Some 450,000 students sat for the SPM exam last year.
Muhyiddin said teachers would also be able to focus better if students were only allowed to take up to 10 subjects because they would not be burdened with teaching other subjects.
“Parents also will not have to rush their children for too many tuition classes.”
On the grading system, Muhyid-din said instead of giving students 1A, B or C, their grades would include A+, A and A- from next year to make it more effective in deciding who was most qualified for a scholarship.
(quote from The Star)
I have put the quoted phrases in bold as I found they are arguable. I wonder if the government did pinpoint the real flaws existed in the previous SPM exam system, analyse deeply and then make the decision wisely.
- Easier way? Even if the subjects are limited, the problems remain unsolved if there are still a bunch of candidates with a string of A1s under the artificial low threshold to score an A1 for each subject ( except BC ) . The JPA will be in hot soup again, just imagine that there are possibly more than two thousands 10 A1s scorers waiting for their deserved oversea scholarships, yet not to mention the bumiputras and the poors to be taken care.
- Focus better? If they really mean it, why do we ( non-Malays ) need to study Pendidikan Moral ? It is utterly useless!
- Tuition classes? Normally students who attend insane number of tuition classes just don't know how to manage their own schedule. They follow the tuition teachers blindly, but it has nothing to do with taking more subjects which don't really need tuition. It is subjective and depends on the students. Some students don't need tuition at all.
- Grading system? Well, what is the difference between getting 10 A1s and getting 10 A+s? I thought the term CGPA will be recommended when I saw grading system. To really make it more effective in deciding who is qualified for a scholarship, improve the grading inflation is the only way and once it is really tough to secure the A+, I believe no more candidates will consider taking so many subjects.
There will be another change soon, which is now debated hotly. Perhaps the controversy arose when the JPA scholarship had not been distributed evenly is the main reason to push the government to make the decision of limiting SPM subjects from the year 2011, but what is the motive of changing English to a must-pass-subject which is as same as Bahasa Melayu, to secure the SPM certificate? This is a stepping stone to bring the deteriorating command in English back from the edge but I don't hope to see that another artificial threshold is created again after finding that there are just too many who can't make it.
Making English a must-pass subject is a good move. But they must make sure that the 1A is for 85%, 2A for 80%-84%, etc. and keep the passing mark of 40%.
ReplyDeleteIf they keep lowering the threshold passing mark, we will forever have people taking things for granted and come up with things like "I are Henry Yew" or something like that.
Hi Henry =)
ReplyDeleteOnce upon a time I did take it for granted but I have now realised the importance to acquire proficiency in the languages we have been learning, despite of just securing an A. Language is a tool for us to absorb further in other subjects and traverse in the field we wish.
I believe that you just need to score above 65% to get an A in SPM 2008 English paper, or maybe lower -__-
Actually, making English a must-pass subject is not a bad idea. After all, nowadays if you wanna make it in the real world, you gotta know a bit of English. And if you intend to get a scholarship to go oversea, of course you must speak good English.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with the 10 subjects. Because if you read in newspapers, students are debating about why those getting 10 A1s get the scholarship but those getting 16 A1s doesn't get the scholarship. So with only 10 subs, instead of focusing on the number of A1s, we'll focus more on the quality of A1s they obtained.
And that brings us to the grading process. Though I must say how they intend to classify the score, it is a good move to use A+, A, and A-. Like I say, it's the quality that counts, not the quantity :)
I do agree with you regarding Pendidikan Moral. Though I must say, that instead of dropping the sub altogether, why don't they change the way they grade our morality. Instead of making it 100% based on theory, they should have included 50% of community service. That would be a good move, don't u think??? :)