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