I was slightly irritated when I read in the Star yesterday that "Jiao Zong (United Chinese School Teachers Association of Malaysia) chairman Ong Chiow Chuen was quoted in the Sin Chew Daily as saying that the move would have a negative effect." This 'move' is in reference to the decision by the Ministry of Education (MOE) to implement a 5 star rating system for smart schools. I am fully supportive of moves by the MOE to release more information to the public at large which I think will create more transparency and accountability on the part of the school administrators as well as the Ministry. But why did Jiao Zong's chairman reject this ranking system?
First of all, I'm not even sure if there are any Chinese medium schools in the smart school project. A cursory examination of the list of smart schools show that these are all secondary schools and none of them could be considered, as far as I can tell, 'Chinese' national secondary schools in the sense that Catholic High in PJ is a 'Chinese' national secondary school i.e. most of the students are Chinese students from SRJK(C) primary schools and who take Chinese as a PMR as well as an SPM subject. So, I'm a little bit puzzled as to why Ong would object to the ranking of smart schools.
Secondly, his logic of rejecting the ranking of smart schools fails me. He said: "It would give the public a clear picture on how good or bad a school was and this would prompt parents to use all means to ensure that their children were placed in schools that are highly rated."
Given the fact that smart schools already receive greater funding and attention from the Ministry, wouldn't the demand to go to these schools already be sufficiently high? Also, aren't there current procedures which allocate students based on where they live which precludes the sudden streaming in of a large number of outside students who want to enroll in the best smart schools? Furthermore, aren't there other good schools out there which are not designated as smart schools?
As I'm from PJ, I'll use some PJ examples. I can't imagine that all parents would suddenly want to send their girls to Sri Aman since it is a smart school and it would probably do quite well in the ranking system given the demographic profile of the students who go there as well as their middle class and well educated parents. This is because there are other good schools in PJ such as Assunta and Catholic High.
I have to admit that I haven't read the full Oriental Daily interview with Ong. (If anyone knows of the link, please post it here and I'll read the full interview) So I might be guilty of not fairly judging his statements.
But this I will say and I say this based on a more general impression of Dong Jiao Zhong (Dong Zhong and Jiao Zhong) as organizations - that they are not keen on education reform and that they are not keen on being transparent internally and the basis of this attitude is that these organizations are governed and run by aging men who are conservative by nature. Anything that smacks of change is an affront to the way they like things to be - which is to preserve the status quo and not to have change.
While Dong Jiao Zhong has done a great deal in regards to protecting and raising awareness of the plight of Chinese schools in Malaysia, it has done less well in reforming the state of Chinese education in Malaysia. I will just point to two specific examples. They have failed to address the poor standard of English that is being taught and learned in Chinese primary schools as well as Chinese independent schools. So much so that they could not provide alternative proposals when the Ministry of Education decided to implement the teaching of Science and Math in English across all primary schools including Chinese primary schools. The second example is one which Tony has blogged about before - which is the issue of corruption among headmasters in Chinese schools.
The rejection of ranking schools is symptomatic of the conservative streak within Dong Jiao Zhong, I argue. If this leads to a ranking of Chinese primary schools, for example, it will reveal the myth that all Chinese primary schools are equally good at teaching Science and Math, for example, and perhaps reveal the poor standard of English among students in these schools as well as some of their teachers.
While having school rankings is not a panacea for the state of education in Malaysia, I regard it as a positive and progressive step. The fact that the chairman of Jiao Zhong has rejected this move further cements my impression that Dong Jiao Zhong is reluctant to reform itself and to take progressive steps to improve the state of education among Chinese primary schools as well as independent Chinese secondary schools.
20 comments:
Why do we need the government to implement those rankings? My bet is that as soon as the ranking is released, there will be various factions, including this blog, that will claim unfairness in the ranking---and that's because any government project is bound to be politically motivated.
Perhaps Descartes education center or other private institutions can do a better job ranking the schools by interviewing students teachers, collecting data, etc.
kian ming, i agree with you. A lot of the chinese associations are just oppositional and confrontional. they probably just hate changes, of any kind.
the smart school website is last updated on Last update:1/7/1999
..pff..it's just another failed project.
Thanks KM for raising some of the concerns that a person outside the chinese education system would have, based on the impression of Dong Jiao Zong as protrayed by the media. I would like to comment on some of your response.
1. 'They have failed to address the poor standard of English that is being taught and learned in Chinese primary schools as well as Chinese independent schools. So much so that they could not provide alternative proposals when the Ministry of Education decided to implement the teaching of Science and Math in English across all primary schools including Chinese primary schools.'
There are 2 issues being discussed here. The first is the standard of english in primary and chinese independent schools. I think it would come to you as a surprise that the standard of the english examination paper for the chinese independent schools is much higher than the SPM and PMR. This is based on personal experience. However, I won't comment on the MUET since I've not taken that paper before. Nevertheless, the standard of english differs from 1 school to another. I'm sure that even in the government schools, there is a huge disparity on the proficiency of english among the students themselves. The reason could be due to environment of the students (eg. urban vs rural) or the culture of the schools itself (eg. convent schools vs some purely malay school). Even in chinese independent schools, the syllabus are different. Some schools even use english textbook on science and mathematics from singapore! It would be difficult to compare the standard of english of students between the chinese primary school and the Sekolah Rendah Kebangsaan (SRK) since I don't have any data. However, in general, I would believe that teachers in chinese primary school are dedicated in their teaching in all subjects including english based on personal experience.
Perhaps KM could tell us the reasons that shows the standard of English is poor "only" with students from the chinese primary/secondary schools.
Secondly, they oppose the DRASTIC implementation of teaching science and maths in all primary schools. It has been known for a long time that there's a lack of 'competent' english teachers in Malaysia. They proposed that in order to improve the standard of english, the government should instead focus on improving the teaching of the English subject itself! Either by training better english teachers, introducing better english syllabus (eg. singapore syllabus if necessary) or by extending the duration of time teaching the english subject. Although there are a lot of students who are able to cope with the use of english in learning science and maths, the truth is that a lot of the students would do terribly. Many of those could not afford to take extra tuition classes to understand the terms in english let alone learn the various subjects in english. Their position is that using mother tongue to teach the students at that age on science and maths would be better for the overall population of students. Recently, there was an examination exercise conducted to determine the results of using english as a medium of student in maths and science. I'm not sure whether there's any data out there which shows the english standard has improved and did not adversely affect their understanding of maths and science.
2. 'which is the issue of corruption among headmasters in Chinese schools.'
Corruption is a prevailing issue in Malaysia. It is the job of ICA to curb such practice. I'm sure that there are issues of corruption in government schools as well. It's quite often for us to hear that control schools admit students who are not qualified under the influence of "rich and powerful" parents. Although Dong Jiao Zong has the authority to develop school grounds, the power of assigning headmasters to school still lies with the education ministry.
3. If this leads to a ranking of Chinese primary schools, for example, it will reveal the myth that all Chinese primary schools are equally good at teaching Science and Math, for example, and perhaps reveal the poor standard of English among students in these schools as well as some of their teachers.
I don't think everyone has the impression that ALL chinese primary schools are good at science and maths or poor in english. The perception is more of a general observation when compared to all SRK/SMK. I do believe that the dedication of the teachers in teaching in these schools are high! My neighbours who went to SMK (control ones) complained that the "premier" school do not have dedicated teachers to teach them. Many of them just ask the students to self study by themselves the whole time which to me is an indication of "poor" teaching.
4. Dong Jiao Zhong is reluctant to reform itself and to take progressive steps to improve the state of education among Chinese primary schools as well as independent Chinese secondary schools.
Actually, they do recognize that they need to reform from time to time. This is due to the low number of students that are enroling in chinese schools. The syllabus of the independent schools are also revised from time to time to improve the learning of the subjects. They do provide training to teachers either locally or overseas. However, as funding is limited, the onus is on the admistration of each schools to sponsor the teachers. The syllabus of chinese primary school is set by the education ministry but not by Dong Jiao Zong.
I've two schooling children, one at P & the other at S. Both of their schools are vernacular Chinese coed type.
I'm very involved with my children's school works. Thus I've born witnesses to the standard of English in the school of my children.
Its fair to say that the English papers of the Chinese vernacular schools are of higher quality than the national schools. The written papers are of fair quality.
However, when it comes to communicative English then all is lost. Their spoken English is just plain horrible!
Just an example, my daughter can write very decent English compositions, based on her current level in secondary. Her understandings of the English literatures that I bought for her is above average.
Yet her school environment is just not geared her towards as an English speaking crowd! This is the worst short-fall of the Chinese vernacular system to prepare the students for the outside world.
My son in primary is just more conversant in English speaking even thought he is in a Chinese vernacular environment. This is more of the fact that we, as a parent, talk more to him in English than Mandarin after knowing the communicative problem of our daughter. He is more of a bi-lingual than her sister, in his school works.
In the case of my daughter, her situation is just like chicken-&-egg argument. If there is not 'compelling' factors - like environment or English speaking buddies - then it will be hard, very hard to improve the English conversational skills.
I strongly believe that this scenario applies across the educational fields all over M'sia - be they national or vernacular.
Coming back to the topic I also strongly believe that all schools should be rated fairly & independently.
Two goods can come out of this exercise;
Firstly through proper ranking you create competition for the schools to improve. Nothing bet the feeling of overcome your next upper ranking targets. Also through self-awareness the schools & the students will try very best to maintain or improve themselves.
Secondly, & I think is the most important, to identify weak schools so that proper remedial steps can be taken to help to improve them. This will in turn help the students in these low ranking schools to get a proper educational environment.
I personally believe DongJiaoZong has done a great service to the Malaysian Chinese community. BUT I also think that the old guards should be more willing to change with time & functionality.
As it stands now DongJiaoZong is stagnant & directionless in vision while the world is changing.
Contributing money shouldn't buy you a position in this august organisation. Contributing efforts & ideas should put one in the driving seats.
Moreover DongJiaoZong should prepare for a flat world scenario in her educational processes where the students are skilled towards a world-views & not just Chinese-centred.
At the moment there are just too many pickerings about positions rather than efforts to face a new challenges!
Despite ranking system being a good idea, I believe it should be done by an independent party and not the government who themselves are the ones behind success or failure of the schools.
Why are Jiao Zong worried?
Have any of these ranking favoured Chinese schools before? I won't be surprised if teacher/student ratio becomes an element of high weightage. While number of teachers available is not within their control and there's obvious shortage in Chinese school with more students trying to get in and number of Chinese schools not growing in-line. So there may be a possibility that Chinese schools are all ranked at the bottom and then they can now claim "You see! Told you Chinese schools are not that great ...".
How did I come up with this impression (which I admit may be only my personal opinion)?
- Remember those days when there were "Remove Class" for Chinese school students? I was one of them that went through that system. My UPSR results was 5A and 1B (The A's include both BM papers from SK's standard, B came from Chinese Essay). The reason I was sent to "Remove Class"? They say "because my BM is not good enough as a was from Chinese school" ... Criteria to skip "Remove Class"? - You need all A's and 2 C's which can only come from BM papers, Chinese papers must be A. And trust me, it's extremely hard to get an A for Chinese paper in those days. Does the criteria match the reason? NO ... Why? Doesn't it look like an easy way to distort the progress of those learning Chinese?
- for PMR and SPM ... Try doing a research and see how many people score well in all subjects except Chinese? I for one would have been straight A's student for PMR if not for Chinese subject ... When its always harder to score well in Chinese paper, more Chinese don't get straight A's and it becomes alright to overlook them for scholarships, right?
Now if the ranking comes into play, can anyone wonder if the next scholarship criteria be "from the top 10 ranking schools", and Chinese schools don't make into the list because of students/teachers ratio.
Actually, there is no need for ranking system. Parents already knew which schools are good or bad. When the results of major exams come out, you can tell...
Govt no need to 'kepochee'. Do other better things such as prepare for Ijok elections
I whole-heartedly agree with Anon 2:28 above who stated that "I personally believe DongJiaoZong has done a great service to the Malaysian Chinese community. BUT I also think that the old guards should be more willing to change with time & functionality. As it stands now DongJiaoZong is stagnant & directionless in vision while the world is changing."
It is my view that if the DJZ is in a room discussing their actions and thoughts with the Mainland Chinese, the DJZ would be laughed out of the room, even if the others in that room come from rural China. As an example, just compare the sheer thirst of Mainland Chinese in pursuing the study of English and recognising English as an essential tool for progress, with the DJZ's efforts in Malaysia to encourage the learning of English, to the extent of what Anon above said about his kids.
Are they trying to be more Chinese than even the Mainland Chinese? How can intellectual progression take such a back-seat to the preservation of the Chinese language. Have the DJZ learnt nothing from the Singapore example?
I speak mandarin but do not read nor write Chinese. My many siblings were all from Chinese medium primary schools, yet I am undoubtedly the "AhPek" or "Chinaman" in the family- no way am I less of a Chinese than my siblings!
We cannot deny that the original idea and efforts were commendable, but I have seen nothing in the last 20 years that they have done that can move me to say anything nice about them.
As in all organisations, including our PM-ship, when incumbents are too long in power, the rot inevitably sets in and tends to decay in geometric progression.
I personally see (but it is only my view) that not only the DJZ is now ineffective, it is also becoming a stumbling block to the progress of the Malaysian Chinese. If the DJZ do not drastically revamp their thinking and machinery, the Malaysian Chinese would soon appear like "Ah Bengs" even to the rural folks from China.
It is very interesting to see comments on Anon 2:28pm and 9:04pm above. I'm curious to know what is their idea on the current direction of DongJiaoZong? Does the lack of attention of english media contributed to this factor? I think the obvious reason is that only the 'old guys' are protrayed prominently in the news such that nobody knows what is going on behind the back scenes. It's not a small group of old guys who are running the show. It's a collective of people, young and old, professionals and working class people who sacrificed their career and some even their freedom to ensure that the malaysian chinese would have decent education in chinese. Is the organization still irrelevant? I don't think so!
It's sad that their effort is not appreciated especially by anon 9:04pm who do not know at all what they have done not just in the last 20 years, but also during the early age of our nationhood. However, I can't blame you since you are not able to find out such information given the lack of fair coverage by non-chinese media.
I wish I could translate their website into english for the benefit of those who can't read chinese at all. However, the task is overwhelming for me. I leave it for those who are interested with the organization to find out for themselves. I'm sure they would also welcome good ideas and constructive suggestions to improve the education in Malaysia.
http://www.djz.edu.my/home.htm
In addition, many chinese residing outside malaysia are envious over the status of chinese education that is available here. Does learning in chinese makes you less accomplished or "ah beng"? I seriously doubt so. In fact, even Minister Lee Kuan Yew openly said that he regreted closing all chinese schools.
I really wonder how could we be more 'chinese' than chinese in china?? Nevertheless, have you really talked with any person from Mainland Chinese before? As much as they want to learn english, they would not for a moment give up their ability to master chinese in expense. On a personal note, the chinese from china are often surprised by our proficiency in chinese and at the same time, being multilingual. Would DJZ be laughed out of the room? I seriously doubt it. The chinese government recognizes the contribution of DJZ and the standard of the Unified Examination Certificate that they asked DJZ to recommend students to enter their prestigous university such as University of Beijing, Qinghua University with full scholarship. Please also bear in mind that even the Singapore government gave ASEAN scholarships to well deserving students to study in the local university as well.
I really wonder whether malaysian chinese would truly be improved if everyone is english educated. Bear in mind that in Singapore, their progress is mostly due to good government and meritocracy. If they are corrupt, I don't think they would make much progress even if they are all white!!
Here is the link to the original article in the Chinese daily.
http://www.sinchew.com.my/content.phtml?sec=1&sdate=2007-04-17&artid=200704171257
Personally, I don't think it's anything relavant to the standing of DJZ. However, what he said it true. Ranking would only encourage parents to ignore schools which are ranked lower. At the end, you would have a "class divide" among schools themselves, where schools that are ranked higher will consolidate their position due to influx of "better" students in the expense of "lower" ranked school.
More importantly, the article is pointing out 10,000 schools in malaysia! Not "smart school" program as taken literally stated by KM or inferred by The-star! I would paraphase the sentence to :
This 'move' is in reference to the decision by the Ministry of Education (MOE) to implement a 5 star rating system for schools "which are smart"
Actually, it is more of a translation error!! Nevertheless, it's sad to see this kind of misunderstanding for both readers of English or Chinese daily
Good points from ano 11:07pm.
Another issue with any ranking system, as objective as it can be, is that it could also be a tool manipulated to achieve certain goals. It is already a known fact that Chinese/Tamil vernacular schools are being 'ignored' by the government when it comes to fund allocation. What kind of assurance are we getting that the ranking system will not be used as a tool to further certain agenda? I still remembered that in the early 90s, when Dr.M visited my high school and made a donation of tens of grands, every major Chinese newspaper hailed that as one of the major news. It was really a nonsense as that amount could easily be matched by student fund raising activities within a few months. That is another sad story all together.
As Clayton mentioned earlier, if Teacher to Student ratio is used as one of the parameters, depending on the weightage, it will affect the ranking of Chinese schools as it is again a known fact that while the Chinese population in this great country has grown significantly over the last few decades, the number of SRJKC didnt increase in proportion.
Unless there is a separate ranking system for SRJKCs only (then it may defeat the purpose of ranking in the 1st place), I cant see how the ranking system can be fair, given the disadvantage SRJKCs have on parameters such as Teacher to Student ratio and Student to PC ratio (to name a few), due to unfavorable circumstances.
For those who doubt about DJZ's roles and plans, probably as Ano 11:07pm suggested, please try to understand what DJZ has done via their websites and other sources. If you can't read Chinese, please get help from friends before criticizing. It is easy to give up certain rights (rights to learn your mother tongue and culture, for example), but once given up, it is hard to get it back.
I am all for having Chinese classes in SRK to make sure every student who wants to learn Chinese can do so. However, I simply dont have much faith in MOE's policy that may change from time to time. I would rather be on the safe side. That is, keep the SRJKC system to give our next generation(s) another choice.
By the way, the original article referred to JZ's comment on MOE's intention to eventually use SSQS (used to rank 88 Smart Schools currently)to rank 10000 schools nationwide by 2010. It is quite sad that The Star, as one of the leading newspaper in the country, chose to only publish certain portion of the news which somehow misled KM and other readers.
Hi there Kian Ming & Tony P,
GE International is providing internship opportunities to top talents from local universities. I was wondering if we could leverage your site to provide your readers on an opportunity to pursue the said program. My apologies for not emailing you. I could not find a link.
Thanks,
internship.malaysia@ge.com
I personally went to a SRJK(c) and Chinese independent school, and later pursued a degree in the US. I agree there is big room of improvements in today's CIS (Chinese independent schools) education curriculum especially in English department. But overall I never regretted my decision to enter the CIS school.
Besides just because Dong Jiao Zong's chairman opposes the idea of government produced smart school ranking system, doesn't reflect the DJZ (Dong Jiao Zong) collectively a stubborn and counter-progressive group. Similarly, the fact of George Bush supporting Iraq war doesn't make the entire American society inhuman & war supportive.
DJZ may be conservative, but even a pretigious school like Harvard or Oxford can be conservative sometimes. Education is a key ingredient that shapes an entire community's thinking. These educators bear strong responsibility for any new implementation which in return affecting the future of countless youngs.
When I first read about the ranking system, I thought it's not a bad idea. Then on second thought, I began to wonder myself do we need an official ranking system so the parents make comparison with others whether their kid is currently attending the top 5 school or the last 5 school in the region? What if my kid happened to enroll in the last school on the scale, does that make my kid less smarter than those who luckily admitted in the top 5? Would that hurt my kid's admission eligibility or self-confidence when he/she later applies for tertiary schools?
Then I started wishing there's a different approach to attain a more balanced schooling system across the country.
On the other hand, I also doubt its credibility when the ranking is monitored by Ministry of Education. Having read many stories & experiences from those who attended or taught in local universities these days, it seems there's a hidden political influence steering the faculties and students these days (which i hope it isn't true). Therefore I genuinely hope this isn't another political tool to mislead the public.
I completely agree with Kian MING,
you can't really innovate if you remain conservative.
Fear to fail,kiasu?
As Billi Lim said,"DARE TO FAIL".
Only from failure we can learn something.I'm urging all Chinese communities to think outside the box.
I still can't believe that, the government that spent SO MUCH EFFORT to bring down the chinese vernacular schools, would give something "good" for the chinese community. I have a feeling only one or two chinese vernacular schools will be rated as smart schools by the government.
Actually, without the ratings, parents even now knew which schools are best for their children. People talk about it. I talk about it with my neighbours. I know which schools are infested with rotten kids. I talk about it, people talk about it.
Some even spent as much as few thousands to bribe the head master to get their kids to the "prestidge" schools they so wanted for their kids! Even without the ratings, corruptions already there. So, is corruption got to do with whether a school is rated or not? Certainly, it has little impact whatsoever.
For those who said DJZ have done not much for the chinese vernacular schools, please be fair a bit. One thing I'm not very sure is how does DJZ make their decision? Is it Ong, the aging man as some put it, is the ultimate decision maker? or is it a collective of decisions from parents as well? I hope those who concerns about the faith of chinese vernacular schools do their research more thoroughly instead of shooting out straight away, please!
Dear Sir,
You are completely biased against the DJZ and what they have done. Your views are consistently lopsided.
For example:
They have failed to address the poor standard of English that is being taught and learned in Chinese primary schools as well as Chinese independent schools.
What rubbish!
Would you object if WWF failed to address the poor quality of broadband service in the Klang Valley?
The ranking system again, is proposed and controlled by the government through the ministry of education.
If we detail the list of "proposals" originating from the education ministry, I believe almost everyone would/should be thankful that DJZ has been conservative and consistent.
What rubbish? I tell u what rubbish.
The rubbish is about ranking will be equal to transparent. You don’t know Malaysia have all kind of ranking meh?
But I thought education is about not one less?
English in the non CIS very good kah?
If there is no DJZ and Chinese vernacular school, Malaysia ingalish standad is no different from Thailand and Indonesia.
You people please keep your mouth shut on issue you know very little lah.
Talking about the poor standard of english, it is not just the among the chinese schools students.
To begin with my analysis, just look at our neighbour down south, education emphasizes on english so much... but most people there still speak singlish instead of english. Why? This is because of the singapore culture, majority of the people still speaks hokkien and mandarin at home, even in schools with friends.
When english were spoken over here the malay educated speaks manglish, chinese educated speaks chinglish, the tamil educated speaks inglish. And when we meet, our english language 'bercampur aduk'.
None of us (I'm talking about the ordinary and not the news reporters we see on TV) can speak really fluent and proper english.
So bringing DJZ into the blame of the standard of english sounded really funny. Because I know so many chinese educated who can write extremely well english documents but couldn't speak so fluently. What I noticed those who speaks really good english are from a family who speaks english at home and tends to speak the language at school more.
There is no way a student can speak real fluent english in a mandarin speaking environment, so the only argument is to close down all non-english speaking schools and emphasize only in english like our neighbour, but we have witnessed it didn't work either.
Could it be our cultures the main obstacles? To me, they are. We have to throw them away, just like the chinese-american or african-american.
Maybe not only the DJZ is conservative, we malaysians are convservative as a whole. How many of us are willing to change by throwing away our culture? Can a family completely speak english? Even if there is, very few. Eventhough most house holds in PJ grow up in an english speaking environment, other parts of the country still speaks languages other than english at home as well as at school with friends.
You can't deny that language is part of the culture that people were reluctant to put them to history. Many would feel it is a pity to do so.
Dear Kian Ming, it is up to you to delete this comment if you don't want other people to read it because it make you looks bad.
IMHO. the "weak reason" by DJZ does serve it purpose because they don't want to make people in MoE look stupid and disgusting!
1. A ranking system for a primary/secondary school is like a beauty contest. It is commercial in nature! What else, to promote and market the school. So what people do during a beauty contest will happens exactly to the school.
Since nobody know what is the judging criteria, you can bet that school involve in the "beauty contest" will try their best effort to bribe the judge.
So nice, now you just bring another corruptions system to the school.
2. Guess what happens to school with different ranking? Just imagine those school children meet up, they will check the school ranking. So at the end, it become a caste system. So when we try to teach the young about "equality" of human value, you introduce a new system to make them fight.
How nice!!
3. Did MoE draw any plan to improve school given a low ranking? If no, than what is the reason of ranking? If yes, then where is the plan?
4. Hello, in the real world, there is method called ASSESSMENT. If the objective are mean to help the school with poor results, why you must create trouble and make beauty contest like ranking system? Making assessment is simple, you don't need to find the "winner" or loser", you just need to find weakness inside the system.
WHY DO SCHOOLS NEED RANKINGS? DOES THAT MEAN THE GOVERNMENT WOULD ALLOW SUB-PAR TEACHERS THAT TEACH IN SUB-PAR SCHOOL TO TEACH SUB-PAR STUDENTS THAT WOULDN'T QUALIFY INTO GOOD JOBS BECAUSE THEY CAME FROM A SUB-PAR SCHOOL?
The logic behind DJZ's decision is simple, go learn the chinese phrase :" You3 Jiao4 Wu2 Lei4"
Ranking schools is just the same as slapping Hishamuddin and Malaysians.
Post a Comment