It must have been one of the reasons why our educational standards have dropped. I can still remember my daughters complaining about the subject 12 years ago, but did not realize the significance then. The way the Moral paper was structured, it was not meant for any student with intelligence who would question most things. It would suit those who follow to the letter what was required and be able 'to regurgitate word for word what they've memorized'...
"A group of concerned parents are making a representation to Suhakam with regard to many longstanding complaints about Moral Studies taught in upper secondary school.
For many years now, the exam format of this subject has been so rigid that students are forced to strictly memorize 36 ‘values’ and definitions. They are then required to regurgitate word for word what they’ve memorized when sitting the SPM paper.
Such a method of testing morality is best suited to training parrots and appears to be designed by monkeys. Who are these monkeys that have been instrumental in designing the examination and how have they been allowed to get away with their monkey business for so long?
Any youth who has been educated to think critically might well ask, why 36 values, and why not 35 or 37? Who defines these ‘values’? Why must definitions drafted by some textbook writers be so stringent that not a word is to be changed? Even the 10 Commandments handed down by God from atop Mount Sinai allow more flexibility in their wording.
Poor SPM results in Moral Studies have penalized non-Muslim students who otherwise had scored straight As or A+ in their other subjects.
In comparison, Muslim students who are exempted from Moral Studies but instead take the Islamic Studies papers do not have to risk their SPM balance sheet being pulled down due to below-par performance in this one subject alone..."