Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

LEMBAGA PEPERIKSAAN MALAYSIA

KEMENTERIAN PELAJARAN MALAYSIA

FORMAT PELAPORAN ULBS


BAHASA INGGERIS SPM

LAPORAN KETUA PENTAKSIR SEKOLAH

NAMA SEKOLAH SMK TAGASAN


KOD SEKOLAH :

NOMBOR PUSAT : XEA 3331

NO. TELEFON SEKOLAH :

BILANGAN CALON

JUMLAH CALON : 298 CALON

NAMA KETUA PENTAKSIR SEKOLAH : CIK JULIE ANNE A/P BARNAT


1 LAPORAN PRESTASI CALON MENGIKUT KONSTRUK
(KEKUATAN, KELEMAHAN DAN KESILAPAN)

1.1 Give appropriate reponses / Conserve on a topic effectively :

a) Strengths

Most of the students were well-prepared as they had enough time to prepare themselves
the materials for the oral. They managed to prepare texts that are related to their lessons
and texts that they were familiar with. Most of the good and average students were able
to come up with their own materials but for the weak students, they picked materials from
the textbooks and reference books. They had time to prepare well and practice for the
presentation so they were able to present fluently in front of the teacher.

b) Weaknesses

For the weak students, they only memorized the materials, thus when they were asked
comprehension questions by the teacher based on their materials, they could not answer
the questions. This is because they did not understand the materials as they were simply
memorizing for the sake of oral presentation and not for reading comprehension. Even
when the teacher asked them simple questions of the materials, they could give
appropriate responses.

c) Errors

The studentsgrammar can be said quite satisfactory as they had more than enough time
to prepare themselves and the texts. They had enough time to check their grammar and
sentence structure with their teachers thus they did not commit with many grammatical
errors.

1.2 Speak fluently using correct and acceptable pronunciation

d) Strengths

For the good and average students, their pronunciation was satisfactory. They were able
to pronounce simple words correctly and understandable. This may also due to the factor
that they could prepare beforehand their materials thus giving them ample time to
practice their pronunciation by looking in the dictionary or listening to the television or
radio. Short words with 3 or less syllables were not a problem to the students.

e) Weaknesses

For most of the weak students, their pronunciation is hampered by their mother tongue.
They tend to pronounce the words according to their mother tongue pronunciation
version. The mispronunciation sometimes led to misunderstanding of the ideas heard.
f) Errors

Some of the errors made by students:

1) the word there they pronounced as they


2) the word determination they pronounced as determaination
3) the word know they pronounced as now

1.3 Speak coherently

g) Strengths

The good and average students were able to deliver their materials coherently and
smoothly as they knew how to use discourse markers and sentence connectors sujch as
frist, second, beside that etc. They were able to converse quite coherently with their
friends by giving the appropriate responses regarding the topic of discussion. This may
due to the fact that they had enough time to practice thus making their presentation
seemed natural.

h) Weaknesses

However, it is a different case for the weak students. Even though they had enough time,
their presentation was still full of hesitation as they tried to remember what they had
memorized. This is because they were memorizing without understanding making it very
hard for them to act natural in having a conversation with their friends. So, when one of
the students could not remember the lines, it affected the whole presentation. The flow
became disrupted. They also could not use the correct sequence connectors and logical
connectors.

i) Errors

The weak students were merely presenting what they had memorized. It was obvious that
they were not discussing but merely turn-taking in expressing their ideas. Thus, the flow
of their conversation was not smooth as when one candidate had done his or her part,
there was a gap as the group waited for the next candidate to coontinue.

1.4 Speak the language using a wide range of appropriate vocabulary within context

j) Strengths

As the materials were all prepared beforehand, the words used were from a wide range of
appropriate vocabulary within context. They could use the correct vocabulary in context,
even more for the students who took the materials from the textbook or refernce books.
Their choice of words was appropriate and ineteresting.
k) Weaknesses

The weak students could speak using a wide range of sppropriate vocabulary within
context but problems arose when they were asked to explain on what they had presented.
Since they only took the materials from the textbook and refernce books and memorized
the materials, they could not explain the meaning of certain words.

l) Errors

Wrong choice of words such as live stay, lend borrow, study learn.

1.5 Speak using correct grammar

m) Strengths

For the good and average students, they had no problems in basic grammar i.e simple
tenses especially in having a conversation. So, when they got more than enough time to
prepare and practice their presentation, grtammar became a small problem to them.

n) Weaknesses

However, for the weak candidates, since they only memorized, when they could not
remember what they had memorized they committed a lot of errors especially in SVA and
tenses. They could correct themselves.

o) Errors

Examples of errors made by students:

1) Ali and Siti is went to school now.


2) They could found the books.
3) Halim was climbing a tree when she fell down.
2. PRESTASI KESELURUHAN CALON BERDASARKAN SKOR

LEVEL SCORE CANDIDATES


EXCELLENT 26-30 1
GOOD 21-25 24
SATISFACTORY 16-20 42
WEAK 11-15 104
VERY WEAK 5-10 49
TOTAL 220

120

100

80

60 CANDIDATES

40

20

0
EXCELLENT GOOD SATISFACTORY WEAK VERY WEAK

3. COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS

3.1 COMMENTS ABOUT THE INSTRUMENTS/MODELS

a) Models used by the candidates

All 4 models could cater for the various levels of candidates proficiency. However, for
the weak candidates, even the simplest task could be a big challenge for them especially
the interview carried out by the teacher. They felt inferior and shy. The chances that are
given to the students 3 times: 2 in form 4 and 1 in form 5 help them to upgrade their
marks if they are not satisfied with the first one. It is good as the students feel the need to
improve when they know their marks in comparison to their friends.

b) Suitability of models

The models tested both, individually and in pairs or groups that involves conversation.
Thus, the models test both, the candidates individual communication skills and
conversational skills. Furthermore, it gave them the experience of communicating with
others using English even though they were only acting out the situation.
3.2 SUGGESTIONS TO CANDIDATES

The candidates should take more serious about school based oral assessment as many of
the weak students tried to run away from doing the oral test. The candidates also should
be more particular in choosing the topic of their material. They should choose a topic that
is related to them so that they would really understand what they were t5alking about.

3.3 SUGGESTIONS TO TEACHERS

Give students the freedom to choose their own materials to present. Dont limit their
options. Be creative in suggesting possible topics to students.

3.4 ISSUES AND SUGGESTIONS FOR ULBS

May be there should be a stimulus type of question to elicit some responses from the
students in addition to the models that have been given to test the students ability to
communicate spontaneously. This would really test their communication skills as the
models in practice now are not really testing their skills but more on testing their
memorization skill.

3.5 OTHER MATTERS


May be it is better to have other teachers from other schools to test the students. It is
because it is hard to get the cooperation from the students as they feel that this is not a
real exam paper since the tester is their own teacher. Furthermore, the students were not
serious at all. They think that the oral test is not included in their overall marks in SPM.

Tandatangan Ketua Pentaksir Sekolah (KPS) :

Nama :
Jawatan :
Tarikh: