Joint Statement Released by Dong Zong and Jiao Zong

September 21, 2018

Of late, the MOE Examination Division pronounced if any one candidate requests during a public examination in a vernacular school, invigilator who knows the candidate’s mother tongue but not the chief invigilator is allowed to explain the examination instructions further; moreover, all state Education Bureaus are also directed to assure invigilators of this sort be assigned to both Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools. Dong Zong and Jiao Zong take this directive uncompromising and urge for further explanation as it justifies the government’s intent to appoint non-Chinese-speaking chief invigilators to Chinese vernacular schools during examination with only one (or at least one) Chinese-versed invigilator accompanies. Dong Zong and Jiao Zong are deeply concerned about this with angst thus calling the Chinese community to respond, believing that it will eventually browse the unique characteristics of Chinese primary schools.

1. Dong Zong and Jiao Zong posit, based on the inherence that mother tongue is the medium of instruction for all vernacular schools, chief invigilators posted to vernacular schools should be able to speak in that particular tongue; take for instance, the medium of instruction in Chinese vernacular schools is Chinese, thus the chief invigilator as the accountable figure in the examination should by right be able to speak in Chinese for better handling of various matters, including explaining examination instructions to the candidates. This is believed to be the correct and necessary way. In fact, chief invigilator using Chinese for explanation in examination accords the characteristics of Chinese vernacular schools and also is the persistent request of Dong Zong and Jiao Zong over the years.

2. All this while, the MOE appointed chief invigilators in a compromising way, viz., sending Chinese speaking chief invigilators to Chinese primary schools during public examinations. But unfortunately, due to the mishandling of certain officials of the MOE, the mentioned incident happened sporadically. With the strident opposition raised by Chinese community, some incidents were resolved while others are still pending for solution. Frankly, the unsolved cases make things inconvenient for the schools involved, so to speak. The appointment this year worsened the dispute and aroused angst among the Chinese community. Eventually, the Deputy Minister of Education Teo Nie Ching was appealed to address the problem.

3. To our regret, notwithstanding the ongoing disputes and worries, the MOE Examination Division directed that “if any one candidate requests during an examination taking place in a vernacular school, invigilator who knows the candidate’s mother tongue but not the chief invigilator is allowed to explain the examination instructions further”. As the directive did not request the chief invigilator to be Chinese-speaking, but only that at least one invigilator who knows the candidate’s mother tongue be present, the intention of deliberate justification of the ongoing practice in certain states—sending non-Chinese-speaking chief invigilators to Chinese primary schools in public examinations which is deemed inappropriate—is evident. Dong Zong and Jiao Zong found it worrying and uncompromising. The act, if not curbed, is worried to gradually browse Chinese vernacular schools’ unique characteristic of using Chinese as their medium of instruction.

4. Further, “if any one candidate requests during an examination taking place in a vernacular school, invigilator who knows the candidate’s mother tongue but not the chief invigilator is allowed to explain the examination instructions further” as pronounced is reckoned unreasonable. In Chinese primary school public examination, the chief invigilators are expected to explain the instructions in Chinese to the Chinese candidates directly and not when they are requested. We believe this improper practice needs to be rectified as it not only is detrimental to the candidates but also incurs negative impact seminally. Nonetheless, in the said examinations, let alone the chief invigilators being Chinese-speaking, sufficient Chinese-speaking invigilators need to be sent to such schools to facilitate and assure the smooth running of the examinations.

5. Dong Zong and Jiao Zong insist, Chinese-speaking invigilators to be sent to Chinese primary schools for assured handling of all matters during the examinations and it is persisted by Chinese community and believed to be the right and reasonable approach unanimously. The strident opposition against the said measure from the Chinese community shows both inherent and deep concern to safeguard the continuity of Chinese education in this country. The Deputy Minister of Education Teo Nie Ching thus should not take it as an overreaction of the Chinese community, instead, she needs to listen to the voices attentively and address the worries appropriately, including withdrawing the relevant pronouncement and regulate it on paper that “chief-invigilators appointed should be Chinese-speaking” for the non-deterioration assurance of Chinese vernacular schools.

6. On that score, Dong Zong and Jiao Zong urge the Deputy Minister of Education Teo Nie Ching to schedule a meet-up for the exchanges of pent up Chinese issues, including the UPSR (Primary School Achievement Test) chief invigilator appointment for a long-term solution.