Focus on learning, not the exams

The newly introduced school-based assessment system (PT3) has drawn considerable flak among many quarters nationwide.

Many prefer the Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) to the PT3. The grievances aired by Malaysians about the PT3 are strong testimony to the extent of our faith that examinations have earned.

However, researchers have empi­rically reported multifarious drawbacks in basing our judgment on the quality of teaching and learn­­ing by means of one-off examinations, which come mostly in written form, at the end of the learning process. PMR is a case in point.

The norm of holding students who performed with straight As in high regard and sidelining those who did not, is entrenched in many societies. Malaysia is not exempted from this norm.

Thus, one best shortcut to get straight As which students and teachers can think of is studying the format of examinations.

They may end up reviewing the format of examinations from one year to another to discover the most frequently asked questions and the ones which are rarely tested.

Worse still, those students who hail from well-off families may find the job of analysing the examination formats being done by their private tutors or tuition centres. They prepare for their exams in line with the format analysis. It is quite obvious that real learning may never take place if this is the case.

Ideally, an assessment which aims to promote learning should not have any fixed formats which in many cases are always abused by some quarters.

Instead, it should allow teachers to identify students’ strengths and weaknesses in their learning process as they could intervene accordingly.

While various drawbacks can be seen in other subjects, they are inevitably glaring in language learning environment. Learning any language is a social process as it has to be practised with others, either in oral or written forms.

Unlike the other subjects, the validity of written language examination results can always be called into question as it is almost impossible to test “everything in a language” in just an hour or two.

At the end of the day, a student who has managed to acquire an A in any language should be proficient enough in that language. To strengthen the proficiency of languages among students, it is best their own teachers teach and assess them over a period of time.

Thus, they may be more reliably able to observe their own students’ growth of learning unlike the one-off examination. Nevertheless, integrity and professionalism on teachers’ part is of great concern here.

Realising these shortcomings of assessing learners by means of one-off examinations and having external examiners scoring exam scripts, education systems around the world have now begun to assign teachers in schools to assess their own learners through multiple methods of testing to strengthen the reliability of tests and validity of the claims made based on the acquired results.

This system in broad terms is referred to as school-based assessment. As informed by research, this new assessment system has already been a norm in developed countries. Finland, which often outperforms other countries in Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), is well-known for this assessment system. It has also been gaining popularity among many education systems in Asia.

In view of the transition in Malaysia from an entirely public examination at the lower-secondary level which has been in practice for about 30 years into totally school-based assessment, it is acceptable for such mixed reactions the new system has drawn at this stage.

Changing the assessment system alone may not create better tea­chers and learners but a significant change in our perceptions and attitude may do so.

Our society as a whole should make every effort to transform ourselves from being overly exam-oriented into learning-oriented lot.

ALLA BAKSH MOHD AYUB KHAN

MOHD SALLEHHUDDIN ABDUL AZIZ

Penang