134 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 15: I 

 

Educational Dualism in Malaysia: 
Implications for Theory and Practice 

By Rosnani Hashim, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1996, 
204 pp. 

Since World War II, Malaysia has undergone numerous reviews and changes 
in its educational policy at the primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. Reports 
by Barnes, Fenn-Wu, Razak, Rahman Talib, and the Malaysian cabinet as well 
as the formulation of a national educational philosophy have inspired 
Malaysians and non-Malaysians to conduct research and thus produce several 
theses. Some are concerned with educational reform and ethnic responses, oth­
ers with national development; some are concerned with national identity and 
national integration, others with a national educational policy and teacher edu­
cation; and still others are concerned with the New Economic Policy (NEP) and 
equality of educational opportunity. 

The book under review is one of a series of studies in the form of a doctoral 
dissertation on education. It seeks to investigate the problems of educational 
dualism in Malaysia, particularly as it affects the Muslim. Its aim is to arrive at 
a viable solution through a genuine synthesis of the two systems so that Muslims 
overcome their educational dilemma without alienating the non-Muslims. 

In the first chapter, it is stated that this study hopes to contribute to the reso­
lution of long-standing educational and social problems in Malaysia. It also 
hopes to demonstrate lhe compatibility of faith and reason. 

Chapters 2, 3, and 4 trace the history of lhe educational systems in Malaysia, 
i.e., the traditional or Islamic educational system and the colonial education in
the nineteenth century in the Straits Settlement followed by the establishment of
vernacular education in the Malay states following the Pangkor Treaty of 1874.
The period from the early twentieth century up to the World War II has wit­
nessed the increase of English and Malay vernacular schools, both in Strait
SeUlements and Federated States.

The year 1956 marked a milestone in the evolution of a national system of 
education. That year an education committee was set up. It was led by Dato 
Abdul Razak bin Hussein, who recommended the introduction of common con­
tent syllabus and the compulsory study of national and English languages in all 
primary and secondary schools in order to orient pupils with a Malayan outlook, 
to inculcate national consciousness, and to foster mutual understanding among 
citizen of various races and religions. 

Chapter 4 describes the creation of the Rahman Talib report and the impact of 
the NEP on the decline of enrollment in religious schools to lhe transformation 



Book Reviews 135 

of the curriculum of the Madrasah and the shortage of teachers in them. This is 
followed by the creation of the NEP after the May 13 crisis which had a two- 
pronged objective, namely, the eradication of poverty and the restructuring of 
Malaysian society. 

Chapter 5 describes the Islamic philosophy of education. Based on the con- 
ception formulated in the First World Conference on Muslim Education in 
Makkah in 1977, it is taken mainly from a paper presented by Muhammad al- 
Naqib al-Attas on the aims and objectives of Muslim education. This is proba- 
bly the core of the study. It is also the basis for all reforms of education after 
1977, i.e., the Cabinet report, the New Curriculum of Primary School (KBSR), 
the Integrated Curriculum of Secondary School (KBSM), and the formulation of 
the National Education Philosophy in 1987. The rest of the book is a review and 
analysis of contemporary education in Malaysia with two systems running par- 
allel to be amalgamated and integrated into a single educational system to bring 
all Malaysians irrespective of race and creed to study together and achieve the 
dream of a truly united, progressive, and prosperous Malaysia. 

So much for the dream. Now let us look at the early statements and general- 
izations made by the author on the Islamic philosophy of education. She says: 

For this purpose the Western philosophy of education will be used as a 
basis for comparison and as a guideline since there is insltfficient original 
thought and work on philosophy of education in the Islamic intellectual tra- 
dition although it is rich with work of pedagogy. (p. 77) (emphasis added) 
The quotation is taken from Khalil A. Totah’s The Contribution of the Arabs 

to Education (New York Teachers College, Columbia University, 1926). She 
could have qualified under which conditions and circumstances Totah‘s work 
was published because after Totah there were generations of philosophers pio- 
neered by Mustafa Abdel Razeq, a professor of philosophy at Cairo University 
before the World War 11 and then Sheikh Abdul Halim Mahmud (Grand Shaykh 
of al-Azhar), Muhammad al-Bahiy. Abdullah Darraz, Mahmud Qasim. and 
many others. The most influential probably is Ali Sami El-Nashshar, who head- 
ed The Alexandrian School of Philosophy. The only disadvantage is that their 
works were not available in English as they were graduates of either French or 
German universities. The translations, however, are available in Arabic. The 
only work cited in this book, apart from Totah‘s, is Ahmad Shalabi’s-since he 
graduated from Cambridge University it is available in English. The translation 
is also available in Arabic as well as in Malay. It is unfair to judge the original 
thought and work on the philosophy of education in the Islamic intellectual tra- 
dition based solely on Totah’s work because a generation of contemporary 
philosophers have refuted Totah‘s claims. 

There were typographical errors. The most salient one is the absence of 
Arabic transliteration for the Arabic names and subjects. One also notices that 
‘ulum ‘aqliyah is written ‘ilm al-aqliyah which should be written either a l - ‘ U l h  
al-‘Aqliyah or ‘ u l h  ‘aqliyah; that ‘ilm aqliyah should be ‘ilm aqliy (p. 83); and 
that al-Zkhwan al-Safa should be Ikhwan al-Safa. 

If the book is reprinted a separate chapter comparing the colonial legacy and 
Islamic legacy should be added so that the excellent exposition of dualism in 
Malaysian education does not give the impression that it was an isolated phe- 



136 The American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences 15: I 

nomenon. Dualism was created by colonialism in all walks of life: education, 
politics, economics, law, arts, etc. And it did not happen only in Malaysia but in 
the entire developing world, including the Muslim world. 

Despite the shortcomings mentioned above, this work is an excellent eye­
opener in the field of educational dualism. 

Prof. Hasan Langgulung 
Department of Education 

International Islamic University 
Malaysia