In September 2013, the Ministry of Education (MOE) launched the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025, a document touted by then Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin as the “most comprehensive and biggest manifestation of government transformation in getting the best returns in human capital to drive all national development aspirations.”[1]
According to the Blueprint, while our students “excelled at reproducing subject content,” they were uncompetitive in international assessments such as PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) and TIMSS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study) because they “struggle with higher-order thinking skills.”
Recognising the need to hone skills that would enable our students “to reason, to extrapolate, and to creatively apply their knowledge,”[2] the Blueprint therefore outlines 11 shifts that would transform the current exam-oriented system into one that would “focus less on predicting what topics and questions will come out and drilling for content recall,” and instead train students “to think critically and to apply their knowledge in different settings.”
Additionally, the Blueprint also recognises that summative national examinations such as the UPSR, PMR and SPM “do not currently test the full range of skills that the education system aspires to produce.”[3] Thus, in order to shift the focus away from rote learning towards higher-order thinking skills, school-based assessment would be introduced and incorporated into the UPSR and SPM examinations. In fact, the Blueprint clearly states that by 2016, “higher-order thinking questions will comprise at least 40 per cent of questions in UPSR and 50 per cent in SPM” by 2016.[4]
Unfortunately, just two years into the implementation of the Blueprint, some of these policies are now being reversed. The expected changes in the UPSR format to incorporate 40 per cent school-based assessment, due to take effect next year, has now been rescinded. This means that the UPSR will continue to be a 100 per cent written, central examination.
In addition to the incorporation of school-based assessment into the UPSR and SPM examinations, the Blueprint also states that practical tests for science subjects would be reintroduced beginning 2015.[5] However, this too has been put off following the announcement earlier this year that science practical examinations for Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Additional Science, scheduled for implementation in this year’s SPM, would be deferred.
Another fundamental problem identified by the Blueprint is poor English proficiency, where only “28 per cent of students achieved a minimum credit in the 2011 SPM English paper against Cambridge 1119 standards.”[6] Hence, amongst the many measures highlighted by the Blueprint to address this deficiency is to make English a compulsory pass subject at the SPM level by 2016.[7] This too, has now been postponed.
Not only have these flip-flop decisions effectively wasted years of time, resources and effort spent training and preparing teachers and students for the new changes, it also calls into question the relevance of the 12-year Blueprint. What use is the Blueprint now, when key milestones are not adhered to?
Furthermore, it also makes one wonder what the Education Implementation and Performance Unit (Padu) is doing, being that it was established as a special entity to monitor and ensure the success of the measures outlined by the Blueprint. Clearly, they have failed in their role as the executor of the education transformation plan.
The implications of these policy U-turns are serious, as it indicates failure on the part of the MOE to implement the Blueprint’s reforms, as well as to adequately prepare students and teachers for the new evaluation formats. If even the short-term objectives cannot be met, then there is real cause to believe that the Blueprint is nothing more than an unrealistic and insincere attempt at reforming the education system.
Source:
[1] http://education.bernama.com/index.php?sid=news_content&id=975685
[2] Malaysia Education Blueprint, p. E-11
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Op. cit., p. 4-8
[6] Op. cit., p. E-12
[7] Ibid.