Somebody Has To Say It: Pendidikan Moral is a Extreme Prodigality

Hi readers. Been a while? Errrmm yeah. Well, writer's block kicked in and got me all fuzzy. Before we splash into the title of the post, I would like to thank all my readers and wish everyone a - late - Happy New Year. I would also like to apologise and promise to make some time to update my blog every now and then.

Somebody Has To Say It #1 : Pendidikan Moral is an Extreme Prodigality

Bold, some might say. I am actually expecting a lot of criticism and negative feedbacks towards my choice of post. I would like to clear the tension in the air and remind everybody that I do not intend to insult anybody but just expressing my perception.

To readers that aren't too familiar with Malaysia and the education system here, Pendidikan Moral is a subject taught to Standard One students and all the way to Form Five. So, basically a normal Malaysian student studying at a government school would study Pendidikan Moral for eleven years. For the first six years, the questions and syllabus are purely nothing but the science of logic and deduction. More of what would you do if you were there stuff.

Once you pave your way into Form One, students will scratch the heads and sigh loudly, wah? Or even a desperate what the heck sigh! Because it doesn't make any sense. Pendidikan Moral syllabus in  the secondary schools are divided into thirty-six chapters, each for a moral value. Such Kepercayaan Kepada Tuhan (Belief in God) being the first chapter. And each moral value consist of two three lines of exaggerated so-called definitions. To everyone questioning my opinion, how can I accept a general definition of a moral value when my accounts of the moral value are different? What if my definition of the value is different from what is stated? 

If so, isn't that the right method? Assessment should be based upon what the students think about the value and how they define the value. But, is that how it works? NO. The syllabus is meant to test students ability to remember thirty six exaggerated definitions, only for the students to forget what or how they think the value is. And apparently, even misplacing a word in the essay-looking definitions would earn no empathy from the marking scheme. The marking scheme cites it as an wrong answer. What the heck?

One should always remember that not everyone who aces Pendidikan Moral examination really have moral values and ethics in themselves and not everyone who doesn't ace his Moral examination doesn't have moral ethics.

To those readers who think I'm just a student who's complaining because I can't ace it, you're wrong and that's a horrible lie. I generally think it's just a pure prodigality if the examination syllabus doesn't change. Pendidikan Moral is an important subject, but for the moral values to be properly instilled in each student, remembering thirty six definitions is certainly not the way.

Before I rest my case, I would like to apologise to anyone who felt hurt, offended, unappreciated or exasperated by my views. I would like to insist that I am merely expressing my thoughts and views into words. Only words - not bitter insults. I am not condemning my alma mater, teachers nor students or even the syllabus. What you are reading - here - is nothing but me saying that what's being done is not efficient enough.

Thank you. 

 TJ.