Talk:Education in Malaysia/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Accuracy

There is some inaccurate informations here. Ex. Chung Ling High School is converted to English Schools before The Independence. There are only 60 Chinese Independant Schools in Malaysia, not 61. -- Terrorgen 00:51 23 Jan 2006 (UTC+0800)

There seems to be an emphasis on Chinese primary & secondary schools, but not much on national schools or Tamil schools. Or heck, even private schools or tuition centres (which seem to be a huge part of Malaysian education). Can someone add them in? -- Mydemand 02:28, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Can somebody please improve on the descriptions of secondary and tertiary education? ;-) I'm just a Form 2 student, so I don't know much about what's beyond that. --219.95.155.11 10:32, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

this topic should include chinese secondary education (independant schools) Terrrogen | Talk --Terrorgen 03:53, 2004 Aug 11 (UTC)

UPSR stands for Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah, not Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah. I'm in Standard 6, so i should know!Yongrenjie 05:49, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Merging

Can somebody who has the time please merge the older revision before the anon's rewrite with the current one? Both have a lot of valuable information. Thanks in advance to anybody who has the time. Johnleemk | Talk 14:28, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Update: This still hasn't been done, actually. Both revisions had a lot of information not available in the other revision, and I don't have the time to stick the two back together. Johnleemk | Talk 14:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Matriculation

removed "However this only applies to Bumiputera students"

Wrong. All may APPLY for matericulation. But you will probably not get it unles... --Malbear 01:19, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Removed "However, since 2003 the matriculation programme has been opened to a small percentage of non-Bumiputera's as well. "

Wrong again. "some" non-bumiputras have always been admitted to matriculation. --Malbear 01:19, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Removed "from mostly non-Bumiputera's "

This statement is a red herring unless you have some evidence. First you will need rough numbers of people criticising it and subsequently the proportion of folks who are/are not Bumiputras advocating this view. Is probably logical that some criticise it. Following that, it is credible that such a criticism exist int hat form.....but to state that most of those who criticise it are non-Bumiputra may not be true. Most non-Bumiputra parents have already given up on the local uni and sent their children to private colleges. Heck, 2 percent of malay parents now send their children to private chinese schools (words of the PM, not mine). While such criticism does exist (cf. the local press), its not really clear who the voices are behind it. --Malbear 01:19, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Removed " It is considered easier because in the matriculation program the teachers set and mark the final exams that their students sit, whereas in the STPM the final exam is standardised and exam papers are exchanged between schools in different states to ensure unbiased marking"

This is misleading information. Matriculation Semester Examination Papers are marked by the local University Lecturer and not by the Matriculation Teacher.

Bias?

The article, like every other article which has something to do with Malaysia, seems rather biased. I for one think the education here stinks, but some of the stuff in the article seems to me rather unfounded. I've never heard of a controversy about demographics and the PTS. Heck, the article doesn't even mention how it is biased. That part seems rather weak to me — can I have a source please? And the Politics section could be toned down a little. Johnleemk | Talk 09:09, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Update: The article still says that the PTS demographics were biased, and it's glaringly lacking a source. Johnleemk | Talk 14:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Glaringly biased - why can't there be some balanced writing instead of paragraphs of criticism? Not a place to "unload" your personal dissatisfactions

Compulsory schooling

Compulsory Schooling does not exist in Malaysia as far as legislation goes. Otherwise it would be illegal for Orang Asli and the noodle man not to send his child to school. Education is however "free" to citizens.

According to the Serawak on line site (http://www.sarawak.gov.my/contents/education/education.shtml) " The Government is soon to make primary education compulsory for all Malaysian children." This would imply that such legislation does not at this moment exist. Kindly cite a source that such legislation does exist (even then, enforcement....) Malbear 07:57, 24th Aug 2004 (UTC)

Terminology for primary education

Can someone confirm

"Primary Education in Malaysia consists of 6 years of education, referred to as Standards 1 through 6."

The term that was used Darjah (before) is loosely translated as Standard or Grade but I thought the new term is "Tahun" which is "Year"....Anyone?

Malbear 07:57, 24th Aug 2004 (UTC)

I don't know. As a primary student, we used Standard and Year interchangeably. Johnleemk | Talk 16:34, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
During my elementary school time (1962-1966), we used the term Darjah. I had a friend who was in Standard 2 (Darjah 2) for three years without any promotion to higher class. In the end he left schooling and joined his fisherman father with his Standard 2 qualification. At that time you could not be promoted to Standard 3 class unless you passed the Standard 2 exam. At present whether you passed or failed in your present class, you are still promoted to higher class. As such these educationists use the term year 1 to year 6 in primary schools, because taking the example of my experience, my poor friend should have left school with a Standard 5 qualification (If he passed his annual exam).
Fair Enough. So what should the entry reflect? The "official" name or the standard usage one or both with an annotation as to which is which?

Malbear

I think now, they use the term "tahun". But, during my primary school year, they use "darjah".--Dehanz 07:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Reverted last change

Please provide a source for the following removed paragraph, as the quote is highly inflammatory, if true:

In 2004, the government created a new ministry called the ministry of higher education to oversee tertiary education. It's first minister, Dr Amir Shafie stated "As the Higher Education Minister, I will ensure the quota of Malay students' entry into universities is always higher".

It is quite possible the quote may have been mistranslated, miscapturing the Minister's real meaning. Right now it does not sound like something a Minister would say. Johnleemk | Talk 14:54, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In other words this is not something you want the minister to say but he has said it and now you wish to supress the truth? Shame on you.
Ok two things you reverted which are true but somehow don't fit your worldview
  1. UiTM is only for Bumiputra
  2. Shafie Salleh is a quota monster.
  1. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/FJ02Ae05.html Then there was Higher Education Minister Dr Shafie Salleh's remark: "I will never allow non-Bumiputra students to enter [Universiti Teknologi Mara] UiTM. I will not compromise on this matter." Bumiputra means "sons of the soil" and refers to Malays and a handful of indigenous minority groups, such as the Ibans and Orang Asli. Government policy grants the Bumiputras privileges.
  2. http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news.php?id=94883 "As the Higher Education Minister, I will ensure the quota of Malay students' entry into universities is always higher," he said.
I trust that you will be gentlemanly enough to change it back because I can't e arsed to repeat something I have already written right now. Will check back in 12 hours to see it has been done. Alternatively I will add it back myself and find recourse for removal of FACTS simply because they make you unhappy....Yhank you sir--Malbear 09:01, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Assume good faith, please. I have always assumed your changes that I viewed as detrimental were not made on purpose in order to introduce errors or because of any intentional bias. I was just asking for a source. If you had a source, why was it not included? Just place [http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v3/news.php?id=94883] after the sentence. The removal of the UiTM info was not intentional — apparently the rollback feature of the software rolled back both of your consecutive recent edits instead of only your most recent one. I will revert my change, but next time please provide a source if possible, particularly for controversial issues such as this. Johnleemk | Talk 14:01, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Update: Apparently Lim Guan Eng, Lim Kit Siang's son, disputes this: [1]. Here's the quote:
Dr Shafie had also assured UMNO delegates that so long as he remains as Higher Education Minister the number of Bumiputera students in public universities will always exceed the given quota. For example, he said in 2002, there were 69 per cent Bumiputera students, while the quota was only 63 per cent, while in 2004, there were 64 per cent Bumiputeras (the quota was only 53 per cent).
This example given by Guan Eng clearly indicates that what Shafie meant is that there will always be more Bumi university students than the minimum quota allocated to them. The quote given in the article implies that Shafie intends to raise the the quota year after year just for the heck of it. This doesn't mean that he's justified in making such racist comments, but as I suspected, there's more to this quote than at first glance. Johnleemk | Talk 14:12, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Actually the initial assertion is not regarding quotas. Whether the final "play" is the imposition of quotas or the shooting of qualifying non-Bumi students (heh heh) the point is that a non-bumi student is disadvantaged for univerity entry to universities paid for by their own tax dollars. And totally denied entry into certain universities again paid for by their tax dollars. This is whats happening and I hope its been reflected proportionally in the article. --Malbear 07:08, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Um...why again are you trying to bias and politicise this article?
Such gauruntees, whether through the use of quotas or not, would put non-Bumiputra students at a disadvantage and implies that race-blind meritocracy is not a current priority of the present administration.
It's bleeding obvious that that's what's going to happen. We're making an implicit point explicit, but this is not the conclusion all readers will draw. Leading them to this conclusion is directly biasing the article. We're supposed to tell them about the quote, about the quotas, what Guan Eng said, but we're not ever supposed to tell them what conclusion to draw from what we told them. Johnleemk | Talk 08:22, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
for the simple reason that earlier in the article it states that (1) a system of meritocracy will be practiced and (2) that quotas are being reduced. This paints a picture that the system is getting MORE equal but the truth is that it is not so. Why are you trying to politicise it by hiding whats happening?--Malbear 10:43, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Yeah, right. Removing that paragraph hides nothing. Shafie's statement makes it bleeding obvious that the government has no intention of taking any serious action to move towards meritocracy. We don't need to repeat it. I'm trying to remain calm here, but it's sickeningly and ironically annoying how only days ago I was arguing with one idiotic Bumi who thinks Chinese are evil and out to get the Bumis if they try to dismantle the NEP, when now I'm here debating with a Chinese who, consciously or not, tries to insert his bias into every article relevant to his political opinions by constantly harping on the points in the article he agrees with. Stop treating the readers like idiots. Shafie's statement makes the whole sentence redundant, because his quote directly states that he doesn't give a shit about meritocracy. Johnleemk | Talk 15:29, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Okey. Removed all the commentary and we let the quotes speak for themselves on both sides.--Malbear 10:22, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
I moved the other quote from Guan Eng to the section on Chinese schools since it had nothing in common with the other quote except they're from the same person. I also clarified how Guan Eng alleged the statement can be misinterpreted. I've also done some cleanup elsewhere in the article. Johnleemk | Talk 14:31, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Have split the Guan Eng quote into two sections. The first part deals in the fact that students of other races study in Chinese schools. The second bit has to be where it is because it's doubtful that he holds the views that Shafie does.--Malbear 05:46, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Forgive me for saying this, but this article is starting to sound like a newspaper column. Could someone please re-edit the whole thing so that it is stylistically more like an encyclopedia article? Perhaps, references to specific quotations should be re-written in the third person instead of verbatim to improve the flow. Also, some of the sentences in this article are leaning towards POV.


UiTM has a campus in Section 17, Shah Alam that caters for pre-university education, especially sponsored students meant to go overseas. Scholars from different races go there. I believe it is called INTEC. Just to say that UiTM is not strictly bumiputra-only.

Template:Education infobox

I created a template, Template:Education infobox which can give a quick at a glance demographics table for education articles. See its implementation at Education in the United States and feel free to help improve the template.--naryathegreat | (talk) 01:00, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

References

Could we please convert the links like this iroatm.cjb.net into proper references, as per Wikipedia:Cite sources/example style? Johnleemk | Talk 15:10, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Resources 

         The three major resources of malysia are tin,copper and timber. there are many more but those are the main three.

Should mention about "The philosophy of Malaysian Education"

I think this artical is unbalance,especially in the part "secondary school", as the main stream school system is not largely describe.

However, this article is over focus on "chinese independent secondary school", this should be a independet articale. I think others(non malaysian) will hardly understand what happen becoz this event(the rise of chinese school) is very complex.

Chinses Independent secondary school is part of the malaysian education system, but it does not represent the whole system.

More importent, this article is not mention about "the philsosophy of Malaysian Education" at all. Some one should adjust it, becose this is a very importent figure.

favour vs favor, program vs programme, etc

I find those that want to turn the article into Queen's English standard as highly annoying and irritating. Could we edit on substance instead? __earth (Talk) 04:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

This is an interesting issue, by the way -- as I understand it, the manual of style advises us to both use the kind of English applicable to the article (i.e. an article on Tony Blair should use Commonwealth English, while one on the White House should use American English) and refrain from altering it if we don't like the style. Hm? Anyway, I don't see the point in reverting these pedantic edits, so -- like you said -- let's focus on the article's substance instead. Johnleemk | Talk 05:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Education and Politics

This is weird, is this section, don't you find it odd that Acts like Universities and University Colleges Act are not mentioned at all? 130.195.2.100 13:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have added more some preliminary information about UUCA and the tuition phenomenon in Malaysia. Some help would be appreciated. 203.109.210.197 12:40, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

References

Hi everyone, can you please judge whether Malaysia Students is relevant enough to be added as a link under the reference section along with blog like Education in Malaysia and Recom Forum.

Please add the link if you find it should be added. I tried to add the link but foreign Wikipedian (Veinor) kept saying that the link to blogs should be removed just because they're blogs. Hello Malaysians, please help to judge whether the link should be added.Cupid9 19:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Update: Veinor removed links to Education in Malaysia (blog) and ReCom Forum (forum) too!Cupid9 20:02, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure. I'm just being fair. It's not like I'm just against Malaysia Students specifically. Veinor (talk to me) 20:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
I prefer to remove all blogs, unless they could be proven as notable. __earth (Talk) 10:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
It's good to see that you're "not just against Malaysia Students specifically". However, I think we should judge whether the articles on these blogs and forum are useful to the readers of the Wikipedia articles. Must they be posted on notable blogs then we can link to them? From a Malaysian perspective, I think all three links that were removed - Malaysia Students, ReCom.org and Education in Malaysia are useful to the Malaysian, especially Malaysian students. From a Malaysian student's perspective, they're somehow "notable" and useful to them. Hello, any Malaysian please post your views on this. Thanks. Cupid9 12:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, Wikipedia isn't just for Malaysian students. It intends to be a global project (though there are inherent biases since it requires knowledge of the English language and internet access). Veinor (talk to me) 16:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
WP:NOT. And I am a Malaysian. __earth (Talk) 12:22, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

History section

FYI, the Chapter 2 National Education Blueprint [2] is a great source. I would contribute to the history section sooner or later but if any one wanna to go ahead first, please do. __earth (Talk) 14:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Major cleanup required

This article's organisation is a complete mess; we have second-level sections devoted to primary, secondary and tertiary education, and suddenly we jump into types of primary and secondary schools. Then we have a short bit on school uniforms and the history of Malaysian education (which is dreadfully incomplete), and a laundry list of "issues" about the Malaysian school system. Issues in Malaysian Education is probably warranted, but at the moment it reads like a POV fork. There's also the problem of getting citations for things like quotas; the article speaks of them in the present tense, but under meritocracy, they were removed in 2004. (I removed a couple of paragraphs about quotas, FWIW.)

In short, we need to:

  • Clarify this article's organisation;
  • Restructure it accordingly;
  • Clean up the issues of bias. Johnleemk | Talk 21:00, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
1) Education in Malaysia can be categorized by level of education and types of school. I suggest combining Pre-School, Primary, Secondary, Pre-University and Tertiary under levels/stages of education (current known as "Characteristics").

2)Mission schools should be moved to Types of Schools section. 3)"The division of public education at the primary level into national and national-type school has been criticised for allegedly creating racial polarisation at an early age. In the 1970s, around half of all Chinese parents sent their students to national schools; as of 2006, the same figure stood at 6%. Lim Guan Eng of the opposition Democratic Action Party stated that ""When I was growing up in Malaysia, going to national schools, I never imagined that the country would become so polarized." Non-Malays, Chinese in particular, avoid national schools due to said schools being Malay-dominated and, especially in recent years, having an overwhelmingly muslim atmosphere.[1]" This part should be in the Issues in Malaysian Education article. The same with all the political and contensious issues. 4)The stuff bout UEC should be a separate article like the other examinations e.g. PMR, SPM etc... 5)All rehashings of difficuty levels, recognition levels should be in their respective article, not here. 6)"Brain gain" issue should be in Issues in Malaysia Education.

That's all that I can think of. 202.185.55.80 (talk) 10:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

This article's is not balance and not follow the wikipedia guideline, whereby it was bias for chiness school and criticize the national school. The acticle's not mentioning about the history and the condition of Islamic Religious Schools (Sekolah Rendah Agama (SRA) and Sekolah Menengah Agama (SMA)compared chiness school. The Islamic Religious Schools (Sekolah Rendah Agama (SRA) and Sekolah Menengah Agama (SMA)is important for bumiputera(mostly muslim) but goverment not support it unlike chiness school, I suggest this article should not have any criticise to bumiputera and politics section.it should be remove and avoid. 203.126.136.223 09:01, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree that most of the things stated here are a bit biased. My Indian and Chinese friends all laugh that such small things could be a big issue. I think that someone is making a mountain out of a molehill over here. We Malaysians have been schooling and leaving together peacefully. But then, they are some who says this and that just to destroy our harmonic relationship to support their own personal objectives. It's these kind of people who like to create disturbance here in Malaysia. If you are a Malaysian and you dare write something that is based on your own perception without looking at all points of view, I believe that you are a troublemaker. It's true that some things do seem true in one aspect but most of the nonsense stated are just too biased and full of fallacies. So, when you read anything or hear anything, you must go back and process the information to see whether their logic is acceptable or not. In relating to the depth of information stated, I have to say that the selection of information are pretty subjective. I can only find information about certain schools that supports the writers view on education. National schools are criticized as though the government is not fit to give education to Malaysian and yet it had been reported in the local papers that top students actually came from national schools. If they can raise such students, why are you criticizing them so badly as though they are useless? If you are a teacher in these schools, won't you feel hurt knowing that someone is criticizing your institution? SRA and SMA differs greatly from 'sekolah pondok' and madrasah. Their syllabus are way different and it's standardized for all SRA and SMA. Furthermore, they also take national examination just like everyone else in Malaysia. Some of our students who are going overseas (UK, Ireland, Australia) are from SMA and SRA. If Australian Education can accept them, why are you saying that Malaysia can't accept them? MARA also had sponsored students even from madrasah to go to the US in the past. JPA, Petronas and FELDA offers scholarship to non-bumiputera. So, why are you saying that non-bumiputera are being ignored? So, what is actually going on? I don't see any quotations from recognized education officers regarding the issue. So, how can I tell whether this is your views or the experts' view of education in Malaysia? How can one find absolute truth when it is true only for one person? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.49.218.37 (talk) 03:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Dates of the school year

Greetings all. The page Academic term lists countries by the date/extent of the school year. North America, Europe, Asia, and Oceania are almost exclusively represented on the list. This country has not yet been added onto the page. Would anyone be able to pop over, and give it a quick edit? Thanks, samwaltz 22:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Generally, universities in Malaysia follows different academic terms. Notably, private instituitions usually follows the academic terms of foreign universities depending on its syllabus. Public universities usually have Term 1 from June/July to October/November. Term 2 from December/January to April/May. Term 3(sometimes optional) from May to June/July. Example: http://www.ukm.my/english/UKM_calender.html202.185.55.80 (talk) 09:35, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

La Salle Brothers

In your comments regarding Missionary Schools, you glossed over the La Salle schools. The La Salle Provincialate in Section 5, PJ. Still manages & governs all the La Salle schools in Malaysia. The distinction is that the La Salle Brothers own the land & buildings, hence these schools carry the SRJK & SMJK labels. Up till recently, you would find Brothers as teachers & headmasters in these schools. The main reason we no longer have many of them around is that there aren't many people willing to dedicate their lives to joining these teaching orders anymore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.95.219.23 (talk) 07:23, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Pre School Education Curriculum

There is actually a curriculum for this called 'Kurikulum Prasekolah Kebangsaan' available from http://myschoolnet.ppk.kpm.my/sp_hsp/pra_sek.htm Kurikulum Prasekolah Kebangsaan teaches (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject: Education in Malaysia proposal

This proposed WikiProject is meant to organize, improve and expand all articles related to Education in Malaysia at all levels, including adult education, vocational education, etc. A lot of the articles in this category need work. If you're interested or would like to discuss this further, please go to WikiProject Proposal entry. Thanks. - Bob K 07:20, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Uniforms and Rapes

I've removed the entire section about the girls uniforms being possibly sexually attractive and leading to rapes. It was completely based upon a story by the Star, contains no factual content, was completely opinionated and there is a factual section about uniforms anyway. Thanks, JameiLei (talk) 23:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Reasons for ethnic schools

What are the reasons for ethnic schools in Malaysia? Why the Chinese or Indian settlers do not mix with local population??? Are they racist and against the Malays? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.34.140.72 (talk) 02:43, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

There are no ethnic schools per se in Malaysia, only schools that use vernacular in the primary level. The students come primarily from particular ethnic communities but enrolment isn't exclusively restricted. Quite a few schools boast significant enrolment from various ethnic groups, including Malays. The tone of your question seem to insinuate something a little more insidious. I have to wonder if its asked in good faith. - Bob K | Talk 03:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I also have to wonder about the use of the loaded term "settler". A large majority of Malaysians are indigenous to the land although their ancestors may have settled over the last millenia from the various parts of East, Southeast and South Asia with significant increase in settlement over the last 2 centuries. The use of the term "settler" is a weaselly method of trying to deny a significant proportion of Malaysians their birthright as well as a less than subtle attempt to introduce partisan political agenda to Wikipedia. - Bob K | Talk 11:35, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Developments and Public Debate

There's been some significant developments in public opinion about the education system in Malaysia, particularly in the primary levels :

  • The highlighting of the plight of private Islamic religious schools (Sekolah Agama Rakyat) which do not receive adequate funding and support from the authorities, whether in terms of physical infrastucture, curriculum development or human resources (Previous emphasis had only been on Tamil language and Chinese/Mandarin language vernacular schools)
  • The ongoing debate about the teaching of Science and Mathematics subjects in the English language
  • The growing public discussion about the possibility of revamping the system to abolish state funded/supported vernacular schools while incorporating compulsory third language study in public schools

Any ideas how these discussions and developments can be incorporated into the article? - Bob K | Talk 11:46, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

National versus vernacular?

It seems that there is some such a divide, but those that worked on this article seems to understand this, but not explain it.Snori (talk) 12:03, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting article. Can someone please give more reasons why the Chinese (who I assume either newly migrated or somehow didn't become Malaysian citizens when they were born there and do not assimiliate) do not integrate with the local population in Malaysia and for example run their own Chinese schools? Are those schools sponsored by the Chinese government in Beijing? Do the Chinese students follow curriculum of the communist China in those schools in Malaysia? Anyway, quite unusual to be able to have so many Chinese schools in foreign country and not to learn local national language. Very different to other parts of the world. Thanks! Jenny —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.129.20.9 (talk) 07:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

There is a single national syllabus in Malaysia with three different language streams in the primary level, Malay, Mandarin and Tamil, all of which are administered and funded by the federal Ministry of Education.. The national language, Malay, is still a compulsory subject in all these streams. When the "vernacular" stream is referred within the context of the Malaysian education system, this is what is meant by it. It does not refer to a foreign syllabus independently run by a particular community although a few private schools do incorporate foreign syllabus if operating as international schools. The controversies that arise between the vernacular streams are quite complex and would be better served by its own article rather than as part of this main article on Education in Malaysia.
There seems to be quite a bit of assumption on the part of the previous commenter; assumptions that would have been negated if the other articles about Malaysia in Wikipedia were referenced to. One has to wonder if the commenter was being deliberately provocative? - Bob K | Talk 19:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

National-type primary schools

The article downplays the importance of the national-type primary schools, given that most non-Malays (and some Malays as well) start their formal education in a national-type primary school. I have rewritten the primary education section to include the national-type schools. Elsewhere in the article, "vernacular schools" are used to refer to these schools, in a potentially confusing and non-NPOV way. For those who are not familiar with the issue, please bear in mind that most, if not all ethnic Chinese and Indians studying in the so-called "vernacular schools" are Malaysian citizens as well.--Joshua Say "hi" to me!What I've done? 15:19, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Cleanup and reorganization

As noted in the section Major cleanup required, this article is a total mess. It can be said that the article has not improved much after two and a half years. IMO, this article is too focused on the criticism of the educational system. (On a side note, the article Issues in Malaysian Education is still a rip-off of this article with no real content of its own. I would suggest its merge into this article.) Of course, the educational system is not perfect, but I will rather see an objective description of the educational system. I would like to do some of the cleanup, but I can't guarantee that I will accomplish much due to commitments in real life, and I would need help in sourcing references. I think the article Education in England has a better organization of the sections, and i think it is one that we can refer to, since our educational system is modelled after the one in England. --Joshua Say "hi" to me!What I've done? 03:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problem

‎ This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:21, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup the Pre-University Section

I have done some editing to this section. I think the criticism on the matriculation programme should be removed. Or at least, there should be links or references provided to support the strong claim. I also plan to start a new article on the Malaysian Matriculation Programme. 07 Matthew (talk) 07:36, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

There are many criticisms of the programme, but this doesn't seem to be the best summary. A new article would be very useful, I'm sure sources can be found. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 09:54, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
I have started a new article entitled Malaysian Matriculation Programme. I will add more stuff to that article soon. I am sure I can find some "good points" about the programme from the speeches given by some Ministers. :) 07 Matthew (talk) 12:58, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Education in Malaysia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:30, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Education in Malaysia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:39, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

School types and medium of instruction

Currently the article states that "Public primary schools are divided into two categories based on the medium of instruction". While this may seem true on the surface, the main divisions of public primary schools (and public secondary schools for that matter) are “Government Schools” and "Government Aided Schools“ (see §2 and §16, Education Act 1996). In fact some vernacular schools are Government schools, rather than Government aided. Almost all statistical documents produced by the Ministry of Education uses this classification of division with the type (National or National Type) being the secondary classification.

Perhaps the article can be amended to reflect that? - Bob K | Talk 08:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Education_in_Malaysia/Archive_1&oldid=1169846259"