Nowadays, many people know the terms of thinking outside the box (sometimes erroneously called "thinking out of the box"). Many people especially academic staffs and educators often advocate thinking outside the box and they can list out enormous advantages of it. Some of the advocators have even developed a plenty of tools in how to think outside the box such as lateral thinking, intergalactic thinking, creative thinking, so on and so forth.
Besides, our lecturers and tutors often encourage the students to think outside the box. Likewise, university has organized some of the courses and talks such as critical and lateral thinking courses, mind mapping talk, etc. Eventually, our students should be able to think outside the box.
But, why the unemployment rate of fresh undergraduates is still high in Malaysia?
According to our minister of higher education, Y.B. Dato’ Seri Mohamed Khaled bin Nordin (31, March 2010), he indicated that some of the fresh undergraduates could not get the job because they unable to adopt what they’ve learned into the real situation and their capability are inadequate to meet the market needs.
But, the students have been encouraged and trained to think outside the box in the university, how come they cannot adopt what they have learned into the real situation? How come they don’t know what is happening outside? How come their capability is inadequate to meet the market needs?
Is it they are stupid? Is it they are lazy?
Based on my own experience, in fact, our lecturers and tutors really often encourage the students to think outside the box. However, meanwhile, the students are bound by the examination. Why I say so? Let’s look at my own experience. One time, I asked my tutor that can I use another formula instead of the formula which taught by the lecturer when answering the question. This is because I thought that formula would be easier for me in answering the question and it could get the same answer as well. But, my tutor answered me that it is better to follow what my lecturer has taught me. Then I asked her why she said so. She replied me that it is safer for me to score marks in the examination. That time, I thought what the hell is it, why I have to follow the difficult formula just because it is safer in scoring marks in exam? At the moment, I was depressed and I was wondering am I studying for knowledge or for examination.
In addition, I’ve found out something that restricts the students from thinking outside the box. Most of the tutorial questions or even examination questions did have subjective or limited answers. It means that the answers which provided by the students are subjected to the marking scheme. The marker will just mark the paper by referring to the marking scheme which consists of limited and subjective answer. Although your answer could be right and acceptable, however, if the answer does not follow or match with the marking scheme, sorry for that, you will be given an “0”; if you hit some of the points which in the marking scheme, perhaps you will get few marks for that. This is what my tutor has told me.
Indeed, there is no absolute answer for any question. Come on, we are not studying kindergarten, answering those true or false questions. There are so many answers for a question. In certain extend, the right answer could be wrong as well.
Sadly, the subjective marking scheme restricts the students from thinking outside the box. Likewise, the result of the students is only judged by what grade they able to score in the examination. Therefore, the students scare that they won’t get higher mark if they don’t follow exactly what the lecturers’ has taught or the “absolute” answer. Over time, the students are gradually depressed and demotivated from learning. As a result, the students would not study anything that is not covered in the examination. For instance, once they have found out the “answer” for the tutorial question, they would stop from finding any other sources or answers. This is because they think they have already found out the answer and that is what the tutor wants, what for they have to spend additional time in finding other answers? This is meaningless for them. What a student has to do is, study the tips and score in the exam; other things which are not related to the exam, don’t even bother it, no point to study that because the marker will not appreciate it. I believed that this is every student’s mindset.
Lecturers and tutors often encourage the students to think outside the box, but, in the mean time, the university restricts the students’ thought and action by examination. What a great irony. Therefore, I think that the marking scheme should serve as a guideline for the marker in marking the paper. If the students’ answer is not following with the marking scheme, however, it is acceptable and feasible; the answers deserve marks and even full marks. Sometimes, the markers have to appreciate the students’ answer; don’t only judge the answers of the students by the stupid marking scheme.
Based on my own experiences, therefore, I can conclude that fresh undergraduates could not get the job is not because they are stupid or lazy. If they are stupid, it is caused by the inefficient educational policy. If they are unable to adopt what they’ve learned into the real situation, it is caused by the spoon-feeding educational system. I have to say that the current educational system and policy is insufficient; it restricts the potential of every student.
Lastly, I’d like to post two questions; one is for student, and another is for examiner.
For student:
Are you studying for knowledge or examination?
For examiner:
The examination is testing the students’ intelligence or memory?