Like how you were being placed into different compartments once you have reached 16.
For scoring A’s in both his Science and Mathematics in last year’s PMR, my son Nicholas was put into a Pure Science class. He is in Form Four this year.
Besides Mathematics and Additional Mathematics, he have to study science subjects like Physics, Chemistry and Biology.
“Mom, I don’t mind doing Additional Mathematics but I hate Biology. I want to drop Biology to do Commerce and Economics but was not allowed to do so,” he complained to me after the first day at school last week.
“Do you want me to see your school principal and talk to her?” I asked him, hoping to help him out of his predicament.
“It’s no use, I’ve seen her this morning. She said the school’s decision is final and we’re not allowed to appeal anymore,” he replied dully.
My son told me he is not keen to study living things like plants and animals. He is more into numbers.
But this year, due to the pressure from the Education Minister, schools are tasked to put more students into Pure Science. Even though you hate certain science subjects, you have to study them.
Each year, since the pre-independence days, right after the examination known as LCE in the early days or SRP during my school days or PMR as it is now known, 16 year olds were placed into different streams based on their results.
For those who did well in Science and Mathematics, to the Science Stream you go where you are expected to end up as doctors, engineers or pharmacists one day.
As for those who did well in languages but not Science and Mathematics, you will be put into the Arts Stream where you can later become writers, artists or fashion designers and etc.
I have nothing against this process. Indeed it had and will continue to serve its purpose of putting students on the right career track.
But I wish as parents and students, we have more say in this streaming instead of taking whatever that is being thrown into our path.
It is too rigid, clear-cut and more to the convenience of the school rather than to the students themselves.
Let me ask this question – at 16, how many of us are so dead sure of being a doctor or a writer one day?
As a student or a parent, do you share my sentiment on this age-old method?
Should the students be consulted on which streams they would like to go to or should their schools make the decisions for them?
.jpg?resize=200%2C200)
188 Hugh Low Street, Ipoh 
Parents normally know best and would advise their kids on what to do.
However, once they reach adulthood, they should be able to know for themselves what they want to do for life
Ipohgal,
I can imagine how upset you are about your son getting such a raw deal. It’s really a shame when a kid is prevented from studying a subject that he is drawn to. Just thinking about the streaming system gives me the creeps anyway. So many late bloomers are discouraged and discriminated against where it is used. What a waste of talent. Remember, Albert Einstein almost flunked Algebra. I’m certainly no Einstein, but I shake my head when I try to think where I’d be if I had been “streamed”. I certainly would not have gotten a Master’s Degree and had a successful career in Aviation Maintenance Management. Probably I’d be a retired construction worker.
After reading your post, I get the feeling that your son would be a natural for a degree in Business, (not that a business degree is necessary for success in business.) Is there a “business stream”? What are the courses that he didn’t do well in that purport to determine whether a 16 year old is qualified to pursue that “stream.” I’ll bet there aren’t any. If there were, they would have interested him like his math and science courses did, and being your son, he would have done well in them too.
For that matter, are there “streams” that prepare kids for the Social Sciences, Anthropology, Sociology, and Economics, for example. (I feel sure the Malaysian Government doesn’t encourage the study of Political Science) 🙂 How about Law and Government Service? What are the courses that determine whether or not kids are suitable for those professions?
In Singapore, if you can’t master two languages, neither of which is the
language spoken at home usually, you are branded a dolt and not allowed to continue schooling. The daughter of a good friend, whose parents are not from the same ethnic group, refused to master Mandarin. What she wanted to study was French. She spoke Cantonese and English in the home, and her English was good enough to qualify her to read children’s stories on SBS. The result was that she was not allowed to proceed beyond O levels. My wife and I invited her to live with us and study in the U.S. Her O level Singapore education was good enough to get her into a junior college. After a year there, she transferred to a University, and earned a degree in fashion design. (Took 4 years of French with straight A’s.) She is now a buyer for a very large and well known department store chain, teaches a course in purchasing at the University, and is married to the son of a millionaire. Her company has sent her to France several times on buying trips. Do you think that Singapore could have used that intelligence and strong-minded perseverance? If she had stayed there, she would still be a shop girl.
Well, I suspect that at this point you have similar thoughts about streaming, so I won’t belabor the point any further. But once again, I am very sorry for your son. Please tell him that at least one of your bloggers sends his condolences. But also remind him that he must bite the bullet, and do well even in those subjects that bore him. They probably won’t matter in his future, but his grades will.
Hi Tom,
Thank you for your sympathy, encouragement and of course, the inspiring story of your friend’s daughter.
Yes, I was mad as hell, to put it mildly. I was mad because a decision was being made for my son by the Government of Malaysia without consulting the parent or the child and the saddest part is, we have to swallow it down without a whim.
If you score A for both Maths and Science, then its Pure Science class; for A in Maths and C or D in Science, then its Commerce class. Those weak in both subjects will go to Art class. Very bureaucratic, courtesy of the Education Minister who was alarmed that the numbers going to Pure Science class has dropped drastically in recent years and this was his idea to pop up the numbers. Kids inclinations have to take a back seat to accomodate the minister’s ruling.
I can’t help blaming myself now. It was my fault to coach him day in day out the previous year to excel in Science. 😦
Tom and Ipohgal:
In the old days, many Methodist schools outside Ipoh served as feeder schools for ACS Ipoh’s Form 6 classes. Thus I’d hoped that my nephew, who lived in a nearby town and scored very well in his Cambridge high school diploma, would enter ACS Ipoh. His strongest subjects were in the sciences, but partly because we used to spend time together seeing movies such as The Miracle Worker or To Kill a Mocking Bird, and perhaps his inculcation of good reading habits, he didn’t mind being streamed in the arts. That – his opting for the arts – was exactly what happened, except that instead of moving on to Ipoh, he was sent to Tapah! All of us, including his mom (my sister) and of course yours truly, were horrified as this represented a break in tradition for both for our family and for ACS itself. That was the year when hordes of high school students from a different religion were sent to missionary schools in the cities whereas students from the Christian feeder schools were denied places in the schools of their choice.
The national school in Tapah didn’t even have qualified teachers in a number of subjects. My nephew was so disappointed that he left Form Six to register himself as a private candidate. My sister blamed me partly for his choice, for once upon a time I’d also left school to take my exams as a private candidate. However, in between his reading of novels and trips to the Ipoh public library, he managed to score very well in his A levels and was offered a scholarship in economics at the University of Malaya! The rest is history as his career shot off after getting his BA degree and today, though still a salaried worker, his income is probably three to four times that of the average Malaysian. Better still is his late marriage (during his 40s) to a very capable woman who bore him children who’re so intelligent that I always have to be on my toes when they asked me questions on topics that I’d only faintly heard about!
The moral of this story, Ipohgal, is that we are a people used to struggle against heavy odds, and that no matter what happens, we’re more than likely to emerge triumphant. All the best in whatever the future has in store for you, your son, and your family.
Thank you, Larry. 🙂 Seeing that there is nothing we could do against the school’s decision, the other day, I just told my son to turn this setback into a personal victory. He nodded and gave me a confident smile. I think my boy is beginning to see the bigger picture now….at 16, he is still a growing baby that needs his daddy and mommy by his side to guide him along.
The reason why most schools is promoting science stream is due to the vast further study opportunities that this field can offer. Unless the student knows exactly what he want to do in the future (for example an accountant or economist), I will advise him/her into science. A science student can opt for some art stream subjects too (for eg accounting and economics) to enhance their scope of choice for the university later on. I have a friend who did very well in his PMR, but he choose to study in art stream as he has no interest in all the science subjects. He is not a successful accountants. It depends on the child’s interest. Hope this helps!
I was about to say what Andrew said. By studying in the science stream, the options are left wide open to a student. He can opt for Business, Arts or whatever courses he is interested in thereafter. Not many 16-year-olds have a clear idea about their choice of career. Their interests and inclinations tend to change as their grow up, going through the ‘discovery stage’. Those in the Arts or Business Stream do not have this privilege.
The two years of studying in the Science stream is not wasted. The study of science trains one to be objective and analytical. A lawyer friend told me that the training is useful even in the study of law. Students with science background also do well in accountancy for the same reason. It is common these days to find engineering graduates going into the banking field which they find more lucrative. Top management consultant firms do not mind hiring engineering graduates and train them up in management. In short, those from the science background are most versatile and have the most options.
Hi Andrew and Teh MC,
Thank you for your advices. I think Nicholas is beginning to warm up to the idea of studying pure science subjects instead of combining accounting and economics.
Yours truly (this poor mommy) here will have no choice but to go back to study Physics, Chemistry and Biology in order to be able to guide him along. I am from the Arts and I will have to work double hard. It is like having myself going back to school again, for my son’s sake! 🙂
Dear Friends,
I wish to show how high school subjects are relevant prerequisites subjects for University course. However, I do not include university subjects as they are outside the boundary of this discussion. I intent to show that a broader education in high school has merit but in reality, this broad beam has to be focused later in life when one chooses a profession or career, A broad education will sustain a person for life.
Maths is a very basic subject that will sustain a person for life. Hence most universities will ask for a Maths prerequisite subject.
Course – Medicine, Dentistry, Pharmacy
(Prerequisites – Chemistry, Biology (Maths))
Course – Engineering -Civil, Mechanical, Electrical, Aeronautical, & Chemical & Geology (Pre-requisites Physics, Maths Chemistry and Geography for Geologist )
Course – Architect, Surveying (Prerequisites Physics, Maths)
Prerequisites for these Medical Science course can include Anatomy and Physiology taken at the University level and therefore not included in the pre-University prerequisites.
Course- Medical Science – Clinical Chemistry, Medical Microbiology, Clinical Pharmacology, Pathology, Anatomy, Physiology (Prerequisites Biology, Chemistry, Maths).
Course – Medical Science – Nuclear Physics, Radiographer (Pre-requisites Physics, Maths).
Psychology major or Clinical Psychologist (Pre-requisites Biology, Chemistry and Maths).
Course – Commerce (Pre-requisites Maths)
Course – History, Geography, Sociology, Political Science, Law, Communications -Journalist/Public Relations, Advertising, Commercial Art
(Pre-requisites English and corresponding Art subjects such as History, Geography),
Looking at the above prerequisite subjects, it is clear that a High School student should be educated in both Arts and Science. The school education in the first 9 years, has been a general one which introduces broad knowledge to the young students.
Streaming into Science or Art has been a tradition for more than 50 years, and in my humble opinion, it has worked well. Although the decision in the placement of students into the Arts or Science stream is not 100%, it had served 95% of the students well. In the older days, parents were not sophisticated enough to question the decision of the school and parents who were teachers or professionals then were able to convince the school that their children should be put into the Arts or Science stream. In the example given by Ipohgal, the school decision was too autocratic and parents should be able to convince the school to change its decision. Before an attempt to change the decision, one must be sure that you are making a right decision for your children.,
Some Arts students end up doing Science or Medicine and some Science students end up doing Law. Hence the decision to put a student in one stream or another, may not be consistent with the expected outcome.
There are also many examples of university graduates hating the course they did and subsequently changed their profession by doing another course.
What is the right decision? The prevailing wisdom is this, it is too early to pigeon hole the students into their predicted profession. Most first year university students are not really sure what they are doing. Can a young Form IV to Form VI student really know what they are doing?
In some universities, it is compulsory for Science, Medical, Engineering students to take up “Humanity” subjects such as Political Science, Psychology, Economics, Literature etc, the purpose is to broaden the mind of the students.
Late bloomers seldom know what course to do until they tried it. When they latch on to something they like, they excel.
The final analysis points to the fact that a broader education is better for the students because it gives the student a wider choice of what to do academically.
The modern world expects that all persons with education of any standard to know a bit of everything. It also expects those who are very talented to excel. Hence, we started as “Jack of all trades, Master of none” and those with talents continue to become a Master of something.,
Although it is important to have a basic understanding of other subjects, the expansion of knowledge is very challenging to modern human beings. Equipped with basics, one can overcome the difficulties of understanding other unfamiliar subjects.
The final wisdom of education is to be able to read a theory or proposition, digest it, analyse it, reach a conclusion about it and finally, ability to communicate his/her findings to others.. This ability is generic and universal, and a person with such a skill can master any subject if he/she wishes.
If the medium of instruction in teaching of academic subjects is English, then the attainment of a high level of proficiency in the language is essential.
Hi IpohBornKid,
Glad you’re back! Thank you for your comments. For the time being, I think I will let things be and see how things will be going after the SPM or O level. Knowledge learned will be knowledge gained. I am confident things will eventually turn out the best for my young son. 🙂
Ipohbornkid wrote: “The school education in the first 9 years, has been a general one which introduces broad knowledge to the young students.”
This was known as the comprehensive system, and relates to my earlier posting about the Renaissance Man. As you noted, in most universities, students are required to take core subjects that include both the sciences and the arts (humanities).
“we started as “Jack of all trades, Master of none” and those with talents continue to become a Master of something.”
Perhaps it should be “Jack of all trades and master of as many as possible.” Such an ideal is not impossible to achieve: Su Dongpo (Su Shi) was not only a great poet and calligraphist, but also an accomplished statesman, inventor, and military strategist. Another notable all-rounder was Leonardo Da Vinci who emerged about 4 or 5 hundred years later in Italy. Carl Sagan once attributed the existence of many all-rounders in Britain to that country’s stress on comprehensive education, of which Bertrand Russell was an example (though we ought to remember that Lord Russell had the privilege of having excellent tutors during his formative years).
The idea that one should know as much of everything as possible instead of simply specializing on one area could found in Cicero’s “De Oratore.” I alluded to the work in one of my columns some time ago:
“….professionals, especially politicians, often assert that they should not be questioned by people who have no adequate knowledge on the subject under discussion. Such an assertion sounds reasonable only because it is very easy to confuse the technical aspects of an issue with those involving universal themes or values.
For example, while most Malaysians might not be qualified to discuss the merits or demerits of a specific scientific procedure, or the meaning of a particular scriptural verse, they are certainly qualified to speak on the ethics of euthanasia or on the “punishments” for, say, adultery or apostasy. All the more so when the issues under discussion affect the way they live and the people they might become.
This idea of generality versus specificity is not new: Thousands of years ago, in his book De Oratore, Cicero had Crassus arguing that the orator must know military science in order to speak on military matters, and political science in order to speak on government policy. However, Crassus’ debating opponent, Antonius, claimed — rightly, I think — that it is not possible for any single person to be an expert on all subjects. All a rhetor needs to do, therefore, is to study the general or universal themes on the topic under discussion and present arguments in the most effective manner.
Indeed, if the rule of specificity is applied to all, then few would be qualified to act as responsible citizens. Most Malaysians would, in fact, not qualify as voters, for they might base their support on matters beyond their expertise. The average urban person might not know enough about agriculture to vote on agricultural policy, and the average rural person might not know enough about industry to vote on industrial policy. Most Malaysians, whether rural or urban, might not know sufficiently well the vagaries of international trade, IT development, or foreign policy to have a say in any of those fields.
At the highest level, the Prime Minister himself might not be qualified to decide on matters outside his personal expertise. Yet he is the final decision-maker in all areas that affect that nation.”
In short, what everyone needs is a grasp of universal themes and values, complemented by a strong ethical sense. Certainly, as humans, we’re prone to errors, but that cannot be helped. To paraphrase Lincoln, we can do the right only to the extent of our understanding of right and wrong. And a broad-based education system is the best way to acquire that understanding.