Abolition of UPSR and PMR: Analysing the Fruits of Exam-centricism

It was reported yesterday that the Malaysian Examinations Syndicate (MES) has proposed that the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) and the Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) be abolished and replaced by a system of school-based assessment.

Today The Star reported that "most parents are wary about doing away with the [exams]."

This is not a surprising reaction, as most of these parents have never envisioned a school system without these two major examinations seperating the realms of primary, lower secondary and upper secondary school. These parents have themselves grown up within this system, and are disconcerted by the thought of such a radical change.

"Dr S.C. Ng said that examinations prepare students for life. 'Children must be trained to face challenges and there is no better way then through public examinations.'"

Now, this statement would true if one looks at life as one long series of tests and trials. Even if one were to adopt that view of life, can it really be said that there is no better method of preparing a child for challenges than through these two "big-time" exams?

Perhaps it would be helpful if we were to analyse how these major examinations shape our children.

Result #1: Hafalization
It is well-known that Malaysian students, like most Asians, have become masters of memorisation. Some (for example, those trained in Chinese schools, with a long heritage of hafalization stretching all the way back to Imperial China) are better at it than others. Nonetheless, memorisation, superseding true understanding, has become the primary mode of learning for many. All of us know of students who memorise entire essays -- gleaned from various books or worse, fed to them from tuition teachers -- and vomit them out word for word in robotic fashion.

Impressive, certainly. But what is the goal of education? Is it merely training a pupil to perform amazing feats of memory? Definitely not. Yet, who needs to bother about learning how to really write a fine essay when all that matters is producing a few good pieces of work to impress some unknown examiner? And why bother about really understanding the mechanics of Keynesian economics when there's no oral exam where one's shallow, superficial grasp of the material will be exposed?

Result #2: Narrowing of the Mind
Malaysian students commonly pester teachers with the famous question, "Is this coming out in the Exam?" The moment a Malaysian student is told that a certain portion of the subject is "not in the syllabus" (meaning it is not going to be tested in the major examination), it is certainly rare for him or her to bother trying to understand it, much less remember it. In this method Malaysian students have been limiting their range of knowledge for years and years.

The exam-based system has produced a species of student called the "Professional Exam-taker" (PET). He or she is brilliant at doing whatever it takes to score on a test/exam. But ask him or her anything that lies beyond the Almighty Exam Syllabus, and be prepared to get a shocking answer, or no answer at all. I can offer you one real-life example:

T: Do you know where Cuba is?
PET: Err... um... I think it's somewhere near... Russia?

T, who is a friend of mine, has been going around asking various "top students" similar questions, as a test of their general knowledge (The PET in this case was the top student of the top SMK(C) secondary school in my hometown). The results have been overwhelmingly depressing, if not unexpected.

Result #3: Tuition-mania, and other spawn of The Exam-Driven Life
This one needs no further elaboration. But I shall make a quick comment about the focus of teaching in our schools today. Without a doubt the ultimate focus is to allow the student to do well in the public examinations. This translates into all sorts of arguably unhealthy practices such as overemphasis on workbooks, answering-exam-questions-centred teaching etc.

Once again I reiterate: the opposition of parents to the abolishment of the UPSR and PMR is due to not being able to imagine what education will be like without these two examinations. It can be likened to the "old wine-skins" analogy. They have never tasted what the "new wine" of continuous school-based assessment is like, and hence, they are dead-set that the old exam-centric way of doing it is the very best.