National exams fail relevancy test

Ardi Wirdana ,  Sumedang, West Java   |  Sat, 05/17/2008 11:15 AM  |  Opinion

The controversy surrounding national examinations seems to crop up year after year. The critics have had a field day with this, understandably so.

The government's decision to set an average passing grade of 5.25 on six school subjects has raised eyebrows, especially those of teachers and students, and have started a lot of debates -again.

Although this is obviously an important issue to discuss, it is not, by any means, the most substantial one, because it has become evident that no matter how much you fiddle with the passing grade or other passing requirements, it will all be in vain unless a closer and tighter inspection of schools is carried out before, during and after the proceedings of an examination.

There is a wider issue at hand, an issue too often overlooked, which effectively discredits and discourages many students.

After closely observing the national exam and the peo-ple, particularly students, involved in the testing, we will realize that it is quite shocking how the exam - and the Indonesian education system in generalutterly devalues students as indi-vidual beings.

Every student is treated the same, given the same-level tasks and the same targets and standards. How can this be fair when it is obvious that not everyone has the same learning capabilities?

This would greatly disadvantage those with learning difficulties and lead them to resort to cheating, which - as every student will tell you - is nowadays the name of the game.

This is a problem that students may have to endure for years, day in, day out. And when the exams finally come they are suddenly forced to climb a mountain they may not wish or even do not need to climb.

The existence of a passing grade, in which all other lower scores, however close they get, are deemed a failure, surely heavily burdens those with learning difficulties.

The national exam is designed with the assumption that every student has the same intention in mind upon leaving school. This concept favors the more able students, but is another unnecessary added pressure for less able students whose concern may only be to complete school, knowing that they have tried their best, and leave without any hassle.

The setting of one single standard or passing grade also hampers the development of the brighter students as they will feel that they are not adequately challenged by the low target that is set for them by the government.

The matter of individuality does not only rest on the students' different learning capabilities, on whether they are intelligent or unintelligent, but also poses the question of the kind of intelligence being assessed.

The famous theory of multiple intelligence by Harold Gardner suggest there are eight kinds of intelligence which should all be valued equally. Those include linguistic intelligence, logical-mathematical intelligence, spatial (picture) intelligence and musical intelligence.

Since the national exam is the sole method and means of true assessment in their three years of senior high school, every student will undoubtedly try their best to throw in all the bits of intelligence they have into the exams.

But how are the students supposed to optimally show, say, their spatial intelligence when all the questions in the exam require them to utilize merely their memory ability in a multiple choice test? You can now see how gravely the exam denies students an opportunity to demonstrate their abilities.

There could be many solutions for this problem. The key is, however, to not let one set of monotonous examination be the single source of a student's assessment. Marks from coursework or assignments could be used to account for a certain percent of a student's final grade. Or teachersas the people who best know students as individual learners - can be given more of a say in determining the student's final grade.

For a more concrete and reliable solution, we should look abroad for inspiration. The GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) in England and Hong Kong, for example, uses the concept of three different tiers (lower, intermediate and higher) in their assessment to ensure that every student receives a fair evaluation according to his or her own ability.

The HSC (Higher School Certificate) of Australia, like the GCSE, does not set a passing grade but instead gives freedom to higher education institutions as well as workplaces to set their own requirement grades for students, as opposed to giving out entrance examinations.

School examinations are important but can only be implemented effectively if the education system behind it is right. Maybe a thorough review of our education system is desperately needed. As for the national exam, the use of such a test to assess the nation's quality of education would be acceptable, but to use it to make or break students at a crucial stage in their life is very harsh.

The writer is a student of Padjadjaran University ma-joring in English literature. He can be reached at rd_wirdana@hotmail.com

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.