By Assoc Prof Dr Abdul Halim Abdullah

Every time the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) results are announced, public attention almost always focuses on statistics such as how many students excelled and how many failed.

However, for certain subjects like Mathematics, the failure rate hovering around 20 per cent each year should prompt deeper questions, especially about the root causes of these failures.

Mathematics consistently ranks as a core subject with the lowest passing rate among dozens of other subjects offered in Malaysia's only public examination.

The announcement of the SPM 2025 results on 31 March 2026 provides important context. This cohort is the first generation to have never sat for the Ujian Pencapaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) and the Pentaksiran Tingkatan Tiga (PT3) during their schooling.

Added to this was the uncertainty they faced in Year 6 and early secondary school due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led the government to implement the Movement Control Order (MCO).

In addition to the challenge of implementing Home Teaching and Learning (PdPR) – done for the first time in the nation’s educational history – this change is not merely about abolishing exams at primary and lower secondary levels but signifies a shift in the country's educational philosophy, moving from centralised assessment to continuous assessment that emphasises learning.

However, the reality is that subjects often recording low pass rates, such as Mathematics, consistently require solutions to address earlier weaknesses.

They are cumulative in nature. Failure to grasp the basics early on will continue to hinder students at higher levels.

Therefore, when we see that the Mathematics failure rate in SPM remains high, at 23.2 per cent in 2023 and 22.4 per cent in 2024, we must accept that this problem did not originate in Form 5. It started much earlier.

Malaysian Learning Matrix

In this context, as outlined in the National Education Plan (RPM) 2026-2035, the implementation of the Malaysian Learning Matrix (MPM) in Year 4 should be regarded as a crucial turning point.

Assessment at this stage is not about determining who passed or failed, but more importantly, about identifying students who need support before it is too late.

If weaknesses in basic numeracy, operations, and reasoning are detected as early as Year 4, interventions can be introduced when the learning gap is still small and manageable, and when ample opportunities remain.

The same applies to other subjects tested in MPM Year 4, namely Bahasa Melayu, English, and Science. For instance, Bahasa Melayu recorded a slight dip in the SPM 2025 pass rate.

However, the bigger question is how prepared we are to use the data effectively. Without consistent and ongoing actions, early assessment will just become another figure in the education report.

In the context of Mathematics, increasing primary school teaching hours from 576 to 608 hours starting in 2027 can be seen as a practical step. But let’s be honest, more time spent on Mathematics does not necessarily result in more effective learning in the subject.

In other words, quantity does not automatically mean quality. If the teaching approach still relies on drills and memorisation of procedures, then the extra time will only prolong the same issues.

Conceptual understanding and reasoning

On the other hand, if that time is dedicated to developing conceptual understanding and reasoning, the impact can be truly transformative.

Again, teacher readiness is crucial. As long as outdated issues such as high workloads, combined with the challenges faced by Year 1 teachers accepting six-year-olds from 2027, remain contentious.

At the same time, Malaysia’s participation in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) for Grade 4 (Year 4) and its continuation to Grade 8 (Form 2) for Science and Mathematics subjects provides more opportunities for reflection.

For the first time, we can better observe how Malaysian students develop in Mathematics from early childhood to adolescence.

TIMSS is not only an international comparison tool but also a mirror that reveals our true standing. It helps answer the often-overlooked question of when students begin to “disappear” in Science and Mathematics.

When TIMSS findings are combined with the Year 4 Learning Matrix and Form 3 assessments, we gain a comprehensive data set covering students' entire educational journey.

The issue is no longer a lack of information but how that information is used to improve classroom practice. Data and information are already abundant.

Not to mention the data from the Southeast Asia Primary Learning Metrics (SEA-PLM), which tests three core subjects: reading, writing, and numeracy (maths) among Year 5 students.

A more meaningful step is how we act on the available data and statistics. At the lower secondary level, the Malaysian Learning Matrix (MPM) for Form 3 should serve as the final warning before SPM.

At this stage, interventions must be more assertive, focused, and targeted. Otherwise, students will enter Form 4 with a gap too large to bridge in two years.

The addition of History to the MPM for Form 3 brings the total number of subjects assessed to five: Bahasa Melayu, English, Mathematics, Science, and History. Bahasa Melayu and History are compulsory subjects that must be passed for SPM.

Furthermore, the move to Year 1 entry at age 6, beginning in 2027, introduces a new factor that must not be ignored. Children at this age develop at varying rates.

Without adequate preparation, they risk starting their learning journey on unstable ground. A weak initial step often leads to a prolonged and difficult journey. However, this is also where opportunities lie.

If the education system can support students from the very beginning with a developmentally suitable, experiential, and meaningful approach, a strong foundation can be laid before challenges become too complicated.

Ultimately, the concern over statistics for certain subjects in SPM is not just about the exam.

It is about the system – how we establish the foundation, identify weaknesses, and intervene before it becomes too late. As long as we see SPM as the endpoint for addressing issues, we will remain behind.

Conversely, if we recognise all subjects as part of a long journey starting from the very first day a student enters school, then genuine solutions can begin.

-- BERNAMA

Assoc Prof Dr Abdul Halim Abdullah is a lecturer at the Faculty of Educational Sciences and Technology, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.