'Sample Answer Ccts by Miss Emy Jong\r'

'National train exoteric examinations such(prenominal) as the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) and Sijil Pelajaran Tinggi Malaysia (STPM) take aim ever so generated a lot of interest among the general public as they are essential for entrance into univer dumbfoundies and in like manner to enter into the work market. In the recent unverbalisedly a(prenominal) years, attention has been drawn to the phenomenon of savants getting up to 20 As in the SPM examinations and this has been a source of leaning especially with regards to scholarship allocation and university placements.\r\nThe government wherefore has been mulling a decision to set a go under on the maximum soma of subjects a medical prognosis may sit for as a bureau to simplify the selection handle into tertiary studies. The source of this article, Dr. I. Lourdesamy of the Pacific Institute Technology in Petaling Jaya offers his views on this development and the article is aptly titled â€Å"SPM Subjects: permit schoolchilds make the choice. Basically, the generator is of the opinion that setting a cap on the number of subjects a student may sit for does not address the in truth issue of suitable selection criteria into tertiary teaching, and he goes on to suggest how we may best take over the issue by giving his recommendations as whole approximately as what he expressions the goal of education should be. The writer proposes that we should not limit the number of subjects SPM students can sit for, and instead students can be evaluated on the terra firma of their performance in subjects directly related to the proposed orbit of study.\r\nHe is disagreeable to limiting students’ opportunity to learn, and feels that the students should be allowed to finalise on their own goals based on their aptitude and aptitude. He also suggests that schools offer a range of elective subjects to cater to different student interests. Further more(prenominal)(prenominal), the writer opines that most students have in like manner a great deal free measure and actually should be promote to do more.\r\nFinally, the writer addresses the primary objective of education †to provide opportunity for its students to maximize their learning potential. Personally, I find the writer’s argument of not limiting the number of subjects for SPM students to be reasonable and logical. As he said earlier, if the concern is the assessment process for scholarships and places in universities then what we requisite is a suck in and comprehensive guideline on the selection criteria for the mixed disciplines in tertiary education.\r\nActually, the practice of taking into grade only subjects which are directly relevant to the proposed force field of study has long been practiced and limiting the number of subjects would not help in any behavior to determine which students are more deserving of university placements or scholarships. What students need to be made aware of is th at they need to prepare for their desired field of study by taking relevant subjects which would be necessary in the selection process.\r\nThe author’s arguments on allowing students to decide on their own goals based on their capacity and aptitude, besides having schools offering elective subjects are so good suggestions. Having gone through the path of macrocosm a student myself, I strongly feel that if students are given more say in what they are studying, it bequeath make them more ca expenditure and keen to learn. They can also be challenged appropriately, and the scenario of having students creation bored (because the syllabus is too easy or uninteresting) or not being able to take note lessons (because they are too weak) will be greatly reduced.\r\nHowever, the implementation of such suggestions may be in truth difficult as a lot of resources will need to be made available to schools and students. We would have to first have a large copious pool of competent tea chers to teach students these various subjects at all levels of difficulty, and sorting out the logistics such as allocation of classrooms and time-tabling could also prove very challenging. Students’ use of their free time was also one of the points raise in the article. The author obviously feels that students could be more productive and that they do not have untold to do.\r\nWhile there may be some truth to his argument, I think that it is not sporting to generalize and say that all students are too free and should be asked to do more. How much time a student actually spends on his studies and other(a) worthwhile activities differs greatly from one student to another. It very depends on the individual’s motivation and goals. slightly students who are already pushing themselves very hard should actually be taught to relax and have more balance in their life. Therefore, this argument shows the author’s bias towards students nowadays and he should give mo re careful thought to this before making such conclusions.\r\n'