KOTA KINABALU: A psychologist said a former student in the trial of an absent teacher experienced minor trauma as a result of losing the opportunity to get a proper education.
Dr. Noor Aishah Rosli, 46, who is child clinical psychologist and a registered counsellor, told High Court judge Datuk Ismail Brahim that she ran two tests on Siti Nafirah Siman (the student and also the plaintiff in this case) to assess her mental status and cognitive ability.
"In this case, I have chosen two tests - one test is for cognitive and the other for emotion. The purpose of these tests is to assess the mental status and cognitive ability of the plaintiff - whether she is able to understand her environment, including the learning process.
"The emotion test was chosen to assess if the plaintiff experienced stress and trauma about what she had gone through, especially when it was related to academics.
"As a result of the tests, I found that the plaintiff has a low average IQ level. However, in psychology, the low average and average do not really have a difference. The score obtained (by the plaintiff) is 87, while the average is 90. These three different points prove that the plaintiff has a good intellectual level.
"For the emotional test, I found that the plaintiff showed symptoms of stress and minor trauma that she went through as a result of losing the opportunity to get a proper education," said the expert witness.
Dr. Noor was the second witness in the hearing of the suit filed by Siti, 23, who was a former secondary student of SMK Taun Gusi, Kota Belud.
Dr. Noor was answering an additional question from Siti's counsel, Shireen Sikayun.
In the suit filed on Oct 30, 2018, Siti had named Mohd Jainal Jamran (her former teacher known as Sir JJ), Suid Hanapi (in his capacity as a principal of the SMK Taun Gusi), the Kota Belud district education officer, Sabah education director, director general of education, education minister, and the government as the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth defendants, respectively.
Siti claimed that the teacher had failed to turn up in class for seven months in 2015.
Counsel: Please explain how the tests that you carried out in 2019 would still be relevant when the experience by the plaintiff took place in 2015?
Dr. Noor: When I was running both tests I've taken into account the incident that happened in 2015. I have been working in this field for 15 years. In the concept of psychology, when I conducted the IQ test in 2019, the score was 87, which is a low average. I believe that if I had run the test in 2015 the results would not have been much different because I was informed that the plaintiff was not involved or experienced any kind of accident that could affect her cognition.
Human cognitive development does not change dramatically; for example, a person's IQ in 2015 was 75, and it will not suddenly reach 90 in 2019.
"I would like to emphasise that my assessment of the plaintiff's cognitive level is accurate and can be used even though the incident happened 4 years ago.
"Likewise, with the self-reflection test that I use to measure emotions, it can be used because if we experience trauma, sadness, or stress, it remains in our lives. It is impossible for the emotion to disappear, as if we have never experienced it."
Meanwhile, during a cross-examination by Federal Counsel Mohd Fazriel Fardiansyah Abdul Kadir, Dr Noor agreed that she was attached to a private organisation and would charge a fee for her service of conducting tests and preparing a report.
She also agreed that a man named Ibrahim paid for the tests, not Siti.
Mohd Fazriel: Based on your evidence, I put it to you that it was not an initiative by the plaintiff to meet you but it was Ibrahim's initiative, agree?
Dr Noor: I disagree.
To another question, Dr Noor disagreed that her report was biased. She said that she considered all aspects when making the report.
Mohd Fazriel and Senior Federal Counsel Mohd Hafizi Abd Halim acted for the defendants.
Hearing continues on Aug 16 -18 and Aug 28 – 30.