Station master Ahmad Pandak Wahab stormed into the office of King Edward VII Secondary School (KE VII), Taiping, principal Long Heng Hua with his son Jamil in tow.
“Come in Haji, what’s the matter?” Long asked, not surprised as Ahmad had earlier asked for an appointment.
“He failed the trial exam. I don’t know what to do with him. I don’t care what you do to my son; break his bones if you have to, but make sure he passes his MCE (Malaysia Certificate of Education),” Ahmad replied.
Long eyed Jamil before asking: “What do you want to be?”
Jamil: “I would like to be an ambassador.”
Long: “How can you be an ambassador if you don’t pass? How many subjects did you fail?”
“Seven”, Jamil answered in a quivering tone.
Long: “Bend down.”
And Jamil stopped thinking. His body shook as disciplinarian Long caned him seven times. He then looked up at Ahmad and said: “I hope this will make him realise the need to study harder and pass.”
Thanking him, Ahmad left with his son, whose hands were rubbing his buttocks.
It was, Jamil tells me, the most “groundbreaking” moment in his secondary school life.
“It was a mark of shame and embarrassment for me. However, I carry no grudges against Pak Long (as Long was known to his students) or my late father for that incident, as that caning flipped my academic journey.
“That was the turning point. I studied harder and not only passed my MCE but did well enough to get a seat in Form Six. In my Form 5 trial exam, I only passed English and Bahasa Melayu. But I did well in the real exam.”
Jamil went to the University of Malaya (as Universiti Malaya or MU was then known), got his degree and joined the civil service. He recently retired as an associate professor at MU. Prior to that he was the senior vice-president of the Iskandar Regional Development Authority.
I tell this story because sometimes the cane does wonders; certainly, the cane of Long did wonders to many students who went to KE VII
Also, I tell this story because parents of the past were willing to trust the school heads and the cane. They felt that the temporary pain inflicted on their child would do him good. They did not mollycoddle their children as today’s parents are wont to do.
Parents today may think they are protecting their children by complaining if a teacher or school head scolds their child or canes him or her, but overprotection is only going to make them soft and incapable of facing future challenges boldly.
I know of many students who behaved better because they were caned or because of the fear of caning.
Recently, due to the rising incidences of bullying in schools, compounded by two instances of gang rape this month and the stabbing to death of a girl student in school, there have been calls for the “return” of the cane.
However, many psychologists and mental health experts are against this. They say caning does more harm than good, and that children who are caned are more likely to develop aggression, anxiety, low self-esteem and defiant behaviour, and that it teaches them that power justifies cruelty.
In fact, such a view resulted in the education ministry issuing its Circular No. 7/2003 — Power to Cane, on Oct 29, 2003, which sets out when and how caning should be done. Unlike in the past, no teacher could cane or hit anyone. Caning could only be done by the school head or teachers given written authorisation by them, with someone standing as witness.
Another restriction is that only male students can be caned and that too as a last resort. The school head or teacher can only use light strokes on the palm or over clothed buttocks, and they have to record down the offence, the number of strokes and witnesses present.
Public caning, under the new instructions, has been disallowed.
Are the mental health experts right? I don’t know if they are citing studies done on Malaysians or simply stating conclusions of studies done in western nations. For obvious reasons, I would give more weight to the former than the latter.
Perhaps they are right. But none of the countless number of students I know who have been caned or slapped or pinched by their teachers and headmasters in KE VII have been traumatised. All of them have turned out to be well-behaved, upright citizens.
Take Jamil, he is one of the most peaceful and friendly persons I know. Not only that, he strives, in his own way, to promote better understanding between Malaysians of different religions and cultures. He’s neither aggressive nor anxious. His self-esteem is fine and I’ve never heard anyone say that he had used his authority to hurt anyone.
In the 1950s-1970s, children were afraid to tell their parents that they had been caned or disciplined by their teachers as they would be inviting a double whammy.
If someone were to tell his father that his teacher had hit him, he could be almost certain that his father would slap him or hit him, sometimes with a belt, and say: “You must have done something wrong.”
While parents of the past marched into the principal’s office demanding that their child be caned, parents today march into the principal’ office demanding to know why their child had been caned.
Why?
Could it be that society’s views of discipline have changed drastically over the years? Have the views of psychologists and mental health experts who warn that corporal punishment has deleterious effects on the child’s development been adopted wholeheartedly by today’s parents?
Parents in those days almost always took the side of the teachers. However, parents today have a proclivity for believing their children’s version of events.
Why?
In the past, teachers were seen as role models and parents intrinsically trusted the wisdom of their children’s teachers. If their child was disciplined, they felt that the teacher was only acting for the good of their child.
Not so today’s parents; they do not trust teachers as much, just as they do not fully trust the school system.
Why has this trust declined or, in some cases, evaporated?
Is something wrong with teachers today? Are they simply seen as career-minded or working only for a salary? Do they feel teachers are showing bias in the way they deal with students? Worse, are they being seen as potentially abusive, given the reported cases of teachers sexually abusing students?
Are teachers no longer seen as wise guides or role models who would properly lead their children?
Why do some parents feel that the public education system has been compromised and that there is too much politicking in education? Have race and religion become too embedded in public education, causing anxiety and distrust among some parents? Has mediocrity set in?
These are questions that need to be answered by those in the teaching profession, parent-teacher associations and especially the education ministry. Unless these are answered honestly, problems in schools – such as bullying and violence and distrust – will persist.
Trust between teachers and parents definitely needs to be strengthened. Parents should know the difference between being protective and being overprotective; and teachers should take greater interest in their students so that when they do discipline them, the students will understand.
As in the case of Jamil Ahmad and countless others.
See also: Poor quality of HMs and the sorry state of our schools
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.