SPM History Textbook Controversies

Unintended/Biased?

Our Malaysian Form 4 History textbook had it's syllabus changed, with 50% of the subject devoted to Islamic history as compared to only 16.6% in the previous textbook from the past decade.

In the previous textbook, “Sejarah Peradaban Dunia – Tingkatan 4”, Islamic history was one of the six chapters in the book:

1. Tamadun Awal Manusia
2. Islam Mengubah Tamadun Manusia
3. Perubahan Masyarakat Eropah dan Kesannya
4. Revolusi: Fasa Baru Kehidupan Manusia
5. Zaman Imperialisme Barat dan Reaksi Masyarakat Setempat
6. Ke Arah Kerjasama Masyarakat Antarabangsa

In the revised history textbook, “SEJARAH – Tingkatan 4”, Islamic history occupies five of the ten chapters:

1. Kemunculan Tamadun Awal Manusia
2. Peningkatan Tamadun
3. Tamadun Awal Asia Tenggara
4. Kemunculan Tamadun Islam dan Perkembangan di Makkah
5. Kerajaan Islam di Madinah
6. Pembentukan Kerajaan Islam dan Sumbangannya
7. Islam di Asia Tenggara
8. Pembaharuan dan Pengaruh Islam di Malaysia sebelum Kedatangan Barat
9. Perkembangan Eropah
10. Dasar British dan Kesannya terhadap Ekonomi Negara

While Islamic history has expanded from 16.6% to 50%, Asian history and civilizations like Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and Taoism have been further marginalize and given lesser space. Don't even get me started on modern history.

What were they thinking?!

The people over at DBP (Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka) seriously need to look into this matter. Didn't they reviewed it first before publishing? Did they run out of ideas for the textbook?

I don't mind learning on Arabic culture, but spending most the time memorizing religious history is just plain ridiculous! What happened to American, African, Asian and European history? We should learn more about the world than focus on a particular group.

Related info:
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Saturday/National/2534586/Article/index_html
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Saturday/National/2534601/Article/index_html

... continue reading

Form 4 History Textbook Fail

Errors & typos?

Back in secondary school, I compiled a list of errors and factual disparities in our beloved Buku Teks Sejarah Tingkatan 4. Did reported to the history teachers but being a student doesn't give me much say over these matters.

I'm not sure if the latest editions of the textbook had corrected those errors yet. Hopefully some of you reading this post would have better connections to the Education Ministry than I did.

So, here's the list. Check for yourselves.

1. Pengasas Adat Temenggung - Datuk Ketemenggungan [from Form 1 textbook] or Datuk Tumanggungan [page 199]. The usage is according to context. In Malaysia, Datuk Ketemenggungan is more proper. Datuk perpatih Tumanggungan is from a Minangkabau reference.
2. Zaman Graeco-Rom or Zaman Graeco-Roman? [both found on page 51] This is a mistake due to direct translation. Graeco-Rom is in Bahasa Melayu, while Graeco-Roman is in English.
3. Emperor Shih Huang Ti [page 41] or Shi Huang Ti [page 45]? The former is more accurate in terms of pronounciation and is widely used in many references.
4. Bilal bin Rabah or Bilal bin Rabbah [both are on page 110]? Just keep your fingers cross and hope that the examiners aren't picky.
5. On the Sudut Maklumat column [page 254], the term Sin Kheh or "newcomers" in Hokkien, should be redefined as pendatang baru dari China, not imigran miskin dari China.
6. The Roman Emperor Augustus, reigned from 27 S.M.- 14 M. not 27 -14 S.M. [page 44]. FYI, Sebelum Masihi = B.C. and Masihi = A.D.
7. On the Sudut Maklumat column [page 257], the explaination of the term Komprador isn't accurate. It should be: Ejen tempatan yang diupah untuk mewakili suatu syarikat asing sebagai orang tengah dalam urus niaga perdagangan tempatan dengan syarikat asing.
8. Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) started his search for enlightenment at the age of 29 years, not 39 years [page 65].
9. The explaination for Rancangan Stevenson was repeated twice [page 250, 261].
   
10. Confusing sentence structure: Antara sumber falsafah China termasuklah Kung-Fu Tze atau Confucius dengan ajarannya, iaitu Confucianisme, Lao Tze, Taoisme dan Mo Tzu. To convey the intended meaning, I suggest the correction: Antara sumber falsafah China yang berkembang pada zaman itu (770-221 SM) adalah ajaran Confucianisme, Taoisme, Mohisme dan "Legalisme". Ideologi-ideologi ini asaskan berdasarkan ajaran-ajaran ahli falsafah yang berpengaruh seperti Kung-Fu Tze, Lao Tze dan Mo Tzu.
11. More English-to-BM translation mistakes: Theology is in English, teologi is in Bahasa Melayu [page 61].
12. And minor typos: pentabdiran should be pentadbiran [page 46]; parilineal should be patrilineal [page 199].

Lesson learned

These are all I manage to find, could be more. Maybe I shouldn't make such a fuss over "unnoticable" mistakes in the textbook. But hey, it's a textbook, it's used as the main reference material in exams questions. Someone should at least take this seriously.

Another good reason not to blindly accept "knowledge", just because it's written down and entrusted to you. Historical facts are easily manipulated. History in education is about uncovering the truth. And truth, as we all know, is subject to interpretation

So, do your own research and learn to ask the right questions.

... continue reading