Category Archives: MQA

Not up to mark The Star Online > Education

Sunday June 7, 2009 The Star Online

Not up to mark

By SARAH CHEW

With about 100,000 graduates being churned out every year, a university degree can’t be all that hard to get.

IT’S in the media, it’s in the coffee shops and everyone seems to have an opinion about the quality of education in the country.

With the increasing number of higher education institutions and graduates, increasingly one of the measuring rods held up is student assessment.

Nor’s* nightmare began when she only passed two of her students in a Syariah law exam.

“The dean told me that we don’t have to follow the marking scheme strictly as it is ‘just a guideline’ and he told me to be lax about the English language because they (students) come from Agama (religious) schools,” says the ex-lecturer of law from Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (Usim).

“The dean told me it would affect our university ranking if too many students fail.”

She claimed she was told to give her students who failed a ‘B’ grade if they regularly attended class.

Recently, Kosmo! highlighted her case and Usim has adamantly refuted her claims, stating that the university did not give out ‘mercy marks’.

In a letter to Nor, the university management stated it was not wrong in asking for a review of student assessment, and did not ask her to add marks.

Nor says she has tried her best to give marks to her students – but they do not warrant it.

“Their answers did not answer the basic questions, and I didn’t even ask them analytical questions, I asked them ‘route’ questions like giving definitions, examples, instances and so forth,” she says.

Shocking discovery

Reading through the students’ answer papers, question paper and marking scheme, this reporter discovered a shockingly high number of questions that required straightforward memorisation and even more shocking unrelated answers.

What would the world think of me if I pass these students? It would be unethical of me,” she adds.

Nor claims she has been subjected to verbal abuse, accused of being mentally unstable, with people even poking fun at her personal life.

It is not just Nor, however, as a few lecturers would share similar experiences when probed.

Shanta Perumal* taught in a variety of well-known public universities and a private college before she quit lecturing out of sheer frustration.

She recalls her lecturing days at a private college, where although the passing rate for their exams were high, only five out of a hundred students would pass the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) required for them to continue their twinning degree in a partner New Zealand university.

For some lecturers, the hassle of writing a report to explain every student failure, arguing with the management, dealing with student appeals and having to possibly re-mark the paper, causes them to resort to unethical practices.

“Instead of going through all that, might as well just add five marks and let the student pass,” says Shanta.

The same sometimes happens in the public universities she has taught English in, she says.

Hard to fail

She thinks that for some courses, “it is impossible to fail” because the breakdown of the marks allocated would easily allow an average student to pass; such as awarding 5% for attendance, 10% for participation and marks for appearance.

She recalls the time she refused to pass a matriculation student who handed in a torn fullscap paper scrawled with some sentences for his essay assignment for her compulsory module. The university passed him on her behalf.

There was also another hilarious occasion where the students were required to answer an exam question “give reasons to your cousin why he should join this course”, in order to test their critical thinking skills.

“We expected them to write things like ‘it opens your mind’, ‘you will gain new experiences’ and so forth.

“But instead, they wrote ‘you will get money from the government and you can buy yourself a motorcycle, it’s a guaranteed pass here, so don’t worry, and later you can work for the government or if you can’t get a job, you can come back here and lecture at this university’”.

The Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) says that in its accreditation processes, they look into student assessment systems, even reading samples of student papers to ensure the marking is fair and follows the scheme.

“It’s quite common around the world to use the bell curve as a guide,” says MQA chief executive officer Prof Datuk Dr Syed Ahmad Hussein. “Usually a small group of people would do well, most would be average and some will fail.”

He says in situations where every student gets an ‘F’ or and ‘A’, the “alarm bells” should ring and this would usually call for an investigation by the university senate on why this is so.

The university senate has the authority to do this because there are many possibilities — maybe the exam was too easy or hard, maybe the question papers were leaked, or the lecturer was not fair,” he explains

Varsity can rectify

Should such situations occur, the university is allowed to make rectifications like asking students to re-sit exams, scale the grade brackets upward or downward, or making changes to the student assessment system.

If the senate decides to, say, add 10 marks across the board, it is allowed for and it is legal,” he says. Prof Syed Ahmad doesn’t deny cases where people have complained about standards or non-consistent marking schemes, but he thinks these are isolated cases and not a trend.

He is sceptical of claims that the standards have deteriorated as opposed to “back then”.

There are 100,000 graduates a year these days compared to the 70s, he says, which means that the number of both half-baked graduates and competent graduates would rise as well.

So far, Dr Syed Ahmad reveals that MQA has not received any complaints of conspiracies to pass students.

At the end of the day, he feels that consumers are the best judges of quality.

“After a while, people will start to say that graduates from this college or university don’t get employed, then word will go round and the college will die.”

Public universities such as Universiti Malaya (UM), use the bell curve as a guide, although UM’s examination section (academic division) senior principal assistant registrar Yeoh Siew Wan says it’s not necessary for all courses.

Depending on programmes, UM (like most universities) awards marks to students in a continuous assessment framework which includes not only written examinations but also presentations, quizzes, assignments, fieldwork and projects.

The university’s quality management and enhancement centre’s director Prof Dr Fauza Abdul Ghaffar says UM has in place certain quality management procedures such as internal and external audits, submitting papers to external examiners for input, and vetting the examination papers and marking schemes before students sit for them.

Lecturer’s discretion

Yeoh reveals that the way a lecturer awards marks, however, is left to the discretion of the lecturer.

“The lecturer knows best how to give marks to the students because he or she taught them,” she says, adding that there are strict guidelines and the decision to give extra marks to a student is the committee’s decision, not the lecturer’s.

The same system is practised in Multimedia University, where IT lecturer John See says though the university has the auditing or vetting processes in place, the department heads would not have time to look through or sample the answer sheets, so the lecturers would have to be “responsible”.

“It’s up to the lecturers to set a hard or easy paper, and no one would say much,” he says, adding that there used to be a stricter guideline of what was deemed a “normal” rate of passing and perhaps lecturers were fearful of failing students to adhere to the bell curve, but MMU does not practise that anymore.

“We felt we had to maintain our standards, regardless whether students are lousy or not.”

In UM, there are chances for students to appeal for their paper to be re-marked and also to “redeem” themselves upon failing a subject, if their past performance has been good.

“The lecturer can set him a test, an assignment or interview him — but he can only redeem one subject if he has failed a few,” says Yeoh.

International Medical University (IMU) and Monash University Sunway Campus (Monash) do not use the bell-curve guide but rather, criteria referencing — which assesses a student based on criteria, rather than on the performance of the overall student body.

IMU Faculty of Medicine and Health executive dean Prof Victor K E Lim simply describes it as “if everybody meets the outcome, everybody must pass, but if nobody meets the outcome, everybody must fail!”

He believes the bell-curve guide is not suitable for professional courses like medicine which needs to judge expertise, but is more appropriate for entrance exams where many types of students are taken into account.

To maintain the exam standards across the years, IMU question papers undergo double vetting by lecturers and deans, before being sent to an external examiner for corrections.

After the students sit for the exams, the answers also undergo double marking before sample answer sheets with high, low and average marks are sent to the external examiner to check for marking consistency.

We don’t really find ways to pass a student,” Prof Lim says. “If they want, they can re-sit the exam.”

And to ensure a student is rightly assessed in other areas such as practicals and interaction with patients, they are assessed by multiple lecturers and staff, rather than just one person.

Monash has rigorous vetting and sampling processes, as director of education quality and innovation Dr Glenda Crosling believes that the event of having to scale the grades up or down according to a paper’s level of difficulty shouldn’t happen after students sit for the exams.

I think the paper should be set at the right level beforehand to prevent that from occurring,” she says. “And marks shouldn’t be adjusted just because there are many who fail.”

But if there are unusual trends, the chief examiner would have to explain to the board of examiners why this occurs.

Student assessment obviously does not depend solely on examinations, as assignments and projects play a big role.

A time for learning

From his experience in MMU, See finds that students who fail in his course don’t have the fundamental grasp of the basic concepts in programming.

I think usually the problem stems from secondary school. If the quality of students is low, we can’t help it,” he opines.

The complaint of low standards in the schooling assessment to begin with is not an uncommon one.

We know of students who got straight As for PMR coming into our centre and they literally can’t string together sentences properly,” says Tan Poay Lim, principal of Creative Horizons Language Centre.

“Numbers of distinctions now are so high but the performance is still so low. Put the two and two together and you know that our standards have dropped.”

With 20 years of teaching experience behind him, Creative Education Consultancy managing director Alagesan Arumugam has seen certain trends in the public school examinations.

“I have assessed some of my students and find it hard to comprehend that they are distinction students,” he says. “On my tests, they would get 55% but end up getting 1A in SPM. It does look like it’s relatively easy to score an A these days.”

Alagesan points out that this could be due to a few factors – perhaps the students “bucked up” before the exam, perhaps his own standard was too high or perhaps the marking scheme was lenient.

His suggestion for fairer awarding of grades would be to give A’s to the top 10% of the nation’s scorers according to subjects, to decrease the likelihood of many students getting a string of As.

“Because at the moment, a student may be in the top 1% in Physics but only the top 20% in Chemistry but he gets 1A for each subject.

“So you may get a situation where two students in a class – one who always scores 90% in school exams and another who scores 60% – both getting 1A in SPM. It’s not fair to the first student, isn’t it?”

For Shanta, the root of the problem lies in the low entry requirements for universities and colleges.

She thinks that the government should consider implementing minimum prerequisites to study at matriculation centres, colleges and universities.

“Let’s say most of the class at university got an F in the SPM English paper, the possibility of two thirds failing is very high,” she explains. “But if so many fail, the programme is questioned, the lecturer is questioned and the university has to blame somebody. At the end of the day, lecturers want to hold on to their jobs.”

See believes the general public’s attitude is partly to blame for the occasional lapse of standards.

“I don’t think the public values standards very much,” he says. “When I talk to parents sometimes, they are always asking for the fastest way possible to finish a course.”

He feels there is a tension between maintaining standards and pleasing students as they are “customers” and therefore the pressure is greater, with some students even forming petitions and setting up blogs to contest their results.

Some believe that it is really up to a student himself or herself to make the most of university education.

“The only difference between good students and under-achieving students is whether they put in the effort,” says Owen Yap, a subject matter expert for Basic Interpersonal Communications at Open University Malaysia (OUM).

“I’ve never been pressured by the university to pass students, but my students have begged me before! But I always tell them that they should have done their assignments in order to secure their marks,” he says.

It boils down to attitude, Prof Lim reckons. “Sometimes, it’s not really about knowledge or skills, a very important component is professionalism.

“But assessment of professionalism is difficult. You can’t assess students in an exam, they are bound to give all the right answers!’

And because it’s harder to detect or train attitude problems, Prof Lim claims “we have crooks in our medical system” who would resort to unethical means for money.

It’s not just attitudes of students, of course, it applies to anyone. But it might come at a price, as Nor found out.

“You know, I could have done what was wanted of me and I would still have my job today,” Nor admits ruefully, having resigned from her posts since last year.

“I’ve lost my pension, I’ve lost my chance to study abroad but a life with no conscience is not the way to live.”

■ names have been changed.

Advertisements

Comment to OmegaMan in TMP by SJS & Team (Now deleted)

Thanks OmegaMan for every kind words. OmegaMan, in another blog “Normal is Overrated” under “A Complaint to USIM” somebody wrote to me, the following:

 

“an2blur Says:

 

April 21, 2009 at 3:12 am

dear my beloved Nor,

 

may i ask u something?

 

what happened at MMU before u come to USIM?

 

So I replied to him OmegaMan the following,

 

April 21, 2009 at 4:32 am

“Well go and check with the MQA lah, U think U can use it against me, ha!ha! Go ahead, I am waiting for your cheap shots, I am not afraid of U & Ghauth Jasmon!!!!!! Ha!HA! HA! You are fighting with the wrong person!Kah! Kah! Kah! You are digging Gauth Jasmon’s Grave & MMU. Kah ! Kah! Kah!”

 

OmegaMan,

This is not the first time I was victimized for sticking to my principles. Prof Dato Dr Ghauth Jasmon (former MMU president & the current VC of University Malaya) suspended me because I refused to follow MMU’s regulations that “only 20% can fail & a majority of the undergraduates must get B”. I really suffered because MMU did not pay my salary until I had to borrow RM50 from a friend and it was during the fasting month. You know I had to celebrate hari raya being jobless & penniless with my children. I can suffer alone but my children also HAD TO SUFFER WITH ME because I stuck to my principles!!!!! I even felt sorry that MY CHILDREN HAD ME AS THEIR PENNILESS DOWNTRODDEN MOTHER!!! For the Record, MMU later paid me the salary.

 

Despite being victimized at MMU, in USIM, the same thing happened, THE SUPERIORS DEMANDED HIGH PASSING RATE REGARDLESS OF THE POOR QUALITY but OmegaMan, I was still the same principled person just like when I was at MMU. Nobody can buy my soul, it is not for sale. I won’t sell my soul at any price, as every soul belongs to ALLAH the Almighty.

 

OmegaMan, SJS & readers of TMP,

 

You will read all those character assassinations against me. It is the Malay culture to look down at divorcees. When I refused to obey the unethical order by the dean at USIM, the VC of USIM Dato Prof Dr Abd Shukor Husin stoop so low to announce in a meeting with all USIM Deans, that I ada hubungan dengan seorang dekan yang sudah berkahwin!!! Dengan nama Allah, ini adalah fitnah! OmegaMan, in Islam, fitnah/slander is more sinful than killing. This Fitnah came from a VC whom the Malaysian Government ALSO appoints as “Chairman of Fatwa Committee”. O My God! Allah please save the Muslims from this charlatan & Munafiq!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Dato Prof Abd Shukor Husin treated me as if I am an immoral, cheap woman who have no parents & no breeding. His daughter is as ugly as him and he puts her high on the pedestal. Would anyone slander his daughter having an affair with anyone as she is god-damn ugly?

Dato Prof Abd Shukor Husin is too much as he slandered/fitnah me just because I refused to manipulate marks. I am not his first victim you know!

 

Don’t be fooled by charlatans out there who have Syariah/Islamic degrees/masters/phds to boot, but they are the ones who desecrate and defile Islam as well as trample on those who strive to be bertaqwa (like me). I don’t claim to be bertakwa but I try to please Allah My Creator & Savior!!!

 

Prof Dato Dr Ghauth Jasmon labeled me as “gila” in a board of directors meeting when a director tried to defend me. Prof Dato Dr Ghauth Jasmon said to the Director, “Why do you defend her, is she your girlfriend?”

 

These people, OmegaMan, ada good connections WITH THE POWERS THAT BE, KAKI AMPU & YES Men. I am a nobody. I challenge the Malaysian Government to investigate MMU & USIM & REVEAL TO THE PUBLIC!!!!! KOREK! KOREK! KOREK!

 

FYI, OmegaMan, I complained to MQA about MMU but the answer is very disappointing. As usual lah, you knowlah, partners in crime, brothers in arms, solidarity among the corrupt!!!

 

Why am I not afraid to say this? SJS, if they sue you FOR PUBLISHING THIS, ASK THEM TO SUE ME, I’ll take FULL RESPONSIBILITY AS THESE PEOPLE MADE ME & MY CHILDREN SUFFER BIG TIME YOU KNOW! I shall reveal my identity to you if they sue you. They forget I have strong faith in ALLAH ALMIGHTY (SUBHANA WA TAALA).

 

No problem lah OmegaMan, Allah is Fair, now, I have food on my table, I have roof over my head & my children are healthy. What more can I ask. I don’t die if I am jobless. No problem lah, OmegaMan, rezeki di tangan Allah.

 

Thanks OmegaMan, I am not trying to get your sympathy, but Dato Prof Dr Ghauth Jasmon & Dato Prof Dr Abd Shukor Husin used the fact that I am a divorcee against me.

 

Dato Ghauth Jasmon is better than a psychiatrist, you know. Although he is qualified as an engineer, he can tell a person is crazy just by looking at her. He said to me the first time he saw me, he concludes that I am crazy! He said I am crazy because I failed 80 percent of his students! He said, “All over the world people want to study in MMU”.

 

OmegaMan, I swear in ALLAh’s name that I speak the truth.

Probe into lecturer’s ‘sympathy marks’ case theSun TUESDAY APRIL 21 2009

Probe into lecturer’s ‘sympathy marks’ case

By Tan Yi Liang
newsdesk@thesundaily.com

PETALING JAYA:

The Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) has begun a probe into a former public university lecturer’s allegations that she was forced to resign for refusing to give “sympathy marks” to underperforming students.

“The Complaints and Enforcement Unit is heading the investigation. We are looking into this because this is about quality,” said MQA spokesman Muhammad Muammar Gaddafi.

Muhammad, who spoke to theSun yesterday, said currently “we are checking the validity of the claims which were published in the Malay language daily Kosmo! last week”.

“We do not know if the accusation is valid or not. We have to see what Kosmo! reported, and we do not know who the teacher is,” said Muhammad, who declined to comment further on the probe.

“It is still too early to make any comment,” he said.

The lecturer, who spoke anonymously on April 15, told the paper that she had resigned from Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia (Usim) as she was unable to tolerate the pressure to give out “sympathy marks” to students who had failed an examination set and marked by her.

In that examination, only four out of a class of 157 passed, prompting the university to send her a letter through the faculty dean calling for an explanation for the high failure rate.

She was then criticised heavily by her superiors who allegedly pressured her into adding marks based on the attendance of students.

She refused as she felt it was the responsibility of the students to turn up for classes.

“How am I to give them more marks if they are undeserving. I have given them all the marks I can even though the students do not deserve them,” said the lecturer, who had been teaching in Usim’s law faculty since 2007.

However, her allegations were dismissed by Usim vice-chancellor Datuk Dr Abdul Shukor Husin who said that the university had a clear procedure for marking test papers and that Usim had been ISO 9001:2000 accredited since 2004.

“We obtained our ISO 9001:2000 accreditation on Nov 11, 2004, and we were re- accredited on Jan 8 last year by the Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (Sirim). This proves that we have clear and transparent procedures in place,” said Abdul Shukor in a press conference on Sunday.

He said examination results were first scrutinised in a meeting of the faculty’s undergraduate exams committee before being validated by the University Senate.

“We also have an external panel that oversees the academic and examination system,” he said.

Nor refutes MQA’s claim that it does not know her identity

Dear Readers

I refute MQA’s claim in theSun at page 6 being reported on Tuesday April 21 2009 that it does not know my identity in an article “Probe into lecturer’s ’sympathy marks’ case”. I complained about Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia’s (USIM) unethical practice forcing me to manipulate marks to Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif of Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein on the 10th of June 2008 (10/6/2008). Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein called me and informed me that MQA can only investigate allegedly “unethical Public Universities” in January 2009.

This year, I sent an email to Ketua Pengarah Biro Pengaduan Awam Dr Tam Weng Wah regarding USIM’s unethical practice forcing me to manipulate marks whereby I explained to him that I gave extra classes to the students after they performed badly in the mid semester exam. Then Dr Tam forwarded my email to En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad (mohdasri@bpa.jpm.my) on Wednesday March 4 2009 at 7:55:39pm which states the following:
“KPP (A4), Disertakan maklumat tambahan untuk tindakan susulan. Sekian, terima kasih. KP” This email by Dr Tam was being cced (cc) to the aforementioned Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif MQA, Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein at syedahmad@mqa.gov.my.

Then on Thursday March 5 2009 at 1:01:05 PM En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad (mohdasri@bpa.jpm.my) sent an email to the Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) which reads the following:
“Tuan, Dikemukakan bersama-sama ini email aduan daripada pengadu untuk mendapat makluman dan tindakan pihak tuan jua. Dipohon maklum balas daripada pihak tuan dikemukakan terus kepada pengadu dan sesalinan dipanjangkan kepada BPA untuk tujuan rekod.Di atas kerjasama dan tindakan segera di pihak tuan amatlah dihargai. Sekian, terima kasih.” This email by En Mohd Asri bin Mohamad was also being cced (cc) to the aforementioned Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif MQA, Dato’ Dr. Syed Ahmad Hussein at syedahmad@mqa.gov.my.

Based on the abovementioned explanation, I hereby rebut MQA’s spokesman Muhammad Muammar Gaddafi’s claim in theSun which reads “..we do not know who the teacher is”.

Please be informed. Thank You.

Sincerely,
Nor

V-C: Explain criteria for education rating system By EMBUN MAJID embun@thestar.com.my

Thursday July 22, 2010

V-C: Explain criteria for education rating system By EMBUN MAJID embun@thestar.com.my

ALOR SETAR: Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) vice-chancellor Prof Dr Mohamed Mustafa Ishak wants the Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA) to explain the criteria for the Rating System for Malaysian Higher Education 2009 (Setara). “The MQA should give a clearer picture on how the rating is made because it is unfair that public and private universities are lumped together as they are ‘different’. “Private universities are profit-oriented while public universities aim to provide education for all,” he said after hosting a dinner with the media here on Tuesday. Dr Mohamed Mustafa said grouping the two under one category also gave a negative perception to well-established public universities, as they are compared with newer private universities, some of which might have been operating for a few months only. In the Setara rating announced by Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin last week, UUM was in Tier Four with 24 other institutions – 14 private and 10 public – classified as “Very Good”. The rating, which involved 58 universities and university colleges nationwide, is conducted every two years and evaluates teaching and learning quality. Dr Mohamed Mustafa said that according to MQA, UUM’s rating had dropped, but the university felt that this was not correct. “We have more than 30,000 students, including some 3,000 foreigners from 42 countries. “We also have twinning programmes with foreign universities,” he added.

JOHAN MANGKU NEGARA (J.M.N.):Y. Brs. Prof. Zita Mohd Fahmi

JOHAN MANGKU NEGARA (J.M.N.)

Y. Bhg. Dato’ Seri Azahar Muda, Alagasan Gadigaselam, Siti Halimah Ismail, Hasnah Dato’ Mohammed Hashim, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Badariah Hassan, Ab. Rahim Md. Noor, Y. Brs. Dr. Nor Aliah Mohd Zahri, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Che Mohd Hashim Abdullah, Y. Brs. Dr. Salbiah Ismail, Badarudin Abd. Rahaman, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Bijaya Indera Syed Unan Mashri Syed Abdullah, Jamela Mohd Syed, Y. Brs. Dr. Shahnaz Murad, Y. Brs. Dr. Amar Singh H. Surjan Singh, Y. Brs. Prof. Zita Mohd Fahmi, Y.M. Prof. Dr. Raja Noor Zaliha Abd Rahman, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Sharifah Mastura Syed Abdullah, Y. Brs. Prof. Emiritus Abdullah Hassan, Ramli Putih, Johari Abdul Muid, Wong Sau Ngan, Saffie Bakar, Chong Thin Kiong, Yusof Abdul Rahman, Subramaniam AR. A. Nachiappan, Tan Kim Chan, Y. Bhg. Datuk Mustapha Ahmad S. Marican, Ibrahim Hamzah, Kwan Foh Kwai, Y. Bhg. Mej. Jen. Dato’ Ir. Mohd Salim Ali, Y. Bhg. Mej. Jen. Dato’Dr. Abd Razak Md Yusoff, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Muda Dato’ Abd Hadi A. Rashid, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Muda Dato’ Musa Omar, Y. Bhg. DCP Dato’ Syed Ismail Dato’ Haji Syed Azizan, Y. Bhg. DCP Dato’ Khalid Abu Bakar, Yong King Chew, Chee Biang Phan, Y. Brs. Dr. Osman @ Othman Minudin, Ramlee Bohani, Abdul Shariff Hamid, Wong Koon Mun, Lee Cheam Choon, Tan Bon You.

Letter to the Big Boss of MQA Dato’ Syed Ahmad Hussein

—– Forwarded Message —-
From: myself

To: syedahmad@mqa.gov.my
Cc: tam@bpa.jpm.my; sidek@pmo.gov.my; anwarhalim@mqa.gov.my
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 12:27:30 PM
Subject: Fw: Enquiry : Private & Confidential

Yg berbahagia Dato’ Syed Ahmad Hussein,   Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim “Siasatan MQA mendapati, perkara ini telah disiasat oleh pihak Senat MMU dan tiada unsur manipulasi.” (the emphasis is mine)

 

1. Berdasarkan kenyataan di atas, adalah pelik pihak senat sendiri yang menyiasat sama ada terdapat unsur manipulasi, sedangkan salah laku dilakukan oleh fakulti di bawah seliaan senat sendiri.

 

2. Does the senate play the roles as the judge, jury and the investigator at the same time, whereas its own credibility is being challenged and indicted as well? Dr Goh said to me, Prof Chua and the senate will not approve your marks!” 

 

3. Where is the check and balance?

 

4. Dr Goh yang tidak berkelulusan undang-undang menukar markah mengikut formula ekonomi ciptaannya sendiri tanpa melihat langsung kertas peperiksaan. Siasatan jenis apakah yang dilakukan oleh senat sedangkan saya sendiri sebagai saksi yang melihat sendiri Dr Goh menukar markah, tidak dipanggil langsung oleh senat atau MQA sendiri?

  Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim, “Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.”   Soalan saya sebelum ini yang berkenaan ialah:   “24. Prof, Does Lan approve a compulsory rule presribing: a. the maximum number of students who fail {20%]. b. the average marks to be from 60% to 70%.”  

Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim, “Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.”, amalan MMU menetapkan compulsory rule presribing the maximum number of students who fail {20%] and the average marks to be from 60% to 70%, adalah dianggap wajar oleh MQA. Jadi keputusan peperiksaan telah ditetapkan lebih awal oleh IPT tersebut and does not reflect the actual performance of the students. Kalau macam tu, buat apa ada peperiksaan, bagi aja kelulusan percuma!!!!! Kalau ada peperiksaan pun, pensyarah dikekang oleh kuota markah.Sekiranya ada 100 pelajar, pensyarah wajib luluskan 80 orang, dan hanya boleh gagalkan 20 orang pelajar. Dah Kuota macam itu. Kalau macam ni, pensyarah dihalang berlaku jujur dalam melakukan penilaian dan pemarkahan!

 

Saya terkejut dalam dunia akademik terdapat sistem kuota berapa orang pelajar wajib diluluskan. Jadi para pelajar tak perlulah baca buku, senat sudah tetapkan siang-siang hanya 20 peratus pelajar sahaja dalam satu kursus yang boleh gagal. Jadi kalau ada 200 orang yang ambil satu kursus, 160 orang pelajar WAJIB DILULUSKAN ,hanya 40 orang boleh gagal!!!  

 

 Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Adakah amalan ini dinamakan “guaranteed pass”?Adakah ini sama dengan “jual degree”?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Adakah cara di atas, iaitu IPT menetapkan peratusan jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN, contoh baik IPT bertaraf  world class?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Berdasarkan pengalaman MQA, nyatakan adakah Universiti Malaya, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Pertanian Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia mempunyai sistem kuota jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN seperti MMU?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA:Berdasarkan pengalaman MQA, nyatakan adakah universiti Harvard, universiti Cambridge, Universiti Columbia, Universiti Princeton, universiti Oxford mempunyai sistem kuota jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN seperti MMU?

 

 

Since the marks are predetermined, if there are 100 students all of them need not study hard because they know 80 students are guaranteed to pass and only 20 of them are allowed to fail according to the quota set by the senate.

  Based on the above, lecturers cannot exercise their academic freedom as they are forced to mark the papers according to the quota set by the senate.   I believe that the integrity of the lecturers are being undermined.   I also believe that the practice guaranteeing passes above is a corruption and debasement of knowledge.   The above practice guaranteeing passes  does not reflect the real quality of the students.   Sebelum mengundur diri saya dapati Tuan tidak menjawab soalan saya yang saya ajukan kepada Tuan sebelum ini: “Further questions I now raise to MQA are: 3. Did MQA examine the examination papers of the students? 4. Are the papers of high quality? 5. Was the grading a fair one?”     Saya memohon jasa baik Tuan menjawab soalan saya pada kadar yang segera.   Yang benar

 

Jawapan dari

ANWAR HALIM NOR HASHIM diterima pada 5 Mac 2009

Pegawai Eksekutif

Unit Penguatkuasaan

Bahagian Koordinasi Jaminan Kualiti

Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia

 

Dengan hormatnya saya merujuk kepada aduan yang dikemukakan oleh puan pada 30hb Januari 2009 mengenai ‘Marks manipulation at Multimedia University (MMU)’.

 

Semakan Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia (Malaysian Qualification Agency-MQA) mendapati siasatan telah dibuat dan jawapan telah diberi kepada puan pada 5hb Februari  2009 melalui email 

 

 (salinan disertakan)

 

Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.

 

Siasatan MQA mendapati, perkara ini telah disiasat oleh pihak Senat MMU dan tiada unsur manipulasi (Jawapan sebelum ini kepada puan pada 5hb Februari 2009 berkaitan).

 

 

ANWAR HALIM NOR HASHIM

Pegawai Eksekutif

Unit Penguatkuasaan

Bahagian Koordinasi Jaminan Kualiti

Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia

—– Forwarded Message —-
From: myself

To: syedahmad@mqa.gov.my
Cc: sidek@pmo.gov.my; tam@bpa.jpm.my
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 9:24:37 AM
Subject: Fw: Enquiry : Private & Confidential

Sila beri sebab Tuan tidak menjawab soalan-soalan saya sebagai pengadu.

—– Forwarded Message —-
From: myself
To: syedahmad@mqa.gov.my
Cc: tam@bpa.jpm.my; sidek@pmo.gov.my; anwarhalim@mqa.gov.my
Sent: Thursday, March 5, 2009 12:27:30 PM
Subject: Fw: Enquiry : Private & Confidential

 

 

 

 

Semakan Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia (Malaysian Qualification Agency-MQA) mendapati siasatan telah dibuat dan jawapan telah diberi kepada puan pada 5hb Februari  2009 melalui email  (salinan disertakan)

 

Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.

 

Siasatan MQA mendapati, perkara ini telah disiasat oleh pihak Senat MMU dan tiada unsur manipulasi (Jawapan sebelum ini kepada puan pada 5hb Februari 2009 berkaitan).

 

 

ANWAR HALIM NOR HASHIM

Pegawai Eksekutif

Unit Penguatkuasaan

Bahagian Koordinasi Jaminan Kualiti

Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia

—– Forwarded Message —-
From:
To: syedahmad@mqa.gov.my
Cc: sidek@pmo.gov.my; tam@bpa.jpm.my
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2009 9:24:37 AM
Subject: Fw: Enquiry : Private & Confidential
Sila beri sebab Tuan tidak menjawab soalan-soalan saya sebagai pengadu.
Yg berbahagia Dato’ Syed Ahmad Hussein,
 
Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim “Siasatan MQA mendapati, perkara ini telah disiasat oleh pihak Senat MMU dan tiada unsur manipulasi.” (the emphasis is mine)

 

1. Berdasarkan kenyataan di atas, adalah pelik pihak senat sendiri yang menyiasat sama ada terdapat unsur manipulasi, sedangkan salah laku dilakukan oleh fakulti di bawah seliaan senat sendiri.

 

2. Does the senate play the roles as the judge, jury and the investigator at the same time, whereas its own credibility is being challenged and indicted as well? Dr Goh said to me, Prof Chua and the senate will not approve your marks!” 

 

3. Where is the check and balance?

 

4. Dr Goh yang tidak berkelulusan undang-undang menukar markah mengikut formula ekonomi ciptaannya sendiri tanpa melihat langsung kertas peperiksaan. Siasatan jenis apakah yang dilakukan oleh senat sedangkan saya sendiri sebagai saksi yang melihat sendiri Dr Goh menukar markah, tidak dipanggil langsung oleh senat atau MQA sendiri?

 
Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim, “Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.”
 
Soalan saya sebelum ini yang berkenaan ialah:
 

Berdasarkan kenyataan Anwar Halim Nor Hashim, “Walau bagaimanapun, maklumbalas  yang diterima daripada puan masih merujuk kepada aduan yang sama serta membangkitkan soal ketetapan sistem penilaian tentang pemberat dan skema pemarkahan. Dalam hal ini, MQA hanya menyediakan panduan bagi tujuan tersebut dan terpulang kepada Institut Pengajian Tinggi untuk menetapkan sistem penilaian yang sewajarnya.”, amalan MMU menetapkan compulsory rule presribing the maximum number of students who fail {20%] and the average marks to be from 60% to 70%, adalah dianggap wajar oleh MQA. Jadi keputusan peperiksaan telah ditetapkan lebih awal oleh IPT tersebut and does not reflect the actual performance of the students. Kalau macam tu, buat apa ada peperiksaan, bagi aja kelulusan percuma!!!!! Kalau ada peperiksaan pun, pensyarah dikekang oleh kuota markah.Sekiranya ada 100 pelajar, pensyarah wajib luluskan 80 orang, dan hanya boleh gagalkan 20 orang pelajar. Dah Kuota macam itu. Kalau macam ni, pensyarah dihalang berlaku jujur dalam melakukan penilaian dan pemarkahan!

 

Saya terkejut dalam dunia akademik terdapat sistem kuota berapa orang pelajar wajib diluluskan. Jadi para pelajar tak perlulah baca buku, senat sudah tetapkan siang-siang hanya 20 peratus pelajar sahaja dalam satu kursus yang boleh gagal. Jadi kalau ada 200 orang yang ambil satu kursus, 160 orang pelajar WAJIB DILULUSKAN ,hanya 40 orang boleh gagal!!!  

 

 Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Adakah amalan ini dinamakan “guaranteed pass”?Adakah ini sama dengan “jual degree”?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Adakah cara di atas, iaitu IPT menetapkan peratusan jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN, contoh baik IPT bertaraf  world class?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA: Berdasarkan pengalaman MQA, nyatakan adakah Universiti Malaya, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Universiti Pertanian Malaysia, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia mempunyai sistem kuota jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN seperti MMU?

 

Soalan saya kepada Tuan selaku Tunggak MQA:Berdasarkan pengalaman MQA, nyatakan adakah universiti Harvard, universiti Cambridge, Universiti Columbia, Universiti Princeton, universiti Oxford mempunyai sistem kuota jumlah pelajar yang WAJIB DILULUSKAN seperti MMU?

 

 

 

Since the marks are predetermined, if there are 100 students all of them need not study hard because they know 80 students are guaranteed to pass and only 20 of them are allowed to fail according to the quota set by the senate.

 
Based on the above, lecturers cannot exercise their academic freedom as they are forced to mark the papers according to the quota set by the senate.
 
I believe that the integrity of the lecturers are being undermined.
 
I also believe that the practice guaranteeing passes above is a corruption and debasement of knowledge.
 
The above practice guaranteeing passes  does not reflect the real quality of the students.
 
Sebelum mengundur diri saya dapati Tuan tidak menjawab soalan saya yang saya ajukan kepada Tuan sebelum ini:
“Further questions I now raise to MQA are:
3. Did MQA examine the examination papers of the students?
4. Are the papers of high quality?
5. Was the grading a fair one?”
 
 
Saya memohon jasa baik Tuan menjawab soalan saya pada kadar yang segera.
 
Yang benar

 

“24. Prof, Does Lan approve a compulsory rule presribing:
a. the maximum number of students who fail {20%].
b. the average marks to be from 60% to 70%.”
 

 

 
Jawapan dari

ANWAR HALIM NOR HASHIM diterima pada 5 Mac 2009

Pegawai Eksekutif

Unit Penguatkuasaan

Bahagian Koordinasi Jaminan Kualiti

Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia

 

Dengan hormatnya saya merujuk kepada aduan yang dikemukakan oleh puan pada 30hb Januari 2009 mengenai ‘Marks manipulation at Multimedia University (MMU)’.