Concerns about revamping education, abolishing exams and ensuring effective learning

Changes, reforms and updates with the objective of improving our education system are necessary. The minister of education’s decision seems final — no more national exams will be conducted at the end of primary schooling and at the Form Three level, as a checkpoint prior to the SPM exams at the end of secondary schooling. The heavy dependence on an examination-based education system, which served us in the past, is now passé and no longer suitable as a measurement of effective learning. However, it is understood that exams are needed to serve as an indication of academic performance. There is no turning back on the decision to abolish the UPSR and PT3. The inconvenient truth is that only strong sentiments that play on race, religion and language have the propensity to alter and shape our education.

Sadly, a good policy, the teaching and learning of science and mathematics in English (PPSMI) was abolished in 2010. But it was reincarnated in 2016 as the dual language programme (DLP). Though lacklustre in its implementation, it is still currently ongoing. Sarawak, meanwhile, has taken the step to pursue DLP in all schools. PPSMI and DLP were meant to nurture our children to be STEM literate and globally ready from young. However, these policies do not go well with certain perceived sentiments.

DLP is considered a better programme because it provides the option for students and their parents to choose English as a medium of instruction for the subjects of science and mathematics, a liberal approach unlike PPSMI that is being enforced nationwide on all pupils. But DLP too has its challenges, and along the way, less emphasis was given to its importance. The scaling up of the programme to more schools and the opening of more classes seems to have stopped. Instead, some schools are forced to abolish DLP classes, and parents are being shortchanged as they are unable to choose DLP.

As with any implementation process, the challenge for any policy and programme decisions is that they must be backed up by a solid and proper implementation plan based on correct and authentic data. Leaders in the Ministry of Education (MOE) and schools too must be genuine and be accountable in carrying out their duty with integrity. This would ensure that students under their charge would benefit most and that learning happens regardless of the policy, programmes or whether the assessment is based on exams or not.

The Parent Action Group for Education Malaysia (PAGE) is of the view that the school-based assessment (PBS) is progressive. The goal of PBS is to encourage learning, while producing well-rounded and balanced individuals. High stakes testing in an exam-centric system, on the other hand, creates rote learning, memorisation and regurgitation of facts, while producing expert test takers. None of these qualities are valued in the real world. Problem solvers, critical thinkers, innovators and creative individuals are what we would like to see more of being developed by improving student outcomes. In essence, the school-based approach would enable our students to learn for the sake of learning, and not worry about getting it right or wrong, but instead learning why it is wrong and how to do better through feedback from their teachers. Remedial actions and interventions are to take place for those who do not reach the targeted benchmark. PBS combines various ways to evaluate learning, combining methods such as exams, projects, exploration and class activities, among many others.

PBS is not new in our school system. It has been used in tandem with the UPSR and PT3 since 2011. It was introduced with the new curriculum of KSSR and KSSM (kurikulum standard sekolah rendah dan menengah). Therefore, MOE would have data to support the view that PBS is better than having national exams. The question is, is PBS more effective than the UPSR or PT3 as a measurement of learning and performance? In theory, PBS, which has been running for at least 10 years, should show that our students performed better in international benchmarking tests like PISA 2018 and PISA 2022 compared to previous years PISA of non-PBS cohorts. However, that is not the case. Despite PBS, the country’s results have been constantly at the third tier. If the PBS system is to provide constant assessment and intervention, then why is it that 42% of learners at age 11, who are in Standard Five, are still unable to read, write and count?

It is no wonder that many parents want the return of the UPSR and PT3, because they feel that students and teachers take teaching and learning more seriously regardless of the rigorous grilling. At least there is an indication of the standard of performance across the country and that there is a target to work towards. Parents are concerned that their children will be ill-prepared for the SPM. Indeed, their concerns are valid. It points to the fact that our teachers are not ready to go full board with PBS when they are more suited and trained for the exam-centric system. Data from the Trust Schools Programme (TSP) shows that the capacity and capabilities of the teachers to implement the PBS method is only at the 25% to 30% level, whereas the sweet spot to effectively run PBS is to build and develop teachers’ ability to achieve the 70% to 80% level.

Unless and until MOE develops the capacity and capabilities of the teachers, through proper training such as the TSP model, only then can we see the improvements in students’ learning and outcomes. Therefore, more focus, resources and support must be given to our educators to improve their teaching skills. If not, the trust deficit in our education system will be ever present.

The Edge