Malaysian Minister of Education announced that students sitting for SPM (O-levels) examination would only be allowed to sit for a maximum 10 subjects. Personally, I felt this is the way forward from the education viewpoint.
Why it's good?
Firstly, this initiative reduce the highly-intensive rat-race for scoring more A's in examination. Under the current open examination, it seems almost "ridiculous" to have students sitting for 23 subjects, possibly all the available subjects. However, what's the point? It is just producing "Jack of all trades, master of none".
Secondly, this limitation is the right way to re-align the focus of education, which should be about learning and not examination. In a way, by reducing the numbers, students can now give more attention to the learning of the subjects, rather than preparation for examination. After all, the purpose of learning is to master the subject.
Thirdly, this initiative also enable students to think carefully about the subjects that they are interested. I recalled that when I was studying in STPM (A-levels), I have to make an important decision in choosing the subjects due to the limitation of only 5 subjects. Therefore, I was forced to seriously think about my strengths, weaknesses, abilities as well as the practicality of the subjects that I will be taking. After making such decision, learning seems to be more "purposeful" and interesting.
What else need to be done about SPM education?
Firstly, the Minister, policy-makers and educationalists should consider reducing the number of core subjects in SPM examination. As far as I could remember, students have to take Malay Language, English Language, Mathematics, Islamic Studies or Moral Education and History. Perhaps, consideration should be given to reduce the number of core subjects. Although I do not doubt the importance of history, but forcing everyone to study history for the sake of examination certainly isn't the best way to learn history. As for moral education, my frank opinion is that this subject should not even exist in the first place; plainly redundant and ridiculous.
Secondly, as I applaud the initiative to place a maximum cap to the number of subjects, I also wish to contend that the minimum cap to be reduced or removed. In a way, the system should be more flexible for students at the other spectrum, those with low academic abilities, to take less number of subjects. It is important to note that, while public examinations at Year 6 and Form 3 require all students to attempt similar number of subjects, nevertheless, considering those who failed terribly in these previous examinations, it is almost unthinkable that they will be able to cope with 8-10 subjects at this level of examination. Perhaps, it would be more practical and useful for these students to concentrate on two or three subjects, rather than taking 10 subjects and failing all of them. After all, education is about learning, and more importantly, should be an enjoying experience for all.
Why it's good?
Firstly, this initiative reduce the highly-intensive rat-race for scoring more A's in examination. Under the current open examination, it seems almost "ridiculous" to have students sitting for 23 subjects, possibly all the available subjects. However, what's the point? It is just producing "Jack of all trades, master of none".
Secondly, this limitation is the right way to re-align the focus of education, which should be about learning and not examination. In a way, by reducing the numbers, students can now give more attention to the learning of the subjects, rather than preparation for examination. After all, the purpose of learning is to master the subject.
Thirdly, this initiative also enable students to think carefully about the subjects that they are interested. I recalled that when I was studying in STPM (A-levels), I have to make an important decision in choosing the subjects due to the limitation of only 5 subjects. Therefore, I was forced to seriously think about my strengths, weaknesses, abilities as well as the practicality of the subjects that I will be taking. After making such decision, learning seems to be more "purposeful" and interesting.
What else need to be done about SPM education?
Firstly, the Minister, policy-makers and educationalists should consider reducing the number of core subjects in SPM examination. As far as I could remember, students have to take Malay Language, English Language, Mathematics, Islamic Studies or Moral Education and History. Perhaps, consideration should be given to reduce the number of core subjects. Although I do not doubt the importance of history, but forcing everyone to study history for the sake of examination certainly isn't the best way to learn history. As for moral education, my frank opinion is that this subject should not even exist in the first place; plainly redundant and ridiculous.
Secondly, as I applaud the initiative to place a maximum cap to the number of subjects, I also wish to contend that the minimum cap to be reduced or removed. In a way, the system should be more flexible for students at the other spectrum, those with low academic abilities, to take less number of subjects. It is important to note that, while public examinations at Year 6 and Form 3 require all students to attempt similar number of subjects, nevertheless, considering those who failed terribly in these previous examinations, it is almost unthinkable that they will be able to cope with 8-10 subjects at this level of examination. Perhaps, it would be more practical and useful for these students to concentrate on two or three subjects, rather than taking 10 subjects and failing all of them. After all, education is about learning, and more importantly, should be an enjoying experience for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment