Views from the Garden

By Prof Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak - December 16, 2018 @ 9:22am

SF: It must be better balanced at the level of the individuals, institutions and nation with some semblance of Key Intangible Performances infused in. LIFE in the age of robotics (read automation and autonomous devices), unlike some would argue, is not about living at “the speed ‎of light”. We draw this lesson from the current age of “fast” movement, notably that of “fast food”, where we are supposed to gobble up our food quickly even while walking (on the pretext of being busy or important) — all in the belief that things must be carried out “faster”, emulating a machine and forgetting that it has no need for food.

Conventional wisdom, however, tells us that only animals “feed” as they move around (think of cattle grazing and poultry pecking). This says volumes about the “disruption” of adab (manners) that the machines cause, making us less human. We have not even broached the value that they introduce — the fact that “fast food” is considered junk. Worst, it is now well-linked to many life-threatening diseases that are ever on the rise. These are not limited to major killers like obesity, diabetes and heart complications that have been shown to prematurely shorten our lifespan like a lightning flash. While the new era speaks about ageing society, the “shortening” of lifespan seems to stand in stark contradiction due to some form of aberrant human behaviour.

Why aberrant? Precisely because humans are not machines and that human life cannot be automated like we do robots. Artificial intelligence (AI) and human intelligence are two very distinctive make-ups and creations. When that distinction is blurred it becomes not just an aberration but seriously problematic.

The former after all is man-made; the latter is divine-inspired which demands different obligatory roles in the search for a deeper meaning of “life”. Similarly, its interpretation of success both here and in the hereafter going beyond bottom lines, and  acronyms like GDPs (gross domestic product) and KPIs (key performace indicators) as dictated by the AI logic of economics.

In addition, it knows of no higher purpose that is a disconnect to the mechanised activities of human capital, if not posing as counter-purposes in realising the “true” meaning of life. What is sure is that it impinges on the quest for success, turning it more into some numbers game.

So today, success is periodically (mis)measured in numerical terms (including the number of “likes” or “followers” on social media); otherwise reduced to percentages and figures to be ranked coming out of the management clichés viz., “what gets measured, gets done”, which we have swallowed whole unthinkingly (think Pemandu).

Contrast this with the profound observation made by Einstein: “All that counts cannot be counted. Not all that can be counted counts.” No wonder Einstein is recognised as a genius surpassing the best of all management gurus to date given their narrow preoccupation and obsession with bean-counting even as the disparities get wider over the years.

Ironically still, this gets to set the rules that by and large pushes the world to be out of balance. At the same time, rendering “life” to machine-like routines by discounting “all that counts” just because they cannot be counted “managerially”. In other words, ethics, integrity, morality, collegiality, hi-touch, and being human are relegated to the back- burner, if not thrown out of the window together with its numerous socio-ethical ramifications.

It is not surprising, therefore, to note that even at a very tender age, preschoolers are fed with activities spurred by numeracy and literacy, instead of nurturing and strengthening aspects of civility and accountability as the roots to educating a holistic human person.

All these are done in imagery of machines that humans are supposed to eventually emulate as education loses its soul. Meaning, they are potential citizens of the world of instant gratification who appreciate successes and excellence by the price tags (read commodatised knowledge) they carry. Rather than the inherent human (if not divine) values closely interwoven into it. In short, what is vital is the achievements of the extrinsic KPIs; falling short of the intrinsic Key Intangible Performances (KIPs) of ethics, integrity and morality to name a few. Succinctly, it is about the ends justifying the means.

So when the announcement to review the role and relevance of KPIs was made by the chief secretary to the government recently, it brought a huge sigh of relief. For instance, in the academic world, KPIs have virtually no place unless it is deemed as a factory that produces standardised “products” (like how graduates are now labelled) lending support to the proliferation of league tables sans the KIPs. As its unintended consequences the number of “dishonest” academic activities begin to mount simultaneously ranging from plagiarism to downright unethical behaviours of corruption and abuse of power. This can only worsen if nothing drastic is done.

Therefore, moving forward, the notion of KPIs must be revisited and revised. It is our ardent hope that the new and bold steps taken will inspire fresh mindsets and behaviours that could save the existing situation from being hijacked, and corrupted.

In summary, it must be better balanced at the level of the individuals, institutions and nation with some semblance of KIPs infused into it. In its present form it is conceptually inadequate as a measure without bringing in the intangibles (those not easily measured) that are innate to human beings. A good place to start is the National Education Philosophy (NEP) because education underlines it all. As it stands the NEP is 360 degrees — because it advocates a “balanced and harmonious person” that is rarely seen in other policy documents, including those pertaining to the civil services that hinge mostly on human capital, theory intentionally or otherwise.

‎The writer is a honorary fellow of CenPRIS, and the Rector of IIUM. 

Source: https://www.nst.com.my/opinion...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak / 12 Dec 2018

I TEND to generally agree with the prime minister’s comment on the unbridled state of corruption plaguing the nation.

However I can only rely on my childhood memories where each time such cases were reported chances were that the involvement of Malays would be minimal, if at all.

As Tun says, it was not part of the culture then in contrast to what we are witnessing today bordering on kleptocracy.

The reason for this is because the word “malu” is so much ingrained into the culture that it becomes almost a deterrent not to be on the take.

“Menconteng arang di muka ibubapa” is enough to incite a strong emotion that makes “malu” an effective firewall.

But that sense of shame has lost its meaning when greed for “prestige” got into the game.

The “malu” factor took a different slant, in reference to a status symbol.

Not having this and that, or falling short of some arbitrary (often self-made) prestigious symbols is the new normal for “malu”.

In fact, it becomes the convenient entry point for corrupt and unethical practices in keeping up with the Joneses.

This describes the current state of affairs many times over.

“Malu” today applies differently, that is, when one is unable to afford some of the so-called “basic” to be recognised and accepted among the select few as framed by some lucrative material standards.

This new normal turns the word “malu” on its head.

At times justified superficially as a political necessity to cling on to “power” falling right into the very trap of “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

Welcome to the world of money politics in all its forms where “cash is king” – from the lowest to the highest levels of the political hierarchy.

Horizontally, it works across party lines especially among those belonging to the same coalition endorsing such culture as the winning streak for all intents and purposes.

This has unfolded in front of our very eyes.

Hence I vividly recollect as a teenager what my grandfather reminded me of the two types of people that I must differentiate in navigating the future.

The first are those who genuinely want to assist others as part of their sincere commitment to the nation-building strategy.

The second, however, are those who will only do so to help themselves.

He used the term “hypocrites” to describe the latter.

This group was “unmasked” in another discourse.

Yet, for the longest time I naively thought that they were few and far between.

After all thus far then I had been exposed to many stories of the unsung heroes as role models who gave not only their wealth but also their lives to ensure that we remain independent and sovereign.

Some of them are relatives and some others are within the family circle.

Amazingly, the genuine selfless spirit could be felt and embraced by the younger generation of Malaya Merdeka and later Malaysia Merdeka.

By and large, the feeling is contagious and nurturing another generation of unsung heroes.

Their sense of pride is bolstered by an acute sense of “malu” and of not wanting to embarrass the nation in the eyes of the world come what may.

Often this took the form of “give-and-take” so that peace and harmony was maintained, turned into the beacon of multiculturalism that reduced to a mere community among communities thanks to the calculative colonial policy of divide-and-rule.

Yet it has persisted until today and cast a long shadow in the new human rights polemics as ICERD ‎took centre-stage.

The Saturday outing is evident of this; so too the Sunday response as it were. All said and done, “human rights” is alive and kicking, Malaysia Baru style.

Still some alleged that the Malays are out to embarrass one another.

It may be so but going by the simple observation that my grandfather made, this is nothing new.

Sadly, we are more than 50 years late in our analysis to make any substantial difference.

The “malu” factor is now upside down.

No pronouncement will be able to bring it back as there is little shame left to motivate anyone unlike previously.

It is now no different to what Robert Kuok wrote in his memoir citing how the Chinese while hugging and kissing in public have their daggers half-drawn.

Now it is keris too given the kind of polemic to hypocritically help the Malays in order to help themselves.

The others are not spared either as each is also desperate to survive politically.

Ultimately, Malaysia takes a beating and suffers from an even greater shame in the eyes of the world. Predictably, my grandfather would have quipped: I told you so.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that “another world is possible”. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

MALAYSIANS are familiar with the word “halal”. To most, however, it is confined largely to gastronomical matters relating to how food is prepared for consumption by Muslims based on the tenets of Islam. Some liken it to kosher food of the Jewish faith.

While this is fair comment, it is not limited to just food. Given its broad meaning as “permissible”, this applies to almost anything that relates to how Muslims must act so long as they do not transgress the limits set by the tenets of Islam. This is where the word “halal” often falls short in its interpretation and practice.

Using the food example, “halal” also covers the source of food and its preparation that must be proved to be safe and hygienic. Food from a “halal” source can become toxic (eg due to adulteration) at the preparation stage and when this happens it is no longer permissible. Likewise “halal” food that is obtained illegally by corrupt means or unethical means is not permissible. The fine line of what “halal” is all about has faded in the eyes of the public.

To others, “halal” is simply about being “pork-free” and everything else is permissible. It is not that simple. Neither is it a “licence” to transact business the Muslim way. It is about ensuring and promoting overall quality of life. Unfortunately, such an enlightened interpretation has fallen on the wayside as “halal” quickly becomes synonymous to economic activities measured in the trillions of dollars globally. With the vulgarisation of “halal” into a very narrow definition, it loses its deeper inherent value.

For that reason one can appreciate why tobacco and alcohol cannot qualify as “halal” products. There is ample scientific evidence to show that these are “harmful”. By most accounts? they have been proven to threaten overall quality of life at least in the long run as it tends to be associated with addictive tendencies.

Another aspect of “halal” that is rarely broached is the behavioural dimension that prevents one from falling into extreme “relationships” as a way of living, against what is sanctioned by the tenets of Islam. For example, a relationship forged through marriage in the Islamic way is often described as “halal” but not otherwise. So too relationships built on activities to do good and prohibit the bad.

In lay terms, it is about “adab”. The reverse is “biadab” (uncouth). The ultimate aim is to erect a social order conducive to peaceful and harmonious living. The use of “halal” in this context is to encourage trustworthy and healthy relationships within the Islamic framework. The opposite such as bullying and other forms of aggression are not permissible.

The blending of this aspect into a “total halal” concept is what I observed during my recent visit to Japan – a nation that is well-known for its decorum in most aspects of daily living. Now with its interest in “halal” food, it brings back what has gone amiss as mentioned above. For example, in the cafeteria of the campus where the meeting was held, the “halal” menu appeared side by side with the regular Japanese food. Although the seafood used to be the default “halal” – and need not carry the “halal” insignia, this time it did together with the non-seafood items implying that even the seafood-based items have undergone a different treatment in rendering it “halal” unlike previously.

Add this to the very visible hygienic environment what with the behavioural decorum of systematically serving the preferred food items without upsetting the quiet ambience, the full meaning inherent in the term “halal” is fully restored, beyond just its economic status. In short, “halal” in the Japanese context is able to realise the real virtue of “halal”.

This is in stark contrast with what is reportedly happening in China which is said to be retrogressive.

Of late, the word “halal” is allegedly being discontinued where it once was proudly displayed by its Muslim citizen in “autonomous” regions. Several reliable accounts point to the “downgrading” of the use of the word from its original Arabic script to just the Chinese script; and more recently, none whatsoever is allowable.

That is to say, the customers, especially Muslim tourists are unable, or have great difficulty, to recognise which eateries offer genuine (certified) “halal” products. Without certification there is no guarantee the term “halal” is being complied with diligently. After all there is no requirement to be accountable to any authority responsible for promoting a genuine “halal” culture.

Once again, this is in sharp difference with several Japanese cities where “total halal” outlets are being introduced. They do not even serve alcoholic drinks. Some offer separate meal sets and forks and spoons for “halal” use only, without marginalising the excellent decorum that the Japanese culture is noted for – especially the hospitality and utmost concern to best serve the client. This is one big step forward in ensuring that the overall standard of “halal” is not compromised in any way when blended with Japanese cultural values. After all this is not new to Islam which allows the best of the local culture to be merged seamlessly.

Historically we witnessed this in the original Silk Route where Islamic values and norms of local cultures played a tremendous role in promoting inter-cultural bonding and holistic living. In this sense, it is difficult to understand what China is up to now especially in areas where the majority have been Muslims for centuries. It is therefore hoped that the Malaysia-Japan halal link can help refresh many selective amnesic memories as we forge ahead for the betterment of humanity.

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak / 28 Nov 2018

SULTAN Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah, who is also the deputy Yang di-Pertuan Agong, last week labelled corrupt politicians “the most dangerous enemy of the people”, likening them to “hypocrites” whose double speak took a heavy toll on the country’s state of integrity.

He also quoted the Quranic term “munafik” (singular) to describe the hypocrites who dwell on the heinous culture of insatiable greed for material wealth and power while pretending to be virtuous and religious at all times. He alleged that this was also the cause of “division” among those who have kept good faith and loyalty towards them.

In Islam, the “munafiqun” (plural) are referred to as a group who outwardly behave as Muslims but inwardly profess disbelief and insidiously seek to undermine the community.

The hypocrisy could be expressed in many ways such as directed towards God with respect to the actual faith; or towards its tenets, for example, by not taking heed in practising the faith or refraining from contravening the belief and faith, thus committing sins because of them. And yet pronounce the “fear” or “devotion” to God.

Still hypocrisy can be towards fellow humans, and described as double-faced and forked-tongued; praising someone sky-high in their presence or publicly, but denouncing them behind their back or privately in a slanderous manner.

Or as we often hear today, holding someone in high esteem (read apple-polishing) even though it causes injustices and pain to many others, but doing exactly the opposite the very moment that someone is out of favour. Like chameleons, they have no shame about changing their colour at will.

In the world of adulation and admiration, hypocrisy is often just a short distance away. Especially when one is in denial, or blinded by fear, or blinkered to toe the partisan line, or sheer herd-mentality to gain as much as possible in the shortest possible time, hypocrisy will be the likely consequence.

Thus corrupt behaviour and traits become prevalent and tolerant as the “new” norm that is to be expected in several feudal practices worldwide where the risk of being ostracised or even punished is real, if not daunting, namely for the unprincipled and faint-hearted.

For this reason, the Quranic verses on hypocrisy mostly refer to hypocrisy in belief and politics (read survival) which often result in chaos and mischief. After all, the hypocrite speaks and acts contrary to what he harbours in his heart. The Quran warns categorically against committing to something when there is not the slightest intention in the heart to put it into practice in reality. This is enough to make one a hypocrite.

In summary, hypocrites are more widespread when generally understood to include those who pretend to hold on tightly to virtues, morals or religious beliefs and principles, while in fact faking it, especially through actions that subtly betray the said beliefs and sentiments.

In other words, a hypocrite is also a liar who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, while in private, his opinions or statements grossly contradict the public expressions. No doubt, such a broader understanding is not limited to those in politics or in leadership positions. Invariably almost everyone is hypocritical the moment he or she fails to walk the talk when it is not convenient to do so. More so, just to keep up with their status, desires and domination at the expense of the rakyat.

Like the Greek root word hypokrite which means “an actor” or “a stage player”, hypocrisy is about being two-faced and taking on contradictory “roles” in propping up a lifestyle and value system that are exploitative and unethical if not immoral. This is commonly acted out in ancient Greek theatre where the actors hide behind large masks to show which character they are depicting, and play out the role without being fully recognised. Such dramas are almost a daily affair today in the real theatres of life. In fact, it can be so blatant that the “mask” could be an entire institution or system that provides “protection” to the hypocrite(s) causing the issue to worsen beyond anyone’s imagination. Under such circumstances, little can be done, short of unmasking those involved to ensure justice for the rakyat.

The time has indeed come for justice to take its course through legitimate channels. This may not be as simple because the hypocrites will not leave any stone unturned to ensure their survival.

Some are still in denial. Nevertheless, rest assured that justice will prevail in due time when there is no longer any place to hide. Hypocrites by nature are spineless and self-serving and this is their Achilles’ heel once the process of unmasking takes effect. However, they have no qualms dragging the whole system down with them if they cannot get their way. The situation can get ugly before we see the last of them.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that “another world is possible”. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

read more; https://www.thesundaily.my/opi...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

MALAYSIA is said to be among the few countries that have crafted their own philosophy of education nationally. This was made known to the audience at the Seminar on Values-based Education last week at the International Islamic University Malaysia.

The philosophy aims to provide the country with a better focus and direction as to how education could enhance Malaysia's standing as a nation that is independent to shape and inform her own destiny as well as identity.

Coming on after 30 years of Merdeka that ignited the same aspiration, the move to develop an education philosophy is apt and strategic in its intent. It is after all a negotiated document that brings together enormous goodwill among the citizens of a newly-born sovereignty.

Like the Rukun Negara that came into being in 1970 as a positive reaction to the aftermath of the May 1969 tragedy, the Falsafah Pendidikan Negara (FPN) acted in the same way to "educate" the nation to be unified and cohesive as a sovereignty. In essence, it acts like the Rukun Negara taking on the educational platform by articulating each of the five principles of the former in more ways than one.

In fact, the FPN must be read alongside the Rukun Negara as a social contract among its loyal citizens.

Unfortunately the Rukun Negara falls short of the targeted goals causing a cry, more recently, to re-institutionalise it. That few among us can recite the principles of Rukun Negara, is a strong indication of how, we, as citizens take real interest of Malaysia's state of being.

It is therefore not a coincidence that theSun is the only newspaper (if not among mass media as a whole) that carries the Rukun Negara as a matter of concern beyond that of reporting routine news.

This further sums up the state of lethargy when it comes to promoting the Rukun Negara to the public. In the same way, much can be said about the educational ecosystem that is almost devoid of the Rukun Negara too - in letter and spirit, as a common values system cutting across the nation and its populace. So it is not surprising if even fewer of the current generation have even heard of the FPN (1988), less still to understand what it all entails in the search for knowledge and purpose to be educated as Malaysians as well as global citizens in tandem with the international and civilisational worldviews.

It has now been another 30 years since FPN made its debut, and underwent some small but significant changes; and was renamed as Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan (FPK) in 1996. Although in reality the spirit remains unchanged, still its impact remains insufficiently recognised when it comes to embedding values.

However this by no means implies that it is no longer relevant to the educational development of the day. Far from it. Instead the very fact that Unesco in the same year released the Four Pillars of Learning for the 21st Century is evident enough. This is because the four pillars resonate well with FPK and arguably with another Unesco-led agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals as the Education 2030 Agenda.

FPK if properly conceived and executed will not only be relevant for the future, but also vibrant and humanising in its impact. In the words of Education Minister Maszlee Malik, when officiating the seminar, "it's not enough for children to know how to read, count, and write. They must care about humanity too.

" He recognised that the FPK is still very relevant although it has been neglected in the new millennium He said the FPK focuses on producing balanced individuals through continuous and holistic efforts based on a belief in God.

The FPK is fully endorsed and supported by participants of the seminar to be lifted up again as the values-based education system in meeting the demands of the future. This is deemed more important than the "profitdriven" ranking because the latter gives no assurance "to produce graduates who are good citizens, who care about the environment, and are considerate of others."

Source; The Sun Daily

Read more; https://www.thesundaily.my/opi...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

EACH time an announcement is made about a university conferring honorary awards, chances are it involves an individual. This has been the norm among Malaysian universities.

Certainly they are deserving in most cases, but individuals are also part of communities. And when they act collectively, the impact and contributions are almost always greater than the sum of parts.

One such example is the Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) that the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) has proudly chosen to recognise and push the boundaries of distinctions away from just individuals.

This is actually not new since many august institutions have adopted something similar including those of Nobel Peace laureates where any one individual is too "small" to prevail. The fight against climate change or nuclear disarmament are two examples where the Nobel Peace Prize went to two formidable organisations. CAP is no less formidable in the same sense on the basis of which it was conferred the Inaugural Ibn Khaldun Merit Award (Ikma) for its colossal contribution towards global social transformation.

Echoing the universal stature of Ibn Khaldun and his ideas about kinship, solidarity and the relationship between culture and environment, IIUM introduced Ikma to elevate his scholarly legacy for the world to reflect on. It is intended to highlight the value of organisational effort within the community and to promote its achievements as positive role models for both the government and non-governmental sectors in delivering distinctive community service across humanity.

The award recognises those who consistently endeavour towards such objectives in advancing sustainable development to be more participatory, directly or indirectly, in bringing about the global social transformation.

CAP, as the first recipient, is no stranger to this given the untold contributions it champions ranging from consumer rights to interests of the underprivileged and marginalised members of the community for almost half a century. Even universities cannot claim such achievements.

Over the years, CAP expanded its role to cover environmental protection and monitoring; promoting environmental education, training and capacity-building as well as research. It also partners with other agencies; and cooperates with other regional and international bodies in spreading the best way to manage such issues. More recently it embraced the concept of sustainable development as a culmination of it all.

In so doing, CAP's wide-ranging efforts in rooting sustainable development through participation, advocacy and research, have brought numerous benefits to Malaysian society as a whole and also globally. In summary, CAP has been successful in advancing community or individual actions for greater accountability on the part of the government and corporate sectors.

Since its establishment in 1970, CAP has diligently highlighted the rights and interests of Malaysians from all walks of life especially the deprived and disenfranchised members of society. It took bold steps to solve innumerable problems faced by just about anyone and on anything.

With the tagline "giving a voice to the little people" this non-profit, independent organisation ensures the right of consumers to food, housing, health care, sanitation facilities, public transport, education and a clean and healthy environment. This started at a time when such awareness was still very low and terms like B40 were not fashionable.

Yet CAP stood its ground without compromise in discharging its responsibility. It is no wonder that it manages between 3,000 and 4,000 complaints from the public annually ranging from issues of poor quality consumer products and food adulteration to delivery of shoddy services and affordable and quality housing.

It has successfully managed to resolve no fewer than 100,000 cases since its establishment and this is no ordinary feat especially for an organisation with limited funding and a modest human resource of 35 staff members. Still, to date it has more than 300 affiliated members in addressing globalised and digitalised changes worldwide while interacting with governments and corporations alike.

CAP is still led by its pioneering president, "Uncle" S. M. Mohammad Idris, the 92-year-old outspoken veteran who has devoted a lifetime to upholding the need for educational reforms to building national unity by reducing poverty, disparity and polarisation.

Two of its affiliates, Sahabat Alam Malaysia and Third World Network are instrumental in pushing the many issues of ecological degradation to the forefront and creating a vibrant, dynamic, fair and just society by forging new and relevant policies, and institutions rooted in the diverse traditions, values, cultures and beliefs of the Malaysian people.

In the era of New Malaysia, CAP is well ahead in not only articulating urgent issues and finding ways to arrive at long-term solutions; it is also pre-empting future threats by acting proactively. At the same time it is building an impressive corpus for the few generations to benefit from.

Therefore, it is only right that CAP be duly recognised and IIUM took the lead role to open another window of opportunity for several CAP-like unsung heroes to be accorded their rightful places in the eyes of the world. This is long overdue.

Without a doubt, CAP is exemplary by all counts including contributing immensely to social justice based on true intellectual honesty and integrity not only for Malaysia but humanity as a whole. Unfortunately, this is where most universities are still negligent to say the very least.

The writer is the Rector of IIUM. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

By Prof Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak - November 11, 2018 @ 9:48am

MUCH has been said about the 2019 Budget’s three areas of emphasis: implementing institutional reforms; fostering an entrepreneurial economy; and ensuring socio-economic wellbeing of Malay-sians.

While most commented on their quantitative dimensions, few said much about the qualitative aspects, creating a kind of value bias against the latter. This has many vital implications with regard to ensuring a more holistic and human-centric representation of the 2019 Budget.

This is best illustrated from the aspect of the third focus area: to ensure the socio-economic wellbeing of Malaysians, which in Malay reads as memastikan kesejahteraan rakyat. It is as though this aspect is the accumulation of the other two — institutional reforms and entrepreneurial economy — to arrive at the state of wellbeing (sejahtera) limited to the socio-economic realm.‎ The limitation becomes even more obvious when rendering of “socio-economic wellbeing” of Malay-sians falls short of fully explaining what memastikan kesejahteraan rakyat is all about (the word “socio-economic” is not even implied).

After all, as explained in the 2019 Budget, this aspect has a broader spectrum, embracing the quality of life and welfare, health and social welfare protection, and employment and employability as its subthemes as the overall targets. The reality is that the keyword sejahtera is more comprehensive and sophisticated than just “socio-economic wellbeing” — which is just one layer of its meaning. Sejahtera is a rather multilayered concept that conveys a deeper meaning than any single word can convey. As such it has no equivalent in other languages, neither can it be accurately translated into different languages due to its close cultural leaning and nuances to the local Malay(sian) tradition.

Hence to understand it from a one-dimensional perspective is to miss the whole point and can even give a very distorted meaning. What would be most sorely missed is the qualitative-cum-intangible aspects that are today’s major concern. Health, for example, is not just about the absence of disease or illness that may be quantifiable, one way or the other. However health is also universally recognised as the state of emotions, sans “physical” diseases, that could lead to a situation of tidak sejahtera (read depression, stress, violence) without any clear signs and symptoms until perhaps it is too late to deal with.

A recent report that cited the case of some 20 per cent of students in Penang experiencing depression and about six per cent attempting suicide is an alarming case in point. This is just the tip of the tidak sejahtera iceberg beyond socio-economic terms. Indeed, sejahtera is foremost spiritual in nature, embracing both emotional and ethical dimensions that are too often left out in the limited understanding of the word. In short, it is defined by values and virtues as its basic framework.

This takes us to the concern that Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has been expressing all along: values must come first before any form of skills or competencies. In fact, with good values, it is a lot easier to acquire skills and competencies of all sorts because the ethical and moral disciplines are well nurtured as a base for any skills and competencies to be built upon. He was recently quoted, on his working visit to Japan, reaffirming his conviction leading to the establishment of the Look East Policy some 30 years ago.

Good moral values should be given attention and taught to children from kindergarten to university, said the prime minister. ‎Accordingly, he remarked that the “n‎ational educational system should teach students good values and character” beyond imparting (marketable) knowledge which is the true purpose of “education” as per the “Falsafah Pendidikan Negara” (later “Kebangsaan”) (national education philosophy) .

Quality of life is another area that “socio-economic wellbeing” is inadequate at addressing. It fails to grasp the full meaning of the entire human person (life). “Life” as in quality of life is invariably related to the “spiritual being” first rather than the material being which is socio-economically defined and determined. Otherwise, values/virtues such as happiness, love and mutual respect will be marginalised.

In a nutshell the element of “sejahtera” must be fully understood, internalised and practised because it is the fountainhead of good values/virtues that are innately human (and divine too) that will lead to a righteous and balanced way of life in nurturing the human person as advocated by the “Falsafah” which is in no uncertain terms the basis of the national education system from pre-school to the university and beyond. The urgent question is whether this is taking place in a continuous, holistic and integrated manner (as advocated by the “Falsafah”).

Until this happens, “sejahtera” in all its forms and taglines are nothing but empty clichés. Applied to a document as critical as the 2019 Budget (the latest to leverage “sejahtera”), the outcome may fall terribly short of what the word is supposed to convey qualitatively as a way of life based on values and virtues that Malaysia desperately finds wanting especially of late. Salam sejahtera.

The writer is the rector of International Islamic University and an honorary fellow of CenPRIS at Universiti Sains Malaysia

TOWARDS the end of last month, Transport Minister Anthony Loke announced something which many had been waiting for. In fact, this column has several times pushed for it, and his announcement was welcome, indeed.

By 2020, said Loke, child car seats will be made compulsory for all private cars. Before then, he said, the ministry will conduct awareness programmes to educate the public on the importance of these seats. He went on to explain that another reason implementation would only be in 2020 was that at the moment, there were not enough suppliers, not enough stock.

Loke also wanted car seats to be sales and service tax exempt so as to make them cheaper. Malaysians, it must be said, are becoming more and more safety conscious. More and more, these days, you see couples with young children using such car seats. Kudos to them. Studies have shown that children in car seats have a better chance of surviving crashes.

But there are still those who refuse to take safety, of their children no less, into account when getting behind the wheel. Of course, when Loke’s announcement came out, there was a little bit of a hue and cry.

The most common argument against it was that it would cost a lot of money, especially for the poor and those with many children. To be fair, the prices of such items are terribly high.

In 2007, a couple expecting their first child noticed the price of such items here. It just so happened the couple flew to the United States soon after and found the same item for a third of the price in Malaysia.

Of course, not everyone can go to the US to shop, and heading there would cost more anyway. But since then, perhaps because Malaysians are becoming more safety conscious, there are more such items available and prices have come down somewhat, though they are still high. And, that is exactly what Loke and the ministry are trying to avoid.

The reason why he mentioned that there were not enough suppliers and stock is because, right now, these items are expensive.

Having more suppliers, and local manufacturers, mind you, will allow for prices to come down, at least a little. Will they be cheap enough for the poor to afford? That remains to be seen.

But the more pertinent and infinitely more important question would be this: What price your children’s safety?

Parents, generally, will risk it all for their children. They would sacrifice their lives for them. Yet there are many — perhaps through lack of knowledge or perhaps because they do not quite understand or just have not thought things through — who put their children’s lives at risk every day on Malaysian roads.

We are not talking here about the car seats, per se, but about parents who have their children on motorcycles, minus helmets. We are talking about the parents who, while their kids are jumping around in the rear, ironically sit buckled up, safe and sound.

Having child seats is an extra precaution, but one which is completely necessary. And mandatory in many countries. So it is an extra expense, but so what? Again, what price your children’s safety? Is your child’s life worth so little? Just a few hundred ringgit, perhaps?

That aside, there are other things that the government needs to ensure before such a plan is implemented. The first is quality control. There must be certain standards which need to be followed right from the materials used in the manufacture of the seats. Then there are the proper guidelines. This is easy enough to do.

There are many countries which have such laws. Just look at these countries to determine what needs to be done here. For instance, when do babies outgrow baby seats? When can they use car seats, when do kids “graduate” to booster seats? Do they face forwards or backwards? Can seats be in the front seat? These are just some of the questions which need to be answered.

And then there is also what needs to be done after car seats are made mandatory. This cannot be stressed enough in Malaysia. Enforcement is the key to making any law successful, yet sadly, enforcement always seems to be lacking in the country.

Whatever it is, the ministry is taking a step in the right direction. What needs to be done now is to ensure the move is successful. It is not just about implementing it. It is about researching best practices, coming up with solutions and proactive measures after 2020.

lesliea@nst.com.my

The writer has more than two decades of experience, much of which has been spent writing about crime and the military. A die-hard Red Devil, he can usually be found wearing a Manchester United jersey when outside of work.

Read more: https://www.nst.com.my/opinion...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

AFTER about 50 years in the education sector, I had the privilege of being invited to Wisma Putra for a Town Hall session with newly minted Foreign Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah and his top officers.

It was held as part of the consultative-participatory processes that the new government is earnestly advocating.

We have heard before that the days of the government knows best is over, but that is more talk without much walk. This time it looks different.

The minister briefed the audience regarding the items that make up the framework of our foreign policies and then invited the floor to respond and intervene.

It seems unreal too because usually, it tends to be a monologue (top-down) as though all else is cast in stone.

Perhaps that is true to a certain extent but in reality, there is always room for improvement. Three aspects were cited to make this possible.

First, where Malaysia is in a position to make and shape policies at the global. We must be active in articulating our views beyond the usual in recognition of our own worldview and experiences.

Second, where such privileges are not readily forthcoming. Malaysia can help by extending strong support for the desired outcome using its stature. This can at least help in balancing the outcome accordingly.

Lastly, where we are in neither capacity, we still can assert our influence by putting forward our arguments given our vision and thought leadership. In other words, Malaysia must have the courage to be involved actively in all situations as part of its leadership role globally. Particularly in representing the Asian and Islamic perspectives.

That said, the two hours allocated passed rather quickly. The responses were plenty and varied.

I took the opportunity to further highlight an item dear to my heart – the diplomacy on sustainable development, more specifically Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) – since there were many academics present.

More so there seems to be dismal interest in giving ESD centre stage as an educational platform in any ministry as far as I can tell.

So not only is the Wisma Town Hall a uniquely golden opportunity to breathe life into ESD, what more to craft it in diplomatic terms and outcomes that could change the future of the world and its inhabitants.

Bearing in mind that since ESD has been successfully promoted as the "buzzword" globally over the last two decades, it has now acquired a notion of "soft power" to create global change.

While this is welcomed, it can be worrying too as it has the tendency to be "hegemonic" in imposing what ESD is all about from a given (western) perspective derived from some dominant worldview that is prevailing today.

While for the last 20 years this may not be so apparent as each country is grappling to make sense of what ESD is all about, now the situation is clearer and dangerously so.

Certain economic interests have been persistently interpreting ESD as a form of "green consumerism", leaning to a thinking that would be beneficial to one side and not the other.

More often than not, the "other" is a weaker counterpart that has little choice but to make unreasonable compromises when it comes to hard bargaining for resources to sustain a basic livelihood.

The recent campaign against palm oil is a good case in point when some quarters seem to champion an ecocentric viewpoint over a human-centric one in arguing their position.

Lest we forget, ESD is foremost contextualised on the basis of attaining "equality" and "justice" worldwide. The growth of inequality reportedly made it harder for people to achieve justice relative to others due to less sustainable behaviour and livelihood.

Consumerism (green or otherwise) shows how we are readily affected by others – an expression mostly of outward appearances devoid of deeper knowledge of each other.

Evidently, the more one spends the more likely it is to contribute to an unsustainable phenomenon like global warming.

As such if diplomacy is directed to the issues of global equality, ESD must be well understood to enable one to demonstrate how an issue at hand can be diplomatically dealt with.

This is even more relevant now that Budget 2019 is also in the same way, that is, similarly contextualised to mainly target the poor (the so-called B40) while at the same time keeping the economy viable despite global uncertainties.

No doubt ESD fits into this framework very well involving a wide range of situations.

Invariably, it is about closing the prevailing inequitable gaps and (historical) injustice among members of the communities without being unsustainable in the socio-economic realms particularly in an attempt to restore Malaysia's dignity (not just about fiscal health) as an Asian tiger that it once was.

It is interesting to note tigers in Asia are generally heading for extinction due to the many unsustainable practices.

Metaphorically speaking, there will be no roaring Asian tiger to speak of should ESD fail to be properly understood as an important item of diplomacy. We have far too many toothless tigers when it comes to the fight for ESD.

The writer is the president of the alumni and the 5th vice-chancellor of USM. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more; http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Membaca buku berbahasa Inggeris bertajuk Fourth Industrial Revolution: The Leadership Dilemma karya Profesor Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak, Rektor Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia (UIAM) terbitan Penerbit Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM) pada 2018 amat mengujakan kerana masih begitu kurang perbincangan tentang Revolusi Perindustrian Keempat (4IR) dilakukan secara kritis dan mempersoalkan impaknya kepada kemanusiaan.

Kita dapat melihat banyak perbincangan yang dibuat dalam bentuk penulisan dan perdebatan memperlihatkan kecenderungan menerima dengan positif terma popular yang abstrak (ms 12) dan lebih membincangkan tindakan yang perlu dilakukan, dan pengetahuan serta kemahiran yang perlukan tambah baik di pelbagai peringkat dan bidang.

Dalam buku setebal 56 muka surat ini, Dzulkifli membawakan tiga dilema 4IR yang memanggil pemimpin untuk lebih kritikal terhadap revolusi ini kerana golongan pemimpin adalah tunggak yang menggerakkan masyarakat.

Tiga dilema yang dibincangkan adalah pertama: dilema sama ada 4IR perlu dan telah dilihat sebagai “satu peristiwa” atau “kesinambungan peristiwa”; kedua:  sejauh manakah kita perlu berorientasikan manusia (antroposentrisma) atau berorientasikan teknologi (teknosentrisma); dan ketiga: sejauh manakah kita perlu mengaplikasi kebijaksanaan tiruan (artificial intelligence, AI) dan meraikan kebijaksanaan asli yang dianugerah Tuhan.

Dalam membincangkan dilema pertama, Dzulkifli menegaskan keperluan untuk memahami 4IR bukan sebagai satu bentuk peristiwa seperti menjalankan ceramah, forum, dan pembangunan modul. Sebaliknya, 4IR perlu dibincangkan dalam kontinum, yang berteraskan kefahaman sejarah tentang Revolusi Perindustrian Pertama dengan perkembangan teknologi wap, Revolusi Perindustrian Kedua dengan pengenalan elektrik dan Revolusi Perindustrian Ketiga dengan kemajuan masyarakat moden dari pelbagai segi. Dalam kontinum ini, 4IR menjanjikan kepelbagaian ketidaktentuan dan kesannya boleh jadi sangat negatif jika tidak ditangani secara bijaksana.

Kesan jangka panjang termasuklah hilang peluang pekerjaan kerana amalan automasi, pembahagian kekayaan yang tidak seimbang, masalah alam sekitar seperti penipisan ozon, kepupusan spesis serta pemanasan global.

Dilema seterusnya membawa persoalan lebih berat tetapi berkaitan dengan dilema pertama; di manakah letaknya nilai sebagai manusia jika segala-galanya diambil alih oleh teknologi? Status manusia sebagai makluk yang penting semakin diragut oleh teknologi, tetapi bagaimanakah teknologi semata-mata boleh menyelesaikan cabaran-cabaran yang utama di seluruh dunia seperti kesihatan, alam sekitar yang memerlukan suntikan pengalaman manusia untuk memahami, bertindak dan meneraju keseimbangan? Ini membawa kepada persoalan apakah sebenarnya peranan sebenar 4IR kepada umat manusia?

Dilema terakhir pula mempersoalkan di manakah kita perlu meletakkan kepentingan “fitrah” berbanding AI yang rata-rata dilihat penyelesai kepada hampir semua masalah dunia. Persoalan asas yang perlu difikirkan pemimpin secara kritis ialah adakah AI akan membantu mengurangkan masalah utama dunia seperti kemiskinan, perkauman dan diskriminasi?

Kritikan utama dalam aspek ini ialah dari segi memfokuskan kepada STEM (sains, teknologi, kejuruteraan, matematik) yang dilihat Dzulkifli sebagai mengenyahkan manusia (dehumanising) kerana tiada unsur kemanusiaan di dalamnya. Di sinilah mudahnya manusia kehilangan hikmah kerana pendidikan bukan lagi menjadi alat untuk mengembangkan hikmah malah hanya untuk kerjaya dan menjana pendapatan (ms 25). Alternatif yang diutarakan ialah STREAM, dengan penekanan terhadap sains dan juga kemanusiaan termasuk agama, etika dan pengurusan. Inilah yang dilakukan oleh Kanada, yang meraikan pengetahuan sebagai mendapat hikmah, kasih sayang dan keamanan dan keberanian menghadapi musuh dengan penuh integriti.

Kepada Dzulkifli, cabaran utama untuk kita semua dalam menatari cabaran 4IR ialah bagaimanakah kita mengekalkan atau meningkatkan nilai kemanusiaan dalam mengharungi arus teknologi.

Menerima 4IR semata-mata tanpa mencari jawapan dan kaedah tindakan bagi persoalan-persoalan yang dibawakan mungkin membawa kepada kemusnahan manusia, sebagaimana diingatkan mendiang Profesor Stephen Hawking (1942-2018) pada 2014, “Perkembangan dan aplikasi sepenuhnya AI akan menjadi sumpahan buat umat manusia” dan ini “sepatutnya perkara terakhir yang kita lakukan sebagai spesis, kerana sekali kita terjerumus, kita tidak akan dapat keluar lagi” (ms35). Hari ini sendiri kita dapat lihat beberapa negara yang sudah mula mengamalkan perancangan ketenteraan yang melibatkan serangan masa yang automatik, melalui arahan umum kepada sistem automasi robot. Melalui sistem ini, lebih ramai “musuh” yang terbunuh, namun ramai juga rakyat biasa yang tidak bersalah menjadi mangsa. Pastinya dalam konteks ini, hilanglah kesedaran keagamaan kerana robot membunuh tanpa mengecam siapa dan tanpa pertimbangan etika.

Rata-rata, buku ini disampaikan dalam bahasa yang mudah difahami walaupun ia membincangkan isu abstrak yang masih begitu kabur. Dengan kaedah penulisan yang ringan dan agak jurnalistik, ia memberi kesegaran kepada intipati dan pembaca seluruhnya. Fokus khusus kepada kepemimpinan mempunyai matlamat yang perlu dan jelas, kerana kedudukan pemimpin dalam mana-mana masyarakat dan budaya, menjadikan mereka golongan yang berpengaruh dan mempengaruhi terutama dalam konteks fenomena 4IR ini. Namun, isi kandungan buku ini juga sangat sesuai dibaca oleh masyarakat umum sebagai salah satu respond kritikal kepada perkembangan ini.

Fokus khusus kepada pemimpin, kerana kedudukan mereka dalam masyarakat & budaya, menjadikan mereka golongan yang berpengaruh & mempengaruhi fenomena 4IR ini

Dengan kekuatan ini, dalam waktu yang sama pendekatan penulisan juga membawa kepada beberapa kelemahan buku ini. Antaranya ialah kecenderungan penulis untuk mengutarakan isu tetapi tidak menghuraikan dengan jelas. Misalnya, konsep modal insan dikritik (ms 26) tetapi tidak dijelaskan permasalahan yang dilihat oleh penulis. Kecenderungan yang sama berlaku pada muka surat 29 apabila penulis menyebut beberapa tinjauan telah dibuat dalam kajian-kajian yang mendapati banyak masalah yang timbul hari ini kerana manusia sendiri. Tinjauan-tinjauan yang dimaksudkan tidak dijelaskan dan lebih baik jika ada sitasi bagi rujukan.

Rata-rata buku ini membuka perspektif baharu terhadap 4IR yang banyak dibincangkan tanpa penilaian kritikal. Kekuatan utama buku ini bukan hanya dari segi perkara yang dibincangkan penulis tetapi ia sesuai diaplikasikan oleh semua tidak terhad kepada golongan pemimpin. Untuk menjadi manusia yang benar-benar manusia, kesedaran spiritual, teknologi dan rangkaian dengan dunia luar dicadangkan dirangkum untuk membentuk manusia yang sedar diri, kenal diri, beretika dan berintegriti.

Sumber: https://www.majalahsains.com/u...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

THE keynote speaker of the Conference on the Finnish Education held at the International Islamic University recently ended his presentation by highlighting the development of a human being (not human capital) and citizen. That this came from the director-general of education (a three-term former education minister, is something unthinkable in Malaysia) made it even more precious. The question is why?

For one, it is because the same could be said for Malaysia some 30 years ago only if the Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan (FPK) were put on a pedestal that it rightly deserved. More specifically, this is because the FPK talked about nurturing a balanced and harmonious person (also not human capital) and citizen as its endpoint. The resemblance between the two cannot be more identical.

The difference perhaps is the Finnish are focused on implementation regardless of who comes who goes. The education agenda as per Finland's constitution since its inception has benefited from this approach for more than a century now.

For Malaysia, this seems not to be the case. It wavers depending on political expediency.

Even the Federal Constitution was changed to accommodate some unhealthy political compromises that make the ecosystem so complex that it remains untenable when it comes to meeting the goal of nurturing the balanced and harmonious person, more so as Malaysian citizens. Otherwise, how else do we explain why "national identity" is still one of the six student aspirations laid out in both the latest education blueprints after almost 60 years of Merdeka. Worst, when "national identity" is being contested by bigotry and racism every now and again with the issue of the national language taking most of the beating.

Indeed, this week marks the end of the National Language Month, which rightly should have been a daily affair where all Malaysians are truly conversant with the national language being the Malaysian citizens that they are.

But instead this turns out to be embarrassing when a sizeable number still cannot string a reasonable sentence in Bahasa; unlike that of Finland where even migrants as recent as the last exodus in Europe are required to muster the Finnish language before being assimilated. And that they have to attend the Finnish education system – the one and only.

More ironic still is that the FPK too has a clear statement that our education ecosystem is continuous, holistic and integrated. But then to no avail until today. In contrast, it has been subjected to distortions (mis)shaping it into what it is today. Vague and disjointed when implemented.

The conference was therefore a good and timely reminder yet again that there is nothing essentially wrong with the national education ecosystem. It is the political intent and political will that must be scrutinised and put to rigorous realignment if the outcome of the FPK is to reach a higher level of satisfaction across the board. By doing so, Malaysia could have easily mirrored the successes of Finland some time back and not wasted several decades as the case today because of our national resolve which is confused to begin with.

In short, learning from the Finnish experience is to start to work on "trust" (amanah) as the foundation and investment to build a truly cohesive nation as the ultimate goal and motivation nationwide.

It is this "pride of work" that will drive the education system such that there is no longer any need for supervision and even assessment the way the KPIs are structured in the Malaysian education environment.

School inspection in Finland was reportedly abolished as far back as the 1990s whereby "trust" takes over as the underlying framework to deliver and perform. Thus, there is only one national standardised test after 12 years of education. Otherwise each school carries out its own self-evaluation using local materials guided by a national core curriculum. The emphasis on flexibility and local context is paramount, not a one-size-fits-all (read bureaucratic) model that is now blanketing our system based on the need to compare and contrast (read ranking), which is virtually non-existent or celebrated in the Finnish system.

Key to this are the teachers who are highly valued and well-empowered as professionals entrusted to lead and sustain a highly effective and human-centric learning ecosystem. It goes a long way to demonstrate that the culture of "trust" is a vital ingredient for the Finns. It is helped through partnership and collaboration derived by the said "trust".

Contrary to conventional wisdom, reportedly less competition is producing better outcomes in nurturing an ambient that promotes "the joy of learning" – to learn and work together forging even greater "trust" all round. In turn, it brings about a world of change with varying concepts for the future, said to be largely uncertain and unpredictable.

What is clear is that education is no longer a linear process confined to just one stereotype (outdated) environment. Instead, it is more than that whereby working and learning are being diffused to further widen the concept of learning beyond the classrooms or lecture halls. It is more experiential as well as diverse in tandem with the reality of the day. It is invariably values-based zeroing in on the issue of equity as the path forward in creating a cohesive nation. Education is free of charge and not commoditised. There is no PTPTN. No student debt.

In that sense, the Finnish ecosystem is future-proof because it is easily accessible and adaptable to change without sacrificing inclusiveness, diversity while remaining egalitarian and least hierarchical or politicised, that is, of equitable benefit to all in the name of "justice".

In words of the FPK, it is about being balanced and in harmony at the level of the individual and community laying down the need for a fair and just system centred on the culture of "trust". Unfortunately, this is where our failure is. Period.

The writer is Rector of the International Islamic University Malaysia. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more; http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Wawancara bersama Prof Tan Sri Dzulkifli Abdul Razak, Pengerusi Panel
Perundingan Budaya Produktiviti dalam program Agenda AWANI.

Read more: http://www.astroawani.com/vide...

Pilihan AWANI 25 Okt: Pendidikan apa yang diperlukan untuk masa depan?
Bersama Rizal Dzulkapli segmen khas ini mengetengahkan dua berita utama dan gambaran 360 darjah mengenai isu semasa.

Bersama Rizal Dzulkapli segmen khas ini mengetengahkan dua berita utama dan gambaran 360 darjah mengenai isu semasa.

Posted on 24 October 2018 - 07:19am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

YESTERDAY I had the good fortune of being recognised by my alma mater on the 56th convocation of the university. Such an event is always a highlight for any institution as it is the time to take stock of how the university is delivering and maturing vis-a-vis in fulfilling its role and responsibility, not as an Ivory Tower of days gone by, or increasingly as Trading Post as it is made out to be, but more as Custodian of Trust for the rakyat at large. More so as a public institution paid by the public to ensure that their welfare is well looked after as the university makes a name for itself.

As an alumni, I would like to address such expectations, particularly in relation to this convocation as it coincided with three major events that have very intimate associations with the university. To miss them is to miss a golden opportunity to live by its impulsive slogan: "Kami Memimpin" (We Lead), which is close to the hearts of all who had sampled the exquisite experiences of the Universiti Pulau Pinang, Universiti Sains Malaysia dualism.

Let us start with the 10th anniversary award of the Apex status that took place on Sept 4, 2008. It is certainly a memorable Kami Memimpin phenomenon by any count because the university stood as one in committing itself to "excellence" that is explicit in the acronym Apex – accelerated programme for excellence (read transformation for the future). There took place a spectrum of unlearning and relearning that was systematically and meticulously undertaken in very participatory and consultative ways. After a decade of such a process, where is it now and what is next?

To respond to these questions in any meaningful way is to recall that this year saw that concept of sustainable development being introduced some 30 years ago by the United Nations (UN). The aim, to safeguard the welfare of inhabitants of the ailing planet Earth. After all, the Apex initiative was crafted on a similar theme as a sustainability-led university with the tagline "Transforming Higher Education for a Sustainable Tomorrow".

The link between the UN and the Apex agenda is without a doubt intimate. What more, when the university was honoured in 2005 as one of seven pioneering UN University acknowledged regional centres of expertise (RCE) on education for sustainable development (ESD) worldwide. Since the RCE was fashioned as the precursor of a university of the future, it compounded the question as to how futuristic the Apex scenario is moving forward given today's untold crisis-prone (unsustainable) world. What lies ahead in living up to its Apex tagline of 10 years ago?

Yet this is not the end of it all because this year too is the 30th anniversary of the National Education Philosophy of Malaysia, better know as Falsafah Pendidikan Negara, later Kebangsaan (FPK). It may come as a surprise to many that the FPK was first crafted in 1988 – a year short of SD in 1987.

Moreover, it is now abundantly clear that the FPK is arguably an excellent conduit in paving ways to attaining ESD and its five overarching goals of Peace, Prosperity, People, Planet and Partnership.

In essence, the FPK advocates and aims at similar "sustainable" targets linked to the desired sustainability-led university of tomorrow (read Apex). It is therefore hard to imagine how the Apex ambition could be arrived at without taking the FPK into serious consideration in its overall implementation.

This includes creating an ambience that is balanced and harmonious, be it at the individual or community level as a living lab both at the micro- and macrocosmos respectively. This translates, in the words of the FPK, into an aura of "sejahtera" – a concept which was introduced by the university in the early 2000s through the unique Kampus Sejahtera initiative.

Hence, the ultimate question that needs to be asked: at what level is sejahtera today? That is, how sustainable is the campus as an indication of a balanced and harmonious lifestyle as well as the ecological makeup that supports such a desirable state of being? Is the campus a sejahtera living lab for all to experience?

This no doubt asserts another demand on the Kami Memimpin mantra, which, most of the time, has been the pride of its alumni in leading the way. And this cannot be more pressing in about a year from now when the university celebrates its Golden Jubilee on Oct 4. A day that is known as Hari Pemimpin, a tribute to the many leaders at all levels who have made the university what it is, some more impactful than others. Notably the founding vice-chancellor, the late Tan Sri Hamzah Sendut who dreamed it all.

On that day perhaps we will have all the forthcoming answers that the university truly deserves in asserting the Kami Memimpin role.

As for now, we are grateful to the alma mater for what it imparted and instilled in us, the need to stay ahead. For that can never be graceful enough in keeping the spirit of Kami Memimpin high on the agenda. The university needs to amply demonstrate this come its 50th anniversary in 2019, as a gesture of thanks to the alma mater.

The writer is the president of the alumni, and the 5th vice-chancellor of USM. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 17 October 2018 - 07:02am 

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

FINALLY, truth be told yet again when the headline screamed: 18.5 % of students in the state of Penang suffer from depression.

That Penang is named this time has some special significance as it is known to be the most vibrant scholarly state in the country, if not the region. Many of the schools in the state have stories to tell as being the first for this and that, going back into history. Illustrious names are associated with them no less than the first prime minister of Malaya and then Malaysia.

The first university outside Kuala Lumpur is located in Penang, being the second oldest in the country, celebrating its 50th anniversary next year.

When talking about activism of all sorts Penang again leaped forward. It is the state where the world famous Consumer Association of Penang (CAP) – also celebrating its 50th anniversary next year – makes its mark globally.

So are strings of other non-governmental organisations then and now, locally and internationally – Pesticides Action Network and Consumer International are two random examples.

Culturally, the vibrancy is second to none with the Unesco World Heritage Site being awarded to the state because of its unique diversity in living cultural heritages of multiple origins. It is the one resort island where we can find mosques, churches, temples and other houses of worship standing side by side in "perfect" harmony.

With this comes the myriad of food and culinary delights beginning with those in the street stalls to fine dining at high-end outlets. These are accessible 24/7 and well acknowledged worldwide as the world's best "people's restaurant" as it were, with Asam Laksa topping the menu.

The natural scenery that stretches from the sea to the jungles and beyond the hills as far as the eye can see is a beauty to behold.

Many fall in love with Penang the moment they step foot on the island befitting the name, The Pearl of the Orient.

To some it is paradise on Earth where the state of mental health is at its prime dazzled by the near-Shangri-La ambience.

So when the word depression is uttered, it broke into a nightmare begging the big question: how is it that students are implicated – almost 20% of them – when they should be having so much fun ahead of their counterparts in other states – to live and enjoy, to learn and experience life?

Indeed, it is beginning to sound quite the contrary although to some there are no surprises. The tell-tale signs have been there since some years ago but we were too busy with ourselves to take notice or to give enough attention to the students and youths under our care as parents, teachers, community leaders and above all politicians.

So reportedly, once again, we were told that mental health problems among Penang students are now recognised as fast becoming a worrying trend, with a fifth of the population said to be suffering from depression. This comes no less from the director of the state Health Department, based on findings from the National Youth Health Survey 2017.

However, as usual it was quickly doused with the same cliché that the situation is "under control" (then why is it rising?) and yet there is "the need to take necessary action to help the students". Yes, but why only now when the writing was on the wall ages ago? What action was taken then that could have resulted in a positive outcome instead?

It is contradictory, when it is further emphasised that the problem is "quite serious and must be tackled because it not only affects an individual but also the community at large.

"Imagine, 9.5% of secondary school students admitted to plans to commit suicide while 6% tried to do so," as it was made known during the launch of Mental Health Day and the Healthy Students Programme last week. The finding of 6% trying to take their life at such a tender age cannot be swept under the carpet.

More worrying still is when there seems to be a "breakdown" of the paradise-like image caused by "numerous factors, which affected the youth's emotions, leading them to be involved in unhealthy activities, including addiction to internet". The addiction issue has been the concern of this column ever since but until now it's as though it doesn't matter.

Compounding this, is what comes out of the horse's mouth: "The internet addiction can influence their emotions to commit crime such as cyber bullying and others. If this is not contained, it will lead to an unhealthy environment for them."

For all intents and purposes, this is an overdue wake-up call where some concrete actions should have been laid down long before. But sadly none of this was done in earnest while the addiction threats continue to gnaw at us.

All these remain ironic as we continue to give so much hope and expectations to the youth (anak muda) as leaders of the future especially after the 14th general election power transfer. We now have the youngest minister of Youth and Sports allegedly in the world just as we have the oldest prime minister – both of whom we are very proud of. But those "record-breaking" claims are demeaning if the headline we read today continues to haunt us as a nation.

In fact this column wrote an open letter (My View July 11) to alert the Ministry of Youth about the forewarning signs of the very same life-threatening concerns – drug abuse (including tobacco use), depression (including suicide) and internet addiction (including various screen devices). It was during 100 days of the new government, with so much expectations for a game change beyond the usual ones that offer name and fame, and a medal to show off.

After all, the latter means little if our youth, as a constituency of the future, is losing ground especially at the school-going age, where else but in a paradise called Penang.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Posted on 10 October 2018 - 07:02am 

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

PRIME Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, interviewed on BBC's HARDtalk last week following his speech at the UN, as expected raised a number of pertinent issues. One which I found compelling was the subject on colonialism that seems to be making a comeback recently. When asked, Mahathir was quoted: "I merely said that there are other forms of colonialism and one of them is neocolonialism, which was coined by (former Indonesian) president Sukarno."

He made this remark in reference to what is now known as "debt diplomacy" that casts a long shadow as a result of mega infrastructure investments made by certain foreign companies, strongly backed by the respective governments. This could be termed as a "new" form of colonialism not seen before, spreading its tentacles unsuspectingly. The prime minister, however, denied that he was directing this at any one country.

Elaborating further, Mahathir was categorical in what drew his concern, including the selling of "big pieces of land" to some foreign interest "to build a city, which is very, very luxurious meant for their people to come and live there (in Malaysia)" – to the tune of several hundreds of thousands as a result of the so-called "foreign direct investment (FDI)". Whereas, according to him, FDI is "about bringing money, bringing investment, setting up plants in Malaysia, employing Malaysians", not otherwise.

After all, of late, no country wants other people to come en masse to their country and settle there, citing Europe as a living example (ironically, after doing just the opposite for themselves and benefiting tremendously from it). As for the US, President Donald Trump is insistent on building a "wall" along its southern border and somehow not in the north.

In his most recent trip to China, Mahathir spoke his mind when he made reference to the different levels of development with respect to richer counterparts making the "poor countries unable to compete". Therefore fair trade, not just free trade, is imperative, as he highlighted to the Chinese.

Similar happenings can be witnessed in the African continent, bringing back vivid memories of what took place with Congo as a case in point some 140 years ago.

In 1878, Congo came under the focus of European colonial powers in the same way. In particular, Belgium hatched out a plot by forming the so-called International Congo Society with "more economic goals" that later turned "imperialistic".

Prior to that King Leopold II of Belgium was said to have created an International African Society in 1896, which then served primarily as a "philanthropic front" to the imperialistic ambition.

One Henry Morgan Stanley was sent to research and "civilise" the continent for this purpose. He was in Congo, from 1878 to 1885, as an envoy with a "secret mission to organise what would become known as the Congo Free State".

As an outpost for Belgium, the so-called "state" was later confirmed as the "private property of the Congo Society" (read Leopold), which was opened to "all European investment" and would have "free" (not "fair"?) trade throughout the Congo Basin (think Bandar Malaysia, in our case).

Such development quickly stirred up the French to expand its own "colonial exploration". By 1881, the French flag was raised over the newly formed "Brazzaville" in Congo, named after the "founder" Pierre de Brazza, a French naval officer who was dispatched to the region to counter the influence of imperialistic Belgium. Brazzaville is now reportedly considered as the (Democratic) Republic of Congo.

Next, Portugal joined in the foray through its "proxy state" – Kongo Empire, by renewing its interest based on old treaties with Spain and the Roman Catholic Church.

Later, together with Great Britain and Ireland, Congo Society's access to the Atlantic was effectively blocked in the competition for presence and interest. In short, Africa in general was conveniently carved up by European foreign powers, which eventually led to the removal of the word "terra incognita from European maps of the continent" and replaced by claims coming from the Belgians, French, Portuguese and British – largely what remains today (in addition, to several others) – exercising their own version of the "diplomacy".

Bearing in mind, by the early 1880s diplomatic posturing and manipulation had already set in to exploit Africa's natural resources that enriched the colonial powers at the expense of the locals.

At once, the heightened and ruthless colonial activities by the Europeans set aside the forms of African autonomy as well as self-governance. The situation is no different from what is experienced today albeit through another form of diplomacy by another name. Is history repeating itself, perhaps with different and ambitious actors this time around?

Here is where Mahathir is spot-on in alerting us of the precarious future ahead if we are not vigilant and continue to be gullible. Instead, the struggle against the legacy of (neo)colonialism must not stop.

It is time to begin in earnest the decolonising process across the board for New Malaysia, whereby softpower seems to be the most "effective" point of entry.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 3 October 2018 - 07:00am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

REGIONAL Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development (RCE-ESD) was a concept promoted by the United Nations University (UNU) in Tokyo amid attempts to understand and translate what sustainable development (SD) is all about. This was in the early 2000s when SD was still a vague and abstract idea.

In 2005, the then UN secretary-general (1938-2018), the late Kofi Annan, was quoted as saying: "Our biggest challenge in this new century is to take an idea that seems abstract – sustainable development – and turn it into a reality for all the world's people".

It was in the same year that the RCE-ESD became a reality with the establishment of seven pioneering RCEs around the world including RCE Penang, which is based in Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM). Others in Asia are in Japan.

The RCEs were expected to translate SD into reality through education, that is, ESD, which is deemed to be the key in its implementation.

In so doing it must be transformational in substance, such that SD awareness is heightened enabling SD to be practised and eventually becoming a "new" way of life for the rest of the 21st century and beyond. This part somehow has been missed in most education systems worldwide as they pursue business (literally)-as-usual approaches at the expense of ESD, thus the future. This is because there is no unlearning taking place, and thus there is zilch "relearning" of ways that we could be aligned to the implementation of SD across the community. There is no colearning as well, which is necessary in taking into account local indigenous knowledge and wisdom – which are generally "sustainable" in nature because of the closeness between the community and nature then.

Members of the community, more often than not, are acquainted to their local traditions, decorum and heritages, which were nurtured over centuries and generations.

All these make the concept of RCE an interesting one since it upholds and respects what is available locally and assimilates it into mainstream knowledge to be recognised as yet another source of legitimate knowledge that has been marginalised for a long time, especially with the advent of colonialisation of learning and education.

Otherwise, SD is made less "abstract" because it can be easily identified by the locals as part of their own traditions and framed meaningfully within their context.

For example the concept of "sejahtera" and "budi" is very much attuned to SD but now is almost loss in the practice of it all despite the words being bandied around without any deeper appreciation at all.

More than that, each RCE has therefore its own uniqueness given the varying traditions and cultural context. In fact this is one of the outstanding features of the RCE where diversity is celebrated and widening even more participation across the global community.

It is not surprising therefore to find that there are now close to 200 RCEs in all continents within a span of some 10 years. Each of them is networked to other associations and organisations (including botanical gardens, zoos, museums) that are deeply involved in promoting and enhancing the implementation of SD across the board.

One very distinct feature of RCEs (unlike the "stereotype" conventional institutions of higher learning) is that it is not a one-size-fits-all model and that it is very closely linked to the local community working hand in glove to bring SD back into communal activities so that future generations are better adapted to ESD and their social responsibilities.

In other words, it does not have to adopt "foreign" ideas (even so-called "experts" or "consultants" – often with exorbitant "fees") when it is incompatible with local values, traditions and norms that have a tendency of being hegemonic by asserting what is deemed as a "new" form of colonialism as the prime minister warned recently.

More ironic when the ideas (or consultants) are known to fail in transforming their country of origin; yet have the audacity to claim otherwise away from home.

It is here that Malaysia has some good news to celebrate when just last week the country's top private university – UCSI University (note the "S" stands for "sustainability") had been acknowledged by the UNU as the fourth RCE-ESD in Malaysia. The first three are USM, UM and UTM in that order – all are public universities located in the Peninsular.

This makes the UCSI's RCE rather special, being the first Malaysian private university and located in Sarawak. And together all four RCEs form a formidable consortium to move ESD, especially at the tertiary level, linking it to numerous communities that support one another in all matters related to SD at the most basic level, not forgetting schools.

In doing so, the entire community and the nation will be more ready to embrace SD development as envisaged some 40 years ago.

In 1968 for example, Unesco organised the first intergovernmental conference aimed at reconciling environmental and development, in what we now call SD, that is inspired by the local context and nuances.

In so doing we are reliving the aspirations of former secretary-general Kofi Annan as quoted above, especially as an attribute to the only black person to hold the position (1997-2006), who passed away recently at the age of 80 after a short illness.

He will be remembered as the main "driver" for ESD and will be sorely missed. May he rest in peace, as ESD thrives on, without exception in Malaysia under New Malaysia.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 1 October 2018 - 06:59am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

TODAY, Oct 1, the newly appointed Mara board resumes duty. It is therefore timely to highlight what this entails.

"Amanah rakyat" are two sacred words when taken together convey a multitude of meanings. Unfortunately, it is often taken for granted, especially when it is "hidden" in an acronym so much so that the "deeper" meaning is lost.

As such what is expected by the rakyat is not fully met. Worse still when it is squandered away at their expanse without them realising it.

In short, there is already a breach of trust, the very essence of "amanah", which is beyond the various lexical meanings of being reliable or even acceptance of the truth without evidence because it commands confidence. It is, essentially, about honesty at the heart of it all, beginning with oneself.

Hence, according to the Prophet (pbuh): "Man will go to sleep during which honesty will be taken away from his heart and only its trace will remain in his heart like the trace of a dark spot; then he will go to sleep, during which honesty will decrease further still, so that its trace will resemble the trace of a blister as when an ember is dropped on one's foot, which would make it swell, and one would see it swollen but there would be nothing inside. People would be carrying out their trade but hardly will there be a trustworthy person. It will be said, 'in such-and-such tribe there is an honest man', and later it will be said about some man, 'What a wise, polite and strong man he is!' Though he will not have faith equal even to a mustard seed in his heart."

That the heart is referred to is interesting because amanah always resides in the heart such that one does not need any further supervision.

It is inherent in the display of character, ingrained with utmost integrity and morality akin to virtuous and upright ethics, strongly upheld as a commitment to be kept at the highest level regardless of circumstances.

At the most esteemed level amanah relates to the covenant with God Almighty in ensuring faith as mentioned in the saying of the Prophet (pbuh): "There is no faith for the one who has no trust."

Indeed, it was reported that Khalifah Umar Al-Khattab said: "Do not let yourselves be impressed by the roar of a man. Rather, if he fulfils the trust and restrains himself from harming the honour of people (rakyat), then he will truly be a man."

Some have identified amanah and classified it into various contexts, like we are the amanah of God and thus becomes obligatory for us to avoid His wrath and whatever that is prohibited upon us. Our children and our spouse, for example, are the amanah upon us and it becomes obligatory to look after them well.

The country and the community is the amanah for those who have been entrusted to lead so that justice and peace always prevail. At a more functional level, the enforcement units are often on the front line, entrusted to serve and protect everyone. In this context, work is the amanah that must be carried out with the utmost honesty and integrity. The Prophet said: "Any man whom God has given the authority to rule some people (rakyat) and he does not look after them in an honest manner, they will not enter Paradise nor smell its fragrance."

To Muslims, the Quran is amanah to be read, in seeking guidance and understanding in order to maintain an Islamic way of life as much as the Sunnah is the amanah of the Prophet (pbuh) to avoid slander (fitnah) from disrupting individual and communal life.

In short, amanah generally includes everything that God has entrusted to us and instructed us to take care of.

That includes guarding anything that has to do with the rights and dues of others, namely the rakyat, and also refraining from engaging in anything that is not pleasing to the Almighty.

More specifically, however, it is about paying attention to the amanahs and fulfilling each of them, and not in any way neglecting or betraying them.

Based on this, what is meant by amanah for those in positions of power and responsibility (public or private), they should execute such positions with amanah in the delivery of truth and justice. Not just the acquisition of power including oppressive and corrupt ones.

In other words, leadership too is about amanah, be it judicial or managerial positions in any organisation, including that of the family and community, that is, the rakyat.

The Prophet (pbuh) said: "When trusts are neglected, then await the Hour."

When asked: How would they be neglected, O Prophet? He said: "When positions of authority are given to people who are not qualified for them, then await the Hour."

On this basis we wish the new lineup every success in the delivery of amanah for the rakyat and country without fear or favour. The rakyat awaits.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more:  http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 26 September 2018 - 07:06am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

FEW Malaysians would have realised that today marks the day when the nation lost one of our (unsung?) heroes 18 years ago. He passed away due to cancer at the age of 82; but not before contributing so much to the country, especially in the legal sector. As Malaya then journeyed to shape its own destiny, Tun Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim (1917-2000) left a remarkable legacy that we must take cognisance and be proud of.

In this day and age of a new Malaysia where the "rule of law" is gradually creeping back as the centrepiece of Malaysia's future, Tun Suffian remains a beacon of which direction we should be heading. And more importantly, we should take heed of where we have gone terribly wrong in the past.

Known for his humility, compassion and fierce independence, he is regarded as Malaysia's most distinguished judge. According to The UK Telegraph: "His international standing made him one of the few in his country to speak freely without fear of repression."

As Lord President of the nation's federal judiciary from 1974 to 1982, among his prime concerns was the dignity of the ordinary citizen, and reportedly "he never let legal technicalities prevail over justice".

This may have something to do with his humble beginnings as the first "anak watan" (local boy) to occupy the topmost position in the nation's legal hierarchy.

As son of a kadi from a remote kampung of Kuala Kangsar, Perak, he understood what it meant.

Yet allegedly his wit and talents did not escape his schoolmaster in the nearby Clifford School, who predicted that he would one day be "the pride of the Malay(sian) race".

He eventually proved it when he took over the various legal positions where the colonial British rule had left. He made it clear what constituted an independent Malaya, later Malaysia.

High on his agenda was indeed the rule of law in an uncompromising way. He soldiered on to promote the separation of powers and never flinched from his criticism in defence of the well-respected judiciary in Malaysia when placed under threat.

While it took some time for the citizens to be comfortable with such an arrangement amid the feudal environment of yesteryears, the latter continued to be recognised as part of the socio-cultural makeup in an evolving nationhood that otherwise remained subservient to the rule of the people, by the people, and for the people.

In other words, away from the feudal environment, which categorically excludes that of partisan politics (where some assumed the role of politician-kings dubbed as arrogant "warlords"), the people have the final say. There were no two ways about this.

This is what in essence the new Malaysia is all about, arising from a nationwide collective decision made peacefully on May 9 through the ballot box.

As a result, many of the politician-kings had to face the bitter onslaught of the people, especially the younger generation, whose wrath knew no nostalgia of the feudalistic ways. The consequence of which is now well-known for all to see if not embrace. More so, with a hope to learn from it, namely the rule of (just) law is here to stay and must be deeply entrenched if the brave, new future is to be forever sustained.

That being said, the reality is no less challenging provided we are all fully aware and "well-educated" about it as citizens of this beloved country. It is here once again that Tun Suffian left his hallmark when he described what a university ought to be.

He was very sure of this when the committee he chaired for the establishment of USM summed it: "the university should be an autonomous body separate and apart from the government."

Furthermore, "we believe that academic freedom is a necessary condition of the highest efficiency and the proper progress of academic institutions, and that encroachments upon their liberty, in the supposed interest of greater efficiency, would in fact diminish their efficiency and stultify their development" (Suffian, 1969). Not surprisingly, he was then also the esteemed pro-chancellor of University Malaya for a good quarter of a century, from 1963 to 1986.

Indeed to my mind this is where the problem begins to rear its ugly head, that is, when we deviated from the notion of the rule of law by subjugating the autonomy and intellectual freedom of the university. That derailed understanding of what the rule of law is, or it is at all practical levels when politics tend to abuse it.

Fortunately, now this has come to pass under the present government at least as promised through its election manifesto.

It is therefore up to us to claim it so that the rule of law can be immediately restored as our overdue rights are not only confined to the universities but nationwide.

As today marks the first memorial anniversary of Tun Suffian in new Malaysia, perhaps the following words accorded to him is best remembered in the current context.

In a speech in 1980, he commended the ability to "disagree in a civilised way"; and that "law is made for man, not man for the law".

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 19 September 2018 - 09:11am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

A HISTORICAL milestone was made last night when the inaugural International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) Public Debate Series (PDS) was launched at The Garden of Knowledge and Virtue.

The collaborative effort between IIUM and the Youth and Sports Ministry firmly translated the aspiration that new Malaysia is more open to diversity of opinions and expressions, especially on things that matter.

The 6D formula encompassing disagreement, dissent, dialogue, discourse, debate and decorum is the rule of thumb in making this aspiration a reality.

The youth and sports minister, in welcoming the initiative, reiterated that it is aimed at developing a culture of critical thinking, public speaking and raising the quality of debates as well as the use of English.

All these resonate well with the Education Ministry in an attempt to shift education to take a more publicly engaged role as the nation's "think-tank" where the younger generation are accorded the all-important responsibility of interlocutor for the future.

Not only must they know how to communicate with conviction and confidence, without fear or favour, they must also know what to convey given the myriad of issues overcrowding the nation's mind, indeed the world today.

More so in the distant future. In order to accommodate this, the series will be conducted monthly involving a combination of senior and junior speakers coming from members of the community; dealing with the most pressing issues.

The event last night set the tenor of what to expect in the coming series. With no less than "bro" minister himself leading the team on one side, and the freshly minted Asian Best Overall Debater, Syarif Fakhri of IIUM on the other, the audience were given a treat of what the new breed of Malaysians are capable of.

If there are so much negative reports in the media about the younger generation, it is because we choose to focus more on those because "bad" news sells, as the media struggle to keep their heads above the water.

So the actual story is never completely told. The inaugural IIUM PDS, however, gave a somewhat rare insight into the minds of our youths.

To the surprise of many, the situation is not at all hopeless. It also means that the 6Ds should be given its rightful place in nurturing new ways in the new Malaysia.

And universities are just the place for it provided they are prepared to change in tandem with the demands of the time. That said it is time to reconsider what is called "education" today.

Over the last month, I have participated in a couple of seminars that were associated with the term "Education 4.0," instead of "Education 2030".

Answering why is hard to tell especially when the latter comes out of the 2015 World Education Forum held in Incheon, South Korea on the back of the United Nations Decade on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), which expired the year before.

It is intended as the way forward post-2015 well into 2030, hence the name. That it is framed on ESD shows that there is every need for the 6Ds to be embraced because ESD is inherently futuristic in nature laced by uncertainties and subjected to a plethora of interpretations.

It is bound to open up many doors in order to match the expectation of the future that we want.

This is quite the opposite from the narrative of "Education 4.0", which seems to be mechanistic in its form.

As such, it is rather monolithic in its presentation within a very linear structure, like many of the processes that makes up a machine.

In other words, there is little flexibility to speak of in the context of the 6Ds. More often than not, there is an inclination to some "standardised" one-size-fits-all herd-like thinking as the more dominant approach. Consequently, the so-called "education" is not only becoming more redundant, it also tends to be dehumanising.

The people, especially youths, become more and more disengaged as they get hooked on new habits brought forth by mechanistic gadgets that push them towards the "standardised" ways of life.

Few realise that technology has the capacity to standardise and "take over" the individual involved insidiously.

The ultimate manifestation of this will be the various forms of addiction that is now associated with assembly-line, factory-like learning where the 6D rule has no place at all.

In short, while public debates, discourses and dialogues are crucial for education, in the real sense of the world, the deeper understanding of what education is all about, with all its intended meanings and philosophy, must also be given due consideration.

Education 2030 Framework for Action adopted in 2015 that provides the roadmap to achieve the 10 targets of the education goal cannot be sidelined by another illusive "target" like that of Education 4.0.

More so when it is ill-defined against that of Education 2030 as it stands today.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Dzulkifli‎ Abdul Razak

OF late the issue of who should be a "president" of a university (likened to chairman of the board of directors in other situations) caught the interest of the public and politicians alike. It is a good sign because it means that we are taking greater interest on how our universities are being governed. And for more than six decades this issue has not received such "publicity" even though we have more than 20 public universities and counting (with a possibility of another "state" university announced recently). What is more, given that it is triple the number in the public sector.

As far as I can recall, a large number of them holding such positions can be classified as "professionals" and not "politicians" as such. Perhaps that is why there is no apparent "controversy" then.

But on closer inspection most of them are beholden to partisan politics bias to that of the ruling government of the day. Such political affiliations somehow does not count although the "impact" was just as good (or as bad) as having "true blue" politicians being physically present at the material time.

Stories of "them" making calls to a politician's office before some "hard" decisions were taken were not unusual. They were political proxies in many ways, just like the civil servants (including retired ones) who are "planted" as members of the board, so to speak, on behalf of the ministry (read minister).

The difference is subtle but the impact is very real – practically no difference vis-a-vis to the so-called "controversy" that is being aired today.

The only stark difference is that, at present, the government has committed not to involve any politician (in person), whereas the previous regime was silent on this. But the latter tolerated many politically-linked personalities, including retired politicians.

Some are real heavy weights known to "politicise" the university in no uncertain terms.

I remember one who admitted that he was appointed to "clean up" (memutihkan) the university of "opposition" politics! Hence, the culture of collegiality flew out the window as the rule of fear descended on the campus.

In other words, the entire issue on the choice of a president or a chairman is a red herring. The nett effect could be the same in the long run as amply demonstrated during the past 30 years.

In fact, I would rather risk working with a "politician" who is on record to be staunchly academic in his/her beliefs, understanding and practices relating to issues of academic freedom, and a slew of autonomies – ranging from organisational to financial as well as recruitment – because all of these are essentially tied up in one ecosystem. One cannot proceed without the other. There is no such thing as "staggered" autonomy based on "performance" as being promoted today.

Figuratively, if a university is likened to a vehicle where accuracy and speed are key to deliver impact, then lending "autonomy" only to one part, say the steering wheel and not the gearbox, will not change anything.

Such are the intricacies that must be understood in the world of academe if things are to go full throttle.

Failing to appreciate this fundamental is to "fail" the university, which is the crux of the current issue. Not just confined to the presidency or chairmanship, especially when the person concerned is clueless.

I recall one higher eduction KSU who compared "autonomy" with a camel getting into a tent. And he reckoned it takes five years for the beast to do so!

This weird idea came from a seemingly apolitical professional (if civil servants then can qualify as one) – without the slightest hint of what "autonomy" entails. So what is the fuss all about? Storm in a teacup?

Lest we forget all this started during the days when corporatising the university was considered the in-thing. Blindly emulating the corporate sector, the then university council was sacrificed to accommodate a board of directors (as it is now) instead. Explicit to this idea was to place the university under a tighter grip of the government, through the ministry of education. So it is no surprise that the alleged political appointees became convenient pawns to ensure that the political agenda took precedence over academic ones.

The "human capital" (economic) agenda coming out of The Human Capital Theory is one, at the expense of the Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan that speaks a different language of a balanced, harmonic and "sejahtera" human being (insan seimbang, harmonis lagi sejahtera dirinya). In other words, the issue at hand is just symptomatic of a larger "invasion" into the university system that now acts as a defunct idea of the corporate version. Whereas in the case of the latter the CEO has autonomy to call the shots, not so for the former.

In contrast, the university council that was hijacked in the name of corporatisation was inherently autonomous. The chairman is elected by the council, and he/she could even be a politician from the opposition party. This is the case for the University of Malaya where Dr Tan Chee Khoon (an opposition leader) was elected as chairman (think of the recent PAC chairman) after serving the council for the longest time from 1950s. And he left a significant mark on the development of the oldest university in the country.

In hindsight, we have got it right and we have proven it to the world. But then change our stance for political expediency. And that is where the problem lies distracted by the current hoo-ha that is more of a symptom of deeper interference that must be stopped once and for all as the new government has given its assurance.

Indeed, we have been barking at the wrong tree yet a again. Turning a mountain out of a molehill without really discerning what the root of the problem is.

The writer is the rector of IIUM and chairman of USIM. He also served as the 5th USM vice-chancellor (2000-2011).

SINCE May 10, "new Malaysia" is gradually gaining acceptance, but there is more to be done. The column (My View Sept 5) last week highlighted some the issues at hand where "old" mind sets tend to stifle the growth of new Malaysia. After all, old habits die hard when cultural changes are held at bay. Culture is largely a product of stubborn habits.

In "old" Malaysia the "yes, minister" culture was the norm. Now "saya menurut perintah" is being replaced by "saya pemegang amanah". To quote the new chief secretary, the days of blindly following instructions are over. Meaning to say there is ample room for disagreement and dissent through dialogues, discourses and debates with utmost decorum – the 6Ds. Admittedly, this is easier said than done if the "right" culture is not in place as we have often witnessed, even in the parliament.

This is where the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) is taking a lead role in acculturating new ways of encompassing the 6Ds: disagreement, dissent, dialogues, discourses, debates and decorum. This is not entirely new for many but not when it involves "decorum".

The so-called (anti-)social media is a classic example where "decorum" is often left wanting, instead creating more of "discomfort" if not "discord." Hence the bold IIUM initiative is indeed timely.

IIUM, as a Garden of Knowledge and Virtue, is no stranger in this regard. In a short span of 35 years, the university is well recognised as 12th best in the World Universities Debate Ranking, based on institutional cumulative achievements in international debating for five-year period.

As such IIUM takes the next step going beyond competitive debating, and demonstrating leadership in Malaysia debate and intellectual activities by making public discourse a norm and culture as hallmarks for balanced future leaders.

In tandem with this, the IIUM World Debate and Oratory Centre (IWON) by collaborating with the Ministry of Youth and Sports, and hosted by the Garden Campus is set to pioneer a Public Debate Series (PDS), called "Action – Youth Engaged", directed particularly at youths.

According to IWON director Siti Aliza Alias, the year-long series will be open to the public and will feature prominent figures such as policy makers and leaders across the academic, social and corporate sectors, notably those who are known to have strongly held views.

The aim is to engage youth in discussions on the national and global agenda and raise awareness particularly among them on pertinent issues that could lead to policy decisions and actions in shaping new Malaysia.

The philosophy is "to create a culture of discourse and reasoning among the youth, and provide a platform for the exchange of ideas, and championing freedom of expression, while holding to the values of Islam".

This aligns well with what is often advocated by the youth and sports minister and education minister. The former, being an IIUM debate alumnus, envisions Malaysia as a "debating nation" where youths actively engage in discussions that will shape the country's future as well as its present. The education minister, a former IIUM academic on the other hand, envisions a more intellectually open environment in universities as higher learning institutions.

It is only fitting then that IIUM takes the lead in realising all these aspirations through the PDS platform, which is the first of its kind in Malaysia.

While it draws inspiration from the culture of open and public debate in Oxford and Cambridge Union, IIUM brings its own unique flavour. With strong Islamic values, such as respect and ethical conduct in disagreements, the IIUM programme underscores debate as an activity that is not stigmatised by aggressive (verbal) behaviours including personal and vulgar attacks that usually colour political debates (read shouting matches) in this country. It is more about "agreeing to disagree".

Youths, as future leaders, must therefore nurture these traits as second nature to play an effective role as public intellectuals when engaging larger audiences in search of solutions beyond the norms of competitive debates. For this, IIUM seeks the active involvement of youth by having a nationwide online recruitment of speakers between 16 and 25 years old, one each to partner-up with two lead speakers. The demographics in Malaysia has shifted and youths are increasingly the new decision-makers, as can be seen from the recent 14th general election.

In order to commemorate the inaugural event, IIUM is welcoming the public into its Garden Campus in Gombak to participate and witness the first public debate between two prominent figures on a current topic of national importance. This time the debate topic "Repealing the Anti-Fake News Act is a Mistake", will showcase nationally two prominent lead speakers: "bro" Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman, minister of Youth and Sports (IIUM debate alumnus, 2006) and "bro" Syed Ahmad Taufik Albar, group chief financial officer, RHB Banking Group (IIUM debate alumnus, 1996).

In the spirit of Hari Malaysia, the event taking place on Sept 18, 8pm at the IIUM Cultural Centre (ICC) will also be streamed live on social media platforms and through media coverage.

It is envisaged that this first ever nationwide collaborative debating effort will forge ahead a new culture towards nation-building in acculturating New Malaysia.

More details at: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Posted on 8 August 2018 - 07:34am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

THE Trust School Conference blazed another trail in
Kuching last week with more than 700 participants including school
principals, teachers and students from all over the country. The venue
was appropriate because Sarawak was one of two states that pioneered the
trust school (TS), or sekolah amanah, concept some eight years ago. The
other state is Johor. It started with 10 schools but has now increased
more than eight-fold covering almost all states, except Kedah, Perlis,
Penang and Malacca.

However, other similar projects are being introduced in the interim before the full TS programme comes on board in the remaining states. Admittedly the number is a drop in the ocean. Nevertheless, the sea of knowledge and transformational experience gained so far is in itself invaluable, being the first successful home-grown transformational model of significant impact on education.

The conference, the sixth since 2012, documents the impact publicly for others to see and judge for themselves. Nothing like "seeing is believing" as far as education is concerned. It is too complex to be simplified into numbers as currently done as if they are "the" absolute indicators of "quality" as "falsely promoted" by parties with a myopic view of education.

Instead, the conference bares the real "anatomy" of education and opens it to scrutiny, creating a deeper understanding of the human-centric aspect. It is aimed at developing the whole person (not just "human capital") and not just someone who "excels" in making a living but fails in life. Trust schools form the bedrock in the evolution of Malaysian education in its own mould as clearly outlined by Wawasan 2020. It is after all our story, the Malaysian story for a "new" Malaysia.

Over the years, the model has been improved and fine-tuned by co-learning with other experienced experts and members of the community. This is an ongoing process like all vibrant and organically grown initiatives – lifelong, lifewide and lifeworthy processes that will never stop. Otherwise, it will be stillborn and no longer transformational. With the studied transfer of knowledge and expertise, the Malaysian counterparts are playing more and more dominant roles adding socio-cultural nuances in shaping the future of national education as a preferred and relevant one. This is one of several rewards of the TS programme where virtually all the participating schools experienced their own transformation (not a one-size-fits-all) making it unique within their own context.

They range from the "better" schools in urban centres to that in remote rural areas covering schools considered "less" privileged – out of sight, out of mind. Included are those for the orang asal as well as other minorities. This wide and varied range is evident enough to show the robustness of the model cutting across the board in mainstreaming the programme to be templated throughout the nation. In this context, the statement by the education minister in conjunction with the conference that the TS programme is to be extended is timely and most welcome.

The theme this time was aptly titled "Transformation beyond borders". In a nutshell, the programme adopted a "whole school improvement" approach as a change strategy by using social enterprise (with no profit motives) as the vehicle to drive the transformation. It nurtures a more holistic, comprehensive and quality education for students and staff alike founded on high value and integrity.

A key attraction this time was the participation of Finnish experts. Finland, known for its sterling performance in education, is well recognised by the international community. Some of the lessons learned are seemingly simple but will have a tremendous impact in "humanising education".

For example, foremost, the system is built on a culture of trust and pride of work. The latter focuses on competent teachers working on a foundation of respect, autonomy and professionalism with no evaluation and inspection by external authority. It focuses on "self-reflection" rather than "assessment" in general and "standardised assessment" in particular. In other words, everyone is accountable for themselves, including the students where the building of "trust" is imperative. And they become owners of their own learning. Throughout the sharing sessions, several rounds of applause were heard from the audience as a sign of overwhelming approval.

Other eye-openers were when it was revealed that the Finnish education system works on the basis of "more problems, more resources". Meaning to say that they are more interested in slow learners and low achievers so that all of the students will arrive at an acceptable level of performance and achievement.

Thus the goal is to narrow the gaps and divisiveness among not just students but also schools throughout the nation. It is for this reason too that it entertains no form of ranking and competition in all aspects. Parents and the communities supported and accepted this so that education is not skewed towards only those that can be measured (KPIs?) but otherwise ignored including "trust" that is so fundamental to the Finnish philosophy.

The evidence: The student dropout rate is 0.3% – virtually nil. This is another eye-opener that prompted another round of applause from the rather "baffled" audience. No KPIs, really? Not in Malaysia! Thanks to advice fed to us by consultants.

For all these reasons the Trust School Programme is deemed necessary to put in place what Malaysia ought have at par with the Finnish experience.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

THIS column was written while witnessing the unfolding of the 61st Merdeka celebration with all its splendour and freshness. The "third" wave of independence (see MyView, Aug 29) presented itself as a new platform to reshape into a more dignified, balanced and harmonious nation. New faces representing the younger generation are symbolic of this hope in taking Malaysia forward.

But how serious is this away from the celebration site is the question? At the place where I am living, for example, the evidence is overwhelming (hopefully it is an outlier) where less than 10% of the households put out any form of patriotic symbols, not limited to the Jalur Gemilang. If the national flag is an indicator, then the observation is worrying.

The "finding" is rather depressing noting that in the area there are many "well-educated" and "well-to-do" citizens judging from the locale and vehicles parked in the vicinity.

Indeed, the row of bungalows are the worst "exhibitor" in displaying any form of patriotic symbol on Merdeka day. None of them bothered to do anything. So much for new Malaysia for the rich!

More disturbing still is to know that just a stone's throw away from the location, Jalur Gemilang flags were available for as a little as RM2 a piece without GST. Either these people are too busy with themselves or too lethargic to take notice.

The latter cannot be since the management of the housing estate had an early start to flying the national flags in public spaces well before Aug 31.

On closer casual observations, the cause may be apparent. There seemed to be a skewed correlation between the numbers of Jalur Gemilang displayed and various occupants, namely those who displayed some Jawi (Arabic) scripts outdoor in contrast to the ones who hung lanterns outside, including the non-red-coloured ones. The correlation for the former is proportionally far better than the latter. Why?

The difference observed can be further understood in the larger context such as the recent and upcoming by-elections. In all these, it is hard to miss how the "racial" slants were openly used without a hint of reservation – reminiscent of the "old" ways.

Otherwise how do we explain what is happening in the by-elections where the candidates, who were jostling for the seats and power, came from the same racial stock. In other words, the reality on the ground is still very much based on the "old" mindset laced with "racial" bigotry, instead of the reverse as expected from the "new" reality that we vouched for.

Worse still is when one contesting political party has clearly opted to fly its own insignia instead of the "multiracial" coalition that it claimed to still hold allegiance to despite the glaring departure.

It can only suggest the ambivalent attitude in embracing the rump national coalition as and when it can "profit" from it.

This is almost synonymous with its general public image subscribing to the belief that money is king – viz it can buy just about anything to gain and retain power and position. Even if it means keeping complete silence – if not in defence of – when gross corruption or "stupidity", as the prime minister recently alleged, was committed as long as it can profit and gain from the situation.

Under the circumstances it would be interesting to see whether this type of "opportunistic" thinking has a place in new Malaysia come polling day on Sept 8. Particularly when that "money is king" adage, hopefully, is now a matter of the past.

Even then on the broader dimension political analysts of all shades are generally unable to convey their opinions "objectively" without trailing the racial lines too. Meaning we are still stuck within this "old" frame of mind. How sad.

So while the 61st Merdeka celebration is a phenomenal performance especially by the youthful generation, it is still very much a reality in the making until "old" mindsets are totally dispensed with – from the households to those who are hungry for power.

Otherwise, it gives a very muddled signal to the younger generation in a search for their identity as citizens of new Malaysia. What is certain is that anything "new" cannot be sustained if the scaffoldings are generally "old" in the sense that it is a liability in delivering justice for all.

Fortunately, the location of the 61st celebration serves as a keen reminder. With the Palace of Justice towering in the background, it can only mean that the third Merdeka cannot but be framed by the rule of law centring on justice. Including putting "right" what has been "wronged" in the context of historical injustices too.

To be sure, it takes a lot of hard work to be rid of "old" mindsets before "new" ones can freely emerge. The time for that has just begun. Sayangi Malaysiaku! With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Posted on 29 August 2018 - 06:56am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

IN a couple of days, Malaysia will celebrate her 61st Merdeka on Aug 31. This time it is not just a rerun for the 60th time so to speak. Rather it is one of a kind due to a variety of reasons.

Notable among them is the fact that the celebration will be held under the auspices of the newly minted Pakatan Harapan government. And this is a significant milestone to (re)shape the nation anew.

In view of this, the upcoming Merdeka event has been dubbed as the third in the series of Merdeka as it too "liberates" the country from an "incompetent" regime.

If the first (1957) Merdeka unshackled the country from the elitist clutch of colonial power, the third version did so from a ruling coalition of local elites who are out-of-touch with the rakyat.

Fortunately, both saw a "bloodless" (albeit reluctant) transition of power, but they were equally painful nevertheless.

These are vital reminders that must not be forgotten. In fact, the world over was amazed how Malaysians were able to conduct themselves very maturely in a democratic way.

More so because the 14th general election (GE14) was slotted much too close to May 13 – intentionally or otherwise.

The date in 1969 is by all counts a "dark spot" in the country's history, which otherwise remained remarkably peaceful within the civil sphere. Still, the general election reaffirmed that Malaysians are generally peace-loving and resilient people. Among them this time are a relatively large group of young voters born after 1969.

Be that as it may, the 1969 tragedy cannot be dismissed outright as it has a close link to the emergence of the second Merdeka.

Particularly beginning May 16 when the then democratically elected government was forced to give way in a favour of a National Operation Council (Mageran) that lasted until Feb 23, 1971.

Henceforth, the "return" to a democratic rule arguably is another form of Merdeka for the second time. After all, it led to the disbanding – quite willingly – of a "non-civilian, non-democratic" apparatus in preference of a voluntary restoration of an elected government with an even tighter set of caveats and the rule of law. This, however, as we found out recently, is not sufficiently so.

This is evident from the aftermath of the general election, where a massive clean-up is imperative, this time caused by unprecedented corruption and alleged abuse of power never seen before nationally or internationally as claimed by some.

It therefore marked another milestone in the country's struggle to steadfastly save the country from failing.

Indeed, prior to the general election, Malaysia's sovereignty was allegedly being threatened under the cloak of corruption and rampant abuse of power.

This is substantiated, of late, by several charges laid on the ruling elites working hand in glove with some unscrupulous power brokers, locally and abroad.

The alleged collusions were conducted away from public scrutiny, distracted by secessions of lop-sided mega-projects in the name of foreign direct investment – illogically practised and defined.

It is so lop-sided that the prime minister used the word "stupidity" to rubbish them.

One would expect, as we move closer to a developed nation status in 2020, words like "equanimity" becomes the key in describing the situation.

On the contrary, "equanimity" instead is scandalised, applied to a super luxury piece of property that is allegedly appropriated through the country's coffers.

The prime minister upped the ante when he made mention of a new type of colonialism that comes easy as soon as "stupidity" makes its mark.

In other words, Malaysia is a probable candidate to be (re)colonised, no matter how hard those implicated choose to deny it.

Especially when the other parties and power brokers involved are equally gullible, if not downright unethical.

That the prime minister courageously made such an observation during his latest official visit abroad speaks volumes of how vulnerable the situation is nationally.

Yet these are mere tips of the iceberg as even more cans of worms were uncovered within the 100-day period after the last election.

Just from this brief run down of events, one can already pick up ample reasons why the 61st Merdeka celebration is "special".

It is no less another wave of Merdeka that Malaysia (not just Malaya) gallantly "fought" to save the country from being subtly subverted, and its wealth and dignity squandered again.

Lest we forget many countries in the African continent are lamenting on such a fate as the rugs are being pulled right under them through the infamous tactics of "the debt diplomacy".

Malaysia therefore must keep the highest level of equanimity so as not to be manipulated into such unsuspecting diplomatic schemes aimed at undermining our sacred Merdeka.

Thus, come Aug 31 let us then stand shoulder to shoulder to forge a smarter and brave new Malaysia, riding on the third wave that we collectively created to fend all forms of conspiracies by (re)asserting #kitapunyaMalaysia in the spirit of Sayangi Malaysiaku.

With some four decades of experience in education, the writer believes that "another world is possible". Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

Posted on 21 August 2018 - 08:13am

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

THE 84th World Library and Information Congress, the first for Malaysia (after two other bids previously), will open in Kuala Lumpur from Aug 24-30. The theme "Transform Libraries, Transform Societies", with the sub-theme: "Reaching out to the hard to reach" – clearly points to the challenges ahead as libraries, like many knowledge-based organisations, face an uncertain future.

Malaysia, the host country, is no exception when its policy expressly directs us "Towards developing a (Malaysian) society that is characterised by a reading and knowledge culture, by 2020", which is just around the corner when she is supposed to be transformed.

More than that Malaysia has in fact recently crafted out an unprecedented (and unplanned) societal transformation in the 14th General Election, which took place barely three months ago on May 9.

Malaysians from all walks of life decided to do this peacefully through the ballot box in the most creative way to elect a new government after more than 60 years.

This makes the transformation a unique one, more so when it is realised without any form of violence, let alone the loss of life that is often accompanied with a tumultuous and unexpected change of such dimensions. There was hardly an overt protest of any kind post-election reaffirming the need for more changes as promised, notably reaching out to the hard to reach in the same spirit of the sub-theme of the conference.

It deals directly with the irony of today's reality, namely, as the world is allegedly getting smaller in reach and distance, disparities and discrimination among the various sectors of the seven billion global inhabitants somewhat widens in stark contrast thanks to the ceaseless proxy wars and terror waged ever since the turn of the 21st centuries.

This can only mean that "Reaching out to the hard to reach" is even harder to conceive, what more to translate into reality. Meanwhile, it culminates into a worsening exodus of human migrations breaching numerous boundaries in the so-called "borderless" world. More ironic still is when many nations closed their "borders" in an attempt to keep out the desperate migrants, endangering thousands of innocent lives, if not wasting them at the same time.

Reportedly, since the International Conference on Population and Development of 1994 the international migration issue and its relation to development has risen steadily on the agenda of the international community.

So much so the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development includes several migration-related targets and calls for regular reviews of the progress toward their achievement.

Not surprisingly, the number of international migrants worldwide has continued to grow rapidly in recent years, reaching 258 million in 2017, up from 220 million in 2010 and 173 million in 2000.

It is against this harsh back-ground that the theme of the conference must be read. Invariably, libraries need to clarify their reason(s) for existence within the transformational theme as claimed.

Ultimately, it begs the question how far can "libraries" effectively touch "the hard to reach", not limited to just the "normal" (read peaceful) situations, but more so for those who are being grossly shut out through no fault of their own.

For example, according to International Migration Report 2017, as today's increasingly interconnected world turned international migration into a nightmare that touches nearly all corners of the globe, it simultaneously elevates conflict, poverty, inequality and a lack of sustainable livelihoods.

In other words, while it is trendy to talk about libraries embracing the latest of technologies and becoming digitally inclusive (the fourth industrial revolution in the case of Malaysia), it may still be furthest from the panacea of meeting the noble aspirations of the conference.

What is more, several sources have cautioned that some of these technologies can consume budgets that far exceed what libraries in general can afford under the circumstances.

Yet it is often said that to improve the reach to those who are hard to reach, literacy of the remotest local communities must be enabled optimally, a tall order by any count.

As reminded by the Malaysian experience, transforming the Malaysian society is fraught with challenges because of the widespread diversity. Not only is it multiracial, multi-religious and multilingual, it also reflects an urban-rural dichotomy, the rich-poor socio-economic divide, with varying literacy levels including that of information versus knowledge silos to say the least.

We have not even broached the subject of "wisdom" as a future destination following the oft-quoted knowledge explosion phenomena.

What is rather obvious, as knowledge continues to multiply, re-imagining what the futures for libraries are like, we remain starved for the much needed "wisdom" as part of transforming libraries prior to that of societies.

On this note there is much to look forward to from the "wisdom" of the 84th Congress given its list of impressive speakers, not least Malaysia's own chief secretary.

After all, Malaysia has been said to be transforming under his watch for about a decade before the new government swept into power.

The time to be wiser has come and libraries must embrace this before societies are "suffocated" by more knowledge sans wisdom; and putting the billions who are hard to reach in an even worse situation threatening "libraries" to be irrelevant in meeting the urgent needs of all humanity.

The writer is the rector of the International Islamic University Malaysia, and the chairman of USIM Board of Directors.

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...

Dzulkifli Abdul Razak

THE Education Ministry will carry out a holistic study before making a decision on whether to recognise the Unified Examination Certificate, said its minister Maszlee Malik recently. This column lauded the statement by underscoring that the operational word is "holistic" which is to be understood within the Malaysian context. Otherwise it can mean many things to many people including those who are not "holistic" in their understanding of what education is all about and have the tendency to hijack the discussion politically to serve their self-interest. One former politician is already attempting to do this. The minister is against such a move and deserves to be supported.

To be sure, all types of qualification or certification are outcomes of one or many education systems. The "holistic-ness" in terms of policy decisions must be made within such a context if it is to be "educationally" meaningful. That is to say it is not about any one part of the system, especially the certification as an endpoint per se, but what goes into it. This takes us back to the heart of the issue, the Falsafah Pendidikan Negara (FPN, 1988) since three decades ago that spells out clearly in its very first sentence what "holistic" means – suatu usaha berterusan ke arah memperkembangkan lagi potensi individu secara menyeluruh dan bersepadu ...".

Key words that framed any policy decisions must take cognizance of the three elements of being continuous (lifelong), complete (life-wide) and convergence (life-worthy) respectively, reflective of the outcome that shapes a successful Malaysian education. And this is to be embodied "holistically" too in the individual/learner as a person who is balanced and in harmony (insan yang seimbang dan harmonis) in four main dimensions: intellectually, spiritually, emotionally and physically. I am convinced that we cannot be more "holistic" than this especially when it is mirrored by Unesco's four pillars of learning unveiled almost 10 years later in 1996.

The truth of the matter is that the education system itself ought to be "seimbang dan harmonis" before we can hope to see Malaysians embracing the same regardless of certification that is granted by whatever name or institution. After all what is in a name (sometimes exorbitantly branded) if it shies away from our national aspiration in violation of the FPN, later FPK (Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan, 1996). And by extension globally against the Unesco pillars of learning as well as the sustainable development goals.

To be blunt, any policy decision made with no regard to this is necessarily "flawed" and must be challenged. This has been the crux of the issue where no politician dares to venture for fear of political suicide. Never mind if it is a social time bomb. So unless such a "legacy" is dismantled head on (60 years have passed as the minister said) then there is every chance that we will prolong a "failed" system to hopelessly power the "new" Malaysia. Not just in letter but more so in spirit, namely, nurturing "new" Malaysian mindsets that are balanced and in harmony. We can do away with the need for other confusing notions like "moderates" or "wassatiyyah" or groupings who promote their own leanings when the education system is well rooted in values that are functionally "balanced and harmonious".

That the issue keeps recurring is enough to show that the FPK has been sidelined for far too long if not ignored. What else to embrace it as a philosophy to live by and proudly shaping the aspiration of Malaysia as prominently engraved in the national emblem – "Bersekutu bertambah mutu" – (remember?) at once rendering the 1Malaysia slogan redundant and politically divisive (ironically) from its inception.

In other words, nothing can be construed as "holistic" without first debunking the "old" strategy of divide and rule that is in-built in the education system(s), policy and structures. As previously noted (MyView, June 27) we cannot just reject race-based politics to be fashionable without first rejecting race-based education systems. Figuratively, the latter is the viper pit that feeds into the former.

To top this, the fact that the system is archaic has been well argued. Again it is impossible to be "holistic" as defined by FPN/FPK/Unesco when each component of the overarching system is not "holistically" linked educationally speaking, reinforced by the race-based multi-streamed system. Therein is the characteristic siloed, first industrial revolution model ingrained with assembly-like exploitative norms, which are not conducive for the 21st century collaborative learning environment to blossom.

In a nutshell, the UEC issue is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to resetting the education system in a "holistic" way as advocated by the education minister.

It is time to take this discourse forward with a "new" frame of mind based on our philosophy to nurture generations of "new" Malaysians. Otherwise we will slide back to the "old" ways sooner than we thought.

Read more: http://www.thesundaily.my/news...