See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235300714

Educational development and reformation in

Malaysia: Past, present and future

Article in Journal of Educational Administration · December 1998

DOI: 10.1108/09578239810238456

CITATIONS READS

63 2,087

1 author:

Rahimah Haji Ahmad

University of Malaya
2 PUBLICATIONS 64 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Rahimah Haji Ahmad on 06 February 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of
Educational Educational development and
Administration
36,5
reformation in Malaysia: past,
present and future
462
Rahimah Haji Ahmad
Professor and Dean, Faculty of Education, University of Malaya,
Malaysia

Introduction
Educational development and reform in Malaysia have always been
characterized by the government’s efforts to adapt education to national
development needs. The essence of educational development and reformation,
as in other developing countries, has always been (and is) curriculum
development, to provide education for human resource development to meet the
needs of the social, economic and political development of the country.
Moral and values education has always been recognized and acknowledged in
the Malaysian school curriculum. It dates back to the time of the British colonial
government, when missionary work was one of the reasons for providing
education for the people. The curriculum had included Scripture as one of the
subjects at the secondary level, and ethics for the non-Christian pupils. Mukherjee
(1986, p. 151) states that there were “weekly slots on ‘ethics’ (given) to their non-
Christian pupils…with liberal extracts from the Bible accompanied by frequent
exhortations to ‘be good’”. Following the English school tradition then, the
National School System included Islamic Religious Education, then known as
Agama (Religion) in the curriculum for the Muslim pupils. For the non-Muslim
students, some form of moral education was given in place of Agama. More fervor
is given to values education in the present curriculum. The Kurikulum Baru
Sekolah Rendah (KBSR), that is the New Primary School Curriculum, and the
Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (KBSM), or the Integrated Secondary
School Curriculum, which have completed their first cycle recently, emphasize the
teaching of values in order to enhance quality individual development, as well as
creating Malaysian citizens of the future, through education.
This paper will briefly outline educational development from the time of
independence, followed by a discussion on the current educational reforms
beginning in 1980s. Highlights will be made on the development of values
education in the curriculum, particularly the importance given to it in the new
curriculum being implemented.

Journal of Educational
Administration,
Vol. 36 No. 5, 1998, pp. 462-475,
© MCB University Press, 0957-8234
This paper is an adapted and improved version of a paper, “Educational development in
Malaysia: the dilemma of values education”, presented in the 8th International Intervisitation
Program (IIEP 94), held at OISE Toronto, and SUNY Buffalo, 15-27 May 1994.
Educational and curriculum development: independence to 1990 Reformation in
The National Education System of Malaysia, as mentioned earlier, was Malaysia
inherited from the British colonial government. However, the policy outlined in
the Education Act of 1961, was a result of clearly thought out strategies aimed
at revamping the fragmented education system of the British colonial era, with
the main objective of achieving national unity and development through
education. 463
The Education Act was to be implemented in stages, to ensure a gradual
transition. It was this gradual implementation of the Education Act, which
characterized educational development and curriculum changes in the early
decades after independence. In essence, it was a gradual change from the
British (English School) type of education to a Malaysian education system,
with a Malaysian outlook and Malaysian oriented curriculum.
Curriculum planning and development was (and is) done at the federal level
and the national education system is centrally administered. Education was and
is a federal matter. Curriculum changes mainly took the form of adapting the
curriculum to the changing needs of the nation, specifically adapting the
syllabus, that is content of subjects to be taught, to fulfil the development needs
of the country. The main objective of education was still national unity, but
changes during this time have also shifted the emphasis from national unity to
national unity and human resource development for a developing nation.
At the end of the 1970s, after undergoing changes in the curriculum and
system as a whole, all schools used Bahasa Malaysia as the medium of
instruction (except at primary level which was provided for in the Education
Act) and comprehensive education was provided for nine years. The changing
emphasis during this period reflected the importance given to science and
technology, in the light of economic development of the times. The system of
education then can be described as providing basic education at the elementary
level, general comprehensive education at the lower secondary level, and semi-
specialized at the upper secondary level. Specialization as preparation for
university was done in Grades 12 and 13, or the pre-university level, at the end
of which students sit for the Malaysian Higher School Certificate of Education
Examination.
Societal and economic changes during the period, reflected in an increasing
emphasis on science and technology in general, also saw the changing
importance given to technical and vocational education as part of the “science
stream” in schooling. As a result, technical and vocational education gained
recognition and popularity, due to the demand for technically oriented
individuals in the labor market. By the end of the 1970s, there were 68 technical
and vocational schools in Malaysia, with more than 30,200 students enrolled, in
addition to 1,200 normal “academic” schools in the country.
At the end of the 1970s, the government felt that it was time to review
whether the system’s evolution was meeting the needs of a progressive
Malaysian nation. Once again an Education Review Committee was set up
under the then Honorable Minister of Education, Dr Mahathir Mohammed (now
Journal of the Prime Minister). The report, released in 1979, now popularly known as the
Educational Cabinet Committee Report, was a result of a very comprehensive study of the
Administration education system as spelt out by the Education Act of 1961.
The Cabinet Committee Report (1979), is in essence in line with what is later
36,5 declared by the Prime Minister as Vision 2020 (Mahathis, 1991). Although the
Cabinet Committee Report did not delineate a new education policy, the
464 emphasis shifted towards building a truly Malaysian society of the future. To
that effect, it emphasizes at all levels of schooling, a holistic (intellectual,
spiritual, physical and emotional) approach to quality human development to
ensure development from all domains – cognitive, affective, and psychomotor.
As stated in the National Educational Philosophy:
Education in Malaysia is an ongoing effort towards further development of the potential of
individuals in a holistic and integrated manner, so as to produce individuals who are
intellectually, spiritually, emotionally and physically balanced and harmonious based on a
firm belief in God. Such an effort is destined to produce Malaysian citizens who are
knowledgeable, who possess high moral standards, and who are responsible and capable of
achieving a high level of personal well being as well as able to contribute to the harmony and
betterment of the nation at large (Ministry of Education, 1993).
In attempting to revamp the curriculum, the KBSR and KBSM take on a whole
new approach. Specific teaching strategies, which are child centered,
characterized with student participation, are incorporated into the teaching
learning activities, (which include both classroom activities as well as co-
curricular activities outside the classroom), combined with a holistic approach
to human development. This is the essence of the current movement.
The KBSR is a back to basics movement, aimed at reducing the previously
heavily content-oriented curriculum, to concentrate on the three Rs. The
orientation clearly specifies a child-centered approach, which requires more
student participation and focuses on individual differences of students.
Teaching activities are designed to especially encourage participation and
verbal communication through verbal skills (aural and oral) as well as reading
and understanding, experiential based writing and practical application of
mathematical concepts such as additions, subtractions, multiplication and
divisions. Learning is to be gained through a variety of experiences, such as
group learning (class, small groups, or diads) or as individuals, depending on
the skills, interests and ability of the students. The teaching and learning
process should, as far as possible, be improved through the use of local
prototype materials and orientations to reflect a truly Malaysian curriculum.
KBSM is a continuation of the KBSR, to provide general education until the
11th year of schooling, through the offering of core subjects, and elective
subjects to enable them to make choices in selecting subjects of their interest. At
the lower secondary level, KBSM retains the structure and subject offerings,
except that the choice of electives of prevocational subjects is eliminated.
Instead a new subject, “Life skills” is introduced as part of the core, taken by all.
The contents comprise some basic elements of Industrial arts, Home economics,
Commerce and Agricultural science, to enable students to acquire manipulative Reformation in
skills in coping with their day-to-day lives. Malaysia
Major changes occurred at the upper secondary level. The KBSM aims to
continue providing general education (implying that specialization is to be
deferred to the pre-university level, which is beyond what is covered by the
KBSM). In this way, the eleven years of schooling (six years elementary and five
years secondary) at one and the same time, prepares students for the work 465
market as well as to further their education to higher levels. Students are thus
no more streamed into specialized areas, (“Arts”, “Science“, “Technical” or
“Vocational” streams), although there is room for them to have subject
concentration through their choice of elective subjects. The upper secondary
curriculum consists of core subjects required of all students (general education),
and four groups of subjects from four areas (Humanities, Science, Technical and
Vocational, and Islamic Education). Students are allowed to choose their
electives from two of the four areas. This may also mean paving the way for the
ultimate abolishment of the technical and vocational schools.
Pre-university education consists of two years of specialization in
preparation for students to enter university, although in essence students treat
it as another step in education. For some, pre-university education is in the form
of matriculation classes of particular universities. In some cases students enter
the universities for integrated programs which allow them to graduate with
Diplomas (in the Malaysian context diplomas are one step lower than full
fledged degrees), or be converted into the degree programs, which ultimately
enable them to graduate with bachelor’s degrees. For those preparing to enter
foreign universities, they sit for the A-levels, Associate American Degree
Programs , or Australian Matriculation Programs.
It is pertinent to mention here that private education in Malaysia is a fairly
recent phenomenon. During the early stages of educational development, when
the country saw the consolidation of the education system, private schools were
unheard of. During the developing years, when the importance of education
was strongly linked to social mobility, and the formal education system was
rather élitist, private schools were established as charity organizations to assist
school dropouts and examination failures by giving them a second chance to sit
for the public examinations in order to reenter the mainstream. This was to
complement government efforts of giving further education classes to school
dropouts or adult learners to enable them to sit for the public examinations.
When the schooling system became more democratized, and education was
assured for at least nine years (now 11 years), the need for such organizations
diminished. Private schools, then took on another character, that of providing
alternative education. Today, this is the mainstay of private schools. Many of
them cater for both the elementary and secondary and a few until the pre-
university level. Private schools, however, also follow the national curriculum,
since their main function is to prepare students for the same examinations.
Journal of The development of values education curriculum
Educational Values education in one form or another has been a part of the Malaysian
Administration educational curriculum in at least some schools since the British colonial era. In
English schools, be it government or the missionary schools, it was Christian
36,5 ethics. In the government Malay schools, there were also doses of values
education in the teaching of hygiene and “ethics” similar to those of the English
466 schools. In Arabic or Koranic schools, Islamic ethics were the core, taught in the
context of teaching Islam as a way of life. It can be assumed that some form of
values education, no matter how informal, was given in the other schools, since
all education is in fact moral education, as “…all the experiences that pupils
have in schools have a morally educative effect” (Downey and Kelly, 1986, p. 168).
The post independence era saw the establishment of the National school
system (and the abolishment of the different strands of schools systems) and
following the British tradition – religion (in this case Islamic Studies) was
taught in place of Scripture. Agama, as the subject was then known, was
heavily content based, and doctrinaire in approach, but nevertheless had an
important section devoted to akhlak (Islamic ethics).
Agama, however, was only for the Muslim students. The constitution
ensures freedom of worship for all, and taking the sensitivities of the different
ethnic groups as being important for national unity, Agama could not be forced
onto non-Muslim students, nor Islamic ethics be infused into their teaching.
Steps had to be taken to ensure that all students were exposed to some form of
values education, in direct instruction. In the early 1970s, Civics as a subject
was introduced as a mandatory subject for all non-Muslim students; but the
subject was non-examinable. It was soon found to be ineffective, and schools
put little significance to its implementation as the school system was (and still
is) very examination oriented. Islamic education, on the other hand, was (and is)
an examination subject.
During this phase too, Agama like the other subjects underwent changes and
adaptations parallel with the changing times and needs. Although teaching
was still heavily content based, there were efforts to make it more applicable to
everyday life and expand the curriculum to reflect teaching of Islam as a way of
life. Co-curricular activities were also designed to strengthen the classroom
teaching. The name was changed to Pendidikan Islam (Islamic Education), to
reflect the scope.
At the end of the 1970s, the need for the teaching of values was formally
acknowledged. The Cabinet Committee Report recommended that the Ministry
of Education drew up a curriculum for the teaching of values in the form of
moral education (as a subject) for the non-Muslim students, and for it to be
made mandatory as well as examinable. It was to be taught at the same time
when the Muslim students are taught Islamic Education.
In implementing the recommendations, the Curriculum Development Center
set up a machinery to draw up a syllabus for moral education. In doing this,
much care was taken to include values that reflect Malaysian society, which are
acceptable to all and do not offend any one religious group. A committee was set
up to work on the syllabus, the members of which include the curriculum Reformation in
officers, representatives from all religious groups, as well as consultants from Malaysia
the universities.
It was also at this time that Malaysians got involved in a series of Asian
workshops sponsored by the National Institute of Education (NIER) Tokyo and
Unesco which undertook to discuss and identify core values universally
accepted (Mukherjee, 1986). Values adopted by the workshops are taken into 467
consideration in developing the moral education syllabus. Finally, a total of 16
core values (which can again be detailed as the core content of the moral
education and approved for implementation in the KBSR and KBSM. The list of
values is in the Appendix.
These values are derived from religions, traditions and customs of the
people, while taking into consideration the universal aspects. They relate to
human relationships in everyday life, particularly relevant to relationships with
the family, peer group, society as well as organization.
The syllabus, however, does not put them in a hierarchy, or serialize them.
Instead all 16 values are to be taught at all levels, to enable the students to be
continuously and consistently infused with them. Nevertheless the scope and
depth of approach were to be different for every level. The issues are to be
presented in an increasingly difficult and complex manner, to be in line with the
student’s maturity and ability to think. Teaching strategies should be in the
realm of daily living, and every day occurrences in the life of the student. Hence
the values are to be presented as of equal importance, and to be treated in
relation to one another.
The syllabus of moral education, which can be applied to values education as
a whole, as delineated in the moral education syllabus (1988) the Sukatan
pelajaran Pendidikan moral 1988, was to mould individuals of good character
possessing good moral values through the nurturing of, and internalizing as
well as applying moral values relevant to the Malaysian society. It is expected
then to help produce good citizens, who can make decisions and are responsible
members of the society, and able to cope with moral issues in the modern world.

Issues in curriculum implementation: the dilemma of values

education
Although values education in one form or another has from the beginning been
acknowledged as relevant in the school curriculum, the current curriculum
clearly pays special attention to the teaching of values as a means of achieving
the objectives of providing quality education for qualitative individual
development of the future Malaysian generation as discussed in the previous
sections. It is considered to be the most important strategy of the KBSM and at
the same time the most radical movement in the current curriculum reform
movement.
The main thrust is the adherence to the principle of holistic development of
individuals through education, which is firmly based on values centered around
the belief in God. To achieve this, the KBSR and KBSM encompass the teaching
Journal of of values in a more fervent manner. The government had made a bold statement
Educational that quality individual (human) development is to be firmly founded in the
Administration teaching of values education, which in turn is based on a “firm belief in God”.
No excuse is made for the inclusion of religion in the curriculum, and no issue is
36,5 made of whose values to teach. Acknowledgement is made to the existence of
different beliefs and religions, but the underlying philosophy is that all religions
468 profess the same things as good and evil, and more importance is given to
similarities between different people rather than their differences.
To this effect too, the teaching of values is emphasized in the curriculum, not
only through the direct teaching of the subject (Islamic Education and Moral
Education), but also to be integrated into the teaching of other subjects (values
across the curriculum), as well as indirect infusion through the teacher as the
role model. It is this bold move which is the crux of the dilemma in values
education as discussed in this paper.
This paper will now address the dilemma of values education as the dilemma
of teaching values in the context of the KBSM implementation. No attempt will
be made on the issue of values clarification or values development per se, which
have been extensively deliberated on by well-known scholars. This paper will
be limited to the Malaysian case in terms of the dilemma of implementing
values education and coping with KBSM implementation.
Discussions will revolve around the reflection of issues in the context of
values education in Malaysia, namely values education in the holistic
curriculum of the KBSM, values education and the hidden curriculum and
classroom based values curriculum development.
It is clear that Malaysia has taken the stand that values education should be
an integral part of the school curriculum and that values are to be firmly based
on religious values. Malaysia believes that all education is values education
oriented. Specifically, the importance put on values education reflects the notion
that for individuals to be truly developed it has to be balanced in terms of the
intellect, spiritual, physical as well as emotional, which are based on values.
A total of 16 values have been adopted as the content of moral education,
which are also the values to be integrated into their teaching. The point of
concern here is whether the teaching of values as in moral education and
Islamic education, as well as the infusion of values in teaching through values
across the curriculum achieve their objectives.
Direct teaching of values education is actualized in Islamic Education and
Moral Education. The teaching of moral values, as can be attested by anyone
who has been involved in it, is a very complex process. We know that moral
guidance does not have to, and should not be (especially in a multi ethnic and
multi religious society) an imposition of any one’s values on all children. It
should be offered in a spirit and in a manner that will ensure that in the end the
students will be able to think for themselves, to reach their own moral
conclusions on issues, not contradicting their own religious beliefs.
This is indeed a tall order, when we talk about all teachers. The end result
can very well be confusing to students. We must also remember that the intent
is for teachers to reinforce each other in the teaching of values but one wonders Reformation in
whether the other teachers can reinforce what has been dealt with in the Islamic Malaysia
education or moral education classes.
It is assumed that Islamic education and moral education teachers are
trained in the methodology of teaching values. The moral education syllabus
clearly states that teaching it needs to use the problem solving method, and as
far as possible there should not be moral imposition. However, that being a 469
complex and sometimes personal process, they may be in a dilemma. The end
result might as well be teaching values by teaching content which again raises
the issue which is often debated whether knowledge about the content of the
subject (in Malaysian case they are Islamic education and moral education) may
mean that they are morally mature.
Another point of concern is the integration of values across the curriculum
approach. It is clear that the moral education syllabus consists of values, which
are not in contradiction with any religion. It may also be true that values or
ethics education transmitted through Islamic education may not be the same as
that which is obtained through moral education, even though the curriculum is
planned for the two subjects to be complementary. Hence, the KBSM
emphasizes values across the curriculum, which should ensure that all students
get the same dosages from all teachers. In effect then all teachers are moral
education teachers, underlying the belief that teachers are key figures in the
way in which values education is taught in schools.
Here another dilemma emerges. How far are teachers serious and successful
in inculcating values in their different subjects? How far can they integrate the
16 core values without reference to subsidiary beliefs, particularly those specific
to their own personal religious beliefs?
To avoid sensitivities, teachers once again may take the easy way out, that is,
only referring to, or mentioning the 16 values as listed. This may in the end be
a futile exercise of reciting the values. Informal surveys done by the writer have
shown that, at least at the initial stages, teachers were “lost” and hardly knew
what was expected of them. The end result is that teachers mention what values
they want to integrate, which neither interest the students nor leave a lasting
impression. This is very clearly demonstrated when we observe trainee
teachers implementing it. More often than not, they write down the values in
their lesson plans, but they hardly integrated them into the teaching, and
sometimes they do not even know what activities or strategies can be done to
integrate the values into their teaching. A lot of care and special training may
be needed for teachers to infuse values in their teaching effectively.
And then again, the syllabus identifies 16 core values. The list is not
exhaustive, and teachers are encouraged to be innovative and creative. It is then
left to the initiative of the teacher to look for and use them to good advantage.
According to Leo (1993), in the geography syllabus alone there are at least 36
values, other than those identified in the curriculum, which can be extracted. It
is then left to the individual teacher, whether he/she can utilize those apparent.
On the other hand, there is the dilemma that teachers in their enthusiasm, and
Journal of influenced by their different personal beliefs, promote values which may even
Educational contradict what other teachers do.
Administration When talking about integrating values in teaching, we also know that
teaching values is a complex process, which involves several phases of
36,5 understanding, acceptance, and finally internalizing. We also know that
teachers are individuals each with their own beliefs, attitudes, and values,
470 which differ from one person to another. In integrating values into their
teaching, they will then inevitably be influenced by their own beliefs and will
not give the same emphasis to values identified.
An important consideration especially pertinent to the teaching of values is
the hidden curriculum. Values are transmitted a lot by behavior and nonverbal
messages. A teacher is always a role model in the school, and yet teachers are
individuals, with different values. If these can influence them in their direct
teaching, these are more important in the infusion of values through the hidden
curriculum. Even when the teacher consciously tries to be neutral, he or she can
still transmit the value that he/she does not intend to. This can be a dilemma in
itself because teachers find it difficult and unnatural to control themselves so as
not to transmit values which are at times at a tangent with those listed in the
syllabus.

Current developments, reforms and issues

Current reforms in Malaysian education are a continuation of the efforts which
began in 1980s, but now encompass more than the school system. The reforms
of the 1990s culminated with the introduction of the Education Act 1996. This
act outlines specific policies that reiterates the Education Act of 1961,
strengthening it to include all levels of education, including preschool and post
secondary education, which was not covered in the Education Act 1961.
(Previously, higher education was covered by the Universities and Colleges Act,
1971.)
The impact of the 1990s on the school system is also acute in terms of the
invasion of the computer and information age. At the point of writing, things
are in a most interesting state of affairs with the government initiative for
schools to be in line with the Malaysian super corridor (MSC) project. One of the
flag carriers of this effort is the Smart School which centers around the concept
of teaching through integrated usage of modern technology in teaching. There
is as yet no real overhaul of the school curriculum.
We are given to understand, however, that the curriculum for the Smart
School is ready for implementation as a pilot project in January 1999, to be
followed nation wide the year after. What is clear is that the subject content
remains the same, but the implementation of the curriculum will have to
accommodate current development, particularly the advent of technology in
schools. The Ministry of Education has indeed fallen in love with the computer!
Nevertheless we know that the Smart School is not about having computers
and technology assisted teaching only; it is about teaching the right things with
the assistance of technology and the focus is on making students resource
based learners. This is to ensure that students will undo the phenomena which Reformation in
has developed over the years, the result of success being measured by Malaysia
performance in public examinations, specifically the increasing problem of
developing children to be rote learners, and less as thinking individuals. Smart
Schools seek to ensure that the Malaysian school children will be young adults
who will be learners working together with the teacher and other materials
which are accessible and at their disposal, responsible for their own learning. 471
This flurry of changes and policy implementation is also raising more
dilemmas in the teaching of values at all levels. The dilemma of teaching values
in schools is now added with that opening up of the skies, and a whole new
scenario of retraining teachers. We are as yet not tested on the success of the
values across the curriculum, as teachers are thoroughly confused as to how to
integrate values in the real sense. With the advent of the computer and the
inevitable invasion of the Internet into the classrooms, other dilemmas emerge.
The fact that Malaysian schools cannot ignore world developments cannot be
refuted, and in fact the government has taken the bold and brave move in
moving ahead and trying to be ahead of world developments, by adapting
modern technology and strategies, in the Smart Schools concept. However,
Malaysia is making sure that developments are in line with our stated
philosophy and goals. This looks like a bigger dilemma. It was already difficult
enough to infuse Malaysian values by making all teachers “values education”
teachers with the “values across the curriculum strategy”. In the Smart Schools
teachers are being asked to meet this challenge even as they use alternative
media, particularly from the World Wide Web! Much is to be done to ensure that
the Malaysian schools can successfully ensure positive effects of the so called
“opening up of the skies” and keep the children firmly rooted in the Malaysian
context and inculcate the Malaysian values, even though the so-called values
are universal.
What stands out in the current spate of events is the emphasis on tertiary and
higher, particularly private tertiary, education and private education in general
There is as yet no overhaul of the school curriculum, except to adjust to new
needs and global changes, and the demand of technology. This of course has
hastened a flurry of private tertiary education institutions and the response from
the public tertiary institutions to complement or compete with the private sector.
As the government is still controlling the establishment of private universities,
numerous institutions are twinning with or offering preparatory programs for the
overseas institutions. The Education Act of 1966 also allows for the establishment
of branch campuses, which promises the mushrooming of the big stakeholders
from the USA, the UK and Australia to have branches in Malaysia. It is
interesting to observe the developments in the next couple of years. These will
bring certain dilemmas for Malaysian society should there be a real invasion of
foreign “curriculum” in the branch campuses, and an influx of foreign students in
the country. To date it has been announced that private tertiary colleges are
allowed to twin with foreign institutions and grant degrees on their behalf.
Journal of Conclusion: future trends and issues
Educational The development of the times in the last few years has made it impossible for
Administration the government not to allow the mushrooming private tertiary institutions to
flourish. The Education Act 1996 has endorsed the existence and function of
36,5 private education, especially private tertiary institutions to complement that of
the public higher education institutions. The Act outlines policies in order to
472 impose some form of control on the quality of higher education, such as
provision for the establishment of the Lembaga Akreditasi Negara (National
Accreditation Board), as well as content which imposes the Malaysian context.
It also has the underlying objective of making Malaysia the center of
educational excellence in the region without compromising the development of
the Malaysian citizenry with Malaysian values. The latest announcement is
that all higher institutions of education, including private institutions, are to
include Islamic and Asian Civilization into the curriculum, besides Malaysian
studies which was identified earlier.
The Education Act 1996, the establishment of private tertiary education and
the dawn of private higher education and the dilemma of values education have
also affected tertiary and higher education, if we are to adhere to the Malaysian
educational philosophy at all levels.
The infusion of Malaysian values into tertiary and higher education, both
public and private, is doubly difficult as compared to the process in schools.
Furthermore, the opening of private branch campuses of foreign universities
brings to us another issue of infusing Malaysian values to the Malaysians. The
objective of making Malaysia the center of educational excellence in the region
is another. We have to tackle the problem of providing world education in the
Malaysian context, and to suit both Malaysians and foreigners, with a foreign
curriculum is something we have to resolve and at the same time not to forget
education for a Malaysian citizenry for the future.
References
Downey, M. and Kelly, A.V. (1986), “Personal, social and moral education”, in Theory and Practice
of Education: An Introduction, 3rd ed., Harper Education Series, London.
Leo A.M. (1993), “Integrating values into the geography curriculum”, paper presented at the
Seminar of the 30th Anniversary Celebration of Faculty of Education, University of Malaya,
3-5 November 1993.
Mahathir, M. (1991), “Malaysia: the way forward (Vision 2020)”, paper presented by the Prime
Minister, in a Conference of the Malaysian Business Council, 28 February 1991.
Ministry of Education (1993), Education in Malaysia, Educational Planning and Research
Division, Kuala Lumpur.
Mukherjee, H. (1986), “Moral education in a developing society: the Malaysian case”, in The
Revival of Values Education in Asia and the West, Comparative and Education Series, Vol. 7,
Ch. V, pp. 147-62.

Further reading
Asiah, A.S. (1979), “Curriculum development in Malaysia: context, approach and concerns”,
paper presented at an Unesco Seminar on Curriculum Design, Canberra, Australia, 10-22
September 1979.
Azizah, A.R. (1983), “Studying the unstructured curriculum”, paper presented at a Seminar on Reformation in
Education and Development organized by Penang Consumers Association, 18-22 November,
1983. Malaysia
Azizah, A.R. (1990), “The odds against the school-based curriculum development: implications
for future actions”, paper presented at the Fourth Annual Conference of the Singapore
Educational Research Association, Singapore, 20-21 October 1990.
Brooks, B.D. and Kann, M.E. (1993), “What makes character education work?”, Educational
Leadership, Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 19-21. 473
Chang, L.H. (1993), “Pengajaran nilai dalam mata pelajaran perdagangan” (The teaching of
values in the subject Commerce), in Pendidikan di Malaysia:Arah dan Tujuan (Education in
Malaysia: Direction and challenges), Special publication in commensuration with the 30th
Anniversary Celebrations of the Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur:
Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Malaya, pp. 5-14.
Huffman, H.A. (1993), “Character education without turmoil”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 53
No. 3, pp. 24-6.
Hussain, A. (1990), “Gearing education toward the needs of the nineties”, Suara Pendidik,
(Educators’ Voice), The Malaysian Society for Education, Kuala Lumpur.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia, (1979), Laporan Jawatankuasa Kabinet Menkaji Pelaksanaan
Dasar Pelarjarn (Report of the Cabinet Committee Reviewing the Implementation of the
Educational Policy), Kuala Lumpur, Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (Otherwise known as
Cabinet Committee Report, 1979).
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, (1989), Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah (The
integrated Secondary School Curriculum), Kuala Lumpur:Pusat Perkembangan Kuriklum.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, (1990), Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah (The New Primary
School Curriculum), Pusat Perkembangan Kuriklum, Kuala Lumpur.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, (1990), Pendidikan di Malaysia (Education in Malaysia),
Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Pendidikan, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia,
Kuala Lumpur.
Leming, J.S. (1993), “In search of effective character education”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 53
No. 3, pp. 63-71.
Lickoni, T. (1993), “The return of character education”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 53 No. 3,
pp. 6-11.
Lockwood, A.L. (1993), “A letter to character educators”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 53 No. 3,
pp. 72-5.
Rahimah, H.A. (1993), “Perkembangan dan reformasi pendidikan:Dilema pelaksanaan nilai”
(“Educational development and reformation: the dilemma of implementing values”), paper
presented at the 30th Anniversary Seminar of the Faculty of Education, University of Malaya,
3-5 November 1993.
Rahimah, H.A. (1993), “Pendidikan di Malaysia:Perkembanngan dan reformasi ke arah masa
depan” (“Education in Malaysia: development and reformation for the future”), in Pendidikan
di Malaysia: Arah dan Cabaran (Education in Malaysia: Directions and Challenges), Special
publication to commensurate the 30th Anniversary of the Faculty of Education, University of
Malaya, Fakulti Pendidikan, Kuala Lumpur, pp. 224-34.
Rahimah, H.A. and Chang, L.H. ( 1996), “Pendidikan moral dan nilai adalah martabat profesion
keguruan” (“Moral and values education is the soul of the teaching profession”) Paper
presented at Konvensyen Pendidikan Moral dan Nilai dalam Pembangunan Negara
(Convention of Moral and Values Education in Human Development), at National University
of Malaysia, Bangi, 26-30 November, 1996.
Ryan, K. (1993), “Minding the values in the curriculum”, Educational Leadership, Vol. 53 No. 3,
pp. 16-18.
Journal of Spiecker, B. and Straughan, R. (1988), Philosophical Issues in Moral Education and Development,
Open University Press, Milton Keynes.
Educational Wan Hasmah Wan Mamat (1993), Pelaksanaan kurikulum Pendidikan Moral di Sekolah:Arah
Administration dan cabaran bagi guru-guru (Implementing the Moral Education curriculum in schools:
36,5 Direction and challenges for teachers), in Pendidikan di Malaysia: Arah dan cabaran,
(Education in Malaysia: Direction and Challenges), Special publication to commensurate 30th
Anniversary of the Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, 15-20.
474
Appendix. Sixteen core values integrated into the curriculum
(1) Cleanliness of body and mind:
• personal cleanliness;
• cleanliness of the environment.
(2) Compassion and tolerance:
• compassionate;
• generous;
• charitable;
• tolerance;
• considerate;
• hospitable;
• patience.
(3) Cooperation:
• mutual responsibility;
• fraternity.
(4) Courage:
• courage as opposed to foolhardiness.
(5) Moderation:
• moderation in thought;
• moderation in speech;
• moderation in action.
(6) Diligence:
• industriousness;
• hardworking;
• perseverance;
• dedication.
(7) Freedom:
• freedom within the law;
• freedom to choose;
• freedom from slavery.
(8) Gratitude:
• gratefulness;
• thankfulness;
• appreciation.
(9) Honesty:
• truthfulness;
• trustworthiness;
• faithfulness;
• sincerity.
 (10) Humility and modesty: Reformation in
• as opposed to showing off;
Malaysia
• as opposed to arrogance;
• admission of one’s fault.
(11) Justice:
• a sense of fair play;
• concept of reward and punishment. 475
(12) Rationality:
• flexibility of thought;
• weighing of alternatives.
(13) Self reliance:
• responsibility;
• independence;
• autonomy.
(14) Love:
• love for the environment;
• love for life and humanity;
• love for the nation, patriotism;
• love for peace and harmony.
(15) Respect:
• respect for rules, law and authority;
• respect for time and punctuality;
• respect for institutions;
• respect for exemplary behaviour;
• respect for parents;
• respect for elders, teachers, and leaders;
• respect for another’s beliefs and customs;
• respect for knowledge and wisdom.
(16) Public spiritedness:
• Spirit of gotong royong (working together);
• Sensitiveness towards societal needs.

View publication stats