This “Thing” Called Majority (and Minority)

The Beware of those numbers! series

I would like to continue with our discussion on numbers (or, rather, the misuse of numbers) this time by discussing about majority, and its complement, minority. Why? Because you can easily come across people, whether in conversations or in writing, who like to throw in either of these words, especially if they believe it would lend credence to their argument. Beware of these people and their arguments the moment they say majority or minority.

The following article appears in the Sun, July 1, 2009. I do not wish to debate the merit of English as the language of business and technology—that’s a no-brainer. Neither do I wish to argue about English being the medium of instruction for teaching Science and Mathematics in our primary schools. If you are interested on this subject, please read my previous posts. But one thing I hope readers can be wary of is the last paragraph in the article. As usual, I have bold-emphasized the section(s) related to numbers.

————————————————————————–

‘My England not powderful one’
by R. Nadeswaran

IN September 1996, I argued profusely with the authorities at the Anglia Ruskin University in Chelmsford, England, who wanted me to sit for an English proficiency test after which they would decide if I had to attend language classes. By that time, I already had 24 years of journalism in English newspapers under my belt and I vehemently protested to no avail.

“All Malaysian students have to sit for this test and if need be, they will have to attend English classes so that they can better understand what is being taught,” was the curt reply. More than 90% of the 100-odd Malaysians who were government scholars sat this test. There were many casualties and of course, they had to spend endless hours at the language lab while some of us used our time trying to learn German.

When I read an email recently containing a note purportedly sent by the director of sports at a public university, my thoughts reflected on what happened 13 years ago at my university. Then of course, the two over-used phrases came to mind – “My England not powderful one” and “I no speaking Englang!” The email from the university, which had numerous grammatical and typographical errors is testimony to the deteriorating standards of English and what most Malaysians have to live with. If this was an isolated case, it would be understandable that we have one or two administrators who are incompetent in English. However, it has happened before. Remember the advertisement from another public university which caused a member of the Johor royal household so much embarrassment last year?

This administrator’s “mistakes” won’t be the last we read. More and more boo-boos will see print. More and more letters and circulars will make the rounds in cyberspace. It’s no laughing matter either. If administrators have such standards, what can you expect of the students?

Yes, the debate on the teaching of maths and science in English is continuing. Everyone wants to have his say – the academicians, parents, the politicians and of course the self-appointed guardians of mother tongue.

While no one wants to argue that language is a unifying factor, let’s not run away from the fact that mastering English is the way forward globally. Hence, despite all kinds of pressure and objections, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad pushed through his “reforms” in the education system so that Malaysians can compete in the international arena.

Sad to say, the bold step he took is now at risk of being reversed. Pressure is mounting on the authorities to go back to having one medium of instruction for all subjects because some quarters have turned it into a political hot potato. Some have argued that teaching the two subjects in English is an affront to Bahasa Malaysia being the official language. Others have likened it as being condescending to the colonial British masters who introduced the English education system. On the extreme side, we have those with blinkers who associate language with loyalty and patriotism.

Now, imagine having the director of sports as the chef de mission for an international sports tournament. How is he going to converse with his counterparts and officials? How will he understand the numerous circulars and directives issued by the organisers from time to time? How will he speak at the meetings of heads of contingents? How is he going to promote Malaysia? After all, isn’t such a post always associated with being the “sports ambassador for the country”?

Dear readers, I do not want to add to the thousands of comments which have appeared in this and other newspapers. The “Letters to the Editor” pages in most publications have been overwhelmed by the volume of mail on this subject. The Education Ministry has said that a decision would be made in the next few weeks. We can only hope that common sense aided by looking for long-term results would prevail. We cannot forsake our children’s future by taking a narrow-minded approach with politics being in the forefront. Any decision made must be thought out, argued and arrived at by looking at the benefits such a system would bring.

But we should never allow sentiments or a minority group to impose their will on all 27 million Malaysians. That would be of course, the beginning of the end of our dream of Malaysians being in the forefront of technology, much less a developed nation by 2020.
————————————————————————–

Let us focus on the author’s use of the word minority in the last paragraph.

I would like to ask the author how he arrived at the conclusion that the group (or groups, rather) who are supposedly against the policy of teaching Science and Mathematics in English represent the minority? Has he conducted a survey? If he has, how was it done? What was his sample size? By sample size I mean the number of people he surveyed. Did he sample those coming from urban areas and those living in rural areas? What was the racial mix? Social and economic background? You see, all these factors have an effect on the outcome to our conclusion whether it is majority or minority. Or, did the author draw his conclusion from reading feedbacks from the public who wrote to English newspapers? Or, perhaps by talking to his circle of family or colleagues who, in most likelihood, favor English? Some conclusion, the author has made! Can you see the potential biasness and hence, fallacy of his conclusion?

Don’t get me wrong. I love to read Nadeswaran’s Citizen Nades every Monday and Wednesday in the Sun. I support him on issues of corruption, accountability, and competency on the part of the authorities.

I’m afraid, though, he missed the point this time about teaching English as it should be, and teaching Science and Maths the way these subjects ought to be taught.

I could sense that in his haste and last-ditch effort to influence the powers-that-be, the author had fallen into the trap of misusing numbers.

Everyone, beware!