Republic of virtue, 7/09

The mantra of meritocracy PDF Print
Posted by admin
Tuesday, 07 July 2009 11:32

Azly Rahman

http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/2009/07/i-think-therefore-i-perish.html#comments
Do we really understand what ‘meritocracy’ means? Do we know what ‘intelligence’ means and how it is to be measured? Are we making the right connection between intelligence and merit and determination and cultural diversity and intelligently link these psychological constructs with the idea of “meritocracy” that is becoming increasingly political.

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) is a poor measuring tool of human intelligence. It’s a paper and pencil test that has cultural biases. It is a political tool in the field of schooling as social reproduction. The French, through Alfred Binet used it to recruit soldiers who could read manuals. The Americans, through Lewis Terman used it to test thousands of Californian kids. The Stanford-Binet test evolved into the present test of IQ, and became a model for test developers to construct present-day high stakes/state standardized tests. Testing has become a huge industry.

In America, standardised exams/test scores decide which school district will get the most funding from the state. The Scholastic Aptitude Test (the SAT) is another big one that determines if one gets into an Ivy League or elsewhere. Bill Gates, the Harvard dropout had a perfect score on his SAT.

Our education system, borrowed from the colonial era and transposed into IQ-based selection and filtration system such as in the early MRSM system, is based on an outdated assessment of the human intellect. Dr Siti Zaharah Sulaiman’s Cornell University dissertation on the selection process of Maktab Rendah Sains MARA (MRSM) Kuantan students of the 1973 intake addressed this dimension of IQ testing.

Our debate on testing and measurement

Our economy is a technocratic institution that is obsessed with numeracy and the possessed by the spirit of logocentrism. This means that we are fundamentally trapped in the argument of statistical-based economic restructuring systems.

Elsewhere I have argued on the limitation of this ideology of measuring for example, in the calibration of ownership of the Malaysian economic pie. Many an educationalist have made statements debunking affirmative action and championing the setting up, in toto, of a merit-based system. This is a good call but is not necessarily the best perspective. It is based on a misunderstanding of what meritocracy means. In fact, this argument and a political platform will only do the following:

* Create an evolutionary system of reverse discrimination.
* Create a non-issue and a mask for the real issue of ‘justice for all races’ without resorting to the tedious argument ala economic pie again.
* Create a poor basis of public understanding of what “meritocracy” actually means.
* Create a smoke screen/haze on the issue of what we are really measuring in university entrance examinations.

Political parties outside of the hegemonising front are clamoring on the idea of meritocracy as if its definition is limited to IQ + hard work only, discounting the argument of nurture versus nature, culture versus biology, genetic versus habitus.

It seems that advocates of pseudo-meritocracy are having an upper hand of the argument by saying that it is hard work and results of high stakes testing themselves that are to be considered more supreme a basis of scholastic measure than affirmative action.

It is somewhat a truncated Confucianist argument that does not take into consideration what Kung Fu Tze and Lao Tzi would also champion for – social justice and egalitarianism in social promotion. Mao Zedong would mount a better argument on meritocracy, intelligence, and class formation based on how we create economic elites.

Because Umno’s ideologues and its intelligentsia do not yet have a good answer for all these, and particularly in the issue of meritocracy, and because the ‘other races’ are appearing to have a better argument on the issue of the meritocractic system as a “better system”, we need to understand this issue thoroughly.

Existing arguments on this great Malaysian school debate are not strong. We need to find better ways to look at meritocracy. Borrowing John Dewey, the American philosopher of education, we need to look at ‘growth’ from a constructivist point of view, taking into consideration the notion of “intelligence” as cultural bound and not as a fixed construct.

Let us excavate the foundation of this argument and look at the ideological structure it is fashioned by.

Let us explore if the notion of ‘meritocracy for the many’ is indeed another name for ‘aristocracy for the few’. To do this, we must look at what exactly this psychometrical construct called IQ is.

From aristocracy to IQ to meritocracy

I am now worried that the polarised argument will turn into a Malaysian-styled ‘Republican-Democrat’ great school debate, with Ralph Nader’s Green Party left out.

I am worried of the following trends in the development of evaluation, measurement, and filtration in all levels of our educational enterprise, from pre-school to graduate school:

* That we will be trapped into a more sophisticated version of the quota system and fail to look at the issue of how our children are learning to become labourers in this globalised system of production.
* That we are using the wrong assessment strategies to create another colonial-styled pluralistic education system that favors the children of the economically-privileged in this nation that is increasingly cybernated and ‘bio-technologised’.
* That we are going to marginalise the children of the newly arrived immigrants that need all the help in order to be good citizens that will contribute meaningfully in our national development.
* That we will continue to create the new Mandarins and aristocrats who will acquire power and knowledge through the new system of Malaysian aristocratic reproduction system.
* That we will continue to blindly uphold and defend an educational system that challenges children to become cut-throat competitors instead of teaching them to share resources (cultural, material, metaphysical) in a nation whose natural resources are depleting.
* That we are creating a dystopia in that the vision of a truly multicultural, just and equitable society is replaced by one that will have a small percentage of people controlling a large percentage of the wealth.

Meritocracy for all?

A vision of a good and intelligent society is possible if we deconstruct the definition of intelligence and broaden its dimensions, so that measurement does not become a ‘mismeasure of man’.

We have inherited the definition of merit uncritically and use it in the following ways:

* To create little brown brothers through the British education system.
* To advance the ideology of a plural society.
* To create a Americanised, Anglicised, and Nipponised elites through residential/boarding school systems, such as the MRSM school system.
* To create academic winners and losers through our national standardized exams.
* To create ethnically-based satisfied and dis-satisfied high school students through our translucent and opaque university entrance exam systems.
* To create classes of technology-rich and technology-poor human beings through our almost-abandoned concept of smart schooling.

I have proposed elsewhere that we need to begin to explore other perspectives in the way we acquire knowledge. We seemed to be trapped in a version of logical-positivism that mismeasures human beings.

I hope our understanding of meritocracy is going to be debated, discussed, deconstructed, and developed further by academics and educational policymakers before we as a nation gets further entangled in the web of confusion surrounding what it means to be intelligent and, which race gets to be called less intelligent, in our fight for economic control.

The argument between Bumiputeras and non-Bumiputeras on the issue of meritocracy is taking a wrong linguistic/semiotic turn. It reflects how much we are taking half-baked and outdated notions of ‘intelligence’ and using it to create gates and human filtration systems in the educational and social-mobility institutions we build.

Instead of talking about ‘multiple dimensions of intelligence’ that can be equated with creativity and problem-solving, the Bumiputera-non-Bumiputera debate centered around the idea of linguistic-mathematical intelligence used in high stakes examinations.

A national debate needed

I call upon educators, policymakers, and those interested in the education of our children to consider the following in order to enlighten ourselves of the issue of meritocracy:

* Understand the nature of human beings we wish to develop, through our education system/educational conveyor belt.
* Understand the dynamics of educational change as it involves the interplay between technology and culture and the development of workers and citizens.
* Understand the process of schooling as more than just the creation of homo economicus/the economic beings but that of beings, that will become active citizens that will be constantly aware of changes in their surroundings and be able to manage the change, complexity, and chaos.
* Understand how to craft a philosophy of education based on the mission of developing informed citizens that will acquire the skills of participatory democracy and anticipatory skills; a philosophy that will guide the next generation into deconstructing and dismantling hegemony we inherit from the previous long-serving regime and one that gave us our unique totalitarian character.
* Understand how authentic assessment works in the way we evaluate human beings that go thorough the education system by adopting multiple assessment strategies that are more valid and reliable that IQ-styled paper and pencil tests.
* Understand the impact of the ideology of testing on race relations and how to evolve out of the quagmire of the creation of a totally – bureaucractic- technocractic system that strangles humanity – one that batch-process human beings, stylized after (Frederick) Taylorism/Deming –TQM philosophy, into aristocrats and outcastes of the global system of production.

Let us all initiate a national debate on what constitutes ‘intelligence and merit’ before we further put human beings into different cognitive caste systems that will also reflect differences in the ownership of economic, cultural, and political capital. We do not want to evolve into a system based on our own version of eugenics.

OUR USUAL REMINDER, FOLKS:
While the opinion in the article is mine,
the comments are yours;
present them rationally and ethically.
AND -- SET ALL I.S.A. DETAINEES FREE]

Comments (8)Add Comment
...
written by Sinewy, July 07, 2009 12:03:34
To a large number of ordinary workers on the streets working hard day in day out to make enough to provide for a better education and future for their children who may be discriminated by the biased government policies in this country, please ask them what their views are about meritocracy, fairness and equality treatment in this country. While no one dispute the need to address and assist any economically disadvantaged group, but the ordinary people expect that their and their children would be treated fairly and equally in the eyes of the government. Why is this that in this country by asking for fairness and equality would make one to be branded as racist by some stupid brains? Do they mean that by demanding special treatment and having policies that discriminate others is their birth right and there is nothing racist in making people feel second class in this country? Simple people only understand simple logic. You can be very philosophical in defining meritocracy but the bottom line is simple people only expect to be treated fairly and equally by their government. A simple issue of having one single univerity entrance exam in this country is so difficult and you have all the stupid local professors making stupid statements to justify the unfairness on this issue which discriminate against certain group of people is enough to put this argument about meritocracy a joke in this country. And you have stupid bloggers claiming that vernacular schools caused disunity in this country. They don't seem to understand that the government policies enforced onto people that discriminate and deprive them of fairness and equality is the main cause of disunity in this country...and don't forget about the racist BTN program that brainwash genersations of malays to hate others and make them think that others owe the malays for their livelihood...
report abuse
disagree 1
agree 10
...
written by New Malaysian, July 07, 2009 12:15:36
I'm mightily impressed with Dr Siti Zaharah's informed,incisive, avant-garde piece and its rational, measured presentation. I must admit surprise.

Why can't these liberal, intelligent constituents find expression in UMNO? Why are their mouthpieces invariably the less intelligent, less coherent buffoons? Anifah Aman, take heed......

New Malaysian
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3
...
written by NSTPravda, July 07, 2009 13:32:18
Do we really understand what ‘meritocracy’ means?
Aiyah! Cerita pajang....
It is elementary matson... "Understanding" is ober rated..
Just ingat, it means what UMNO sez it means...
As simple as dat!
Semua-nya OK!
Rasuah sayang eh!
report abuse
disagree 2
agree 4
...
written by magickriver, July 07, 2009 14:08:36
Thank you, Azly, for raising an immensely pertinent issue. I'm inclined to believe it all boils down to the infamous left-brain versus right-brain, masculine (logical) versus feminine (emotional) schism. The same dichotomy can also be couched in terms of the archetypal sibling rivalry found in all mythological traditions - going as far back as Enlil vs Enki, Osiris vs Set, Amun vs Aton, Apollo vs Dionysos, Thor vs Loki, Castor vs Pollux, Cain vs Abel, Christos vs Luciferos, Isaac vs Ishmael. In the last 7,200 year, a pronounced left-brained masculine-logical-patriarchal=Apollonian bias has resulted in a worldview that rewards logical intellectuality and punishes emotional intuitiveness. Racial groups seem to fall into either left-brained or right-brained biases: e.g., Caucasian races appear more yang (competitive and confrontational) in their attitude towards Nature, while most African and some Asian races appear more comfortable being yin (cooperative and adaptive). This is speaking in very broad and general terms, of course, since the reality spectrum doesn't bother about neat little compartments and imaginary dotted lines dividing one state from another.

A schoolteacher in Baltimore once lamented how hard it was to teach a bunch of black kids to memorize the days of the week and the multiplication table. Their slowness to master alphanumeric skills made him believe these black kids weren't all that smart. But had he left them to their own devices in a big room full of musical instruments, he might well have come back two weeks later and discovered the birth of Earth, Wind and Fire, Motown, R&B or Hip-Hop! He might have decided to quit teaching for the music business and ended up as Stevie Wonder or Prince Roger Nelson's manager!

Same goes for Orang Asli and also rural Malay kids - it's hard work cranking up their left brains to receive, process and retain hard facts and figures - but their right brain development is way ahead of urban Chinese kids who for the most part might be found severely lacking in rhythmic skills and physical agility.

The holistic approach factors in left and right brain tendencies and attempts to integrate them to ensure that well-balanced individuals emerge from the educational process. We want logical artists and poetic scientists, receptive men and assertive women!
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 8
..., Lowly rated comment [Show]
...
written by Samanyan, July 07, 2009 16:36:53
Dr. Azly,

I gave up reading your post one-fifth of the way through. Let me just give my input of what 'meritoracy' means.

Recently I read of the Saudi Arabian government going on a serious recruitment drive to get professors and lecturers for their latest university. The idea was to develop the university into one of the best there is in the world.

Do you think, it can ever happen? I have lived with the arabs for 6 years and have been involved in business with them for nearly 2 decades and I do not think they can produce a world class university in the next 100 years. Why? One could produce a whole series of thesis in answering the 'why'.

To a lesser degree it is the same with us. Malaysia has a very small population base and very large huge 'resource' base. Consequently, there is no real pressure on any of our institutions or entities or the government to really perform (as it is in the case of Singapore).

We can continue meandearing along merrily in our half slumper mode for many a decade to come, until the population base increases to the point where we have to worry about sustaining the run as we are used to. Say, in another 30 - 50 years time.

Then, when the population has increased to problematic levels and when the racial mix is skewered heavily towards the rent seekers and the laid back non-performers of the society, then at that point the true meaning of 'meritocracy' will hit us right smack in the face. Then we will have no more excuses or time but to accept that 'maruah' means to be able to compete and win on a 'man-to-man' basis.
report abuse
disagree 2
agree 5
...
written by renoir, July 07, 2009 16:49:01
It's perhaps inevitable that, as the years go by, similar arguments will arise again and again in M-T. I'd discussed years ago here the fallacies associated with IQ tests, and how such tests were used to consign American blacks to benign neglect. Further, papers by Jensen and the like merely revealed the cultural affinity for education by the Chinese, and had little to do with innate intelligence. I recalled saying that an Orang Asli child would probably learn how to get around the jungle faster than the urban Chinese child, showing the case for multiple intelligences. However, I do understand Sinewy's points, and the perception of racism in admissions to public universities in this country. This racism, and it certainly exists, isn't doing the bumiputras a lot of good either, as bumi children are thrown into majors they'd little preparation and affinity for. The point is NOT so much proportional representation among the ethnic groups as ensuring that children get into areas they're interested in, and have aptitude for. To do this, an imperfect but nevertheless necessary way is to go by exam scores, supplemented by other variables such as socio-economic conditions and national needs. It was wrong for certain IQ advocates to use the tests as excuse for neglecting the underprivileged, but it's even more wrong for anti-IQ proponents to rely on skin color to shut minorities from the academia. This was what happened for the past 30 or so years, with devastating results for this country's development status. Finally, magickriver is right to call for holistic individuals. To paraphrase Russell, love without knowledge could be disastrous, but knowledge - especially the scientific type - without love was what happened in Nazi Germany. Logical artists would not only entertain us, but also strive to enrich our culture and better our civilization. Poetic scientists would use science for the people, not at the expense of the environment or, as often had been the case, conquest and extermination of other peoples and nations.

LChuah
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 4
...
written by educationist, July 07, 2009 19:41:05
Dr Azly has raised some very pertinent questions with regards this issue of meritocracy.
I have read that even in the US, the disadvantaged groups are given positive discriminations to ensure that they don't lag further behind.
Who will initiate this discussion on merit and intelligence?
The UMNOputras won't be interested, they have their own version of meritocracy!
report abuse
disagree 0
agree 3

Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
You must be logged in to a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.