Criticise Education System Not Solehah

---

 


YOURSAY | 'One has to question quality of research papers on which the doctorate is awarded.'
UM probes Solehah's article citing satire site as factual source
Malay-Rome shipbuilding claim makes it to Parliament
Doubtful: “History must be based on authentic evidence, not based on myth or fantasy. When history is used as a propaganda tool, it not only contributes to the dumbing down of society but also disunites it,” said Syerleena Abdul Rashid (Harapan-Bukit Bendera) in Parliament on Nov 10.
Sorry, but does this statement apply in this country? What this International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) Arabic language lecturer, Solehah Yaacob, is doing is no different from what the government has been doing for decades in school history books - manipulating history as a propaganda tool.
ADSWe should instead criticise the rotten system that produced such lecturers. I doubt she's the only one in this country's so-called "higher" learning institutions. By the way, how can a "language" lecturer be qualified to make such historical claims? The answer? Only in Malaysia.
Determined Sarawakian: Universiti Malaya (UM) has confirmed that it is undertaking a comprehensive investigation following allegations that an article published in one of its academic journals cited a satirical website as though it were a factual source.
Mastura Yusoff, Head of Media and Creative at UM’s Corporate Communications Centre, stated that the university is reviewing the entire editorial and publication process of Jurnal Al-Tamaddun to safeguard its academic integrity.
Mastura, this incident raises a serious concern: were the peer reviewers complicit in permitting such a lapse? If so, Jurnal Al-Tamaddun risks forfeiting its credibility, for a journal that allows satire to masquerade as scholarship undermines the very foundation of academic truth.
UM, long regarded as Malaysia’s foremost institution for research and higher learning, must recognise that prestige and reputation alone cannot shield it from the erosion of trust.
If its educators and academicians are complicit in such negligence, then the institution itself risks becoming a cautionary tale - where intelligence and recognition are overshadowed by the decay of integrity.
Ultimately, it is not academic brilliance that sustains a university, but an uncompromising commitment to honesty and rigour.
Without a proper audit of the editorial process, this matter will not be taken lightly. The Higher Education Ministry, mindful of UM’s standing as Malaysia’s leading university, will expect accountability.
UM must therefore act decisively, not merely to correct this error but to reaffirm that educational integrity - not propaganda - remains its guiding principle.
Outlier: The issue goes deeper than one lecturer publishing a fiction that embarrasses the whole country. At the very root of the problem is the sheer number of PhDs being granted and awarded locally each year.
One has to question the quality of the research papers on which the doctorate is awarded. And most of these doctorates eventually become a route to academic professorships.
ADSIf this mass churning out of PhDs continues unabated, you will eventually find Malaysia full of academic clowns, calling themselves professors and spewing rubbish.
Let us move on, and if IIUM still wants to maintain such lecturers, it is on them. Their reputation is at stake.
Employers will be careful when it comes to hiring any of their students in the future. Uncertain of their capabilities and knowledge handed down.
Koel: It is very simple, Mastura. Define a satire. Make sure the definition comes from a credible source. Your academics in the literature departments can help you as they should in this instance.
For example, “Gulliver's Travels” is a classic satire. So is George Orwell's Animal Farm. Would you use “Gulliver's Travels” as a factual source to prove that Lilliput exists? Or the “Animal Farm” to prove that animals can talk?
Also, it may be helpful to your team to find out who the peer reviewers were and how many there were. They should be removed from the list of reviewers.
We wait to hear UM's "learned" findings.
Coward: Not only should the article be reviewed. The reviewers and editors have to be reviewed as they are supposed to flag up issues like this. It is their job to check that the references are supplied appropriately and are factually correct.
BobbyO: We keep going around in circles with this issue of this article, when we know the truth that it is false. It is basic common sense, and we know it. Not once, but on many occasions, she has raised such “hair-brained” theories.
World Citizen: Here's a little history from my own research on the statement by Solehah, who claimed the ancient Romans learned shipbuilding from the Malays.
The Romans were great at adaptations and brilliant engineers. They perfected the shipbuilding skills from the Greeks and Carthaginians, who were known original builders of seafaring ships.
Did the Malays teach shipbuilding to the Romans? The answer is “No”, nor is it the other way around. The Malays, who were being referred to as Austronesian-speaking peoples of Southeast Asia at that time, were also pioneers and masters of building their own type of ships, which were very different from those built by the Romans.
The naval prowess of the Malays was especially dominant during the Srivijaya and Majapahit empires that ruled most parts of Southeast Asia from the seventh to the 16th centuries. The Romans and the Malays were geographically too far apart, and they never taught each other about shipbuilding or anything like that.
Solelah has delved into some of these historical facts but may have overstated or misstated her facts merely to show the prowess of the ancient Malays in shipbuilding skills over that of the Romans or others before them.
The ancient Malays were great shipbuilders in their own right, and their prowess at this should be celebrated on its own. - Mkini

---