COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLE
The author (Mommy Lyna) has presented an issue about the PPSMI policywhere Mathematics and Science are taught in English language. In her writing,she argued that the PPSMI should be reversed now since it can be good to thestudents and teachers and the best option to the education system.After reading this article, I found that this article is not well writtenbecause of several reasons such as fallacies. One of the fallacies that can bedetected in this article is encouraging complicity. For example, in the thirdparagraph where the author started her s entence with ‘everyone knows’ which
she expected that all the readers were already part of a group of like-mindedthinkers. So, this can be classified as encouraging complicity.Next fallacy is ad populum. The author takes advantage of the desire mostpeople which is have to be liked and to fit in with the others and uses that desireto make the audience believe in something because everyone else does. Forinstance, in the sixteenth paragraph, the autho r was talked about ‘a lot of’
students in the rural areas are not able to catch up with the teaching of subjectsin English language. She tried to attract people to agree with her statement bypointing out this view.Other fallacy is hasty generalization (stereotype version) such as in theninth paragraph, she claimed that Malaysians has been known to read the less.This assumption is not enough to conclude that all Malaysians read least becausethere are some of Malaysians are read most. Thus, this is a stereotype since theauthor convinced the readers that someone who has particular characteristics arebelongs to the group that has the same characteristic.Overall, this article is valid and credible since the author able to give thelogical reasoning to support his argument. The author has shown an ability todescribe and summarize texts but does not demonstrate good reasoning skills.
In my opinion, PPSMI policy should be continued because it...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document