[SPM] Lots of A1s, does it show anything?

[Neutral_pH]

The recent news of Amalina getting 17A1s in the recent SPM is nothing new, after all the 2 or 3 years before there was one who got 16As and it made quite a ruckus in the papers. But does anyone ever think that what is the significance of having so many As?
I believe the whole meaning of taking SPM has been distorted, well, maybe a bit. The papers all cheer for those who obtained straight As and heap even more praise on those who got 11, 12, 13 ,14++++As like nobody business. Does that mean those who obtain 6-8As are lousy?
Well, no. Maybe that time it wasn't his/her luck. Maybe he/she put her foot wrong somwhere and it cause his/her SPM. But all of them are equally good, aren't they?
Please note that success in life is not governed by SPM results. Sure it does eases the way a bit but exams are not a benchmark to measure how capable a person is. What are we seeing now is a trend so common among students nowadays, take as many subjects as possible, burn the whole tankfull of the midnight oil and then pass successfully and hope that he/she can obtain a scholarship to continue his/her study. And of course with that the media will make lots of noises about that and shall he/she did not succeed in getting it, he/shey/they will hit back by going through the media to force the government or some poor guy to give it. And then you have all these commercials saying these guy got straght As by using their pencils/erasers/pens/calculators/books etc etc........it wolud be interesting to see someone who all those things and take the exam WITHOUT STUDYING. And using staedler's 2B pencils DOES NOT GUARANTEE YOU CAN GET AN A, NOT MATTER WHAT THE COMMERCIAL SAID.
Right to the main point, it's quite obvious with such a high number of As Amalina will get ( I think so and I hope too) the JPA/MARA/PETRONAS scholarship but is it fair? Are you saying that the others who got lower than that are inferior? I think it's time that the government change its policy of giving scholarships based on the number-of-subjects-getting-A1s to real corporate type of assesment, well, like the Apprentice. The working world does not consists of mathematical equations and scientific notations but also employer-employee relationships, social skills, leadership and much more. It's not really academic oriented. Face it, people, just because you get a dozen As you could get into MIT, heheh, because the guys at MIT know that it's more than books only.
Perhaps the scholarship givers should change the way of handing out those funds, rather than just interviews maybe they should put more emphasis on leadership and problem solving skills, the ability to work with others etc, etc. Put them in camp for maybe 2 weeks and then give them problems, real ones that the companies are facing now, and apply as much pressure as possible. From there you could see who has the coolness of a pressure cooker and cracked up egg.
I want to say more but now I am very hungry :D , keep posting!

[lyzzy]

It's definitely not only academics that matter - well, that depends on who you ask... :D

Is 16A1s better than 9A1s? Me thinks not - if the 9A1s person is much more involved extracurricularly.

Though I must say that I really admire that girl who got 14A1s in SPM, I think her name is Anushree or something. She could go really far with her talent in music as well as her academics - if she applied to US colleges, I really won't be surprised if she got admitted to Harvard-Yale-Princeton and equivalents. Awesome extracurriculars and academic record.

As for the other top scorers ..... no comment.
________
Toyota Porte specifications (http://www.toyota-wiki.com/wiki/Toyota_Porte)

[DecentMerson]

fairness??? nobody says that everything is fair... and JPA scholarship grading system is definitely one of those unfair things... so is SPM grading, so is examinations, so is many other things... nothing is perfect and nothing is absolutely just to start with...

i dun think there's ever a fair benchmark for anything... so, u might feel that putting Form 5 leavers to a camp and give them a series of test and all, but is this fair? people with high IQ or experience with solving problems might be able to deal with these test, but will they put so much effort, do they have a high level of EQ as others?

those who score many A1s put in lots of effort in preparing for the exams, if they are being awarded with scholarships, isn't this a fair deal?? Not that we are saying that those who score less As are inferior or wat. But in this harsh reality, there's only a winner in every race, so, we can't blame the winner for winning rite? It is also too bad that our world only cherish winners, top performers, and high achievers (i think we shld be thankful for this trend, or else we will still be living in a stone age without much technology...), so, this doesn't mean that those who didn't score as many As are lousy, just that they are not as good...

be real, get real... just like every other race, study is a competition too... All of us have boundless potential, but, not all of us have amazing achievements. For example, in an Olympic event, all of the participants are among the greatest athletes in the world, but there can only be 1 winner... so, maybe one is unlucky for not performing well... but all he or she can do is just get over with it and get another shot on another event, or another competition...
life is just the same...

if one is lucky or unlucky, we can't really help, can we?? there are so many uncertainties which afffect the examination process, the marking process, and the selection process.... so, what can one do??

while we are using our computer/laptop to discuss about this and that, others of the same age might be working to support their family, or maybe they are suffering from other diseases, or maybe he or she just strikes a lottery.... or watever....

all i can say is to cherish what we have and dun cry over spilled milk, dun worry about the millions of unknowns... get ready for tomorrow!!!

to put it aptly, there's no point saying that one thing as FAIR.... or UNFAIR...

[lyzzy]

so, this doesn't mean that those who didn't score as many As are lousy, just that they are not as good...


when you say that they are just "not as good", what exactly are they just not as good as? spewing out facts? memorizing small details? memorizing the exam scheme?

*must spend less time on recom...*
________
Energy Regeneration Brake (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Energy_Regeneration_Brake)

[DecentMerson]

so, this doesn't mean that those who didn't score as many As are lousy, just that they are not as good...


when you say that they are just "not as good", what exactly are they just not as good as? spewing out facts? memorizing small details? memorizing the exam scheme?

*must spend less time on recom...*

haha... i think i'm spending too much time on recom too...
they are not as good in scoring As...(watever it takes)

[nwx86]

Lots of A's does shows that that particular person is good academically no matter in what examination..spm, stpm, A'levels ect...the more A's the better he or she is...and being academically good does ensure better choices of furhter studies in wider selection of colleges and universities, especially if one wants to persue a course in the medical field. For a course of pharmacy in local private institutions, generally the min requirements would be 3 B's in science subjects in STPM or A'levels...for UK uni, they would require ABB's...as for medicine, the requirements would be even higher...and thats only for the entry requirements....what abour scholarships? this is where the extra A's and extra co-curicular activities come in...

Well, back to SPM...I came across a complain by a parent in one of the newspapers saying that her son, who got 13A1's and 2 other grades which I don't remember, was considered not as good as those straight A's scorers who took less subjects than her son. I think this is not fair for a student like the boy as he would have more knowledge than others. And this would affect his chances of getting a scholarship in the future.

[iQing]

We are entraped in many memes in life. This is just one of them.

[kucingbiru]

Well, back to STPM...I came across a complain by a parent in one of the newspapers saying that her son, who got 13A1's and 2 other grades which I don't remember, was considered not as good as those straight A's scorers who took less subjects than her son. I think this is not fair for a student like the boy as he would have more knowledge than others. And this would affect his chances of getting a scholarship in the future.

taking more subjects doesnt guarantee that the person has more knowledge compared to someone who takes less subjects. knowledge is broader thn what a school can teach.

[WeiJie]

Too many A's doesnt mean anything , it doesnt show anything when u really further study in college and then tertiary in overseas

1 of my fren get 10A's but when in college he cant even pass the subjects

well no of A's only give u a passport to apply scholarship , better college or watever

as long as u excel in those important subjects such as chem , physic , math ur future will be right within ur hand

let me put it this way
u get D grade for history , moral , BC , BM etc doenst mean u are less better than those who get straight A's
ur science subject marks might be 90% is more greater than others

SPM is ntg

[khor_albert]

Bravo, Neutral_PH!! I am just about to post that...you are a step ahead...cool~~

Okay, look...I completely agree with you. For Amalina's case, I heartily and sincerely congratulate her out-of-the-world achievement, it's not easy I know!! But consider the worthiness of the 17 A1s. Applying for medicine (more accurately SAKIT PUAN) but taking Kesusasteraan Melayu and business subjects?? What in the world is the connection between medicine and business or literature?

And another thing is this...why in the world she take Sains Teras? I understand that it is not an offence to do that, but why since she take Bio, Kim and Physics?

But still, I know why, we know why...the Government sets its eyes on STRAIGHT AS MANY A1s as possible...is this fair? Just because I do not want Kesusasteraan or Bahasa Arab because they have nothing to do with actuarial science, can that be a reason for the JPA to may not give the scholarship to me? I (and I m sure u too) have been hearing that JPA is strictly in love with A1s. Then JPA is being too robotic and static. Now my chance to get JPA Scholarship is like 10%, my teacher told me because not "enough" A1s and not "straight enough" A1s (btw, I got 8 A1s and 3 A2s)...that is real nuts...isn't Co-co is also a criteria?

JPA should review its criteria. St. John and PBSM active members should be given special priority for medicine. I know what I want (actuarial science), so I joined Pers. Sains and Matematik, ELS and Chess Club (for thinking skills). JPA should make sure that co-co be given a more important role in awarding the scholarships.

Now, one more thing. Is the government encouraging F6? I don't think so. If the gov supports F6, JPA should be given to F6 leavers with excellent results in SPM and STPM. Then, JPA can save a lot of money (coz priv college's an expensive part you see) and in the same time really evaluates some1's ability...

Consider this...really praying some1 from MOE is seeing this and absorbing this into their mind...

[Anduril]

let me put it this way
u get D grade for history , moral , BC , BM etc doenst mean u are less better than those who get straight A's
ur science subject marks might be 90% is more greater than other

That depends, you know. If you want to be an all-rounder in study, you need to polish up both your language and science skills. The constant use of both left and right brains will make you a more balanced person.

[lolilo]

And another thing is this...why in the world she take Sains Teras? I understand that it is not an offence to do that, but why since she take Bio, Kim and Physics?


My mom said there used to be a syarat in which science student is not allowed to take sains teras, i guess it has been abolished.....

[Neutral_pH]

Good love the feedback.......

Well in some ways yeah there is probably no such thing as fair and unfair but I think we should take ways on how to make this thing a level playing field. Certainly the candidate with the most amount of As will has a higher probability of securing a scholarship.

Yup no doubt about that those with high IQ can solve problems better or do they? Put them in camp I said is not only putting them inside a trench and solve problems from there. What I meant was you put them in a real life situation and mount as much pressure as possible upon them. And yeah load as much problems as possible. Create a pressurize environment. All humans have weaknesses and they must rely on others to cover their own. Those with high IQ does not mean that they are as cool as a cucumber. At a certain point they will crack up. And that's what we want to see. When do they crack up?

You see, life is not about obtaining JPA/MARA/PETRONAS scholarship, it's more than that. The reason why the government is sending us to foreign countries to study is not to enjoy winter; it's to bring the knowledge that they have and use it to develop our own. The country needs it and we need it too, otherwise we will always count on others to help us. Do you call that independent?
Life does not end after you finished getting the degree; it's only starting. When you're starting to look for jobs and have your own life that's when people see the your true self. Are you fit for this work? ARe you a team player? Can you mix with people? Can you balance your working life and your home life? SPM does not guarantee that, in fact nobody says that to be successful in life you have to obtain excellence in all the exams. It boils down to determination, hardwork and patience. If you slug it hard, then your chances for a good life is higher, hopefully. That's what I want to emphasise, A1s are not a true measure of success, and are not a true measure of someone's character. They are nothing more than just grades, set by humans to gauge the levels of other humans. A1s are just A1s, there's not need to make a fuss about it. Don't make others feel degraded just because they did not obtained the same number of A1s as the national top student; in each human there is a speciality, and we must never forget that. That particular person might good in study, but when he/she goes out and mix with society, he/she could be a miserable failure. Who knows?

PS I am setting up another forum for a topic name Pr?France: Stuff you need to know. For those applying to France, I suggest you read this one up before deciding to accept the offers.

[bp_ffei]

Consider this...really praying some1 from MOE is seeing this and absorbing this into their mind...

I bet they still won't give a damn.

Anyway, like what some people have said, I don't see any reasonable reason for anyone to take so many subjects. It's more likely to be for glory I think... Surely everyone has a favourite subject that they are more than willing to spend more time with? They should dedicate their free time to boost their knowledge and skill in that subject, rather than study such a diversified range of subjects.

FOCUS. That's what I'm trying to convey here. Malaysians generally lack this. Singapore always ranks higher than us in International Olympiads. They actually have teachers to specially train those who have potential. I wonder if Malaysia is doing this? Or if Malaysia is, is it only in top schools? Can't blame Malaysia too I guess... there's a lack of teachers with high qualifications. And most students are stuck with their textbooks and the meagre knowledge in it.

[youngyew]

I think this thread overlaps with this one (http://recom.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1900&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=). Can moderator combine it?

[bubblesgirl]

There is no doubt that having a good achievement in SPM will ensure someone with a better way to get scholarship..But in fact,once you have really furthered your studies to University in oversea,u will find that SPM result doesn`t make use anymore..i am not sure about other countries but as wat i concern,so it is in Japan.Someone whom had scored 9,10,11A1s or more than that during his/her glory Form 5`s life can`t even pass their examination in college of Japan..Does it mean that they lost their superiority??or they are actually not such as superior as what SPM achievement had showed??
In my point, market today demands graduates with great social skills,good perspective in solving problems and a wider acknowledgement of every little fields besides their major specialty...Let`s see a real case which did happened in Japan..I am sure u guys know about University of Tokyo,aren`t you?There were two graduates,A and B.. A graduated from University Of Tokyo and the other one,graduated from one of the less famous universities in Japan...then both of them went for the same job interview of a big company..normally,we used to assume that sure A will be employed as he is Todai graduate..However,out of expectation,A failed but B was being employed..The reason is, though A is good in academy, he is lack of those requirements which i stated above...besides,students of engineering course in University of Tokyo were asked to study sociology and economic as there came out plenty of complaints that they don`t know anything about their country,world and also other fields..that is what currently happened in Japan..
In a nutshell,what am i trying to say is,your academic achievement during secondary school is only a small part in your life..for those whom got excellent result,think about how deep your acknowledgement is,always updated yourself with different kind of knowledge..and for those whom failed to get flying colors result in SPM,dont be despair,work hard now..instead of studies,polish yourself,form yourself with a great social skill,leadership and vision..ok?these are only my 2 cents :wink: ..sorry if i have said anything wrong.. :(

[khor_albert]

This is quite a mind-flickering thread and yes, it does makes sense in some things but consider that actually the length of the A1 string is the actual only way to determine one's worthiness of the JPA scholarship. They dont have much choice so dont blame JPA or any "too-high" scorers here, they are desperate because of the great competition...

[WeiJie]

as long as u have the skill and required ability in ur future carrier , no doubt u still can achieve success although the no of A's is less than someone
some straight A's student SOME are depend on their hardwork , good memorizing ability , all they do is jus memorize and write down on the paper , True it do works in SPM but in college , u wont get A's by applying teh same method
frankly , they have better chance offered byJBA , u htink they will do well in overseas ? by the same method
actually there are some example here

my fren jus got her result 10 A's (science stream), when i asked her wat u plan to do ? Answer : Art
and i asked y ? SPM is jus memorizing , but when my further my study next time , i cant score , i rather dont waste my time

dont upset those who get less A's , most importantly u should know wat u capable of ... doing engineering ? art ... etc ?

in my college , someone who are still changing course from eng to buisness . reason : i cant catch up , i think im not suite to this course

anyway , my advice for those 04 spm candidate , try to find a counsellor or do JOB test , so tat u know which direction u heading

[kucingbiru]

let me put it this way
u get D grade for history , moral , BC , BM etc doenst mean u are less better than those who get straight A's
ur science subject marks might be 90% is more greater than others


in my case, that worked. but u need to open your mind my friend. not everyone wants to do science in college.

[lyzzy]

dont upset those who get less A's , most importantly u should know wat u capable of ... doing engineering ? art ... etc ?

in my college , someone who are still changing course from eng to buisness . reason : i cant catch up , i think im not suite to this course

anyway , my advice for those 04 spm candidate , try to find a counsellor or do JOB test , so tat u know which direction u heading]

This quote and some other comments (which is somewhere around, I'm pretty sure I saw it, but perhaps it's in another thread) that suggested that we should specialize early and not do so many subjects in SPM that's not related to our future career....

That's crazy talk... same goes for everyone who suggests that we specialize so early in life. I don't agree with the whole culture of acquiring As fo the sake of acquiring As, but neither do I agree of this idea of specializing so early - it narrows your mindset and your thinking

An engineer needs other subjects too, you know. Writing, literature, art, music, history and all that.... otherwise, you are not 'educated', you are just a machine, doing something because you get something. There is a good percentage of the population with this mindset (mostly chinese), and that's why the chinese stereotype "cinapek" comes in. You may be a capable engineer who's very good at what you do - but you are still uneducated if you don't appreciate art or lit or music or whatever.

I'm not saying that an engineer should spend ALL his time learning music, and no time on engineering and math, but I'm suggesting a healthy balance. Knowledge is never useless, no matter what you are doing.

Malaysians (including myself) tend to think that careers are fixed for your entire life - that's not true...SPM is just the first step. So any extra knowledge is always good, should you think about switching careers.
________
volcano classic vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/volcano)

[N-Guy]

The idea of taking many subjects in SPM blossomsed dramatically since the year Ong Jin hock scored 13 1As in SPM.Ever since than,students seem to so motivated to take extra subjects as deadly venom that could kill other students(who didn t take extra subjects) in the rat race to garner a scholarship.

subjects like Sains teras and Prinsip akaun have certainly became a norm amongst students.Well,whats the purpose???....Suprisingly,very few students(minus those from sekolah teknik) take Lukisan kejuruteraan as extra subject because they know gettting an 1A in that subject is pretty difficult.....so my advice is....take subjects according to your ability and interest...Getting a scholarship is a everyone's dream....but you must be those lucky ones.....

[nwx86]

There is no doubt that having a good achievement in SPM will ensure someone with a better way to get scholarship..But in fact,once you have really furthered your studies to University in oversea,u will find that SPM result doesn`t make use anymore..i am not sure about other countries but as wat i concern,so it is in Japan.Someone whom had scored 9,10,11A1s or more than that during his/her glory Form 5`s life can`t even pass their examination in college of Japan..Does it mean that they lost their superiority??or they are actually not such as superior as what SPM achievement had showed??
In my point, market today demands graduates with great social skills,good perspective in solving problems and a wider acknowledgement of every little fields besides their major specialty...Let`s see a real case which did happened in Japan..I am sure u guys know about University of Tokyo,aren`t you?There were two graduates,A and B.. A graduated from University Of Tokyo and the other one,graduated from one of the less famous universities in Japan...then both of them went for the same job interview of a big company..normally,we used to assume that sure A will be employed as he is Todai graduate..However,out of expectation,A failed but B was being employed..The reason is, though A is good in academy, he is lack of those requirements which i stated above...besides,students of engineering course in University of Tokyo were asked to study sociology and economic as there came out plenty of complaints that they don`t know anything about their country,world and also other fields..that is what currently happened in Japan..
In a nutshell,what am i trying to say is,your academic achievement during secondary school is only a small part in your life..for those whom got excellent result,think about how deep your acknowledgement is,always updated yourself with different kind of knowledge..and for those whom failed to get flying colors result in SPM,dont be despair,work hard now..instead of studies,polish yourself,form yourself with a great social skill,leadership and vision..ok?these are only my 2 cents :wink: ..sorry if i have said anything wrong.. :(

I agree that life is more than just our SPM results, especially when we have already enter the workforce. However, ever thought that without a good result, can you even qualify to enter a university? yes, i know that many people become successful without furthering their studies, but that was in the past decades...now, employers are looking more to academic background and of course other extra qualities....try looking in the advertisments in the papers...most jobs require minimum diploma or bachelor degree... unless u include salesperson or clerk,...even those jobs require minimum SPM....

[kucingbiru]

That's crazy talk... same goes for everyone who suggests that we specialize so early in life. I don't agree with the whole culture of acquiring As fo the sake of acquiring As, but neither do I agree of this idea of specializing so early - it narrows your mindset and your thinking

An engineer needs other subjects too, you know. Writing, literature, art, music, history and all that.... otherwise, you are not 'educated', you are just a machine, doing something because you get something. There is a good percentage of the population with this mindset (mostly chinese), and that's why the chinese stereotype "cinapek" comes in. You may be a capable engineer who's very good at what you do - but you are still uneducated if you don't appreciate art or lit or music or whatever.

i agree with u that an engineer needs other subjects too. but i'd be more interested to learn subjects like sejarah in high school if i wasn't gonna be graded on it. u know, learn it for the knowledge, not because u're forced to do so. maybe we should have a pass/no pass system in SPM.

[Neutral_pH]

Yup some very good stuff coming.....

Frankly, I didn't know that when I started on this thing it will become such an intense discussion....and yeah life after SPM is just the beginning..

One more thing though, those who scored those 12++++A1s tend to get exploited and exploit their fame as well. Sort of mini superstars. YOu can see the trend; some guy with 14A1s put himself on TV about some pencil commercial while the recent one had the person being the ambassador of some sections of a newspaper. Exploitation to the very maximum! Just like Beckham drinking pepsi. Commercials can be misleading especially when you attribute your success to a 2B pencil!

We should grab the knowledge for our love and interest of it, not the put our face in the media. If that's the case, then the whole meaning of acquiring extra As is meaningless

[N-Guy]

Do you know who is that??

He's Ahmad Atiq

Scored 14 1A and 1 2A(in biology) SPM 2003

He got offered to pursue medicine in Cambridge by JPA....No joke seriously

he's from klang by the way...my hometown...lol

[lyzzy]

There are about 30 or so malaysians (at least that's what my friend in cambridge told me) first-years in Cambridge right now...
________
EPIC (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Dodge_EPIC)

[youngyew]

This quote and some other comments (which is somewhere around, I'm pretty sure I saw it, but perhaps it's in another thread) that suggested that we should specialize early and not do so many subjects in SPM that's not related to our future career....

That's crazy talk... same goes for everyone who suggests that we specialize so early in life. I don't agree with the whole culture of acquiring As fo the sake of acquiring As, but neither do I agree of this idea of specializing so early - it narrows your mindset and your thinking

An engineer needs other subjects too, you know. Writing, literature, art, music, history and all that.... otherwise, you are not 'educated', you are just a machine, doing something because you get something. There is a good percentage of the population with this mindset (mostly chinese), and that's why the chinese stereotype "cinapek" comes in. You may be a capable engineer who's very good at what you do - but you are still uneducated if you don't appreciate art or lit or music or whatever.

I'm not saying that an engineer should spend ALL his time learning music, and no time on engineering and math, but I'm suggesting a healthy balance. Knowledge is never useless, no matter what you are doing.

Malaysians (including myself) tend to think that careers are fixed for your entire life - that's not true...SPM is just the first step. So any extra knowledge is always good, should you think about switching careers.

I think you are referring to my post in the other thread.

I agree that we should not fix our outlook so early in our life. In fact, nobody should fix the career prospect even when he or she has graduated from a university degree. There's never a thing called fixed, as long as life is concerned. You can always do something that suit you best, even when your interest does change later in your life.

However, as far as SPM is concerned, I beg to differ with lyzzy. Yes, do offer as many choices as possible to the students, and do promote them to take up subjects that suit their interest; but, don't make them swallow things that are totally irrelevant to career or interest. One of the most obvious example that is already discussed many times is science stream student taking sains teras.

When I said that we should be able to determine what he or she wants to do when they start taking form 4, what I really meant is that he should be able to at least narrow down the scope of the possible career paths. You know, I realize that there are many people out there who cannot recognize yet their real interest and career choice in form 4, so they are certainly in a quandary if they are forced to choose. I was one (cannot choose career). However, people should at least eliminate the thing that they are uninterested in. In my case, art subjects are out for me because I am neither well-versed or interested in them. Well, you can argue that people may have super wide interest that they simply like every subject offered by the examination board, but then again, where is the focus if we do so?

Yes, very true is the statement that we need multi-dimensional development in personal growth and knowledge acquisition. We need to know more about everything even though it is not related to the stuff we are actually working for. However, let's be multi-dimensional in real sense instead of in marking-scheme sense. I don't want people who take up all sorts of subjects, get A1 in every single one of them and know every single marking scheme of the papers; but don't know much about things outside the scheme. (refer to my post in the other thread) It's happening, as far as my experience can tell. So tell me, is it "multi-dimensional" as you would call it?

Ideologically, what we implement in our education system is "quite good". We get our choices, we get the freedom to choose. But with bad execution, excessive pressures resulted by glorification of N A1-er and the unfair comparison between students who took different number of subjects, I don't see a healthy growth of the whole system. Something certainly needs to be remedied.

[iQing]

Nowadays people study more and learn less.
Who cares to learn less and study more ?
it?s a trend.

[gal_flower]

We never stop debating about this, don't we?
We ALL know that SPM is not exactly the best way to sift the best students in Malaysia out from the entire cohort. We ALL agree that SPM is definitely NOT a good indication of how smart a student is, or how deserving a student is in getting a scholarship. We ALL agree that this 'who-gets-the-most-A1s' business is getting more and more of hand.
But can we say that there's something wrong with the students pursuing more and more A1s? It's a rat race now...and everyone needs to fight to be more outstanding than the other. Is it their fault for choosing to take on more subjects, or is it the society's fault? Think about that. Or maybe, just maybe, the student chooses to do more subjects to challenge herself ( :P I choose the female gender) or to explore her abilities? Think about that. Those who take on more subjects are in a way putting themselves in a risk that may be costly. I'm not saying that their efforts are entirely admirable that I can just ignore the rest who also scored straight A1s but less number of the A1s or those who did well but just didn't score straight A1s or those who just faltered at SPM but are indeed smart as anything else. But this is how our education system and our society works. We ALL know THAT.
It IS luck sometimes. I, for one, never expected to get straight A1s...I took another subject because my mom and I think that if i take an Arts course (by the way, I don't think Economics should be considered as an Arts course) so I can have another route in life to choose from. So I wouldn't be stuck in sciences especially if I'm not good at it. But I got lucky. And indeed lucky, because my year, almost everyone who gets straight A1s gets a scholarship. But it isn't the case for the following year. Not everyone got a scholarship even though they scored straight A1s for SPM.
Doesn't it feel frustrating when all your efforts go unrecognized simply because you fail to get an A1 for a subject or if you fail to get ENOUGH A1s to beat the other person who got more A1s? But ask yourself. Isn't it the society that goes 'ooh' and 'aah' when someone gets straight A1s or more A1s? That is why you're striving for that, isn't it? I rest my case.
I'm a co-curricular activities person...not very academic-orientated...so I'm all for the student who does well academically AND non-academically as well...it doesn't matter if you don't get straight A1s (or the lack of number of A1s) as long as you have those skills and talents and passion that others don't. Not every book-smart person is street-smart. So what if you don't get a scholarship and your plans get frustrated and there's obstacles everywhere? It is the fact that you can get around all those despite of everything that makes you the fighter and survivor in life. I know it's easy for me to say because I'm nicely sitting here in the States, being sponsored and all. But trust me, I admire street-smart people more than book-smart people.

[youngyew]

it?s a trend.
Which needs some remedy. :(

[youngyew]

But can we say that there's something wrong with the students pursuing more and more A1s? It's a rat race now...and everyone needs to fight to be more outstanding than the other. Is it their fault for choosing to take on more subjects, or is it the society's fault? Think about that. Or maybe, just maybe, the student chooses to do more subjects to challenge herself ( :P I choose the female gender) or to explore her abilities? Think about that. Those who take on more subjects are in a way putting themselves in a risk that may be costly. I'm not saying that their efforts are entirely admirable that I can just ignore the rest who also scored straight A1s but less number of the A1s or those who did well but just didn't score straight A1s or those who just faltered at SPM but are indeed smart as anything else. But this is how our education system and our society works. We ALL know THAT. It IS luck sometimes.
I never blamed those students whose reason to take up more subjects is to "beat the others". If this is the reason, then it's not their fault as they are the victims themselves.

What I am lobbying by my previous articles is to remedy the whole system, instead of criticising those who took the subjects. People react to the external environmental change (sorry but I am taking biochemistry at the moment.. :wink: ), so when stress is exerted by the external factor, they have to swim or sink. However, what we really need to react is to correct the system, not asking those students to stop taking more and more subjects to out-smart others. It concerns their own survival.

[iQing]

We never stop debating about this, don't we?
We ALL know that SPM is not exactly the best way to sift the best students in Malaysia out from the entire cohort. We ALL agree that SPM is definitely NOT a good indication of how smart a student is, or how deserving a student is in getting a scholarship. We ALL agree that this 'who-gets-the-most-A1s' business is getting more and more of hand.
But can we say that there's something wrong with the students pursuing more and more A1s? It's a rat race now...and everyone needs to fight to be more outstanding than the other. Is it their fault for choosing to take on more subjects, or is it the society's fault? Think about that. Or maybe, just maybe, the student chooses to do more subjects to challenge herself ( :P I choose the female gender) or to explore her abilities? Think about that. Those who take on more subjects are in a way putting themselves in a risk that may be costly. I'm not saying that their efforts are entirely admirable that I can just ignore the rest who also scored straight A1s but less number of the A1s or those who did well but just didn't score straight A1s or those who just faltered at SPM but are indeed smart as anything else. But this is how our education system and our society works. We ALL know THAT.
It IS luck sometimes. I, for one, never expected to get straight A1s...I took another subject because my mom and I think that if i take an Arts course (by the way, I don't think Economics should be considered as an Arts course) so I can have another route in life to choose from. So I wouldn't be stuck in sciences especially if I'm not good at it. But I got lucky. And indeed lucky, because my year, almost everyone who gets straight A1s gets a scholarship. But it isn't the case for the following year. Not everyone got a scholarship even though they scored straight A1s for SPM.
Doesn't it feel frustrating when all your efforts go unrecognized simply because you fail to get an A1 for a subject or if you fail to get ENOUGH A1s to beat the other person who got more A1s? But ask yourself. Isn't it the society that goes 'ooh' and 'aah' when someone gets straight A1s or more A1s? That is why you're striving for that, isn't it? I rest my case.
I'm a co-curricular activities person...not very academic-orientated...so I'm all for the student who does well academically AND non-academically as well...it doesn't matter if you don't get straight A1s (or the lack of number of A1s) as long as you have those skills and talents and passion that others don't. Not every book-smart person is street-smart. So what if you don't get a scholarship and your plans get frustrated and there's obstacles everywhere? It is the fact that you can get around all those despite of everything that makes you the fighter and survivor in life. I know it's easy for me to say because I'm nicely sitting here in the States, being sponsored and all. But trust me, I admire street-smart people more than book-smart people.


This is quite true.
When I study in INTI college I see many very talented geniouses but they do not score more than 6 A

When I was studying in INTEC MARA Shah Alam I see lotsa top scorers who appears to be a bunch of bookworms. Dissapointing indeed. One of the guy who scored 13A1 (name not mention) appear to be a loner who lacks communication skill. But never mind, he is still considered a genious...

Well, under peer pressure, memes, environment and mind frame, it is already a disease planted in our mind that life is always competitive.

I have an example... this time is teacher?s fault...

no doubt there are extremely genious students amongst us but quite often some of them behave very strange (due to extreme curiousity I guess) but not many teacher really appreciate them.

In a class there are 2 students.

One does all the homework all the time but read only novel.
He got good result and teacher always praise him (typical study a lot, learn little type of student)

another guy is a weirdo. He always read in the class and seldom he do homeworrk nor really pay much attention. when the teacher looks at what he?s doing, he?s reading stuff like "history of almost everything by bill bryson, the secret of quarks and sub-atomic particle, the mysterious wormhole and string theory" etc.

the teacher got angry and complain to his parents that this guy read rubbhish and should learn only what is taught by the teach (this is the fate of learn a lot but study little type of student)

so under such situation, it is no doubt to expect the majority of top scholars are just geeks. dissapointing indeed.

===============

Einstein failed college due to poor exam result and thomas edison is doing poorly in his school.

btw, gal_flower , what activities do you do?

[WeiJie]

lyzzy wrote:
An engineer needs other subjects too, you know. Writing, literature, art, music, history and all that.... otherwise, you are not 'educated', you are just a machine, doing something because you get something. There is a good percentage of the population with this mindset (mostly chinese), and that's why the chinese stereotype "cinapek" comes in. You may be a capable engineer who's very good at what you do - but you are still uneducated if you don't appreciate art or lit or music or whatever.


now tats really machine doing writing, music , art , history ...
ermm wat i mean is not dun take those subjects , but be more concerntrated on wat u want to study
i NEVER said tat not to take the subs , juz tat spend more time on other important subjects

frankly i dun think history , art should put in EXAM
these subjects true are interesting , but is completely not require in future unless u going to be artist etc related to them

anyway i think is out of topic =P jus to clerify wat i want to say

[gal_flower]

iQing wrote:
btw, gal_flower , what activities do you do?

LOL...I'm like in a whole bunch of crap but the ones I WAS really active in WERE netball, track and field, prefectorial board, choir, cheerleading (in spore) etc...
My mom used to scold me whenever I choose to go for this and that instead of staying at home and study...LOL
But now, I'm slightly more passive...

[iQing]

Interesting. I use to practise wushu a lot but now I go to fitness centre very often and do sungazing.

I learn lotsa stuffs on internet and sometimes I do my own experiments.

[lolilo]

Scored 14 1A and 1 2A(in biology) SPM 2003

He got offered to pursue medicine in Cambridge by JPA....No joke seriously



no fair..........A2 in biology and yet medicine.......in cambridge. :(

[Neutral_pH]

Nah....I am not sure that Cambridge is a good place to study medicine though, i think Ireland and the US are the good ones and on yeah France!

Probably you ppl who want to take medicine should try to apply to France, it is reputed to be one of the top in the world. And it is a bit more cheaper if compared to the US and UK, as the fees are sponsored by the government. So far no malaysian students managed to finish medic in France, all of them failed the entry test to the medical school and that's why JPA and MARA are not sending any medical students to France anymore. I am way out of topic though...heheheh

I agree with youngyew said, I think it's about time they overhaul the system and give a good cleaning, tweak a bit here and there.

[inevitable]

so, now what do you want? you want them to choose the student based on what then? you want them to test every student in malaysia on their 'real-world' ability? is that what you want? better think about it more logically. there are thousands of students take spm every year, how do you think the scholarships going to manage that? there are a lot of competition. how do you think they want to choose the student? based on spm ofcourse. they cant afford to manage a test of ability on the 'real-world' on every student. even if they do, they would only choose the good results. how else do you want them to? even if the students who are not so good in spm are actually can do the 'real stuff' like you said, then the spm wont be a block for them, if they are good enough, they would survive and be great people. i know a lot of people who did not pass spm but are rich people now. spm is a reward, you work hard, you'll get the prize. but there's not just one prize in this world, there are a lot more. you dont get this one, you can try and get the other. even if you feel unsatisfied and try to prove something ridiculous as you just post here, that's the way it is, better think about it more deeply before you post something like this[/b]

[zchen]

talking about this...i think fairness is not an issue at all...we know the game since the start that people with more 1As get the deal...if we really wanted it...we have to play the game...not thinking of other matters than question the rules later after the results are out...personally,regardless of whatever subject amalina took,her hard efforts paid off..and i congratulate her for the success.

btw,i am applying for JPA too....for medicine<similar with her pick>....
i know it's tough...but i believe in miracles.....just hope it happens

[jabir1909]

I think taking as many subject in SPM to gain attention of the media or to gain praises by the others or to get the best scholarship is one's private matters and is up to anyone to do so. Its their right whether its right or wrong. But let us not to forget that when one have to decide to take more subjects than everyone else, they DO realize that it means the more burden they'll have to carry and the more difficult their percentage of getting straight A's (of course we're all aim for straight A's). They, too, surely have feeling, and they surely wont break theirs, nor their families who have even higher hopes for them, especially when they’ll have more eyes looking onto them by making such a decision. Believe me there're surely so much things one will have to consider before they make such a decision of a life time, and they surely wont just do it for such particular reasons that I’ve mentioned at first.. So what makes them do so? I believe its about their extremely adorable self-confidence that makes them want to proof to they themselves of their own potential, or if they do were born talented, why they should bother to waste their special ability, which no one will.. Well, for the prizes Amalina’ve won herself, we could say that it was her luck, and she didn’t even ask for it (did she?).. I can even say that she deserve it for everything she’d done. I believe if she is ever going to get a scholarship then the sponsor have done the right thing (its fairer to give scholarship to her, rather than everyone else and not her isn’t it? well, she’s the best for last year’s remember?) And who said she’s not active in co-curricular activities? There’re time when sometimes the sponsors keep one of their eyes shut over the co-curricular to judge a possible scholarship candidate, well again, its their right.. If you don’t like it well it’s unfortunate for you because that’s how our world works. And if we’re going to put someone like Amalina in that 2 weeks camp, I guess she’ll demand for a longer period for that camp, too ;)

[iQing]

I think it is nothing wrong if you take a lot of subjects to prove your ability and give yourself a goal to improve your acadamic status and ability. Sometimes it can be a good motivation.

If the motive behind your action is positive, there?s nothing wrong to go for as many As as possible.

If your motive is for pride.... *shrug*

[chloecircus]

as an sbp student i think it's not fair actually coz sbp'ens were given only few choices of subjects and cnt xceed a number of subjects..whereas students in public skools were allowed to take as many subjects as they cn afford 2 take..nway, its nt lyk ur gonna use all d subjects u take! its juz a matter of proving urselves..i guess :roll:

[iQing]

as an sbp student i think it's not fair actually coz sbp'ens were given only few choices of subjects and cnt xceed a number of subjects..whereas students in public skools were allowed to take as many subjects as they cn afford 2 take..nway, its nt lyk ur gonna use all d subjects u take! its juz a matter of proving urselves..i guess :roll:

Er. I think I do not really understand what you are trying to say. Can you please translate it to simple English without abbreviation?

[youngyew]

so, now what do you want? you want them to choose the student based on what then? you want them to test every student in malaysia on their 'real-world' ability? is that what you want? better think about it more logically. there are thousands of students take spm every year, how do you think the scholarships going to manage that? there are a lot of competition. how do you think they want to choose the student? based on spm ofcourse. they cant afford to manage a test of ability on the 'real-world' on every student. even if they do, they would only choose the good results. how else do you want them to? even if the students who are not so good in spm are actually can do the 'real stuff' like you said, then the spm wont be a block for them, if they are good enough, they would survive and be great people. i know a lot of people who did not pass spm but are rich people now. spm is a reward, you work hard, you'll get the prize. but there's not just one prize in this world, there are a lot more. you dont get this one, you can try and get the other. even if you feel unsatisfied and try to prove something ridiculous as you just post here, that's the way it is, better think about it more deeply before you post something like this
First of all, probably you are new in ReCom, but I don't think typing everything in a bold font is a good demeanor in a forum. :wink:

And I don't know why you would get so irated with our ongoing discussion. Nobody lobbied for the demolishment of the whole examination system, nobody said university has to pick their students with real-world talent. Please reread carefully and think about it more deeply before you post something like this.

The whole discussion has been orientated on the point that, instead of judging the student's aptitude by his results in the relevant subjects, the yardstick of academic aptitude (which directly affects scholarship chance) has been deformed to the number of subjects he takes up (and get A1 in).

Is it fair? Yes, everyone knows that it has become the rule of the game, you take up more subjects, you get more A1, you get a higher chance of getting scholarship. But is it fair at all? Please don't be complacent as to say that this is the rule of the game, so just accept it. Remember, this is not an opt-out game, every single student in Malaysia has to take it, and we have to improve the game as much as possible instead of just accepting the status quo.

My point is: Okay, assume that I am an excellent student who takes up "only" 10 subjects. I knew very well from the beginning of form 4 that I want to become a doctor in the future, so I only took those core subjects and science electives. Besides, I also didn't feel the need to take up subjects which I was not interested in and didn't find any thrill in the prospect of gaining fame from scoring 20 A1. SPM is over, and I scored extremely well in all of the subjects, and got 9A1 and 1A2 in chinese language (haha, ring a bell?). Now the moment of truth: there are this hundreds of people who took up astronomic amount of A1 and got astronomic amount of A1 (probably some partial supra-result, like those 11A1 and 2A2). Remember these astronomic scorers aren't necessarily better than him just because they scored more A1. I think it's an undeniable fact no matter which side of fence you are on.

You don't have to be a good guesser to know what happens. Those astronomic scorer got the coveted JPA offers, and I have to cry at home.

See, this is the effect of the game. This is not a fabricated story, but it happens to many friends around me. Yea yea, you can say that you should have known the rule of the game, but has any curricular statement of SPM ever stated that "students aptitude are ranked accordingly based on the number of A1"? I was game over, but I lost because I didn't follow the undocumented "rule of game". Now tell me, is that fair?

As I have said before, the problem doesn't lie on the students who take up N subjects themselves, because they are just trying to survive and thrive in the system. It's the system that goes unhealthy. Personally I congratulate Nur Amalina and other high scorers who have proved themselves, and I heartilly think that they should be proud of their paid hardwork and the achievement. But I sympathize even with more emotion for those who are sidelined by the unhealthy system. Even the government itself should feel bad about the unfairness, because it's our beloved country that suffers the loss of talents.

so, now what do you want?
As a remedy, I would like to say that a fixed amount of subjects (or at least set a ceiling limit) is the better way of creating healthily competitive environment. A-level is fairly good, although the decrease of standard has sort of created another problem of unability to separate the diamond from the pebbles.

p/s: For the record, I am currently a JPA sponsored student who was lucky enough to have scored 10A1 and lucky again to have been chosen by JPA. So all my previous posts were not "sour grape" posts. Although I survived the cruel test, I was greatly saddened to hear the stories of wasted talents because of the "rule of game".[/b]

[pangping1510]

edited

[USSDefiantNX74205]

As a remedy, I would like to say that a fixed amount of subjects (or at least set a ceiling limit) is the better way of creating healthily competitive environment.

In addition to setting a limit to the number of subjects that can be taken, I would suggest the MOE be more stringent in marking and maintaining the standards of the SPM. No use setting the ceiling when there is a prospect of more and more students getting the max number of A1s available. Such a scenario decreases the quality of the exam and gives JPA a big headache too.

As for Amalina, I find it pretty unfair that MARA immediately made an offer to sponsor her after her results were announced. Does this mean getting 17A1s (or the best result in the nation) immediately exempts you from the selection process that everyone else has to go through? If so, I bet it will only encourage folks to gun for 18A1s or more next year and the years after that - not for the knowledge, but for the scholarships.[/quote]

[lolilo]

as an sbp student i think it's not fair actually coz sbp'ens were given only few choices of subjects and cnt xceed a number of subjects..whereas students in public skools were allowed to take as many subjects as they cn afford 2 take..nway, its nt lyk ur gonna use all d subjects u take! its juz a matter of proving urselves..i guess :roll:

Er. I think I do not really understand what you are trying to say. Can you please translate it to simple English without abbreviation?

lol.okay, i guess i can clarify.students from Sekolah Berasrama Penuh(SBP) can only take a certain amount of subjects, which i guess is around 11 - 12.This step taken is to maintain the quality of their students(so that they dont screw up the school's results?) The same goes to MRSM, which we can only take 11 subjects (maximum). My teacher told me thats why student from SBP or MRSM wont be the top student or appear in the media(low profile :))

p/s: you really have to look at the satistics of these schools.You will be in awe.

[kucingbiru]

well, i'm not sure if tha's why SBP's do it for that reason. my school did that because we didn't have enough specialized teachers to teach other subjects. yes, they dont want the students to screw up the results, and they dont want teachers to screw up too.

[Neutral_pH]

Well as it goes again I had to agree with youngyew. The whole exam system has been distorted to such a way that passing the SPM with flying colours is the get a scholarship rather than to gauge your capability in that particular subject or subjects. The true reason why SPM was formed at the first place (modeled after the GCSE O levels) was that to separate the cream from crowd, allowing them for higher study in order so that THEY COULD HELP PUSH THE COUNTRY FORWARD.
Think about it, SPM now isn't like what our parents had last time. Somehow it has been oversimplified, making scoring probably a bit too easy. That's why our parents then took a fixed amount of subjects and that's why SPM then was accepted as a minimum requirement to work. Go compare the Add maths papers then and now, and you will see there is a huge difference between them. Now nobody accepts SPM for work, as they know how the papers are marked, and you could see probably it has a very low standard indeed.
Revamp the exam system to a higher level and possibly set the grades, like if A is 80-100, then use it and DON"T CHANGE. Don't based the grades according to the exam results. In that way quality is preserved and probably no one could get an A so easily as before.
Tweak the exam system or the education system as a whole. Well I don't feel nice probably I have offended some of you by posting this topic, but please could you see now that people goes to school not to gain knowledge but only to pass exams and earn scholarships? Then what's the point of gaining knowledge then? Only to earn money and have a castle?
Oh yeah to Jabir 1909, i didn't say anything about amalina not deserving anything but please do note that what others think when you get a laptop and cash and free scholarship while the past top scorers don't even get anything like that? Fair? The queen of johor went to visit her while the past 16As girl no MBs ever go and wish her congrats? what do you think of that?
No I am not saying anything wrong about these people, but what's the point of scoring A1s if only to get scholarship? Sell your pride for money? GAIN KNOWLEDGE NOT BECAUSE OF CASH, ACKNOWLEDGEMENT BUT BECAUSE YOU WANT TO HELP OTHERS GAIN KNOWLEDGE AND DEVELOP THEMSELVES TOO.

[gonjeng]

err... why did i do to high school in the first place? i think, maybe because everybody goes to school and so did i :)

anyway, now whos to say that the achievers went through all the hassle not because they love knowledge, but scholarships? money? from my understanding, neutral, you are implying that they did all those just because money. aiseh... i bet if they actually read this thread, they'll get pissed off of the accusations, which i believe is mainly based on assumptions.

also, im sorry but i dont see what is wrong with busting your ass study gila2 for money and acknowledgement. as long as they are not violating other's right, what is the problem again? should i had the passion and will to do the same, i would have done the same also... well mainly, to build up my own self confidence (and err... ego? lol). when you did something which has never been done before, do you not feel good?

Oh yeah to Jabir 1909, i didn't say anything about amalina not deserving anything but please do note that what others think when you get a laptop and cash and free scholarship while the past top scorers don't even get anything like that? Fair? The queen of johor went to visit her while the past 16As girl no MBs ever go and wish her congrats? what do you think of that?

thats what i call luck. its too bad laa if last years achievers didnt get the same kind of attention. at the same time, this cannot be reason to achieve better than them. for example, the year before i flew to US was when mesia had its economic downturn. many scholarship were pull back and students were asked to return to mesia. when the economy has recovered, according to your argument, its not fair to sponsor my batch just because the students from the previous year did not receive the same chance. aiseh, while i still respect your opinion, i dont think its the right thing to do.

also, from my point of view, earning extra A's in SPM is like acquiring extra major's and minors in universities. why do you think some ppl spend extra year and put extra effort to graduate with extra majors? or minors? one thing i know is to increase their chance to get a job. secondly, for the sake of knowledge. they love to study *ehem* nerd! *ehem* (kidding :p) and thirdly, for whatever reasons, to proof to themselves or others that they can. anyhow, is there anything wrong earning extra degree merely to get a job? if not, then i dont think there's anything wrong earning extra A's to guarantee getting a scholarship.

heh as i said, as long as you are not troubling others, i dont see anything wrong in getting billions and billions of A's. nevertheless, i do agree with some of you all who said that the examination scheme has to be reviewed.

and USSDef... why is it unfair again? when the selection criteria is mainly based on SPM results? it is unfair IF, from her SPM results, she is not qualified and yet she was offered - indicating some politics involved :) if you are refering to the interview, extra 'personality test (im not sure they still give this test or not), yada yada... i believe those are merely protocols and i shouldnt hurt anybody if it is skipped. :)

[USSDefiantNX74205]

Right, gonjeng. But if the protocols are skipped for her, shouldn't it be skipped for every top scorer then? While most of us here (including me) believe that the interview is just a side show and what really decides are the SPM results, protocol is still protocol and must be followed.

[USSDefiantNX74205]

Oh, and by immediately offering her a scholarship without the fuss and hassle, the government has put themselves in a tight situation whereby they'd be under pressure to immediately offer every year's top scorer a scholarship as well.

[inevitable]

i have one question, okay lets follow you guys who feel bad about this edu. system. every student are allowed only to take 10 subjects for this year. it turns out half of the students got 10A1. and more get straight a's. so now, how's the system? how do they want to choose for schorlarship and stuff?
another one, when a few students got a good schorlarship, others will demand why they didnt get to be choosed?
there will be no difference between universities, every body ask for the same best place, thinking they could get it with their good results. when they dont, conflict will happen, riot, parents will go out asking why their children didnt get what others who achieve as much as their children get.
do u really think it is wise to limit the subjects taken in spm...

[USSDefiantNX74205]

it turns out half of the students got 10A1. and more get straight a's. so now, how's the system? how do they want to choose for schorlarship and stuff?

Which is why I mentioned this earlier:

In addition to setting a limit to the number of subjects that can be taken, I would suggest the MOE be more stringent in marking and maintaining the standards of the SPM. No use setting the ceiling when there is a prospect of more and more students getting the max number of A1s available. Such a scenario decreases the quality of the exam and gives JPA a big headache too.

[jabir1909]

Ahem, straight to the point, even if these people takes more subjects in SPM for an intension (money, fame, etc..), let?s say that they took them as their MOTIVATION (and is there anything wrong with that?). And they?re lucky enough if they manage to succeed it (or worse things could happen). Different people have different type of motivation, and at least their success manage to open up some lazy eyes or became a strong motivation among the other youngsters (how beautiful).
I guess what you really want is a world of equality where everyone should have the same achievement and later they should get everything the same as a reward (hello, we?re not robots). Well, unsurprisingly we all know that God doesn?t create our world this way, that?s why we are obligated to believe in fate and destiny because this life has so many ups and downs that come in time. Well, if we don?t get our satisfactory result in SPM, don?t give up coz every dog has its day ;)
[/quote]

[gonjeng]

Right, gonjeng. But if the protocols are skipped for her, shouldn't it be skipped for every top scorer then? While most of us here (including me) believe that the interview is just a side show and what really decides are the SPM results, protocol is still protocol and must be followed.

err... was your result as good as hers? 17A1's, or at least 17A's? i guess not. also, say... how many students in the whole mesia achieved the same result as you did? im not downplaying your results, but i believe if you received 10, 11 or 12 A's, which unfortunately is getting more and more common, you may have to go through the same 'screening' procedures. and i disagree with your last statement. i think it is stupid to go through some protocols, just for the sake of formality, if the outcome has been decided. whereas in most students cases, you are not guranteed a scholarship yet. hence, you will have to go through them. also, just wanna clarify that when i said that the interview and etc are merely protocols, it is ONLY in her case (because she WILL receive the scholarship regardless). in your case (and others too), it is different and is stated as above :)

and i dont see why the government wouldnt want to sponsor every year's top student. they have the money, so why not? there's this competition between JPA and mara to sponsor the best students, ya know...

cherios...

[gohweihan]

Right, gonjeng. But if the protocols are skipped for her, shouldn't it be skipped for every top scorer then? While most of us here (including me) believe that the interview is just a side show and what really decides are the SPM results, protocol is still protocol and must be followed.

err... was your result as good as hers? 17A1's, or at least 17A's? i guess not. also, say... how many students in the whole mesia achieved the same result as you did? im not downplaying your results, but i believe if you received 10, 11 or 12 A's, which unfortunately is getting more and more common, you may have to go through the same 'screening' procedures. and i disagree with your last statement. i think it is stupid to go through some protocols, just for the sake of formality, if the outcome has been decided. whereas in most students cases, you are not guranteed a scholarship yet. hence, you will have to go through them. also, just wanna clarify that when i said that the interview and etc are merely protocols, it is ONLY in her case (because she WILL receive the scholarship regardless). in your case (and others too), it is different and is stated as above :)

and i dont see why the government wouldnt want to sponsor every year's top student. they have the money, so why not? there's this competition between JPA and mara to sponsor the best students, ya know...

cherios...

Inability to follow protocols lead to questions being asked, and when the government gives some answer that does no more than divide opinion, that is what you're going to have in the media.

If the govenment really wants to sponsor top students every year, have something like the Lee Kuan Yew Scholarship in Singapore. That way, you know that the top student would be given the scholarship because there is no protocol to bypass whatsoever.

The mistake here was by MARA to just simply pop in, and say that girl is going to get a scholarship. To bypass protocol is a dangerous thing that MARA needs to be prepared to answer to all the people.

However, just to note, interviews are not just protocol. It may be, for those top students now. But it does have an effect for those on borderline cases. Mine was a good example. 2 people, exact same result, exact same country and course for application. My friend got it, I didn't. At that time, the number of straight A scorers was about twice the number of straight 1A scorers now.

But the thing is, I may still be satisfied with this issue, because in a way, my friend did involve himself in co-curricular and was not those who just studied to get 1As'. I am just unhappy with the way JPA offers scholarships, that is prioritizing straight A scorers first. From my own observation, there are indeed people who got JPA but are nothing more than walking books - no life, spend physical education doing nothing but training his fingers doing maths, and always carrying a book around (read: textbook) and could possibly quote the textbook for you if required. Ask him anything else and he would ask you back "Is it in the syllabus?".

The remaining question is what the government can do, and what these students can do. The idea is this. The government now doesn't seem to care but to prioritize based on what they are prioritizing before. For the students, they still worship the books in order to get 1As' and get the governments prize to go overseas.

But to some extent, I would say these students don't look far on their own. I attribute this to the very narrow mindset of straight 1As' to JPA to happy life. Those who are the type whose life aren't just about books would probably agree with me - life after SPM is more than just about getting JPA. No doubt, I complained after not getting JPA, but that was merely for like a week, in which then I set my target straight - STPM, then Singapore (no matter if I get a scholarship or not, at that time), and no looking back to the inefficient government systems (of which one is the JPA selection criteria).

The idea of taking many subjects for SPM in order to broaden knowledge is nothing but a superficial statement of which there is not much sense to be made of. No doubt, we would learn a little more, but to what extent can these be utilized in the real world. It's not about specializing early, but merely to take the subjects that we are interested in, and then followed by moving towards studying what we are interested when we are in university. I was told before to take Principles of Accounts during my SPM (everyone told me to take), but I didn't want to take it, because I know that I would not want to be an accountant, and that even if I did, PA wouldn't help me much because it just covers nothing but the basics. I may as well go for an ACCA certification if I want to be an accountant.

The government doesn't get my support for what they are doing, and neither do those who try to obtain as many 1As as possible just for the mere sake of securing JPA (with some claiming that they are taking it to broaden their knowledge to blanket the real reason for taking that many subjects).

[youngyew]

I guess what you really want is a world of equality where everyone should have the same achievement and later they should get everything the same as a reward (hello, we?re not robots). Well, unsurprisingly we all know that God doesn?t create our world this way, that?s why we are obligated to believe in fate and destiny because this life has so many ups and downs that come in time. Well, if we don?t get our satisfactory result in SPM, don?t give up coz every dog has its day ;)
What about the unfair treatment to those who refused the game of "get as many subjects as possible to prove yourself"?

We are not asking for a world of equality, it's Utopian. What we ask are to reduce inequity. Please don't distort other's arguments in favour of your point, dude. Nobody said everyone should get the same rewards, we just said that the reward system (if that is what you would like to call it) should be based on a common and fair pitch.

In case anyone doesn't understand what I am talking about, please refer to my previous post in page 3.

p/s: And ya, about "unsatisfactory result", should I consider 9A1 1A2 as "unsatisfactory"? :roll:

[Neutral_pH]

Well, the topic is getting hotter and hotter, isn't it? heheh....

Ok gonjeng you're asking for it :D ,
Well in a way you're troubling others by denying them a chance to continue study in instituitions of higher learning. Oh one more thing I really respect nerds and I hope one day my wife is one of them you know....heheh :P
I never said it's wrong but perhaps scholarships givers should review the way they are handing out all this money. AND you cannot liken adding more subjects in SPM is like putting extra majors or minors in unis. They're totally different. Lemme tell you somethin old boy (or gal) even if you have 17 different majors or minors attached to your scrolls that doesn't land you a job with anybody. It's different with SPM, the more As you have, the more chances you will have, like if you get around 20-25 A1s I bet that JPA and MARA will be begging you to take up their scholarship. Different from the working world, degrees don't guarante jobs.
Oh gonjeng..I took my SPM in 2003, not this year so don't think I am a sour grape.
Of course the guys with a dozen As do deserve the scholarships but how about the 6-9As, don't they deserve a chance too? As I have said in the beginning ( I introduce this topic by the way), 9As doesn't mean they are inferior to those with 13++++As. In fact they are better in some ways. But being in the shadow of the higher As scorers meant that they can't bring out their full potential, and the country loses this guys in the end. Which one you will rather have, one person with 18As or 7 with 9As? You rather sacrifice 1000 guys just to save a person?

[lolilo]

I really respect nerds and I hope one day my wife is one of them you know....heheh

GOOD LUCK then...

[USSDefiantNX74205]

Right, gonjeng. But if the protocols are skipped for her, shouldn't it be skipped for every top scorer then? While most of us here (including me) believe that the interview is just a side show and what really decides are the SPM results, protocol is still protocol and must be followed.

err... was your result as good as hers? 17A1's, or at least 17A's? i guess not. also, say... how many students in the whole mesia achieved the same result as you did? im not downplaying your results, but i believe if you received 10, 11 or 12 A's, which unfortunately is getting more and more common, you may have to go through the same 'screening' procedures. and i disagree with your last statement. i think it is stupid to go through some protocols, just for the sake of formality, if the outcome has been decided. whereas in most students cases, you are not guranteed a scholarship yet. hence, you will have to go through them. also, just wanna clarify that when i said that the interview and etc are merely protocols, it is ONLY in her case (because she WILL receive the scholarship regardless). in your case (and others too), it is different and is stated as above :)

Bending the rules for anyone is wrong, period. Also, if we go according to what you say, then all straight A1 scorers should be awarded scholarships immediately too since their outcomes have already been decided, right?

and i dont see why the government wouldnt want to sponsor every year's top student. they have the money, so why not? there's this competition between JPA and mara to sponsor the best students, ya know...

Maybe I didn't make my point clearly. What I'm saying is that the govt will now be expected to bend the rules and give scholarships to each year's top scorer. Failure to do that would see the govt's integrity and motives questioned.

[pangping1510]

since the gov like straight A1s so much, just take the basic subjects...get 9A1, 10A1 and the scholarship is urs...remember to forget those who got more A1 than them but din get straight A1 bcuz of more A2... :lol:

[zchen]

i am a very pessimistic person....to those who intend to change the way scholarships are given out,good luck in your noble mission<i am set to benefit from it>...although i believe it's a pity many more are wasted when only one is offered a scholarship...i think this<politics aside> happens everywhere...top scorers are yards ahead of the rest...that is always the case.the outstanding one wins the competition....

[lyzzy]

You rather sacrifice 1000 guys just to save a person?

I just would like to point out that this statement, while it may seem obvious to you that the answer is NO, is highly subjective.

What if the person is your brother? What if the person is YOURSELF?

The point that I'm trying to make is that different people have different priorities; and you shouldn't assume that JPA has the same priorities as yourself. I agree with you that their priorities is wrongly placed, but to defend it, you do need a better argument than the above.

Also, I would like to say that the person who gets 17A1s and has NO special extracurricular activities whatsoever (except doing what "all normal teenagers" do which includes watching tv and what not) is NOT BETTER, but actually worse off, than the person who gets 10A1s and represents the country in something. This is just a hypothetical example btw.

However, a "normal teenager" who gets 17A1s is better than a "normal teenager" who gets 10A1s. It's what you do with your time that counts - whether you spend it studying, or achieving something extracurricularly, or wasting it, as in the second case.

What JPA does is that they totally don't look at extracurricular activities and judge solely on number of A1s.

If you feel like you should be judged by virtue of your extracurricular activities, as well as results, I dare you to apply for US universities. I dare you to be more successful in life than the others who got more A1s - then you can look at them and laugh.
________
M10 (http://www.bmw-tech.org/wiki/BMW_M10)

[wwhong]

What JPA does is that they totally don't look at extracurricular activities and judge solely on number of A1s.



any evidence or proof that you can provide that support the statement? from what i understood, co-curricular plays an important part when applying for JPA scholarship too. maybe i m too out dated. please update me.

[lyzzy]

What JPA does is that they totally don't look at extracurricular activities and judge solely on number of A1s.



any evidence or proof that you can provide that support the statement? from what i understood, co-curricular plays an important part when applying for JPA scholarship too. maybe i m too out dated. please update me.

This girl represented her state in swimming, she also won some Anugerah Pelajar from some VIP.. now she's doing Pharmacy in UK. She got 9A1s and 1A2 (in Moral). She got rejected.

Another guy represented MALAYSIA in the International Maths Olympiad (four to six students are chosen each year). Now he's in Cambridge. But he got rejected by JPA. He didn't get straight A1s (Mandarin)

Two other people who got into Cambridge and had very good extracurriculars was also rejected by JPA. They didn't get straight A1s (I think 9A1s and 1A2 in Mandarin). One guy had to turn down his Cambridge offer to go to a Singaporean univ because despite pleading with JPA, he still couldn't get the scholarship or any funding.

All are batch of SPM '02.

I could name many more, but you get my point.
________
penny stock picks (http://pennystockpicks.net/)

[el_empty]

i think students should look to not depend on jpa, and instead try to look towards private or foreign sources. unless you want to work towards an alternative govt, the jpa and its unfathomable style is here to stay. you'd think that years of dealing with this has taught them a lesson but nooo... it's dark inside the tempurung.

i gave up relying on the gov since F3, when i was sidelined from a promotion to a better class bc of 'sensitive' reasons. in my story, good ECAs and grades won't really take you anywhere so i had to take myself somewhere where people appreciate good grades and good ECAs.

[lolilo]

since the gov like straight A1s so much, just take the basic subjects...get 9A1, 10A1 and the scholarship is urs...remember to forget those who got more A1 than them but din get straight A1 bcuz of more A2... :lol:

This statement sounds stupid and crude, but it is trueeee....

[OperaGhost]

As I have said in the beginning ( I introduce this topic by the way), 9As doesn't mean they are inferior to those with 13++++As. In fact they are better in some ways. But being in the shadow of the higher As scorers meant that they can't bring out their full potential, and the country loses this guys in the end.

I truely agree with that. Nowadays it quite easy to get A1s. (except BC and Moral) Score 80+ and that A1 is in your pocket. It's still the same even if you surpass those who set the questions and score 180 in your Maths paper. So even if you get A1, it doesn?t mean you?re really good in that subject. For instance, a guy who got A1 for SPM English gave me a ?they doesn?t? and I believe that?s not a typing error. (I got A1 in GCE O Level English but my English is not that good either)

And the marking scheme is really unreasonable. In some occasions, you?ll get marks as long as the keywords are there, even if you can?t write a proper sentence. But sometimes, you got the right answer but your sentences were not phrased according to the marking scheme and bingo! You?ve earned yourself a big fat zero.

Those who score 80-85 in 20 subjects are not necessarily superior to those who score 95+ in 10 subjects. To me, the latter are geniuses but in reality, the former are more likely to bag the scholarships. Frankly, getting lots of A1's means nothing to me. I've got 10++A1s (straight A1s) but I'm still as stupid as ever. Duh.

[Neutral_pH]

Yeah if that was me well...I don't know, truthfully, but hey it wasn't me! :D

Right, I have some suggestions for this thing. I think that the government should limit the number of subjects taken for SPM and then revised the marking scheme. Make it more difficult for them to score As.
If anyone is against the subjects limits, then we should abolished the grading system and replace with points. Here we should try the French Baccalaureat system. All right, no subjects limitations, but add all the marks and then averaged them out of the number of subjects taken. In that way, we could see who's good or otherwise. Then all is fair I think, since the sum of all the marks divided by the sum of the subjects taken will provide for a fair assessment. Provide marks for individual subjects so that the scholarship givers will know who are they dealing with.
And what if the student take a subject only? well then if he/she is applying for a scholarship, then he/she will not be entertained. All scholarships have a requirement, y'kno.

[lyzzy]

It's surprising that no one has mentioned anything about extracurricular activities - that just goes to show how one-sided Malaysian concept of education is and what moulded their students to be like.
________
Yamaha XV920R (http://www.yamaha-tech.com/wiki/Yamaha_XV920R)

[youngyew]

Another guy represented MALAYSIA in the International Maths Olympiad (four to six students are chosen each year). Now he's in Cambridge. But he got rejected by JPA. He didn't get straight A1s (Mandarin)
Are you referring to Ta Sheng?

[DecentMerson]

It's surprising that no one has mentioned anything about extracurricular activities - that just goes to show how one-sided Malaysian concept of education is and what moulded their students to be like.

it's not surprising at all becoz it is not the subject of the thread.

[iQing]

Yup. It is not the topic.

Taking co curriculum doesn?t mean you are all rounded...

Maybe co curriculum is just another loop where students are trapped in it and not learning anything useful due to some reason (flaws) ?
that would be another topic.

I would say they should add better criteria in SPM exam to measure an invidual?s capability more accurately such as...

taking initiative to read very good books (I would recommend Bill Bryson and Tony Buzan)

Looking at the quality of our national library, I doubt Malaysian student would reach a new limit of learning or have some sort of breakthrough.


-----------------

Well, normally we only take SPM ONCE in our lifetime and what is wrong of giving the best shot and get many As?

[chiunlin]

In retrospect, I have to admit that part of the motivation for me to take 11 subjects back then is to be the one "outstanding" student in my school. But such a motivation is due largely to the fact that if I have taken 10 subjects, I would have been like all other 10A1s scorers in my school, though I definitely outperform them in nearly every single subject( I always got perfect or near perfect scores for my science and math subjects, as well as history). And I believe that there are so many straight As scorers is because the A grade cutoff point is very low( around high 60s, that was what my parents, both secondary school teachers, told me).

So, IMHO, lots of A1s would only have a meaning if the government raise the A grade cutoff point back to 80(which, according to my form 5 chinese teacher, is the cutoff point for BC).

By the way, why am I seeing two threads on A1s in SPM?

[pangping1510]

just raise the standard of the marking scheme...all wil b fine... :lol:

[pangping1510]

double post

[jun]

currently, the gov uses the graf system. if there is too many people passing or getting A1 for a certain subject, then the passing mark and the A1 mark is raised. if the other way around, then the passing mark and the A1 mark is reduced.

so actually the gov is the one that decides how many people will get straight A1 every year or how many people passes. this system is flawed and unfair because a person who gets A2 in a certain year might get A1 another year for the SAME paper. some times the A1 mark can be 65 and other times it can be 85 for a given subject.

this sort of power and manipulation totally defeats the purpose of the grading system which is to assess and seperate the weak, the good and the great.

the funny thing is the solution to this problem is very simple. just SET the grading mark the same EVERY year. for example, the A1 mark for every subject every year should be 80.A2 should be 75 and so on.

the question that rings in my mind is why does the gov prefer the flawed system and not the logically fair and just system?

anyone know the answer?

[youngyew]

currently, the gov uses the graf system. if there is too many people passing or getting A1 for a certain subject, then the passing mark and the A1 mark is raised. if the other way around, then the passing mark and the A1 mark is reduced.

so actually the gov is the one that decides how many people will get straight A1 every year or how many people passes. this system is flawed and unfair because a person who gets A2 in a certain year might get A1 another year for the SAME paper. some times the A1 mark can be 65 and other times it can be 85 for a given subject.

this sort of power and manipulation totally defeats the purpose of the grading system which is to assess and seperate the weak, the good and the great.

the funny thing is the solution to this problem is very simple. just SET the grading mark the same EVERY year. for example, the A1 mark for every subject every year should be 80.A2 should be 75 and so on.

the question that rings in my mind is why does the gov prefer the flawed system and not the logically fair and just system?

anyone know the answer?
I beg to differ.

Apparently, it would solve any problem if we were to use same cut-off point for every year, as it would seem fair to students from all years. But the problem is, the exam standard does differ from one year to another. Let's say, the government has decided one day to set the A1 threshold as 80 for chinese language for every single year. Now, according to my command of language, I may get 81 in 2004 paper but I may get only 74 in 2003 paper. So, I would have gotten A1 in year 2004 but only 2003 in year 2003. This is the problem that the MOE tries to avoid by using the graph system.

By graph system, they may set that the best one tenth of all candidates would obtain an A1. This would be a fairer approach, in my opinion, because even when the exam paper difficulty fluctuates from one year to another, I would still obtain an A1 if my level of Chinese language is among the top tenth of all candidates.

Therefore, instead of setting a fixed threshold score, MOE should set a fixed threshold graph distribution instead.

[gohweihan]

I'll comment on this grading system and fairness only after I complete my module on Test and Assesments for my minor over here....

[N-Guy]

a piece of advice.....students who are taking extra subject should realize that subject that are taken match their ability....getting As is certainly no great deal....WIth proper time management and a pinch of sheer luck....hmmm....not impossible...But...Sit back and ponder....Do you actually meet the standards??

[Patrick]

You know, getting like 17A1s isn't really a big deal. The big deal is, did she get 90++ marks or she's just a girl, getting marks that are just enough for an A1? (Around 70++)

I must say, quality beats quantity, but quality and quantity beats everything else. I'm not saying that Amalina got like 70++ marks. Nobody knows, probably she's a genius with perfect scores.

The 2004 SPM Papers isn't that difficult, so it is normal to get 90++ scores for Additional Mathematics, Mathematics, English, EST, Basic Science, Principles of Accounting. Those were the subjects i took, EXCEPT Basic Science of course, and I can judge my marks.
=.=
A Science student taking Basic Science? OVERKILL!

So, the point is, no matter how many As a person has, just treat that person like you treat everybody else.
There's no use worshipping someone with tons of As and you know, saying that a person with a couple of As dumb.
You'll never know how a person fared in his/her SPM.

Try tracking down his/her past performances in school exams and you might get a better clue.

Lastly, no offence. I write in peace :D

[Irresistible]

(I got A1 in GCE O Level English but my English is not that good either)
I've got 10++A1s (straight A1s) but I'm still as stupid as ever. Duh.

Ha ha, isn't u r the top scorer who got 12 A1's in Jit Sin?? (M I wrong?)
1st of all, congratulate on ur great success! (at least u get straight A1's)
A few years ago, if u get A1 in GCE O level English, it means your English is excellent (I got B4 during year 200*).
For SPM 2004, in ur school case, those students who managed to get A1 or A2 in GCE has increased substantially! Is your batch of students is better, or the marking for this paper is not so strict like b4.

[someone]

When I met the 16A1 girl, I asked her, "Why did you take so many subjects? Don't you worry that you can't get all As?"
She replied sincerely, "I take more subjects to learn more things. We don't take more subjects just because we want to get more As. I never expected that I can get all As."

Although getting lots of As doesn't mean everything, I believe that it does mean something. At least, hard work is included. I truly respect the 16A1 girl, not because of her result but because of her modesty and hard work. :)

[bush]

(I got A1 in GCE O Level English but my English is not that good either)
I've got 10++A1s (straight A1s) but I'm still as stupid as ever. Duh.

Ha ha, isn't u r the top scorer who got 12 A1's in Jit Sin?? (M I wrong?)
1st of all, congratulate on ur great success! (at least u get straight A1's)
A few years ago, if u get A1 in GCE O level English, it means your English is excellent (I got B4 during year 200*).
For SPM 2004, in ur school case, those students who managed to get A1 or A2 in GCE has increased substantially! Is your batch of students is better, or the marking for this paper is not so strict like b4.

Even if its a few years ago, the so called GCE O in the cert is not recognised, it is nothing and cannot be compared to the real O-levels........

[Anthony]

i agrree that the quality of GCE 1119 level has droped..
I am kinda happy though becoz or esle i wudnt have gotten A1 most prob A2 or B3....damn lucky me.....

and getting str8 A1s shows the individual is good in his or her academics..it also shows that the person is serious about their studies..i dunt think str8 A1s is an easy thing i dun think anyone of the Str8 A1s scorers thought it was a breeze becoz thr was a lot of preparation invovled....if we aim for high marks not only str8 A1s...

look at wat ESt did to my skool's top scorers.. i mean in usual exams...
at least four of them were pinned down by ESt..for having the second highest A1 line in history...of coz its inferior to the Bc in 2004 ---90!!!!
well it shud b the A1 mark for subjects in my own opinion..to show the standard but..is that wat Malaysians want?....?

i rather having my string of As..hahahaha....
selfish but i think its most realistic to say so...
and getting 17 A1s in SPM is vry important becoz amalina got herself a scholarship without bond and unlimited source of cash....i heard..and they can enrol in any U they want.....cool right?

why didnt I take Basic science?....
the funnything is my juniors ask me whether thr is such things as Moral 2, Moral 3 or Basic Accountancy...i laughed....mayb the kiasu spirit has reached Malaysian shore....sigh*

[bush]

the english 1119 cannot be considered as equivalent to english at GCE O level........by right they should not even put it in the cert as people might get confused...

quite some time back a parent wrote to the sun,voicing her displeasure over some foreign boards marking our very own english paper.When in actual fact, everthing is done locally by our own teachers.

the A1 or A2 we see in the cert indicates how much u scored in ur paper 2 section C, continuous writing......so if its 32/42 u get A2...so on

[Anthony]

r u sure?
my tchers say a stack is sent to london then sent bak...later tchers wud mark the papers according to the score given...thru comparison..

[bush]

r u sure?
my tchers say a stack is sent to london then sent bak...later tchers wud mark the papers according to the score given...thru comparison..
very sure,it's mark by our own examiners.......u can't really compare essays especially when its a continuous writing, meaning u can write anything so long its relevant to the question......so how can we compare two essays with different contents?

it is marked normally and the score for ur continuous writing will be the grade for GCE O.....

so if u r a student who constantly scores 30 and above, u will most like lt get an A1 or A2........

[Patrick]

Yes I agree that the 1119 standard has deteriorated greatly.

I've seen good Singaporean english essays and they deserve their A. Some of my friend's essays are nothing compared to theirs', but they still get A1 for their 1119.

[masdie]

from my point of view, i think writing essays is all about gaining interest (and maybe trust) from the reader. you should try to capture and sustain your reader's interest. if you succeed, you get better scores, otherwise, you get lower scores.

[bush]

Yes I agree that the 1119 standard has deteriorated greatly.

I've seen good Singaporean english essays and they deserve their A. Some of my friend's essays are nothing compared to theirs', but they still get A1 for their 1119.

thats the thing, 1119 is not really GCE O, somebody in the ministry must be feeling itchy somewhere, thats why we have this fake GCE O

[Anthony]

mayb if ur talking about the standard....i dun think its a vry wise move for government to push the students to the max....
if so...ppl would tend to out-do themselves....
it helps to ease the the tension for students oso lar...
i think the malaysian education style is too rejimen...shud take America as an example...

[Psycho]

r u sure?
my tchers say a stack is sent to london then sent bak...later tchers wud mark the papers according to the score given...thru comparison..
very sure,it's mark by our own examiners.......u can't really compare essays especially when its a continuous writing, meaning u can write anything so long its relevant to the question......so how can we compare two essays with different contents?

it is marked normally and the score for ur continuous writing will be the grade for GCE O.....

so if u r a student who constantly scores 30 and above, u will most like lt get an A1 or A2........

Not necessarily the papers are being marked by local examiners. I was informed that a group of ppl from Cambridge will come over here annually to do the job, through which they do random picks at those papers. So, basically the 'lucky' ones whose papers got picked are unlucky indeed as the markers are known for their strictness.

[bush]

r u sure?
my tchers say a stack is sent to london then sent bak...later tchers wud mark the papers according to the score given...thru comparison..
very sure,it's mark by our own examiners.......u can't really compare essays especially when its a continuous writing, meaning u can write anything so long its relevant to the question......so how can we compare two essays with different contents?

it is marked normally and the score for ur continuous writing will be the grade for GCE O.....

so if u r a student who constantly scores 30 and above, u will most like lt get an A1 or A2........

Not necessarily the papers are being marked by local examiners. I was informed that a group of ppl from Cambridge will come over here annually to do the job, through which they do random picks at those papers. So, basically the 'lucky' ones whose papers got picked are unlucky indeed as the markers are known for their strictness.

where did u hear the news from?

[Psycho]

well, my teacher was the one who informed me, and she is one of the local examiners... so sure she knows a little bit about this thing.
they do call this group of foreign examiners as somethig, but i can't exactly recall the term used.

[youngyew]

From what I hear here, it seems that all the papers are marked by local examiners, while the foreign examiners are here just to modulate the marks with the "standard" level.

[ElansarGelmir]

From what I've heard, the papers are marked locally first. Then the group of kwai lou (like what Psycho said) will select some random papers and start grading them. If their gradings are not on par with the local grading, then the local examiner will have to regrade the papers again with a higher level of strictness. If they are satisfied (for example, the kwai lo thinks that this kid should get an A2, and indeed he was given an A2 by the local examiner, then it's ok).

That's what I heard from my English teacher too.

[Anthony]

if so thank god the Kuai lo who came last yr was nice...WAKAKAKAKA

[shernren]

I think the problem is very much a deep indication of our society becoming a very performance-based society ... I mean, how many of you can name 10 people who went to help in Aceh when the tsunami struck? I know I wouldn't be able to. And yet we know all about Anushree and Amalina and all those high-scorers. The media chooses to accentuate the stories which will sell ... performance stories, not character stories.

Actually there's a very simple solution to the problem. The government should just do to all the subjects this year whatever nonsense they did to Chinese last year. I know, because I took Chinese and now apparently it will affect me (I got A1 in everything else, Chinese A2). I'm not disappointed at myself, but at the system. I know for sure that I'm better at my Chinese than at my BM, so how come I got an A1 for BM? I know for myself that there were subjects I was weak at. In fact my parents were unhappy that I took Chinese because they thought it would jeopardise me, but I believed that I was proud of my mother language.

If next year there are only 15 students per school who get A1s for each subject (like how SMJK Catholic kena screwed with Chinese), then this whole idiotic A1 hype will die down within a few years. Along with a few political careers undoubtedly, but who cares about dirty rich old men anyways? :P

And as for JPA, sorry if I offend anyone, but it's an open secret that due to irresponsible officials overseeing the process, there are certain "genetic criteria" that also come into play ... ;)

[Ryosuke]

all work no play makes Jack a dull boy... i guess many A1s is nothing though..... Its just my opinion not that i am jealous....

[iQing]

here is a nice story on this issue

http://smkteworld.9.forumer.com/index.php?showtopic=51

[Irresistible]

r u sure?
my tchers say a stack is sent to london then sent bak...later tchers wud mark the papers according to the score given...thru comparison..

A few years ago, my teacher also say the same thing. However, I don't know the current system. 8)

[gohweihan]

I think the problem is very much a deep indication of our society becoming a very performance-based society ... I mean, how many of you can name 10 people who went to help in Aceh when the tsunami struck? I know I wouldn't be able to. And yet we know all about Anushree and Amalina and all those high-scorers. The media chooses to accentuate the stories which will sell ... performance stories, not character stories.

Actually there's a very simple solution to the problem. The government should just do to all the subjects this year whatever nonsense they did to Chinese last year. I know, because I took Chinese and now apparently it will affect me (I got A1 in everything else, Chinese A2). I'm not disappointed at myself, but at the system. I know for sure that I'm better at my Chinese than at my BM, so how come I got an A1 for BM? I know for myself that there were subjects I was weak at. In fact my parents were unhappy that I took Chinese because they thought it would jeopardise me, but I believed that I was proud of my mother language.

If next year there are only 15 students per school who get A1s for each subject (like how SMJK Catholic kena screwed with Chinese), then this whole idiotic A1 hype will die down within a few years. Along with a few political careers undoubtedly, but who cares about dirty rich old men anyways? :P

And as for JPA, sorry if I offend anyone, but it's an open secret that due to irresponsible officials overseeing the process, there are certain "genetic criteria" that also come into play ... ;)

There need to be a move to bring back the value of the A. The grade inflation now is so great that it's virtually worthless.

[jackfook]

A lot of A1 shows your effort of doing well in your examination.It is not all part of your life.You can be happy now but keep up your effort.The path of life is just beginning!It is very easy to score A1 in your SPM.Don't be arrogant! 8) 8)

[masdie]

true, very true. strings of A1s doesn't mean anything other than being very familiar with the marking scheme. you have to continue to work hard and strive on in the future. so straight-As students, remember you are similar to other students. don't boast around!

[Jia_Hong]

Yes, spot on about working hard continuously.

However, all these cycle of string of A1s-JPA scholarship-overseas universities...

Does the strive go on in general? (for instance, among JPA scholars, where they are paid by hard-earned taxpayers money)

I've seen n heard many stories of scholars who can't even get through a-levels, n scholars become slackers as oppose to their SPM days. This is a waste of taxpayers money.

As oppose to most, if not all Singapore scholarships - the maintaining grade is either 1st class or 2:1, and some GPA of 3.8.

Personally I would say selection is one thing, but having a system that ensures the standard of the students are well-maintained is also as important.

[ok... perhaps this part is out of topic]
If such quality assurance are not given, then isn't it that the scholarships are merely political tools to satisfy certain crop of citizens and just show that the government is doing something, when in real terms - the money can be well invested in making better local unis within the country, giving more opportunity to all.

[gohweihan]

Yes, spot on about working hard continuously.

However, all these cycle of string of A1s-JPA scholarship-overseas universities...

Does the strive go on in general? (for instance, among JPA scholars, where they are paid by hard-earned taxpayers money)

I've seen n heard many stories of scholars who can't even get through a-levels, n scholars become slackers as oppose to their SPM days. This is a waste of taxpayers money.

As oppose to most, if not all Singapore scholarships - the maintaining grade is either 1st class or 2:1, and some GPA of 3.8.

Personally I would say selection is one thing, but having a system that ensures the standard of the students are well-maintained is also as important.

[ok... perhaps this part is out of topic]
If such quality assurance are not given, then isn't it that the scholarships are merely political tools to satisfy certain crop of citizens and just show that the government is doing something, when in real terms - the money can be well invested in making better local unis within the country, giving more opportunity to all.

I'm seriously curious as well - is there any check and balance mechanism to ensure that these scholarship holders graduate with quality degrees instead of just one where any Tom, Dick and Harry could get (considering the ease of getting into some universities overseas and securing a degree there).

[Ryosuke]

A lot of A1 shows your effort of doing well in your examination.It is not all part of your life.You can be happy now but keep up your effort.The path of life is just beginning!It is very easy to score A1 in your SPM.Don't be arrogant! 8) 8)

Its not easy buddy.... unlike PMR cincai tembak also can A.....

[Neutral_pH]

dunno about that but I think most JPA scholars are doing better than their MARA counterparts in general...but the quality of the malaysians students pale in comparison with their singaporean neighbours...one of my friend who is currently pursuing his studies in Carnegie Mellon University told me that every year during graduation day nearly all of the singaporean students are sitting on seats reserved for first class honours students, that's no mean feat considering they type of course that they are taking!

* I thought this forum is dead never knew that this subject still cause interest among you guys :D

[Anthony]

of coz not....
i think it counts....
so its not like your the only one who gets it...
but still it counts.....
every step in life is like a stepping stone...
so does it mean it is not important to get the string of As...
ppl I mean students might juz think thats its ok to get not str8 As...
if it duznt mean anything y shud you care....
thrs a lot meaning behind the string of As..sure it duznt say that this person is going to be successful..but duz getting a few Bs say that?
or duz getting a few Bs say that they r better than the ones with the strings of As...
the fact is i think those with the strings of As might not be cleverer than a person with a result not as gud...but i think knowing the marking schemes vry well is a feat of it self....
at least these ppl care to know...they pay more attention and care to know how they can be better in the exam and in life..and generally speaking thrs no doubt that spm reflects ur future to a certain extend......
its thru that ur future is uncertain but im sure that the str8 As guy will not end up as a mps worker..
although i respect the mps workers effort...and the nature of their job
sure singaporeans r great in that sense but i think we shud judge ppl as who they are and not compare so much...
all in all...its vry important to get THE result but i think its more important to sustain it...
keep up the gud work....chiao!

[shernren]

Quite frankly you can go out on the street now and buy an SPM A1 for under RM50. That's the price of a Pelangi workbook. You want more guarantee, you just sponsor one tuition teacher for two years, lagi sure you can get.

You might say that there are some achievers who don't need this, well I can tell you that for every person who did well in SPM without tuition there are at least 100 or more who did. It's all about freaking money and learning not to think while you're answering the questions.

[Anthony]

i dun think so... it takes more than that ...
my frens who are so gud in english got A2, B3,B4,even C6!! for EST...
my god for god sake!! C6 how do u explain it?
so its not all about pelangi books and tuition teachers....
to prove you wrong further.......ill gif you an example...
thrs tis fren of mine ( extremely smart ) he went for double tuition for BM...in skool he always got 90 above and in the SPM exam he got A2..how do you explain that......?
for me i take luck as an answer..wat esle?
so dont say its damn easy to get...
nowadays some tuitions is a need becoz the drop of enthusiasm amongst tchers and the need to study more but i think tuition provides students who are a little lazy to add up the study hours...
and do more exercises...
mayb we shud start a thread on the relevance of tuition tchers...mmm.....
of coz you can buy the books and tchers but it duznt buy you the A1..U STILL NEED TO STUDY!!!!!!!!!

[ElansarGelmir]

i dun think so... it takes more than that ...
my frens who are so gud in english got A2, B3,B4,even C6!! for EST...
my god for god sake!! C6 how do u explain it?
so its not all about pelangi books and tuition teachers....
to prove you wrong further.......ill gif you an example...
thrs tis fren of mine ( extremely smart ) he went for double tuition for BM...in skool he always got 90 above and in the SPM exam he got A2..how do you explain that......?


Just to remind everyone who's taking SPM soon that you may shine in your school, but you may not do so in other schools. And at the same time, to the top SPM scorers, we may shine in Malaysia, but not in the world.

Actually, I don't see why we should limit SPM students to a certain number of subjects in SPM. Why shouldn't they be given the freedom and choice to take as many subjects as they want to, as long as they know that they can manage them? I don't see how unhealthy this is, as long as they are expanding their potentials in them.

Maybe this is not the right time to post (it's 0216 now and I got to get up early for a fishing trip with friends), so I will elaborate more on this after tomorrow. Meanwhile, feel free to rebut if you don't think that there shouldn't be a limit to the # of subjects taken in SPM.

[youngyew]

Actually, I don't see why we should limit SPM students to a certain number of subjects in SPM. Why shouldn't they be given the freedom and choice to take as many subjects as they want to, as long as they know that they can manage them? I don't see how unhealthy this is, as long as they are expanding their potentials in them.
It's not appropriate because it's not fair in terms of the selection of the scholarships.

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

It's not fair because even if I get A1 in all 10 subjects I take today, I can't be assured of a JPA (or any other) scholarships.

It's not fair because one who score outstandingly in 10 A1 may be viewed as less outstanding than those who scored mediocrely in 13 A1.

It's not fair because the yardstick has changed from the quality to the quantity, and to prove yourself you have no choice but to take up more subjects.

[lyzzy]

Actually, I don't see why we should limit SPM students to a certain number of subjects in SPM. Why shouldn't they be given the freedom and choice to take as many subjects as they want to, as long as they know that they can manage them? I don't see how unhealthy this is, as long as they are expanding their potentials in them.
It's not appropriate because it's not fair in terms of the selection of the scholarships.

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

It's not fair because even if I get A1 in all 10 subjects I take today, I can't be assured of a JPA (or any other) scholarships.

It's not fair because one who score outstandingly in 10 A1 may be viewed as less outstanding than those who scored mediocrely in 13 A1.

It's not fair because the yardstick has changed from the quality to the quantity, and to prove yourself you have no choice but to take up more subjects.

I don't quite agree with youngyew's reasons, but I do agree that there has to be some limit to the number of SPM subjects.

Scholarships are not a given - no one should be "assured" of a scholarship if they get so and so number of A1s.

In response to Elansar Gelmir: An unlimited number of subject system merely encourages a system where the more number of As a person gets, the better. You saw the results - glorification of A1s - "top" students getting automatic scholarships without looking at the other criterias that make up a person.

Academic results are very important, but it is not the only thing - it's far from it, surely. Family background, social skills, determination, passion, athletic abilities are all very important too.

A system that encourages more A1s would inevitably decrease the time that students spend on extracurricular activities - students don't devote time to other activities as well - hence extra curricular activities are NOT number one, or even number two, or even in the least bit important.

If there's a limit placed on the number of SPM subjects, then you will get a ton of scholars getting straight A1s. Now you ask: What's there to distinguish them? How do you choose scholars? Perhaps, during the scholarship process, since each scholarship applicant is equal in terms of academics (all having achieved the max number of A1s), they have to distinguish themselves from other applicants in OTHER ways than academics ... like excellence in extracurriculars. Then, extracurriculars would be given more priority - and maybe we'll have more Malaysians at top universities.

Or perhaps, if this system of unlimited A1s should continue where top scorers get automatic scholarships, other students who have distinguished themselves in other subjects should be honoured too.
________
Honda CR-X del Sol (http://www.honda-wiki.org/wiki/Honda_CR-X_del_Sol)

[youngyew]

Can you kindly tell me why you don't agree with my reasons?

I agree with all your points, it is definitely better to see the concept of student excellence beyond the framework of academic aptitude. However, that is another topic altogether, what I have been trying to convey is the unjustice of the usage of the no. of A1 as the yardstick of academic excellence.

Sorry for the usage of "assure", of course I don't think that "strings of A1" = "excellent student". If you have read my other posts in other threads you would be familiar that I am totally against this ingrained concept.

However, talking about fairness, i was trying to pass on the concept of the giving of scholarship to the more worthy students, in terms of academic aptitude. What I am unsatisfied with, is the one I have put in bold, that is the distortion of yardstick from the quality to the quantity.

If you really have to rank "fairness" in decreasing order, it would be:
1. A comprehensive evaluation of a student in all his academic and non-academic excellence.
2. An evaluation of a student's academic aptitude.
3. A count of student's A1.

Apparently, the most ideal system would be 1 while we are using 3. I can't help but to say that 1 is too ideal to be practiced, considering the subjectiveness and the tenuous nature of non-academic excellence. Therefore I root for 2, while trying to be close to 1.

There are thousands of excellent students who take 9 or 10 subjects; but they miss out on subjects such as moral studies, so their hope of getting a recognition (most commonly in the form of a scholarship) fall to deep abyss. Therefore it's really unfair on their behalf. Just imagine... do we agree with these two phenomena:

1. Those who got 9A1 and A2 in moral wail upon getting their results, saying that, "If i have known earlier, I would have taken up more subjects."

2. Teachers and seniors tell their juniors, "Do take up more subjects, because only so your chance of getting a scholarship would increase."


These phenomena are happening around us everyday.

[youngyew]

If there's a limit placed on the number of SPM subjects, then you will get a ton of scholars getting straight A1s. Now you ask: What's there to distinguish them?
Yes we can - increase the cut-off point, ensure the quality of the exam papers and maintain the quality of A1.

10 years ago, there were only about 60 straight A1 scorers in the country.

[gohweihan]

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

Not to mention taking subjects which are irrelevant (i.e. our nation's top scorer and her stint with Basic Science).

[ElansarGelmir]

Wait, I still don't see the problem of allowing the students to take unlimited number of subjects. If some students think that they can handle more than 10 subjects, than by all means, go ahead. If you only want to take the subjects that you are interested in (besides Malaysia's World History and Moral), the no one's stopping you. The minimum number of subject that you can take is 5, if I'm not mistaken. So if you are not interested in taking anything more than the Sc subjects, then just stick to the Sc subjects. No one's saying that you must take at least 1 Art or Divinity or Social Sc subject for SPM.

The underlying reasons of us having too many "more than 10 A1s" scorers these days are not coming from the unlimited no. of subjects that each student is allowed to take, but from the over-leniency of the grading system and also the decline in the standards of the syllabi. However, it's unfair to put a ceiling to limit the number of subjects that the students can take. I believe that you have heard of paper chromatography: the analytes travel along the mobile phase until its polarity prevents them from traveling any further. The objective of this paper chromatograph is to see how far each analyte runs, and in other words, to distinguish the polarity of each analyte. The SPM students are analogous to the analytes and their academic potentials are represented by the polarity of each analyte. So basically, students with higher academic potentials may travel a longer distance than others. However, proposing to limit the number of SPM is the same as limiting the distance each analyte can travel, or set a certain time limit for the analytes to run. In the end, it defeats the whole purpose of running the paper chromatography because all analytes stops at the same distance and we can't distinguish the analytes from one another.

Everyone is aware that the grading system of SPM is too lenient, and at the same time, the standards of the syllabi also have declined. To solve this problem, it's either we should be more stringent in grading the SPM papers (quote ussdefiantblahblah) or we increase the standard of SPM again. Then we do not need to worry about limiting the number of subjects for SPM because the system will automatically shift towards equilibrium: Each student will be aware of their own individual academic strength and take the number of subjects that only they can handle. Some students may find it hard to cope with too many subjects because they need to study harder to secure A1s in other subjects, so in the end they may drop the extra subjects that they planned to take. Students who are confident that they are able to secure more than 10 A1s will take more than 10 subjects. In the end, as long as we increase the polarity of the stationary phase or decrease the concentration of the mobile phase, we do not need a long paper chromatograph or a long time period for those analytes to run. Eventually, each analyte will stop traveling at the distance where it can't go further anymore (and I assure you that the distance travelled won't be too long) and we are still able to distinguish the academic potential of each student.

It's not appropriate because it's not fair in terms of the selection of the scholarships.

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

Well, you want to get the JPA scholarship, so you need to prove to JPA why you deserve the scholarship. Being among the 10A1s scorers while there are many 12A1s scorers may not help you in securing the scholarship (if we assume that JPA only selects students according to their SPM results). If you think that you can only handle 10 subjects while there are many more people who can handle more than that, why should JPA pick you and not them?


It's not fair because the yardstick has changed from the quality to the quantity, and to prove yourself you have no choice but to take up more subjects.

The flaw is in the distribution of scholarships, and not students taking more than 10 subjects. It's unfair to place the problem of someone onto someone else's shoulders. Limiting the number of subjects allowed in SPM is not the solution.

On the other hand, to solve the problem, we should:
1. Raise the standard of SPM (including the grading system)
2. Change the incentives (scholarships and awards)

About number 2, right now the incentives provided only ensure the students to prove their ability in SPM, and not in other aspects. Students only respond to incentives, and this case, they only focus on SPM instead of other healthy things in life (not to say that studying for SPM is unhealthy).

To address this problem, the scholarship provider should include the students' other personal achievements besides SPM and also outdoor activities and interviews while selecting their students (lyzzy should agree with this). Without limiting the number of subjects in SPM but at the same time if CCA is taken into account in scholarship selection, then I believe most students will (again, respond to incentives) try to get more involved in CCA instead of studying only for SPM. Students will have a wider option to channel their time and talent into either academics, sports/CCA or both. There might be some students who are able to handle 15 subjects in SPM and at the same time, excel in sports or other CCA. So why should we stop them from doing so by putting a ceiling on the number of SPM subjects?

If there's a limit placed on the number of SPM subjects, then you will get a ton of scholars getting straight A1s. Now you ask: What's there to distinguish them? How do you choose scholars? Perhaps, during the scholarship process, since each scholarship applicant is equal in terms of academics (all having achieved the max number of A1s), they have to distinguish themselves from other applicants in OTHER ways than academics ... like excellence in extracurriculars. Then, extracurriculars would be given more priority - and maybe we'll have more Malaysians at top universities.

I see your point here, but I don't think it is a healthy solution. We should allow each student to develop their individual potentials. Not everyone is born to be an athlete, a debater, a genius, or a star. Shouldn't we allow each students to develop their own potentials instead of making them doing something else which they are not good at. Imagine a system in an infinite space which is growing vertically. By putting a ceiling to limit the number of subjects allowed in SPM is equivalent to inhibiting the system from growing upwards. No doubt that some may find some space to grow sideways, there are some who are better in growing upwards than growing sideways (uhmm.. get the picture?). This creates an unhealthy deadweight loss of potentials. There are students who can excel in sports while there are others who do better in academics. Why don't we allow them to grow into the direction that they are comfortable with? If someone has reached his/her (damn this egalitarianism) maximum potential in growing vertically, it can grow sideways instead. And those who still have the potential to grow upwards can choose to continue growing vertically or sideways. In the end, it's up to the scholarship providers to select their students based on their personal achievements (ok, i don't think i'm doing a good job in conveying my point here. If you understand, good. if you don't understand, tell me).

An unlimited number of subject system merely encourages a system where the more number of As a person gets, the better. You saw the results - glorification of A1s - "top" students getting automatic scholarships without looking at the other criterias that make up a person.

We should jubilate in the achievements of those top scorers (hey, they went the extra mile to do well in SPM), but we should also glorify those who excel in sports, social services or outstanding achivements. Equal scholarship opportunity should be given to them. Malaysia lacks of other scholarships like sports scholarships. Maybe we should lobby the Minister of Sports to do something about this.

[Salvation]

It's not appropriate because it's not fair in terms of the selection of the scholarships.

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

I don't think JPA give a damn if you score 9A1s or 1000 A1s..their marking scheme is 60% out of 60% (which means you get full marks if you scored all A1s).

An unlimited number of subject system merely encourages a system where the more number of As a person gets, the better. You saw the results - glorification of A1s - "top" students getting automatic scholarships without looking at the other criterias that make up a person.

So far I think only BNM offers automatic scholarship.

[youngyew]

Well, you want to get the JPA scholarship, so you need to prove to JPA why you deserve the scholarship. Being among the 10A1s scorers while there are many 12A1s scorers may not help you in securing the scholarship (if we assume that JPA only selects students according to their SPM results). If you think that you can only handle 10 subjects while there are many more people who can handle more than that, why should JPA pick you and not them?
In my opinion this point seriously flawed. Academic excellence does not only hinge on "the ability to absorb an astronomic amount of knowledge". While the undocumented status quo requires me to take up more subjects in order to prove my worthiness, it doesn't imply that the causality is right and fair.

To help illustrate the situation, I would use one of my old examples again.

Just imagine an astute and outstanding student (A) who is clear that he is going to be a doctor, and interested in science and biology only. He has neither skills nor interests in arts or economics, so he took up the standard 10 science subjects package. He doesn't feel the need to take up those subjects because science subjects are all he needs.

Another moderately good student (B) doesn't know much about his future, but he heard from his seniors that he should take up more subjects to increase his chance of getting a scholarship. So he did, taking up subjects such as arts, principles of accounting, business, IT etc to beef up his quantities of subjects.

At the end, A got 9 outstanding A1's and a doubtful A2 in chinese language (which happened to tons of people); while the mediocre B got a tuition-boostered 13A1's and an A2 in chinese.

By experience, B is recognized as "the better student" by the society and the scholarship providers, while A is in fact better.


So, if we follow your point, do you think that we should conclude that, A is actually less worthy as a student because he didn't take up more subjects in order to prove himself?

[masdie]

i don't think any of us knows for sure what criterias those scholarship-givers consider when they offer scholarships. yes, everyone knows it's the applicant's spm results, cca, interview, etc etc. but we don't know for sure which has more or less weightage. besides, i think they don't need to reveal the requirements. why? because it's them who offer those scholarships. it's up to THEM who they want to give it to. we don't have the say. it's their decision.

[shashi]

Hi! i'm just new to this thread and i would like to share some latest news that i've heard from a fellow friend from smk ulu tiram (amalina's ex-school).

It seems that there is a girl taking 16 subjects from this school for 2005 spm exam.
for 2006 spm exams there will be another 2 students aspiring to break amalina's record by taking 18 and 19[malay] subjects each. well good luck for them. :o

[zAiTsEv]

i don't think any of us knows for sure what criterias those scholarship-givers consider when they offer scholarships. yes, everyone knows it's the applicant's spm results, cca, interview, etc etc. but we don't know for sure which has more or less weightage. besides, i think they don't need to reveal the requirements. why? because it's them who offer those scholarships. it's up to THEM who they want to give it to. we don't have the say. it's their decision.

I disagree. Government agencies are using taxpayer's money to offer scholarships. We've the right to know the criteria being used to judge the worthiness of one to receive the scholarship.

[youngyew]

Apart from that, basically I agreed to many of Elansar's' points like increasing the grading standard and trying to evaluate and recognize other potencies of students (although I think it's not foreseeable in the near future given Malaysia's environment).

However, regarding the point of no-ceiling allowing the development of potencies, I can't help but to invite you to think from the other perspective.

It's indeed quite true that we shouldn't shackle those outstanding students at the extreme of the spectrum, who are willing to take up risk and devote their time in order to prove themselves. They should be given their right channels to expand their full-fledged wings, and there is no limit of how far they can go. To them I extend my heartfelt good wish.

As we jubilate and feel proud for them, stop and think for a moment.... what about those who are also excellent but just didn't see the necessity to take up as much subjects? Should they turn in to the rat race, taking up unnecessary subjects just for the sake of competing with the rest and proving that "I can do the same"?

It's equally unfair to ask those students soup up their result slips with unnecessary subjects, resulting in the unnecessary pressure and tuition-centre dependence - if you say that it's unfair to cut the tall poppy down to size.

[masdie]

I disagree. Government agencies are using taxpayer's money to offer scholarships. We've the right to know the criteria being used to judge the worthiness of one to receive the scholarship.

yes, i agree. but if we look at the government as a large big-assed company, and the tax-payers pay that lousy company to govern our country. then the money belongs to them. it's their "hard-earned" money. so it's up to them how they use this money.
*just my opinion.

[masdie]

....... there will be another 2 students aspiring to break amalina's record by taking 18 and 19[malay] subjects each.......

WOW!! :roll: more A1s

[youngyew]

I disagree. Government agencies are using taxpayer's money to offer scholarships. We've the right to know the criteria being used to judge the worthiness of one to receive the scholarship.

yes, i agree. but if we look at the government as a large big-assed company, and the tax-payers pay that lousy company to govern our country. then the money belongs to them. it's their "hard-earned" money. so it's up to them how they use this money.
Our Prime Minister is not Thaksin Sinawatra.

[gohweihan]

We should jubilate in the achievements of those top scorers (hey, they went the extra mile to do well in SPM), but we should also glorify those who excel in sports, social services or outstanding achivements. Equal scholarship opportunity should be given to them. Malaysia lacks of other scholarships like sports scholarships. Maybe we should lobby the Minister of Sports to do something about this.

Exactly the problem with status quo. Right now, scholarship opportunities aren't abound for those who do well in other fields (perhaps sports may be a slight exception). You have people with skills and abilities, but aren't valued. And it's not about glorification - it's about giving them opportunities.

[masdie]

i totally agree with ElansarGelmir's opinion. in that way, we can improve the quality of students churned out by our education system. proving themselves in totally-unrelated fields are not something bad. to those who're lazy to join the rat race, it's their choice to be left out. however, i believe even when there're some who'll strive to be good in all aspects, there'll always be a group who doesn't need to do all that but still get scholarships. :evil:

[gohweihan]

I disagree. Government agencies are using taxpayer's money to offer scholarships. We've the right to know the criteria being used to judge the worthiness of one to receive the scholarship.

We do have the rights to know, but then again, since when is our government transparent in this? They even openly refused to disclose the names of AP holders.

[zAiTsEv]

to those who're lazy to join the rat race, it's their choice to be left out.

I don't agree with the use of the word "lazy" here. They just don't see the need to join because they know there are many other worthwhile things to do out there.

[youngyew]

to those who're lazy to join the rat race, it's their choice to be left out.
I smell apathy in this idea.

It's indeed their choice, but they are the victim of the circumstances. Today I would also advise my juniors to take up more subjects if they can, but that doesn't mean that "i can only prove myself with more subjects" is a healthy sign of our education system. I gave that advice because in this swim or sink environment they either follow the trend or they would drown themselves.

However, when the system is unhealthy, please don't attribute the failure to the person alone. It's the system at fault.

As an example (an exaggerated one though), this idea is like a food company who won more market share by doubling MSG and unhealthy food additives, laughing at the other companies who refuse to add MSG saying "who asked you not to join the rat race?"

[gohweihan]

however, i believe even when there're some who'll strive to be good in all aspects, there'll always be a group who doesn't need to do all that but still get scholarships. :evil:

Well, it's always this way. During my time, there was this guy who is smart, could probably quote to you everything in the text book, and as expected, scored 9 1As in SPM. However, he doesn't do anything except study - i.e. no ECAs, no hanging out with friends, etc. And expected, he got the JPA.

There is another guy, who isn't as smart, but managed 7 1As and 2 2As in the same SPM examination. He was in charge of the school's computing backbone (he's like the IT manager of the school, and even gives purchasing advice to the school), and was responsible of bringing his school to success in computer related competitions up to the national level. He can do in hours, in his field, what others would take days to accomplish (especially in publication and web designing), with at times, a higher standard finish. With his capabilities alone, he personally thrusted the school to limelight within the district in the field of multimedia and computer related activities. He is outspoken, and knows more than just textbooks. Yet, JPA rejected him, although he didn't even apply for a competitive course like the former did.

This flaw in the system warrants youngyew's suggestion, because ultimately, we don't want more of those people up there just because they can spit out everything in the book and doesn't have (or know) the passion to do something.

And to draw the analogy to today's world, the person with 9 1As is like the person who got 13 1As while the person who got 7 1As and 2 2As is like the one who doesn't want to take 13 subjects, while just settling for 10 and getting all 1As.

[lolilo]

Hi! i'm just new to this thread and i would like to share some latest news that i've heard from a fellow friend from smk ulu tiram (amalina's ex-school).

It seems that there is a girl taking 16 subjects from this school for 2005 spm exam.
for 2006 spm exams there will be another 2 students aspiring to break amalina's record by taking 18 and 19[malay] subjects each. well good luck for them. :o

god bless them, seriously.

( permainan apa ni?)

[ElansarGelmir]

Yet, JPA rejected him, although he didn't even apply for a competitive course like the former did.

This flaw in the system warrants youngyew's suggestion, because ultimately, we don't want more of those people up there just because they can spit out everything in the book and doesn't have (or know) the passion to do something.

As I have mentioned, the flaw is in the scholarship selection process, and not in students who just study and study and study. If JPA suddenly says that 30% of their selection criteria is based on CCA, I bet that even parents will force their kids to get involved in CCA and be extra competitive in leadership positions in school/state or national levels. Btw, was Nicole Ann David awarded a scholarship? It's been a long time news and I haven't heard of her for the past 2 years (heh, i'm not really an avid newsreader).


what about those who are also excellent but just didn't see the necessity to take up as much subjects?

Then that's why we need to increase the standard of SPM, or perhaps provide Special papers like what Singapore's doing so that they can prove to others, mainly scholarship givers that they excel in those specialized fields.

[lyzzy]

If there's a limit placed on the number of SPM subjects, then you will get a ton of scholars getting straight A1s. Now you ask: What's there to distinguish them? How do you choose scholars? Perhaps, during the scholarship process, since each scholarship applicant is equal in terms of academics (all having achieved the max number of A1s), they have to distinguish themselves from other applicants in OTHER ways than academics ... like excellence in extracurriculars. Then, extracurriculars would be given more priority - and maybe we'll have more Malaysians at top universities.

I see your point here, but I don't think it is a healthy solution. We should allow each student to develop their individual potentials. Not everyone is born to be an athlete, a debater, a genius, or a star. Shouldn't we allow each students to develop their own potentials instead of making them doing something else which they are not good at.


Potential at what? What exactly does SPM test anyway? An ability to memorize random facts that would never be of any use in real life (like, for example, the 16 nilais and subnilais, the key words, and the specific situations that each nilai is used for? I think youngyew said this earlier - SPM is not a good indicator of academic potential.

You pointed out that not everyone is born to be a great debator or athlete. Actually no one at all is born to be a debator or an athlete. Even athletes aren't born with this ability to run 42 km in 2 hours, they have to TRAIN for it by running 200 miles in a week. Doesn't the saying goes, "genius is 1% inspiration, and 99% pespiration"?

Likewise, no one is born with the ability to get straight A1s in SPM - what are workbooks and tuition for, if not to hone this aspect? Don't you remember the one trillion hours that you spent memorizing key words and key facts and doing workbooks?

You too could be a good, perhaps not great, debator/writer/athlete/whatever if you put as much effort (or at least half as much effort) into it as you put into studying for SPM.

Yes, we shouldn't totally blame the SPM system, but rather the scholarship providers themselves. But isn't it much easier to say that 17A1s is better than 10A1s, rather than weighing all these other qualities?

Let's face it, it's so much neater/easier/non-subjective to weigh someone's potential by using the number of As . It's easy to say, oh, that person is better than that other person because he has more As. It's SO much harder to say that, oh, that person is better because he has all these other qualities like being passionate, determined, which is really hard to judge?

It makes scholarship selection easier, surely.

Won't you agree, that by limiting the number of subjects to, let's say 10, scholarship providers are FORCED to choose based on other criteria?

Furthermore, extracurricular is not only about sports, as you indicated in your last post - it is also about doing things that you are passionate in - and that's why you become good at what you are doing. Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.



To quote a letter addressed to the Star: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2005/6/5/education/11089455&sec=education


Our dear ?Lost Sheep? has emerged, I imagine, with no networking skills, no life friendships and little interpersonal skills. It is really sad.

All undergraduates should be encouraged to mix with others and to enjoy college and university life with all its risks and exposure to new and alien thoughts and values. After all, university life is meant to develop thinking and learning, and the whole person.

________
ultimate fighter (http://ultimatefighters.org/)

[ElansarGelmir]

to those who're lazy to join the rat race, it's their choice to be left out.

It's not that they are lazy. They don't see the point of doing something that they don't need to. However, given the circumstances of our education system, we need to do "more" than what we need to get the scholarship. It's something like a requirement when you're applying for work. It's good that you've managed to fulfil our requirements, but it's a bonus to us if you have extra skills/knowledge in areas which aren't listed.

Imagine that you're applying for a scholarship. Your cert shows 10A1s, while another candidate's shows 12 A1s. Others being equal, which candidate will you choose?

You may claim that the other candidate's results might be mediocre A1s, but there's no proof to your claim. Plus, who knows, your result may be more mediocre than the other's.

I admit that there are some ways to show how excellent their results are by submitting extra certificates like National Olympiad certs, but there are limited places in the Olympiad and not everyone has the opportunity to participate in those competitions. And there are lots of students scoring A1s but are not involved in the competitions. And there are some really excellent students but think that SPM's the only thing they need to focus on and they do not see the need to involve themselves in olympiads (ok, this is rare, but there's a possibility). So, how would you have a good yardstick to measure each student's academic potentials?

It's equally unfair to ask those students soup up their result slips with unnecessary subjects, resulting in the unnecessary pressure and tuition-centre dependence - if you say that it's unfair to cut the tall poppy down to size

It's their issue if they choose to grow upward. What's so unfair about it? They choose to commit themselves to the pressure to get good results and scholarships. If they succeeded, then kudos to them. Their efforts should not be disregarded. Putting a ceiling is only fair to those who are not able to compete far in academic field, but have the opportunity to involve themselves in other activities.

Right now, most scholarship selection criteria are solely based on SPM. There are two things that we can do about it: It's either we conform to it, or we demand for a change in the policy.

Oh yeah, by the way, if I were the scholarship giver, I would prefer to offer the scholarship to someone who has a wholistic education, ie someone who has explored other academic fields in lieu of specializing only in a certain area. Most universities in US require their students to take classes from other schools to graduate. Like to graduate from MIT, you are required to take at least 8 humanities classes. Those classes are unnecessary towards their majors, but it's a boon if they have knowledge in that area.

[youngyew]

However, given the circumstances of our education system, we need to do "more" than what we need to get the scholarship.

-snip-

It's good that you've managed to fulfil our requirements, but it's a bonus to us if you have extra skills/knowledge in areas which aren't listed.

-snip-

You may claim that the other candidate's results might be mediocre A1s, but there's no proof to your claim. Plus, who knows, your result may be more mediocre than the other's.

-snip-

And there are some really excellent students but think that SPM's the only thing they need to focus on and they do not see the need to involve themselves in olympiads (ok, this is rare, but there's a possibility).

I agree with your points, they are all very fair and comprehensive theoretically. But I beg to differ that it's not as good as it seems in the real life. The "extra knowledge" is, in my opinion, doing more harm than good in terms of the multi-dimensional development of our students.

Or in other words, we will end up producing more candidates who take up unnecessary subject or even redundant ones like Basic Science to beef up their A1's, than really excellent all-rounded students like Anusree. If we produce the former type of student, what's the point of having hundreds of straight A1 scorers with "extra knowledge" but barely any other good qualities (there are a lot of students like that)?

If no-ceiling system is driven to produce more Arusnee, I am all for the system. But as long as there are people who compete for 18/19 A1 or people taking up basic sciences, I really can't foresee the production of a generation of viable students.


P/s: I concur that "total-fairness" can't be achieved, in any system there will be victims of unfair treatment. However, I believe in this system we produced more students who are charged up with keywords and facts, rather than multi-dimensional and thoughtful student.

[ElansarGelmir]

Potential at what? What exactly does SPM test anyway? An ability to memorize random facts that would never be of any use in real life (like, for example, the 16 nilais and subnilais, the key words, and the specific situations that each nilai is used for? I think youngyew said this earlier - SPM is not a good indicator of academic potential.


That's why I say the standards of the syllabi need to be increased. They should ask more problem solving questions rather than focusing on testing your memory. And I didn't say that SPM is a good indicator either. But in general, exams are academic potential indicators. The problem is that SPM is not up to the standard.

You pointed out that not everyone is born to be a great debator or athlete. Actually no one at all is born to be a debator or an athlete. Even athletes aren't born with this ability to run 42 km in 2 hours, they have to TRAIN for it by running 200 miles in a week. Doesn't the saying goes, "genius is 1% inspiration, and 99% pespiration"?

That's true. But I wasn't pointing out at those normal healthy teenagers, or those who are suffering from certain diseases like stammerings (how can someone has a good debating/public speaking skills if he stammers?).

Likewise, no one is born with the ability to get straight A1s in SPM - what are workbooks and tuition for, if not to hone this aspect?

And that's why I say those who cannot compete far in academics will have to find other space to compete in, such as CCA or in other interests. How would you react if the MOE decides to limit one's participation in CCA coz they didn't spend enough time studying? Isn't it the same as imposing a quota on the number of subjects allowed to be taken in SPM? Why shouldn't we let the invisible hand to work its miracle and guide the whole system to equilibrium?

But isn't it much easier to say that 17A1s is better than 10A1s, rather than weighing all these other qualities?

That's the flaw of the status quo. Now, if we increase the standard of SPM... The 17A1s might drop to 9A1s, 4 A2s and 4B3s, while the 10A1s might remain the same. Or miraculously, the 17A1s might remain the same, and the 10 A1s drops to 10A2s.

It's SO much harder to say that, oh, that person is better because he has all these other qualities like being passionate, determined, which is really hard to judge?

Better in what? Social skills? Life? Knowledge? In general? You can't do a direct comparison between two individuals without specifying on what basis you are comparing them. You're like claiming that Bill Gates is so much better than Mozart because he makes lots of money while Mozart died as a pauper.

It makes scholarship selection easier, surely.

That I agree.

The problem is what the scholarship giver is looking for, and not who's better in other perspectives. Obviously that now the scholarship givers are looking for students with as many A1s as possible, and the students are going to respond to that by taking more subjects. The only way to make the whole system healthier is to change the selection criteria of the scholarship givers. If SPM is limited to 10 subjects, and everyone else is doing well in it, thus it's implying that the main criteria of scholarship selection is CCA and not academic wise (since JPA will have a large pool of 10A1s scorers).

Won't you agree, that by limiting the number of subjects to, let's say 10, scholarship providers are FORCED to choose based on other criteria?

That I agree, but as I've stressed again, it's UNHEALTHY. If I'm the scholarship giver, of course I would wish to have my own flexibility to choose my own students. Forcing the scholarship providers to do something is not going to give them any incentives to provide scholarships. For example, if I were a private research company who wish to give my scholarship to Science Major students who take at least 3 Science subjects, 1 Art & Literature, 1 Humanities, and 1 Social Science in SPM besides the 5 core subjects. Also, those with other CCA achievements are encouraged to apply. Now, those Science majors out there who are interested in applying for my scholarship would certainly try to fulfil my requirements and at the same time, try to outdo others by either taking additional subjects or get active in CCAs. However, Lyzzy, the new minister of Education suddenly imposed a 10 subject quota on SPM candidates. Now, the SPM students find it hard to fulfil my requirement, and I wouldn't be happy at all coz I want my students to fulfil my requirements. In the end, I would rather get my scholars from other places who can fulfil my scholarship requirements.

Maybe the example above only works for private companies and the main scholarship provider in Malaysia is JPA. But by doing so does not necessarily mean that JPA's going to look into other criteria like CCA. That may give them more reason to practice discrimination and give more scholarships to rural students instead of those with 10A1s (which are almost everyone) and good CCA records.

Furthermore, extracurricular is not only about sports, as you indicated in your last post - it is also about doing things that you are passionate in - and that's why you become good at what you are doing.

I also believe that I mentioned other personal achievements in my previous posts. It's just that it's too tedious to write CCA and personal achievements over and over again. So I assumed that by writing CCA, it includes other non-academical achievements.

All undergraduates should be encouraged to mix with others and to enjoy college and university life with all its risks and exposure to new and alien thoughts and values. After all, university life is meant to develop thinking and learning, and the whole person.

That's true. But limiting the number of subjects won't guarantee that the students will be heading towards that direction either.

[ElansarGelmir]

Or in other words, we will end up producing more candidates who take up unnecessary subject or even redundant ones like Basic Science to beef up their A1's, than really excellent all-rounded students like Anusree. If we produce the former type of student, what's the point of having hundreds of straight A1 scorers with "extra knowledge" but barely any other good qualities (there are a lot of students like that)?

If no-ceiling system is driven to produce more Arusnee, I am all for the system. But as long as there are people who compete for 18/19 A1 or people taking up basic sciences, I really can't foresee the production of a generation of viable students.


Aduh! That's so basic... Of course we know that Basic Science is a redundant subject if you're taking Science subjects. Back then, I think Basic Science was banned from the Science majors. But I do not know how she managed to take it. Anyway, that's one redundancy, but that's still not a plausible reason why we should have subject quotas... i think so far there's only 1 or 2 redundant subjects in SPM... But yeah, I was about to address that issue, but because my post was too long, I totally forgotten about it.

[youngyew]

Huh? Why aduh? The reason I underlined the word redundant wasn't to show it's a hard vocab, it's just an emphasis. :wink:

Anyway, I wasn't focusing on the basic science as a redundant subject, I was more worried about students who only rote study and attend dozens of exam-orientated classes for more A1.

But I have changed my mind... I think although we have different opinions, we both agree on these points:

a) The leniency of the SPM marking has produced too many straight A1 scorers, making it impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff. Therefore JPA had no choice but to say that 13A1 is better than 10A1.

b) Since more A1 distinguish you as a better student, we have more and more students who only care about getting A1 through exam-orientated life and strategies, which don't contribute to a multi-dimensional development in the students.

c) We need to do something to address these issues.


I concur. When I suggested to set a ceiling, I didn't have the "marking scheme leniency" in mind. If we set a higher standard in our papers, these issues shouldn't have arised at all.

There are 4 possible cases:
1. No ceiling + same standard (like today)
2. No ceiling + high standard (Elansar's suggestion)
3. Ceiling + same standard (my suggestion)
4. Ceiling + high standard (my suggestion)


I have been arguing 3 or 4 (because I didn't specify the standard of the paper) is better than 1 while Elansar thinks 2 is better than 1. Yes, now I agree 2 should be the better solution. We won't have people flocking to take 19 subjects if it's hard to get A1.

From the best to the worst, should be 2, 4, 3, 1, in my opinion.

[ElansarGelmir]

From the best to the worst, should be 2, 4, 3, 1, in my opinion.

Ditto! :D

4. Ceiling + high standard (my suggestion)

That measure is plausible too, but the problem is that we cannot be sure that students will expand their potentials else where, or the scholarship givers will look at the CCA now because they have nothing else to look at.

b) Since more A1 distinguish you as a better student, we have more and more students who only care about getting A1 through exam-orientated life and strategies, which don't contribute to a multi-dimensional development in the students.

That's true in the eyes of the scholarship givers, and not ours. That's why we should strive hard to change their mind.

And in addition to that

P/s: I concur that "total-fairness" can't be achieved, in any system there will be victims of unfair treatment. However, I believe in this system we produced more students who are charged up with keywords and facts, rather than multi-dimensional and thoughtful student.

While this system only benefits those who gobble up text books and vomit them in SPM, imposing a ceiling without changing the system doesn't change the the way the students learn except that there are only 10 subjects to gobble and vomit. By raising the standards to more KBKK types, we can distinguish the real cream of the nation. It's excellent that you have 10A1s with CCA achievements, but it's better if you have 15A1s and also CCA achievements.

Actually, while I was taking my shower, I forgot to reply to this:

Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.

If I like playing, say Counter Strike. I am DETERMINED to play well, and I COMMITTED my time and energy in practising the game PASSIONATELY and in the end, I become one of the top Counter Strike players in Malaysia (I wish). Should that be considered in my scholarship application?

[youngyew]

Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.

If I like playing, say Counter Strike. I am DETERMINED to play well, and I COMMITTED my time and energy in practising the game PASSIONATELY and in the end, I become one of the top Counter Strike players in Malaysia (I wish). Should that be considered in my scholarship application?
I think outstanding Counter Strike players (or gamers in general) should be awarded in some ways too.

[Jhuen]

From the best to the worst, should be 2, 4, 3, 1, in my opinion.


b) Since more A1 distinguish you as a better student, we have more and more students who only care about getting A1 through exam-orientated life and strategies, which don't contribute to a multi-dimensional development in the students.

That's true in the eyes of the scholarship givers, and not ours. That's why we should strive hard to change their mind.


Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.

If I like playing, say Counter Strike. I am DETERMINED to play well, and I COMMITTED my time and energy in practising the game PASSIONATELY and in the end, I become one of the top Counter Strike players in Malaysia (I wish). Should that be considered in my scholarship application?


i agree with ElansarGelmir's statement....the fact is,in our current education system,A's matter more than anything else...eventhough everyone claims that CCa's important too,but no one really looks at that particular aspect when u get AMAZING results like what amalina got(prove-our exam oriented system)...the same applies to the scholarship givers....sure,they claim that CCA carries some weightage..but truth is,we'll never really find out how much right??we students believe that scholarship holders shld be all-rounded students..not just one who scores straight A1's..but,unfortunately,it really isnt easy to change the perception of these scholarship givers...

well,u cant really write down how determined,committed and passionate u r in ur cv or testimonial,right?if u manage to get through the first selection process to the 2nd round(which is usually an interview),i think that's where u can hightlight ur determination,commitment and passion while doing smthg.....but,excellence in studies,sports and CCA usually show a person's willingness to commit and succeed...if a student wins a medal in a tennis match,it just goes to show that he's willing to work hard to get what he wants.

[lyzzy]

Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.

If I like playing, say Counter Strike. I am DETERMINED to play well, and I COMMITTED my time and energy in practising the game PASSIONATELY and in the end, I become one of the top Counter Strike players in Malaysia (I wish). Should that be considered in my scholarship application?

Pretty off-topic, but to answer your theoretical question - YES. If there exists such a person who not only is the top Counter-Strike player in the country and has excellent academic achievements (which is pretty unlikely), he would have something pretty unique to contribute to the university.

He would stand out- as compared to your standard top scorer, who's a prefect/ librarian, not really exceptional in anything, not really passionate about anything, does a lot of workbooks, rote memorizes, and pretty normal in every other way (look at most JPA scholars, btw). Agreed?

Of course, a person who's a top counterstrike player and a top scorer is pretty unlikely - and that's why they are a rare commodity.

To illustrate this point, I know this guy who's at Yale, and is pretty good in his studies, but his "hook" or special quality that separated him from all the other applicants who had 1600 SATs scores and perfect GPA is that he plays Texas Hold-Em very well, to the extent that he is one of the top poker players in the country. He goes to Vegas and makes a ton of money from there. Apparently it has something to do with his ability to memorize card hands and evaluate them or something.



here are 4 possible cases:
1. No ceiling + same standard (like today)
2. No ceiling + high standard (Elansar's suggestion)
3. Ceiling + same standard (my suggestion)
4. Ceiling + high standard (my suggestion)


And back to youngyew's suggestion, *theoretically*, number 2 is definitely the best, also agreed by Elansar. But the current system doesn't promote enough incentives for extracurricular activities to be important.

Changing the standard of SPM will force more tuition, it will force LESS time for extracurricular activities because SPM is now harder. Actually, we should be "somewhat" glad that the standard of SPM is so low, because it gives us time to participate in extracurricular activities too.

Realistically, if the standard of SPM is so high that it is to weed out the non-cream of Malaysian students, will you spend your free time getting involved in extracurricular activities (like playing basketball or something), or will you, like the rest of your peers, spend your time going to more tuition for SPM because it's much harder to score now? .

I mean, just imagine what your mum would say if you were to spend a lot of time playing basketball, and not studying for the now-much-much-harder SPM. Would she praise you for being passionately involved in basketball, or would she say, "study more lar! now the standard of SPM is so much harder, you have to do more workbooks than your brother. back in those days, your brother could afford to get involved in extracurricular activities, but since now it's so much harder to get an A, you must study harder too!"

Most of all, would you be content just being where you are, and watch the rest of your classmates go for more intensive tuition classes?

For the first few years, yes, there would be less scorers getting A1s. But after that, students would wise up, and get used to the new format, and you have the problem of too many scorers getting A1s again- look at Moral, the format of the exam is changed everytime the students get good at answering the questions and knowing the exam format.

Another example close to home would be Singapore. There, the exam standard is higher - and you hear cases of intensive tuition and extreme pressure on students to perform

Now, you say, change the selection criteria of scholarship providers, so that our current system (that favours only academic results) will change.
But I say, impose a limit, so that our current system will change.

Academic results are extremely important to us - it could be because of the scholarship system, but IMHO, it is mainly because of the Malaysian society's priority on academic results. Scholarship or no scholarship, the person who succeeds in our society is the person who gets the most A1s.
________
Jaguar XJR-12 picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Jaguar_XJR-12)

[youngyew]

First of all, I thought what Elansar meant was, those best CS players who are not cream of the cream academically (but with an average, not-so-bad result), whether their proficiency in gaming should be considered as an merit to the scholarships.

Hmm.. about the theoretical and realistic part. I am not sure though. A thought that always lingers in my mind is - what induces the proliferation of exam-orientated intensive classes and "no-life-only-tuition-and-books" students?

a) Standard of the exams?
b) Number of subjects taken?
c) Kiasuism (of the oriental culture especially)?
d) Competitive environment in a developed (or developing) country?
e) The lack of emphasis and recognition in ECC and other forms of excellence


For me, it's the combination of all five factors, but I think the most dominant ones ought to be C, D and E. In other words, even if you decrease the standard of the subjects or the number of subjects one is "obliged" to take, with the influence of C and E alone (D is unavoidable though), you will still have people flocking to tuition centres and sleep with practice books everyday.

Maybe the point is, no ceiling -> people might still take a lot of subjects -> more time for tuition and exam-intensive classes -> one-dimentional students. However, for me I would believe that the increase of standard would shift the equilibrium point between the number of subjects one's capable of scoring well and the number of subjects one need to take to distinguish themselves as a good student.

Today the equilibrium point is so distorted to the extent that you can rather easily get scores of A1's but at the same time you also have to get more A1's to prove yourself. That's why people take up 19 subjects, because that's the only way you can prove yourself.

However, with the increase of the standard, you would shift the equilibrium point, that is, although it's harder to get an A1, but at the same time you don't need 17 of them to show that you are the cream of the cream. If we remember, 10 years ago, a feat of scoring 10A1 would already have established you as the top 60 among the country. So you will have people only taking a moderate amount of subjects because they would eschew extra subjects like how people today relinquished the notorious mandarin paper.

So my point is, the increase of standard would inherently decrease the subjects a student needs to take and is capable of taking; therefore you will have an increased standard but a decreased N, cancelling out to give the equal amount of workload, if not less. It can be less if we increase the standard in terms of critical thinking skills instead of more memorising work. We can't really study critical thinking, can we?

To summarise, when you increase the standard without altering the ceiling, this is what results for different categories of students:

crazily brilliant and all-rounded type: With the current system, they could have taken up 19 subjects to beat Amalina's record and prove themselves. But at the same time their talent in other areas have to be oppressed due to the amount of workload required in rote memorisation. New system, They can still take up 16 subjects if they dare and prove themselves (remember the Nepal guy that chenchow mentioned on the first page of this thread). They might also take up 10 subjects, saving their time to expand their other potentials.

"kiasu and life = tuition" type: With the current system they have to take 19 subjects and go to gazillions of tuition classes to prove themselves. New system, they might go to the same or less amount of tuitions (remember the cancellation effect of high standard and less subjects?). If they goto less tuitions, that means they can do other things such as getting involved in ECC.

Err..what other types of students can you think of? :roll: My point is, with the increase of standard, the students spend either same or less time in studying, but not more.

[youngyew]

It's not appropriate because it's not fair in terms of the selection of the scholarships.

It's not fair because in order to prove my ability and get a JPA scholarship, I have to take more subjects than what I need and what I am interested in.

It's not fair because even if I get A1 in all 10 subjects I take today, I can't be assured of a JPA (or any other) scholarships.

It's not fair because one who score outstandingly in 10 A1 may be viewed as less outstanding than those who scored mediocrely in 13 A1.

It's not fair because the yardstick has changed from the quality to the quantity, and to prove yourself you have no choice but to take up more subjects.
I would like to reiterate this post at this juncture. At this moment, let's brainstorm about what can be improved on this SPM system with no-ceiling and relatively low standard.

He pledged to help these top scorers, especially those who had obtained 12As and 13As.
We forgot about all who took 10 subjects.

Maybe we should tell our juniors, "Let's fight for more subjects, everybody!!"

[Anthony]

Right now, most scholarship selection criteria are solely based on SPM. There are two things that we can do about it: It's either we conform to it, or we demand for a change in the policy.


super untrue......
not at all!

[Anthony]

ok...raise SPM standards...
one thing raising the standars of SPM wunt help decrease the number of Str8A1s....this is determined by the MOE..
and wat do you mean too many str8 A1s?
JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662 easily fitted into JPA
but is dat so...no!
well after all JPA is god given right?????

[masdie]

JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662

you should know that in that 1000 places, there're allocations for each course. jpa can't afford to send all 662 for medicine you know, if you can understand me. so if the allocation is exceeded, jpa have to reject students. but that's also a gimmic. there're a lot of string-pullings happening. sometimes you just don't understand. chill.

[iQing]

Don't forget about those students who reject JPA scholarship because they are not willing to learn foreign language.

[Anthony]

The biggest problem this year is.....we dont have two or three choices..this made ppl who are vry interested in certain subjects denied.......its not their fault that wat they like is oso favoured by another...I for one..dun onw medic....still i couldnt get JPA....if JPa given us more choices it wud be more fair to the Str8A1s

[kucingbiru]

I for one..dun onw medic

what?

[Randomphantom]

My friend and I were joking that we'd see 300 A1s in the future. Then there'd be this super shen tong who gets 500 A1s. They'd be tested a single formula for each exam. Every day is a new subject. The exam itself will span 1 year. :LOL:

[kucingbiru]

JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662 easily fitted into JPA


you think everyone who gets STRAIGHT A1s is better than anyone else?

[DecentMerson]

The biggest problem this year is.....we dont have two or three choices..this made ppl who are vry interested in certain subjects denied.......its not their fault that wat they like is oso favoured by another...I for one..dun onw medic....still i couldnt get JPA....if JPa given us more choices it wud be more fair to the Str8A1s

either u are super creative... or u cannot understand simple directions...

u don't blame JPA for not giving u 2 or 3 choices... everybody is filling the same application form... u think others have 2 or 3 choices? NO...

u know that there's only 1 choice, and u know that whatever course is very competitive... so, it's ur choice to put the very competitive course, or to put another less competitive choice, or knowing that u cannot get the scholarship, to opt out...

it is not "their fault that what they like is also wat others like"... but too bad... others may score better point under JPA grading than them... so, too bad also that they didn't get the scholarship...

i think the single choice column serves its purpose - to let those who know what they want to study and who are really determined to get the scholarship in order to reduce the unnecessary problem created by those fussy and choosy scholarship recipients WHO wanted the scholarship badly, and yet, unwilling to learn another language, unwilling to go to countries like India, Indonesia, Korea, Russia ...

and another thing, getting straight A1, so what... u don't deserved any better treatment... as long as ur core subjects are the same, a student getting another A2 can be just as good, if not better (of course might be worse) than u are.

[budakkerek]

JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662 easily fitted into JPA


Straight A1s students doesnt mean they are better than the other students. i, for one, didnt get straight A1s for my SPM, which i sat for 4 years ago. but i got a scholarship, and i'm doing good at uni.

Straight A1s doesnt mean you'll do great at UNI.
some of my straight A1s friend, got scholarships, went overseas, got sent back halfway coz they didnt get the required results. Straight A1s la sangat.

so, dot go around harping about how unfair and how all straight A1s students should get scholarhsips. Life is unfair. deal with it.
sorry if i sound a bit harsh. But you should open your eyes a bit, and think how the other students would feel by your statement.

sudah la they tak dapat straight A1, got ppl saying they dont deserve pulak. maybe those non-straight A1s who got a scholarship, have something you dont hv. hv you thought of that?

[windy_city]

JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662 easily fitted into JPA


Straight A1s students doesnt mean they are better than the other students. i, for one, didnt get straight A1s for my SPM, which i sat for 4 years ago. but i got a scholarship, and i'm doing good at uni.

Straight A1s doesnt mean you'll do great at UNI.
some of my straight A1s friend, got scholarships, went overseas, got sent back halfway coz they didnt get the required results. Straight A1s la sangat.

so, dot go around harping about how unfair and how all straight A1s students should get scholarhsips. Life is unfair. deal with it.
sorry if i sound a bit harsh. But you should open your eyes a bit, and think how the other students would feel by your statement.

sudah la they tak dapat straight A1, got ppl saying they dont deserve pulak. maybe those non-straight A1s who got a scholarship, have something you dont hv. hv you thought of that?
Can?t agree more.
Straight A does not mean anything.
I have seen lot of straight As students who come here and berkampung sesama sendiri and get bad results.
And please dun go on and on about how unfair it is that people who get straight As did not get the scholarship. Life is always unfair; if you want a very fair life, work hard and create one for yourself, whining in Recom will never solve your problem. Have you ever thought that maybe there are more deserving students out there who did not get the straight As but should get the scholarship.

By whining and complaining here, you not only make yourself seems desperate but na?ve as well, why the hell straight As people SHOULD get the scholarship. Getting the scholarship is not a right and it is never a right!! There are tones of factors involved in deciding a scholarship holder, and result is just a part of it.

If you still cannot get the scholarship after you appeal, just move on man. Work hard and prove to others that you are worth more than this. I know a PHD student who studied in UM before getting into MIT for his PHD. He is a Chinese, straight As student but did not get JPA (well back in those day, they dun even know that JPA scholarship existed) but he worked his ass off and now he is going to graduate soon from MIT with a PHD (he does not come from a rich family, he get into MIT on his own). This is just one example of people who move on. So please stop whining, move on if you cannot get it. Life is never fair, if you want a fair one, go to sleep and find it in your dream. The only way for you to get what you want is to work your ass off for it, whining and complaining is BS. I know it is harsh, but let face it, this is life.

I wish you good luck!

[broccoli]

JPA scholarships = 1000
Str8A1s in 2004 = 662 easily fitted into JPA


Straight A1s students doesnt mean they are better than the other students. i, for one, didnt get straight A1s for my SPM, which i sat for 4 years ago. but i got a scholarship, and i'm doing good at uni.

Straight A1s doesnt mean you'll do great at UNI.
some of my straight A1s friend, got scholarships, went overseas, got sent back halfway coz they didnt get the required results. Straight A1s la sangat.

so, dot go around harping about how unfair and how all straight A1s students should get scholarhsips. Life is unfair. deal with it.
sorry if i sound a bit harsh. But you should open your eyes a bit, and think how the other students would feel by your statement.

sudah la they tak dapat straight A1, got ppl saying they dont deserve pulak. maybe those non-straight A1s who got a scholarship, have something you dont hv. hv you thought of that?

well said!! getting an A1 in spm doesn't mean that one is very proficient in a certain subject. i've friends who could get an A1 for physics but can't even squeeze into the olympiad physics KEPUJIAN list; there were some who claimed A1s for english but ranked on the 20-something percentile in the NSW english test.

so what if u get straight As?? straight A scorers are so common nowadays!! since everyone has equally good results, other factors should come into consideration ie cocurricular activities and other acheivements.

dun call me unpatriotic but if jpa could jz take a leaf out of singapore's ministry of edu's book(ASEAN scholarship), things would have been much easier. since most applicants have excellent academic results, the best way to gauge them is thru aptitude tests and interviews!! perhaps jpa should consider calling up those 662 straight A1 scorers for an iq test... then only can we see who really has wat it takes to be one of the 300 over jpa medic scholars.

[youngyew]

dun call me unpatriotic but if jpa could jz take a leaf out of singapore's ministry of edu's book(ASEAN scholarship), things would have been much easier. since most applicants have excellent academic results, the best way to gauge them is thru aptitude tests and interviews!! perhaps jpa should consider calling up those 662 straight A1 scorers for an iq test... then only can we see who really has wat it takes to be one of the 300 over jpa medic scholars.
I agree with you broccoli, but I don't think IQ test should be employed as the gauge for medical students. High IQ gives you an advantage, but it's not a requirement. Empathy and communication skills surpass the importance of IQ by miles, in medicine.

[ElansarGelmir]

Well, at least all JPA applicants should take a selection test consisting of
1. English proficiency / General Knowledge
2. Math
3. IQ
and 4. An elective subject in the field you are applying (for eg. engineering - physics/math, pharmacy / medic - chemistry and yada yada)

And these tests should weigh about 30% of the scholarship selection criteria. In that case, it doesn't matter how many As you got in SPM; all applicants are competiting on equal grounds (academic wise).

[ElansarGelmir]

Extracurriculars doesn't merely test talent, it tests your DETERMINATION, COMMITTMENT and PASSION - qualities that are probably more important than what you can memorize. The more determined, committed, passionate you are about an activity, the more better you are likely to be at it.

If I like playing, say Counter Strike. I am DETERMINED to play well, and I COMMITTED my time and energy in practising the game PASSIONATELY and in the end, I become one of the top Counter Strike players in Malaysia (I wish). Should that be considered in my scholarship application?

Point 1.

Pretty off-topic, but to answer your theoretical question - YES. If there exists such a person who not only is the top Counter-Strike player in the country and has excellent academic achievements (which is pretty unlikely), he would have something pretty unique to contribute to the university.

He would stand out- as compared to your standard top scorer, who's a prefect/ librarian, not really exceptional in anything, not really passionate about anything, does a lot of workbooks, rote memorizes, and pretty normal in every other way (look at most JPA scholars, btw). Agreed?

Of course, a person who's a top counterstrike player and a top scorer is pretty unlikely - and that's why they are a rare commodity.

To illustrate this point, I know this guy who's at Yale, and is pretty good in his studies, but his "hook" or special quality that separated him from all the other applicants who had 1600 SATs scores and perfect GPA is that he plays Texas Hold-Em very well, to the extent that he is one of the top poker players in the country. He goes to Vegas and makes a ton of money from there. Apparently it has something to do with his ability to memorize card hands and evaluate them or something.



here are 4 possible cases:
1. No ceiling + same standard (like today)
2. No ceiling + high standard (Elansar's suggestion)
3. Ceiling + same standard (my suggestion)
4. Ceiling + high standard (my suggestion)


And back to youngyew's suggestion, *theoretically*, number 2 is definitely the best, also agreed by Elansar. But the current system doesn't promote enough incentives for extracurricular activities to be important.

Point 2.

Changing the standard of SPM will force more tuition, it will force LESS time for extracurricular activities because SPM is now harder. Actually, we should be "somewhat" glad that the standard of SPM is so low, because it gives us time to participate in extracurricular activities too.

Realistically, if the standard of SPM is so high that it is to weed out the non-cream of Malaysian students, will you spend your free time getting involved in extracurricular activities (like playing basketball or something), or will you, like the rest of your peers, spend your time going to more tuition for SPM because it's much harder to score now? .

I mean, just imagine what your mum would say if you were to spend a lot of time playing basketball, and not studying for the now-much-much-harder SPM. Would she praise you for being passionately involved in basketball, or would she say, "study more lar! now the standard of SPM is so much harder, you have to do more workbooks than your brother. back in those days, your brother could afford to get involved in extracurricular activities, but since now it's so much harder to get an A, you must study harder too!"

Most of all, would you be content just being where you are, and watch the rest of your classmates go for more intensive tuition classes?

Point 3.

For the first few years, yes, there would be less scorers getting A1s. But after that, students would wise up, and get used to the new format, and you have the problem of too many scorers getting A1s again- look at Moral, the format of the exam is changed everytime the students get good at answering the questions and knowing the exam format.

Another example close to home would be Singapore. There, the exam standard is higher - and you hear cases of intensive tuition and extreme pressure on students to perform

Now, you say, change the selection criteria of scholarship providers, so that our current system (that favours only academic results) will change.
But I say, impose a limit, so that our current system will change.

Point 4.

Academic results are extremely important to us - it could be because of the scholarship system, but IMHO, it is mainly because of the Malaysian society's priority on academic results. Scholarship or no scholarship, the person who succeeds in our society is the person who gets the most A1s.

Point 1.

If his academic excellence is the same as others with no other achievements to bolster their application, I would have chosen that guy too. He might be one of the better candidtates, but definitely not the best per se unless he can prove it to me that being one of the top CS players is very productive and may benefit others. Unless I were a scholarship provider who is interested in fishing for good comp players, that achievement itself is not good enough to be considered in the scholarship application.

Point 2.

Well, if they want to spend more time on their studies and less on extra co-curricular activities, then by all means be my guest. In the end, the real talented students who do not see the need for tuitions have enough time for ECA and stand a better chance in getting scholarships from JPA.

I mean, just imagine what your mum would say if you were to spend a lot of time playing basketball, and not studying for the now-much-much-harder SPM.

If I am sure that I am able to score excellent results even though I spend most of my time playing basketball, then I would continue playing it.
I think you've got your priorities messed up. Although ECA is very important in balancing our student's life, our studies should never be neglected. Quoting my humanities professor, who is also my unofficial academic advisor, "Always make time for things that you want to do, be it sports or performances. But never allow your studies to be affected by them", we as students are supposed to be involved in things that we are passionate about; however, not on the expense of our studies. ECA is there so that we can learn some things that classroom education can't give us. Unless there is a wide job market for ECA degree holders, ECA should not be more important than our studies.

point 3

I don't see how knowing the format makes you good in answering KBKK questions. In the end, we are only producing students with superficial level of academic knowledge if you decided to keep the standard of SPM with a ceiling to the number of subjects allowed to be taken.

Another example close to home would be Singapore. There, the exam standard is higher - and you hear cases of intensive tuition and extreme pressure on students to perform

And they are madly involved in ECA too. That's why some of us have to go to school as early as 7.30 am and come back after 8 pm, for the sake of ECA.

Point 4.

Although I do not agree that academic result is 100% important to everyone, it should have a greater emphasis compared to other aspects, especially in scholarship applications. Although SPM is flawed, we shouldn't conclude that academic excellence is less important than ECA or whatsoever.

[youngyew]

^ bumping this thread.

We have been discussing this issue for several years, but now with the latest 21A student, I reckon this discussion might be of some interest to our members. Do read it, and feel free to add more opinions to this discussion.


p/s: This is one of my favourite threads so far throughout my involvement in ReCom, especially in my debate with elansargelmir from page 12 where I actually changed my stand and concurred with his point. It's one of the most intellectually satisfying experience for me in ReCom.

[Sillyboy]

Of course it shows something, but not everything!

[4seasonspring]

it might not show that this boy is brilliant or deserve any kind of "nobel prize" or watsover

but at least it clearly shows one thing:he is really efficient in his time management.
Imagine, 21 subjects, that's almost twice the subjects a budak normal ambil
Imagine the time he have to plan to juggle between studies and cocu activities!

*of course, hopefully his koku is not=0

[Zeroth]

I think to counter the problem we need to introduce percentile system.

In this system (which is used by new south wales high school certificate) you select a number (say, ten) of your best subjects and then it is graded against your peers.

Then those scoring 99% percentile for example are the top 1% in the country etc.

However, the problem lies in fairness as some papers are easier than others, but a formula or algorithm can easily solve the problem.

Look at the subjects he took to reach 21A1s. Some of them are pretty interrelated anyway such as the three Islamic papers he had.

The question is: how relevant is that to his career?

[vseehua]

I think to counter the problem we need to introduce percentile system.

In this system (which is used by new south wales high school certificate) you select a number (say, ten) of your best subjects and then it is graded against your peers.

Then those scoring 99% percentile for example are the top 1% in the country etc.

However, the problem lies in fairness as some papers are easier than others, but a formula or algorithm can easily solve the problem.

Look at the subjects he took to reach 21A1s. Some of them are pretty interrelated anyway such as the three Islamic papers he had.

The question is: how relevant is that to his career?Instead of letting him choose his best 10 subjects i think it's better for the uni itself to choose the core (number) of subjects that provides the skills and knowledge needed for that particular course and rate it. Additional related subjects can be used as a bonus as well. This, and the percentile system can really go a long way in helping us build a real system that is based on meritocracy.

[Zeroth]

Instead of letting him choose his best 10 subjects i think it's better for the uni itself to choose the core (number) of subjects that provides the skills and knowledge needed for that particular course and rate it. Additional related subjects can be used as a bonus as well. This, and the percentile system can really go a long way in helping us build a real system that is based on meritocracy.

Yes I agree. Or it can be done in categories i.e:

Humanities
Science
Arts

And each category only counts say 2 subjects out of whatever amounts you take.
Then depending on the course you want, the different categories can be weighted differently.

[prince_J]

i think the percentile idea will be a good one... in that case, it shows the quality of a student's work, and not the quantity... :)

[Leen]

Let me tell you a story.

When I was young, my mom always told this story to me.

"Last time, we could buy 10 sweets with just one cent. A bowl of noodles cost 20 cents and they gave us lots of noodles and meat. Right now, ten cents can give you 2 sweets and the noodles have much smaller bowls and content even though it cost us 2 dollars now."

I can imagine telling a similar story to my children next time.
"Back then, I just needed 10 -12 As to secure a scholarship. My teacher went to UK on a scholarship with just 7As. Now, you can only secure a twinning program scholarship even though it requires 30As from you."

History repeats itself. :amuse

That's my opinion on this whole topic.

[Seiryu]

Well, I guess this is what they called "grade inflation". High grades, little value.

[capablanca]

And yet, the grade inflation masks up the true pupils with great potential. Thus, stopping them for receiving the acknowledgment they truly deserve.

[chiachean]

Conclusion : The government should cut down the maximum subjects can be taken for SPM..

Besides, government should make the marking system more transparent. Let say fix 80 for A1 and so on..

[seiken]

Well, one has to acknowledge that SPM has lost its value. I just hate it when people say "Nola, maybe Malaysians are getting smarter and smarter every year."

These people are nothing but ignorant. SO angry when I hear such comments

[Sillyboy]

Well, one has to acknowledge that SPM has lost its value. I just hate it when people say "Nola, maybe Malaysians are getting smarter and smarter every year."

These people are nothing but ignorant. SO angry when I hear such comments

Absurd!! It is the exact opposite! XP

[starlemon]

It doesnt show anything! getting all A1 nowadays is a common phenomena.
plus the science and maths subjects,i am sure most ppl will score A1 in these subjects.it all because the grade fix for these subjects are too easy to score an A1.

In contrary, i can say if someone get an A1 for mandarin, his or her mandarin standard will be very high.

[jayden]

Lots of A1's courstesy of grade inflation actually may make people overestimate their abilities and pick a path that may not suit them in college and university. anyway, didn't the government wanted to cut the maximum number of subjects down to 12 or something last time?

[Sillyboy]

Lots of A1's courstesy of grade inflation actually may make people overestimate their abilities and pick a path that may not suit them in college and university. anyway, didn't the government wanted to cut the maximum number of subjects down to 12 or something last time?

Unlikely to happen. Will not comment further least I'm accused of inciting hatred.

[capablanca]

Lots of A1's courstesy of grade inflation actually may make people overestimate their abilities and pick a path that may not suit them in college and university. anyway, didn't the government wanted to cut the maximum number of subjects down to 12 or something last time?
Nah, the government only provide free exemption from exam fees for up to 12 subjects. If want more, pay yourself. Dang, why didn't they implement this earlier so I could enjoy it. In fact, I think this encourages people to take more subjects since the cost of SPM exam gone down from average of RM100++ to almost nothing

[kintaro_kun]

Conclusion : The government should cut down the maximum subjects can be taken for SPM..

Besides, government should make the marking system more transparent. Let say fix 80 for A1 and so on..

nope, i dun think its necessary for the gov to put a limit on how many subjects a student can take. in fact, the only thing needs limiting is the number of subjects taken into account for JPA scholarships. the gov should impose like, maximum of 10 subjects for JPA application. anymore subjects taken beyond this 10 subject limit will not be considered for JPA. since the majority of students who had 15-21A1s interviewed in the newspapers said that their motive of taking so many subjects is to challenge themselves etc, well, they can, but just dun expect these extra subjects to be taken into account of your JPA application.

another thing is, i dun agree with "fixing" hard numbers to a grade, like 80 for A1. maybe what can be done is using the % system, where the top, say, 5%, will get A1, the next 5%, will get A2, etc. this will be more consistent with the difficulty of the papers student might face every year, since its more likely that the paper's difficulty being inconsistent than the student population's intelligence.

[capablanca]

nope, i dun think its necessary for the gov to put a limit on how many subjects a student can take. in fact, the only thing needs limiting is the number of subjects taken into account for JPA scholarships. the gov should impose like, maximum of 10 subjects for JPA application. anymore subjects taken beyond this 10 subject limit will not be considered for JPA. since the majority of students who had 15-21A1s interviewed in the newspapers said that their motive of taking so many subjects is to challenge themselves etc, well, they can, but just dun expect these extra subjects to be taken into account of your JPA application.

another thing is, i dun agree with "fixing" hard numbers to a grade, like 80 for A1. maybe what can be done is using the % system, where the top, say, 5%, will get A1, the next 5%, will get A2, etc. this will be more consistent with the difficulty of the papers student might face every year, since its more likely that the paper's difficulty being inconsistent than the student population's intelligence.
But fixing a percentile system might be taxing on students from rural areas since some of them might not have access to the wealth of knowledge urban students have. If this happened, I expect urban students to dominate the top percentile of the calculation.

[Leen]

It doesn't have to be the case where the grades are tied to a certain mark.

In many US top universities, As and Bs are curved as well, BUT there is still only VERY little inflation to grades.

It does have to be so mean that we tied A1 to 81. What about those who got sick and scored an 80? It would not be too advantageous for them. Or what about if clearly the questions are too hard that only 10 person out of the whole country score 81 and above?

Curving can solve that problem but I think the problem lies in the curve itself. What is the mean? What is the standard deviation? What is the line where they say, "Ah... this line above will get As," ? This education system is too bleak about it. If only it can be more transparent about the whole thing, I'm sure that things will be better.

What if MOE actually publish the average, the standard deviation, the numbers of people scoring As, the number of people taking the subjects and so on? It will provide people with all the numbers they need until they can't complain anymore about the seemingly "unfair" government.

Well, we could say all we can but if the government never listens, then it is futile too. Bleh. I should just go back watching anime and reading manga.

[youngyew]

Conclusion : The government should cut down the maximum subjects can be taken for SPM..

Besides, government should make the marking system more transparent. Let say fix 80 for A1 and so on..
ElansarGelmir and I had a debate about this point before (look at page 13 or so in this thread). And in the end, I kind of agreed to his point that limiting the number of subjects without raising the bar for good grades is not going to do anything except for producing tons of "quite-good" students that are not easily differentiable.

Raising the bar for the grades should be the top priority in revamping the exam system; whether the subject is limited or not is rather trivial. Once you have a paper challenging enough, there won't be a throng of people taking 16 subjects just to "prove himself" - only the cream of the cream is able to take 16 challenging papers and ace it. So in the case of challenging grades, the number of maximum papers taken by the candidates will be curtailed naturally, basically via "free market" principles.

[4seasonspring]

nope, i dun think its necessary for the gov to put a limit on how many subjects a student can take. in fact, the only thing needs limiting is the number of subjects taken into account for JPA scholarships. the gov should impose like, maximum of 10 subjects for JPA application. anymore subjects taken beyond this 10 subject limit will not be considered for JPA. since the majority of students who had 15-21A1s interviewed in the newspapers said that their motive of taking so many subjects is to challenge themselves etc, well, they can, but just dun expect these extra subjects to be taken into account of your JPA application.


Starting this year(or last year?),JPA already implemeted the policy of "limiting the num of subjects taken into account for its sholarship". student candidates can only choose their best 12 subjects(including core subjects) to be filled into the application form.

[youngyew]

But still, when it comes to appeal stage, people will still say a result of, say, "14A1 3A2" is still going to sound more impressive than, say, 11A1.

[capablanca]

Eve if JPA limits it, I think the officers there will still ask right, how many As you have. That's what they ask my group last time.

[JetLee0510]

funny.. of coz a student with 17A1 will be better than 12A1.. in terms of their success in the exam.. but of coz that doesnt mean than the student with 12A1 might not be better, even academically.. but ppl will always see from the result one have.. but still, the student with 17A1 might be better.. so, getting lots of A1s doesnt mean anything, other than "he got a better result"..hmm?

[vseehua]

funny.. of coz a student with 17A1 will be better than 12A1.. in terms of their success in the exam.. but of coz that doesnt mean than the student with 12A1 might not be better, even academically.. but ppl will always see from the result one have.. but still, the student with 17A1 might be better.. so, getting lots of A1s doesnt mean anything, other than "he got a better result"..hmm?
Say that the limit to get A1 is 65 points.

The 17A1 guy got all his subjects by getting 66 points, while the 11A1 guy got 99 points for all his subjects. Who is the better one now?

[TheArtOfMedicine]

There is a high possibility that the one getting 1000A1s is a geek. He definitely has to spend much more time in his extra subjects compared to his peers and thus, depriving him of his social life.

[lindley]

but i seriously dont get why some people who are in the science stream, take general sci for extra sub. challenge? its called gen science for a reason..=.='

[pinkcat]

I feel that if these people really put in extra effort to get more A1's. They should be considered better than other students. There is nothing wrong in taking one more general science if you've already taken physics, bio and chemistry. It actually proves that u are willing and able to challenge yourself and that should be a factor that can be taken into account when choosing who should get a scholarship. Of course, co-curricular achievements play an important role too. I have no comments if this students scored like 1000A1's but never participated in any coco activities. But what if this student scored 1000A1's (Literally) and was also active in coco activities? Definitely, this is a clear indication of the capacity and capability of this student compared with other students who chose to play safe by taking only a few subjects. U can say that they take more subjects just so that they can gain more advantage when it comes to applying for scholarships. How about those, who purposely dropped Bahasa Cina just because they do not want to have an A2, or B3 which will affect their chances of getting straight A1's?
Come on people, be realistic. If these students, like that guy who got 21 A's are capable of scoring such amazing results, we should give them an applaud, no matter what their motives are. Even if they took more subjects just because they really want scholarships so badly, there is nothing wrong with that, right? For those who got 11A1's, perhaps they could not have scored 17A1's if they took 17 subjects. So i think that getting more A1's is actually something that we should be proud of. We shouldn't look at the negative side because as far as i have followed this thread, most of you regard those people who take many subjects and scored straight A1's as nerds. But i am sure that there are people out there who scored like more numbers of A1's than the usual amount of A1's an average malaysian student can get are also, at the same time very active in coco activities. And do bear in mind that when they chose to register for so many subjects, they are actually taking a risk as well. What if they only managed to scored 11A1's, or 12 A1's and get some A2's and B3's for the rest of the subjects? And this might make them seem even more inferior to those "straight A1" students who actually score the same amount of A1's as them as well. Perhaps the selecting system for JPA has changed. But as far as i know, a straight A1 student is USUALLY considered better than a student who has A1, A2's, and other grades.
And about those who scored straight A1's being regarded as nerds. I totally disagree with that statement. Not all students who scored straight A1's are nerds. In fact, what is the problem with being a nerd? If all the people in the world are street smart people who do not perform well in their studies and have average IQ's. Who is going to do the job that nerds do? For example, creating new programs and softwares, finding cures to deadly diseases, new ways to save the world and etc. We should not look down on nerds as do remember, they might not be as good as socialising as other people, but their intelligence is higher. And for those "street-smart" people. They might be terribly, extremely, extraordinarily good in socialising with other people but perhaps have lower intelligence. So it is the same. Both kinds of people make the society balanced. And we should not speak of nerds like they are some weird creature or someone that should be looked down on. It isn't easy to be a nerd too, u know? As i said earlier, there are students who are equally street-smart and have high intelligence such as being able to scored straight A1's. They are also talents in the society that we should be proud of!

Cheers!

[yeng]

but still we dun hv a sufficient indicator to judge a student's ability.....

1.compare "A s" , we have a grade inflation that too many ppl gt straight A1,
2.compare co-curricular activity and "A s", who knows if the society is a "Dead" society that have no activities,
3.compare by interviews, who knows if a person hv extraodinary good communicating skills but only know how 2 talk, duno know how 2 melaksanakan? or he works just as good as he talks(express his opinion)?
4.compare by teachers comments, you can't ensure teachers give good comment by hoping his students get a scholarship?
5. compare by each other's ability, how d u ensure everything is fair because there is thousands kinds of abilities, and millions of students?
6. compare by getting a scholarship, this is a common stereotype that ppl get scholarship is a genius.
7. etc.

there is a lot more to see, but d we hv a really accurate measurement?
every system hv disadvantages.

although comparing As is a least favourable indicator, we do not hv much choice unless we do something to improve our system of identifying really good students.

i agree wit youngyew and fellow recomer wit same opinion in the earlier post.

[pinkcat]

but still we dun hv a sufficient indicator to judge a student's ability.....

1.compare "A s" , we have a grade inflation that too many ppl gt straight A1,

2.compare co-curricular activity and "A s", who knows if the society is a

3.compare by interviews, who knows if a person hv extraodinary good communicating skills but only know how 2 talk, duno know how 2 melaksanakan? or he works just as good as he talks(express his opinion)?



4.compare by teachers comments, you can't ensure teachers give good comment by hoping his students get a scholarship?



5. compare by each other's ability, how d u ensure everything is fair because there is thousands kinds of abilities, and millions of students?

6. compare by getting a scholarship, this is a common stereotype that ppl get scholarship is a genius.



7. etc.

there is a lot more to see, but d we hv a really accurate measurement?
every system hv disadvantages.


although comparing As is a least favourable indicator, we do not hv much choice unless we do something to improve our system of identifying really good students.

i agree wit youngyew and fellow recomer wit same opinion in the earlier post.

1. If there is a grade inflation why can't most of the students get A1 in every subject even when there is a grade inflation? Getting A1 is an achievement regardless of whether there is, or is not the occurance of grade inflation, and we should not have the mindset saying that getting A1 is merely because there is a grade inflation.
2. "Dead" society that have no activities.
We can't say that all societies are dead. And by looking at the participation in competitions, we can determine whether this student has been active or not. We can also look at the posts that he/she has held during their sec school life.
3. Being able to communicate is a talent itself and we can see if he knows how to melaksanakan what he says by looking at his results and also posts that he has held and also competitions and societies that he has joined and participated.
4. Most teachers would give their students good testimonials to assist their students in getting scholarships therefore this can be taken as a point of reference but should not be trusted fully as everyone knows that most teachers are always trying to help students. You might not believe it, but in my school, they are actually very strict. For those who were absent for many days or have been really naughty, they do get grade B, or even C for kelakuan.

5. If you have the ability to let out a long burp for like 10 minutes,perhaps other people might not possess this ability therefore you should be considered special, right? But as far as i know in interviews, or selection processes, the judges look for abilities that are most important and useful for them. Therefore, if those students have abilities such as leadership and able to work well with a team. They should be given priority as these are really important abilities that not all people have. And if you have other abilities that other people do not have, perhaps you could try showing it to the judges? :-)
6. What we want are geniuses who are street-smart. What is wrong with that? Don't tell me that we want people with low iq and are quiet and reserved and antisocial.

I do not deny that each system has their own disadvantages. But i have to say that each system has their own advantages as well. If there are really better ways to select good students for scholarships, perhaps you could be the one to implement it? or suggest it to JPA? or other institutions who offer scholarships.





Hope that i have not offended anyone with my post. Correct me if i'm wrong. This is just an opinion. :))

[skyrainbow]

i think jpa give scholarships to straight a1 students coz they want the jaminan that the $ will not be wasted.
those who dont score as well cant guarantee jpa tat much. so jpa turned to the straight a1 scorers,assuming that they will work v hard n pass all the papars, though tis isnt fair as some subjects like BC is extremely difficult to score.

i think jpa want high achievers that will run the country n play the game of the society, not the inventors philosophers...that will case an evolution.

There is a high possibility that the one getting 1000A1s is a geek. He definitely has to spend much more time in his extra subjects compared to his peers and thus, depriving him of his social life.


do u think it is excusable for people wif asperger syndrome to do that? (autism- my current interested topic)

1.well, what if ur friends r geeks n nerds that will score 12A1, but urself onli score 10A1.
this doesnt mean u r inferior to them, but what will they think of u?
will they look down on u? yes or no - but being left out of the activities they can join like quizes or some ceremony that evey other friend gets to go, will be miserable.
2.everyone has their own ability n disability. some ppl r juz v poor in socialization like those kids wif autism or asperger. they can excel in other things like acadeimicly so that they r not so left out of every thing like posts in the coco. n they still get to contribute to the fame of their school n exp the admiration of others for thier academic gifts even if they r really unpopular.
of course that the life after spm is not based on books, but scoring really well can prevent others from looking down on them at least in the academic field at that moment.

i'm not really good in anything - socila, coco or academic, but being lift out of things classmates did was miserable.

so, i think that it is fair for those geeks who r v poor in socializing to stand up juz for once in front of their peers by scoring 20+A1. then when it comes to being street smart, others can show off loh.

it's only a matter of choice imho, whether one wants to be good to which degree in coco, aca, social, or all, but this all need great sacrification, solid effort n preserverence.it's not fair to say that someone who score 1000+A1 as a geek if he puts in solid effort, n he has sacrifice many other things for this choice.

for siding the geeks n nerds,
i'm ready to be criticized....XD

[youngyew]

I feel that if these people really put in extra effort to get more A1's. They should be considered better than other students. There is nothing wrong in taking one more general science if you've already taken physics, bio and chemistry. It actually proves that u are willing and able to challenge yourself and that should be a factor that can be taken into account when choosing who should get a scholarship.
How is taking core science a proof that "you are willing and able to challenge yourself"? For all intent and purpose, core science is just a simplified and summarised version of the physics, chemistry and biology, and the action of taking that subject defines the term "redundancy". In this age where a person is judged by the number of A1, should I start taking "maths for beginners", "intermediate maths", "basic applied maths", "additional maths", "core maths" etc if those subjects are being offered, since they show that I am willing to "challenge myself" with basically the easier version of subject that I am already taking?

But what if this student scored 1000A1's (Literally) and was also active in coco activities?
If this happens, it says LOTS more about the joking nature of the exam than the quality of the student. Of course the student must be quite good; but to be able to allow so many A1 is simply a failing of the education system. How many people have you seen to have taken four majors in three years and aced them all?

Definitely, this is a clear indication of the capacity and capability of this student compared with other students who chose to play safe by taking only a few subjects.
1. If I don't take redundant subjects like core science, it doesn't mean that I am "playing safe". It only means that the person taking core science is "playing foul".

2. If I knew that I am going to become a doctor and so I concentrated more on the science subjects, should I go adding in economics, IT, accounting principles, religious education (sub-subject-1, sub-subject-2, sub-subject-3 & sub-subject 4) etc, so that I am not "playing safe"? If I "played safe" by choosing only subjects relevant to my interest and ambition, and scored excellent in the end (say, 10A1 1A2), does that make me less good than people who "dare to venture" but despite mediocre performance are able to get something like 12A1 3A2? Apparently JPA and SPM would say that the latter is better, judging from the result slip alone.

U can say that they take more subjects just so that they can gain more advantage when it comes to applying for scholarships. How about those, who purposely dropped Bahasa Cina just because they do not want to have an A2, or B3 which will affect their chances of getting straight A1's?
Nobody has said that it's a healthy phenomenon for those who drop chinese paper in order to improve the chance. People are forced to do that in order to circumvent the categorical disadvantage of the low percentage of A1 in that subject. And if possible, we wouldn't have wished to see this happen at all.

Similarly, many people are forced to take more subjects (including redundant ones, irrelevant ones and probably ones they are not interested in) because of the categorical disadvantage to people who take less subjects. And if possible, many wouldn't have wished to see this happen too.

Just because "people do it" doesn't mean that the circumstance behind it can be justified. If your kid is being kidnapped and the police is ineffectual, you would be forced to pay the ransom too - but doesn't mean that kidnap->pay ransom can now be justified as an acceptable norm.

[pinkcat]

How is taking core science a proof that "you are willing and able to challenge yourself"? For all intent and purpose, core science is just a simplified and summarised version of the physics, chemistry and biology, and the action of taking that subject defines the term "redundancy". In this age where a person is judged by the number of A1, should I start taking "maths for beginners", "intermediate maths", "basic applied maths", "additional maths", "core maths" etc if those subjects are being offered, since they show that I am willing to "challenge myself" with basically the easier version of subject that I am already taking?

You have to know that when a student chooses to take up more subjects, he would have to spend more time on it. It doesn't mean that since we have already studied physics, chemistry and biology and take up core science, we can just leave it aside and only study for it just a day before the exam because the syllabus might not be entirely the same. He would still have to put in extra effort and obviously he should be given credit for it. If he takes up more subjects it means that he would have less time to spend for each subjects, isn't it a challenge? And by taking up this challenge isn't he challenging himself that is to have to study more subjects in the same time as everyone else? Even if you say that it would be redundant to take up such subjects because they are merely a simplified version of the other more specific subjects, i would say that there is nothing wrong. Practice makes perfect. Perhaps he would have already learnt the concepts in physics, chemistry and biology, and by studying core science it would be like revising everything he had already learnt, and perhaps this would help him understand it even better? What's more is he can get an extra A1 for that. I'd say that it is a smart action. For example the biology we study now in secondary school is also considered simplified compared to the biology subject university students study. We have to study from the beginner's level and slowly make our way up until we reach the highest level. If a student is not that smart perhaps by taking core science it will serve as a foundation for him to study physics, chemistry and biology? If the ministry of education is really against the idea of students taking up core science even though they've already studied phy, bio and chem i think they will have already set up a condition that those who have already taken phy, bio and chem cannot take up core science.


If this happens, it says LOTS more about the joking nature of the exam than the quality of the student. Of course the student must be quite good; but to be able to allow so many A1 is simply a failing of the education system.

There is another point of view to this scenario. Since there is the occurence of grade inflation, it would be easy for many students to score A1 in many subjects. How are students to be differentiated since straight A's students are no more a miracle or amazement and can be found everywhere. Some students might choose to take up more subjects in order to stand out from other students. I believe there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps the government is trying to help more students score good results, and to compensate for the downside of this act of kindness, they allow students to take up more subjects, it would be the student's choice if they want to be different from any other average student by taking up more subjects and in fact scoring more A's and it is a way for them to shine in the crowd. That will make them stand up from other average students. And if really smart students are really that smart, i believe it won't be a problem for them to concentrate on more subjects, it will help them when it comes to applying for scholarships and the judges would be able to sift out these bunch of talents who are really more capable and daring than an average student who takes only average amounts of subjects. Perhaps you will say that not all smart students take up so many subjects. But since it is a well known fact that our education system truly does emphasize on how many A's you get, if you really wanna be different and prove that you are indeed more capable than anyone else, the only choice you have is to take up more subjects. Who cares if you scored 99, or even 100 in 11 subjects? Although i do not deny that these people who can score almost perfect marks for even though only 11 subjects are indeed geniuses, but they must know that in Malaysia, this is not what matters most. And we, as humans living in such a competitive society should be realistic. If you wanna be special and succeed in life, you have to be realistic and realise what is going on around you. For your information, not everyone is able to focus on so many subjects and the ability to concentrate and do well in say, 21 subjects is anything but an easy task. In my case, i only took 11 subjects but i already had a hell of a time studying for these subjects and i can't imagine how life would be if i studied 21 subjects or rather just more than 11 subjects. I really salute those student who are able to take many subjects and are also able to ace them all. It's really an achievement.

How many people have you seen to have taken four majors in three years and aced them all?

Indeed, i have never heard of anything like that. But if someone is able to achieve that, it does make him special and there is nothing wrong with wanting to be special, right? It does take hard work to ace all four majors in three years, and not everyone has that ability. It is something that you can show to others and it's a proof of your capability.


1. If I don't take redundant subjects like core science, it doesn't mean that I am "playing safe". It only means that the person taking core science is "playing foul".

You refer to people taking core science with physics, chemistry and biology as playing foul. I think that there is no point to this judgement as the ministry of education does allow people to do this. There is nothing 'foul' in doing this and as i mentioned earlier there are in fact benefits in taking up one more subject like this. It is not against the law as far as i know. And there is no cheating involved as people who take up core science have to study and understand the format as well. It all comes from hard work!


2. If I knew that I am going to become a doctor and so I concentrated more on the science subjects, should I go adding in economics, IT, accounting principles, religious education (sub-subject-1, sub-subject-2, sub-subject-3 & sub-subject 4) etc, so that I am not "playing safe"? If I "played safe" by choosing only subjects relevant to my interest and ambition, and scored excellent in the end (say, 10A1 1A2), does that make me less good than people who "dare to venture" but despite mediocre performance are able to get something like 12A1 3A2? Apparently JPA and SPM would say that the latter is better, judging from the result slip alone.

I am not saying that you are less good. But have you thought that perhaps the other person who scored 12A1 and 3A2 also scored excellent performance in it? And even if their performance was mediocre and not as good as yours, it doesn't make them less good than you either. They took up more subjects and perhaps they did not have any idea on whether to pursue science or arts next time and by taking up all these subjects maybe he would have more choices to choose next time? And it doesn't hurt to learn more. By taking up more subjects you are actually gaining more knowledge even if you don't put it to use in your job next time. If he can concentrate and excel in the subjects that he is really interested in and can really help him in his job as a doctor next time ( not referring to anybody, this is just an example), and at the same time take up non related subjects such as principles of accounting, IT..etc. It would be an advantage to him in the future as at least he would have a little knowledge in these fields even if not a lot. Its better to know more, than to know less than other people isn't it?


Nobody has said that it's a healthy phenomenon for those who drop chinese paper in order to improve the chance. People are forced to do that in order to circumvent the categorical disadvantage of the low percentage of A1 in that subject. And if possible, we wouldn't have wished to see this happen at all.

Even if someone dropped Bahasa Cina in spm just so that he can be a straight A1 student, it doesn't mean that he doesn't know or learn his mother tongue. He can do the learning himself without taking up the subject. As i said previously, this world is a real world and is very competitive indeed. If taking up this subject in Malaysia will become a disadvantage to you in your future, why take the risk? Yes, we do not wish to see this happen and it is indeed an unhealthy phenomenon but since we are living in Malaysia and the situation here doesn't look like it is about to change, we shouldn't criticise these students for not taking up BC as they made that decision just so that they will not end up being considered inferior in Malaysia by scoring 11A1's and 1B3 for BC.

Similarly, many people are forced to take more subjects (including redundant ones, irrelevant ones and probably ones they are not interested in) because of the categorical disadvantage to people who take less subjects. And if possible, many wouldn't have wished to see this happen too.
I agree with you that we do not wish to see this happen too but i think that sometimes we have to do something even though we do not like it as this is life. If taking less subjects would make someone end up being catergorically disadvantaged i believe he should do something about it, even if he doesn't like it. And it doesn't hurt to take up more subjects, he is only enriching his knowledge.


In my point of view, taking up more subjects is actually good for you and being able to ACE all of them is even better still and although i do not agree with the system inw hich a student who gets 11A1 is considered better than someone else who got 11A1, and 1A2, i believe that this obstacle can be overcomed by the smart younger generation if this situation is to continue in Malaysia.


If your kid is being kidnapped and the police is ineffectual, you would be forced to pay the ransom too - but doesn't mean that kidnap->pay ransom can now be justified as an acceptable norm.

This example cannot be used as a comparison to this situation as kidnapping children is morally wrong but taking up extra subjects is no where close to being wrong in any way.

[bluez_aspic]

re: pinkcat

To take 15-30 subjects is really biting off more than one can chew. Knowledge isn't properly assimilated - not that there's much nutritional value in the education fodder we're fed anyway. It's junk food really.

[pinkcat]

re: pinkcat

To take 15-30 subjects is really biting off more than one can chew. Knowledge isn't properly assimilated - not that there's much nutritional value in the education fodder we're fed anyway. It's junk food really.

My point is if one can really bite off more and chew it well, what's wrong with that?

Who says that knowledge can't be properly assimilated when you take up many subjects. As far as i know the education system in Malaysia is mostly based on memorising, memorising and more memorising. However, we have to take cognizance that memorising is also a method of studying for example in sejarah we learnt that the students in china olden days used to memorised books sometimes without even understanding the content. But only start to learn and interpret what they have memorized in a later stage. And to refer to malaysian education as fodder without any nutritional value is just so wrong. I do not deny that perhaps the syllabus needs to be revamped but i do not agree that the current syllabus is pure crap(except moral, hehe). What we learnt in add maths, physics, chemistry and bio can be applied when we proceed to study our pre-u course and when i studied my pre-u i realised that the overseas syllabus aren't as good as you think as well. And what we learnt in secondary school can in fact help us a lot when we go to pre-u level. If we really understand what the syllabus is trying to convey which is not really a very hard task if you study hard i believe we can gain a lot of knowledge as well.:P

[bluez_aspic]

My point is if one can really bite off more and chew it well, what's wrong with that?
If students actually properly digested whatever they were learning, how come none have asked the questions which prompted the development Theory of Special Relativity or the Epsilon-Delta Definition for Continuity?

The exams are baby stuff, and since results are not normally distributed anyway, the As are essentially meaningless. It's the smart students who are especially short-changed.

The best way to learn is to ditch school and pick up University level textbooks, or popular reading material. But such efforts however prodigious are not recognized with an 'A' so not many people take such initiatives.

I don't know why Malaysian education exists, actually - to keep juvenile delinquents at school?

[youngyew]

Don't really have time to reply to every single point yet (since gohweihan I have never had a long debate), but just want to throw in this point first: for science stream students, taking core science used to be forbidden, and for some reasons it was allowed again since some time ago.

[TheArtOfMedicine]

i think jpa give scholarships to straight a1 students coz they want the jaminan that the $ will not be wasted.
those who dont score as well cant guarantee jpa tat much. so jpa turned to the straight a1 scorers,assuming that they will work v hard n pass all the papars, though tis isnt fair as some subjects like BC is extremely difficult to score.

i think jpa want high achievers that will run the country n play the game of the society, not the inventors philosophers...that will case an evolution.




do u think it is excusable for people wif asperger syndrome to do that? (autism- my current interested topic)

1.well, what if ur friends r geeks n nerds that will score 12A1, but urself onli score 10A1.
this doesnt mean u r inferior to them, but what will they think of u?
will they look down on u? yes or no - but being left out of the activities they can join like quizes or some ceremony that evey other friend gets to go, will be miserable.
2.everyone has their own ability n disability. some ppl r juz v poor in socialization like those kids wif autism or asperger. they can excel in other things like acadeimicly so that they r not so left out of every thing like posts in the coco. n they still get to contribute to the fame of their school n exp the admiration of others for thier academic gifts even if they r really unpopular.
of course that the life after spm is not based on books, but scoring really well can prevent others from looking down on them at least in the academic field at that moment.

i'm not really good in anything - socila, coco or academic, but being lift out of things classmates did was miserable.

so, i think that it is fair for those geeks who r v poor in socializing to stand up juz for once in front of their peers by scoring 20+A1. then when it comes to being street smart, others can show off loh.

it's only a matter of choice imho, whether one wants to be good to which degree in coco, aca, social, or all, but this all need great sacrification, solid effort n preserverence.it's not fair to say that someone who score 1000+A1 as a geek if he puts in solid effort, n he has sacrifice many other things for this choice.

for siding the geeks n nerds,
i'm ready to be criticized....XD

I'm of no reason going to criticise you. I was just trying to point out those who took ridiculously extra subjects(such as 21 A1ssss)should(theoretically)spend more time on his studies, and therefore have less time socialising or even just have a drink with his friends. There are however, people(under EXCEPTIONAL circumstances)who are able to achieve both, to take up 20 subjects and to maintain a balanced social life. I seriously wonder how that person manages his time. Assuming that person spends half an hour for every subject and he revises ten a day, he'd have to spend 5 hours on his studies EVERYDAY!!I spend only 3/2 hours a day on my work, and i'll go crazy if i exceed that duration.

[youngyew]

Before I begin, let me make it clear about my standpoint: I am not against students who take lots of subjects in SPM in order to stand a better chance of getting the scholarship. They are simply doing what the system drives them to do in order to prove their worths. In fact if I were taking SPM right now, I would most likely have done the same - take 15 subjects or so instead of the 10 that I actually need, know and excel in, so that when the results come out, people know how much I worth. As a corollary, I am not inculpating the 20A scorers, 17A1 scorers and the like for taking many subjects. I also acknowledge that those who achieved such feat must have a relatively high degree of academic aptitude.

I am arguing against the system; not people who do well inside this system. Though I disagree with some of the ways people do well in it.
You have to know that when a student chooses to take up more subjects, he would have to spend more time on it. It doesn't mean that since we have already studied physics, chemistry and biology and take up core science, we can just leave it aside and only study for it just a day before the exam because the syllabus might not be entirely the same. He would still have to put in extra effort and obviously he should be given credit for it. If he takes up more subjects it means that he would have less time to spend for each subjects, isn't it a challenge? And by taking up this challenge isn't he challenging himself that is to have to study more subjects in the same time as everyone else? Even if you say that it would be redundant to take up such subjects because they are merely a simplified version of the other more specific subjects, i would say that there is nothing wrong. Practice makes perfect. Perhaps he would have already learnt the concepts in physics, chemistry and biology, and by studying core science it would be like revising everything he had already learnt, and perhaps this would help him understand it even better? What's more is he can get an extra A1 for that. I'd say that it is a smart action.
While I acknowledge that some amount of effort must have been put into the redundant subject, that doesn't make the subject less redundant and the redundancy less ludicrous.

Also, allowing such redundancy simply degrades academic excellence, since we now allow "the amount of time dedicated in revising redundant subjects" to bias our objective assessment.

For example the biology we study now in secondary school is also considered simplified compared to the biology subject university students study. We have to study from the beginner's level and slowly make our way up until we reach the highest level. If a student is not that smart perhaps by taking core science it will serve as a foundation for him to study physics, chemistry and biology?Everyone has their foundation for their physics, chemistry and biology. It's called UPSR science, PMR science and the first few chapters of the respective SPM subjects.

If the ministry of education is really against the idea of students taking up core science even though they've already studied phy, bio and chem i think they will have already set up a condition that those who have already taken phy, bio and chem cannot take up core science. It was forbidden some years ago. "Incidentally", the ban was lifted some years ago as the A1 obsession grew.

There is another point of view to this scenario. Since there is the occurence of grade inflation, it would be easy for many students to score A1 in many subjects. How are students to be differentiated since straight A's students are no more a miracle or amazement and can be found everywhere. Some students might choose to take up more subjects in order to stand out from other students. I believe there is nothing wrong with that. Perhaps the government is trying to help more students score good results, and to compensate for the downside of this act of kindness, they allow students to take up more subjects, it would be the student's choice if they want to be different from any other average student by taking up more subjects and in fact scoring more A's and it is a way for them to shine in the crowd. That will make them stand up from other average students. That's where my statement of system vs. student comes into the picture. I have nothing against the students (apart from those taking redundant subjects); but the system simply needs a revamp. As as Elansar Gelmir spent a good length debating, the best solution is simply to raise the bar of each grade in order to improve our differentiating power. Once you raise the bar, the limit of maximum subject will become less important - and people will be more willing to acknowledge the real aptitude of astronomical scorers. Just like the 11A scorer in A-level as mentioned by someone in the beginning of this thread.

And if really smart students are really that smart, i believe it won't be a problem for them to concentrate on more subjects, it will help them when it comes to applying for scholarships and the judges would be able to sift out these bunch of talents who are really more capable and daring than an average student who takes only average amounts of subjects. Perhaps you will say that not all smart students take up so many subjects. But since it is a well known fact that our education system truly does emphasize on how many A's you get, if you really wanna be different and prove that you are indeed more capable than anyone else, the only choice you have is to take up more subjects. Who cares if you scored 99, or even 100 in 11 subjects? Although i do not deny that these people who can score almost perfect marks for even though only 11 subjects are indeed geniuses, but they must know that in Malaysia, this is not what matters most. And we, as humans living in such a competitive society should be realistic. If you wanna be special and succeed in life, you have to be realistic and realise what is going on around you. For your information, not everyone is able to focus on so many subjects and the ability to concentrate and do well in say, 21 subjects is anything but an easy task.Yet another system vs. student issue. It's a well known fact that our education emphasizes more on the number of A than other qualities - and it's this very fact that I am lobbying for rectification. Allow me to (boringly) reiterate that I am not against students who try very hard to prove their worth within this distorted system.

(Although I still think the Stabilo advertisement by Nur Amalina is ridiculous. :P)

Indeed, i have never heard of anything like that. But if someone is able to achieve that, it does make him special and there is nothing wrong with wanting to be special, right? It does take hard work to ace all four majors in three years, and not everyone has that ability. It is something that you can show to others and it's a proof of your capability.System vs. student.

You refer to people taking core science with physics, chemistry and biology as playing foul. I think that there is no point to this judgement as the ministry of education does allow people to do this. There is nothing 'foul' in doing this and as i mentioned earlier there are in fact benefits in taking up one more subject like this. It is not against the law as far as i know. And there is no cheating involved as people who take up core science have to study and understand the format as well. It all comes from hard work!It's also not against the law for people to break their JPA contract, as long as they pay back to JPA. The existence of a loophole in a system, and the subsequent exploitation of the loophole, are not the ethical justification of the continued existence of the loophole.


I guess the rest that follows is going to be the same thing - it's the system, not the people.

[Leen]

My point is if one can really bite off more and chew it well, what's wrong with that?

Who says that knowledge can't be properly assimilated when you take up many subjects. As far as i know the education system in Malaysia is mostly based on memorising, memorising and more memorising. However, we have to take cognizance that memorising is also a method of studying for example in sejarah we learnt that the students in china olden days used to memorised books sometimes without even understanding the content. But only start to learn and interpret what they have memorized in a later stage. And to refer to malaysian education as fodder without any nutritional value is just so wrong. I do not deny that perhaps the syllabus needs to be revamped but i do not agree that the current syllabus is pure crap(except moral, hehe). What we learnt in add maths, physics, chemistry and bio can be applied when we proceed to study our pre-u course and when i studied my pre-u i realised that the overseas syllabus aren't as good as you think as well. And what we learnt in secondary school can in fact help us a lot when we go to pre-u level. If we really understand what the syllabus is trying to convey which is not really a very hard task if you study hard i believe we can gain a lot of knowledge as well.:P

Umm... memorizing is crap. It is useless to memorize all the physics formula and math formula to use them on questions if you don't know how to derive those formulas. At least that's what I'm suffering in college now. The local education system teaches you how to use derivatives in add. math but 99.9% of the people only know how to do the math but not understand what a derivative means. While it does let you get A1, it doesn't give you knowledge at all. In college, if you want to take a calculus class and you don't know the meaning of derivative, you are basically learning nothing.

If someone can take 15-30 subjects and memorize all of them, it is useless too. Pure memorizing without the understanding of the knowledge is useless really. Sorry to say that but there is no such thing as interpreting something later. If you memorize 100 math formula to just get A1 and then you go on and do medicine, you are not going to have the interest/time/pleasure to get a Calculus book by Michael Spivak and learn how to do delta epsilon proof. So it is meaningless. After a while, you just forgot about those math. Same way if you take tonnes of subjects that are irrelevant to your desired major, you are not going to go back one day and be like, "Ah... I think I need to brush up my bio a little bit. Why not I buy a college level bio book and learn about it?" No, you just don't do that. You move on with life and your major.

So really, it is pointless to say that you take many subjects so as to learn more things (or to further learn them later). It doesn't work that way. Admit it, those subjects will only be used as leverage to secure scholarships. I'm fine with using lots of As to leverage for scholarships but I am not fine when people try to give excuses like, "Ah... I want to learn more of this and that." No, you DID NOT learn anything. You just memorized. And that's useless.

*agrees with youngyew that the stabillo advertisement is a total joke*

[clep]

And to refer to malaysian education as fodder without any nutritional value is just so wrong. I do not deny that perhaps the syllabus needs to be revamped but i do not agree that the current syllabus is pure crap(except moral, hehe). What we learnt in add maths, physics, chemistry and bio can be applied when we proceed to study our pre-u course and when i studied my pre-u i realised that the overseas syllabus aren't as good as you think as well. And what we learnt in secondary school can in fact help us a lot when we go to pre-u level. If we really understand what the syllabus is trying to convey which is not really a very hard task if you study hard i believe we can gain a lot of knowledge as well.:P

Agree with you that the overseas syllabi are not always better than the Malaysian one. The way it is taught to Malaysian students might be less creative or interesting, but we still learn a lot of core information than students in other countries studying at 'equivalent' levels as us. Take, for example, Australia's NSW HSC - it's a pre-u course, but a Malaysian SPM leaver could easily do 20-30% (or more if he/she has been diligently reading A-level stuff for SPM) of the Biology paper using the knowledge he/she has learnt in F4/5. However, I daresay few Malaysian students who scored A1 for English would be able to get a Band 6 for, say, Advanced English, because English is not so much an 'information-based' subject, but more of one which requires you to think, reason, be creative and so forth.

So does having lots of A1s in the Malaysian system prove that a person is smart? There are many ways to define the word: smart as in knowing a lot of things, or knowing and being able to apply that knowledge in various situations. A straight A1-holder could be one of the twain. The system is not particularly able to differentiate between average and outstanding students academically, more so when our SPM result slips do not display our actual marks.

At the very least, a hatful of A1s shows that the person is capable of memorising lots of facts and applying them in a basic way to answer the questions. How much more they are capable of is not demonstrated by their As. By this I do not intend to demean the many excellent and/or hardworking students who I daresay deserve their As by the effort they have put into it - I just think that the system has blurred the actual value of an A1 so much that it is hard to distinguish a 95 and a 65-mark student when they are both given the same grade, and therefore hard to judge exactly what the value of straight A1s are.

Just my two cents.

[bluez_aspic]

Agree with you that the overseas syllabi are not always better than the Malaysian one. The way it is taught to Malaysian students might be less creative or interesting, but we still learn a lot of core information than students in other countries studying at 'equivalent' levels as us. Take, for example, Australia's NSW HSC - it's a pre-u course, but a Malaysian SPM leaver could easily do 20-30% (or more if he/she has been diligently reading A-level stuff for SPM) of the Biology paper using the knowledge he/she has learnt in F4/5. However, I daresay few Malaysian students who scored A1 for English would be able to get a Band 6 for, say, Advanced English, because English is not so much an 'information-based' subject, but more of one which requires you to think, reason, be creative and so forth.
Whilst I won't go for the blow-for-blow rebuttal, I take issue with your claims re: the Australian HSC. The syllabus is less extensive, but the exams are designed such that the average student is not able to finish it, and questions of greater difficulty incorporated to differentiate students with respect to academic ability. I've seen Singaporeans/Malaysians boasting that they've learned everything only to be forced to eat their words.

Then you go to Uni and realize you haven't learned a damned thing.

[Sillyboy]

Won't reply much to the previous posts but having lots of A1 shows one is hardworking and have good memory. Apparently in the Malaysian context, the more A1s you obtain, the more hardworking you are.

[lindley]

please dont shoot me if i say this, but i think that our SPM doesnt really have a standard. anything that is hard, the ministry will take that topic/chapter out of the syllabus. then those who get straight A1s, some of them will think like they're so great and everything. when they go to college, they are the ones who have a problem. i know of this student who got A1 for SPM chem, when he did his SAM chem, he failed his first two Common Tests.

and general science, really, its the summary of bio/chem/phy.
personally i think people who take this sub when they are already pure sci students just want to obtain more As.

i dont see the big deal about getting straight A1s actually. getting straight A1s doesnt necessarily mean you'll do well in life. however, it does serve as a stepping stone to a good uni which = good education.

[capablanca]

Assumingly, it will be the education system at fault. Since, they put emphasize on memorizing for the subjects, it is only social norm for everyone to try and excel at something, mainly, they adapt to memorize as their way to success. Such is the case and we can't do anything to change that for the moment unless Kerismuddin drastically revamped the syllabus. So, does A1 show anything. It only proves to me that the peopel who took more have more passion to succeed.

As much as I support critical thinking instead of blatantly memorizing, it is undeniable that memory is an essential part of education where you need to memorize the facts to lay a foundation. For me, I can assume them into 2, memorizing as the first part of education and critical thinking as the second part of it. Memorizing is used to provide the bare facts and you think to expand the knowledge into understanding and application. Although, I am sad to say this, memorizing is the way to go to succeed in the secondary school system. However, I suggest for students to throw this away once they go a step higher and start to think instead. Because in the end, almost everyone will forgot what they learned in school and just retain the skills they mastered there - mainly, the ability to think. So, for the students with lots of A1s, I got no problem with them, except, can they think critically about what they learned?

[lindley]

but i think that mugging subjects like sejarah, the ministry should incorporate critical thinking in the questions, and not just requiring the students to memorize and regurgitate everything out

*okay, that didnt sound right grammatically*

[vseehua]

It's is sad to see that students just resort to memorizing and taking tons of subjects just because they want to secure a scholarship.

In the Malaysian syllabus, using creative thinking is possible to pass the public exams, as what i've done myself. I hate memorizing, because i know i am going to lose all that knowledge, pardon me, information, right after the exam. This happens to everyone. If the information is forcibly forced into the brain, the brain will overload and dump it right after it'd passed it's usefulness (after an exam). In fact, deriving equations in the physics exam because i've forgotten what exactly it is are some of my best moments in life. Because it shows that i understand the concepts instead if gurgling them in.

Here i will have to agree with youngyew that taking redundant subjects that aren't really needed to succeed in your dreams is a way of playing foul. In Pinkcat's example, taking general science when the student is also taking physics, chem and biology just screams blantant redundancy. I don't think taking such a simplified subject will improve the persons' understanding of the subject in general.

[Sillyboy]

please dont shoot me if i say this, but i think that our SPM doesnt really have a standard. anything that is hard, the ministry will take that topic/chapter out of the syllabus. then those who get straight A1s, some of them will think like they're so great and everything. when they go to college, they are the ones who have a problem. i know of this student who got A1 for SPM chem, when he did his SAM chem, he failed his first two Common Tests.

and general science, really, its the summary of bio/chem/phy.
personally i think people who take this sub when they are already pure sci students just want to obtain more As.

i dont see the big deal about getting straight A1s actually. getting straight A1s doesnt necessarily mean you'll do well in life. however, it does serve as a stepping stone to a good uni which = good education.

Erm, this might irk you but I must say, I was ecstatic when I obtained straight A1s for SPM. And yes, for that very moment, I thought I was great. Why? Because I can! XP

Have to agree with this. An easy A for pure science students.

No big deal? Mine you, it meant a great deal to me! And the usual getting-straight-A1s-for SPM-don't-mean-you'll-do-well-in-life reason is quite inapplicable these days. You need something more solid than that my dear.

Ok, don't take it to heart what I've just said. I'm being humorous, don't mind me. Ultimately, I believe that this little A1 hype here is really destroying the concept of education.

It's is sad to see that students just resort to memorizing and taking tons of subjects just because they want to secure a scholarship.

In the Malaysian syllabus, using creative thinking is possible to pass the public exams, as what i've done myself. I hate memorizing, because i know i am going to lose all that knowledge, pardon me, information, right after the exam. This happens to everyone. If the information is forcibly forced into the brain, the brain will overload and dump it right after it'd passed it's usefulness (after an exam). In fact, deriving equations in the physics exam because i've forgotten what exactly it is are some of my best moments in life. Because it shows that i understand the concepts instead if gurgling them in.

This is a game. The only way for students to beat others is to obtain more As. Every student wants their piece of the cheese so they resorted to such measures.
Deriving equations during exams?? Can't afford to do that in an exam, pure waste of time.

[JetLee0510]

Say that the limit to get A1 is 65 points.

The 17A1 guy got all his subjects by getting 66 points, while the 11A1 guy got 99 points for all his subjects. Who is the better one now?

well.. tat's only one of the cases.. what if the 11A1 guy got 66 points for all his subject, and the 17A1 guy got 99 points? In fact, I dun expect a 17A1 guy wld get such marks and lots of lucks just to pass the border of A1..

isnt ur example prejudice agaist those with more A1s?

[vseehua]

This is a game. The only way for students to beat others is to obtain more As. Every student wants their piece of the cheese so they resorted to such measures.
Deriving equations during exams?? Can't afford to do that in an exam, pure waste of time.
If this is the game, does it mean that people can resort to shady measures just to make sure they win it? JPA scholarship is just really an overhyped scholarship. Is it so good that some students actually make it a life mission to get it? Trust me, I've seen examples of people who've made it their only aim in life to get it.

If i can have enough time to derive equations in the exam and still have time to double check, why can't you?

[youngyew]

well.. tat's only one of the cases.. what if the 11A1 guy got 66 points for all his subject, and the 17A1 guy got 99 points? In fact, I dun expect a 17A1 guy wld get such marks and lots of lucks just to pass the border of A1..

isnt ur example prejudice agaist those with more A1s?
It's possible, and both you and See Hua has just pointed out the two extremes how our failing grading system is incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff.

None of your examples are prejudice, they are the two ends of the same spectrum.

[lindley]

Erm, this might irk you but I must say, I was ecstatic when I obtained straight A1s for SPM. And yes, for that very moment, I thought I was great. Why? Because I can! XP

Have to agree with this. An easy A for pure science students.

No big deal? Mine you, it meant a great deal to me! And the usual getting-straight-A1s-for SPM-don't-mean-you'll-do-well-in-life reason is quite inapplicable these days. You need something more solid than that my dear.

Ok, don't take it to heart what I've just said. I'm being humorous, don't mind me. Ultimately, I believe that this little A1 hype here is really destroying the concept of education.



This is a game. The only way for students to beat others is to obtain more As. Every student wants their piece of the cheese so they resorted to such measures.
Deriving equations during exams?? Can't afford to do that in an exam, pure waste of time.


i think its good if he/she can derive the equations, at least it shows that he/she understands the concepts, not just pick the right formula and use it. it might be a waste of time to you, but if he/she can do it within the time limit, then why not? at least its for 'self-evaluation', you know that you understand how the formula is derived. =)

[chiachean]

well.. tat's only one of the cases.. what if the 11A1 guy got 66 points for all his subject, and the 17A1 guy got 99 points? In fact, I dun expect a 17A1 guy wld get such marks and lots of lucks just to pass the border of A1..

isnt ur example prejudice agaist those with more A1s?

A more transparent marking system will solve this problem. The government should do something about it, but I believe they won't. Everyone knows why, is it?

:huh

[Yvonne90]

straight As in PMR enables u to get into the first class in form 4 ..a lot of A1 in SPM is simply juz the key for some ppl to get scholarship..it doesn't represent much about a person..agree?

[vseehua]

straight As in PMR enables u to get into the first class in form 4 ..a lot of A1 in SPM is simply juz the key for some ppl to get scholarship..it doesn't represent much about a person..agree?
nope, it's just defined which next step the people are going to take...

[Sillyboy]

If this is the game, does it mean that people can resort to shady measures just to make sure they win it? JPA scholarship is just really an overhyped scholarship. Is it so good that some students actually make it a life mission to get it? Trust me, I've seen examples of people who've made it their only aim in life to get it.

If i can have enough time to derive equations in the exam and still have time to double check, why can't you?

This game is not fair in the first place. I won't be surprised if students resorted to 'underhand' means to achieve their goals!

Aiyo! There exist such narrow-minded people??

Possible I guess. :D But I won't do it!

i think its good if he/she can derive the equations, at least it shows that he/she understands the concepts, not just pick the right formula and use it. it might be a waste of time to you, but if he/she can do it within the time limit, then why not? at least its for 'self-evaluation', you know that you understand how the formula is derived. =)

By all means go ahead! :P I guess you've not seen formulas which in no way could you derive it in an 1.5 hour exam.

A more transparent marking system will solve this problem. The government should do something about it, but I believe they won't. Everyone knows why, is it?

:huh

How is the marking system 'not transparent' in the first place. These things are supposed to be keep in secret. Ever heard of the word 'SULIT'?

[vseehua]

This game is not fair in the first place. I won't be surprised if students resorted to 'underhand' means to achieve their goals!

Aiyo! There exist such narrow-minded people??

Possible I guess. :D But I won't do it!



By all means go ahead! :P I guess you've not seen formulas which in no way could you derive it in an 1.5 hour exam.



How is the marking system 'not transparent' in the first place. These things are supposed to be keep in secret. Ever heard of the word 'SULIT'?I don't think there are formulas that can't be derived in a 1.5 hrs exam, at SPM level...

Underhand or not, it just highlights what is wrong with the Malaysian society/students today, getting what they wanted by all means...

I guess they can start by publishing the cut off points that they've used to evaluate their grades. This will in effect be a measure on just how good the students are, based on the marks they get rather than an arbitary letter based grade that means almost nothing nowadays

[youngyew]

How is the marking system 'not transparent' in the first place. These things are supposed to be keep in secret. Ever heard of the word 'SULIT'?
Eer, that was not an answer at all. "It was not transparent because it's confidential."

What Chia Chean meant is (I think), why do we need to keep the grades "sulit" in the first place? Why is such a secret that we are not supposed to know whether a score of 20 or so is indeed enough to pass your matematik tambahan paper?

[Miracle_seed]

Eer, that was not an answer at all. "It was not transparent because it's confidential."

What Chia Chean meant is (I think), why do we need to keep the grades "sulit" in the first place? Why is such a secret that we are not supposed to know whether a score of 20 or so is indeed enough to pass your matematik tambahan paper?
Yea... There're some exams in the world where the threshold marks for A are published... Anyway, I believe there is a strong reason for not publishing the threshold for SPM, because the differences for some subjects are just too big, or the marks required for certain grades are ridiculous... The reason behind this is quite obvious too...

[chiachean]

Eer, that was not an answer at all. "It was not transparent because it's confidential."

What Chia Chean meant is (I think), why do we need to keep the grades "sulit" in the first place? Why is such a secret that we are not supposed to know whether a score of 20 or so is indeed enough to pass your matematik tambahan paper?


All the grades should be known, the passing marks, the mark to score A1, etc..so that the candidates can aim for their goal..

Yes, you can keep the marking schemes and test papers 'SULIT', but not the grades

[Sillyboy]

I don't think there are formulas that can't be derived in a 1.5 hrs exam, at SPM level...

Underhand or not, it just highlights what is wrong with the Malaysian society/students today, getting what they wanted by all means...

I guess they can start by publishing the cut off points that they've used to evaluate their grades. This will in effect be a measure on just how good the students are, based on the marks they get rather than an arbitary letter based grade that means almost nothing nowadays

Agreed. Since we are talking about SPM, I guess one do have the choice of deriving their own formulas provided that they do it within the stipulated time.

Working hard for all the wrong reasons.....

True. The UK A level follows a similar system.

Eer, that was not an answer at all. "It was not transparent because it's confidential."

What Chia Chean meant is (I think), why do we need to keep the grades "sulit" in the first place? Why is such a secret that we are not supposed to know whether a score of 20 or so is indeed enough to pass your matematik tambahan paper?

Ah I see!! For that I have an easy answer! The grades are not disclosed for fear of controversy!

[lindley]

of course those 1.5 hour long formulas arent in our syllabus.
and SULIT doesnt really mean anything.
if so, how come the exam papers can be leaked? or how come some of the students know the marking scheme?

[youngyew]

Regarding the "derive formula in the exam hall" issue, it has just happened to me a few hours ago. I was teaching a year twelve student when I was required to use those formulae to solve some trigo questions:

sin^2 a + cos^2 a = 1
1 + tan^2 a = sec^2 a
1 + cot^2 a = cosec^2 a

Just a question: when you won't be using maths in your studies / work a few years down the track, may I ask, how many of you are confident that you will still remember all three formulae by heart?

If people simply rote remembered all three formulae, I am pretty sure that they will forget it in one or two years. I did forget them too (the second and the third. In fact I never really remembered the second and the third by heart). But I do remember how those formulae came about - you just divide the first formula by sin^2 a and cos^2 a respectively. And I derived the two missing formulae in five seconds (as I have always done since form 5).

Even for the first formula, even if you do forget it (which is quite hard though, considering the simplicity), you can always get it back via Pythagorean theorem.

[lindley]

lol and uh your point is?

[vseehua]

of course those 1.5 hour long formulas arent in our syllabus.
and SULIT doesnt really mean anything.
if so, how come the exam papers can be leaked? or how come some of the students know the marking scheme?
The marking scheme are supposed to be known, since the marks are listed with each question in the exam papers.

The papers are leaked because of carelessness or intentional foul-play by the people involved in handling the sealed papers...

[yummyummylicious]

kinda think of a lot of As does mean something...
loads of As = easier to get a scholarship
loads of As = can get rewards, lol
loads of As = can get into the newspaper, lol
loads of As = can get money from banks or certain organisations
loads of As = hardwork of us during the exams are worth it
loads of As = parents can be more proud in front of the friends
loads of As = won't be shame when anyone ask about your results

[youngyew]

lol and uh your point is?

Are you referring to my post? :) If you are, my point is that it's indeed possible to derive formulae in exam hall. Not saying that people *should* derive all the formulae on the spot, but being able to do that should be something we ask of the students, or at least the good ones.

Also, our questions tend to be too schematic and all-the-same, there aren't many really out-of-expectation challenging questions at all. How often do you come across a question like this:

There is a boat on a lake, and inside the boat there is a guy and a stone. The guy throws the stone out of the boat. Will the water level of the lake rise, fall, or remain the same? (The water level is in reference to the land, not the water level of the boat. Assume that the total water volume of the lake is constant and that we have measurement accurate enough to measure the change of water level, however minute it is)

Totally within SPM syllabus.

[Sillyboy]

Regarding the "derive formula in the exam hall" issue, it has just happened to me a few hours ago. I was teaching a year twelve student when I was required to use those formulae to solve some trigo questions:

sin^2 a + cos^2 a = 1
1 + tan^2 a = sec^2 a
1 + cot^2 a = cosec^2 a

Just a question: when you won't be using maths in your studies / work a few years down the track, may I ask, how many of you are confident that you will still remember all three formulae by heart?

If people simply rote remembered all three formulae, I am pretty sure that they will forget it in one or two years. I did forget them too (the second and the third. In fact I never really remembered the second and the third by heart). But I do remember how those formulae came about - you just divide the first formula by sin^2 a and cos^2 a respectively. And I derived the two missing formulae in five seconds (as I have always done since form 5).

Even for the first formula, even if you do forget it (which is quite hard though, considering the simplicity), you can always get it back via Pythagorean theorem.

I'm confident I will remember the 3 equations. :P But if a Math Olympiad participant have doubts about remembering these simple formulas, who am I to say I can remember them all? :P

[vseehua]

degression alert!

[youngyew]

(actually See Hua, it is still within the topic as long as we don't go too far. Whether our straight A students fully understand their subjects can be partly reflected by this "derive formula" example. As long as we don't tread too far I don't see any reason we can't discuss this :D)

(has someone been stalking me? :P)

We seriously need more challenging questions that would stump all but the cream of the students in subjects like science and maths. I am not sure about now; but in my time basically most of the questions are just rephrased or rearranged from questions you would see from your pelangi practice books.

In Australia they do have one or two harder than usual questions, and apparently they are there to separate the diamond from the pebbles. If our questions remain rubber stamps of pelangi and past year questions, it's no wonder we have lots of straight A1 students, aptitude of whom we can't really differentiate.

[vseehua]

In Australia they do have one or two harder than usual questions, and apparently they are there to separate the diamond from the pebbles. If our questions remain rubber stamps of pelangi and past year questions, it's no wonder we have lots of straight A1 students, aptitude of whom we can't really differentiate.
They are doing it as well in the A-Levels. They take the principles taught in class to formulate a question that incur a real life situation. These question will be harder to answer because they will require you to use all the principles that you've learnt and apply it collectively...

[TheArtOfMedicine]

I'm confident I will remember the 3 equations. :P But if a Math Olympiad participant have doubts about remembering these simple formulas, who am I to say I can remember them all? :P

I thought that's easy...just remember cos^2 x + sin^2 x = 1, divide them accordingly to get the other two derivatives. For example, divide the whole equation by cos^2 will give you 1+ tan^2=sec^2

[vseehua]

I thought that's easy...just remember cos^2 x + sin^2 x = 1, divide them accordingly to get the other two derivatives. For example, divide the whole equation by cos^2 will give you 1+ tan^2=sec^2
I'd bet the ones who only memorize will soon use up all the memory space in their brain trying to memorize the complete list of equations... unlike the smart ones who only use part of the memory and utilize their cpu power to the full...

[Sillyboy]

I thought that's easy...just remember cos^2 x + sin^2 x = 1, divide them accordingly to get the other two derivatives. For example, divide the whole equation by cos^2 will give you 1+ tan^2=sec^2

It is only easy for math savvy people! Tell it to any Form 5 student and they will give you the blank stare. :D



(has someone been stalking me? :P)

We seriously need more challenging questions that would stump all but the cream of the students in subjects like science and maths. I am not sure about now; but in my time basically most of the questions are just rephrased or rearranged from questions you would see from your pelangi practice books.

In Australia they do have one or two harder than usual questions, and apparently they are there to separate the diamond from the pebbles. If our questions remain rubber stamps of pelangi and past year questions, it's no wonder we have lots of straight A1 students, aptitude of whom we can't really differentiate.

:P

Soalan Klon SPM, that is what we get from local workbooks thesedays. I wonder what are the writers doing...

[vseehua]

It is only easy for math savvy people! Tell it to any Form 5 student and they will give you the blank stare. :D
This is what happens if people kept memorizing stuffs instead of trying to understand them...

[lindley]

omg australia. you know, we are ahead of them in terms of syllabus,
but they have lotsa out of the box and application questions which we msian students cant do. my whole class did so badly for Year 12 test (calculus which we've learnt in form 4)

and yep. agree with youngyew. we should have more challenging questions lol.

[Sillyboy]

This is what happens if people kept memorizing stuffs instead of trying to understand them...

Point well taken.

omg australia. you know, we are ahead of them in terms of syllabus,
but they have lotsa out of the box and application questions which we msian students cant do. my whole class did so badly for Year 12 test (calculus which we've learnt in form 4)

and yep. agree with youngyew. we should have more challenging questions lol.

Hoho....could it be that only YOUR class has that problem? :P

[lindley]

lol really. results dropped for maths, not only in my class but other classes as well.
well thank god its not only my class LOL

[Sillyboy]

lol really. results dropped for maths, not only in my class but other classes as well.
well thank god its not only my class LOL

Well, I bet some of these students have A1 for Math of Additional Mathematics yet couldn't solve simple (to the year 12 students) calculus questions.

Nevertheless, you can definitely catchup with the the Aussies!

[lindley]

lol i can say almost all of us got A1 for add math. =.='
lol i do hope we can xD

[youngyew]

Digression alert. :)

[lindley]

lol sorry xD

[yeng]

i m surprised that we dun hv 2 learn hw 2 derive formula in WA pyh yr12 syllabus

[lindley]

WA? whats that?

[Josh Loo]

izzit getting B, C or D is actually better than those who get A?
:notrust