UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
Kajian kuasi eksperimen ini bertujuan menilai pendekatan pembezaan pengajaran terhadap pencapaian dan sikap murid terhadap kimia. Teknik pensampelan rawak mudah digunakan dalam kajian ini yang melibatkan dua buah sekolah menengah harian dari daerah Kuala Kangsar, Perak. Seramai 73 orang murid tingkatan empat terlibat dalam kajian ini yang mengikuti pendekatan pembezaan pengajaran inkuiri 5E dan pengajaran inkuiri 5E bagi tajuk ikatan kimia yang berlangsung selama dua minggu. Instrumen yang digunakan dalam kajian ini ialah Ujian Pencapaian Kimia dan Soal Selidik Sikap Terhadap Kimia. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan bahawa terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan bagi skor min ujian pra antara kumpulan eksperimen dan kumpulan kawalan. Apabila perbezaan dalam skor min ujian pra dilaraskan, didapati pendekatan pengajaran tidak menunjukkan kesan yang signifikan terhadap skor min ujian pasca. Ini bermakna, tidak terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam skor min ujian pasca antara kumpulan eksperimen dan kumpulan kawalan. Kajian ini juga mendapati kedua-dua kumpulan eksperimen dan kawalan menunjukkan peningkatan yang signifikan dalam ujian pra dan ujian pasca bagi Ujian Pencapaian Kimia. Kajian juga mendapati bahawa terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan dalam sikap terhadap kimia antara kumpulan eksperimen dan kumpulan kawalan. Kesimpulannya, pendekatan pembezaan pengajaran tidak mempunyai kesan yang signifikan terhadap pencapaian murid tetapi menunjukkan kesan yang signifikan dalam sikap murid terhadap kimia. Implikasinya, pendekatan pembezaan pengajaran dapat menggalakkan penglibatan murid secara aktif semasa pembelajaran dan memupuk sikap positif murid terhadap kimia. Oleh itu, pendekatan pembezaan pengajaran boleh menyokong dan memudahkan pembelajaran murid dalam kimia. |
References |
Abu Hassan Kassim & Che Zubaidah Deris. (2012). Tahap pemahaman konsep jadual berkala dan struktur atom serta aplikasinya dalam kalangan pelajar sekolah menengah di Daerah Gua Musang, Kelantan. Jurnal Sains dan Matematik, 4, 43-52.
Ahmad, R.N. & Asghar, S.K. (2011). Attitude towards biology and its effects on student‟s achievement. International Journal of Biology, 3, 100-104.
Aziz Nordin & Lin, H.L. (2010). Hubungan sikap terhadap mata pelajaran sains dan penguasaan konsep asas sains pelajar tingkatan dua. Diperolehi pada 7 Oktober 2015, daripada http://eprints.utm.my/11404/
Barmby, P., Kind, P.M. & Jones, K. (2008). Examining changing attitudes in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1075-1093.
Beliavsky, N. (2006). Revisiting Vygotsky and Gardner: Realizing human potential. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 40, 1-11.
Brown, J.D. (2011). Likert items and scales of measurement? Shiken: JALT testing & evaluation SIG newsletter, 15, 10-14. Bybee, R.W., Taylor, J.A., Gardner, A., Scotter, P.V., Powell, J.C., Westbrook, A. &
Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins, effectiveness and applications executive summary. Colorado Spring: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study.
Chapman, C. & King, R. (2014). Planning and organizing standard-based differentiated instruction (Edisi 2). California: Corwin.
Cherry, K. (2014). What is the experimental group? Diperolehi pada 30 Januari 2016, daripada http://psychology.about.com/od/eindex/fl/What-Is-the-ExperimentalGroup.htm
Cherry, K. (2016). What is the control group? Diperolehi pada 30 Januari 2016, daripada http://psychology.about.com/od/cindex/g/control-group.htm
Cheung, D. (2009). Developing a scale to measure students‟ attitudes toward chemistry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 2185-2203.
Cheung, D. (2011). Evaluating student attitudes toward chemistry lessons to enhance teaching in the secondary school. Educación Química, 22, 117-122.
Chua, Y.P. (2014). Buku 2: Asas statistik penyelidikan (Edisi 3). Shah Alam: McGraw-Hill Education.
Coll, R.K. & Taylor, N. (2001). Alternative conceptions of chemical bonding held by upper secondary and tertiary students. Research in Science & Technological Education, 19, 171-191.
Collins, B. C. (2013). Teaching chemistry concepts using differentiated instruction via tiered labs and activity menus. Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. East Lansing: Michigan State University.
Daniel, E. (2010). Cerebal influence in Malaysian science teaching and learning: Word, images or both? Jurnal Pendidikan, 30, 85-110.
Demircioğlu, G., Aslan, A. & Yadigaroğlu, M. (2014). Exploratory factor analysis study for the scale of high school students‟ attitudes towards chemistry. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 5, 38-45.
Eng, N.H, Lim, E.W. & Lim, Y.C. (2016). Focus SPM Kimia. Bangi: Penerbitan Pelangi Sdn. Bhd.
Farhana Wan Yunus & Zainun Mat Ali. (2013). Attitude towards learning chemistry among secondary school students in Malaysia. Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies, 3, 1-11.
Franklin, S. (2006). VAKing out learning styles-why the notion of „learning styles‟ is unhelpful to teachers. Education 3-13, 34, 81-87.
Fundi, S. K. (2016). The effect of matching learning styles and instructional strategies on academic achievement and student enjoyment of science lessons in a high school general chemistry course. Disertasi Doktor Falsafah yang tidak diterbitkan. Atlanta: Mercer University.
Gardner, H. (1987). The theory of multiple intelligences. Annals of Dyslexia, 37, 19- 35.
Gregory, G. & Chapman, C. (2012). Differentiated instructional strategies: One size doesn’t fit all (Edisi 3). Thousand Oak, CA: Corwin.
Hilton, A. & Nichols, K. (2011). Representational classroom practices that contribute to students‟ conceptual and representational understanding of chemical bonding. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 2215-2246.
Hofstein, A. & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2011). High school students‟ attitudes toward and interest in learning chemistry. Educación Química, 22, 90-102.
Ikhsan Othman & Rohizani Yaakub. (2010). Aplikasi teori kecerdasan pelbagai dalam pelaksanaan kurikulum. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 25, 21-32.
Johnstone, A.H. (1991). Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 75-83.
Joyce, B., Weil, M. & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of teaching (Edisi 8). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Kalpana Thakur. (2014). Differentiated instruction in the inclusive classroom. Research Journal of Educational Sciences, 2, 10-14.
Kamisah Osman, Zanaton Iksan & Lilia Halim. (2007). Sikap terhadap sains dan sikap saintifik di kalangan pelajar sains. Jurnal Pendidikan, 32, 39-60.
Kan, A. & Akbas, A. (2006). Affective factors that influence chemistry achievement (attitude and self-efficacy) and the power of these factors to predict chemistry achievement - I. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 3, 76-85.
Kapusnick, R.A. & Hauslein, C.M. (2001). The „silver cup‟ of differentiated instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 37, 156-159.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2012). Spesifikasi kurikulum kimia tingkatan 4. Putrajaya: Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum.
Kind, P., Jones, K. & Barmby, P. (2007). Developing attitudes towards science measures. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 871-893.
Konstantinou-Katzi, P., Tsolaki, E., Meletiou-Mavrotheris & Koutselini, M. (2013). Differentiation of teaching and learning mathematics: An action research study in tertiary education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44, 332-349.
Lanzo, M.K. (2011). Will differentiated instruction through mixed ability grouping improve the attitude of the struggling student toward mathematics? Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. New Jersey: Caldwell College.
Lee, M.P., Thang, S.M. & Radha, M.K.N. (2015). Matching teaching styles and learning styles: What happens in the case of a mismatch? International Conference on Social Sciences & Humanities. Theme: Knowledge for Social Transformation & Development in the 21st Century, Special Issue 1, 66-76.
Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia. (2016). Analisis bertopik kertas soalan peperiksaan sebenar 2009-2015 SPM Chemistry. Kajang: Cepat Cetak Sdn. Bhd.
Levy, H.M. (2008). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: Helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, 81, 161-164.
Llewellyn, D. (2002). Inquire within: Implementing inquiry-based science standards. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E. & Graetz, J.E. (2005). Cognition and learning in inclusive high school chemistry classes. Cognition and learning in diverse settings, 18, 107-118.
Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E., Norland, J.J., Berkeley, S., McDuffie, K., Tornquist, E.H., et al. (2006). Differentiated curriculum enhancement in inclusive middle school science: Effects on classroom and high-stakes tests. The Journal of Special Education, 40, 130-137.
Mohd Hasrul Kamarulzaman, Hazita Azman & Azizah Mohd Zahidi. (2015). Differentiation practices among the English teachers at PERMATApintar national gifted and talented center. Asian Social Science, 11, 346-351.
Mohd Nor Bakar & Nur Afza Ayob. (2010). Masalah pembelajaran mengenai topik ikatan kimia dalam konteks penyelesaian masalah di kalangan pelajar tingkatan empat. Diperolehi pada 2 Disember 2015, daripada http://eprints.utm.my/11556/
Mok, S.S. (2009). Psikologi pendidikan & pedagogi: Murid dan alam belajar (Edisi 4). Selangor: Penerbitan Multimedia Sdn. Bhd.
Morgan, H. (2014). Maximizing student success with differentiated learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 87, 34-38.
Muhammad, J.L., Asghar, S. & Ahmad, A. (2011). A validity study of attitudes toward science scale among Iranian secondary school students. International Education Studies, 4, 36-47.
Muthomi, M.W. & Mbugua, Z.K. (2014). Effectiveness of differentiated instruction on secondary school students achievement in mathematics. International Journal of Applied Science and Technology, 4, 116-122.
Nahum, T.L, Mamlok-Naaman, R., Hofstein, A. & Taber, K.S. (2010). Teaching and learning the concept of chemical bonding. Studies in Science Education, 46, 179-207.
Najiba Abdullah Meyad, Samsilah Roslan, Maria Chong Abdullah, Pabiyah Maming. (2010). The effect of differentiated learning method in teaching Arabic language on students‟ motivation. Journal of Social Sciences Research, 4, 671- 678.
Nik Zarini Nik Kar & Salmiza Saleh. (2012). Kesan pendekatan inkuiri penemuan terhadap pencapaian pelajar dalam mata pelajaran kimia. Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, 27, 159-174.
Nunley, K.F. (2006). Differentiating the high school classroom: Solution strategies for 18 common obstacles. California: Corwin Press.
Osborne, J., Simon, S. & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079.
Pallant, J. (2013). SPSS survival manual (Edisi 5). Berkshire: Open University Press. Pejabat Pendidikan Daerah Kuala Kangsar. (2014). Peperiksaan Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (2009-2013): Analisis mata pelajaran kimia mengikut sekolah. Ipoh: Jabatan Pendidikan Perak.
Popescu, E. (2009). Addressing learning style criticism: The unified learning style model revisited. Dalam M. Spaniol, Q. Li, R. Klamma, & R.W.H. Lau (eds.), Advances in web based learning–ICWL 2009, LNCS 5686 (ms 332-342). Germany: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Rasidah Rashid. (2007). Hubungan antara gaya pembelajaran dengan motivasi dalam kalangan pelajar di sebuah sekolah menengah luar bandar, Sabah. Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. Johor Bahru: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Reid, J.M. (1984). Perceptual learning style preference questionnaire. Dalam J.M. Reid, (ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (ms 202-204). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Robinson, W.R. (1998). An alternative framework for chemical bonding. Journal of Chemical Education, 75, 1074-1075.
Rohani Arbaa, Hazri Jamil & Nordin Abd Razak. (2013). Hubungan guru-pelajar dan kaitannya dengan komitmen belajar pelajar: Adakah guru berkualiti menghasilkan perbezaan pembelajaran antara jantina pelajar? Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 35, 61-69
Rojo, P. (2013). Studying the effects of differentiated instruction in the science classroom. Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. Bozeman: Montana State University.
Rugg, G. & Petre, M. (2007). A gentle guide to research methods. Berkshire: Open University Press.
Salmiza Saleh & Afik Aziz. (2012). Teaching practices among secondary school teachers in Malaysia. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research, 47, 63-67.
Salvucci, S., Walter, E., Conley, V. Fink, S. & Saba, M. (1997). Measurement error studies at the National Center for Eduation Statistics (NCES). Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Santangelo, T. & Tomlinson, C.A. (2012). Teacher educators‟ perceptions and use of differentiated instruction practices: An exploratory investigation. Action in Teacher Education, 34, 309-327.
Scardino, R.M. (2011). The effects of differentiated instruction on understanding middle school science concepts. Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. Bozeman: Montana State University.
Schmidt, H.G. (1994). Problem-based learning: An introduction. Instructional Science, 22, 247-250.
Schunk, D.H., Pintrich, P.R. & Meece, J.L. (2008). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications (Edisi 3). New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Smith, A. (1998). Accelerated learning in practice: Brain-based methods for accelerating motivation and achievement. London: Network Educational Press Ltd.
Suriati Sulaiman & Tajularipin Sulaiman. (2010). Application of multiple intelligences teaching approach in classroom instruction based on POMAT model. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 20, 41-72.
Suzana Abd. Mutalib & Jamil Ahmad. (2012a). Penggunaan teknik pentaksiran formatif dalam subjek Bahasa Melayu darjah satu: Kajian kes. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu, 2, 17-30.
Suzana Abd. Mutalib & Jamil Ahmad. (2012b). The use of formative assessment techniques in the Geography subject: A case study. International Journal of Assessment and Evaluation in Education, 2, 19-31.
Taber, K.S. (1998). An alternative conceptual framework from chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 597-608.
Taylor, B.K. (2015). Content, process, and product: Modeling differentiated instruction. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 51, 13-17.
Tomlinson, C.A. & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding by design: Connecting content and kids. Virginia, Amerika Syarikat: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C.A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. USA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Treagust, D., Chittleborough, G. & Mamiala, T. (2003). The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1353-1368.
Tuckman, B.W. & Monetti, D.M. (2011). Educational psychology. USA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Veloo, A., Rahimah Nor & Rozalina Khalid. (2015). Attitude towards physics and additional mathematics achievement towards physics achievement. International Education Studies, 8, 35-43.
Wan Zah Wan Ali, Sharifah Md Nor, Siti Suria Salim, Othman Mohamed, Kamariah Abu Bakar, Arshad Abd. Samad, et al. (2009). Persepsi murid berisiko terhadap iklim pembelajaran. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 34, 17-36.
Westbrook, A. F. (2011). The effects of differentiating instruction by learning styles. Disertasi Ijazah Sarjana yang tidak diterbitkan. Georgia: LaGrange College.
Winnie, S.S.L. & Mohammad Yusof Arshad. (2014). Verbal interaction in chemistry secondary school classrooms. Jurnal Teknologi, 66, 21-26.
Yüksel, M. & Geban, Ö. (2014). A study of the prediction of academic achievement in the chemistry course. Education and Science, 39, 354-365.
Zubair, A.S. & Nasir, M. (2011). Developing a scale to measure attitude towards science learning among school students. Bulletin of Education and Research, 33, 71-81. |
This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |