IT has been the practice at a primary school in Kuala Lumpur where its Year Six pupils are required to buy additional workbooks and attend extra classes during the one-week school break in August.

Presumably, these measures, apart from the extra classes that run from January to August each school week, will help produce better Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah results. But for whom, and at whose expense?

Recently, this school issued a letter requiring pupils to attend extra classes for four days during the first week of the May school holidays.

Why is there a need to encroach more and more on the school holidays? Are schools getting too ambitious?

Is the curriculum so wide that the school is unable to teach effectively during school hours and extra classes? Is the Examination Syndicate setting questions beyond the capabilities of a 12-year-old?

Children are expected to have a wide vocabulary for the Bahasa Malaysia Pemahaman paper. It is a case of expecting too much too soon and in the process, denying pupils the opportunity to love the language.

One can’t help but ask if the Examination Syndicate is keeping to the prescribed syllabus as developed by the Curriculum Development Centre or taking its cue from workbooks in the market.

To make matters worse, the Jabatan Pelajaran Wilayah Persekutuan (JPWP) has set a ridiculous number of tests for Year Six pupils. There are three intervention tests, one diagnostic test, two trial examinations, a mid-year and a final-year examination.

This is in addition to three monthly tests and one trial examination by the school.

Does the JPWP assume that all pupils learn at the same rate? Teachers have to jump from one topic to another to prepare pupils for these tests.

It is the teachers who have first-hand knowledge of the pupils’ capabilities and are better equipped to ensure continuity in the teaching and learning process.

JPWP should reconsider the necessity for these tests.

Education is no longer opening minds and broadening horizons. In most cases, teachers are forced to adopt strategic teaching to prepare students for examinations.

We bemoan the fact that our pupils lack thinking skills, are passive and do not engage actively in discussions. What we refuse to see is that some of our current approaches, ideas and policies on education begin to turn our children into rote-learning automatons from primary level.

Let us revisit some of these policies before it is too late.

If the UPSR is a test by the Education Ministry to gauge if pupils at Year Six have reached a satisfactory level of proficiency in languages and numeracy, then let there be no individual results.

Perhaps in due course, the joy of teaching and learning can be rediscovered and excellence among pupils and teachers can be achieved without having victims.

Source: NST – May 27, 2008