Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia AN INVESTIGATION ON THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN SPM AND A-LEVEL RESULTS Ch’ng Pei Cheng1, Teng Mei Tuan2, Ng Ci Xiang3 and Ch’ng Pei Eng4 1,2,3 INTI International College Penang, Malaysia ( cheng_cheng32@yahoo.com, 2meituan.teng@newinti.edu.my, 3cixiang.ng@newinti.edu.my) 4 Universiti Teknologi MARA (Penang Campus), Malaysia (epchng@gmail.com) 1 ABSTRACT The intent of the present study was to examine the strength of the relationships between SPM and Advance Subsidiary (AS) GCE A-Level result. As such, the objectives of this study were two-fold. The primary objective of the study was to investigate the relationships between SPM subjects among the INTI candidates who enrolled in A-Level AS Exam. The second objective of the study was to explore whether each of the SPM subjects grade is associated with A-Level subjects grade. To fulfil this objective, seven subjects of the SPM result and five subjects of the AS exams results were collected from 93 students. The data gathered were analyzed descriptively utilizing central tendency measures (mean and standard deviation). Furthermore, the collected data were analyzed inferentially using Pearson Correlation and Chi-square-test. The results indicated that there were significant relationships among SPM subjects namely, mathematics and sciences subjects in general but do not relate to language subjects in A-Level results in particular. Similarly, the results revealed significant association between SPM grades and A-Level grades. Moreover, mathematics subject was diagnosed as an important subject that drives most of the subjects in A-Level. The results of this investigation point out comparable relationships between SPM and A-Level result in the Malaysian context. Clearly, the results are local not universal. KEYWORDS A-Level, SPM, Higher education INTRODUCTION There are various methods and public examinations used to evaluate the performance of students in education. In Malaysia, the Malaysian Certificate of Education Examination (SPM) is among the important public examinations on top of the Primary School Assessment Test (UPSR) in Standard 6 and the Lower Secondary Assessment (PMR) in Form 3. SPM is chosen in this study because it is regarded as the most decisive examination in Malaysia (Lim & Zhao, 2005). They are used as national indicators to compare students from different levels of education and background. Students’ performance in SPM provides the gateway to Pre-University studies in Malaysia or overseas. While the Advanced Level General Certificate of Education (GCE A-Level) examination is set and examined by a series of examination boards of the Cambridge Assessment in the United Kingdom. This provides the entry gateway to higher education in United Kingdom. Both SPM and A-Levels are widely recognized around the world, being the standard entry qualification to the different levels of academic courses that applicants are going to study in. 1 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia SPM is the public examination equivalent to the O-Level at the secondary school level while A-Level being a pre-university study equivalent to the Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (STPM), which is conducted at college or university. For those who choose to study pre-university programmes at local private colleges, they are excused from taking STPM examination. Students enrolled in the GCE A-Levels programmes are usually required to study for a period of two years and their qualifications are widely recognised around the world, as well as being the standard entry qualification for assessing the suitability of applicants for academic courses in UK universities or in local public and private universities. LITERATURE REVIEW In reviewing past research, it was found that many local educational researchers had included students’ SPM results as the socio-demographic variable. This data was often taken into consideration as the prior academic achievement variable or predictors of the undergraduate students’ academic performance at institutions of higher learning. For example, in the study conducted by Noor Azina & Azmah (2006), the students’ grades for English language proficiency and mathematics at SPM level were referred as the entry scores in the study. Alfan & Md Nor (2005) studied whether there is any influence over the students’ performance in the university level related to the students’ past performance prior to entering the university, such as scores obtained from SPM, STPM or Matriculation programmes. On the other hand, Muhammad Iqbal Naeem, & Syed Asad Abbas Rizvi (2011) have conducted a comparison study on the curriculum of General Certificate of Education Ordinary level (GCE O-level) and Secondary School Certificate of education (SSC). Both of the rsearchers tried to conduct a comparative analysis of the English language programmes held in Pakistan. Another researcher, Inglis (1980), has conducted a study on the contents of both the GCE examinations papers that were tested on students in the United Kingdom at two different levels: Ordinary Level (O level) and the Advanced Level (A level). Inglis focused on two subjects only, namely, Modern British and European History. The objective of his study was to identify what aspects of the past were emphasised in both examinations and to determine between the two subjects which one was more influential. To the best of our knowledge no studies have been made to directly compare the academic performance between the outcomes of the SPM and A-Level examination taken by the same individuals. Past research has shown that there was a study conducted overseas on the comparisons of academic performance between the outcomes of the DSCE and NBDE Part II by Ranney, Gunsolley, & Miller (2004). In 2010, in a study conducted by Wan, he argued that “the SPM examination may no longer be appropriate as the sole evaluation criterion of academic excellence”. Is this a true statement? Are SPM results meaningless? 2 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia No information or study has been carried out to make a comparative analysis of the GCE ALevel and the SPM examination or among other subjects in Malaysia. This study has, therefore, been designed to probe the issue. The study presented in this paper was conducted to determine whether the A-Level has produced the same or different results when compared with the SPM in the same cohort of students. If it is clearly differentiated, support for requiring the A-Level would be substantiated; if the results were not significantly different, then arguments for redundancy of the two examinations would be supported. The main objective of this study is to examine whether SPM results can be used as a predictor for final A-Level A2 result. The students’ SPM subject grades are specified as grade 10 representing the highest grade (A+) and the lowest grade is grade 1 (E), while the Advanced Subsidiary (AS) subject grades are specified as grade 5 representing the highest grade (A) and the lowest grade is grade 1 (E). THE RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES SPM subjects Mathematics Additional Mathematics Physic Chemistry A-Level subjects H1a H1b Mathematics H1c H1d H1f H1g Biology H1h English H1i Malay Language H1j Physic H1e Chemistry Biology Thinking Skills Figure 1: The Theoretical Model of correlation The following theoretical model was obtained by putting together the relationship factors and the hypotheses. Specific research questions include: 1. Are SPM subject grades related to A-level subject grades? 2. Are SPM subject grades associated to A-Level (AS) grades? 3 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia METHODOLOGY The respondents were 93 undergraduate students, consisting of 49 male and 45 female enrolled in sciences and arts majors of GCE A-Level programme at Inti International College Penang, Malaysia. Respondent data were collected with cluster sampling from the January and March 2010 intake. Table 1 lists the respondent’s demography characteristics, inclusive of their gender and intakes. Table 1: Demographic characteristics. Gender Intake Total Male Female Jan Intake 25(48.1%) 27(51.9%) 52 March Intake 24 (57.1%) 18 (42.9%) 42 49(52.1%) 45(47.9%) 94(100.0%) Total RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In this section, the results of the study are presented and discussed. The zero-order correlations analysis for all the measured variables of the participants' SPM subject scores as compared to A-Level scores are presented in Table 2. The first hypothesis was to examine the significant correlation of each SPM subjects with the respective A-Level subjects in the research model. The second hypothesis was to examine the significant association of each SPM subject with A-Level result. The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 3. Table 2: Correlations between SPM subjects and A-Level subjects. Pearson Correlation SPM subjects A Level subjects Mathematics Physic Chemistry Biology Thinking Skills Mathematics .684** .488** .430** .447** -.011 Additional Mathematics .757** .604** .639** .557** .192 Physic .580** .698** .736** .678** .414** Chemistry .604** .573** .711** .716** .424** Biology .460** .612** .603** .638** .616** English .104 .113 .408** .407** .398** Malay Language .121 .283 .320** .265 .274 **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Hypotheses H1a to H1j examined the relationships of SPM subjects, namely, Mathematics, Additional Mathematics, Physic, Chemistry, Biology, English, and Malay Language with ALevel subjects, namely Mathematics, Physic, Chemistry, Biology, English, and Thinking Skills. All the variables are significantly correlated with each other with the exception for English, Malay Language with mathematics; English, Malay Language with Additional Mathematics; Malay Language with Thinking Skills; Additional Mathematics with Thinking Skills. 4 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia The results indicated that Mathematics in SPM had a significant correlation with Mathematics in A-Level (H1a) but there was no relationship with Thinking Skills (H1b). Additional Mathematics, however, was significantly related to Mathematics (H1c), Physic (H1d), and Chemistry (H1e). For the rest of the other subjects, namely Physic, Chemistry, and Biology are significantly correlated with Physic, Chemistry, and Biology was reported respectively. Thus hypotheses H1f, H1g, and H1h are supported. Similarly, English (H1i) was found to be significantly correlated to Thinking Skills but had no significant relationship with Malay Language (H1j). Finally, SPM subjects such as Additional Mathematics, Physic, Chemistry, and Biology had significant association with A-Level result, supporting hypotheses H2a, H2b, H2c, and H2d. Hypothesis H2e, was not supported. Table 3: Results of analysis. Hypothesis H1a H1b H1c H1d H1e H1f H1g H1h H1i H1j SPM subjects Mathematics Mathematics Additional Mathematics Additional Mathematics Additional Mathematics Physic Chemistry Biology English Malay Language SPM subjects H2a H2b H2c H2d H2e Additional Mathematics Physic Chemistry Biology English A-Level subjects Mathematics Thinking Skills Mathematics Physic Chemistry Physic Chemistry Biology Thinking Skills Thinking Skills A-Level subjects Mathematics Physic Chemistry Biology Thinking Skills Correlation 0.684 -0.11 0.757 0.604 0.639 0.698 0.711 0.638 0.398 0.274 Chi squaretest (sig.) 122.6 (.000) 68.9 (.000) 97.5 (.000) 74.8 (.000) 11.1 (.084) Results Supported Not supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Supported Not supported Results Supported Supported Supported Supported Not Supported There is a significant correlation between the investigated SPM and A-Level subjects. The results revealed significant relationships on all sciences and mathematics subjects, with the SPM Additional Mathematics influencing three A-Level subjects namely Math, Physics, and Chemistry being the most influential. There is significant association established between most of the SPM and A-Level subjects, but not between English and Thinking Skills. 5 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Teaching and Learning (ICTL 2011) INTI International University, Malaysia CONCLUSION From this study, it can be seen that SPM subjects play an important role in enhancing ALevel subjects results. However, more studies should be conducted to investigate the potential influence of Mathematics and Additional Mathematics subjects to enhance Physics and Chemistry results. In general, students who had performed well in sciences and mathematics subjects in SPM examination also performed well in sciences and mathematics subjects in the A-Level examination. In conclusion, SPM result is closely associated to AS examination in GCE A-level result. REFERENCES Alfan, E., & Md Nor Othman. (2005). Undergraduate students’ performance: the case of University of Malaya. Quality Assurance in Education, 13(4), 329-343. Inglis, W.F.J. (1980). A Content Analysis of 'O' and 'A' Papers on Modem British and European History Set by Two GCE Examination Boards, British Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 43-51. Lim, C. S., & Zhao, X. P. (2005). Assessment and Examination System: A Comparative Study between Malaysia and Shanghai (China). Paper presented in EARCOME 3, Shanghai 5-12 August. Muhammad Iqbal Naeem, & Syed Asad Abbas Rizvi. (2011). Comparative study of English language curriculum of Secondary School Certificate of education (SSC) and General Certificate of Education Ordinary level (GCE O- level) in Pakistan. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(1), Part I, 310-316. Noor Azina Ismail., & Azmah Othman. (2006). Comparing university academic performances of HSC students at the three art-based faculties. International Education Journal, 2006, 7(5), 668-675. Ranney, R.R., Gunsolley, J.C. & Miller, L.S. (2004). Comparisons of National Board Part II and NERB’s Written Examination for Outcomes and Redundancy, Journal of Dental Education, 68(1), 29-34. Wan, C.D. (2010). Public scholarships in Malaysia: What are the missing points? Article published in Centre for Public Policy Studies (CPPS). Public opinion. Retrieved 18 December 2010 from http://www.cpps.org.my/sub_page.aspx?catID=7&ddlID=538 6