Category Archives: MOHE

Professor Dato’ Radin Umar’s reply 2

1:56:20
Tuesday
June 10 2008

lakukan yang betul demi kebenaran. Saya yakin Pengurusan USIM akan menanganinya secara adil________________________________

Professor Dato’ Radin UmarDirector GeneralDepartment of Higher EducationMinistry of Higher Education MalaysiaLevel 3, Block E9, Parcel E62505 Putrajaya MALAYSIA

My second email to Prof Dato’ Radin Umar

10 Jun 2008

Terima kasih Dato, saya masih dalam ketakutan.Diharap dapat menolong saya.

Professor Dato’ Radin Umar’s reply 1

12:53:48
Tuesday
June 10 2008

Assalamualaikum,Terima aksih. saya akan minta Prof Rujhan siasat dan membetulkan jika terdapat penyelewengan.Salam .________________________________
Professor Dato’ Radin Umar Director General
Department of Higher EducationMinistry of Higher Education MalaysiaLevel 3, Block E9, Parcel E62505 Putrajaya MALAYSIA

My first email to Prof Dato’ Radin Umar MOHE 10 June 2008

Askm Dato’

Saya (my real name), Pensyarah Di USIM. Saya telah dipaksa memanipulasi markah pelajar dan meluluskan pelajar kerana hanya dua pelajar lulus. Saya tidak mengubah markah kerana saya telah memberi markah dengan adil mengikut skema jawapan dan telah membuat kelas tambahan sebanyak 6-8jam sebelum peperiksaan untuk memperkasa pengetahuan pelajar.

Saya telah menerima surat daripada Dekan Fakulti Syariah & Undang2 menyatakan fakulti kecewa kerana saya enggan bekerjasama “memanipulasi markah” (my understanding, the exact wordings were “melihat/menyemak semula secara menyeluruh kaedah dan sistem penilaian yang dilakukan”.)

Dekan juga menuduh saya tidak efficient dalam pengajaran saya.

Dato’, saya mohon bantuan pihak Dato’ kerana saya dihukum kerana enggan memanipulasi markah pelajar agar ramai lulus kerana ianya tidak beretika. No telefon saya ialah (deleted).
Terima kasih.

I reported to MOHE about USIM in June 2008 -Letter to the Star

Dear Sir
With respect to the article and letter published by the Star namely “Out goes the lecturer” & “No compromise on excellence”, I thank the Star for highlighting my plight. The author of the letter “No compromise on excellence”, CHAN SIANG YEN, wrote “Will the Higher Education Ministry investigate this matter?”. For the record, I reported Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia’s (USIM) victimization towards me to the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) in June 2008. I also reported to the MOHE in September 2008 that I had reached the end of my tether as my USIM superiors continued victimizing me.

In November 2008 (five/5 months after I reported my victimization to the MOHE), I was “forced to resign due to USIM’s continuous victimization” and also out of frustration as I received no official response from the MOHE regarding USIM’s victimization, despite the fact that I wrote to the MOHE, ten (10) times before I resigned.

I retracted my resignation letter as USIM had not punished my superiors who victimized me but USIM refused to accept my retraction.

I only got an official reply from the MOHE in February 2009, nearly EIGHT (8) MONTHS after I lodged my complaint against USIM. The MOHE’s reply is the following:
“2. Sebagaimana Puan sedia maklum, Jabatan ini telah menerima aduan Puan mengenai isu Puan dituduh tidak efisyen kerana enggan bekerjasama dalam menilai semula markah pelajar yang mengikuti kelas Puan pada 15 Jun 2008. Jabatan ini melalui suratnya kepada Naib Canselor Universiti Islam Sains Malaysia (USIM) rujukan JPT (A) 1000/011/011/04 bertarikh 27 Jun 2008 telahpun melakukan siasatan ke atas isu seperti tersebut di atas dan mendapati bahawa Senat USIM telah bertindak wajar atas kapasitinya selaku authority tertinggi dalam hal ehwal akademik dan mempunyai hak untuk memohon markah pelajar dinilai semula.
3. Jabatan ini sekali lagi menerima aduan dari Puan pada 3 Disember 2008 mengenai isu ketidakadilan yang berlaku terhadap Puan sehingga mendorong Puan meletakkan jawatan selaku Pensyarah Universiti Gred DS45 berkuatkuasa mulai 18 Disember 2008 melalui surat Puan kepada Pengurusan USIM bertarikh 17 November 2008. Jabatan ini telah sekali lagi meminta laporan maklum balas Pengurusan Tertinggi USIM mengenai perkara ini melalui percakapan lisan antara saya dan Tuan Addenan bin Hj Abdul Rahman, Pendaftar USIM. Jabatan ini telah meneliti laporan tersebut dan mendapati perkara-perkara berikut:
a) Urusan permohonan perletakan jawatan Puan
adalah mengikut prosedur yang telah ditetapkan
oleh USIM.
b) USIM berhak untuk menerima atau menolak
permohonan perletakan jawatan Puan; dan
c) USIM mempunyai kuasa autonomi dalam hal ehwal
pengurusan dan pentadbiran akademik Universiti.

4. Setelah mengambil kira kesemua aspek perbincangan antara saya, Puan dan juga Pengurusan USIM, saya mendapati bahawa tidak timbul sebarang salah laku dari aspek perundangan berhubung kes Puan.”

I wish to highlight here that the MOHE took nearly EIGHT (8) MONTHS (June 2008 to February 2009) to reply to my written complaints, regardless of the fact that I had informed the MOHE in June 2008 and September 2008 of USIM’s continuous victimization. Please note that on 19th June 2008, I lodged a complaint to the MOHE regarding the verbal abuse by USIM’s Timbalan Naib Canselor (Akademik) Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda.

I went to see Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda, Timbalan Naib Canselor (Akademik) on 19th June 2008 regarding Prof Dr Hj Abdul Samat Musa, Dean of USIM’s Syariah & Law’s Faculty’s victimization towards me.

In the meeting, Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda shouted at me and said the following to me:
1. You are a failure. Your effort goes down the drain
because your students fail . The government can spend
a lot of money training but it’s no use if the students fail.
(I explained to him before he made the remark, that I
spent 6 to eight hours (free of charge) giving them extra
classes due to their poor performance in the mid
semester examination . I also spent 2 to 3 hours per
week (free of charge) for ten weeks teaching English to
my students in order to enhance their vocabulary).
2. You are not suitable for our university. You are at the
wrong place. Our university rates our students based on
their development. We are unlike professional bodies
like Accounting professional bodies which grade their
students based on their performance in professional
exams. (Before he made his remark, I explained to him
that I graded the exam papers based on the merit and
cogency of the answers given as well as based on the
marking scheme).
3. You should leave our university. (I asked him to issue an
official letter that he wants me to quit teaching as he said
that I am not suitable for the university).
4. Can your students understand your teaching as a majority
of them failed?
5. How come your students distorted what you taught?
6. Are you telling me that 153 students (those who failed
my courses) do not understand what you taught? There
must be something wrong with your teaching!
7. What do you think of our students? You look down
at our students!
8. Why are you so vindictive?

Please note that the meeting was the first time I met Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda and yet he accused me of being vindictive.

I reported Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda’s verbal abuse to USIM & its Senate in June 2008. USIM never took any action against Prof Dr Hj Abdul Samat Musa’s & Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda’s victimisation towards me, until today.

Based on the fact that the MOHE took nearly EIGHT (8) MONTHS to give its official respond to my complaint, I am of the view that the MOHE is incompetent, inefficient, lacked the urgency to help me and not interested to render justice to me .

I find the MOHE’s decision that the Senate of USIM has the authority to review the marks to be MOHE’s approval of USIM’s action altering low marks awarded to its UNDERGRADUATES regardless of the “poor quality” of the answers given. Please find attached samples of the questions posed and answers given and be the judge of the quality.

I also find that the MOHE’s decision, that USIM has full autonomy, reflects the MOHE’s failure to understand the World Bank’s Report on Malaysia “Malaysia and the Knowledge Economy: Building a World-Class Higher Education System” (which MOHE helped to prepare) which states, “Increasing autonomy of public universities and expecting full accountability in return” which means that “Autonomy of public universities in Malaysia is not absolute as such universities are expected to be fully accountable in their decision-making.” USIM must be accountable for all its actions forcing lecturers to manipulate marks to get higher ratings and its victimization towards me.

USIM cannot accept the fact that my students are weak and have poor command of the English language. I asked Prof Dato Dr Muhammad Muda on 19th June 2008 why are the courses taught in English as the undergraduates who learnt English since they were in Standard One, are not proficient in English? He answered, “You have NO RIGHT to ask the question!” I said to him, “What do you expect me to do, lower my standards?”

USIM in Harian Metro 17th April 2009 accused me as “berniat jahat” (having bad intention/being malicious). I reported to Kosmo regarding USIM’s victimization towards me for refusing to manipulate marks, as Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (USIM) uses the name Islam but desecrated, corrupted and defiled Islam with its unethical practice of manipulating marks. USIM also victimized me although I strive to be an upright (Takwa) Muslim. USIM higher officials signed their letters to me under the slogan “BERILMU, BERDISIPLIN DAN BERTAKWA”. BERTAKWA means being “god-fearing, righteous & upright”. I find USIM higher officials who victimized me and manipulated marks to be “tidak BERTAKWA”.

Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia should not mislead the public with its unethical practices that desecrate and defile Islam. It must carry the name Islam with Takwa!

The Ministry of Higher Education as the custodian of Higher Education in Malaysia must not protect and cover up USIM’s unethical practices. It must be honest!!!!!

Please be informed.

Sincerely
Nor

Question A
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Answer scheme
When the eddah period has expired
(1 mark)
Talaq through fasakh
(1 mark)
Talaq pronounced before the consummation of the marriage
(1 mark)
Talaq through khulu’.
(1 mark)

Sample answer 1 Question A
4 instances of Talaq Bain Sughra.
The husband pronounce the wife not get the consummet from the husband, the wife not the period iddah after the divorce.
The husband divorce the wife time period the wife must After 3x suci from it For the husband ruju’.
The wife in the hamil must born the baby for the husband ruju’ him.
Marks earned: 0.1 out of 4 marks

Question A
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Answer scheme
When the eddah period has expired
(1 mark)
Talaq through fasakh
(1 mark)
Talaq pronounced before the consummation of the marriage
(1 mark)
Talaq through khulu’.
(1 mark)
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Sample answer 2 Question A
Talaq Ba’in Sughra is the husband pronounced the divorce or talaq one or two times before consumption of the marriage or sex. Four instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra are if the man or husband want to married ex-wife, the marriage must have a new marriage ceremony and new akad nikah without waited the ‘iddah. The woman cannot married another man and divorce and after iddah marriage the ex-husband.
Marks earned: 0.7 out of 4 marks

Question A
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Answer scheme
When the eddah period has expired
(1 mark)
Talaq through fasakh
(1 mark)
Talaq pronounced before the consummation of the marriage
(1 mark)
Talaq through khulu’.
(1 mark)

Sample answer 3 Question A
Talaq Ba’in Sughra is a talaq whereby the talaq that severed immediately on the pronouncement of talaq and has no period of eddah.

The four instances are:
1) Talaq by fasakh
Talaq by fasakh will be effected if;
(1) where the wife the whereabouts of the husband of more than one year.
(2) The husband has neglected or failed to give maintenance to his wife.
and etc. as stated in section 52 of IFLA 1984.
(2) Talaq by Khul’, ‘cerai tebus talaq’.
(3) Where the talaq or divorce irretrievably broken down and both spouses cant be reconcilled.
(4) Where the husband made pronouncement of three talaqs and that he cannot remarry her except if she marries the other man and having consummation/ sexual intercourse between that man.
2 marks out of 4 marks

Question A
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Answer scheme
When the eddah period has expired
(2 mark)
Talaq through fasakh
(1 mark)
Talaq pronounced before the consummation of the marriage
(1 mark)
Talaq through khulu’.
(1 mark)
Give four (4) instances of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(4 marks)

Sample answer 4 Question A
Talaq Bain Sughra is a dissolution of marriage by parties after they consumption and must make a new ceremony of marriage and new mas kahwin when want to return to original marriage state or to revocable after period of iddah. For instances of Talaq Bain Sughra is Khul, Fasakh, Ta’liq and divorced by one or two talaq.
1.9 out of 4 marks

Question B
What are the consequences of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(6 marks)

Answer scheme
Dissolves a marriage instantly
(1 mark)
at the time of pronouncement.
(1 mark)
The rights of the wife cease as soon as the talaq is pronounced.
(1 mark)
If the ex-husband wishes to resume marital relationship with his ex-wife,
(1 mark)
he has to undergo a new marriage ceremony with her
(1 mark)
with a new mas kahwin.
(1 mark)

Sample answer 1 Question B

Talaq ba’in sughra is an irrevocable divorce. In the other words, a spouses cannot revoked the talaq pronounced by ruju’.

However, if they are intent to return back to each other. They need to come with a new mahr and new aqd.

A rights of wife is ceased immediately after the pronouncement of talaq. However, she is still entitled for a mutaah, share in harta sepencarian etc. 2.4 out of 6 marks

Question B
What are the consequences of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(6 marks)
Answer scheme
Dissolves a marriage instantly
(1 mark)
at the time of pronouncement.
(1 mark)
The rights of the wife cease as soon as the talaq is pronounced.
(1 mark)
If the ex-husband wishes to resume marital relationship with his ex-wife,
(1 mark)
he has to undergo a new marriage ceremony with her
(1 mark)
with a new mas kahwin.
(1 mark)

Sample answer 2 Question B
1. The husband can ruju with the wife because not talaq three the husband must marriage ceremony.
2. The wife diverce on the time prenenet baby must the born baby, the husband can ruju,with the wife.
3. The husband diverce the wife not consummeted not iddah,
4. The husband diverce the wife in the time period women must the wife 3 suci for the husband ruju.
0.1 out of 6 marks

Question B
What are the consequences of Talaq Ba’in Sughra.
(6 marks)

Answer scheme
Dissolves a marriage instantly
(1 mark)
at the time of pronouncement.
(1 mark)
The rights of the wife cease as soon as the talaq is pronounced.
(1 mark)
If the ex-husband wishes to resume marital relationship with his ex-wife,
(1 mark)
he has to undergo a new marriage ceremony with her
(1 mark)
with a new mas kahwin.
(1 mark)

Sample answer 3 Question B
The consequences of talaq Ba’in Sughra are where the husband does not agree to voluntarily pronounce a talaq, but the parties agree to a divorce by redemption or cerai tebus talaq, the Court shall, after the amount of the payment of tebus talaq is agreed upon by the parties, cause the husband to pronounce a divorce by redemption.

Talaq Ba’in Sughra is three talak, but when the husband want to return him wife, he must view marriage. And did not to wait the wife to marriage another man.
O out of 6 marks.

Nor refutes MQA’s claim that it does not know her identity

Dear Readers

I refute MQA’s claim in theSun at page 6 being reported on Tuesday April 21 2009 that it does not know my identity in an article “Probe into lecturer’s ’sympathy marks’ case”. I complained about Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia’s (USIM) unethical practice forcing me to manipulate marks to Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif of Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein on the 10th of June 2008 (10/6/2008). Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein called me and informed me that MQA can only investigate allegedly “unethical Public Universities” in January 2009.

This year, I sent an email to Ketua Pengarah Biro Pengaduan Awam Dr Tam Weng Wah regarding USIM’s unethical practice forcing me to manipulate marks whereby I explained to him that I gave extra classes to the students after they performed badly in the mid semester exam. Then Dr Tam forwarded my email to En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad (mohdasri@bpa.jpm.my) on Wednesday March 4 2009 at 7:55:39pm which states the following:
“KPP (A4), Disertakan maklumat tambahan untuk tindakan susulan. Sekian, terima kasih. KP” This email by Dr Tam was being cced (cc) to the aforementioned Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif MQA, Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein at syedahmad@mqa.gov.my.

Then on Thursday March 5 2009 at 1:01:05 PM En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad (mohdasri@bpa.jpm.my) sent an email to the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) which reads the following:
“Tuan, Dikemukakan bersama-sama ini email aduan daripada pengadu untuk mendapat makluman dan tindakan pihak tuan jua. Dipohon maklum balas daripada pihak tuan dikemukakan terus kepada pengadu dan sesalinan dipanjangkan kepada BPA untuk tujuan rekod.Di atas kerjasama dan tindakan segera di pihak tuan amatlah dihargai. Sekian, terima kasih.” This email by En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad was also being cced (cc) to the aforementioned Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif MQA, Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein at syedahmad@mqa.gov.my.

Based on the abovementioned explanation, I hereby rebut MQA’s spokesman Muhammad Muammar Gaddafi’s claim in theSun which reads “..we do not know who the teacher is”.

Please be informed. Thank You.

Sincerely,
Nor

Did the Cabinet decide on undergrad politics? Rockybru

http://rockybru.com.my/2010/08/did-cabinet-decide-on-undgrad-politics.html

Did the Cabinet decide on undergrad politics?

UPDATED, 5.45pm 12/8 Aah, the Cabinet did discuss undergrads’ involvement in politics yesterday, and it was very clear that while undergrads may take active part in politics (which is already provided for under the Act), they should not hold any position in a political party. Original article:- NOTE TO EDITORS: AUGUST 11, 2010 [received 6:54:20pm yesterday] The Office of the Higher Education Minister has requested the media not to publish the news about Cabinet prohibiting undergraduates from involvement in politics.

The news that Bernama sent out earlier yesterday:-

CABINET PROHIBITS UNDERGRADUATES FROM INVOLVEMENT IN POLITICS

Putrajaya, Aug 11 (Bernama) – The Cabinet today decided not to allow undergraduates to be involved in political parties, said Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin. However, he said the decision did not prevent the undergraduates from keeping abreast with political developments in the country. “This is because Section 15 of the Universities and University Colleges Act (UUCA) 1971 is sufficient where an undergraduate can be involved in political activities after obtaining permission from the Vice-Chancellor,” he said in a statement to Bernama, here today. Yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said the government would uphold the restriction on students of public institutions of higher learning to be involved in politics despite the call to allow university students to be involved actively in political parties. Muhyiddin said the amendments to the UUCA earlier were sufficient as it gave more freedom to undergraduates to voice their opinions in campus. – BERNAMA

So what’s the story, Khaled? Did the Cabinet make that decision, or not? If it did, why was the media not allowed to carry the news? And did you know that Khairy Jamaluddin, the Umno Youth chief, had already shot his response to the Cabinet decision to Malaysiakini, which reads like this: 11/8: Khairy Jamaludddin describes the cabinet decision not to allow student involvement in party politics as ‘gutless’ and ‘outdated’./MKINI at 1:25 PM