assessment profile of malaysia: high‐stakes external examinations dominate
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [Simon Fraser University]On: 11 November 2014, At: 16:02Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Assessment in Education: Principles,Policy & PracticePublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/caie20
Assessment profile of Malaysia:high‐stakes external examinationsdominateSaw Lan Ong aa Malaysia Science University (USM) ,Published online: 04 Feb 2010.
To cite this article: Saw Lan Ong (2010) Assessment profile of Malaysia: high‐stakes externalexaminations dominate, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 17:1, 91-103, DOI:10.1080/09695940903319752
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09695940903319752
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & PracticeVol. 17, No. 1, February 2010, 91–103
ISSN 0969-594X print/ISSN 1465-329X online© 2010 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/09695940903319752http://www.informaworld.com
PROFILES OF EDUCATION ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS WORLDWIDE
Assessment profile of Malaysia: high-stakes external examinations dominate
Saw Lan Ong*
Malaysia Science University (USM)Taylor and FrancisCAIE_A_432149.sgm10.1080/09695940903319752Assessment in Education0969-594X (print)/1465-329X (online)Original Article2009Taylor & Francis163000000November 2009Ong [email protected]
Malaysia is a federation of 13 states located in South-east Asia. The country consistsof two geographical regions; Peninsular Malaysia (also known as West Malaysia) andMalaysian Borneo (also known as East Malaysia) separated by the South China Sea.
The Portuguese, the Dutch, and later the British established themselves as colonialmasters in this region from the sixteenth century. In the nineteenth century, there wasan influx of Chinese and Indian immigrants into the country as a result of the Europeancolonisers opening tin mines and rubber estates. This historical background hasresulted in a nation with diverse ethnicities, cultures, and religions. In 1957, Malayaobtained its independence from British colonial rule. The population as of 2006 was26.6 million, comprising 52% Malays, 30% Chinese, 8% Indians, about 7% indigenousgroups in Sabah and Sarawak, and 3% others (Ministry of Education 2006a).
A historical review of public education development
Prior to attaining independence, there were separate schools with different media ofinstruction, curricula, methods, and standards of education for the three dominantethnic groups, that is, the Malays, Chinese and Indians (Ministry of Education 2001).In addition to the three types of vernacular schools, there were also English-mediumschools established by the British colonial government, individuals and missionarysocieties to provide a western education. Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools wereset up by their respective communities as fee-paying schools. Free education wasprovided by the government only in Malay vernacular schools. Secondary schoolingwas only available in the English-medium schools and the independent Chineseschools. Malay-medium and Tamil-medium education were limited to the primarylevel, so students from these schools continued their secondary and higher educationin English-medium schools.
After independence, the education policy consolidated the diverse school systemsinto a single, cohesive national education system. The National Educational Policy(Educational Act 1961) was based on the Razak Report (Federation of Malaya 1956)and the Rahman Talib Report (Federation of Malaya 1960). These two reports empha-sised national unity as the foundation of the national education system to ensure thewell-being and interests of the multiracial Malaysian society. All existing primaryschools were converted to either national or national-type schools, while English and
*Email: [email protected]
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
92 S.L. Ong
Chinese secondary schools were converted to national-type secondary schools. Innational schools the medium of instruction was Malay, while the media of instructionin national-type primary schools were English and the various ethnic vernacularlanguages respectively. Malay, the national language, was made a compulsory subjectin these national-type schools. In 1968, the English-medium national-type schoolswere gradually converted into national Malay-medium schools. The conversion wascompleted at the secondary level by 1980 when the Malaysian Certificate of Educa-tion examination was conducted in Malay only. By 1983, Malay became the mediumof instruction for tertiary level education (Ministry of Education 1985).
Today Malay language is the medium of instruction in all national schools and acompulsory subject in Chinese and Tamil primary schools. English is taught as asecond or additional language in all national and national-type schools. In 2003, thegovernment implemented a policy of teaching science and mathematics in English forPrimary one, Form 1 and Lower 6; previously, the delivery of mathematics andscience subjects had been in Malay. The decision to use English was based on therationale that mastery of English is regarded as an important mechanism for directacquisition of knowledge in the field of science and technology (Ainan Abdul Samad2003). It was intended that in 2008, the language of instruction for subjects in scienceand mathematics at all levels will be in English only (Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia(KPM) 2004b). In response to pressure from mother tongue language groups, theEducation Minister has reversed this policy to the use of Malay, Chinese and Tamilfor the teaching of science and mathematics in the primary schools in the year 2012(The Star 2009). The impact of this innovation and its reversal is outside the scope ofthis paper.
Educational administration
The educational administration in Malaysia is highly centralised with four hierarchicallevels; that is, federal, state, district and the lowest level, school. Major decision- andpolicy-making take place at the federal level represented by the Ministry of Education(MoE), which consists of the Curriculum Development Centre, the school division,and the Malaysian Examination Syndicate (MES). However, the ultimate authority ineducation is parliament; policy issues that have wider ramifications are referred to thecabinet before final decision-making. At the state level, the 14 state education depart-ments coordinate and monitor the implementation of national education programmes,projects, and activities for the MoE. The district education offices serve as effectivelinks between the school and the state education department.
The Malaysian government is committed to providing education for all to the endof upper secondary education. At the primary level, 90% of children attend govern-ment and government-assisted education institutions (MoE 2006a). The MoE targetsfurther increases in educational participation, especially for children aged 6-11. Theparticipation rate decreases to 85% at the lower secondary level, where the childrenare aged 12-14. At the same time, the participation rate for children aged 15-16 atupper secondary level education is only 71%. This pattern of decline continues forpost-secondary and college education with 34% enrolment rate, and a mere 9% foruniversity. An important note about these figures is that they do not include attendanceat private educational institutions. The participation rate for each level would behigher if enrolments at private education institutions were included. This especiallyapplies to the university level; many private universities were established in Malaysia
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 93
during the mid-1990s as a result of government efforts to expand access to tertiaryeducation.
The Malaysian education system
The current formal education system is based on the British schooling system. Itconsists of four phases: six years of primary education, three years of lower secondaryeducation, two years of upper secondary education and another two years of pre-university education (either Form 6 or matriculation). The pre-university level isfollowed by higher education provided in two types of institutions – colleges anduniversities. Since 1999, Malaysian children are assured 11 years of free compulsoryschooling and most students are promoted automatically to upper secondary schooling.
The 1996 Education Act that regulates the provision of pre-school, primary andsecondary education was reviewed in 2002 to ensure that every child in Malaysia hasthe right to primary education. Apart from this Act, the education system is guided bythe National Education Philosophy which states:
Education in Malaysia is an on-going effort to produce Malaysian citizens who areknowledgeable and competent, who possess high moral standards, and who are wellresponsible and capable of achieving high level of personal well-being as well as beingable to contribute to the harmony and betterment of the family, the society and nation atlarge. (MoE 2001, 16)
Most children between four and six years of age begin their education atpreschools which are set up by both government and non-government agencies, andthe private sector. Primary education begins at the age of seven years. There are twotypes of primary school: the national primary school which uses Malay language asthe medium of instruction and the national-type primary school which uses eitherChinese or Tamil. The purpose of primary education is the acquisition of reading,writing, and arithmetic skills. At the end of primary education, students take the UjianPenilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) [Primary School Achievement Test]. In line withthe aspirations of the government to provide a general education for at least nine yearsto all children, students proceed to three years of lower secondary education (Form 1to Form 3) after primary school. The UPSR results provide information regardingstudents’ achievement at the end of primary education to the lower secondary schools.
At lower secondary level, all schools use Malay language as the medium ofinstruction. English is a compulsory subject and has been the language of instructionfor science and mathematics since 2003. Lower secondary school offers a comprehen-sive education programme where the curriculum comprises core subjects for allpupils, plus a wide range of elective subjects. Electives include subjects from the arts,sciences, and vocational and technical subjects. The varied curriculum aims at provid-ing pupils with opportunities to pursue a variety of future occupational or educationaloptions in the tenth year of their education (Lee 2002). Pupils sit for the PenilaianMenengah Rendah (PMR) [Lower Secondary Examination] at the end of the ninthyear of schooling.
As from 1999, all PMR students are promoted to Form 4 (first year of uppersecondary schooling, nominally aged 15). For example, 96% of the total number ofForm 3 pupils in 2004 were enrolled in Form 4 in 2005 (MoE 2006b). Based on choiceor lower secondary assessment performance, pupils enter Form 4 arts or sciencestreams. Some students are channelled into technical secondary schools, usually as a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
94 S.L. Ong
result of PMR scores. In 2005, 50% of students were in arts or religious streams, 36%in the science/technical stream, and 14% in the vocational/technology stream (MoE2006b). Upper secondary education is conducted in the Malay language and concludesat the end of two years with the Sijil Pelajaran Menengah (SPM) [Malaysian Certifi-cate Examination].
Pupils are selected for the different post-secondary programmes by the MoE,based on their academic achievement in the SPM. Students may be selected to post-secondary levels consisting of Form 6, the matriculation programme, or college andpolytechnics programmes. For the Form 6 programme, students get offer letters fromthe state education department based on their three best subjects in two main fields ofstudy (i.e., humanities or sciences). Those who are not selected for post-secondaryeducation will leave the school system and enter the job market.
At Form 6, all subjects are conducted in English for the science stream but Malaylanguage continues to be used as the medium of instruction for the humanities. Thepercentage of pupils enrolled in Form 6 in 2005 was a mere 22% of the Form 5 popu-lation in 2004. The majority of Malay students were selected to attend Matriculationcolleges, which are one-year pre-university courses. Matriculation colleges were setup by the MoE to prepare rural indigenous and Malay students for the local publictertiary institution studies after passing the SPM examination.
Public examinations
Like most Asian countries (e.g., Gang 1996; Lim and Tan 1999; Choi 1999); Malaysiaso far has focused on public examination results as important determinants ofstudents’ progression to higher levels of education or occupational opportunities(Chiam 1984). In a study conducted by Marimuthu, Mukherjee and Jasbir (1984), theexamination-oriented education system governed the learning behaviour of nearly halfthe students in their study. They reported that the primary function of schooling wasseen as a passport to employment and the certificates are seen as controlling entry intoprivileged jobs. As a result, the emphasis by students, teachers and parents is onperforming well in public examinations, which are considered the only valid measuresof academic attainment. Other affective characteristics such as values and attitudes,which are important elements in the development of a well-rounded individual withrespect to intellectual, emotional, spiritual, and physical development according to thenational philosophy of education, are irrelevant in this context.
The dominant form of assessment in the Malaysian education system is externalcentralised public examinations. The Malaysian education system requires all studentsto sit for public examinations at the end of each level of schooling. There are four publicexaminations from primary to post-secondary education. These are the Primary SchoolAchievement Test (UPSR) at the end of six years of primary education, the LowerSecondary Examination (PMR) at the end of another three years’ schooling,the Malaysian Certificate of Education (SPM) at the end of 11 years of schooling, andthe Malaysian Higher School Certificate Examination (STPM) or the Higher MalaysianCertificate for Religious Education (STAM) at the end of 13 years’ schooling (MoE2004). Table 1 shows the four public examinations within the education system.
The UPSR, PMR, and SPM examinations are the responsibility of the MES, whilethe STPM is under the jurisdiction of the Malaysian Examination Council (MEC). TheMES and MEC prepare, administer, score, and report test results for all publicexaminations. Score reports from these examinations usually take months to generate
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 95
and usually contain only summary test scores in the form of grades. How examinationscores are converted to grades has not been made known to the public; nevertheless,brief descriptions of the grade system for each examination are provided below. TheMES has confirmed recently that the main purposes of public examinations are forselection of candidates for educational opportunities, employment and certification ofachievement (KPM 2007). Results from public examinations such as SPM and STPMhave been used as one of the important criteria in selection of staff into the govern-ment services. For the last four years, the SPM examination results have been used forthe awards of federal government scholarships.
UPSR
The UPSR evaluates students’ performance in reading, mathematics, and science.Pupils in national schools are tested for Malay Language, English Language,Mathematics, and Science. Pupils in the Chinese and Tamil national-type schools sitan additional Chinese or Tamil language examination. The UPSR tests consist ofmultiple-choice and open-ended items. Results for UPSR are reported in the form ofgrades indicating the levels of achievement. ‘A’ is for Excellent, ‘B’ means Good, ‘C’indicates moderate achievement, ‘D’ is for Weak, while ‘E’ is for Very weak. Thescience practical assessment reports four levels of skill as: ‘1’ for excellent use ofscientific skills; ‘2’ for being able to use scientific skills; ‘3’ for being able to usescientific skills with teacher guidance; and ‘4’ for ability to use scientific skills onlywith teacher help. The UPSR results from 2001–2005 (Table 2) show an increasingpercentage of students achieving the minimum competency level, that is, candidatesobtaining either A, B or C in all papers taken (five papers for students in nationalschools and seven papers for national-type schools). By 2005, a third were still notreaching minimum competency level (MoE 2006b).
Table 1. Public examination in the Malaysian education system*.
Year Public Examination Age
1312
Malaysia Higher Education Certificate, STPM/ Malaysia Higher Religious Certificate
Form 6
1918
1110
Malaysian Certificate of Education, SPMUpper Secondary
Form 4 & 5
1716
987
Lower Secondary Examination, PMRLower Secondary
Form 1, 2 & 3
151413
654321
Primary School Achievement Test-UPSRPrimary School Education
121110
987
Pre-school education 65
*Table extracted from Malaysia Examination Syndicate 2006.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
96 S.L. Ong
PMR
The purpose of the PMR is diagnostic evaluation of student learning. However, indi-vidual results are reported as grades for subjects examined, with little diagnosticpower for lower or upper secondary teachers. Students are tested on eight coresubjects: Malay language, English language, History, Geography, Islamic Educationfor the Muslim pupils and Moral Education for the non-Muslim students, Mathemat-ics, Science, and Integrated Living Skills. The PMR is a combination of centralisedand school-based assessments. School-based assessment, in the form of course work,is conducted in subjects such as Geography, History, Integrated Living Skills, andpractical science. Students’ performance is reported according to each subjectassessed with another grading system. Students’ performance in the practical exami-nations is reported using five levels: Level 1 indicates ‘Good’, 2 ‘Satisfactory’, 3‘Below minimum competency’, 4 that students are ‘Exempted from course work’, and5 that students ‘Do not carry out course work’. The written PMR examinations reportusing letter grades; that is, Grade ‘A’ is ‘Excellent’, ‘B’ is ‘Credit’, ‘C’ is ‘Good’, ‘D’is ‘Meets minimum competency level’, and ‘E’ is ‘Below minimum competencylevel’ (KPM 2004a). Table 3 shows that for the last five years, approximately 60% ofthe pupils pass the PMR Examination (MoE 2006b). This means that about 40% didnot reach the minimum competency level (i.e., grade D) to proceed to upper secondaryschooling. Nevertheless, all students are promoted to Form 4 for the upper secondaryeducation (Lee 2002). However students with Grade E in all subjects are considerednon-academic and are channelled into Vocational and Technical secondary schools toacquire employment skills.
SPM
All secondary schools, whether academic, technical, religious, or special education,prepare students for SPM. The SPM was revised in 1988 to be an open certificate, inwhich all candidates take six core subjects (i.e., Malay, English, Mathematics, Science,History, and Islamic Studies or Moral Education). In addition, students take two ormore elective subjects (MES 2006). Students are not forced into traditional arts andscience streams and now receive a broad-based education that gives students more flex-ibility to learn according to their individual capacity (Lee 2002). SPM examinations
Table 2. Primary School Achievement Test (UPSR) results.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Number of candidates 436,628 464,228 468,129 488,953 499,632% with minimum competency level 50.9 58.2 60.2 64.7 66.7
*Table extracted from Quick Facts: Malaysian Educational Statistics (MoE 2006b).
Table 3. Lower Secondary Examination (PMR) results.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Number of candidates 395,578 388,622 406,306 383,935 413,358% with minimum competency level 55.8 62.7 61.5 61.9 64.9
*Table extracted from Quick Facts: Malaysian Educational Statistics (MoE 2006b).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 97
serve as the basis for selection of candidates into Form 6 and as a gateway examinationfor various private institutions of higher learning. It became considerably high-stakesfive years ago when the federal government awarded scholarships to pupils whoperformed well on SPM. Students who are successful with the SPM proceed to the post-secondary education of Form 6 or matriculation.
The centralised examinations are normally written tests consisting of multiple-choiceitems, short-answer constructed-response items, as well as essay items. In addition,school-based assessments are conducted for subjects like Malay and English languagein the form of oral examinations, project work is conducted for moral education, andscience practical tests for science, physics, chemistry, and biology. In addition, modular-and competency-based assessments have been adopted for vocational subjects at SPMlevel to assist with skills acquisition relevant to the working world (MoE 2004). Compo-nents include subject knowledge and related skills and attitudes to performing assignedtasks according to MES-developed standards. Students’ performance is reported in theform of modular certificates which indicate the number of modules completed. The SPMOpen Certificate Examination requires a student to pass only the Malay language paperto obtain a certificate. The SPM certificate reports the grades of all subjects taken withoutan overall aggregate and classification of candidates. According to the guidelines byMES (2006), grades ‘1A’ and ‘2A’ are interpreted as excellent, ‘3B’, ‘4B’, ‘5C’ and‘6C’ as credit, ‘7D’ and ‘8E’ as pass, and those who failed are given ‘9G’ (KPM 2008).Science practicals and assessment of coursework are conducted by schools and the resultsare reported by them in a separate certificate. Table 4 shows the SPM results reportedsince the adoption of the open certificate. A high percentage of passes is recorded becauseit is based on passing only the six core subjects.
Accommodations for special candidates
Children with special needs are allowed to sit the same public examinations describedabove, with certain accommodations. For example, visually impaired candidates havetheir examination papers in Braille and are given extended time to answer the questionsowing to the nature of Braille reading and writing. Such examinations are conductedin special rooms and equipment provided includes Braille machines, magnifyingglasses, closed circuit television, voice activated calculators and Braille rulers.
Medium of examination
With the exception of science, mathematics and English language, Malay is used asthe language of assessment for UPSR in the national primary schools, and Tamillanguage in the national-type Tamil primary schools, while Chinese is used in thenational-type Chinese primary schools. The PMR and SPM are conducted in Malayfor all subjects except English language. However, science and mathematics
Table 4. Malaysian Certificate of Education (SPM) results.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Number of candidates 322,789 350,015 357,793 359,721 379,649% of Passes 89.7 90.5 90.9 91.2 90.2
*Table extracted from Quick Facts: Malaysian Educational Statistics (MoE 2006b).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
98 S.L. Ong
assessments at PMR and SPM have been conducted in dual-language format (i.e.,English-Malay) since 2003. At UPSR, science and mathematics are also tested indual-language format; English-Malay for the national schools, English-Chinese forthe national-type Chinese schools, and English-Tamil for the national-type Tamilschools. Candidates are given the choice of answering either wholly in one or bothlanguages (i.e., either English or Chinese/Tamil) (KPM 2004b).
Language accommodation
The use of dual-language science and mathematics test-booklets has been applied toall students since the change in language policy. This accommodation strategyinitially was to continue only until 2007 after which the subjects would be assessed inEnglish only. In 2005, a survey conducted by the MES found that despite learningscience and mathematics in English for three years (from 2003–2005), only 33% ofthe science candidates and 27% of the mathematics candidates used English whenanswering the PMR lower secondary school examination questions. Most of thecandidates preferred to answer in either Malay or a mixture of both Malay and English(The Star 2005). Those who answered in Malay, however, also used English mathe-matics and scientific terms that they were familiar with after studying in English. InDecember 2007 (The Star 2007b), the Education Ministry announced that the initialplan to use English only as the language of assessment for science and mathematicswas being put on hold until a review was carried out. The Education Ministerannounced that candidates would continue to have the choice of being examined inmathematics and science in either English or Malay, or for primary schools’candidates their vernacular language, as most students had yet to attain sufficientproficiency in English. The reversal in the language policy will not affect studentswho have learnt science and mathematics in English as they will be given dual-language test papers and allowed to answer in English and Malay until 2016 (The Star2009). From then onwards, the examinations will be in Malay only.
School-based assessments
School-based assessments do exist in Malaysia. Teachers design, administer, score,and report results from their own assessments. The purpose of school-based assess-ment is to monitor students’ overall growth, ability, progress, and achievementaccording to the objectives of the integrated school curriculum and the national educa-tion philosophy. Information gathered from the school-based assessment is used toinform parents about students’ achievement as well as helping teachers adjust theirclassroom instruction according to the learning needs of their students. During the last10 years, schools in the country have implemented two modes of school-based assess-ment. The first one is conducted by the teacher without reference to the official MESstandards; these include monthly or end-of-term assessments administered by theschool in the classroom. Furthermore all schools conduct trial, or mock examinations,designed to prepare students for the high-stakes, centralised public examinations.
PKBS
Continuous schools-based assessments were introduced in 1997 and are carried outunder the strict instruction and standards set by the MES. These are the Penilaian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 99
Kemajuan Berasaskan Sekolah (PKBS) [standardised common assessment tasks].Examples include the science practical and the oral reading tests for Malay andEnglish languages. The tests are prepared by MES but conducted by school teachersfollowing the timetable set by MES during the teaching and learning process. Someof the results are submitted to the MES for inclusion in the external examinationsgrade calculation. At Form 3, PKBS includes project work for Geography, History,Integrated Living Skills, practical work for Science, and oral tests in both Malay andEnglish languages. At Form 5, PKBS includes a pure science practical and orallanguage tests for English and Malay. Grades for project work and science practicalsare reported on a separate certificate, while results for the oral test are added to thewritten test to compute grades for English and Malay languages.
Assessment reform
Standardised national examinations such as UPSR, PMR and SPM are high-stakesassessments; decisions such as placement in residential schools, attendance atpremiere science schools, and awards of scholarship are made based on them.Successful SPM results open students to opportunities for further study and trainingin the academic and professional fields. The high-stakes use of public examinationresults can interfere with good instructional practice (Hamilton 2003). In Malaysia,pressure on teachers to produce high test performance results in much teaching to thetest and the adoption of teaching methods designed to prepare students for the test soas to achieve high test performance.
Results from the national examinations have been the sole yardstick of assessingstudents’ achievement for many years. The national examination system has been crit-icised for using examinations with too many subjects (KPM 2006). There has beengrowing dissatisfaction over the shortcoming of the present examination system as itis being seen as not able to give a realistic estimate of overall achievement. In addition,the traditional way of presenting results in the form of single letter or number gradesas an overall estimate of an individual’s achievement cannot possibly provide necessaryinformation for all types of uses. The use of school-based assessments has not beenable to provide additional information for decision-making since they are eithercontrolled by the examination system or designed to mimic the centralised examination.
Initial efforts to revamp the assessment system began when the MES organisedseminars and workshops in the early 2000s to receive feedback and opinions fromeducators and the public regarding areas of change needed. The MoE has institutedseveral changes to improve the assessment system and make education more accessi-ble to all (MoE 2004). Among these initiatives is striving to change the assessmentsystem to one that aims to assess for learning instead of for the assessment of learning.In an effort to shift away from the widely criticised exam-oriented assessment system,the MoE recommended increased emphasis of school-based assessment (Raja ZuhaKamal and Sazaki Abdul Rahman 2006) and reducing the number of subjects exam-ined in UPSR, PMR and SPM by focusing assessment on basic skills and core areasof the curriculum only (Abdul Halim Yusoff 2006). The MES has also announced achange from an examination-only focus to a holistic and diversified one (The Star2006). Proposals include evaluation of performance by adopting general ability teststo extend the range of important aspects to those not assessed by examinations.
The MoE intends to implement an assessment system that will give everyone a fairtest and equal chance to demonstrate what he or she knows. The MoE announced the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
100 S.L. Ong
National Educational Blueprint, which spelled out its mission to produce more confi-dent, creative and well-rounded students (MoE 2007). The Blueprint recommendedexpanding school-based assessment and alternative assessment to provide more holis-tic and accurate evaluation than the current one-off public examinations. To ensurequality in school-based assessment, the setting up of standards and criteria will beused as the basis for judging student performance rather than a number of itemsanswered correctly in an examination. This change aims to make teaching and learn-ing more effective. However, the traditional method of paper-and-pencil test will notbe abolished totally.
In 2007, the MES released proposals for a new assessment system based on theMalaysian National Educational Philosophy with a focus on academic, character devel-opment and involvement in extra-curricular activities (MoE 2007). There are five formsof assessment proposed: (1) school assessment, (2) central assessments, (3) centralexaminations, (4) psychometric tests, and (5) physical activity assessments. Schoolassessments involve teachers in planning, developing, conducting, and reporting at theschool-level. Central assessment, like the current PKBS, is criterion-referenced assess-ment using standards, instruments, and reporting guidelines provided by the MES,which is administered at the school level by individual classroom teachers. Centralexaminations are the public examinations as used in the present system, with reportingthrough certificates awarded by the MES. Psychometric tests measure students’ abil-ities, interest and readiness in learning. Physical activity assessments, which have beencarried out without formal recording and reporting of students’ performance, will form-alise school-based data and will include involvement in extra-curricular activities. Theimplementation of the new assessment system according to the various levels of educa-tion is summarised as shown in Table 5. Based on the new assessment structure, relianceand dependence on public examinations will be reduced with the abolition of the UPSRand PMR public examinations. However, MES has yet to announce a definite timeframe for the implementation of the new assessment system.
Future directions
It is clear that the dominant function of assessment in the Malaysian education systemhas been to select students for further and appropriate educational or employmentopportunities. Although MES acknowledges important uses of assessment such asdiagnosis, evaluation and guidance as beneficial characteristics of educational assess-ment, the way assessments are carried out ignores these functions. All the publicexaminations have been carried out towards the end of each education level (hence,
Table 5. The new assessment system proposed by MES in 2007.
Primary Level Lower Secondary Level Upper Secondary Level
Level 1:School Assessment;
psychometric test (Aptitude and personality)
Level 2:School assessment, Central
assessment; psychometric test (General ability test, Aptitude and personality)
Form 1 & 2:School Assessment;
psychometric test (Aptitude and personality)
Form 3:School assessment, Central
assessment; psychometric test
School Assessment, central assessment; Central examination (SPM and SPVM)
External exams will be allowed for international qualifications
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 101
they are summative) and are treated in great secrecy because of their high-stakesconsequences. When the results are given to the pupils or students, it is in the form ofgrades obtained for subjects examined. Reporting examination results in a singlegrade provides limited information about students’ learning priorities or capabilities.Furthermore, the MES’s practice of not returning examination scripts to students andnot revealing marking procedures are all features that negate potential benefits thatcould be derived from the assessment process (Murphy and Torrance 1988). Thesuccess of the new assessment system will require significant effort from MES andother divisions of the MoE. Assessment system changes have wide social and educa-tional implications and are difficult to bring about. If policy-makers and society ingeneral, let alone educators, are resistant to change, then the assessment practices maybe the hardest part of all to move (Murphy and Torrance 1988).
The new assessment system will impose greater demand on school teachers’ rolein assessing their students. The last decade has seen significant teacher involvementin national examinations with the appearance of modular examinations, practical work,and oral language tests. Murphy and Torrance (1988) argue that an assessment systemthat places greater responsibility in the hands of teachers would necessarily demand agood deal of training and support. The success of the assessment system hinges on theprofessional development of, and the support provided to, the teachers. This is a firststep to improving the credibility of school teachers in implementation of the assess-ment system. There is also the debate over resourcing hard-pressed classroom teachersto carry out the centralised school-based assessment.
One major issue in the new assessment system is the introduction of the psycho-metric test. Since its inception in 1957, the MES has been designing national exami-nations, primarily in academic subjects, for the Malaysian school systems. The MESintention of assessing pupils’ personal qualities and general abilities will involvemeasures of psychological constructs that are very different from constructs in educa-tional achievement. The development of suitable psychometric tests as well as theinterpretation of test results for the different groups of student will be a major challengefor MES to face.
The assessment reform has focused on changing assessment practices, withoutlooking at issues to do with the recording and reporting of a wide variety of educationalachievements. Like most testing programmes, MES spends much time and effort indeveloping quality test items, managing standardised administration and scoring, andsetting standards. So far it is obvious that few resources are devoted to reporting. Fornearly all the examination results, the report given is simply an overall, aggregatedlevel of attainment for the subjects examined. Communicating performance on a testshould be seen as a critical part of the assessment process. A record of achievementthat presents information on a student’s achievement, abilities, skills, and experiencesfrom a range of assessment is desired to provide holistic accounts of what students cando. Besides, the interest and needs regarding test data and results of the different groupsmust be considered. Stakeholders who are interested in the test scores include educa-tors, parents, students, politicians, policy-makers, media, the business community,researchers, and the general public. They are varied in assessment literacy and famil-iarity. The MES should allocate more resources to prepare both individual reports andgroup reports that cater to the needs of different audiences (e.g., the New ZealandasTTle [Assessment Tools for Teaching and Learning] system – Hattie and Brown2008). An individual report which aims at providing the student with informationabout his/her performance should include details such as norm comparison, proficiency
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
102 S.L. Ong
level, and diagnostic information. A group report could provide interested stakeholderswith information about the performance of groups of test-takers, such as averageperformance of the group in the form of average score, proficiency classification ofthe group and the score gaps between groups.
The MES are aware of the need to change the assessment system in Malaysia andare putting in considerable effort to developing a sound assessment structure. Concernfor the reliability and validity of assessments has led the MES to consider a mixtureof instruments through which to gather evidence of students’ various learningoutcomes rather than just reliance on examinations. The new assessment system allowsa wider scope of cognitive, psychomotor, and even affective domains related to learn-ing to be assessed. These changes are in the right direction of making assessmentresults more valid indicators for a wide range of educational achievement. However,considerable changes are still needed in society as a whole before high-stakes externalexaminations cease to dominate Malaysian education.
Notes on contributorSaw Lan Ong is a senior lecturer in the School of Educational Studies, Malaysia ScienceUniversity, Penang, Malaysia.
ReferencesAbdul Halim Yusoff. 2006. Subjek peperiksaan dikurang [Reducing examination subjects].
Berita Harian, 4 May.Ainan Abdul Samad. 2003. English as a tool for science and technology acquisition: Bilingual
assessment instruments as a transitional measure. Paper presented at the InternationalAssociation of Educational Assessment (IAEA) Conference, October 5–10 2003, inManchester, UK.
Chiam, H.K. 1984. The elite, exam oriented education system: A socio-psychological critique.Paper presented in Seminar on Education and Development: Key Questions on MalaysianEducation. November 18–22, to Consumers Association of Penang, Malaysia.
Choi, C.C. 1999. Public examinations in Hong Kong. Assessment in Education 6, no. 3: 405–17.Federation of Malaya. 1956. Report of education committee. Kuala Lumpur: Government
Press.Federation of Malaya. 1960. Education review committee report. Kuala Lumpur: Government
Press.Gang, W. 1996. Educational assessment in China. Assessment in Education 3, no. 1: 75–88.Hamilton, L. 2003. Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education 27, no. 1:
25–68.Hattie, J.A.C., and G.T.L. Brown. 2008. Technology for school-based assessment and assess-
ment for learning: Development principles from New Zealand. Journal of EducationalTechnology Systems 36, no. 2: 189–201.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (KPM). 2004a. Peraturan dan Panduan Peperiksaan PMR[Guidelines and regulations for PMR examination]. Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga PeperiksaanMalaysia.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (KPM). 2004b. Peraturan dan Panduan Peperiksaan UjianPencapaian Sekolah Rendah [Guidelines and regulations for Primary School Achieve-ment Test]. Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (KPM). 2006. Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan 2006–2010 [Master plan for educational development 2006–2010]. Kuala Lumpur: BahagianPerancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (KPM). 2007. Central examination and educational excel-lence: Looking ahead. Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia.
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (KPM). 2008. Garis Panduan Peperiksaan SPM [Guidelinesfor SPM examination]. Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice 103
Lee, M.N.N. 2002. Educational change in Malaysia. Monograph Series No.: 3/2002. Penang:Universiti Sains Malaysia.
Lim, E.P.Y., and A. Tan. 1999. Educational assessment in Singapore. Assessment in Education6, no. 3: 391–404.
Malaysia. 1996. Seventh Malaysia Plan, 1996-2000. Kuala Lumpur: Ministry of EducationMalaysia.
Malaysian Examination Syndicate (MES). 2006. Menjana Kecemerlangan Pendidikan Mela-lui Pentaksiran [Generating education excellence through assessment]. Kuala Lumpur:Ministry of Education, Malaysia.
Marimuthu, T., H. Mukherjee, and S.S. Jasbir. 1984. Assessment domination in Malaysianschools. Paper presented in Seminar on Education and Development: Key Questions onMalaysian Education. November 18–22, Consumers’ Association of Penang, Malaysia.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 1985. Report of the Cabinet Committee: To review the imple-mentation of educational policy. Kuala Lumpur: Berita Publishing Sdn. Bhd.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 2001. Education in Malaysia: A journey to excellence. KualaLumpur: Education Planning and Research Division.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 2004. The development of education. National Report ofMalaysia in International Conference on Education. September 8–11 2004, in Geneva.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 2006a. Malaysian educational statistics. Kuala Lumpur:Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education, Malaysia.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 2006b. Quick Facts: Malaysian educational statistics 2006.Kuala Lumpur: Educational Planning and Research Division, Ministry of Education,Malaysia.
Ministry of Education (MoE). 2007. National educational blueprint. Kuala Lumpur: MalaysiaMurphy, R., and H. Torrance. 1988. The changing face of educational assessment. Milton
Keynes, UK: Open University Press.New Sunday Times. 2007. Taking formal education beyond exams. March 4.Raja Zuha Kamal, and Sazaki Abdul Rahman. 2006. Sistem Peperiksaan Diubah–Tumpu
Penilaian Seimbang Kemahiran Pelajar Selain Akademik [Changes in examination system– Focus on a balance evaluation of students’ skill other than academic]. Utusan Malaysia18, May 2006.
The Star. 2005. Students still prefer to use Bahasa. December 23.The Star. 2006. Let’s focus on knowledge, not exams. April 24.The Star. 2007a. Exams to go. May 9.The Star. 2007b. Exams to remain bilingual. October 31.The Star. 2009. Clearing confusion over maths and science. August 12.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Sim
on F
rase
r U
nive
rsity
] at
16:
02 1
1 N
ovem
ber
2014