SPM came and SPM left. Congratulations, class of 2021 — plus random folks like me! (Why I was taking SPM in the first place.) Picture below taken with my candidate statement as I walked out of my final paper: SPM English Literature, on the 22nd of March.

In the end, I caved in and didn’t take the full complement of compulsory papers I had registered for, sitting only for BM (four papers — to satisfy public university employment requirements), BI (four papers) and English Literature (one).
For those who don’t know, these days when registering as a private candidate, you can’t just choose à la carte, there’s a basic set of papers you have to register for as a bloc, and then you add electives and whatnot on top of that. These “compulsory papers” are: BM, Sejarah, Mathematics, Moral/Pengajian Islam (depending which applies), English, Science. My exam results will state ‘tidak hadir’ (not present) for my four no-shows, but that’s not unusual for private candidates who have very specific goals in mind.

Let me get my excuses in early: I was curious enough to want at least take Sejarah and Moral, but I just had too much on my plate with work, job application-related thingies (more on that next time) and just life in general, not to mention Covid-related incidents. There was even a day where I sat for papers in the morning and afternoon, then gave conference talks in the evening! It takes quite a bit of effort to bite the bullet and study for these extra papers — particularly in the case of Sejarah, a subject that I generally like and read a lot about on my own time, I couldn’t justify the trade-off in time that it would take to learn the 20 chapters’ worth of material in its specific SPM-format.
English and English Lit, by contrast, were not only accessible and fun papers to take (especially the latter), but I have a professional interest in taking them as someone whose career (at that point) was training teachers who would eventually teach kids who would be sitting for those exams. Skin in the game, so to speak. Because I had taught English and English Lit for 5 years at this point, I felt fairly okay just reading the core texts for Eng Lit once over before the weekend, and my own set of notes.
In this post I will focus on the most recent paper I sat for, and which I arguably had the most fun with: SPM English Literature (Code 2206). The paper has three sections according to what they consider the ‘main three’ genres of literature: prose, drama, poetry. You have options on what texts to choose within each genre, as long as you at least prepare to answer based on one.
I have to say that the text selections were really good. The texts I read both really address themes that are current and accessible to teenagers while I think having the capacity to stretch their thinking about themselves and the world around them.

A picture taken on the morning of my exams. I enjoyed both these texts!
The Clay Marble, by Minfong Ho, is a novel set on the Cambodia-Thailand border during the Khmer Rouge era, based on the author’s experience working with refugee children in that same area. It’s quite short but covers a lot of ground, with writing that is in places really vivid and thought-provoking. You don’t really have to engage in historical analysis (the text can be read and appreciated stand-alone) but I’d imagine that teachers will undoubtedly prompt students to get into the historical background of the Killing Fields, etc. And you cover themes like war and brutality, displacement, hope, friendship, courage. It’s a great read that I think would create a lot of space for students to have good discussions and explore the meaning of important stuff.
Flowers for Algernon by Coules/Keyes is one of the drama options, the other being Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice, which I’d read and taught before, so I thought to give this a go instead. At first glance it seems a bit unorthodox: the text is actually a radio drama adaptation of the original, meant to be a purely acoustic performance without a visual element. And so the ‘stage directions’ read accordingly. Daniel Keyes wrote the novelette, and Bert Coules adapted it for radio, sometime in the early 90s, for the BBC. More here. Sadly, I can’t seem the access the original radio performance, broadcast on Sep 5, 1991. Any voice talents here keen on doing a re-enactment? We’ve got the script!
Flower’s blurb, as found on the book:
Charlie Gordon knows that he isn’t very bright. At 32, he mops floors in a bakery and earns just enough to get by. Three evenings a week, he studies at a center for mentally challenged adults. But all of this is about to change for Charlie. As part of a daring experiment, doctors are going to perform surgery on Charlie’s brain. They hope the operation and special medication will increase his intelligence, just as it has for the laboratory mouse, Algernon. Meanwhile, each day Charlie keeps a diary of what is happening to him. This is his poignant record of the startling changes in his mind and his life.
It’s a great text about really current themes: appearances versus reality, the value of ‘intelligence’, respect for and dignity of life, scientific ethics, etc. All important themes to ponder, not just for school kids!
And I suppose that gets to the heart of why I found 2206 the most enjoyable of the papers. The other SPM papers, which I hope to cover in another post if I have the time and motivation, feel “constrained” to the “perceived” level of the target audience (which I think is needlessly arbitrary anyway). The hidden curriculum is made clear at many points in the BM/BI papers that you’re supposed to ‘think critically’ (what we call ‘KBAT’) but not too much, not too much explanation or depth, not too divergent from a range of acceptable answers. And the assessment design feeds into that. Students are, after all, motivated to score as well as they can, because their material well-being is tied to it (to gain admissions to courses of choice and to win scholarships). But with Eng Lit I genuinely felt like the ‘sky was the limit’ as far as I could justify my statements through analysis, as I answered questions like ‘Nothing nice lasts forever — what does the text have to say about such a statement’ or ‘How does the author convey the significance of this incident’, etc.

But in all seriousness, to have a subject that educates and rewards students to engage in analyses that are both critical (grounded in reason and justification, in understanding literary devices, with close reference to the text) and creative (multiple possibilities, entertaining multiple perspectives) is a really precious thing that surely is integral to upper secondary education. In terms of the epistemic cognition research, I think this would be akin to what is called evaluativist cognition.

Last I checked, only about 300 students take SPM Eng Lit across the whole of Malaysia annually, in recent years at least. This is because most schools don’t offer it, and students who are interested feel daunted by the prospect of taking it as a private candidate without proper guidance. There are private tutors around of course (and I’d be happy to tutor kids who want to sit for it, if time permits) but of course that entails an additional financial burden.
I am not saying, of course, that the value found in the subject is unique: I believe these skills can be inculcated in all the other subjects, and my comparisons are limited only to two other. That and of course teachers are never limited to exam prep alone, far from it (even if it’s also true that exams have a strong gravitational force for the reasons I’ve said before).
Consider this just an individual’s review, one teacher’s perspective, on a really well-developed course by the Ministry of Education, that deserves a lot more credit and a lot more candidates. More on the rest of the exam experience, next time!
