UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris |
| This study aims to assess the mastery of students who study the historical subjects based on the economic title and study the ability of students to absorb the various entrepreneurial concepts. The concept of entrepreneurship can be achieved properly by students because the theme or the economic title is described in various aspects of its importance and also the weakness by the teacher who teaches the subject of history. Through the economic title that contained in the historical curriculum, various economic activities that have become historical materials are taught by historical teachers. The finding shows that there is a lack in the context of the ability of students to study the economic theme as most respondents only master the historical facts and use less of these facts to see the importance of learning the economic themes in historical learning. There are respondents who just state that with a business can generate wealth. However, respondents are less likely to say about raw materials that can be created on different forms of goods through creative ideas. The conclusions from this study found that students studying historical subjects have not reached the level of analysis and evaluated historical facts leading to the mastery of various concepts, especially entrepreneurship. The implication of the study requires that teachers, especially history subject to be taught at school level, not only emphasize historical facts. It is important so that among the student whose studying economic themes in historical subjects in constructing various meanings of career as entrepreneurs in the future.
|
| References |
1. Ghazali, A. Z. (2005) Pasir Salak, Pusat Gerakan Menentang British di Perak, Yayasan Perak, Melissa, A., Norazalina, M. G. & Sazali. (2007), Pendekatan Proses Dalam Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran. 2. Angelo, Thomas, A. & Cross, K. P. (1993), Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers, San Francisco: Jossey- Bass Publisher. 3. Ausubel, David, P. (1967), Learning Theory and classroom Practice, Ontario. Baron, Joan, B. and Sternbergs, R. J.(ed), (1987), Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and practice , New York: Longman. 4. Block, J. H. (1971) Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 5. Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H. & Krathwohl, D. R.(1956), Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational objective, Book 1, Cognitive domain, New York: Logman. 6. Bloom, B. S. (1981) All Our Children learning, New York: McGraw-Hill 7. Carroll, B. S. (1963). A model of school learning. Teacher College Record. 8. Cavana, R. Y., Delahaye, B. L. & Sekaran, U. (2001)”Applied Business Research, Qualitative Method”. Milton Queensland. John Willey & Sons Australia, Ltd. 9. Colton. (1978) A History of the Modern World, New York: Alferd A. Knopf, fifth edition. 10. Philips, L. (2008) teaching History, Developing as a Reflective Secondary Teacher, SAGE. London, 11. Lorin, W., Anderson and David R. K. (2001)A Taxonomy for learning teaching and Assessing, London. 12. Hashim, N., Othman, N. & Buang, N. (2009), “Konsep Kesediaan Keusahawanan Berdasarkan Kajian Kes Usahawan Industri Kecil dan Sederhana(IKS) di Malaysia, “Jurnal Pendidikan 34(1): 187-203. |
| 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. |