LAST week, Siti Nurhaliza faced criticism over her appointment as an education “expert” by Universiti Malaya’s Centre for Continuing Education.

She received brickbats and comments about her lack of tertiary education, or as detractors phrased it, being “only SPM-qualified”.

Many of the comments, most coming from former students and local graduates, were shocking as well as disheartening, especially in today’s age of mini-degree programmes, self-education, and TVET.

Those familiar with the singer’s accomplishments will remember how she trailblazed the way for Malaysian entertainers, performing before such audiences as the late Queen Elizabeth II, in such venues as the Royal Albert Hall, and being invited to such occasions as the Grammys.

Her role in question is meant to inspire continual education in its various forms, which is in line with present trends where universities team up with influencers, thought leaders, and companies to reduce the ivory tower-like worldview of such places of learning.

Ironically, these naysayers tend to readily recognise the achievements and intellect of those successful in the business arena like Bill Gates or Jack Ma, alongside local legends like Lim Goh Tong or Loh Boon Siew, all of whom made their fortunes and built empires that employ thousands of university graduates, with even less education than Siti.

This educational chauvinism also runs against present trends, which recognise the value of vocational and trade education over theoretical training.

It is also revealing of the myopic worldview some have, still languishing in an archaic mode of thinking, in the face of increasing regional competition in attracting both talent and investments. This isn’t the only form of short-sightedness we suffer from.

For the past 50 years, Malaysians have been jostling over which system of curriculum, pedagogy, delivery, and syllabus is better for us.

We have not ceased debating these since the Fenn-Wu and Razak Reports, continually egged on by communal sentiment and politics.

What should be our unique selling point is thus: parallel but connected educational systems, coexisting, co-functioning, and jointly contributing in producing talent for not only our own workforce, but over 1.86 million skilled and semi-skilled jobs abroad (1.1 million to Singapore alone), helping these economies flourish and causing a brain drain on our own.

Imagine how much stronger we would be if these systems chose to learn from each other instead of their present combative positions against each other – religious versus conventional, private versus public, national versus national-type.

Malaysia has most of the world’s examinations – SPM, IGCSE, MUFY – each instructed in Bahasa Malaysia, English, Mandarin, and Tamil. Why can’t we benefit from each other’s stengths?

For instance, Chinese schools are known for their ability to raise funds and build infrastructure. Improving their buildings and programmes with little to no government assistance helps lighten the load on tax money.

National schools are good at instilling patriotism and producing a ready stream of public service employees, teachers, and middle-tier entrepreneurs.

Our public universities have mature research programmes and are world leaders in research involving maritime, forestry, logistics, transport, and Islamic banking, operating alongside private university programmes from England, Australia, China, Switzerland, and others, bringing with them decades if not centuries of knowledge, tradition, and reputation that we can learn from.

We have unknowingly developed niche expertise, but mutual mistrust, economic and political interests, and the misguided idea that everything must be unidirectional have held us back.

The synergy we could achieve in education will give us a world-leading advantage at every level if we could only look past selfish, outdated, chauvinist ideas. – June 27, 2024.

* Emmanuel Joseph firmly believes that Klang is the best place on Earth, and that motivated people can do far more good than any leader with motive.