Look before we leap on CATs

I REFER to the recent reports on the Cambridge Accessible Tests (CATs) published in The Star. CATs is now aggressively promoted by the Cambridge Malaysian Education and Development Trust (CEMDT) whose chairman is Tun Ahmad Sarji.

Although labelled inappropriately as an assessment device, the programme is more of an online learning platform that will be used by the Education Ministry as one of the initiatives to improve the standard of English in Malaysia.

This initiative and other language programmes are aimed at helping students to improve their proficiency level and thus achieve a higher standard of English.

These initiatives are also meant to push learners onto the direction where more students would be able to obtain a minimum pass in the SPM English examination. Currently, less than 80% of students pass the SPM English test.

According to the ministry, the project will commence in August and will involve 40 primary and secondary schools especially those situated in rural areas.

CATs has three stages namely primary, core and prep; and each of these stages has nine levels.

I personally have no issue with the Education Ministry when it comes to taking initiatives to improve the standard of English in Malaysia. I think the ministry is fully aware of the importance of English and has duly acknowledged this in the 2013 Education Blueprint and also in the English Language Education Reform 2015.

The ministry has adopted many initiatives and programmes but its biggest by far is the implementation of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in 2013. CEFR was actually developed by the Council of Europe to gauge the language proficiency of students across the European Union. It is now the universally adopted standard of language proficiency.

Malaysia and other countries like Japan and Vietnam have fully embraced CEFR.

On the implementation of CATs, a number of stakeholders, especially teachers, are actually questioning its effectiveness and efficacy, as reported in “Better ways to boost English than CATs, say teachers” (The Star, March 22).

For one, it is a new instrument or platform. I myself have not heard of CATs although I’ve been exposed to a number of language learning platforms, testing and evaluation.

I noticed that CATs was only registered as a trademark in 2015. Since it’s quite new, there are a number of issues that need to be raised, such as the following:

> Have the contents of the programme been tested?

> Are the contents appropriate and suitable for language learners in Malaysia?

> If it is truly a test as claimed, has it been validated? If it has been validated, what are the validation numbers?

> If the content materials are also claimed to be aligned to the CEFR, who are the people who ensured that it really does?

The second issue I would like to raise is the name itself. Why is it labelled as a test when in fact it is more of an online teaching and learning platform? I believe anything that begins with the word “test” would definitely put off learners. The use of the label “test” would provoke anxiety and fear among many people including young learners.

In short, the emphasis on testing, as this platform does, would make not only the learners but also the teachers testophobic.

Another reservation I have is the return of investment of the programme. I believe the ministry has put a lot of money on a platform that has yet to actually be proven effective.

Another challenge I see in implementing the CATs is how to motivate students to engage in this online learning platform. The min- istry needs to actually create interest among the students to use the programme, and this could prove to be quite a difficult feat when they have been brought up in the tradition of face-to-face learning.

This problem is further compounded by the fact that this new learning programme requires computer literacy skills among the users. Technological literacy is pertinent in any online learning platform.

Finally, I believe if CATs is properly conceived and implemented, it would truly benefit the learners. However, it must be emphasised that learning a language using a test or an online platform is just one of the many ways available to improve the standard of English in Malaysia.

Language cannot be learned and improved by just taking a test; it can only be improved through interaction and communication. Thus, efforts by the ministry should not only focus on tests but also on other important aspects such as the professional development of teachers using the latest development in pedagogy in the teaching of English.