murid beragama Islam iaitu subjek 'Pendidikan Agama Islam' (PI). Subjek ini diletak dalam linear yang sama dengan subjek lain, seperti Matematik, sains, Bahasa dan lain-lain. Ini termasuk masa pengajaran dan pembelajaran (P&P yang telah ditentukan dalam sistem, iaitu 5 waktu seminggu.
Sekiranya P&P PI telah dijalankan di sekolah, maka apa perlunya lagi murid untuk hadir ke sekolah agama petang (KAFA) untuk mempelajari lagi tentang ilmu fardhu ain? Antara sebab yang sering diterima adalah masa pembelajaran di sekolah pagi (SK) tidak mencukupi bagi membina kualiti murid dalam pengisian rohani mereka. Tidak salah sepenuhnya. (Ada betulnya juga). Yang betulnya, masa diperuntukkan untuk fardhu ain seharusnya melebihi keseluruhan ilmu fardhu kifayah atau sekurang-kurangnya menyamai keseluruhan waktu p&p tersebut. Yang salahnya, pembelajaran sebegini tidak menepati konsep integrasi pengetahuan.
Pada hari ini, umat Islam terperangkap dalam sistem sekular, iaitu sistem yang memecah-mecahkan sistem pengetahuan dan pengamalan. Harus ditegaskan, semua Ilmu adalah dari Allah. Sama ada ilmu fardhu kifayah, mahupun ilmu fardhu ain. (Ilmu tadbir alam, dan ilmu tadbir insan) Dalam ilmu tadbir alam, perlu diserapkan aplikasi Islami untuk melihat dan mengenal Tuhan, dan begitu juga dalam ilmu tadbir insan, perlu diserapkan aplikasi Islami untuk melihat dan mentadbir alam. Perhubungan antara kedua-duanya perlu seiring dan tidak harus dipisah-pisahkan. Ini konsep sebenar pengintegrasian pengetahuan dalam kerangka Islamisasi pengetahuan (Islamization of knowledge)
Seorang kanak-kanak perlu melalui alam kanak-kanak, dan kurikulum untuk mereka perlu memahami fitrah manusia (nature of human being). Ini adalah sangat penting dan perlu diperbetulkan. Model kurikulum sebegini perlu dibentuk. Sememangnya perlu digali diceruk mana kurikulum yang menepati ciri ini?
model alternatif:
Selasa, Disember 20, 2011
Leave teachers alone
Leave teachers alone!
‘Educate! … but first, we must educate the educators.’ - Frederich Nietsche
'Teach your children according to the (changing) times they live in.' - Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
My weekend was spent thinking about poverty and education, and the shape of Malaysian education to come, particularly as we await maybe yet another new educational blueprint to go public, preferably after the 13th general election, depending on who wins.
Will our children become great thinkers and good and tolerant Malaysians? Or will they become good labourers in the international labour system and continue to be more sophisticated racists?
This is how powerful education is as a contested terrain.
Having been an educator and a student of transcultural philosophies for almost two decades, I find the practice of educating constantly shifting whereas its core remains stable.
'Teach your children according to the (changing) times they live in.' - Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
My weekend was spent thinking about poverty and education, and the shape of Malaysian education to come, particularly as we await maybe yet another new educational blueprint to go public, preferably after the 13th general election, depending on who wins.
Will our children become great thinkers and good and tolerant Malaysians? Or will they become good labourers in the international labour system and continue to be more sophisticated racists?
This is how powerful education is as a contested terrain.
Having been an educator and a student of transcultural philosophies for almost two decades, I find the practice of educating constantly shifting whereas its core remains stable.
After teaching close to 50 courses (in the field of education, politics, civilisation, arts and humanities, philosophy, language, international relations, American history and cultural studies) and developing more than 20 graduate courses, I am still learning what Malaysia is trying to do with its educational system.
Today, I have a perspective to share with its education minister and with the thousands of dedicated teachers. I am fortunate to have practised the gentle profession of teaching in two different worlds - Malaysia and the US.
My analysis of Malaysian education is that we seem to borrow too much without thinking, and like the late 1990s Smart Schools project, we seem to achieve many different types of successful failures in our educational reform effort.
Today, I have a perspective to share with its education minister and with the thousands of dedicated teachers. I am fortunate to have practised the gentle profession of teaching in two different worlds - Malaysia and the US.My analysis of Malaysian education is that we seem to borrow too much without thinking, and like the late 1990s Smart Schools project, we seem to achieve many different types of successful failures in our educational reform effort.
Teachers, the labour force in the world of knowledge capitalism, become subdued, silent, and silenced followers of the whims and fancies of state mandates. We love hype more than substance. We love intoxicating ourselves with buzzwords. We bully our teachers into working hard and not allowing them time to grow and become ‘reflective teachers’.
What if we teach teachers to empower themselves by becoming good and creative curriculum designers? What if we give them a less teaching load, less students, less bureaucracy, less political preaching and less time to prepare for school visits by wakil rakyat and Yang Berhormat who may not have any sense of what the daily toil in a classroom is like?
What if we teach teachers to empower themselves by becoming good and creative curriculum designers? What if we give them a less teaching load, less students, less bureaucracy, less political preaching and less time to prepare for school visits by wakil rakyat and Yang Berhormat who may not have any sense of what the daily toil in a classroom is like?
What if we stop wasting their time on non-teaching matters and let them grow as teachers? When teachers are free from these mental imprisonments, they can then become liberators of our children's imagination.
What if we try all these? Miracles can happen in our classrooms, I believe.
Over the weekend, I picked up an important book on curriculum and education, Conelly and Clandin's ‘Teachers as Curriculum Planners’, a text for my reading at Columbia University back in my doctoral days. As I finished reading it, I asked this question: ‘When will our teachers become masters of their own destiny, helping children become makers of their own history?’
The book provides perspectives which are not entirely new to teachers involved especially in the ‘Whole Language’ approach to teaching. Tools such as journal writing, biography, picturing and document analysis are among those which have been in use in Language Arts in addition to a range of other tools in the domain of creative movement, reading, writing, media and speaking which are personalistic in nature.
The authors have essentially tried to contextualise the principles and strategies within the field of emerging curricular practice partially using the rhetoric of postmodernism. Refreshing, perhaps, is the authors' Gestalt and transcendental analytic approach to curriculum planning they call the ‘rediscovering of curricular meaning’, framed to include the learner, teacher, subject matter and the milieu.
The strength of the work lies in the comprehensive range of suggestions on how to create an inclusionary and meaningful approach to such a rediscovering which in turn would scaffold learners' construction of knowledge. It is thus constructivistic in approach permeating all levels - from administrators to learners.
I find the idea relevant to our realisation of the terms ‘situated cognition’ wherein teachers are also required to define their philosophy and exercise their reflective ability so that they and the learners are together subjectivity knowledge; echoing the Lebanese poet Kahlil Gibran's idea that ‘... your children are not yours… they come out of you but not of you’ and ‘… children are like arrows of which you are the bow which launch them’ and in Socrates' idea of the innateness of knowledge in the human being.
Teachers as meaning-makers
Teachers, in this postmodernist context, are ones who live in a shared milieu but do not necessarily claim monopoly to knowledge, for in Arthur C Clarke's words, ‘the future is a different world … they do things differently’.
What if we try all these? Miracles can happen in our classrooms, I believe.
Over the weekend, I picked up an important book on curriculum and education, Conelly and Clandin's ‘Teachers as Curriculum Planners’, a text for my reading at Columbia University back in my doctoral days. As I finished reading it, I asked this question: ‘When will our teachers become masters of their own destiny, helping children become makers of their own history?’
The book provides perspectives which are not entirely new to teachers involved especially in the ‘Whole Language’ approach to teaching. Tools such as journal writing, biography, picturing and document analysis are among those which have been in use in Language Arts in addition to a range of other tools in the domain of creative movement, reading, writing, media and speaking which are personalistic in nature.
The authors have essentially tried to contextualise the principles and strategies within the field of emerging curricular practice partially using the rhetoric of postmodernism. Refreshing, perhaps, is the authors' Gestalt and transcendental analytic approach to curriculum planning they call the ‘rediscovering of curricular meaning’, framed to include the learner, teacher, subject matter and the milieu.
The strength of the work lies in the comprehensive range of suggestions on how to create an inclusionary and meaningful approach to such a rediscovering which in turn would scaffold learners' construction of knowledge. It is thus constructivistic in approach permeating all levels - from administrators to learners.
I find the idea relevant to our realisation of the terms ‘situated cognition’ wherein teachers are also required to define their philosophy and exercise their reflective ability so that they and the learners are together subjectivity knowledge; echoing the Lebanese poet Kahlil Gibran's idea that ‘... your children are not yours… they come out of you but not of you’ and ‘… children are like arrows of which you are the bow which launch them’ and in Socrates' idea of the innateness of knowledge in the human being.
Teachers as meaning-makers
Teachers, in this postmodernist context, are ones who live in a shared milieu but do not necessarily claim monopoly to knowledge, for in Arthur C Clarke's words, ‘the future is a different world … they do things differently’.
For learners, we are preparing them for a future which, in fact, is a present consisting of an archived past. Through apprenticeship and guided participation, learners appropriate knowledge, skill and understanding of ‘situations’ via scaffolds erected by teachers. Learning then becomes situated, dynamic and transformative.Reading the underlying assumptions of Conelly and Clandin's work, I could sense a strong undercurrent of complexity and chaos theory, anti-foundationalism, subaltern narratives and reflexivity and futurism as strands. If I could envision the results of many decades of mass deployment of their strategies in all schools, something such as below would develop:
State-mandated curriculum would be transformed in character; from one of ‘rock logic’ to one of ‘water logic’ in nature in which fluidity in growth and shifting grounds in its parameters will be the feature.
Within the disciplines, knowledge will be organic, mutative, and morphic, much more than inter-disciplined. An analogy of this organic-mutative-morphic nature of knowledge construction, deconstruction, and reconstruction (the ‘Brahma-Shiva-Vishnu’ nature of things in Hindu philosophy) would be the three-dimensional pattern created out of Artificial Intelligence - generated patterns derived out of mathematical equations as in the Mandelbrott set manifested within the paradigm of Chaos and Complexity theories.
The water logic transformation as such can give birth to (Thomas) Kuhnian paradigm shifts, which would be characteristic of integrative, comprehensive and complex systems based upon the principles of ‘perpetual transitions’.
Scenarios of change
Since state-mandated curriculum legitimises the state and hegemonises over the minds of those being schooled (echoing the claims of Theodore Adorno and Antonio Gramsci), decades of ‘water logic’ transformation of bodies of knowledge (especially in the area of ‘soft ideological sciences’ such as social studies and history) can soften the state and pave the way for its dissolution, echoing Thomas Kuhn's idea that paradigms will shift when contradictions can no longer be contained. Just as capitalism within a particular nation can no longer carry its own weight and therefore had to transform into imperialism.
Such a dissolution of the postmodern state can then set the stage for peaceful revolutions which can give rise to the leadership of the techno-mystics as such dreamed of by Socrates and Plato who saw the beauty of the republic governed by philosopher-rulers.
Perhaps the nature of world politics will change if the most powerful nations on the face of our Spaceship Earth are governed by techno-mystics who will then spread the message of goodwill through the use of technology towards moral ends and through the sharing of creative products in altruistic ways.
Wouldn't there be beauty in looking at a perfect world, one that would be ruled by those who have understood the ancient Persian maxim, ‘I wept when I had no shoes until I saw a man with no feet’?
Managers of virtue (curriculum implementers, principals, teachers, curriculum committees) will become de-centered and ‘empowered by being dis-empowered’ by the postmodern possibility of personalistic interpretation of knowledge constructs while freedom will exist for the individual to make his and her history to demystify power and to deconstruct invented realities.
Managers of virtue (curriculum implementers, principals, teachers, curriculum committees) will become de-centered and ‘empowered by being dis-empowered’ by the postmodern possibility of personalistic interpretation of knowledge constructs while freedom will exist for the individual to make his and her history to demystify power and to deconstruct invented realities.
All these can help create a positive atomisation of society as a critical, creative, futuristic and life-long learning organic entity. Everyone can then find their own meaning for living and truth within themselves and achieve wisdom in their own lifetimes.
The ‘McDonaldnised’ idea of state-legitimated schooling for economic development and social advancement can be transformed into the notion of learning as living and living as learning with the ‘truth always out there, within and everywhere’.
Perhaps the notion of 'Trust no ideology’ (with the greatest apologies to the makers of ‘The X-Files’!) can be the dominant idea of the age. Such comments as above thus reflect the link between the ideas proposed in Conelley and Clandin's work and the possibilities which can emerge if we look at these from speculative philosophical and futuristic perspectives.
A teacher's vision
I have provided a scenario based upon the principles of futurism (trend analysis/scenario- building) from which ideas when extrapolated can perhaps predict changes.
Just as the postmodern perspective can provide us with tools to critically analyse modernity and modernism, Connelly's and Clandin's suggestions - which are postmodern in character - can provide educators with the means to build scenarios of living, learning and creating which must be made more and more humane.
The idea of growth, then, can be looked at not necessarily as one spiraling upwards and acquiring more and becoming material in the process but would mean to live, to simply live and to continually ask the ontological, epistemological and axiological questions of living. In short, to reflect upon Kung Fu Tze, for we may then continue to live with questions and to ask the ones which are simple.
For, echoing Socrates, aren't the simplest questions the most profound?
Teachers unite - you do not have anything to lose except your chains of boredom and dying creativity.
The ‘McDonaldnised’ idea of state-legitimated schooling for economic development and social advancement can be transformed into the notion of learning as living and living as learning with the ‘truth always out there, within and everywhere’.
Perhaps the notion of 'Trust no ideology’ (with the greatest apologies to the makers of ‘The X-Files’!) can be the dominant idea of the age. Such comments as above thus reflect the link between the ideas proposed in Conelley and Clandin's work and the possibilities which can emerge if we look at these from speculative philosophical and futuristic perspectives.
A teacher's vision
I have provided a scenario based upon the principles of futurism (trend analysis/scenario- building) from which ideas when extrapolated can perhaps predict changes.
Just as the postmodern perspective can provide us with tools to critically analyse modernity and modernism, Connelly's and Clandin's suggestions - which are postmodern in character - can provide educators with the means to build scenarios of living, learning and creating which must be made more and more humane.The idea of growth, then, can be looked at not necessarily as one spiraling upwards and acquiring more and becoming material in the process but would mean to live, to simply live and to continually ask the ontological, epistemological and axiological questions of living. In short, to reflect upon Kung Fu Tze, for we may then continue to live with questions and to ask the ones which are simple.
For, echoing Socrates, aren't the simplest questions the most profound?
Teachers unite - you do not have anything to lose except your chains of boredom and dying creativity.
DR AZLY RAHMAN, who was born in Singapore and grew up in Johor Baru, holds a Columbia University (New York) doctorate in International Education Development and Master’s degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies and Communication. He has taught more than 40 courses in six different departments and has written more than 300 analyses on Malaysia. His teaching experience spans Malaysia and the United States, over a wide range of subjects from elementary to graduate education. He currently resides in the United States.
(Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/columns/184481 )
Jumaat, November 25, 2011
Isnin, November 21, 2011
Let a Root remains as a Root: Issue on PPSMI
Tulisan ini dibuat bagi menjawab persoalan PPSMI yang sehingga ke hari ini, masih banyak orang keliru apa tujuan dasar ini diketengahkan. Secara tuntas, saya mengulas kenapa tujuan yang salah akan mengelirukan; baik dari aspek falsafah dan pelaksanaan; dan sudah tentu tidak akan mencapai kebenaran dan kejayaan!
Khamis, November 17, 2011
PPSMI lagi - Q&A with DPM (2009)
Q&A with Tan Sri Muhyidin Yassin on PPSMI issues
July 9, 2009
2012 deadline on Science and Maths to cushion impact
Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin answers questions related to the reversal in the Teaching of Mathematics and Science in English (PPSMI) policy during a press conference Wednesday.
Question: You were saying that it will come into effect in 2012 and the implementation will be conducted in stages. However, you say that changes would not involve Form 6 and matriculation. Does this mean the extension of English learning hours will come into effect immediately for Form 6 and matriculation?
Muhyiddin: We want to have a soft landing. When we announced today this new decision, that soft landing only means we will only begin at 2012. At the same time it allow us to make all the necessary preparations. As I have announced just now, the number of teachers to be recruited and then the new sort of co-curriculum books we need to introduce to support. This all takes time. I do believe within the time frame we should be able to fufill the requirement. Regards to matriculation and the STPM, the ministry and of course the Cabinet endorsed that they should remain as it is. As you move that way, there is already a lot of English that has been taught at that level. At the same time, we believe that at the stage they reached Form 5, there is very basic strength in terms of command of Bahasa Malaysia. So when you reach that stage of Form 6 or matriculation, you have a strong command of both. But of course we propose to strengthen it further by adding the number of hours at the matriculation and STPM level. That means more time would be given to increase their proficiency and command of the English language.
Q: Tan Sri, with the new decision made by the Education Ministry, is this not in conflict with the aspirations of former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) who introduced the PPSMI?
A: Yes, I had the opportunity to give a briefing at Tun’s residence along with the director-general and my senior officers. (We) respect that Tun is the initiator of PPSMI and we had a long briefing which stretched more than three hours. Everything was explained. My officers and I had shown what is the success or problems faced by the involved parties in making his vision a success if Science and Maths could be taught in English. So we presented everything and it was then we could inform (him) of the shortcomings our people faced that made it difficult for us to continue with the PPSMI that he proposed. And especially, we have informed (him) of the primary and secondary school standards - which had quite a huge gap and the achievement of students in national schools compared to vernacular schools ie Chinese and Tamil schools. Secondly, the capabilities of the teachers in carrying this out and as I have said earlier, we face a problem because a huge portion of our teachers are not fluent in English....if we continue with it, we are worried of the consequences towards learning. The reasoning is quite clear. It is not that good. Tun has accepted our view. In addition, Tun has also stressed why he proposed the PPSMI. Among (the reasons) is to ensure that Malaysians would really master English as one of the main languages in the world and we want all Malaysians to have the ability to master dual languages which is our national language and English. I explained to him that this is also our aspiration and this is why it is time for me to make the decision today. The Cabinet has approved - we have explained - not only why we are not continuing with PPSMI but more importantly, what are the steps taken to ensure that the status of Bahasa Malaysia is strengthened. The example that we gave Tun was that the periods for teaching English would be increased in time and we would also increase the number of experienced English teachers. Just now, I mentioned 13,000 teachers that we have to recruit. It is a Government commitment towards that. On top of that, Tun also gave his point of view on where we should apply ICT, simple interactive computers that can be used by the students to help them master English. He gave a few suggestions. Those are suggestions which we accept. As I have said earlier, one of the supports we would create is language labs and in addition, with Tun’s suggestions, we would also use technology aid during lessons. The suggestion to use computers to aid the teaching of English we would also take into consideration. And Tun has personally told us that whoever he meets (on that matter), he would bring the relevant parties to us and we are prepared to accept them. Basically, after I have informed that, as it was witnessed by my officers Tun listened and accepted reality eventhough there were a few other suggestions that he aired and that is not a problem to us. We accept. Especially on the matter of mastering English. He gave a lot of examples. So we accept. In China, nearly 200 million of its people are making the effort to learn English. They want to be experts (in English). China’s education system is still based on Mandarin. Because they want to be experts, they have added and increased the learning time for English. And this is what we want to implement in Malaysia and I have mentioned several additional initiatives that we would do such as a fixed English language day which we would have in national schools. During school holidays we could organise summer camps for mastering English... maybe for a week or so. What is important is the syllabus and time table that I have said earlier which can be said not only strengthens but increases the time to nearly 100%. It is the increase of time on top of the current time table that made him see my explanation and made Tun accept the status.
Q: Was the PPSMI a complete failure? A: Well, I wouldn’t say that it is a complete failure. It has not achieved the desired objective. The thing is that the students that got through this system acquired knowledge. It is not a total failure but it is a slow process to achieve even what this PPSMI was supposed to originally achieve. We can continue with it as an option for example but it would take you another 10 to 15 years. By that time I think many things have happened which might not help the student but as far as the education system is concerned - it is not good for us.
Q: PPSMI wasn’t given enough time to come to fruition. A: Well, there were some proposals that it (today's decision) should be made earlier. Some three years ago there was a move to remove it but I think that was a bit premature. So now we have gone through one complete cycle - one cycle. So one exercise to review is correct because we have seen and been able to evaluate the one cycle. What is the position? We have been able to find out this position. So when we saw we cannot allow it for another six more years or five more years? Yes we can but what will be the reprecussion to the students concerned? Will they improve. We are not sure because there are a lot of things we believe are not in that position. Not in the position to deal with the situation of the sort. So the option is to look at what we need. I think parents in Malaysia, I am a parent and would like to see my child or boys and girls have a strong command of English. That is the thinking of all Malaysians. If that is the case, what will be the best modus operandi, the approach we do it? Is it through learning of Maths and Science through English or strengthening the learning of English itself? So we believe this is the better way. Strengthening by way of teaching and learning in English. Getting the right staff and support system. Right technology. Good teachers. Added incentive, added hours. So as you can see from what we have announced, I would believe it put us, our children in a much better position and I did also mentioned that we need to make sure that at the early formative years from Standard One to Standard Six, the six years, the early part when they go to school we must send the best teachers especially in English. They should have within one or two years better command of English. They don’t have to wait for 15 years. If you can see how families that go to kindergarden that has English as the means of instruction, we can see how they fare better within a shorter period of time. So the time that we make this sort of decision to reinforce the learning of English I think it is an appropriate time.
Q: Does this mean that English would become a compulsory subject in SPM? A: That is something which we have to look at because I don’t think it is a right time today to say that we’re moving, enforcing. But as you know when I mooted this idea the response from Malaysians from many vested groups and NGOs, is tremendous. They want to see this implemented as soon as possible, a pass in English or something compulsory before you get a certificate but... I think it will come to a correct time when we all have to make a decision on that later on. If we believe that this system that we are putting into place beginning 2012 will put us in a better state then maybe it is also the right time to make that sort of pass in English as compulsory, that will be the next thing we have to look at. The question is a lot of people think and agree but they say I want you to make sure there are enough teachers, make sure the system is good before enforcing. So we have to look into it.
Q: Six years have gone, do you think the students involved in this circle of time have become guinea pigs because of this decision? A: They are not. They are still humans (laughter from reporters). One, my son is in school and I don’t see him change. I’m talking about improving the command of English that is basically what the reason PPSMI is all about. It’s about learning Maths and Science through English and as far as knowledge is concerned I don’t think we compromise too much. In terms of proficiency of English it hasn’t seen any marked improvement. It is very nominal in nature.
Q: Six years for the government to realise? It’s a very long time. A: Yes, yes we realised it earlier. You must understand the system. We realised it earlier. But at that stage if we start changing, it is too premature. We haven’t got a full cycle, half way through. Today we learn in English and next instant Bahasa Malaysia. If you are in that state you become confused. So the Government is reasonable. To make sure you complete the whole thing. And then we have got a much fairer picture of what decision to make. It must be a correct decision. We cannot make another decision which might lead to people saying, you review it again. I don’t think that is fair. So that’s why we need to take a bit of time. Even when I came to the ministry, people say tomorrow you have to change it. No, I said I’ll take two or three months and I am not making a decision to just stop PPSMI. I am making an option on what I call a new deal for the Malaysian education system. I’m basically reinforcing, strengthening of English and at the same time keep Bahasa Malaysia’s prestige.
Q: What about those who are involved in the creating/printing of text books, especially the English ones? A: I think that maybe a portion of it can still be used because we have the dual language state. Secondly, when we introduced this, we also need to print new books in English. For example, additional books on Bahasa Malaysia tatabahasa or grammar for English, the literature component and maybe we would need novels. We might need to print (more books) for literature to supply to the schools. Whatever it may be, whatever we need to use, we would use.
Q: Will the announcement boost (Barisan Nasional) in the Manek Urai by-election? A: This decision is not political (laughter). I must say that. I do not take this opportunity to gain political mileage. I want to say that it is not a consideration made based on Manek Urai. What is Manek Urai to the question of the people and the country’s future. (laughter from the crowd). What is important is that Barisan Nasional will win in Manek Urai, Insya-Allah. But this is about our children’s future, so our decision is made based on the objective and not political consideration. I want to explain this although the opposition will make their own judgement. The root of the issue is that this was made based on an objective consideration based on the empirical and scientific results gathered from specific studies. Based on this principle, this is what we are doing, not political consideration although people say you need political will to make a decision but that is not the main criteria, it is being view from the context of necessity.
Q: Billions of ringgit has been spent? A: Yes, if we have to continue, we will spend another billion ringgit. Correct, Whatever it is in our expenditure system, nothing is free. But in terms of expenditure, we do not want a system that is not effective to continue. It is not effective and did not give the impact. Spending is one issue, but if our goal is not achieved, this is double jeopardy. It is better we take one brave step and make the decision. What we have spent has been spent, but not all are burnt because the computers can still be used. We will modify and instal new software to further strength our support system that we used through ICT. So the question of spending, but whatever decision we make and by making the changes, we also spent money. It is not that no cost is involved in the changes.
Q: The rational in the use of vernacular languages in SJKC and SJKT over Bahasa Malaysia. Can you tell why these schools are allowed to use the vernacular languages and not BM? A: BM is for the students who understand at national schools. According to a Unesco research, children pick up knowledge easier via the mother-tougue and that is why we have the advantage although BM is our national language but we did not restrict the use of Chinese and Tamil. For these students, to use English in Maths and Science, they understand but not as well as when both the subjects are taught in their mother-tongue. A majority of the rural students are Malays and they would understand better when the two subjects are taught in Malay. That is why we made such a decision because it is proven in studies done all over the world. So I think Malaysia is not excluded from this fact.
Q: By taking the stand to teach Tamil and Chinese in the primary schools, does it help Malaysians to master English? A: This can be debated lah (laughter) but this system has been in existence. We are not discussing this matter today. Eventhough we have stated officialy that Bahasa Malaysia is our unity language, the system that we use is national schools and vernacular schools. So I do not want to turn it into a polemic matter but the root of the issue is that we have made a decision on matters of learning.
Q: Does this mean that Science and Maths in IPTA reverts to Bahasa Malaysia? A: I do not think so. They will remain. We are not talking about the higher education system.
Q: There was a change in the system following PPSMI in 2003. A: Form 6 still maintains whatever medium it uses now, which is English. And when Form 6 students enter university, they will continue to use whatever language they used in Form 6 and matriculation. So we do not need to do any changes or amendments. It means, when they reached that level, I believe the students have already possessed 11 years of Bahasa Malaysia and in addition to programmes to maintain the prestige of Bahasa Malaysia, their command of language would even be stronger. That student then has a choice to pick whichever language he wants. If he wants to use English, he would then continue using English. So when our children reach university level with basic Bahasa Malaysia, he still can use English in university.
Q: (Is it) up to the IPTA to decide? A: I think the IPTA would not make any changes in whatever policy they have. It will remain.
Q: Will you have a shortage of teachers just like in PPSMI? A: Well, for this purpose we have mentioned more than 13,000 that needs to be recruited. That’s why we need time and we have mentioned the four sources that the teachers will be recruited. They must be fully qualified. So I hope with the decision we made today, endorsed by the Cabinet, and of course whwere the Ministry of Finance is concerned, to fund the increased manpower. Then we should have the numbers we require.
Why PPSMI is abolished
[Yang berikut ialah penyataan media Bahagian Komunikasi Korporat Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia terhadap penyataan media PAGE (Parent Action of Group for Education) tentang PPSMI (The STAR
Wednesday October 5, 2011)
Why PPSMI is abolished
WE refer to the letter “Say ‘Yes to PPSMI’” (The Star, Oct 3) by Tunku Munawirah Putra, honorary secretary of Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE).
The author claimed that the Government was ill-advised when it decided to abolish PPSMI in 2009.
As a result, national schools are now not the school of choice as many parents prefer to enrol their children in Chinese and private schools. These remarks are mere conjecture.
We would like to clarify that the decision to abolish PPSMI was done after careful deliberations.
The Ministry consulted various stakeholders and conducted in-depth studies on the effectiveness of PPSMI and its impact on student learning before scrapping the flawed policy.
We found that during the implementation of PPSMI only 4% of Mathematics and Science teachers used 90% or more of English in the teaching and learning of the two subjects.
A majority of them used a mixture of Bahasa Malaysia and English. More often than not, the teachers had to switch to Bahasa Malaysia in their teaching because students could not understand their lessons in English.
A study conducted by a group of educationists from the Universiti Perguruan Sultan Idris (UPSI) revealed that 70% of Form Two students found it difficult to learn Mathematics and Science in English.
Another study done by a Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) professor concluded that PPSMI hampered students’ ability to understand Mathematics and Science concepts, hence resulting in their poor performance in the two subjects.
The Education Ministry also received numerous views from experts, non-governmental organisations and concerned individuals about the impact of PPSMI on student learning.
In the main, we found that students who had poor command of English were at the receiving end of PPSMI. They could not acquire the knowledge of Mathematics and Science as they were not proficient in the language that the two subjects were taught.
We estimated that about 500,000 students ‘fell victim’ to PPSMI each year. Obviously, it is gross injustice to these students if we decide to continue with the policy.
Only students with good command of English benefited from PPSMI. We found that these students also performed well in other subjects that are taught in Bahasa Malaysia, indicating that they will have no problem learning Mathematics and Science in Bahasa Malaysia.
After careful deliberations, the Education Ministry decided that the teaching and learning of Mathematics and Science should be conducted in Bahasa Malaysia in national schools and in vernacular languages in the Chinese and Tamil national-type primary schools.
This decision is in line with the position taken by Unesco that the mother tongue is the best medium of instruction in schools.
Thus, the claim made by Tunku Munawirah that the Government was ill-advised when it made the decision to abolish PPSMI is baseless.
She also made a gross factual error by implying that many parents prefer to enrol their children in national-type Chinese schools due to the abolition of PPSMI. This argument is not supported by fact.
The national-type Chinese schools have been offering the two subjects in Mandarin during the implementation of PPSMI, with additional hours of teaching and learning of the two subjects in English.
With the abolition of PPSMI, the national-type Chinese schools will offer the two subjects in Mandarin. Private schools which use the national curriculum will offer the two subjects in Bahasa Malaysia.
We could not agree with the author that PPSMI is the only way forward for education in Malaysia should we want to create quality workforce and achieve high-income nation status.
This argument ignores the fact that the current generation of scientists, technocrats, lawyers, accountants and other professionals are the product of our National Education System where Bahasa Malaysia is the medium of instruction in schools.
For many decades, Bahasa Malaysia has been our national language and the language of knowledge. It has proven to be an effective medium of instruction in the national schools.
We, however, concur with the author that Malaysia must produce top grade workers who will be able to compete in the globalised world.
And for this reason, our country needs a population that is competent in English.
In relation to this, the Education Ministry has taken comprehensive measures to improve our students’ command of English through the Strengthening English Language (MBI) policy.
We are improving the methods of teaching and learning of English in schools, increasing English hours and hiring quality English teachers, including from abroad, to help our students be proficient in English.
We believe that there are many ways to improve English ability among our students and we are working very hard to realise this objective.
What we need is the support of all parents to help us enhance the quality of our education and improve student learning.
CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS UNIT,
Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Wednesday October 5, 2011)
Why PPSMI is abolished
WE refer to the letter “Say ‘Yes to PPSMI’” (The Star, Oct 3) by Tunku Munawirah Putra, honorary secretary of Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE).
The author claimed that the Government was ill-advised when it decided to abolish PPSMI in 2009.
As a result, national schools are now not the school of choice as many parents prefer to enrol their children in Chinese and private schools. These remarks are mere conjecture.
We would like to clarify that the decision to abolish PPSMI was done after careful deliberations.
The Ministry consulted various stakeholders and conducted in-depth studies on the effectiveness of PPSMI and its impact on student learning before scrapping the flawed policy.
We found that during the implementation of PPSMI only 4% of Mathematics and Science teachers used 90% or more of English in the teaching and learning of the two subjects.
A majority of them used a mixture of Bahasa Malaysia and English. More often than not, the teachers had to switch to Bahasa Malaysia in their teaching because students could not understand their lessons in English.
A study conducted by a group of educationists from the Universiti Perguruan Sultan Idris (UPSI) revealed that 70% of Form Two students found it difficult to learn Mathematics and Science in English.
Another study done by a Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) professor concluded that PPSMI hampered students’ ability to understand Mathematics and Science concepts, hence resulting in their poor performance in the two subjects.
The Education Ministry also received numerous views from experts, non-governmental organisations and concerned individuals about the impact of PPSMI on student learning.
In the main, we found that students who had poor command of English were at the receiving end of PPSMI. They could not acquire the knowledge of Mathematics and Science as they were not proficient in the language that the two subjects were taught.
We estimated that about 500,000 students ‘fell victim’ to PPSMI each year. Obviously, it is gross injustice to these students if we decide to continue with the policy.
Only students with good command of English benefited from PPSMI. We found that these students also performed well in other subjects that are taught in Bahasa Malaysia, indicating that they will have no problem learning Mathematics and Science in Bahasa Malaysia.
After careful deliberations, the Education Ministry decided that the teaching and learning of Mathematics and Science should be conducted in Bahasa Malaysia in national schools and in vernacular languages in the Chinese and Tamil national-type primary schools.
This decision is in line with the position taken by Unesco that the mother tongue is the best medium of instruction in schools.
Thus, the claim made by Tunku Munawirah that the Government was ill-advised when it made the decision to abolish PPSMI is baseless.
She also made a gross factual error by implying that many parents prefer to enrol their children in national-type Chinese schools due to the abolition of PPSMI. This argument is not supported by fact.
The national-type Chinese schools have been offering the two subjects in Mandarin during the implementation of PPSMI, with additional hours of teaching and learning of the two subjects in English.
With the abolition of PPSMI, the national-type Chinese schools will offer the two subjects in Mandarin. Private schools which use the national curriculum will offer the two subjects in Bahasa Malaysia.
We could not agree with the author that PPSMI is the only way forward for education in Malaysia should we want to create quality workforce and achieve high-income nation status.
This argument ignores the fact that the current generation of scientists, technocrats, lawyers, accountants and other professionals are the product of our National Education System where Bahasa Malaysia is the medium of instruction in schools.
For many decades, Bahasa Malaysia has been our national language and the language of knowledge. It has proven to be an effective medium of instruction in the national schools.
We, however, concur with the author that Malaysia must produce top grade workers who will be able to compete in the globalised world.
And for this reason, our country needs a population that is competent in English.
In relation to this, the Education Ministry has taken comprehensive measures to improve our students’ command of English through the Strengthening English Language (MBI) policy.
We are improving the methods of teaching and learning of English in schools, increasing English hours and hiring quality English teachers, including from abroad, to help our students be proficient in English.
We believe that there are many ways to improve English ability among our students and we are working very hard to realise this objective.
What we need is the support of all parents to help us enhance the quality of our education and improve student learning.
CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS UNIT,
Ministry of Education Malaysia.
Jumaat, November 11, 2011
Selasa, November 01, 2011
Kenapa kami bantah PPSMI
Artikel ini telah diterbitkan pada 20/3/2009 di sini.
Rasanya, masih ramai yang tidak jelas dan perlukan pencerahan semula...
< Ini bagi menjawab pihak yang mendakwa bahawa tindakan kementerian untuk mengubah dasar PPSMI ini adalah semata-mata kerana desakan yang emosional. Sebenarnya, tindakan penukaran dasar ini telah mengambil kira semua perkara, termasuk soal kepentingan bahasa inggeris dalam kemajuan >
<Alternatif kementerian adalah memperkenalkan dasar MBM-MBI adalah menjawab isu ini.>
<Siapa sebenarnya yang emosional?>
1) Harus baca e-book ini untuk memahami secara tuntas asas bantahan PPSMI ini.
2) TERLALU RAMAI yang SALAH FAHAM- ASAS bantahan PPSMI ini; Mudah sekali dipengaruhi oleh media dan khabaran berita pihak ketiga (pernah dengar modul telefon karat?)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13099777/eBook-Mengapa-Kami-Bantah-PPSMI
3) SIASAT setiap perkara secara halus dan jelas; kemudian, tetapkan pendirian supaya tidak terpengaruh dengan mainan politik kepartian yang jelas memihak. Dengan kata lain, diri kita harus punya pendirian dulu.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Fikrah-
Penegasannya- bertindak secara jelas; dan dilihat jelas.
Mencari kebenaran perlu berdasar ilmu dan bukan emosi.
Selasa, Oktober 18, 2011
Kedudukan ranking TIMSS
Sabtu, September 17, 2011
PPSMI: Jangan Cuba Cetus Polemik Baru
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM) merujuk kepada desakan PAGE dan Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) agar mempertimbangkan semula perlaksanaan dasar PPSMI secara pilihan di sekolah-sekolah meskipun telah dimansuhkan sejak akhir 2009 yang lalu. Gesaan PAGE dan JMM agar diberikan "autonomi" kepada sekolah untuk memilih PPSMI adalah berdasarkan kajian mereka yang mendakwa sebahagian besar guru dan ibu bapa mengharapkan agar PPSMI dilaksanakan semula.
Walaupun menghargai keprihatinan dan komitmen yang ditunjukkan oleh PAGE dan JMM dalam usaha mereka mengendalikan kajian tersebut, akan tetapi ABIM mendapati terdapat keraguan pada cara perlaksanaan dan hasil dapatan kajian tersebut yang boleh dipertikaikan kesahan dan kebolehpercayaannya.
Dalam hal ini, ABIM menyambut baik ketegasan Timbalan Menteri Pelajaran, Dr Fuad Zakarshi yang menolak kajian yang dikemukakan oleh JMM atas faktor yang sama. Selain itu, hujah PAGE untuk menyokong cadangan mereka pada kali ini adalah ulangan kepada hujah-hujah mereka sebelum ini yang telah dibahaskan dalam siri persidangan meja bulat yang lalu dan dimuktamadkan oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri dengan pengenalan dasar Memartabatkan Bahasa Melayu, Memperkasakan Bahasa Inggeris (MBMMBI) pada 25 November 2009.
Perkara seperti kepentingan penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris, kecemerlangan subjek Sains dan Matematik, diskriminasi kepada golongan yang “beribundakan” Bahasa Inggeris dan ketidakkesanan kepada Perkara 152, Akta Pendidikan dan Falsafah Pendidikan Negara telah dibidas dalam buku “Mengapa Kami Bantah” serta diambil pertimbangan sewajarnya dalam mempersiapkan dasar MBMMBI.
Dalam perkembangan yang berkaitan, ABIM berpandangan bahawa cadangan pemberian kuasa "autonomi" memilih dasar kepada sekolah adalah kecelaruan terbesar dalam sistem pendidikan negara. Tidak ada autonomi bagi perkara dasar melainkan hanya dalam soal pentadbiran dan pengurusan sekolah seperti yang diamalkan di Sekolah Kluster.
Komuniti sekolah hanya sebagai pelaksana dan bersama memberi sumbang saran dalam penggubalan sesuatau dasar tetapi tidak untuk memilihnya bagi kecenderungan tertentu. Hal ini mencabar kredibiliti Kerajaan khususnya Menteri Pelajaran dalam menentukan masa depan negara kerana ia tercorak dari dasar yang diperkenalkannya.
Di samping itu, cadangan PAGE dan JMM tersebut akan menimbulkan konflik dan ketegangan sosial serta kesenjangan di kalangan rakyat apabila dua arus perdana ini bertembung dalam masyarakat. Ini akan menggagalkan usaha penyatupaduan rakyat seperti mana yang terkandung dalam matlamat Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan (PIPP).
Cadangan tersebut juga dilihat tidak munasabah kerana akan menimbulkan kesulitan di peringkat perlaksanaan, penilaian dan pemantauannya. Ia akan menimbulkan masalah dalam proses latihan dan penempatan guru, penyediaan bahan mengajar, penerbitan dan pengagihan buku teks, penggubalan dan pencetakan kertas soalan, dan yang lebih utama penilaian berpusat bagi para pelajar yang menduduki peperiksaan awam.
Oleh itu, ABIM menyeru agar Timbalan Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Pelajaran tegas menolak kajian dan cadangan yang dikemukakan oleh PAGE dan JMM berdasarkan hujah yang dikemukakan.
ABIM juga berharap agar Kerajaan memberikan fokus kepada perlaksanaan dasar MBMMBI seperti mana yang telah diputuskan sebelum ini. ABIM percaya polemik ini tidak akan timbul sekiranya proses penggubalan dan perlaksanaan sesuatu dasar baru menuruti semua peringkat tapisan yang telah ditetapkan oleh pihak KPM tanpa sebarang kompromi.
Abu Qassim Nor Azmi
Ketua Biro Penerangan
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
Walaupun menghargai keprihatinan dan komitmen yang ditunjukkan oleh PAGE dan JMM dalam usaha mereka mengendalikan kajian tersebut, akan tetapi ABIM mendapati terdapat keraguan pada cara perlaksanaan dan hasil dapatan kajian tersebut yang boleh dipertikaikan kesahan dan kebolehpercayaannya.
Dalam hal ini, ABIM menyambut baik ketegasan Timbalan Menteri Pelajaran, Dr Fuad Zakarshi yang menolak kajian yang dikemukakan oleh JMM atas faktor yang sama. Selain itu, hujah PAGE untuk menyokong cadangan mereka pada kali ini adalah ulangan kepada hujah-hujah mereka sebelum ini yang telah dibahaskan dalam siri persidangan meja bulat yang lalu dan dimuktamadkan oleh Timbalan Perdana Menteri dengan pengenalan dasar Memartabatkan Bahasa Melayu, Memperkasakan Bahasa Inggeris (MBMMBI) pada 25 November 2009.
Perkara seperti kepentingan penguasaan Bahasa Inggeris, kecemerlangan subjek Sains dan Matematik, diskriminasi kepada golongan yang “beribundakan” Bahasa Inggeris dan ketidakkesanan kepada Perkara 152, Akta Pendidikan dan Falsafah Pendidikan Negara telah dibidas dalam buku “Mengapa Kami Bantah” serta diambil pertimbangan sewajarnya dalam mempersiapkan dasar MBMMBI.
Dalam perkembangan yang berkaitan, ABIM berpandangan bahawa cadangan pemberian kuasa "autonomi" memilih dasar kepada sekolah adalah kecelaruan terbesar dalam sistem pendidikan negara. Tidak ada autonomi bagi perkara dasar melainkan hanya dalam soal pentadbiran dan pengurusan sekolah seperti yang diamalkan di Sekolah Kluster.
Komuniti sekolah hanya sebagai pelaksana dan bersama memberi sumbang saran dalam penggubalan sesuatau dasar tetapi tidak untuk memilihnya bagi kecenderungan tertentu. Hal ini mencabar kredibiliti Kerajaan khususnya Menteri Pelajaran dalam menentukan masa depan negara kerana ia tercorak dari dasar yang diperkenalkannya.
Di samping itu, cadangan PAGE dan JMM tersebut akan menimbulkan konflik dan ketegangan sosial serta kesenjangan di kalangan rakyat apabila dua arus perdana ini bertembung dalam masyarakat. Ini akan menggagalkan usaha penyatupaduan rakyat seperti mana yang terkandung dalam matlamat Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan (PIPP).
Cadangan tersebut juga dilihat tidak munasabah kerana akan menimbulkan kesulitan di peringkat perlaksanaan, penilaian dan pemantauannya. Ia akan menimbulkan masalah dalam proses latihan dan penempatan guru, penyediaan bahan mengajar, penerbitan dan pengagihan buku teks, penggubalan dan pencetakan kertas soalan, dan yang lebih utama penilaian berpusat bagi para pelajar yang menduduki peperiksaan awam.
Oleh itu, ABIM menyeru agar Timbalan Perdana Menteri merangkap Menteri Pelajaran tegas menolak kajian dan cadangan yang dikemukakan oleh PAGE dan JMM berdasarkan hujah yang dikemukakan.
ABIM juga berharap agar Kerajaan memberikan fokus kepada perlaksanaan dasar MBMMBI seperti mana yang telah diputuskan sebelum ini. ABIM percaya polemik ini tidak akan timbul sekiranya proses penggubalan dan perlaksanaan sesuatu dasar baru menuruti semua peringkat tapisan yang telah ditetapkan oleh pihak KPM tanpa sebarang kompromi.
Abu Qassim Nor Azmi
Ketua Biro Penerangan
Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (ABIM)
Langgan:
Catatan (Atom)