The article “Another Malaysian Education Dilemma: Can We Trust Our Exam?” was published at The Edge Malaysia on Jan 07, 2014. It was written by the author, Nicholas Chan. He is a graduate from Universiti Sains Malaysia and he is a forensic scientist by education. Currently, Nicholas Chan is a socio-political research analyst at Penang Institute. He believes that there is truth in everything and it all depends on whether a person willing to see it or not.
The author started the article by informing the reader about the current education status of the Malaysian students.
The main points which were discussed in this article were about the examination and educational ...view middle of the document...
Besides, the author did mention about the facts of examination in the following sentences: “The undeniable fact is that, examinations, especially those with high stakes involved, are still very influential in deciding learning outcomes because their effects ripples through the entire gamut of the education experience.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014) and “An examination must to an extent, psychometrically reflect on how good the student is, be it cognitive or emotional prowess.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014). These two sentences clearly shown that the author is trying to express his opinion about examination are not only about passing the exam or the grade achieved by the student; Examination should be guidance for student towards a brighter future.
The author uses a lot of slanted language in the articles. The examples of slanted language can be clearly seen in the following sentences: “While the fate ultimatum of Malaysia's education under the Malaysia Education Blueprint (MEB) might take another decade to realise, but the fate of PMR is basically sealed.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014), “This must be a disaster to say the least” (Nicholas Chan, 2014), “Such mismatch of education achievements (assuming that being able to enter University is a measure of quality in itself) and professional demands must have eroded a daringly large portion of trust our parents have towards the education system, which in turn would further impede efforts in improving the system.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014), “Hence, it is disheartening to see that in comparison to South Korea in the PISA 2009 mathematics and science scores, none of our students reach the highest level of proficiency (level 6) and less than 0.5% reaches level 5, as compared to the South Koreans, that has 6.84% (math) and 0.55% (science) for level 6 and 17.81% and 9.95% for level 5 in the same subject order.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014), “This suggests that not only we have an inequality problem to tackle in education, but on the larger picture the language is simple, the standards simply aren't there.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014), and “If not, under the more decentralised nature of PBS, teachers and principals might "game the system" to suit their interests, hampering the opportunity for an honest evaluation of the student's learning outcomes for effective teaching resources allocation.” (Nicholas Chan, 2014). Based on the selected sentences, the slanted language uses by the author were disaster, mismatch, disheartening, inequality, decentralized and game the system. These slanted languages were all negatively slanted and they are emphasizing on the education system. The main purpose of these negatively slanted languages is to help people in realizing the current level of our education system, which is in a very bad situation.
Purpose or Intent
The purpose of the author to write this article is to inform readers about the dilemma faced by parents and students in Malaysia education. The author’s intention is actually to...