The document discusses two international student assessments - TIMSS and PISA - and Malaysia's performance on PISA from 2009 to 2012. It also examines factors that could influence Malaysia's PISA scores, such as differences between the PISA exam format and Malaysia's national exams, the priority given to finishing syllabi over conceptual learning, and constraints placed on science and reading scores. Suggested reforms include aligning Malaysia's curriculum with international standards, increasing the emphasis on English, and addressing weaknesses in the education system despite its large budget. However, others argue that ranking countries based on these tests is unrealistic and fails to consider differences in educational systems and policies across nations.

1. TIMSS- Trends in International
Mathematics and Science
Study
PISA- Programme for
International Student
Assessment

2. TIMSS PISA
International Association for the evaluation
of Educational Achievement (IEA)
Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development(OECD)
Each participating educational systems, a
minimum of 4500 to 5000 students are
evaluated.
15 years old students.
First conducted in 1995 and repeated every
4 years.
First performed in 2000 and repeated
every 3 years.
Evaluates student’s math and Science
performance.
Aims at testing literacy in reading,
mathematics and science.
Measure more traditional classroom content
(Curriculum attainment)
Measure education’s application to real-life
problems and lifelong learning.
(workforce knowledge)

3. Pisa: Malaysia up in maths,
down in science and reading
 2009
Mathematics-57 (mata 404)
Sains- 53 (mata 422)
Membaca –55 (mata 414)
 2012
Mathematics-52 (mata 421)
Sains- 53 (mata 420)
Membaca –59 (mata 398)

4. Format exam
of PISA
different with
format exam of
M’sia
Factor of
Science
and
Reading
Refusal to
put greater
emphasis
on English
Attitude of
Students
Teachers in M’sia
more like to finish
the syllabus then
teaching the
concept of
knowledge

5. The exposure of weakness in
malaysian education
World Bank economist Frederico
Gil Sander says Malaysia's poor
education system more worrying
than household debt.
– March 25, 2014

6. According to PISA's 2012 results Malaysian
students scored below average or ranked 52 out
65. In contrast, Vietnamese students ranked 17 out
of 65.
Spotlighted the weakness of Malaysia's school
system, despite the fact that education gets the
largest share of funds every year from the
national budget.

7. PISA results contradicted the
government's insistence that
Malaysia had a world class
education system.
Questioned the real worth of the
Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) which
produces many students who
scored As, but who can't compete
with their peers from Singapore,
China and Taiwan.

8. Education System
Education
Management
Closed and
structurized
Examination

9. Management
 organize various improvements in line with
international best practices and addressing
immediate concerns identified through evaluation of
Pisa.
 update primary and secondary school curriculum in
line with international standards.
 the inconsistencies in education and a refusal to put
greater emphasis on English

10. Closed and structurize
 models Finland and South Korea are far differing
from one extreme education free and open to the
closed and structured education
 Actually a loss if reject to seek guidance from the
experiences of others or benefit from their success.
However, any borrowing must be adapted to the
culture and basic social policy states that have
borrowed it.In other words, we ourselves must
create the conditions in our country and the
conditions necessary to use any thoughtful
solutions to our social problems
[Malek Bennabi (1905-1973)]

11. Examination
 standard questions PMR and SPM is
not so far behind compared to the
questions PISA and TIMSS. Hence
would be expect if students in PISA
and TIMSS failed then logically would
not get excellent results in PMR and
SPM. So, whether PMR and SPM grades
were lowered to show excellent
results?
 Malaysia questions are totally based
on examination

12. A Chance for Students
 Early reports Education Development Plan (2013-2025
PPPM), the issue of students with special needs (students
last class, poor children, orphans, and aboriginal
minority) only mentioned in chapter 3 of the current
performance, the quality of education and equity in
education but not dealt with in chapter 8 of
implementation and action plan.
 students who achieved excellent results and
unfortunately more focused on monitoring students less
intelligent intentionally or not, made a second priority.
 Most worrying, more than half of Malaysian students
(51.8%) do not reach basic proficiency levels in
Mathematics (i.e. Below Level 2).

13. Conflict
Malaysia Educational Policy
for Teaching Science and
Mathematics in Malay
VS
TIMSS AND PISA TEST IN ENGLISH
LANGUAGE

14. Unfair
 For those students who study mathematics
and science in either English or Malay only.
 PISA and TIMSS should be in double languages
due to Malaysia specific national situation.
 Students are under stress due to too much
subjects and curriculum.

15. PISA Ranking in 2012

16. The distribution of PISA
scores and homework time

17. Unrealistic
 Ranking doesn’t mean effective.
 ShangHai-China scored NO.1 due to the cost of 13 hours
per week in their homework. This also scored No.1 in
all the countries.
 Korea only cost 3 hours and it’s last second of all the
countries, therefore, its PISA ranking in 2012 is NO.5.
 More homework = better result ???
 or Which one is more effective ???

18. Incomparable
 Due to the population, educational
distribution,
 and national policy etc. reasons. It’s hard
to be investigated for some specific country
about its educational academic level. It’s
related to the educational system, coverage,
efficiency.
 -- The only thing can be compared is the
academic contribution of a country. It
shouldn’t be join test such as TIMSS or PISA
and make conclusions based on such reports.
 That’s an unbalanced view.

19. CONCLUSION
 It can’t say that join TIMSS and PISA
can be helpful for improving national
academic education level.
 Study is not for ranking. Losing the real
meaning or purpose of study while
students pursue the ranking only.
 It’s not essential for joining TIMSS and
PISA without progressive the national
development and academic education
during the time.

20. The
End