






























































Philosophical Inquiry in the Malaysian Educational System- Reality or Fantasy?


ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

26 

 

Philosophical Inquiry in the Malaysian Educational System –
Reality or Fantasy? 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT: Thinking skills are a popular topic of conversation nowadays among Malaysian 
educationists. These experts lament that Malaysian students are ill-equipped to face the 
challenges of life in the 21st Century.  As a solution to this and other problems, a reform 
document was proposed by the Malaysian Ministry of Education (MOE) in 2012. The 
'Malaysian educational blueprint' as it is called, has at last recognized the importance of 
critical thinking skills and seeks ways to include these into the national curriculum. 
Philosophy for Children (P4C) is a teaching method that develops critical thinking and 
analytical reasoning in children. The paper therefore recommends the use of P4C to 
achieve the goals of the Malaysian educational blueprint vis-à-vis critical thinking, since it 
has proven its effectiveness in various studies around the world. The main purpose of this 
paper, therefore, is to raise the following pertinent questions: how suitable is P4C for the 
Malaysian education system? Secondly, how will P4C be implemented, bearing in mind 
the challenges within the unique Malaysian context? These questions and others, need to 
be explored if P4C is to be implemented successfully, and Malaysia is to be transformed 
into a more 'thinking nation' through education.  

 

INTRODUCTION: P4C IN MALAYSIA 

 

hilosophy for Children (P4C) was first introduced into the Malaysian educational scene in 
2002 by Rosnani Hashim, a Professor at the Institute of Education at the International Islamic 
University Malaysia, receiving a first-hand, formal training from its founder, Matthew Lipman.  

Rosnani Hashim went on to remodel Lipman’s approach incorporating discussion about common, 
central and contestable concepts by including religious ethics and values relevant to Muslim society.  
She then rebranded it with a new name, the Hikmah1 Programme. The reason for renaming P4C 
was because she noticed that the Malaysian teachers seemed to have an ‘allergy’ towards philosophy 
i.e., they had no background in philosophical inquiry and so she felt the name Hikmah had a more 
positive ring since it comes from a traditional Malay word (Rosnani Hashim, 2009c, p. 660). 

 

     In January 2006, the Centre for Philosophical Inquiry in Education (CPIE) was established under 
the Institute of Education, with the aim of promoting philosophical inquiry in the Malaysian 
education system via the Hikmah Programme. Rosnani Hashim was made its first Associate Director 
and the Centre, through its members, conducted studies in the practice of P4C at different levels of 
education —primary, secondary and tertiary.  As a result of these studies, Hikmah has been found to 
be an effective and stimulating pedagogy.  Books containing thinking stories and issues relating to 
Muslim children have been published under the Centre.  For example, 'Sarah' (Rosnani Hashim, 

P 

Abdul Shakour Preece and Adila Juperi 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

27 

 

2012b) for secondary school students and the 'Mira Series' (Rosnani Hashim & Abdullah, 2009; 
Rosnani Hashim & Banging, 2009; Rosnani Hashim, 2009a, 2009b) for the primary level. The 
following studies have been conducted by members of the Centre and relate to P4C in the Malaysian 
context. 

 

     The first attempt to study the suitability and effectiveness of P4C for Malaysian children was 
conducted by Rosnani Hashim herself, in 2003, using an experimental methodology that involved 
a class of 30 'average' ability, 5th Grade students.  The class was treated to the novel 'Siti', which is a 
translated version of Lipman’s 'Pixie'. P4C was conducted twice a week for sixteen weeks.  Using the 
New Jersey Test of Reasoning Skills (NJTRS) for the pre- and post-tests, it was found that the students 
showed a statistically significant improvement in their critical thinking skills. Also, the results of a 
survey administered to the students revealed very positive feedback  showing that the students liked 
the classes very much and wanted the programme to  be continued (Rosnani Hashim, 2003). 

 

     Research by Moomala Othman (2005) compared P4C and a teaching method known as 'Reader's 
Response' (RR). The effects on critical thinking and English reading skills among secondary school 
students was measured for these two methods and the results revealed a statistically significant 
difference for both thinking and  reading  for P4C  but not for RR.  This suggests that there is 
adequate evidence that P4C enhances thinking and reading skills.  

 

     Juperi (2010) conducted a study about philosophical inquiry in Islamic Education and its effects 
on the development of questioning skills among secondary school students. A qualitative 
observation,  based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, showed that throughout the eight sessions of 
philosophical inquiry, students displayed significant improvements in their ability to create and pose 
questions, demonstrating Bloom's 'Higher Order Thinking Skills' of analysing, synthesizing and 
evaluating.   

 

     A more recent study conducted by Preece (2012) explored ways of making English Language 
Teaching Materials more engaging for Muslim learners, using philosophical inquiry, discussion and 
critical thinking.  Preece found that the combination of philosophical discussions related to learners' 
culture and worldview enhanced their motivation to study English. It also gave them opportunities 
to practise the four language skills of reading, writing, listening and speaking, as well as enhancing 
their critical thinking skills. 

 

     It is worth noting that the above mentioned studies were conducted in the Malaysian context by 
members of the Centre (Rosnani Hashim, 2003; Juperi, 2010; Othman, 2005; Preece, 2012) and 
although results and findings were positive, the studies were exploratory in nature and only 
conducted on a small scale.  Consequently, their results have little impact on the Malaysian 
education scene.  Additionally, the length of P4C in these studies was limited to short periods, with 
no follow-up studies.  Moreover, the studies only showed one or two facets of P4C, i.e., its 
contribution to the development of cognitive skills or English language. It is the authors' opinion 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

28 

 

that 'Doing philosophy' with Malaysian children should have more far-reaching implications and 
benefits, such as character development and behavioural change.  Thus, research in the Malaysian 
context is needed to strengthen the argument for introducing P4C into the Malaysian national 
curriculum. 

 

     In spite of the fact that empirical research has been carried out on the implementation of P4C 
in the Malaysian context, there is still a need to take a step back and re-examine some of the basic 
foundational aspects of P4C and how it might be beneficial to the Malaysian educational system, 
given the distinctive characteristics of Malaysia. Thus, the over-arching question to be answered in 
this paper is: How would Philosophy for Children be beneficial in the Malaysian Educational context? 

 

     This question comes in the light of the numerous success stories around the world about the 
implementation of P4C.  Since its inception in the early 1970s, many studies have shown how 
successful and effective P4C is in promoting good thinking practices among children, i.e., critical, 
creative and caring thinking. The influence of P4C continues to spread throughout the globe. P4C 
has proven its effectiveness for enriching students' educational experience and cultivating critical, 
ethical and caring thinking in countries such as Australia, Iran, Mexico, South Korea and the United 
Kingdom. It would therefore be a great loss if the children of Malaysia were deprived from 
experiencing such an innovative and revolutionary pedagogy. However, it is important to understand 
what are the distinctive benefits and challenges faced in the Malaysian education setting, if P4C is 
to be implemented here. Being able to think philosophically is a substantial advantage for children, 
but would that be beneficial in the Malaysian context where teachers favour a didactic approach and 
where teachers and parents are very exam-oriented?  To answer these questions, we divide our 
discussion into three parts; 'The uniqueness of the Malaysian socio-cultural landscape', 'The current 
educational reform process' and 'Reviving the interest in philosophy in the Malaysian public.’  

 

DISTINCTIVE MALAYSIAN SOCIO-CULTURAL ATMOSPHERE 

 

     Malaysia is a comparatively small but unique country, blessed with a diverse demography. It is 
home to various ethnic groups, professing different religious beliefs and speaking different languages 
and dialects. According to the most recent World Bank data, the total population of Malaysia, in 
the year 2011, was 28.86 million2.The report from the official Malaysian census in July 2011 showed 
that 91.8 per cent of the population were Malaysian citizens, while 8.2 per cent were non-citizens. 
Malaysian citizens consist of four main ethnic groups: Bumiputera (67.4%), Chinese (24.6%), Indians 
(7.3%) and others races (0.7%). The predominant religion is Islam (61.3%), followed by Buddhism 
(19.8%), Christianity (9.2%), Hinduism (6.3%) and others (2.1%). The official language is Malay or 
Bahasa Melayu, but English is also widely spoken and each race has its own language and sub-race 
dialect. 

 

    Historically speaking, Peninsular Malaysia was originally populated by the Malays and indigenous 
tribes (collectively identified as the Bumiputeras3). In the eighteenth century, it was the British, under 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

29 

 

their colonial rule, who brought the Chinese and Indian immigrants to the country to work in the 
tin-mining industry and rubber plantations respectively. This, and subsequent economic migration 
“forms the basis of Malaysia’s multi-ethnic and multi-religious society” (Rosnani Hashim, 2004). 
Given this unique historical background, Watson (1980, p. 150), describes Malaysia as, 
“undoubtedly the most complex and difficult country of the region to examine” when it comes to 
discussion about education and culture. 

 

     One of the purposes of this paper is to examine how P4C can help children living in a 
multicultural society to understand and assimilate the concepts of tolerance and respect towards 
people of different backgrounds and cultures, by  thinking and discussing in a 'community of 
philosophical inquiry' (COPI).  The proponents of P4C strongly believe that, COPI enables children 
to deal with issues  that are sensitive to their social and cultural backgrounds (Brighouse, 2009; de 
la Garza, 2009; Echeverria, 2009; Hannam, 2009; Turgeon, 2004).  Therefore, COPI under the 
auspices of P4C is  an ideal space for intercultural growth, something invaluable for promoting 
national unity and social integration in a country as diverse as Malaysia.  

 

     In the Malaysian educational scene, the Government attempted to address the issue of national 
unity through several programmes, such as the commencement of the 'Student Integration Plan for 
Unity'4 in 1986, the introduction of Civics and Citizenship Education as a subject in the national 
curriculum and the establishment of Vision Schools5 in 1995. Despite all these efforts, a perennial 
social gap and racial polarization among Malaysian students remain unresolved. 

 

     In a study conducted by Malakolunthu (2009, p. 130) about 'Vision Schools,' an initiative 
established by the Malaysian Ministry of Education (MOE), it was observed that there was “no special 
pedagogical intervention to help students understand the concepts of race, religion and culture, and 
how they varied from people to people.” The absence of such intervention eventually resulted in the 
failure of the whole Vision School project.  Thus, the introduction of COPI would be timely because 
it would offer Malaysian school children, as described by Turgeon, (2004, p. 105)  “a safe haven for 
diversity that is both encouraged and nurtured and also caringly examined.” Through philosophy, 
we can nurture more respectful, tolerant, cooperative children and in the long run, better citizens, 
in such a way as to effect social change (Kohan, 2009, p. 119).  Put another way, the inquiry process 
in P4C presents children with the opportunity to share their own views on challenging and 
controversial issues, in a safe space, enabling them to become aware of the assumptions and 
stereotypes present in society in order to challenge them. This process will not only contribute 
towards children’s self-development, but it could also be a factor for constructive social change 
towards a more democratic society. 

 

     In summary, schools should become places where children can learn how to make judgments 
without being judgmental, to differentiate but not to discriminate. School should act as a giant filter 
where all negative influences passing through its gates are neutralized. Ideally, this is how school 
should be, but in reality schools seem ill-equipped to counteract the torrent of bigotry, racism and 
hate that surge from every corner of society, and sometimes from within school.  Thus, if the 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

30 

 

Malaysian government is serious about national unity and racial integration, then the very first place 
to start would be the national schools, where the majority of Malaysians are educated.  

 

EDUCATIONAL REFORM IN MALAYSIA 

 

     The education system in Malaysia has undergone several reforms and transformation, since 
independence in 1957.  These changes happened due to several factors, such as a shift in the 
educational philosophy of the country or changes in the aims and objectives of the system itself. 
Changes in curriculum have happened mainly as a result of the changing needs of society, e.g., to 
develop the country in terms of science and technology, yet national unity has always been the 
overriding priority (Ahmad, 1998, p. 463). 

 

     The most recent government initiative to improve the education system is the National 
Educational Blueprint 2013-2025 (MoE, 2012b). On September 11, 2012, the Malaysian Prime 
Minister, Najib Abdul Razak, launched the Blueprint, and at last, higher order thinking skills and 
the 'spirit of inquiry' were given emphasis for Malaysian students, alongside the 3R's.  

 

     It became evident to the Malaysian public in 2009 that Malaysian students’ achievement was at 
a discomforting level as Malaysia was ranked 55 out of 74 countries by PISA (the Programme for 
International Students Assessment).  This put the country in the final third cohort well below the 
international and OECD average for all three areas of Mathematics, Reading and Science (Walker, 
2011). Almost 60% of Malaysian 15-year-olds who participated in PISA in 2009 failed to meet the 
minimum proficiency level in Mathematics, while 44% and 43% failed to meet the minimum 
proficiency levels for Reading and Science respectively. A discrepancy of 38 points on the PISA scale 
is equivalent to one year of schooling. A comparison of the scores shows that 15-year-olds in 
Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong, and Shanghai  were performing as though they have had three 
or more years of schooling than Malaysian 15-year-olds (MoE, 2012b).  This poor performance in 
the PISA rankings was one of the factors that moved the Ministry of Education to draft the new 
Blueprint, after conducting a rigorous nationwide survey on the strengths and weaknesses of the 
national education system.  

 

     The dismal performance of Malaysian students against this international benchmark has become 
a matter of concern when discussing Malaysian educational standards. Such concerns have increased 
when we consider the amount of money spent by the government on education in the annual 
budget.  Based on data  produced by the World Bank in 2010, Malaysia’s performance lagged  behind 
other countries  with a similar or even lower expenditure per student, per annum, for example, 
Thailand, Armenia and Chile (MoE, 2012b).  Furthermore, the average teacher to student ratio in 
Malaysia is 1:13 which is high compared to other countries. Given these advantageous conditions, 
it is perplexing to think that Malaysian students performed so poorly on international assessment.   

 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

31 

 

     It is interesting to note that the assessment in PISA focuses on questions that test for higher order 
thinking skills, such as analysing, evaluating and synthesizing. In other words, it does not test for 
mere application of knowledge.  This suggests that the Malaysian educational system is still behind 
other countries in equipping students with such skills (Rosnani Hashim, 2012a, p. 1). There is 
therefore a crucial need for educational reform to introduce higher order thinking skills into the 
Malaysian national curriculum.  

 

     In 2012, the Ministry of Education distributed a booklet6 on thinking skills for all state-school 
teachers.  The purpose of the 13-page booklet was to act as a guide for teachers to understand the 
basics of thinking skills in the hope that they would implement it into their classroom teaching.  The 
booklet also  aimed to help students acquire the basics of thinking skills  as outlined in the  new 
Educational Blueprint (MoE, 2012b). Some brief descriptions and examples of how thinking skills 
can be assimilated into learning were included in the booklet.  However, it is not known how helpful 
the booklet was and whether it was successful in enabling teachers to realise the government’s 
aspiration of teaching students to think critically, creatively and innovatively.   Judging by the size 
and simplicity of the booklet we should not expect too much.  The Ministry would do better to make 
a concerted effort to reform the curriculum, rather than adopting this quick-fix approach. 

 

     Rosnani Hashim (2012a, p. 9) suggests a reform in curriculum as well as in pre-service teacher-
training programmes, so that trainee-teachers are exposed to the use of thinking skills as well as the 
techniques of teaching thinking.  If they themselves are sufficiently equipped with thinking skills 
then they will be better placed to introduce these into their future classrooms. Rosnani Hashim 
further submits that the Hikmah philosophy programme is the most suitable thinking skills 
programme to achieve this objective.  Indeed, the existing literature shows that P4C has the edge in 
helping children to cultivate their critical and creative thinking. Thus, P4C or the Hikmah 
programme should be considered as one of the ways to make the Educational Blueprint a reality. 

 

REVIVING INTEREST IN PHILOSOPHY 

 

     It is interesting yet disturbing to know that there is, at present, no faculty or department of 
philosophy in existence in any of the Malaysian institutions of higher learning, public or private. A 
glance through the e-handbook of public university admissions applications for 2013 intake (“E-
Panduan Kemasukan ke IPTA 2013”) issued by the Ministry of Higher Learning7, shows that there is 
not a single undergraduate course related to philosophy on offer for prospective students, in all 21 
public universities across the country. As one would expect, there are numerous courses relating to 
science, technology, business and economics, and the like. One might counter that even though 
there is no specific undergraduate course in philosophy, students will still be exposed to philosophy 
in their respective disciplines e.g., philosophy of law or philosophy of science.  Yet this should not 
be taken as an excuse to exclude philosophy as discipline in its own right.   

 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

32 

 

     The reason for this omission can be attributed to several factors. According to A. Murad Merican, 
a professor at the Petronas University of Technology (UTP), (Abdul Rahman, 2010), the dearth of 
philosophy is the result of the country’s development policy over the last  forty years. As a relatively 
young nation that attained its independence in 1957, Malaysia needed to develop quickly requiring 
a strong foundation in economics, science and technology. More emphasis and funds were 
consequently awarded to these areas of knowledge.  Conversely, funds and financial support for the 
social sciences and humanities were significantly reduced in public universities, with adverse effects 
on facilities, resources, opportunities and teaching expertise in these fields.  Similarly, scholarships 
to study science, technology, economics or law were greater in number than the humanities and 
social sciences.  As a consequence, university departments of philosophy had to be closed down due 
to a shortage of students. Students, parents and the general public perceived these fields to be useless, 
having no practical value, or marketability.  After all, studying philosophy, sociology or literature did 
not appear to contribute anything towards the development of the country.  Thus philosophy lost 
its importance and was abandoned.   

 

     Rosnani Hashim (2009c, p. 658)  also discusses this 'death' of philosophy in Malaysian society  
holding that in many predominantly Muslim societies including Malaysia, philosophy has been 
abandoned because it is seen to challenge Islamic theology.  Muslims believe Islam to be a complete 
way of life, and so they see no place for philosophy in it. Philosophy is not viewed as something 
within religion but rather something alien to it. However, this was not always the case.  Historically, 
philosophy had a place in the Islamic religion, but this tradition was lost centuries ago.  In fact, 
Muslim philosophy came out of a rich culture of intellectual exchange that involved Syrian Arabs, 
Persians, Turks, Berbers and others (Rosnani Hashim, 2009c, p. 656). Muslim scholars engaged in 
philosophical arguments and discussion in the fields of jurisprudence (‘fiqh’), the nature of law, 
analogy ('qiyas') and meaning ('mantiq'). But it was the arrival of Greek philosophy that challenged 
traditional Islamic sciences and it was this that was considered a threat according to the traditional 
scholars.  It also gave rise to the emergence of the Mu’tazilites8, a group of Muslim scholars who 
relied purely on logic, reasoning and rationality, as well as their rivals, the Ash’arites, who argued 
that mere reason alone was not enough to establish the basic tenets and beliefs of Islam (Rosnani 
Hashim, 2009c, p. 658).  This division went on for centuries and in the end, resulted in the 
alienation of philosophy from Islamic fields of knowledge.  For this reason, it is a common trait of 
typical Muslim societies nowadays that too much questioning or inquisitiveness on the part of 
students is seen as inappropriate.  In fact, excessive questioning is discouraged because it is seen as 
a threat that could cause Muslims to doubt their faith.  Whilst there does seem to be ambiguity 
about the demarcation between acceptable and unacceptable questions in Islamic tradition, this 
should not be an obstacle for students who ask questions in the sincere pursuit of knowledge.  

 

     The need for philosophy in the Malaysian schools  has been further discussed by Syed Alwi 
Shahab (2013, pp. 36–38).  Shahab suggests that by modifying the current curriculum to offer 
philosophy, or by infusing philosophy into the existing curriculum, students will find their studies 
more meaningful and interesting.  He claims it is the task of philosophers to design lessons and 
materials with workable strategies that can help teachers develop philosophical thinking skills in 
their students. However, given the actual complexities of the educational system in Malaysia, 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

33 

 

Shahab’s arguments are rather simplistic.  It is easy to talk about ideals, but we have to face the 
realities of life. Even if the Ministry of Education were to go so far as to modify the curriculum and 
include philosophy, such an attempt would be fruitless if teachers are not adequately  prepared in 
the basics of philosophy, or trained to use philosophy in their teaching.   

 

     Currently, the only philosophy that teacher-trainees are exposed to in Malaysian teacher-training 
colleges is the National Educational Philosophy, which is nothing more than idealistic statements 
about how education in Malaysia should be. The National Educational Philosophy reads: 

 

Education in Malaysia is an on-going 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 citizen who are 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. (MoE, 1993) 

 

     This policy statement is as far as philosophy goes in the Malaysian education system. Teacher-
trainees receive no fundamental courses in philosophy such as logic, ethics or epistemology. Without 
knowing the basics of philosophy, how can teachers convey knowledge in a philosophical way or 
encourage their students to practise philosophical thinking? Like any other skill, philosophical 
thinking requires constant practice in order for it to flourish.  

 

     Another challenge faced by the re-introduction of philosophy into the school curriculum is 
resistance from stakeholders.  As stated earlier, philosophy has become something foreign within 
Malaysian society. Thus, getting support for such a programme from parents, teachers and members 
of the public will be difficult.  Similarly, finding teachers who are interested to participate in such a 
programme is also challenging.  Teachers are already overburdened with so many tasks and school 
work that we cannot simply expect them to undergo more training courses in P4C and then expect 
them to implement ‘philosophical thinking ’ into their classrooms; it is not so simple.  Rosnani 
Hashim (2012a) submits that the most viable way to bring philosophy back into Malaysian 
classrooms is to train pre-service teachers.   

 

     From the above discussion it can be seen that bringing philosophy back into the Malaysian school 
curriculum is a very complicated and overwhelming task.  To date, the Ministry of Education is still 
unconvinced about the potential of philosophy to develop students’ thinking skills.  Hence, the 
future of philosophy may seem bleak in Malaysia.  Yet as we speak, there are efforts being made by 
parties who are aware of the gravity of the situation.  Among them is the Centre of Philosophical 
Inquiry in Education (CPIE) which has expended considerable effort to revive the Malaysian public's 
interest in philosophy.  

 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

34 

 

     It is therefore hoped that using P4C as a means to bring philosophy back into the school 
curriculum, will cause the Malaysian public to appreciate the significant impact that philosophy has 
on children's cognitive development and behaviour.  If this happens, then enthusiasm for this lost 
field of knowledge will slowly begin to increase, and this in the long run could lead to a demand to 
re-open philosophy departments in local universities so that philosophy can come to life once again 
in Malaysia.  

CONCLUSION 

 

     There has been much hype about thinking skills in the Malaysian educational scene of late, so 
the call to introduce a philosophy programme into Malaysian primary schools could come at no 
better time. Sadly, however, Malaysian schools are still fixated on what Paulo Freire describes as the 
‘banking’ concept of education, where students are seen as ‘depositories’ and teachers are 
‘depositors’ (Freire, 1996, p. 53). Classroom dialogue is almost non-existent and the learning process 
is still very much a one-way process.  If education remains this way, then children will have little 
chance to improve their thinking skills.  

 

     This paper therefore examines the viability and suitability of implementing the Philosophy for 
Children programme within the Malaysian context, and how this can be beneficial for Malaysian 
school children in their unique, cultural environment. Several arguments have been established in 
support of the idea of returning philosophy to the Malaysian school curriculum. These arguments 
are grounded on three main bases; i) the distinctive social atmosphere in Malaysia, ii) the plan for 
educational reform, and iii) the need to revive interest in philosophy among the Malaysian public 
and stakeholders.  Of all three grounds, the third seems to be the most difficult, yet it is the most 
crucial aspect that will determine the success of any philosophy-based programme in the country.  
Malaysia has lost interest in philosophy, which is evident from the absence of philosophy 
departments in all of the public universities. Thus, it is essential that enthusiasm for philosophy be 
rekindled among the public if programmes like P4C are to take root and grow. The public should 
be made aware that philosophy is not something to be fearful of, but rather something that is innate 
in all of us, which has been lost along the way when we become adults, due to a lack of exposure 
and experience in it. This is not to say that children are born as philosophers; but rather that 
questioning, inquisitiveness and wonder are innate to them.  Young children certainly do ask 
thought-provoking questions, but they need adults to develop these questions so that their 
questioning does not diminish. Unfortunately, more often than not, children’s sense of 
wonderment and curiosity are stifled by adults in the name of education, making them uncritical 
and an easy target for indoctrination. Children's natural curiosity should be continuously nurtured 
and refined, not only for their benefit, but for the benefit of society as well, into which they will 
grow up as future 'thinking citizens'. 

 

     There are several suggestions to be made pursuant to this discussion: 

 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

35 

 

1. A tailor-made P4C programme based on existing models should be adapted to suit the 
distinctive characteristics of Malaysian students. Rosnani Hashim’s Hikmah programme 
(Rosnani Hashim, 2003, 2009c, 2012a) is a good start, but it needs to be expanded to include 
students from other multicultural backgrounds i.e., not just Muslims. Such a programme 
should be tested across the country to see whether it is viable to have a model suited to the 
different types of school in Malaysia (urban, rural, religious, Chinese and Tamil schools). 

2. A module for conducting a community of philosophical inquiry, based on P4C or Hikmah, 
should be devised for teacher-training institutions and included as part of training for pre-
service teachers. Skills acquired from this module should then be integrated into the teachers' 
respective subjects that they teach in school, or alternatively, a stand-alone, P4C-based 
programme should be implemented. 

3. Training should be provided for in-service teachers who are interested in using philosophy in 
their classrooms.  

4. A study should be conducted for educational materials that include thinking stories, 
exercises and modules etc., to be used in appropriate subjects that are already in existence in 
the National Curriculum e.g., Civics and Citizenship studies, Moral studies, Islamic 
Education, History and Languages, etc.  

 

     It is hoped that this method of teaching and learning will catch on and be accepted by the 
Malaysian Ministry of Education, since it affords a bridge between 'academic philosophy' and 'doing 
philosophy' i.e., philosophy for everyday people in everyday life. Philosophy need not be treated as 
an esoteric subject that is only accessible to the academic elite. In fact, philosophy is the right of 
everyone, and so, by nurturing philosophy in our children, we give greater depth and meaning to 
their lives, helping them develop a critical consciousness about the way things are; teaching them 
not to just accept things at first glance but to question them. Through philosophy, children, as well 
as adults, can experience multiple ways of seeing and of understanding the world. Philosophy teaches 
us to evaluate others' claims, to analyse and use our reasoning, rather than just accepting assumptions 
and prejudices. In contemporary life and especially in Malaysia, philosophy is very relevant and 
should be re-introduced to society, starting with our school children.  

 

ENDNOTES 

1.  A Malay word of Arabic origin  which literally means ‘wisdom’ 

2.  http://data.worldbank.org/country/malaysia 

3.  Literally translated as ‘the son of the soil’ 

4.  This programme was intended to create greater and more meaningful integration among students 
of different ethnic backgrounds through positive relationships and understanding, by having 
students become aware of and appreciative of others’ cultural and religious belief and values through 
special outdoor projects like camping, sports, excursions etc. (MoE, 2007) 

 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

36 

 

  

5.  In 1995, the government introduced a new redesigned model of school called the “Vision 
Schools” by which the schools of three major media of instructions (Malay, Mandarin and Tamil) are 
located on the same compound, share the same facilities and organise certain shared programmes 
and events. By virtue of the proximity and open environment thus created, it was believed that the 
Vision School would help to foster racial integration, harmony, and unity among the children of the 
different ethnic groups by creating opportunities for them to mingle, interact, and play with each 
other (Malakolunthu, 2009, p. 124) 

6.  Buku Panduan Kemahiran Mena’akul (Thinking skills Guidebook) (MoE, 2012a) 

7.  https://online.mohe.gov.my/upu/emas/index_epanduan.php 

8.  The ethical theory of the Mu’tazilites is properly called ‘rationalism’ because it held the values of 
human and divine actions are knowable in principle by natural human reason (Hourani, 1976, p. 
59).  

 

REFERENCES 

 

Abdul Rahman, I. (2010, November 1). Semua universiti terbaik dunia ada Jabatan Falsafah - Prof. 
 Murad. mStar Online. Kuala Lumpur. Retrieved from 
 http://mstar.com.my/mingguan/cerita.asp?file=%2F2010%2F11%2F1%2Fmstar_minggu
 an%2F20101101123750&sec=mstar_mingguan. 

Ahmad, R. H. (1998). Educational development and reformation in Malaysia: past, present and 
 future. Journal of Educational Administration, 36(5), 462–475. 

Brighouse, H. (2009). The role of philosophical thinking in teaching controversial issues. In M. 
 Hand & C. Winstanley (Eds.), Philosophy in Schools (pp. 61 – 77). London: Continuum. 

De la Garza, M. T. (2009). Identity and education in an intercultural setting. In E. Marsal, T. 
  Dobashi, & B. Weber (Eds.), Children Philosophize Worldwide: Theoretical and Practical 
  Concepts (pp. 645 – 653). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 

Echeverria, E. (2009). Philosophy for Children with indigeneous children. In E. Marsal, T.  
  Dobashi, & B. Weber (Eds.), Children Philosophize Worldwide: Theoretical and Practical 
  Concepts. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 

Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London: Penguin Books. 

Hannam, P. (2009). From inter-cultural to inter-relational understanding: Philosophy for Children 
 and the acceptance of difference. In E. Marsal, T. Dobashi, & B. Weber (Eds.), Children 
 Philosophize Worldwide: Theoretical and Practical Concepts (pp. 141–152). Frankfurt am  
  Main: Peter Lang. 

Rosnani Hashim (2003). The teaching of thinking through the Philosophy for Children approach 
  in Malaysia. (Unpublished research report). Gombak: International Islamic University 
  Malaysia. 

Rosnani Hashim (2004). Educational dualism in Malaysia: Implications for theory and practice   
(2nd ed.). Kuala Lumpur: The Other Press. 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

37 

 

  

Rosnani Hashim (2009a). Mira’s New School. Kuala Lumpur: Saba Islamic Media. 

Rosnani Hashim (2009b). Mira’s Trip to the Zoo. Kuala Lumpur: Saba Islamic Media. 

Rosnani Hashim (2009c). Philosophy in the Islamic Tradition: Implications for the Philosophy for 
  Children (P4C) Program. In E. Marsal, T. Dobashi, & B. Weber (Eds.), Children  
  Philosophize Worldwide: Theoretical and Practical Concepts (pp. 655–662). Frankfurt am 
  Main; New York: Peter Lang. 

Rosnani Hashim (2012a). Memenuhi Aspirasi Kemahiran Berfikir dalam Pelan Pembangunan 
 Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025 menerusi inkuiri dan pedagogi filosofiyyah dalam 
 kalangan guru. In Institutional Paperworks. Johor Bahru: Malaysian Education Deans’ 
 Council (MEDC).Retrieved from 
 http://www.medc.com.my/medc/seminar_medc/fromCD/pdf/IIUM.pdf 

Rosnani Hashim (2012b). Sarah- The Budding Thinker. Kuala Lumpur: Centre for Philosophical 
 Inquiry in Education, IIUM. 

Rosnani Hashim, & Abdullah, N. (2009). Mira and Helping the Poor. Kuala Lumpur: Saba   
Islamic Media. 

Rosnani Hashim, & Banging, B. M. R. (2009). Mira’s Thinking about God. Kuala Lumpur: Saba 
 Islamic Media. 

Hourani, G. F. (1976). Islamic and Non-Islamic origins of Mu’tazilite ethical rationalism. 
 International Journal of Middle East Studies, 7(1), 86. 

Juperi, J. A. (2010). Philosophical Inquiry in Islamic Education and Its Effect in the Development 
  of Questioning Skills Among Secondary School Students (Master’s Dissertation).  
  International Islamic University Malaysia, Gombak. 

Kohan, W. O. (2009). Some reasons for doing Philosophy with Children. In E. Marsal, T.  
  Dobashi, & B. Weber (Eds.), Children Philosophize Worldwide: Theoretical and Practical 
  Concepts (pp. 117 – 126). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 

Madrid, M. E. (2008). Multiculturalism, extreme poverty, and teaching p4c in Juchitán: a short 
 report on research. Childhood & Philosophy, 4(8), 125–135. 

Malakolunthu, S. (2009). Educational reform and policy dynamics: a case of the Malaysian “Vision 
 School” for racial integration. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 8(2), 123–134.  

MoE. (1993). Education in Malaysia. Educational Planning and Research Division.  

MoE. (2007). Kertas kerja aktiviti rancangan integrasi murid untuk perpaduan. Ministry of  
  Education. 

MoE. (2012a). Buku panduan kemahiran mena’akul. Curriculum Development Division, Ministry 
  of Education. 

MoE. (2012b). Preliminary Report - Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013-2025 (Preliminary 
  Report). Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of Education. 



ANALYTIC TEACHING AND PHILOSOPHICAL PRAXIS VOLUME 35 ISSUE 1 (2014) 

38 

 

  

Othman, M. (2005). Critical thinking and reading skills: A comparative study of the Reader 
  response and Philosophy for Children program approaches (PhD Dissertation).  
  International Islamic University Malaysia, Gombak. 

Preece, A. S. (2012). Benefitting Muslim Learner’s Using Philosophical Inquiry. Presented at the 
 21st MELTA International Conference, Kuala Lumpur. 

Shahab, S. A. (2013). Philosophy for Adolescents: Teaching Philosophy in Malaysian High  
  Schools. International Journal of Humanities and Management Sciences, 1(1), 36 – 38. 

Turgeon, W. (2004). Multiculturalism: Politics of difference, education and philosophy for  
  children. Analytic Teaching, 24(2), 96–109. 

Walker, M. (2011). PISA 2009 Plus Results: Performance of 15-year-olds in reading, mathematics 
  and science for 10 additional participants. Australian Council for Educational Research. 

Watson, J. K. P. (1980). Education and Cultural Pluralism in South East Asia, with Special 
 Reference to Peninsular Malaysia. Comparative Education, 16(2), 139–158. 
 doi:10.1080/0305006800160206 

 

Address Correspondences to:  

Abdul Shakour Preece  

Faculty of Education, International Islamic University Malaysia 

shakour@iium.edu.my  

 

Adila Juperi 

Faculty of Education, International Islamic University Malaysia 

adila_j@yahoo.com 


