So what is wrong with your school’s ‘badge’? This article identifies common issues in the design and conceptualisation of Malaysian school badges, and offers guidelines to assist in the creation of emblems that are memorable, impactful, and conceptually sound—designs that can be cherished and passed down through generations.
Before we begin, some clarification
To begin, let’s clarify terminology. The correct term is school emblem. It is called a badge only when the emblem appears on a person’s attire or belongings — in that context, it signals allegiance to the school. In all other cases, emblem is the appropriate term. From this point forward, I will use school emblem consistently.
While I’ve explored the origins of our school emblems in earlier work, a brief recap may help new readers. The visual style of school emblems in Malaysia is rooted in our colonial history, as many early schools were established by British authorities and Christian missionaries. As a result, the use of heraldry became the visual standard for later institutions.
What is heraldry? Heraldry is a system of visual communication that emerged in medieval Europe, primarily for the purpose of identification. In England, it is believed to have developed during the late 11th or early 12th century. This system employed coats of arms (shields), symbolic devices known as armorial bearings (or just arms), and a set of colours called tinctures — combined in specific ways to create distinct identities. In many ways, heraldic emblems were the medieval equivalents of modern logos or trademarks.
In Malaysia, the use of heraldry extends beyond school emblems — it appears in government bodies, corporations, sports associations, foundations, and more. It is fair to say that, like many countries around the world, we have adapted the discipline as our own, and this is likely to continue into the foreseeable future.
With that context established, we now turn to the core focus of this article: the issues surrounding the creation of our public-school emblems.
What’s wrong?
The first issue is operational in nature: Does the ministry responsible have established procedures for creating school emblems? I would like to believe so. However, judging by the results seen across numerous school emblems, I remain doubtful.
To seek clarity, I contacted several departments within the Ministry of Education via email and posed two key questions:
- When a new school is established, who is responsible for creating its emblem?
- Is there a formal guideline for the design and creation of school emblems?
Finding the right department — and the right person — to answer such specific questions is a challenge. Receiving a response would be even rarer, considering the heavy workload and systemic pressures faced by ministry officials. Frankly, I am not surprised to have not received an answer thus far.
Out of curiosity (and growing exasperation), I turned to ChatGPT with my query. Its response was telling:
“There doesn’t appear to be a publicly available, standardized guideline from KPM (Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia) specifically governing the design or creation of individual public-school emblems or badges.”
As it turns out, even the algorithm couldn’t locate anything official — except, amusingly, one of my earlier articles on the topic (see figure 5). This only underscores how under-researched and overlooked this area truly is.
If the ministry does indeed lack formal guidelines or procedures for the creation of public-school emblems, then the recurring design issues I’ve observed become more understandable.
In many instances, it appears that the responsibility of designing the emblem falls to the appointed headmaster or headmistress. This was the case for schools such as Kuen Cheng High School (Kuala Lumpur), SMK St. Thomas (Kuching), and SJK(T) Lorong Jawa (Seremban). It is likely that many other schools follow a similar pattern.
Common Issues with Malaysian School Emblems
Allowing schools to design their own emblems is, in principle, a positive step. However, if — as suspected — there is no clear guideline or support in the process, several recurring issues tend to emerge:
- Violations of the Rule of Tincture (RoT) — improper use of colour combinations that reduce clarity and legibility.
- Insufficient understanding of heraldic conventions:
a) The use of written text directly on the shield
b) Displaying the school’s name on the scroll instead of a motto
c) Improper shield divisions and false quartering - Lack of unity and visual focus — emblem elements appear disjointed or cluttered.
- Repetition of common devices — such as books, torches, or gearwheels, leading to visual redundancy and reduced distinctiveness.
- Weak conceptualisation and execution — emblems often lack symbolic depth or show signs of rushed or unrefined design.
1. Rule of Tincture Violations: In heraldry, seven tinctures are traditionally used: black, red, blue, green, purple, yellow, and white. Of these, yellow and white are considered metals (gold and silver), while the rest are colours. The Rule of Tincture (RoT) states that metal should not be placed on metal, and colour should not be placed on colour — a principle designed to maintain visual contrast, especially at a distance or when the design is reproduced at a small scale. These guidelines remain highly relevant in modern logo and identity design, where clarity and legibility are essential.
2. Insufficient Understanding of Heraldic Conventions: Heraldry is not native to this region; it was introduced during the colonial era. Yet today, it has become part of our visual vernacular — not only in Malaysia but globally. Many individuals remain unaware that the emblems they design for associations, corporations, government agencies, sports clubs, and schools are rooted in heraldic traditions. Fewer still are familiar with the rules and conventions that govern its proper use.
Beyond the Rule of Tincture discussed earlier, several other conventions are often misunderstood or overlooked:
a) Text on Shields: Emblems based on heraldry should not contain written text. This principle dates to medieval Europe, where widespread illiteracy made symbolic, visual communication essential. Heraldry thus evolved as a purely graphic language. The only exception is when books (or similar objects) are used as arms — in such cases, letters may appear on the book itself. Otherwise, words should appear only on the scroll beneath the shield (typically reserved for a motto).
b) Scroll Used for School Name: It’s common to find school names placed on the scroll beneath the shield — a misuse of heraldic form. Traditionally, the scroll bears a motto, not the institution’s name. In proper heraldic design, the emblem itself — through distinctive form and symbolism — should be enough to identify the institution. The school’s name may appear separately beneath the emblem, but not as part of it.
c) Improper Shield Division and False Quartering: Many school emblems use divisions of the shield that do not follow heraldic standards. Traditional methods include:
-
- Per pale (vertical)
- Per fess (horizontal)
- Per bend and per bend sinister (diagonal)
- Per chevron (inverted V)
- Per pall (three divisions from the centre)
- Per saltire (X-shape)
The per cross division (a vertical and horizontal intersection) is typically reserved for marshalling — combining arms from both sides of a family to reflect lineage. This should only be considered in institutional design if two distinct schools have merged and wish to retain legacy devices or arms. Otherwise, such quartering may be deemed as a false quartering.
In many cases, shield divisions are improvised based on personal preference rather than heraldic logic — resulting in awkward, imbalanced, or inauthentic forms.
3. Designs that lack unity and focus: In many Malaysian school emblems, the symbols — properly referred to as arms, charges, or devices — are often assembled without careful consideration of how they relate to one another. As a result, these emblems tend to lack visual unity. Another common issue is the absence of a clear focal point. Strong emblems typically feature a dominant device that anchors the design and draws attention. Without a central, unique element, the emblem risks becoming visually confusing and less memorable.
4. Repetitive use of arms reducing distinction and uniqueness: This is perhaps the single most pervasive issue among all those observed in Malaysian school emblems. The overuse of armorial bearings (arms) like books, torches, Olympic rings, industrial cogwheels, or compasses that I’ve encountered in my research casts school emblems into a sea of sameness — devoid of distinction, uniqueness, and ultimately, memorability. They are simply forgettable. A school emblem is a symbolic representation of the institution, and it must be unique to the school.
5. Poor conceptualisation and crafting: The ideas behind a school emblem can be drawn from a wide range of sources — historical anecdotes, the school’s founding story, local geography, monuments, unique flora or fauna, or even crops farmed in the area. A school emblem does not need to rely solely on education-related symbols or devices; any of these locally significant elements can be conceptually used to represent the school’s identity. After all, a school often reflects the character of its community. Unfortunately, many school emblems suffer from weak conceptual grounding and poor execution. The crafting — whether hand-drawn or digitally rendered — is often subpar, which not only affects the emblem’s aesthetic appeal but also its memorability.
Why a unique and adored school emblem matters?
School teachers and administrators have a lot on their plate. Many are grappling with serious, even existential challenges that continue to grow. In comparison, fixing the school emblem may seem trivial — hardly something that merits attention amidst more pressing concerns. On the surface, that may be true. But I’d like to make a case for why it matters.
A school emblem is not a decorative symbol, it is a visual identity, a cultural marker and a point of pride. When thought is put into the design of a school emblem it can become a powerful representation of the school’s history, value and aspirations. It is not necessary that a school’s emblem reflect all these all at once of course, as this would often lead to a lack of unity or focus on the design. A thoughtful design could reflect where the school comes from or what it stands for or what is hopes to instil in its students.
A unique school emblem will attract a following and foster a sense of belonging in those who are allied to it. Students, teachers, alumni and the surrounding community would cherish and connect to a school emblem that is distinct and meaningful than one that looks like hundreds of others. It can inspire a school spirit, unity and loyalty.
A school emblem that is adored and cherished becomes part of the school’s lore and is passed down through generations. It would be proudly worn on uniforms and displayed publicly and proudly as a banner to rally behind in sporting events or the like.
In contrast, a generic and poorly executed school emblem will fail to leave a lasting impression. They don’t speak to identity, history, or purpose — and in doing so, miss a vital opportunity to anchor the school in both memory and meaning.
The following are some examples of revised and or reconceptualised school emblems (before and after):
Before:
After:
Before:
After:
How can you go about fixing your school emblem?
You may consider the following process when revising your school emblem:
- Identify someone in the school, preferably the art teacher to lead a committee of talented students to conceptualise, design and illustrate your school emblem. Trust the instincts of those tasked to create the emblem.
- Choose your shield shape. But bear in mind, that the shape of the shield in heraldry is immaterial. What is important is the arms (charges, devices or symbols) used in them. This combination must be unique and can adorn any type of shield thereafter. So, in essence the shield shape can change but the combination of arms in them must not.
- Choose your colours and metals. Keep your colours limited to 2 or 3 at the most. You can choose more but more colours mean less impact.
- Choose your arms or charges. Here is where it gets difficult. Draw upon historical anecdotes, the school’s founding story, local geography, monuments, unique flora or fauna, or even crops farmed in the area. Unify the design by using a single focus point — device or charge.
- Fridge test the design and then commit to one. Sometimes it is good to print out and pin up the design in a visible place to see if it is memorable and impactful immediately.
I have created a simple dual language guideline in English and Bahasa Malaysia to help you through the process. Feel free to share the following guideline.
If you would like to run a workshop revise or review your school’s emblem, you can get in touch with me here.