Penggunaan Buku Teks Bahasa Melayu Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM) dalam Kalangan Guru Bahasa Melayu Menengah Rendah: Kajian Rintis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53797/anp.jssh.v3i2.11.2022Keywords:
Buku Teks Bahasa Melayu, KSSM, Kesesuaian KandunganAbstract
Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM) mula dilaksanakan secara berperingkat mulai tahun 2017 bagi memenuhi dasar Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia (PPPM) 2013-2025 agar kualiti kurikulum yang dilaksanakan di sekolah menengah setanding dengan standard antarabangsa. KSSM dibina berasaskan enam tunjang iaitu (i) komunikasi, (ii) kerohanian, sikap dan nilai, (iii) kemanusiaan, (iv) keterampilan diri, (v) perkembangan fizikal dan estetika, dan (vi) sains dan teknologi. Enam tunjang ini merupakan domain utama yang disepadukan dengan pemikiran kritis, kreatif dan inovatif bertujuan untuk membangunkan modal insan yang menghayati nilai-nilai murni berteraskan keagamaan, berpengetahuan, berketerampilan, berpemikiran kritis dan kreatif serta inovatif. Ia merupakan satu pengintegrasian pengetahuan, kemahiran dan nilai yang turut memasukkan elemen Kemahiran Abad Ke-21 dan Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi (KBAT) secara eksplisit (KPM, 2016). Penyepaduan ini penting untuk melahirkan insan yang seimbang dan harmonis dari segi intelek, rohani, emosi dan jasmani sebagaimana yang digariskan dalam Falsafah Pendidikan Kebangsaan (FPK).
Downloads
References
Affandi Ag Ghani (2006). Tesis: Persepsi Pelajar Terhadap Penggunaan Buku Teks Jawi Pendidikan Islam Dalam Pembelajaran: Satu Kajian Ke Atas Pelajar Tingkatan 4, Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Kota Masai, Johor Bahru. Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
Chew, F.P. & Zulhazmi Hamad. (2018). Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi dalam Pembelajaran dan PemudahcaraanBahasa Melayu Melalui Teknik Penyoalan. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu, vol.8, bil 1, 1-12.
Chung, L. L., Leng, C. H. & Peng, C. P. (2017). Amalan Pengajaran Guru Bahasa Melayu Tingkatan Empat dalamPenulisan Karangan dari Aspek Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif Serta Pembelajaran Kolaboratif. Jurnal Kepimpinan Pendidikan, 4 (1), 1-12.
Combs, B. (2009). Mengajar Secara Efektif. Terj. Siti Aishah Mohd. Elias. Kuala Lumpur: Institut Terjemahan Negara Malaysia Bhd.
Hassan, N. H., Hussin, Z., Siraj, S., Sapar, A. A. & Ismail, Z. (2019). Kemahiran Berfikir Kritis Dalam Buku Teks Bahasa Melayukurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah Tahap II. Jurnal Kurikulum & Pengajaran Asia Pasifik. Januari 2019, Bil. 7, Isu 1
Kartini Baharun (1992). Penilaian Buku Teks Geografi Tingkatan Satu Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah.Disertasi Sarjana Pendidikan. Universiti Malaya
Kesuma A. Bakar, Zarina Othman, Bahiyah Abdul Hamid & Fuzirah Hashim (2015). Making RepresentationalMeanings of Gender Images in Malaysian School English Textbooks: The Corpus Way. Arab World English Journal (AWEJ), 6 (4). 77-89
Klare, G.R. (1969). The Measurement of Readability, Ed. Ke-3, Iowa: Iowa State University Press.
KPM (2016). Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah Bahasa Melayu Dokumen Standard Kurikulum dan Pentaksiran Tingkatan 1 Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia
Mahamod, Z., Awang Hitam, M. & Hamat, A. (2011). Sikap Guru Bahasa Melayu Sekolah Rendah Terhadap Penggunaan Buku Teks Bahasa Melayu. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu. Vol. 1, Bil. 2 (Nov. 2011): 17-30
Mahanom Mat Sam (1998). Evaluation of The Malaysian Primary Science Textbooks. Thesis M.Ed. University of Warwick: United Kingdom
Mahidin bin Awang Itam (2006). Sikap Guru Terhadap Keberkesanan Buku Teks Bahasa Melayu Dan Penggunaannya Di Dalam Bilik Darjah.Tesis Sarjana Pendidikan. Universiti kebangsaan Malaysia
Mariani Rosli (2004). Penerbitan Buku Teks Untuk Sekolah Rendah.Kertas Kerja Dalam Kursus Penerbitan Buku Teks 2004, Di Hotel Regency, Port Dickson 5-8 Disember 2004
Marohaini Yusoff, Abdul Murad Salleh & Sharir Jamaludin (2005). Penggunaan Buku Teks dalam Kalangan Guru dan Pelajar Sekolah Menengah: Satu Tinjauan Kuantitatif. Kertas kerja yang dibentangkan dalam Seminar Penyelidikan Pendidikan, Maktab Perguruan Batu Lintang, 15-16 September, 2005
Mas Zuraini Miswan (2009). Tahap Kebolehbacaan Teks KOMSAS, Disertasi Sajana Pengajian Media, Universiti Malaya.
Mohammad Rahim Mohammed Abdul Rahman (2000). Persepsi Guru Terhadap Buku Teks Pendidikan Islam KBSR. Disertasi Sarjana Pengurusan Pendidikan. Universiti Malaya
Mohd Fadzli Ismai & Mohd Sukki Othman (2012). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Pencapaian Pelajar Dalam Pengajaran & Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab: Satu Tinjauan Di SMAP Kajang. Persidangan Kebangsaan Pengajaran Dan Pembelajaran Bahasa Arab (PKEBAR’12). Unit Bahasa Arab, Fakulti Pengajian Islam, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi. ISBN 978-967- 5478-49-9.
Nathesan S. (2010). Pendekatan dan teknik pendidikan Bahasa Melayu. Edisi Kedua. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasadan Pustaka
Noor Rohana Mansor (2009).Soalan dan penyoalan dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Bahasa. KualaLumpur:Utusan Publications & Distributors Sdn. Bhd
Saedah Siraj (2000). Kandungan Buku Teks Masa Depan: Satu Cadangan Kurikulum Masa Depan. Kementerian Pendidikan. Seminar Buku Teks KBSM (19-22 Jun 2000: Port Dickson) Kertas 8 (23 halaman)
Selvarajah Manikam (2010). Penilaian terhadap kualiti buku teks Kemahiran Hidup Tahun 4: Tumpuan kepada guru-guru Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Tamil di Wilayah Persekutuan. Disertasi Sarjana Pengajian Media, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Kumpur
Sharifah Nor Puteh, Nor Adibah Ghazali, Mohd Mahzan Tamyis, & Aliza Ali (2012). Keprihatinan Guru Bahasa Melayu dalam Melaksanakan Kemahiran Berfikir secara Kritis dan Kreatif. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa melayu; Malay Language Education (MyLEJ), 2 (2). 19-23. ISSN 2180-4842
Supramani, S. (2006). Penyoalan guru: Pemangkin pemikiran aras tinggi murid. Jurnal Pendidikan, 26: 225-246.
Tajul Ariffin Nordin (2010). Pendidik Bina Kebenaran Universal. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka
Tay, M. G. (2010). Pandangan Guru Pelatih terhadap Buku Teks Bahasa Melayu Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah. Jurnal Penyelidikan IPG KBL, Jilid 9, 2010
Toiemah Rushdi Ahmad (1985). Dalail A’mal fi I’dadi al mawad a- ta’limiyyah lil barnamijTa’lim al-Arabiyyah, Mekah: Jamiah Ummul Qura.
Zamri Arifin, Zulazhan Ab. Halim, Nurul Masyitah Mohd Sham & Azimah Shurfa Mohammed Shukry (2013). The Readabilty of the Prose Text. Middle-East Journal of Scientific Research 17 (3):338-343.
bderrahim Benlahcene. (2020). Flourishing and student engagement in Malaysian university students: The mediating role of Personal Best (PB) Goals. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-020-00544-8
Ab. Rahman, R., Ahmad, S., & Hashim, U.R. (2018). The effectiveness of gamification technique for higher education students engagement in polytehhnic Muadzam Shah Pahang, Malaysia. International Journal of educational Technology in Hgher Education, 15(41), 1-16
Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub, Aida Suraya Md Yunus, Rosnaini Mahmud, Nur Raidah Salim & Tajularipin Sulaiman (2017). Differences in students mathematic engagement between gender and between rural and urban school. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1795, 020025, 1-7.
Azina, I. N. and Halimah, A. (2012). Student factors and mathematics achievement: Evidence from timss 2007. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(3):249 255.
Bond, M., Buntins, K., Bedenlier, S., Zawacki-Richter, O. & Kerres, M. (2020). Mapping research in student engagement and educational technology in higher education: A systematic evidence map. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(20), 1-30
Chantell, H. W. (2015). Increasing student engagement in the secondary math classroom. [Tesis Master, Louisiana State University]. LSU Digital commons.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed). Routledge.
Eccles, J. (2016). Engagement: where to next? Learning and instruction, 43, 71-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.02.003
Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: Addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43, 1-4
Fung, F., Cheng, Y.T., & Gaowei, C. (2018). Student engagement and mathematics achievement: Unravelling main and interactive effects. Psychology in the School 2018, 55(4). DOI: 10.1002/pits.22139
Gopal, K., Salim, N. R. and Ayub, A. F. M. (2019). Perception of learning mathematics among lower secondary students in Malaysia: Study on students’ engagement using fuzzy conjoint analysis. Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Science, 13(2), 165-185
Gray, J. A. & DiLoreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environment. NCPEA International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1). Dicapai daripada https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103654.pdf
Gullapyan, T. (2020). Best teaching practices to increase student interest in STEM subjects. [Doctoral Dissertation, Pepperdine University]. ProQuest Dissertation Publishing. (Publication No. 27994971) Dicapai daripada https://search.proquest.com/openview/2a3e46aeac2b1347c2a8d61da62f0f43/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y
Ismail, M. E., Samsudin, M. A., & Zain, A. N. M. (2014). A multilevel study on trends in malaysian secondary school students? science attitude: Evidence from TIMSS 2011. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 4(5), 572-584.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2016). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia (2013-2025). Dicapai daripada http://www.moe.gov.my/userfiles/file/PPPM/Preliminary-Blueprint-BM.pdf
Krauss, S. E., Kornbluh, M., & Zeldin, S. (2017). Community predictors of school engagement: The role of families and youth-adult partnership in Malaysia. Children and Youth Services Review, 73, 328-337
Lee, J. S. (2014). The relationship between student engagement and academic performance: Is it a myth or reality? The Journal of Educational Research, 107(3):177 185.
Lee, W., Lee, M.-J., & Bong, M. (2014). Testing interest and self-efficacy as predictors of academic self- regulation and achievement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 39(1), 86–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2014.02.002.
Mohammed Iman Karim & Harris Shah Abd Hamid. (2016). Factor structure of the student engagement instrument among Malaysian undergraduates. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia, 30(2), 1-12
Muhammad Ridhuan Tony Lim Abdullah. (2014). Development of activity-based mlearning implementation model for undergraduate english language learning. [Tesis Doktor Falsafah yang tidak diterbitkan, Universiti Malaya]. Universiti Malaya. Dicapai daripada https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/268877015.pdf
Nur Raidah Salim & Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub. (2017). Realtionship between mathematics statistics engagement and attitudes towards statistics among undergraduates students in Malaysia. AIP Conference Proceedings 1795, 020026, 1-6
Nurulrabihah Mat Noh. (2020). Pembangunan model pengajaran pemikiran reka bentuk sekolah rendah. [Tesis Doktor Falsafah yang tidak diterbitkan, Universiti Malaya]. Universiti Malaya.
Norakusuma Mohd Din, Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub & Rohani Ahmad Tarmizi. (2016). Influence of parental involvement and peer support on mathematics engagement among malaysian secondary school students. Malaysian Journal of Mathematics Sciences, 10S, 175-185.
Nora’asikin Abu Bakar, Ahmad Fauzi Mohd Ayub, Nor Aniza Ahmad, & Sharifah Intan Sharina Syed Abdullah. (2021). Mathematics engagement: The relationship between student engagement, parental involvement, and peer influence. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 11(5), 496-513
Shahril Effendi Ibrahim & Mohamad Afzhan Khan Mohamad Khalil. (2019). Students engagement in Open
University Malaysia Graduate Centre (OUM GC): Does information seeking behaviour plays a role? International Conference of Education, 458-466
Subramainan, L., & Mahmoud, M.A. (2020). A systematic review on student’ engagement in classroom: Indicators, challenges and computational techniques. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11(1), 1-11
Thien, L. M. and Darmawan, I.-N. G. (2016). Factors associated with malaysian mathematics achievement in PISA 2012: A multilevel analysis. In Thien, L. M., Nordin, A. R., Keeves, J. P., and Darmawan, I. G. N., editors, What can PISA 2012 data tell us?, 81- 105.
Thien, L. M. and Ong, M. Y. (2015). Malaysian and Singaporean students’ affective characteristics and mathematics performance: evidence from pisa 2012. SpringerPlus, 4(1):563 577.
UNESCO. (2015). Education for all 2000-2015: Achievements and Challenges. EFA Global Monitoring Report 2015. Paris, France. United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Veiga, F. H. (2016). Assessing student engagement in school: Development and validation of a four-dimensional scale. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, 813-819.
Watt, H.M.G., Caemichael, C., & Callingham, R. (2017). Students’ engagement profiles in mathematics according to learning environment dimensions: Developing an evidence base for best practices in mathematics education. School Psychology International, 38(2), 166-184
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii. http://doi.org/10.1.1.104.6570
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Azhar Md. Sabil, Shamsuddin Othman, Abu Bakar Razali, Rosmaria Omar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
