Raving Loony

The Star put it as a reversal.

That’s putting the decision to do away with “the teaching of Math and Science in English” policy very mildly.

To state the decision is not political is a load of bullshit.

The subjects will now be taught in multiple languages aka mother tongues.

Why not teach them only in Bahasa Malaysia for uniformity’s sake?

At least you can say that it’s would be for the country’s unity.

The students’ future.. Right, Tan Sri… right.

Imagine then that until the reversal takes place fully, the subjects would be taught in at least four languages.

From the Star: “Beginning 2012, students in Year One and Year Four in primary schools, and Form One and Form Four in secondary schools, will learn Math and Science in Bahasa Malaysia.

The change will not affect those in Form Six and Matriculation.

The two subjects will be taught in two languages until 2014 for other students.”

I hope they will not go stark raving mad.

Presumably some move could now be done to “gradually” undo the mistake of teaching our next generations in English and close the urban and rural gap.

The question must be then: closer to which point?

With evidence pointing to the most atrocious of proficiencies in the English language, could Muhyiddin “Reversal” Yassin truly say that an additional 90 minutes a week will help alleviate this deficiency?

Here’s another bummer of a justification from the Tan Sri:

“Only 19.2% of secondary teachers and 9.96% of primary teachers were sufficiently proficient in English.”

And why, pray tell, is this an important consideration?

Are 100% of teachers supposed to teach subjects in English that the small percentage be deemed crucial?

Whose fault is it that these teachers are not proficient? The students?

Maybe I am just overly emotional on this “reversal” (love this word.)

Perhaps, but I just read the UITM sports centre letter, and still remember the University Tun Hussein Onn advert debacle, so pardon my rants.

You can only take so much of “Powderful England” jokes.

Bollocks reversal.

Wonderful Woes

Here’s to looking at the bigger picture.

There is a lesson to be learned and it’s not only on language and its many semantics.

(Note that all italics are mine.)

On July 1, there was this headline : “PKA defers RM660m payout for PKFZ project.”

News reports cited its chairman verbatim: “The PKA board has resolved, on the basis of preliminary and provisional views obtained, to withhold these payments pending the completion of the full review by the task force.”

Anyone following with an iota interest the PKFZ affair would have either cried in jubilation or in desperation.

Scarcely a week later, another headline sneaked in: “PKA board to release payment to trustees of bondholders.”

Verbatim quoting goes: “PKA has also received instructions from the Treasury that the board be mindful of the implications that might affect the confidence of local and foreign investors in the Malaysian private debt securities market.”

Rm660 million is not chicken feed by a fair margin.

Much is at stake for the players concerned in the whole affair which has since slowed down in its momentum after a hectic stretch of public discussion.

Look at the quotes, though.

Notice the phrase “on the basis of preliminary and provisional views obtained” in the first report.

Preliminary and provisional means exactly that: they are but the first steps in a process, one that has now moved on.

Seems like some very careful choosing of words on PKA’s part.

The Treasury’s instructions on “implications” and “confidence” seemed indicative that they weren’t part of the prelims.

Whatever the case may be, the money will (perhaps it already has) make its way into the coffers of its “rightful” owners.

As to where the money will come from: “The RM660mil has already been made available to the PKA by the Finance Ministry.”

This was also verbatim from the July 1 report.

Makes you wonder about all the fuss, doesn’t it?

What a wonderful world.

Contagious: Shaun The Sheep

Green Thoughts

Ever heard of the phrase Greenwash?

I heard it the first time during a seminar on Green Buildings; spoken by a construction professional from New Zealand.

Without quoting verbatim, what he essentially said was this:

“The most effective methods to go green are usually the most cost effective and lay in good designs. Putting costly so-called green implementations to achieve the same is green wash.”

Going Green refers to moves by developers and building owners in getting accreditations for environmentally friendly design, implementations, management etc. with the recently launched Green Building Index Malaysia making it easier for local buildings to do so.

The essence of what the chap from NZ says is building designs that conform to the environment instead of the other way around do wonders in terms of environmental sustainability.

Things like building orientation, ventilations and openings, layouts; these are all built into any building’s design right from the start.

Adding green stuffs such as solar panels (easily one of the most expensive items any building could have) would make it iconic, shouting the building’s green intentions.

A not-so-great parable would be that of driving a hybrid around town when a bicycle is the best thing an environment could ever ask for.

Something like that.

The guy’s reasoning is spot on really: construction and environmental sustainability do not go so well hand in hand as the former would almost always have to pollute and plunder no matter what.

Going Green looks towards minimizing all the destructive impacts from construction by providing marks to environmentally friendly practices.

A detailed look into this subject would require a really, really lengthy discourse which I neither have time nor energy for.

You could certainly see some of these thinkings in the following art exhibition at the Artist’ Space in Concorde Hotel, Shah Alam.

The solo (at least I think it’s one) exhibition from Sabak Bernam-born Azhari Tasis is from this Saturday, July 4 to the end of the month.

It’s entitled: “Modernization, the Future and the Environment” and the show’s on from 11am to 11pm except on Sunday.

A sample is produced below.

Uneasy co-existence? You decide.