This document is downloaded at: 2018-05-12T01:19:20Z

Title Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling in the Multi-ethnicand Multi-lingual ASEAN Countires

Author(s) Fujita, Takemasa

Citation 東南アジア研究年報, (32), pp.1-14; 1990

Issue Date 1990

URL http://hdl.handle.net/10069/26532

Right

NAOSITE: Nagasaki University's Academic Output SITE

http://naosite.lb.nagasaki-u.ac.jp

i

' Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries

Takemasa Fujita

The Association of･ Southeast Asian Nations(ASEAN)is made up of six countries:

Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia) Singapore, Brunei, and Indonesia. Geographically they

lie to the south of Japan stretching from 180 North Latitude to 120 South Latitude, and

about 950 to 1410 East Longitude. The estimated land area of the･six ASEAN countries put

together is a little more than three million square'kilometers, which is roughly eight.time as

large as Japan's land area.

In terms of papulation, Thailand and the Philippines have each roughly 55 million, so

if put together they form the size of Japan's pupulation. Indonesia has-the largest popula-

tion of more 'than 175 million, which is about one and half times as large'as･Japan's popula-

tion. Indeed, Indonesia is the fifth most populous･ country in the･ world after the People's

Republic of China, India, the Soviet ･Union･and the United States of America. Malaysia has

the population of 17 million, 1 /10 of Indonesia's. The population of Singapore is 2 ･ million

650 thousand and that of Brunei 240 thousand. The aggregete population of the six ASEAN

countries amounts to 310 million, roughly three times the population of Japan. "

With the exception of Singapore, the Population growth rate in the ASEAN region

ranges from 2. 4 percent annually in Thailand to' 2. 9 percent in Malaysia. At a 2. 4 percent

annual growth rate, Thailand's population will double in ･30 years, and Indonesia, at 2. 7 per-

cent, will exceed the population of the U.S;A. by the year 2,OOO. Another feature of the

population of the ASEAN countries is that they seem to be getting younger in sharp con-

trast to the population of Japan, which is 'getting older. In the case of the population of the

Philippines, which grows at 2. 6 percent annually, the median age of the population chahged

from 20 to 16 in 50 years in the latter half'of this century, so that bver 56 percent of the peo-

ple-were beloW age 19 by 1980i' In the case' of Thailand, today more than 40:percent of the

'population are below 15, this compares with only -18 percent of Japanese population who

'are below age 15. So again with the exception of Singapore, over 60 percent･of the ASEAN

populations 'are under age ･19 today. The'ASEAN natioris are young hat-ions indeed.

Societal Multiligualism in･-the ASEAN Countries

Each of the ASEAN nations is ethnically and linguistically diversified. Langtiage is

2l?)eViltnadbolYneasikaeY eleMent in nation'building in souteast Asia.

The greatest ethnic variety is found in Indonesia. The National Language Institute of

Indonesia issued a linguistic map of Indonesia in 1972, in which the number of languages

was 'giyeriito-be 418･. This great diversity of languages in Indonesia is refiected in the na-

tion's motto "Unity in Diversity"(Bhinnelea Ttznggal Ika). However, in spite of societal

multilingualism, there is also a,level of homogeneity in that more than ninety percent of the

languages belong to the ,Ind, onesian. branch of the .Austronesian language ,family. :Some ･of

the ethnic groups are very large,･such as the Javanese who number 60 million or more and

the Sundanese(in Wes･t Java)whQ number,from 20 to 30 milliQn. ･ -

Other groups are small, counted in the thousands. i

According to the L1970 national Census, the number of the languages spoken in the

Philippines is given at,1,41. .The two larges.t language groups, those speaking T'agalog ra-rtd

Cebuano, each contains ten･ million members or almost'half the Philippine.population. .

Both in Indonesia ･and the Philippines the large number of languages is a function of

the physiographic ,features of the archipelagoesrtheir highly fragmented complex･ of

thousands of islands,; wit･h high masses of mountains and an array of rivers on the larger

,islan' ds. ･

The multiethnolingual cemplexity of Malaysia is neatly treated by a prominent Malay-

sian linguist Dr. Asmah Hj. Omar(1979) , who classified,the languages of Malaysia into four

types: (i) indigenous(Malay, 21 other Austronesian, and 20 Austroasiatic languages) ; (ii) im:

migrant･(1,O･ Chinese and several Indian langtiage dialects); (iii) colonial(English); and (iv)

creolized'and 'pidinized. According to the 1983 Census of Malaysiapf the total population,

47 percent were Malay, 32 percent Chinese, 8 percent Indian and 13 percent others.

(4) Singapore ･･ ' --. /, . //' ' '･''' ･' The Republl'c Singapore is a multiracial and multilingual country.

Its populaton of 2. 6 million is composed of 76% Chinese, 15% malay, 7 % indians, and 2 %

others comprising ,Enropeans, Eurasians, Arabs and people of'other ethnic origins.

Singaporeans speak a total of 33 languages and dialects. According to the 1970 Census,

there were seven main ethnic, dialect groups which jointly accounted for 90 percent of the

total population. The three largest groups were among the Chinese: Hokkien(32.2%),

Teochew(17.0%) and Cantonese(13.0%),, with Malays ranking fourth(12.9%).

(s) Thailand

Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries 3In the Kingdom of Thailand, major and minor ethnic groups form the total population. The

largest ethnic group, over 80 percent of the population, are Thais and Thai-Laos subgroups

who are said to have migrated from southern China. The significant minority ethnic groups

in Thailand are Chinese, Thai-Malay, and Vietnamese. The Chinese, who compriSe about 1O percent

of the countryls population, play an important role in Thailand's economy, especially in the

commercial sector. The Thai-Malays, a smaller group of about 4 percent, are mainly in the

southern pro'vinces of Thailand. The Vietnamese are refugees from the homeland. Other

than these four major ethnic groups, there are forty minority languages 'spoken by ethnic

minority groups in Thailand.

Problems of National Language Policy

(1) Singapore

A statement of Singapore's official language policy is found in the Republic of

Singapore Independence Act of 1965 : (i) Malay, Mandalin, Tamil and English shall be the

four official languages in Singapore. (ii) The national language shall-be Malay and shall be in

the Roman script. ' The official language policy of equal treatment for the four languages is upheld as a

national ideal' and implemented in practice. Education is provided in all four official

languages. Public announcements and notices, radio and television broadcasts are in all four

languages.

The most important language problem that Singaporeans have faced is the issue of a

common language. In a multi-racial country where four official languages and fourteen

main dialects are used, the need to have a common language for the people to communicate

across ethnic and group barriers is an urgent one. The solution lies in bilingualism : a good

working knowledge of English and sufficient knowledge of the mother tongue(either

Chinese, Malay or Tamil) . One gives them a medium of intergruop and international com-

munication, and the other a means of maintaining one's own cultural identitY and com-

municating within one's traditional subculture.

This cultural pluralism in Singapore's national language policy, which allows plural

languages and cultures to exist in parallel, is sharply contrasted to assimilation/integration

policy that has been adopted by other ASEAN member countries.

(2) Thailand

Thailand has no stated official language policy. But it is evident that standard Thai,

which is based on a prestigious social class accent of Bankok, is the official language bf the

country. Standard Thai is the medium of instruction in all Thai schools in the country. In-

4

struction in standard Thai is compulsory and begins early. For better integration of minori-

ty language groups into the main stream of Thai society, the Thai Government recom-

mends that the Thai language be their major avenue to national integration at all levels of

education. If a Chinese masters the Thai language, and adopts a Thai name, he can become

a Thai citizen. This is a common way for the Chinese to acquire his status in society.

(3) Malaysia

The national language policy of Malaysia establishes Malay or Bahasa MaLaysta as the

sole national language of'the country. Until 1957,' English was the language of government

and business, and the medium for social intercourse of the elite. Until 1969, besides the

Malay, Chinese and Tamil medium primary schools, there were also the English medium

primary,and secondary schools. In 1970, the decision was made to make･all English medium

schools National Schools, with Malay as the medium of instruction. As one of･the aims of

the Thint Maldysia Plan(1976-1980) we read the following : "Strengthen'the educ'ational

system for promoting national integration and unity through the continued implementation,

in stages, of Bahasa Malaysia as the main medium of instruction at all levelsl"

In 1980, all secondary schools under the Ministry of Education were in the Malay

medium. Today, converSion of the medium of instruction from English into Malay should

be complete even in the in$titutions of higher learning. It is reported'that adopting Malay as

the medium of instruction has caused some qualified citizens[of Chinese of Tamil heritage

'to emigrate to other countries, since they felt their future in Malaysia was not secure. '

The Malaysian policy of assimilation･further goes on to the practice of positive

discrimination.'Indigenotis Malays, better known as "bumiputra" are offered favoured op-

portunities in education so as to increaSe the percentage･in secondary and tertiary institu-

In the nation's Third Five-Year Development Plan, under the topic "Racial Balance and

Education," the authors comment on the improvement of the enrollments of' Malays in

schools during the Second Plan(1970-1975), and propose that during the Third Plan

period(1976-1980), "continuing efforts will be made to increase enrollments among the

'Malays and other indigenous people in areaS where they are in short supply..." (Third

' ' t. .Ma ldys ia- Plan' 1976 T- 1980 p. 404) ･' ･'/ -' ' ･ ' ･' '･ ' '･' ' ' '' -' '' -' ･･

Thus positive disctimination policies baSed on quotas have been pursued in MalaYsia

on a broad scale. The purpose of the quotas is to correct the underrepresentation of the

Malay majority in educaton, the pr6fessions and business. ''

The Chinese and Indian minorities perceive theSe quatas as racist disctimination and

'afull scale attack on the economic'position of their communities.',' ･; '' ' /

Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries 5 Although these quotas have generated intense resentment among the "non-

bumiputra", non-Malay minorities, there has been no academic debate on this issue on

Malaysia. In fact, public questioning of these quotas is legally defined as sedition .and is a

serious eriminal offense.

Suppression of all public dabate is built into the implementation of these. quotas.

(4) Indonesia ･ ' Indonesian, (i.e., Btihasa indonesia)was declared the state language by the 1945 Con-

stitution. It is the national language and the only official language in IndQnesia,

Bahasa Indonesia was developed from the Malay language and it is employed as the

medium of instruction from primary to tertiary education. In certain areas, especially rural

one.s, where Indonesian is not widely used in everyday communication, the local ethnic

language can be used in the first two or three years of primary education.

The Indonesian government policy is to make the most of the national language so as

to bring about the Indonesian culture, which will be a new culture based on various in-

digerious ethnic cultures. However, this policy is applied only to the indigenous people, bet-

ter konwn as Pribumi, and the policy can the be called the policy of amalgamation.

Towards the "alien minority," namely, the Chinese, Arabs and Europeans, of which

the largest number are ethnic Chinese ( 5 million people, or 2. 8% of the total population) ,

the government policy is quite different. The government adopts the policy of "absorption,"

according to Leo Suryasinata of National University of Singapore, "which requires the

ethnic Chinese to abandon their Chinese identity and be transformed into "indigenous" In-

donesians." In other words, Chineseness is considered "alien" and "harmfu1" for the forma-

tion of the Indonesian national culture. Complete absorption of the Chinese･into indigenous

society under Suharto in desired. " (Sbutheast Asian 7bu7nal of Sbcial Science IZb 1 . 16 Alb.

A number of instances to endorse the above statement can be cited.

(i) After the attempted coup of 1965, Chinese-language schools were closed down, marking

the end of Chinese education in Indonesia. Since then all ethnic Chinese children, regardless

of their nationality, have to go to Indonesian national schools. (ii) Chinese characters are pro-

bibited to be displayed. All shop names are now in Bahasa Indonesia. It says in the visitors

entry ･form that "Carrying narcotics, arms.. . Printed matters in Chinese characters and

Chinese medicines is prohibited." (iii) The most comprehensive strategy to change the

Chinese identity is through name changing. By the name-changing regulation of 1961 and

1966 many ethnic Chinese were urged to change their names to Indonesian-sounding names,

although not compulsory.

6

Name changing was often seen as a symbolic act on whether or not the Chinese is "loyal" to

'Indonesia, or wanted to identify themselves with the Indonesian natiOn,' and to display

' 'greater integration or absorption into the dominant clutural stream.

(s) The Philippines

Now we turn to the national language poiicy of the Philippines. Article XV, Section 3

of the 1973 Constitution which, as amended, remain in force and effect in the 1986 Freedom

Constitution promulgated by Presi(lpnt Aquino, contain the following provesions :

1 . This Constitution shall be officially promulgated in English and Pilipino.. . In case of

conflict, the Engli.sh text shall prevail.･

2 . The National Assembly shall take stepts tQwards the development and formal adoption

of a common national language to be known as Filipino.

3 . Until otherwise provided by law, English and Pilipino shall be the official languages.

These stipulations refiect the present linguistic situation in the Philippines. Firstly,

English and Pilipino(which is based on Tagalog)are widely employed as official languages.

Secondly, there is yet no national language in the Philippines.

The stipulation pertaining to the formation of the national language is included in the

Constitution based on a recommendation from a committee in the 1971 Constitutional Con-

vention which was composed mainly of non-Tagalogs. They recommended to eliminate

Pilipino and substitute a new common national language based on all the existing languages

of the Philippines. Today, such a national language is yet to be developed. So "Filipino" as

the natonal language remainsalegal fiction. '

Educational Language PolicY of the Philippines

From 1957 to l974, the policy of the Ministry of Education and Culture was to use

one of the eight ' major ethnic languages (namely, Tagalog, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Il-

ocano, Kapampangan, Pangasinan, or Bikol)as the language of literacy during the first two

years of schooling, with English and Tagalog-based Pilipino as subjects. The transition was

made in the third year of schooling, when English becam'e the medium of instruction and

Pilipino was taught as a subject each year from then on. -

Since 1974, with the policy of the Ministry of Education to make the Filipino people

bilingual, competent in the use of Pilipino and English, the educational language'policy'has

changed to the following:･ ' , ' , , 'i(i) Pilipino shall be the medium of instruction at all levels for the following subjects : social

studies,- work education, health education and character education. - ･ ･

(ii) English shall be the medium of instruction at all levels for the subjectsi of English,

Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries 7

mathematics and sciences. -,･ -' ･(iii) Pilipino and English will continue to be taught aS subjects under Communication

Arts(Pilipino)andCommunicationArts(English). '･ ･

(iv) The ethnic' languages'will continue as auxiliary languages.

･In 1985, the Linguistic ,Society of the Philippines conducted ,a wide-scale surV, ey･ to

evaluate the rusults of the Bilingual Education' Policy ten years after its implementation.

They used a total test sample of some 150 schools, 600 teachers and 8, OOO students from 17

major ethnolinguistic groups. Among their major findings are :

1 . r.The Bilingual Education Policy had been implemented in 98% of,the schoQls that. were

sampled. At the tertiary level, hawever, 65% of the responding institutions had not im-

plemented the policy. ..2 . with fesp6dr to certain subje6t thatters, h6ii-Taga16g mother tongue speakers viere par-

ticularly disadvantaged. (Upon this finding the Society strongly recommend the survival of

the use of major ethnic languages for purposes of initial literacy training among non-

Tagalogs . )

3. With regard to the teaching of social studies(which should, according to' the Bilingual

Education Policy, occur in Pilipino) , many teachers reported that they are not themselves

'fluent in Pilipipo, are uncomfortable teaching via Pilipino, or simply not teaching via

Pilipino.,.' . .. '4 . At the elementary and secondary levels, 80% of the teachers reported they believed it

possible to be a "genuine" Filipino without using Pilipino as a medium of instruction for for-

'mal education. .1 '.' .. ., ,.- .5 . More than 50% of the respondents reported that Pilipino is not as effective or efficient

a medium for advanced scholarly inquiry as is English.

Based upon these findings the Linguistic Society of the Philippines strongly recom-

mended that the Institute of National Language take rapid steps toward cultivation of

Pilipino as a language of scholarly discourse, its intellectualization, its lexical enrichment

and elaboration. They also called for the development of suitable teaching materials, the

training of special teachers and the establishment of incentives for Pilipino teachers so that

Pilipino could be taught as a second language more efficiently and more effectively in non-

Tagalog areas than has been the case.

By way of conclusion we may safely say that it will be a long time befQre the multi-

ethnic and multi-lingual people of the Philippines come to'accept and use Tagalog, or

Pilipino, or Filipino, whatever the language may be called, as their common natonal

language.

8 .･ ･･. '-･ ･' ･･- ･･,Problems of Illiteracy

This year of 1990 A. D. is the United Nation's year of literacy. The rtation's literacy

rate is one of the measures to gauge the levels of attainment of the goals of the nationls

language policy as well as educational policy. I would like to turn here to some statistics by

the UNESCO to see how the literacy rates of the ASEAN countries compare with one

another and with those of some other countries in Asia and,the Pacific region. First, let us

look at the literacy rates of the world(See Table 1 ).

Table 1 Number of illiterates and literaCy rates in the world and the developing

regions for the population aged 15 years and over

(1970 and' 1985)

Region

No. of illiterates(in millions) Literacy rate(%)

Variaton

1970 1985 1970-1985 1970 1985World

Developing Asiaand the Pacific

Africa

Latin Americaand the Caribbean

760

537

140

44

857

618

162

44

+97

+81

+22

67.1

53.6

28.9

72. 7,

73. 2

63.7

tt

46.0

82. 7

Source:UNESCO, Development of Education in Asin and the ,PkecijCiic ED-85/MINEDAP/ 3

In 1985, the number of illiterates of the world is 857 million, of which some 618

million live in developing Asia and the Pacific. This represents'about three-quarters of the

total illiterate adult populaton of the world.

' ' While the aggregate literacy rate of the developing countries in Asia and the Pacific

'has risen by 10% over the 15 years, the number of illiterates (aged 15 and above)has also in-

creased by 81 million. Clearly, the rate at which the adult population is gaining literacy is

outstripped by the rate of population growth.

Secondly, from Table 2 we see large differences among the countries and in the pro-

gress that they have achieved. The four industrialized countries in Asia and the Pacific

region, namely, Australia, Japan, New Zealand and USSR, are not listed in the table. But

they are supposed to have achieved universal literacy.

Nine developing countries in the region have already achieved 80 percent or higher literacy

rates, in which three member countries of ASEAN, namely, the Philippines, Singapore, and

Thailand, are included.

Problems of National Language Policy and Schoolingin the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries

t-t .... /- .- ,t t ' ' Table 2' Illiteracy in the countries of Asia and the'Pacific ., '-. ･･,

(21 countries) (latest census or survey datq..qvailable since 1970)

9

Countrymember of AgeASEAN@ Year group

iiiiteratepopuialofi '''･'' R5{e6fml'telhcy '' ,9itiil91･ll2t,Y,i,e,S,Rit[iiR"it",t,Illg,S ,3i-tCiOi"i,",t,g,e,S

.･ , (thousands),.. , /' ･...(%), ･ . ･, 8a,tfi{:eh%,, - rsaot%,b-.e.grvftenrsaot%,belOY

'"--M-F---'-'i,1'("-----F'-'-'--M'-F'-----M'-"-'-F------'--'--'---""--'--'--'-'--'-"';-":

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

China

Fiji

Indiai

Indonesia @

1980

1981

1982

1976

1971

1980

15+

15+

12+

15+

15+

15+

5,742 2,488 3,254 80.0

". H. "･ 70.8

237,925 73,269 164,656 31.9,

66 24 42 .21.0

209,430 86,346 123,084 65.9

28,325 9,491 18,834 .32.7

66.8

.60. 3

19.2

'.16.0

'52.3

22. 5

94.･2 '

82.o

45.3.

26.0

80. 6

42.3

o

o

o

oo

o

Islamic Rep.of Iran

Malaysia @

1976

1970

15+

10+

11,733 4,875 6,858 63.5

2,972 1,094 1,877 42.0

51.8

30.9

45.6

53. 2

o

oMaldives

Nepal

Pakistan

Papua NewGuinea

Philippines @

1977

!981

1981

1971

1980

15+

15+

15+

10+

15+

147, 6, 998 3, 053

33,597 l5,512

'1,107 513

4,627 2,200

6 17.6

3,945 79.4

18,o85 73.8

' '

594 67.9

2,426 16.7

17:5

68. 3

64.0

60.7

16.1

17.7

90.8

84.8

75.6

17.2

o

o

o

o

o

Rep. of Korea

Samoa

'Singapore @

1970

1971

1980

15+

15+

15+

2, 264

1.6

301

550

O.8

75

1,714 12.4

O.8 2.2

226 17.1

5.6

2.2

7.6

19.0

2.1

26. 0

o

o

oSocialist Rep.

of Viet Nam

Sri Lanka

Thailand

1979

1981

1980

l5+

15+

15+

4,847 1,340 3,506 16.0

'1,336 452 884 13.9

3,297 1,050 2,247 12.0

9.5

9.2

7.7

'21.7

1&8

16.e

o

o

o

Tonga ' 1976 15+' O.2 O･1 O.1 O･4 O.3 O･5 O tt 'Turkey 1980 11+ 9,901 2,749 7,152 31..2 .16.8 46.6 . 0 ' ' tt ' ' ' ' tt tt tt ' '1. Preliminary figures from the 1981 census in India indicate qn illiteracy rate of 63.8 per cent for the total population(of all ages).

' ' ' ' ' ' ' 'IVbte:Due to rounding, figures of illiterates by sex do not always add up exactly to the total.

Source:UNESCO, op. cit.

10

Five countries of Asia and the Pacific region are between 50 percent and 80 percent

level of literacy, of which two countries are member countries of the ASEAN, namely, In-

donesia and Malaysia. And seven countries are below 50 percent in literacy.

Illiteracy is invariably associated with deprivation and socioeconomic underdevelop-

ment. Countries with over half their adult population illiterate also stand at the low end of

other scales of socio-economic indicators. Typically with very few exceptions, these coun-

tries have :

- infant mortality rates of over 100 per 1, OOO live briths ;

- a life expectancy at birth under 50 years ;

- one-half to two-thirds of their children undernourished ' '- widespread endemic and communicable diseases ;

' '- one-third to one-half of their population withOut'access to clean drinking water ;

- half or more of their peoPle with a household income below the poverty line or the

tt ' .t minimum needed for meeting essential needs. ' '''

Table 3 Iliteracy in urban and ruual areas(14 countries),

(latest census or survey data available since 1970)

Rate of Illiteracy

Country

Urban Areas Rural Areas Diff.'U-RAsEAN ..-l>(.!-F..--..l>(.I--------E---.-.-l>,!.IF-..-""-lyt.--..--.-F."-L.--.IYI.lj.-.-.

Ill.e.M.tb,ey'(@) y,., Ag,g.eip (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) 6i](/nts)

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

China

India

Indonesia @

1980

1981

1982

1971

1980

15+

15+

12+

15+

15+

60.9

51.9

16.4

39.6

16.5

45.5

42.0

8.9

27.6

8.8

78. 5

65. 9

24. 6

54.5

24. 0

83.5

74.6

34.8

72. 9

37.6

70. 9

64. 6

21.1

59I4

26.8

96. 9

84.7

49.1

87. 0

47.7

22. 6

22.7

18.･4

33.3

21.2'

Islqmic Rep. of Iran

Malaysia @

1976

'1970

15+

10+

44.0 32.7･ 56.5 83.0 72.3 9314 39.0

32.0 21.8 42.3' 46.1 34.6 57.6 14.1Nepal

Pakistan

Philippines @

1981

1981

1980

15+

15+

15+

52.6 40.3 67.0 81.3 70.4 92.4 28.7

53.1 43.,1 65.3 82.6 73.4 92.7 29.5

6.9 6.0 Z7 23.1 22.4 23.9 16.2Republic of Korea

Samoa

Sri Lanka

Thailand @

1970 1.5t

1971 .15+

1981 15+

1970 15+

5.7

1.3

6.7

12.3

2.0 9.3 17.8

1.3 1.2 2.54.4 9.2 16.06.3 18.1- 22.9

8.5 26.6

2.5 2.410.7 21..4

13.9 31.6

12.1

1.2

9.3

10.6

Source:UNESO, op cit.

Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingtial ASEAN Countries 11 Thirdly, from Table 3, we see that the literacy rates in rural areas are 10-30 per-

centage points lower than those for urban areas. Thus, in Indonesia, one out of every 6

adults is illiterate in urban areas ' but in rural areas the ratio is doubled and we see one out

}}of every 3 adults is illiterate in Indonesian rural areas. And we must consider that about 80

percent of the population live in rural ireas in Indonesia.

In Malaysia, one out of every 3 adults is illiterate in urban areas but in rural areas

about half of the adults are illiterate. We must also take into account the fact that in

Malaysia more than 60 percent of the population live in rural areas.

The case is a little better in the Philippines. In u'rban areas, one out of 14 adults is il-

literate and every fourth adult is illiteate in rural areas.

In Thailand, one out of every 8 adults is illiterate but the ratio is doubled in rural

areas and every fourth adult is illiterate in rurel areas in Thailand.

It is also apparent from Table 3 that each developing country has more illiterate

women than illiterate men. Thus, in Indonesia, about half of women are illiterate in rural

areas. In Malaysia, more than half of women are illiterate in rural areas. In the Philippines,

one out of every 4 women is illiterate in rural areas. And in Thailand, every third woman is

illiterate in rural areas.

So we see that the rate of women's literacy quite decisively determines the over all

level of literacy in a country. A high rate of literacy is a positive influence on Socio-

' 'economic development generally, and on family life' , children's education, health and nutri-

tttion, in particular.

Problems of Universalization of Primary Edueation

UNESCO's Medium-Term Plan(1984-1989) has this to say : "Illiteracy can be

tt ' ' .t 'regarded as one of the great social problems of our time and a major challenge to the inter-

national community. Its elimination calls for an effort in two directions-firstly, securing

the general introduction and updating of primary education so as to stem illiteracy at its

source ; and seCondly, organizing systematic educational campaign for illiterate adolescents

and adults."

The unanimously agreed target in education for the developing countries in Asia hnd

the Pacific, inclusive of the ASEAN, is to foster the development and renewal of primary

education and to promote the total elimination of adult illiteracy. Eradication of adult il-

literacy is to be realized only if primary education is provided for all children, that is, by

universalization of primary education.

Here the questions arese : How far is primar education reached in the ASEAN coun

12

tries? What are the problems that seem to be hindering universalization of primary educa-

tion? Let us again turn to statistics by the UNESCO to see the situation in the ASEAN coun-

treisalittle more in depth. ･ ･' -- . .- -･-.

' t. .t . tt t t./ t. tt t. t ' Table 4 Survival and dropping.out in primary education･

(14 countries) ,

Countrymember ofASEAN@

Proportion of cohort reaching last grade of primary cycle-----------.-------"--"T"-------------------------;/-------------,----L-r--------.--begCiflR:'nrgtin Gradel Gradem Lastgrad6,SUti,"al DrO%t9ut

C Group(less than 70% gross evrollment rations) .

1,OOOAfghanistan 1973 ' 1980 1, OOO

Bangladesh 1974 1, OOO 1980 ' 1,OOO

Bhutan - . '1976, l,OOOB,Group(85-90% gross enrollment ratios) .

1,OOO tt 'Malaysia ' @' 1970'' 1,' OOO ' ' 1980 1,OOO

Thailarid @ 1973 1,OOO

' , 1976 1, OOO 'A Group(100% or more gross enrollment rations)

Fiji . 1971 1,OOO tt ･ 1980 '1,OOOIndonesia @ 1971 1,OOO 1980 1,OOO

Mongolia 1977 1, OOOPhilippines @ 1979 ,1, OOO

Republic of Korea - 1970 1,OOO t. ' 1980. 1,OOO ' 1,OOOSingapore @ 1971 ' .. - . 1980 . 1, OOO ' 'Sri Lanka , ･ 1971 1, OOO

1980 1･, OOO

Tonga 1978 1, OOO

1

1

901

798

323

374

289

973

994

891

891

977

961

900

916

922

801

970

979

,ooo

994

888

,ooo

954

571

565

189

204･

199

410

929

974

465

468

914

904

558

681

715

944

968

956

900

874

908

920

57

60

19

20

20

41

93

97

47

47-

91

90

56

68

92

71

94

97

96

90

87

91

92

43

40

81

80

80

59

7

3

53'

53

9

10'

44

32

8

29

63

4'

10

13

9

8

Source:UNESCO, op cit.

Problems of National Language Policy and Schooling

in the Multi-ethnic and Multi-lingual ASEAN Countries 13 In many countries of Asia and the Pacific region, a major factor undermining univer-

sal primary education is that a large proportion of the children who enroll in schools drop

out before completing the entire primary cycle ; in fact, they drop out usually within the

first two or three years. Drop-out means low efficiency of the educational system and

represents a waste of human and financial resources invested in the system.

' From Table 4 , we see that in Malaysia, in primary education, the gross enrQllment

'ratio is between 85% and 99%, and the drop-out rate is very small for the year 1980. But in

Thailand, which is in the same' category as Malaysia in terms of gross enrollment rations,

'the drop-out percentage point keeps above 50%, which we consider is quite high. ' ' Indonesia, the Philippines, and Singapore have attained 100% or more gross enroll-

ment ratios in primary education. But Indonesia has the drop-out rate of 32%in 1980;the

Philippines, 29% in 1979, and Singapore,･10% in 1980.

The causes of drop-out are known to be social, cultural, economic and educational.

Studies have shown that drop-ou,t affects the enrollment of children from poor families

more than others. Because the incidence of drop-out is higher in the first three grades, most

drop-outs ratain no basic skills or knowledge provided by school.

Table 5 Repetition rates by grade in primary education

(both sexes, 11 countries)

Country member of .Year I I MASEAN@

Grad Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade Grade

N V V[ V[I vrlper cent

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Bhutan

Fiji

Indonesia

Mongolia

Philipines

Singapore

Soc. Rep.

of Viet Nam

Sri Lanka

Thailand

@

@@

@

1980

1980

1978

1980

l980

1978

1979

1980

l977

1980

1976

2.4

27.3

15.5

5. 5

14. 5

1.6

3. 1

O.2

9. 4

8.1

18. 1

2.7

11.1

16. 0

3.0

11.2

'2.3

2. 7

O.3

6.6

11.4

11.1

2.3

15. 4

14.2

3. 5

9.0

1.6

2.7

O.1

5. 3

12.6

IL 1

2.3

8.3

15. 2

3. 1

7. 0

2.4

O.4

5. 1

13. 1

4.4

12.0

8. 0

9. 1

3. 7

5.0

2.2

13.0

3.8

11.4

9.5

10.0

14.3

4. 8

1.7

L5

10.2

8.2

4.5

12.0

L9

8.0

Source:UNESCO, op cit.

14

Another form of wastage in primary education is grade repetition, due to poor ex-

amination scores, low attendance or other reasons. From Table 5 , we see that in many

developing countries of Asia and the Pacific region, the average repetition rate is around 10

-12% in primary education.

According to the UNESCO report, most repeaters tend to become drop-outs, and in

Thailand, two-thirds of all drop-outs were fount to have been repeaters. Cross-checking

Table 4 and Table 5 , we also see that countries which have relatively high drop-out rates

have higher incidence of repetition in the first two or three grades. Thailand had the drop-

out rate of 53% for the year 1976, and for the same year Thailand had the repetition rate of

18.1% for Grade I and 11.1% for Grade Iand the same 11.1% for Grade M. Indonesia

had the drop-out rate of 32% for the year 1980, and for the same year it had the repetition

rate of 14.5% for Grade I, 11.2% for Grade ll and 9.0% for Grade M.

As a conclusion it must be emphasized that the eliminaton of the phenomenon of

dropping out and considerable reduction in the incidence of repetition are indispensable

elements in any educational policy for the attainment of universal primary education, and

thereby universal literacy.