Model struktural pembelajaran Biologi

Jalaluddin Siti Norafizan, Che Ahmad Che Nidzam,

Full Text

Kajian telah dijalankan bagi mengkaji hubungan antara konstruk konsep kendiri akademik, hubungan guru-pelajar dan libatsama terhadap tahap pencapaian pembelajaran biologi seperti yang diusulkan dalam model struktural pembelajaran biologi. Kajian ini juga bertujuan menguji sama ada libatsama adalah pembolehubah penengah di antara hubungan konsep kendiri akademik, dan pembolehubah hubungan guru-pelajar terhadap pencapaian pelajar dalam bidang biologi. Ketiga-tiga konstruk ini dipercayai saling berkait dan dijangka memainkan peranan yang penting dalam mempengaruhi pencapaian biologi dalam kalangan pelajar tingkatan empat. Pendekatan kajian kuantitatif ini menggunakan rekabentuk tinjauan. Sampel terdiri daripada 500 orang pelajar tingkatan empat yang mengambil subjek biologi. Responden dipilih secara rawak kelompok. Terdapat 4 jenis instrumen yang digunakan dalam kajian ini iaitu; 1) soal selidik konsep-kendiri akademik, 2) soal selidik hubungan guru-pelajar, 3) soal selidik libatsama dan 4) tahap pencapaian pelajar akan diukur berdasarkan markah biologi pelajar dalam peperiksaan akhir tahun. Keputusan kajian rintis menunjukkan instrumen-instrumen ini mempunyai kesahan kandungan dan kebolehpercayaan yang memuaskan. Data dianalisis menggunakan statistik deskriptif dan analisis model persamaan berstruktur bagi mengenalpasti hubungan dan laluan antara pembolehubah-pembolehubah yang diuji. Hasil dapatan kajian ini diharap akan menyumbangkan kefahaman yang lebih mendalam mengenai pembelajaran biologi serta memberi maklumat yang mungkin membantu meningkatkan pencapaian biologi pelajar bersandarkan model struktural pembelajaran biologi yang bakal dibentuk, yang mana merangkumi keempat-empat pembolehubah yang dikaji.

References

1. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the student engagement instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427–445. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002. 2. Bong, M., & Clark, R. E. (1999). Comparison between self-concept and self-efficacy in academic motivation research. Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 139–153. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3403. 3. Chua Yan Piaw. (2011). Kaedah dan statistik penyelidikan: Buku 1 kaedah penyelidikan. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw-Hill (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. 4. Chua Yan Piaw. (2012). Asas statistik penyelidikan. Buku 2. Kuala Lumpur: The McGraw Hill Companies. 5. Cohen, J. (1992a). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. 6. Cohen, J. (1992b). Statistical power analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(3), 98–101. 7. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104. 8. Davis, L. L. (1992). Instrument review: Getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research, 5(4), 194–197. doi:10.1016/S0897-1897(05)80008-4. 9. Gavidia-Payne, S., Denny, B., Davis, K., Francis, A., & Jackson, M. (2014). Children’s self-concept: Parental school engagement and student–teacher relationships in rural and urban Australia. Social Psychology of Education, 18(1), 121–136. doi:10.1007/s11218-014-9277-3. 10. Gehlbach, H., Brinkworth, M. E., & Harris, A. D. (2012). Changes in teacher-student relationships. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 690–704. doi:10.1111/j.2044- 8279.2011.02058.x. 11. Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, H. M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students’ cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(4), 462–482. doi:10.1016/j. cedpsych.2004.01.006. 12. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis (7th Ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall. 13. Hardy, G. (2013). Academic self-concept: Modeling and measuring for Science. Research in Science Education. doi:10.1007/s11165-013-9393-7. 14. Hill, R. (1998). What sample size is “enough” in internet survey research? Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 6(3), 1–10. 15. Huang, C. (2012). Discriminant and incremental validity of self-concept and academic self-efficacy: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology, 32(6), 777–805. doi:10.1080/01443410.2012.732386. 16. Johanson, G. A., & Brooks, G. P. (2010). Initial scale development: Sample size for pilot studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 70(3), 394–400. doi:10.1177/0013164409355692. 17. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia. (2012). Spesifikasi kurikulum biologi tingkatan 4. (Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum, Ed.). Putrajaya. 18. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2011). Ringkasan eksekutif pelan pembangunan pendidikan Malaysia 2013-2025. Putrajaya. 19. Klem, A. M., & Connell, J. P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to student engagement and achievement. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 262–73. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15493703. 20. Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607–610. 21. Lawson, M. A., & Lawson, H. A. (2013). New conceptual frameworks for student engagement research, policy, and practice. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 432–479. doi:10.3102/0034654313480891. 22. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41(9), 954–969. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954. 23. Marsh, H. W., & O’Mara, A. (2008). Reciprocal effects between academic self-concept, selfesteem, achievement, and attainment over seven adolescent years: Unidimensional and multidimensional perspectives of self-concept. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(4), 542–52. doi:10.1177/0146167207312313. 24. Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement and achievement: Yields for theory, current issues and educational practice. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 327–365. 25. Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., & Allen, J. P. (2012). Teacher-student relationships and engagement: Conceptualizing, measuring, and improving the capacity of classroom interactions. In Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 356–386). doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7. 26. Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29, 489–497. doi:10.1002/nur. 27. Rohani Arbaa, Hazri Jamil, & Nordin Abd. Razak. (2010). Hubungan guru-pelajar dan kaitannya dengan komitmen belajar pelajar : Adakah guru berkualiti menghasilkan perbezaan pembelajaran antara jantina pelajar ? Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 35(2), 61–69. 28. Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents’ motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437–460. doi:10.3102/00028312038002437. 29. Schaufeli, W. B., Martinez, I. M., Pinto, A. M., Salanova, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). Burnout and engagement in university students: A cross-national study. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 464–481. doi:10.1177/0022022102033005003. 30. Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. 31. Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2013). School goal structure: Associations with students’ perceptions of their teachers as emotionally supportive, academic self-concept, intrinsic motivation, effort, and help seeking behavior. International Journal of Educational Research, 61, 5–14. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.03.007. 32. Türkdoğan, T., & DURU, E. (2012). The role of basic needs fulfillment in prediction of subjective well-being among university students *. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(4), 2440–2446. 33. Wang, M.-T., & Eccles, J. S. (2011). Adolescent behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement trajectories in school and their differential relations to educational success. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 22(1), 31–39. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2011.00753.x. 34. Wang, M.-T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633–662. doi:10.3102/0002831209361209. 35. Yeung, A. S., Kuppan, L., Foong, S. K., Wong, D. J. S., Kadir, M. S., & Yau, C. M. (2010). Domainspecificity of self-concept and parent expectation influences on short-term and long-term learning of Physics. New Horizons in Education, 58(2), 54–72.