LETTER | Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek has urged the public to “stay objective over new DLP guidelines”.

The principal objective of the Dual Language Programme (DLP) as touted by the Education Ministry is that it will first improve the children’s command of the language used in the DLP classes (originally English and now also Malay).

This is but a perception or figment of the imagination of the person who first mooted the idea of DLP to improve command of language and which others are merely following (because the idea came from somebody “big” - the then-PM himself - though he is not an educationist).

The programme was first introduced in 2003 as Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sains dan Matematik Dalam Bahasa Inggeris (PPSMI). At one point it was discontinued, then quietly restarted. The present DLP is a recycling and rebranding of this failed programme.

Was the PPSMI successful? According to education expert Ishak Haron, it was a failure. His research showed that “the shift to English-medium instruction negatively impacted students’ comprehension and interest in mathematics and science subjects”.

That failed programme is now being introduced as DLP where science and maths will be taught in Malay in the Chinese schools. These and all other schools already have Bahasa Melayu classes which are compulsory. Improve the teaching of Malay in these classes.

It is agreed that all schoolchildren should be proficient in both Malay and English but many have not reached an acceptable level of competency. This is because of ineffective teaching of these languages in the early years of schooling, ie Years 1 to 3. Young children pick up languages fast by just hearing them spoken correctly and imitating what they hear.

The minister should instead look into the teaching of languages in the first three years of schooling as the problem lies there. This is where the most competent language teachers are needed. It is far easier to lay a strong language foundation at this level than to do corrective work later.

The policy statement that the DLP is for the purpose of “Upholding Malay Language and Strengthening Command of English” (MBMMBI) means nothing if it fails to achieve the objective as proven by the failure of the PPSMI.

It is therefore foolhardy to compel compliance with a failed programme as it is not going to produce different results.

In the 1950s there was no such thing as DLP but children were able to achieve high competency in both the Malay and English languages. The language teaching methodology of that time should be adopted now.

Put aside egos and overhaul the teaching of languages where it matters most - the first three years of schooling.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.