I am a school teacher in a secondary school. Recently, there is much debate on the pros and cons of public exams. The government must know who can follow the syllabus and who cannot, and this is done by having public exams.

The syllabus has been debated, argued on and finally agreed on to be the subject matter for all Malaysian students. Exams are necessary. Through exams which acts as a filter, students who can memorise, understand, explain, analyse and synthesise are tested through various types of questions in various subjects.

We cannot just say that students who passed due to memorisation are not good. How is a doctor going to remember the names of medicines to be administered to sick patients if he cannot remember the drugs' names and the corresponding sicknesses? Certain professions need memory work. Certain professions don't .

A child is exposed to various skills the moment he attends school. He learns everything in the syllabus including moral values. If he still hasn't learnt anything at the end of his school years, the syllabus is not to be blamed. The teachers are not to be blamed. The subjects are not to be blamed. The exams are not to be blamed.

However, it is not the end of the world for him. He can still go to vocational school and pick up a skill or be an apprentice. He can still survive in this world because there are all walks of people that make up this world.

Therefore, public exams must stay to act as a sieve - to sieve students in order to know their aptitudes and skills and hence provide opportunities for them to further their interests in the various fields.