Preliminary-Blueprint-Eng

Recommendations

Info

3-9 testing possible factors for malaysia’s performance decline in tImSS Three factors have been raised as possible reasons for Malaysia’s decline in the TIMSS assessment: the degree to which the content in the national curriculum matches that which is tested in TIMSS, the shift in language policy, and sampling methodology. However, all three are deemed to be unlikely to be a major driver for the following reasons: Incomplete coverage of the concepts assessed in TIMSS by the national curriculum is unlikely to account for the decline. While there has been some drop in the common content between the Mathematics test questions of TIMSS and the national curriculum between 2003 and 2007 (from 98% in 2003 to 75% in 2007 based on the Ministry’s self-assessment), the same cannot be said for Science, where overlap remains high at 90%. Bahasa Malaysia and <strong>Eng</strong>lish language questions were both provided as options in the TIMSS assessments for Malaysia. Therefore results should not have been affected by the language of testing used for TIMSS. The sampling approach is unlikely to be a major driver. The sample of schools tested in TIMSS reflects the overall performance of Malaysia’s schools based on a distribution of schools by national performance band. Malaysia’s performance in PISA 2009+ Malaysia participated in the PISA assessment for the first time in its 2009+ exercise. Out of 74 countries, Malaysia performed in the bottom third for Reading, Mathematics and Science, well below both the international and OECD average in all three areas. In the latest assessment, Malaysia’s performance was at least 100 points below that of regional peers like Singapore, Japan, South Korea, and Hong Kong on all three dimensions (Exhibit 3-12). In PISA, a 38 point difference is the equivalent of one schooling year of learning. This means that 15-year-olds in Malaysia are performing as though they have had three years’ less schooling than 15-year-olds in these countries—the very countries that Malaysia seeks to compete against in today’s knowledge economy. Compared to Shanghai, the world’s bestperforming school system in PISA 2009+, the gap is equivalent to four years of schooling. Almost 60% of Malaysian students failed to meet the minimum benchmarks in Mathematics—the baseline proficiency required for students to participate effectively and productively in life (Exhibit 3-13). Similarly, 44% and 43% of students do not meet minimum proficiency levels in Reading and Science respectively. Please refer to Appendix V for a sample of PISA questions. EXHIBIT 3-13 Comparison of Malaysia’s performance in PISA 2009+ by skill level against the OECD average Percentage of students at different performance levels on PISA 2009+ 1 1 Reading 2 Mathematics 3 Science Advanced Intermediate Below minimum 0 56 44 Malaysia 1 Advanced includes proficiency level 5 and level 6; Intermediate includes proficiency level 2, 3, and 4; and Below minimum includes proficiency level 1 and below Note: Score is an average of sample of schools in Malaysia: 80% National secondary schools, 3% Religious schools, 4% technical and vocational schools, 3% full boarding schools, 3% MARA Junior Science Colleges, 7% private schools by students SOURCE: PISA 2009+ 8 74 19 OECD average Advanced Intermediate Below minimum 0 40 59 Malaysia 13 65 22 OECD average Advanced Intermediate Below minimum Below minimum proficiency as defined by PISA means: 0 57 43 Malaysia ▪ In Reading, students are unable to do one or more of the following: locate one or more pieces of information in a text, recognise the main idea in a text, make low-level inferences or comparisons between information in the text and everyday knowledge; 8 74 18 OECD average ▪ In Mathematics, students are unable to employ basic algorithms, formulae, procedures, or conventions. They are not capable of direct reasoning and literal interpretations of the results, even though they can answer clearly defined questions involving familiar contexts; and
EXHIBIT 3-12 Comparison of Malaysia’s PISA 2009+ ranking against other countries Comparison of Malaysia’s PISA 2009+ ranking against other countries 1 Reading 2 Mathematics 3 Science Rank Country 1 Shanghai-China 556 2 Korea 539 3 Finland 536 4 Hong Kong 533 5 Singapore 526 18 United Kingdom 494 OECD Average 19 Germany 497 55 MALAYSIA 414 Note: Countries are ranked in descending order of the percentage of top performers (Level 5 or 6) SOURCE: PISA 2009+ … … … … … 42 Russian Fed. International Average 459 43 Chile 449 53 Thailand 421 Mean score Rank Country 1 2 33 4 5 Shanghai-China Singapore Hong Kong Korea Taiwan Mean score Rank Country 600 562 555 546 543 41 Croatia International Average 460 42 Israel 447 52 Thailand 419 57 MALAYSIA 404 Malaysia Education <strong>Blueprint</strong> 2013 - 2025 Chapter 3 Current Performance Regional peers Mean score 1 Shanghai-China 575 2 Finland 554 3 Hong Kong 549 4 5 Singapore Japan 542 Image by MOE 539 20 Austria 496 20 Ireland 508 OECD Average OECD Average 21 Slovak Republic 497 40 Greece International Average 470 41 Malta 461 51 Thailand 425 62 Indonesia 402 68 Indonesia 371 66 Indonesia 383 ▪ In Science, students have very limited scientific knowledge that can only be applied to a few familiar situations. They can present scientific explanations that follow explicitly from the given evidence, but will struggle to draw conclusions or make interpretations from simple investigations. Just as with TIMSS in 2007, the PISA 2009+ results also show that very few Malaysian students are performing at an Advanced level (approximately 0.1% for Reading, Mathematics, and Science) compared to the OECD countries (where almost 8% perform at this level). Performing at an Advanced level in PISA means: … … … … … 21 Czech Republic 500 52 … … … … … MALAYSIA 422 ▪ In Reading, students are able to make multiple inferences, comparisons, and contrasts that are both detailed and precise. They are also able to develop critical evaluations or hypotheses, drawing on specialised knowledge; ▪ In Mathematics, students are able to interpret more complex information, and negotiate a number of processing steps. They demonstrate insight in identifying a suitable solution strategy, and display other higher-order cognitive processes to explain or communicate results; and 3-10
Page 1:
Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013 -
Page 5 and 6:
CHAPTER 1 CONTExT AND
Page 7 and 8:
TION Our education system has been
Page 9 and 10:
Delivering the shifts in achievemen
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
CHAPTER 5 TEACHERS AND SCHOOL LEADE
Page 17 and 18:
CHAPTER 4 CURRICUlUM AND ASSESSMENT
Page 19:
CHAPTER 8 SEQUENCINg THE TRANSfORMA
Page 22 and 23:
E-1 executive summary In October 20
Page 24 and 25:
E-3 significant and sustained inves
Page 26 and 27:
E-5 timss and Pisa international as
Page 28 and 29:
E-7 challenges remain in achieving
Page 30 and 31: E-9 aspiratiOns fOr the malaysian e
Page 32 and 33: E-11 shift 1: provide equal access
Page 34 and 35: E-13 shift 3: develop values-driven
Page 36 and 37: E-15 Eleven shifts to transform the
Page 38 and 39: E-17 shift 5: ensure high-performin
Page 40 and 41: E-19 shift 7: leverage ict to scale
Page 42 and 43: E-21 shift 9: partner with parents,
Page 44 and 45: E-23 What Impact Will This Transfor
Page 46 and 47: E-25 EXHIBIT 9 the education transf
Page 48 and 49: E-27 gains will be delivered within
Page 51 and 52: CHAPTER 1 context and
Page 53 and 54: Background to the Blueprint In 1957
Page 55 and 56: in 2010 to 95% by the end of Year 2
Page 57 and 58: ▪ Fieldwork at both urban and rur
Page 59: The Ministry acknowledges how impor
Page 62 and 63: 2-1 2. vision and aspirations Every
Page 64 and 65: 2-3 consistently demonstrated that
Page 66 and 67: 2-5 EXHIBIT 2-2 Time spent by stude
Page 68 and 69: 2-7 ▪ Emotional intelligence: pos
Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 3 current
Page 73 and 74: EXHIBIT 3-1 Profile of the Malaysia
Page 75 and 76: EXHIBIT 3-3 Educational attainment
Page 77 and 78: EXHIBIT 3-5 Malaysian national exam
Page 79: Malaysia’s performance in the 200
Page 83 and 84: EXHIBIT 3-15 Country performance in
Page 85 and 86: Comparison of results between the T
Page 87 and 88: administration of students’ welfa
Page 89 and 90: EXHIBIT 3-23 Comparison of within-s
Page 91 and 92: EXHIBIT 3-26 Examination results, d
Page 93 and 94: EXHIBIT 3-28 Enrolment rates in dif
Page 95 and 96: In general, there are signs of incr
Page 97 and 98: Which countries Spend the most on e
Page 99: As illustrated in this chapter, Mal
Page 102 and 103: 4-1 4. student learning All educati
Page 104 and 105: 4-3 the Written Curriculum The Mini
Page 106 and 107: 4-5 intensifying support systems fo
Page 108 and 109: 4-7 lANguAge The Ministry will aim
Page 110 and 111: 4-9 EXHIBIT 4-6 English and Bahasa
Page 112 and 113: 4-11 setting the stage for structur
Page 114 and 115: 4-13 the roadmap: Working with comm
Page 116 and 117: 4-15 Centres of Excellence for Indi
Page 118 and 119: 4-17 ▪ Special education schools:
Page 120 and 121: 4-19 special award schools The Mini
Page 122 and 123: 4-21 Johor’s Best Practices -- id
Page 124 and 125: 4-23
Page 127 and 128: CHAPTER 5 Teachers and
Page 129 and 130: TEACHERS The Ministry will ensure t
Page 131 and 132:
EXHIBIT 5-4 Breakdown of academic r
Page 133 and 134:
EXHIBIT 5-5 Breakdown of average st
Page 135 and 136:
ole) in 25 years. Nonetheless, this
Page 137 and 138:
e-Guru Video library The Ministry h
Page 139 and 140:
SCHOOl lEADERS The Ministry will en
Page 141 and 142:
Reviews indicate that these trainin
Page 143 and 144:
Establishing a principal residency
Page 145:
Page 148 and 149:
6-1 6. Ministry transformation The
Page 150 and 151:
6-3 EXHIBIT 6-1 selected examples o
Page 152 and 153:
6-5 LinUs case study on strong prog
Page 154 and 155:
6-7 ▪ Federal: The Head Office wi
Page 156 and 157:
6-9 The Ministry will also prioriti
Page 158 and 159:
6-11 The roadmap: maximising studen
Page 160 and 161:
6-13 incorporating outcome-based bu
Page 162 and 163:
6-15 EXHIBIT 6-11 identified gaps i
Page 164 and 165:
6-17 EXHIBIT 6-13 school infrastruc
Page 166 and 167:
6-19 single- and double-session sch
Page 168 and 169:
6-21 One reason usage still appears
Page 170 and 171:
6-23 discussed in Chapter 4, and wi
Page 172 and 173:
6-25
Page 175 and 176:
CHAPTER 7 SyStem
Page 177 and 178:
EXHIBIT 7-1 the Malaysian education
Page 179 and 180:
Preschool education Early Childhood
Page 181 and 182:
EXHIBIT 7-3 Compulsory education po
Page 183 and 184:
partners to improve the industry re
Page 185 and 186:
In addition, there are approximatel
Page 187 and 188:
enhancing the religious education p
Page 189 and 190:
evaluating sports and arts schools
Page 191 and 192:
current system structure to be main
Page 193 and 194:
They will be provided with addition
Page 195 and 196:
education can make a significant di
Page 197 and 198:
launching an engagement toolkit for
Page 199 and 200:
engaging the broader community Scho
Page 201:
Page 204 and 205:
8-1 8. Delivering the roadmap The M
Page 206 and 207:
8-3 Sequencing the tranSformation T
Page 208 and 209:
8-5 EXHIBIT 8-3 the education trans
Page 210 and 211:
8-7 ▪ Enhanced practicum in vocat
Page 212 and 213:
8-9 Delivering Differently A well-c
Page 214 and 215:
8-11 getting StarteD The first year
Page 218 and 219:
G-1 1BestariNet A project to equip
Page 220 and 221:
G-3 IPTS Institut Pengajian Tinggi
Page 222 and 223:
G-5 National dialogue engagement an
Page 224 and 225:
G-7 SK Sekolah Kebangsaan or Nation
Page 228 and 229:
A-1 Appendix i: A Brief History of
Page 230 and 231:
A-3 educatIon develoPment durIng th
Page 232 and 233:
A-5 Appendix ii. Methodology The de
Page 234 and 235:
A-7 analyses conducted By the Pmo T
Page 236 and 237:
A-9 analyses conducted By PuBlIc un
Page 238 and 239:
A-11 roundtable discussions These w
Page 240 and 241:
A-13 Appendix iii: national dialogu
Page 242 and 243:
A-15 Subtopic Example topic raised
Page 244 and 245:
A-17 school quality Subtopic Exampl
Page 246 and 247:
A-19 student learning Subtopic Exam
Page 248 and 249:
A-21 Exhibit iV-1 the universal sca
Page 250 and 251:
A-23 Exhibit V-2 PiSA PISA a A samp
Page 252 and 253:
A-25 Exhibit V-4 PiSA PISA a sample
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
A-31 Exhibit V-10 PiSA PISA a sampl
Page 260 and 261:
A-33 Exhibit V-12 PiSA PISA a sampl
Page 262 and 263:
A-35 the education transformation w
Page 264 and 265:
A-37 Appendix Vii: GTp 2.0 educatio
show all

Preliminary-Blueprint-Eng

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?