Reducing the Mother Tongue Weighting for PSLE

I received an email from a reader, urging me to write about the reduction of Mother Tongue (MT) Weighting for PSLE.

hi blinkymummy,

I have been your reader for quite some time. Recently there is the announcement by MOE wrt PSLE Mother Tongue Weighting Cut. This has created plenty of noise over the mainstream paper and online discussion. As i know that you are quite interested in Chinese Language, I hope that you can support our cause either by writing about it or at least create some awareness over your blog. Looks like the standard of Chinese is going to take a huge dip with the impending announcement of the cut. A group of concerned parties is trying to create as much awareness as possible. Do take a look at our work and what others had written about it:

1. http://www.facebook.com/pages/fan-dui-jiang-diPSLE-mu-yu-cheng-ji-bi-zhong/113447375354697
2. http://siewkumhong.blogspot.com/2010/04/politics-and-policy-making.html
3. http://politicssg.blogspot.com/2010/04/truth-of-why-moe-is-reducing-weightage.html

The 3rd link gets you to an entry which suggests that MOE is reducing the MT weighting because of its Minister Ng Eng Hen's personal experience, i.e. in 1999, he and his son were quoted in the Chinese papers saying that the son thought Chinese was taught too sternly in class and it would not be as important as English.

Minister Ng said that he "is glad that Chinese B classes will allow his son to concentrate in other subjects. He laments that even when his son was spending 30-40% of his time in Chinese alone, he was not making any progress in his result at all. With the new scheme, he can now spend his time more efficiently on subjects he can understand better."

And so... I am guessing quite a few people are thinking that Minister Ng (now the Minister of Education) is trying to undo the disadvantage his kid(s) had faced with in their earlier school days.
..........................................................

There are a few issues all mangled up here. Let's try to detangle them for purpose of discussion.

(A) Stratification of the Chinese Language

Well, if you have been following my blog, I'm all for stratification of the Chinese Language (as a subject).

CL1, CL2, Higher Chinese, Chinese B, CL'A', CL'AO'... So many...

Why are there so many different names and 'grades' of the Chinese language as a subject in our Singapore education system?

The double first language system was started for a variety of reasons. Some made known to us, and probably others we would never know.

The point is, even with the 'Difficult' vs 'Less Difficult' options, some students cannot cope. Why, you may ask? Because I believe learning the Chinese language is more difficult because:

1. Of the way it is taught (e.g. always preaching certain values = jarring to the ears.); and more importantly,
2. It is used less often in the everyday life, especially if you are a teenager in an elite school, an English-speaking family, and attends mass in English. The less you use it, the more alien you find it, the more difficult it becomes, the more you resist it... vicious cycle. Remember, the contributing factors are 'Community' & 'Family'.

Does this mean the Chinese language is less important, as pointed out by Minister Ng's son? It depends on whether you intend to use your Chinese language skills later on in life, e.g. by then you need to work in China and/or with Mandarin speakers.

The Chinese language is a tool. Regardless, whether it's gonna form 25% of your PSLE or 2.5%, it's up to you to master it. And from the looks of how the world is developing, one would be silly to dismiss the importance of the Chinese language.

(B) Chinese Singaporeans & MT Weighting for PSLE

Why are the letters to the forum (both for and against) by authors with Chinese names? The change in Mother Tongue Weighting affects all Mother Tongues, and not just Chinese. Why no vehement responses from other racial groups?

I only belong to one racial group, so I can only theorise about this.

I think the Chinese group is making so much more noise about the MT weighting, relative to the other groups, because:

(B1i) There are simply more 'Chinese' in Singapore.
It's a bigger group. Hence, higher probability of noise-making. More noise = more attention.

(B1ii) Bigger group also means there are different factions within the group.

Remember 'Community' and 'Family' as mentioned above? Even when it says you are 'Chinese' on your NRIC, your way of life can be very different from someone else who is also 'Chinese'.

You may speak Mandarin to your folks at home, hang around friends/school mates who speak a mix of Mandarin/English/Hokkien, read comics in Chinese, and perhaps go to a Chinese temple for prayers. Your scriptures are in Chinese. Your priority is to watch Ip Man 2 instead of Ironman 2. Mayday over Jonas Brothers.

Meanwhile, this other 'Chinese' person is from an English-speaking family, attends mass in English, hangs around English-speaking classmates who come from similar backgrounds and consume MTV culture and Aston steaks. Their priority is to watch Ironman 2 instead of Ip Man 2. Jonas Brothers over Mayday.

The 'Community' and 'Family' for these 2 groups of Chinese Singaporeans are vastly different. The primary languges used are different too.

If you compare this effect of 'Community' and 'Family' with that of the Malay community, because they speak Malay at home, it's less likely for them to resist Malay MT lessons in school.

And it is highly plausible that the current debate amongst Chinese Singaporeans about the MT Weighting Reduction is in fact about social class (education is seen as a vehicle to move between classes. Hence, its fairness + access are being questioned).

The more 'cheena' Chinese Singaporeans do not want the revised system to benefit the more 'kentang' Chinese Singaporeans, citing a zero-sum game situation amongst the Chinese Singaporeans who take Chinese as MT at PSLE. I'll discuss this 'compeitition' later in the entry.

(B2) Lack of Choice
Because the Indian group is ethnically less homogeneous than the Chinese group. E.g. Sikhs are not Tamils. New immigrants from India are mostly not Tamil. Because of this, non-Tamil Indians are allowed to choose any language as MT. Having a choice may have helped to reduce unhappiness if and when these students don't do well at the MT exam.

(C) Invisible Factors affecting the Reduction of MT Weighting

I personally believe, with the flooding of our little isle with immigrants from all over the world, the MT system has to bend under such weight.

It's getting more difficult to provide appropriate MTs for all ethnicities of Singaporeans (especially New Immigrants). Hence, it is difficult to continue to argue that one has to be forced to learn a MT which doesn't really mean anything to his ethnicity, and that the grade forms a significant portion of his PSLE aggregate score.

In fact, it will make more sense very soon for all public schoolers to be able to choose a 2nd language from a range of languages, e.g. Chinese, Bahasa Melayu, Tamil, Hindi, Filipino (Tagalog), Vietnamese etc. In fact, this may be the next Unique Selling Proposition of Singapore's public school system, i.e. we offer an opportunity for your kid to learn an Asian language.

I also observe a glaring blind spot.
Those Singaporean Chinese, who do not want the reduction in MT weighting because they think their better command of the Chinese Language (relative to the more 'kentang' Singaporeans) gives them an edge, should stop competing inwardly and remind themselves that there are many PRCs who are competing against your kids in school now and in the future. And they can beat your kid at Chinese blindfolded and with their arms/legs bound.

Hence, reducing the MT weighting helps Singaporean Chinese to maintain some sort of advantage (I'm assuming your kid's command of English is better than that of the PRC New Immigrant/PR, hence resulting in some kind of advantage).