Pembangunan Model Kajian Tindakan Pengurusan dan Kepimpinan Gaya Institut Aminuddin Baki
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53797/aspen.v3i2.7.2023Keywords:
Kajian tindakan, budaya, sekolah berkesan, isu dan cabaran, pentadbirAbstract
Kajian ini membincangkan matlamat Kementerian Pendidikan untuk mempromosikan kajian tindakan sebagai budaya dalam sekolah, terutamanya di sekolah yang kurang memberangsangkan. Ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kecekapan pengurusan dan memberi faedah secara tidak langsung kepada perkembangan pelajar. Kekurangan pengetahuan dan kemahiran dalam kalangan pentadbir sekolah mengenai kajian tindakan dikenal pasti sebagai isu utama yang menghalang penglibatan mereka dalam pelaksanaannya. Begitu juga, pemahaman yang lemah mengenai konsep dan proses kajian tindakan dalam kalangan pengurusan dan kepimpinan sekolah ditekankan sebagai punca tindak balas yang perlahan dan tidak berkesan. Cadangan dibuat agar pemimpin sekolah menjadi pakar dan mentor bagi memimpin perubahan dengan berkesan. Dorongan diberikan kepada lebih ramai pemimpin sekolah untuk membentangkan hasil kajian mereka di peringkat yang lebih tinggi bagi menangani isu pengurusan dan kepemimpinan. Keperluan latihan dan model piawaian bagi kajian tindakan ditekankan. Analisis kompetensi pengetua menunjukkan keperluan yang signifikan untuk membudayakan penyelidikan dalam kalangan pemimpin sekolah. Maklum balas daripada peserta yang menghadiri kelas kajian tindakan meminta satu model piawaian yang boleh digunakan di seluruh Institut Aminuddin Baki Malaysia. Penghasilan model kajian tindakan diharapkan dapat membimbing pensyarah dan pemimpin sekolah dalam memperbaiki model sedia ada dan memupuk budaya penyelidikan dalam kalangan pemimpin sekolah dan guru.
Downloads
References
Allen, J., Dyas, J., & Jones, M. (2004). Building consensus in health care: a guide to using the nominal group technique. British journal of community nursing, 9(3), 110-114. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjcn.2004.9.3.12432
Altrichter, H., & Gstettner, P. (1993). Action research: A closed chapter in the history of German social science?. Educational Action Research, 1(3), 329-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965079930010302
Aziz, S. F. A., Siraj, S., Hussin, Z., Norman, N. A., & Norman, N. I. (2017). Development of a Garden-based Curriculum Content Model for indigenous primary school students. Science Journal of Business and Management, 5(5), 62-76. Scribbr. https://apiar.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/10_APCAR_APR17_BRR776_Edu-62-76.pdf
Bleicher, R. E. (2014). A collaborative action research approach to professional learning. Professional development in education, 40(5), 802-821. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2013.842183
Bridges, D., & Bridges, D. (2017). Philosophy and Practice: A Philosopher in the Classroom?. Philosophy in Educational Research: Epistemology, Ethics, Politics and Quality, 133-145. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49212-4_8
Calleja-Sanz, G., Olivella-Nadal, J., & Solé-Parellada, F. (2020). Technology forecasting: Recent trends and new methods. Research Methodology in Management and Industrial Engineering, 45-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40896-1_3
Cavaleri, S. A. (2008). Are learning organizations pragmatic?. The Learning Organization, 15(6), 474-485. https://doi.org/10.1108/09696470810907383
Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (2003). Becoming critical: education knowledge and action research. Routledge.
Cook, J. (2010). Collaborative action research: The ethical challenges. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 4, 141–150. Scribbr. http://www.business.brookes.ac.uk/research/areas/coaching&mentoring/
Corey, S. M. (1954). Action research in education. The journal of educational research, 47(5), 375-380. Scribbr. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27529611
Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (2018). Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development. European Journal of Operational Research, 271(3), 1145-1155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2018.05.061
Edwards-Groves, C., & Kemmis, S. (2016). Pedagogy, Education and Praxis: understanding new forms of intersubjectivity through action research and practice theory. Educational action research, 24(1), 77-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1076730
Elliott, J. (1994). Research on teachers' knowledge and action research. Educational action research, 2(1), 133-137.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Pearson. Scribbr. https://thuvienso.hoasen.edu.vn/handle/123456789/9427
Harvey, N., & Holmes, C. A. (2012). Nominal group technique: an effective method for obtaining group consensus. International journal of nursing practice, 18(2), 188-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-172X.2012.02017.x
Johnson, W. B. (2002). The intentional mentor: Strategies and guidelines for the practice of mentoring. Professional psychology: Research and practice, 33(1), 88. Scribbr. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-10109-013
Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (2009). Laporan Tahunan 2009. Putrajaya: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Kaufmann, A., & Gupta, M. M. (1988). Fuzzy mathematical models in engineering and management science. Elsevier Science Inc.
Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., Nixon, R., Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). Doing critical participatory action research: The ‘planner’part. The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research, 85-114. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2_5
Kemmis, S. (2010). What is to be done? The place of action research. Educational action research, 18(4), 417-427. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2010.524745
Koshy, V. (2005). Action research for improving practice: A practical guide. Sage.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of social issues, 2(4), 34-46.
Mack, Z., & Sharples, S. (2009). The importance of usability in product choice: A mobile phone case study. Ergonomics, 52(12), 1514-1528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130903197446
Mansor, M., Norwani, N. M., Yunus, J., Ghazali, E. E., & Hashim, H. (2014, February). Building A School-Based Professional Learning Model In Malaysian Context. Widyatama International Seminar. Scribbr. http://repository.widyatama.ac.id/handle/123456789/2817
McKernan, J. (1991). Action inquiry: Studied enactment. Forms of curriculum inquiry, 309-326.
McKillip, J. (1987). Need analysis: Tools for the human service and education. Applied Social Research Methods Series. Scribbr. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1573668925038214784
McNiff, J. (2013). Action research: Principles and practice (2nd Ed.). Routledge.
McTaggart, R. (1994). Participatory action research: Issues in theory and practice. Educational action research, 2(3), 313-337. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965079940020302
Mertler, C. A. (Ed.). (2019). The Wiley handbook of action research in education. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119399490.ch12
Mohd Ridhuan, M. J., Saedah, S., Zaharah, H., Nurulrabihah, M. N., & Arifin, S. (2014). Pengenalan asas kaedah Fuzzy Delphi dalam penyelidikan rekabentuk pembangunan. Minda Intelek Agency.
Murray, T. J., Pipino, L. L., & Van Gigch, J. P. (1985). A pilot study of fuzzy set modification of Delphi. Human Systems Management, 5(1), 76-80. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-1985-5111
Nolen, A. L., & Putten, J. V. (2007). Action research in education: Addressing gaps in ethical principles and practices. Educational researcher, 36(7), 401-407. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X07309
Othman, N., & Yee, C. S. (2015). Empowering teaching, learning, and supervision through coaching in action research. Journal of Management Research, 7(2), 98-108.
Pandiyan, V., & Chandran, V. G. R. (2009). Research methods: A simple guide for business undergraduates. Malaysia: UPENA.
Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025. (2012). Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Powell, C. (2003). The Delphi technique: myths and realities. Journal of advanced nursing, 41(4), 376-382. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2003.02537.x
Rahimah, J., Abu, R., Ismail, H., & Rashid, A. (2014). Teachers' Self-Efficacy in Teaching Family Life Education. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 22(3). Scribbr. http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/pjssh
Richey, R. C., & Klein, J. D. (2014). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues (1st Ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203826034
Rostini, D., Syam, R. Z. A., & Achmad, W. (2022). The Significance of Principal Management on Teacher Performance and Quality of Learning. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(2), 2513-2520. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i2.1721
Schostak, J. (1999). Action research and the point instant of change. Educational Action Research, 7(3), 399-417.
Somekh, B. (1995). The contribution of action research to development in social endeavours: a position paper on action research methodology. British Educational Research Journal, 21(3), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192950210307
Strohmeier, S. (2020). Smart HRM–a Delphi study on the application and consequences of the Internet of Things in Human Resource Management. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(18), 2289-2318. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2018.1443963
Tembren, A., & Tahar, M. M. (2022). Penerimaan guru terhadap pelaksanaan program pendidikan khas integrasi (PPKI) di daerah Sibu. Jurnal Dunia Pendidikan, 4(1), 127-144. Scribbr. https://myjms.mohe.gov.my/index.php/jdpd/article/view/17463
Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenney, S., & Nieveen, N. (Eds.). (2006). Educational design research. Routledge.
Vebrianto, R., Thahir, M., Putriani, Z., Mahartika, I., & Ilhami, A. (2020). Mixed Methods Research: Trends and Issues in Research Methodology. Bedelau: Journal of Education and Learning, 1(2), 63-73. https://doi.org/10.55748/bjel.v1i2.35
Wulandari, D., Narmaditya, B. S., Utomo, S. H., & Prayi, P. H. (2019). Teachers’ perception on classroom action research. KnE Social Sciences, 313-320. Scribbr. https://knepublishing.com/index.php/Kne-Social/article/view/4015
Yee, C. L., & Teoh, K. G. C. (2015). Developing a Roadmapping System for Knowledge Management in an Organisation. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 22, 83-100. Scribbr. http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/pjssh
Zuber-Skerritt, O. (2013). Professional development in higher education: A theoretical framework for action research (1st Ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315799872
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Nor Hasimah Hashim, Huzairi Mohd Sani, Indera Syahril Ismail, Suhaida Shaari, Melati Jilon, Azizah Sharif, Ahmad Rafaai Ayudin, Afidah Ahmad Sahari, Ahmad Hanizar Abdul Halim, Jamelaa Bibi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
