Faculty of Education

Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) Puncak Alam Campus

EDU 646
CURRENT ISSUES IN EDUCATION

ASSIGNMENT: REFLECTIVE CRITICAL ESSAY

"RACIAL QUOTAS IN PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES'

ADMISSION"
PREPARED FOR: SIR MOHAMAD AZMI BIN ADNAN

PREPARED BY: (ED241 8C)

NURUL NAJIHAH BINTI MOHAMED YUSOF 2016589155

1
 The newspaper article entitled ‘Race Quota in Matriculation Programme Affects

Everyone’ written by Ikmal Rozan for the website Free Malaysia Today was racial quotas in

public universities admission seem unjust for minority race in Malaysia and Indian in

particular. Dated back on May 23, 2019, this issue is still relevant as up until today, the

Bumiputera community, including the Sabahan and Sarawakian, are given special privileges

and rights in education, mainly in university entrance and scholarship under the New Education

Policy (NEP). According to Kee-Cheok Cheong (2016) from the University of Malaya, while

the objective of enhancing access to education has been reached, the unification and

development of national identity sadly have yet to come true fully. The expansion of private

higher education and transnational higher education is a blessing to Malaysia's state of

education, but the phylogenetic polarization in education has been causing damage. Chong Sin

Wong (2014) from the Malaysian Chinese Association emphasizes that the NEP should make

its imperative objective to nurture talents among youths and not create dissatisfied citizens

against the flawed system of their country. As a Malaysian citizen, let us question ourselves on

addressing this issue fairly and proactively, and the benefit on top of disadvantage on

marshaling outlaw on racial quotas in public universities admission.

According to the statistics distributed by the Department of Statistics Malaysia

(DOSM) for Malaysia's current residents' estimation as of July 15, 2020, the population of the

country itself has been estimated to be at 32.7 million as compared to 32.5 million in 2019,

with a yearly extension rate up to 0.4 %. The declining population growth rate is related to the

decrease in the number of Non-citizens from 3.1 million in 2019 to 3.0 million in 2020. Out of

the 29.7 million citizens, eventually, 0.3 % of Bumiputera’s composition rose to a record in

2020 as 69.6% if we compared it to the data from 2019 with 69.3%. The Chinese and Indians

population declined to 22.6% and 6.9% percent in 2020, while others remained at 1.0%

(DOSM, 2020). The three main ethnic groups speak major languages that differ from each

2
other, asides from speaking the same national language as the first language. In general, Malays

speak Malay and practice the religion of Islam, while the Chinese mostly speak in Chinese

dialects and are the follower of Taoist-Buddhists, while the Tamil language and Hinduism are

practiced by the Indians (H.G. Lee, 2000). The relation between races, religions, and languages

in shaping the identity of each ethnic in Malaysia has become evident in its Constitution. The

Constitution specified "Malay" as a person who practices Islam's religion, implementing the

Malay language in daily interactions, observing the Malay customs, and was born in the

federation of Malaya or Singapore before the declaration of Independence 1957 (Snodgrass,

1978). However, a more ubiquitous ethnic category was introduced in significant policy

matters, which the label is known as "Bumiputera," "Anak kepada Tanah," "rakyat asli," or the

"lawful owner of the land." It refers to Malays and other autochthonous people of Malaysia,

who are also known as the natives of Sarawak, Sabah, Sino-natives, and many more, who

contribute to most of the community itself (Mehta, 2000).

Due to the merging of identities which constituted of race, religion, language, and

custom in Malaysia are linked with various sections of the population in Malaysia, the society

also is impacted by the division of it into major ethnic groups which carry their respective

identities racially, religiously, linguistically and lastly, culturally. The dissimilarity between

each ethnic within Malaysia has influenced the formation of the state and also its policy plan,

which in turn has moved the state into the role of arbitrating and regulating inter-ethnic tautness

that arises from disagreements and misunderstanding among major ethnic groups over the

equal distribution of cultural and religious space, political power and economic resources. This

can also be referred to as "affirmative action," though different implementation is made in

Malaysia. For other countries, it focuses more on the corrective steps to subdue bigotry and

ensure balance and proportional representation of the underprivileged, especially among

3
minority ethnic groups. Eventually, it is more towards the preservation of "special rights" and

"preferential policies" for Malaysia.

Malaysia's Education Policies have developed for half a century, as they responded

successively to a shifting national context and external circumstances. Rao (2009) identified

three significant phases of education policy agendas. Since Malaya declared Independence in

1957, the first phase has been used to introduced affirmative action policies under the New

Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971. The NEP was designed to invent a more equitable society by

eradicating poverty and society's restructuring by abolishing the racial documentation upon

economic function. One of NEP’s main schema was to develop social neutrality through the

means of education. The second phase, enduring about two decades from 1970 to the 1990s,

incorporated the progressive yet more dynamic utilization of the NEP in education. With the

growing influence of globalization and the ensuing need for international competitiveness, the

third phase began. In this latest phase, the emphasis is on fostering human capital for Malaysia

to become a "knowledge economy" and achieve the "2020 Vision". During that time, the former

Prime Minister of Malaysia, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, launched the necessary objective

during the Sixth Malaysia Plan's tabulation in 1991. The vision calls for the nation to achieve

industrialized nation status by 2020 (Kee-Cheok Cheong, 2016).

The first phase of education policy’s formation was demarcated by the Razak Report,

which appeared just before the Independence of Malaya in 1956, and the Rahman Talib Report

in 1961. Both reports emphasized the building of national identity as the aim of the education

sector. This was achieved through a set of syllabus standardization for both primary and

secondary schools, and both language subjects of English and Malay were made to be necessary

(Rao, 2009). Mohamad Zaini (2014) stated that the Razak Report was constructed to

highlighted the top objective of making an education strategy in Malaya has been to bring

children of different races together under the same national education system by prioritizing

4
the national language, which is the Malay language as the primary medium of instruction.

Eventually, both reports formed the basis of the Education Act of 1961, where it saw the

implementation of the national education system where the medium of instruction shall be in

the first or second language (Malay and English).

The second phase of education policy was introduced to achieve equal access to

education for the disadvantaged Malays, which brings to the beginning of affirmative action.

According to De Tray (1984), this was the phase where the Malay-medium schools abolished

the tuition fee, and it was waived mainly for Malays in English-medium schools. Malays during

that time were also privileged enough to acquire government scholarships, which could secure

entry to the public universities much more manageable under the said scholarships. The second

phase was also dominated by the launch and implementation of the New Economic Policy

(NEP).

The New Economic Policy (NEP) was introduced in 1971, highlighting that education

would eventually influence future socio-economic situations. From the operational terms of it,

this action was carried out by establishing an ethnic quota system for student admissions to

ensure that the composition of the student body in Public Higher Education Institutions (Public

HEIs) reflects the ethnic distribution in the general population. To achieve the goal of

restructuring society, the government introduced the ethnic quota system at public higher

education institutions and considerably controlled educational services. For the first objective,

the government reached an agreement on the proportion in 1979: 55% for Bumiputera, 35%

for Chinese, and 10 percent for Indians and others (Boo 1998). Due to the government

intervention, all of it has been achieved, apparently for social stability, primarily through the

Constitution (Amendment) Act of 1971 and the University College Act (UUCA) of 1971. In

conclusion, Bumiputera students' symmetry at public higher education institutions increased

through the implementation of NEP.

5
 In 1970 alone, Bumiputera accounted for 53.7% of the total enrolments at local public

higher institutions, and it rumpled to 65.3% in 1998. This means that they accounted for more

than the 55% quota itself. The ethnic quota system of 55:45 was not followed except by one or

two research universities such as the University of Malaya (UM) or Universiti Sains Malaysia

(USM), where they allowed more Bumiputera students in contrast to the 55% of the specified

quota. Kee (1976) stated that long before the formation and introduction of the NEP, the

Bumiputera students have already taken more place in the higher education system due to the

affirmative policy. For example, for University of Malaya’s enrolment figures itself as one of

the few higher education institutions back then, shows that the ethnicity's percentage of

enrolment was frequently 60% of Chinese, 20% of Malay, 20% of Indians, and others during

1959 (Yahaya, 1981). The Malay enrolment in UM started to overtake the enrolment of

Chinese students by 1972. The rise in enrolment continues to increase unwaveringly, and by

2000, the admission of Bumiputera in public universities had reached up to 60%, while having

the decrease in Chinese students' admission to 32.5%, and the Indians by 6.88%. The higher

educational planning over the last decade has already been achieved to provide places for

Bumiputera in tertiary institutions, and increasing Malay students’ admission into it has

become more apparent. The incentive to admit more Bumiputera students into higher education

institutions was pushed through by establishing MARA (Majlis Amanah Rakyat) in the

division of colleges, matriculation programs, and other prestigious provision university

scholarships who were made exclusive only for Bumiputera students.

It should be eminent that MARA Institute of Technology catered for Bumiputera

students by a particular provision. The institution went through a status upgrade to MARA

University of Technology (UiTM) in 1999 and was accepted by about 130,000 Malay students.

The private education route has gained access by the non-Bumiputera students, but the higher

fees in contrast to the public universities have always been the primary dispute. The opportunity

6
has been denied for the needy students to afford the high amount of fees to obtain higher

education. The issue was brought up by the former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir

Mohamad, in 1999. In contrast, an exchange of upgrading the status of the institution to a public

university, non-Bumiputera students should be allowed to access the same benefits of education

by letting them enroll in UiTM, which cause an uproar among Bumiputera students due to the

tampering of Bumiputera’s status quo which is still kept on its principle till the present day.

Racial quotas were finally eliminated in 2002 by conferring access for public

universities access to be strictly merit-based preferably. Without a doubt, the Bumiputeras,

especially the Malays, still emerge as the upper hand and the side that benefits the most from

the positive discrimination through other education routes after SPM, such as matriculation and

pre-university program. Simultaneously, the Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (STPM) can

be seen as the only accessible route for the non-Bumiputeras to go to enter public universities

do their degree. In regards to that, another issue came out that theorized the grading system's

unfairness among both systems. It was said that the Bumiputeras receives much lenient grading

in contrast to the non-Bumiputeras to allow them to secure placement in higher education

institutions quickly. The meritocracy system was introduced by the fourth Prime Minister of

Malaysia, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, back in 2002 to replace the existing racial quota system

and allow all races to compete in salubrious competition secure their place in public universities

basing on their academic performance. This announcement causes a significant increase in

students' academic performances as we would like to believe that it creates a healthy

competition among the races of Malaysia, without categorizing them into the categories of

Bumiputera or non-Bumiputera. As for the overall admission of students in public universities

in between 2005 to 2008, it was recorded that from the whole percentage, above 84% of it are

from the Bumiputera students, while the remaining percentage goes to Chinese students at 10%,

3% for the Indians and the 2.4% of it for others.

7
 To conclude this critical reflective essay, Malaysia's higher education sector has shown

tremendous growth since establishing the first public university in 1905 (University of

Malaya). The tertiary education landscape of Malaysia in 2020 can be explained as a varied

and multi-level classification that includes public universities, branch campuses (e.g., UiTM

Puncak Alam branch, Dengkil branch, etc.), community colleges, and polytechnics in

association with effervescent private higher education sectors. Sadly, it can be seen that equal

admission for all races is yet to be possible through increased access to it. The Bumiputeras

has received overwhelming support from the public system through the implementation of

affirmative action policies. They also have had the NEP winds in their favor and enjoyed most

advantages in terms of more secure position in public universities' admission, local overseas

institutions' scholarships, and loans to attend private higher learning institutions over the last

decade. The picture has not changed much since the implementation of the meritocracy system

in public universities' admission. The reflection can also be seen through the enrolment figures

in post-2002, which reflected the distribution of ethnic in universities’ population.

Basing on the issues mentioned above, few suggestions could be made to improve the

overall scene of public universities' admission towards a more just and fair system. First and

foremost, the meritocracy system should be upgraded for its implementation to ensure that

universities will adhere to the percentages of required admission from both Bumiputera and

non-Bumiputera sides. The racial quotas' needs should be revised as well, and to promote more

places for the underprivileged groups instead of using the racial quota. Therefore, the

government could set up clear and transparent admissions criteria to the public universities and

higher learning institutions by weighting the students' applications through their socio-

economic, geographical, and regional background instead. Other than that, the provision of

scholarships for academic excellence could be introduced by the Ministry of Higher Education,

which is to be applied to the top 5% of applicants from the selected fields that need to be placed

8
as necessary in accordance to social, cultural and economic needs of Malaysia. Besides, a

particular department can be formed to look at the affairs of the non-Bumiputera ethnic

minority.

9
REFERENCES:

Department of Statistics Malaysia Official Portal. (2021). Retrieved January 30, 2021, from

Dosm.gov.my website:

https://www.dosm.gov.my/v1/index.php?r=column/cthemeByCat&cat=155&bul_id=O

VByWjg5YkQ3MWFZRTN5bDJiaEVhZz09&menu_id=L0pheU43NWJwRWVSZkl

WdzQ4TlhUUT09#:~:text=Malaysia’s%20population%20in%202020%20is,to%203.0

%20million%20(2020)

. (n.d.). Mohd Nahar bin Mohd Arshad Return to Education by Ethnicity: A Case Of Malaysia.

Retrieved from

http://www.ijem.upm.edu.my/vol10no1/IJEM%20(09)%20Rev1%20RETURN%20TO

%20EDUCATION%20BY%20ETHNICITY%20%20A%20CASE%20OF%20MALA

YSIA%2019%20June%2016.pdf

Akihito Aihara. (2017). Paradoxes of Higher Education Reforms: Implications On the

Malaysian Middle-Class #. Retrieved January 30, 2021, from the undefined website:

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/PARADOXES-OF-HIGHER-EDUCATION-

REFORMS%3A-IMPLICATIONS-
Aihara/df3a437e28bf3ea058fb5a117b913477100c4c4b

Ikmal Rozlan. (2019, May 23). Free Malaysia Today (FMT). Retrieved January 30, 2021, from

Free Malaysia Today (FMT) website:

https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2019/05/23/race-quota-in-

matriculation-programme-affects-everyone/

Jamil, H., & Raman, S. (2012). Malaysian educational policy for national integration:

Contested terrain of multiple aspirations in a multicultural nation. Journal of Language

and Culture, 3(1), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.5897/JLC11.025

10
Kee-Cheok Cheong, Hill, C., & Yin-Ching Leong. (2016, October). Malaysia’s Education

Policies and the Law of Unintended Consequences. Retrieved January 30, 2021, from

Research Gate website:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310602676_Malaysia’s_Education_Policies_

and_the_Law_of_Unintended_Consequences

Kee-Cheok Cheong, Hill, C., & Yxzin-Ching Leong. (2016, October). Malaysia’s Education

Policies and the Law of Unintended Consequences. Retrieved January 30, 2021, from

Research Gate website:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310602676_Malaysia’s_Education_Policies_

and_the_Law_of_Unintended_Consequences

Khairuddin, D. (2017). Article Review on Racial Quota on Malaysian University Entrance.

Retrieved January 30, 2021, from Academia.edu website:

https://www.academia.edu/13577783/Article_Review_on_Racial_Quota_on_Malaysia

n_University_Entrance

Lee, H.-A. (2012, May). Affirmative Action in Malaysia: Education and Employment

Outcomes since the 1990s. Retrieved January 30, 2021, from ResearchGate website:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241732102_Affirmative_Action_in_Malaysia

_Education_and_Employment_Outcomes_since_the_1990s

Mohd Nazim Ganti Shaari. (2011). Wither the Bumiputera identity of Universiti Teknologi

MARA (UiTM)? Retrieved January 30, 2021, from ResearchGate website:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292542423_Wither_the_bumiputera_identity

_of_Universiti_Teknologi_MARA_UiTM

Pong, S.-L. (n.d.). Ethnicity and Schooling in Malaysia: The Role of Policy. Retrieved from

website:

11
 http://www.cicred.org/Eng/Seminars/Details/Seminars/education/ACTES/Com_Pong.P

DF

Tho Xin Yi. (2019, May 8). Outcry over retaining ethnic quota for pre-university admission in

Malaysia. Retrieved January 30, 2021, from CNA website:

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/malaysia-outcry-ethnic-quota-

matriculation-admission-11514578

12