2 Alat Kolaboratif PLC 2019

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 151

Common Assessments

According to Lewis Johnson, Director of
Testing and Research, RCS, a common
assessment is any means of measuring
student performance
that meets these criteria for:

Content of the test
Timing of the test
Use of the results

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 152

 The items or tasks measure a set of skills that were taught or will be taught (as in
a common pre-assessment).

 Has at a majority of the items which are exactly the ―same‖ so performance on
these items can be compared between teachers. Additional items may be added to
individualize the assessment, BUT a score must be derived for the SAME items for
each student by ALL teachers.

 Is administered by all teachers teaching the same content to somewhat equivalent
groups of students.

 The assessment needs to have been administered to students at nearly the same
point in time relative to the teaching of the curriculum. For example the Algebra 1
benchmark is a common assessment. However, students in the semester-long
course take benchmark #1 at the end of the first 6 weeks, while the year-long
students take the benchmark at the end of the first 12 weeks.

 Common assessment should be collaboratively developed so that every teacher has
an understanding of what the expected learning outcomes for their students and a
greater understanding of the curriculum. Creating common assessments is a
significantly important PLC task.

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 153

Why We Create And Use Common Assessments?

 By Rick Dufour, Becky Dufour, And Bob Eaker September 2007

 Authors Of Learn By Doing.

 We received a question from a principal of a high-performing middle
school who wrote: ―Although we have made significant growth in many of
the core components of a professional learning community we continue
to struggle with the perception of teacher autonomy as a result of
attempting to create common assessments. A number of teachers
continue to believe that common assessments restricts their ability to
differentiate instruction from their colleagues.... our staff still remains
hesitant to fully engage in meaningful collaboration which would result in
creating common assessments and sharing instructional practices.

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 154

We have offered our own arguments as to why assessments created by a team of teachers are superior to the
formal assessments developed by a teacher working in isolation.

1. Team-developed common assessments are more efficient.

 If five teachers teaching the same course or grade level are responsible for ensuring all students acquire the
same knowledge and skills, it make sense those teachers would work together to determine the best methods
to assess student learning. A team of teachers could divide responsibilities for creating a unit and developing
assessments. Teachers working in isolation replicate and duplicate effort. They work hard, but they do not
work smart.

2.Team-developed common assessments are more equitable.

 The use of common assessments increases the likelihood that students will have access to the same
curriculum, acquire the same essential knowledge and skills, take assessments of the same rigor, and have
their work judged according to the same criteria. We have witnessed repeated examples of teachers who were
emphatic about the need for consistency, equity, and fairness in terms of how they were dealt with as adults,
being completely unconcerned about the inconsistency, inequity, and lack of fairness that characterized the
assessment of student learning in their school. If every teacher has license to assess whatever and however he
or she determines, according to criteria unique to and often known only by that teacher, schools will never be
institutions that truly model a commitment to equity.

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 155

3. Team-developed common formative assessments are more effective in monitoring and improving student learning.

 We have cited several researchers who have concluded that team-developed common formative assessments are one of the most powerful strategies available to
educators for improving student achievement. We know of no research concluding the formal assessments created by individual teachers working in isolation
advance student learning.

3. Team-developed common formative assessments can inform and improve the practice of both individual teachers and teams of teachers.

 Teachers do not suffer from a lack of data. Virtually every time a teacher gives an ssessment of any kind, the teacher is able to generate data – mean, mode,
median, standard deviation, percentage failing, percentage passing, and so on. As Robert Waterman (1987) advised, however, data alone do not inform practice.
Data cannot help educators identify the strengths and weaknesses of their strategies. Data inform only when they are presented in context, which almost always
requires a basis of comparison.

 Most educators can teach an entire career and not know if they teach a particular concept more or less effectively than the teacher next door because the
assessments they generate for their isolated classrooms never provide them with a basis of comparison. Most educators can assess their students year after year,
get consistently low results in a particular area, and not be certain if those results reflect his or her teaching strategies, a weakness in the curriculum, a failure
on the part of teachers in earlier grades to ensure students develop a prerequisite skill, or any other cause. In short, most educators operate within the confines
of data, which means they operate in the dark. But in a PLC, collaborative teams create a series of common assessments, and therefore every teacher receives
ongoing feedback regarding the proficiency of his or her students, in achieving a standard the team has agreed is essential, on an assessment the team has
agreed represents a valid way to assesses what members intend for all students to learn, in comparison to other students attempting to achieve the same
standard.That basis of comparison transforms data into information.

 Furthermore, as Richard Elmore (2006) wrote, ―teachers have to feel that there is some compelling reason for them to practice differently, with the best direct
evidence being that students learn better‖ (p. 38). When teachers are presented with clear evidence their students are not becoming proficient in skills they
agreed were essential, as measured on an assessment they helped to create, and that similar students taught by their colleagues have

 demonstrated proficiency on the same assessment, they are open to exploring new practices. When the performance of their students consistently prevents
their team from achieving its goals, they are typically willing to address the problem. In fact, we consider team-developed common formative assessments one
of the most powerful motivators for

 stimulating teachers to consider changes in their practice

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 156

5. Team-developed common formative assessments can build the capacity of the team to achieve at higher levels.

 As Wiliam and Thompson (2007) found, the conversations surrounding the creation of common formative assessments are
a powerful tool for professional development. When schools ensure every teacher has been engaged in a process to
clarify what students are to learn and how their learning will be assessed, they promote the clarity essential to effective
teaching. When teachers have access to each other’s ideas, methods, and materials they can expand their repertoire of
skills. When a team discovers the current curriculum and their existing instructional strategies are ineffective in helping
students acquire essential skills, its members are able to pursue the most powerful professional development because it
is specific, job-embedded and relevant to the context of their content, their strategies, their team, and their students.

6. Team-developed common formative assessments are essential to systematic interventions when students do not learn.

 We argue that if educators were truly committed to high levels of learning for all students, they would not leave the
question, ―what happens when some students do learn‖ to chance. They would instead, work together to create systems
of intervention to ensure any student who struggles receives additional time and support for learning in a timely and
directive way. Team-developed common formative assessments are a critical element of that system of intervention.

 Not every assessment should be a common assessment. There is still a place for individual teachers to create their own
formal assessments. Team-developed common assessments will never eliminate the need for individual teachers to
monitor student learning each day through a wide variety of strategies that check for understanding. But if schools are
ever to take full advantage of the power of assessment to impact student learning in a posit

 ive way, they must include common formative assessments in their arsenal. Professional learning communities will make
team-developed common formative assessments a cornerstone of their work.

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 157

What Are Common Formative Assessments?

 Periodic or interim assessments collaboratively designed by grade-level
or course teams of teachers

 Designed as matching pre-and post-assessments to ensure same-
assessment to same-assessment comparison of student growth

 Similar in design and format to district and state assessments

 Items should represent essential (Power) standards only

 A blend of item types, including selected-response (multiple choice,
true/false, matching) and constructed-response (short- or extended)

 Administered to all students in grade level or course several times
during the quarter, semester, trimester, or entire school year

 Student results analyzed in Data Teams to guide instructional planning
and delivery

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 158

What Are the Guidelines for Designing Common Formative
Assessments?

 Identify and vertically align Power Standards in content areas for each grade
level and course, preK–12.

 Determine important topics to assess with common formative assessment;
locate the Power Standards that match those topics.

 ―Unwrap‖ the Power Standards for those topics to pinpoint concepts and skills
students need to know and be able to do.

 From those ―unwrapped‖ Power Standards, determine Big Ideas that represent
the integrated understanding students need to gain.

 Collaboratively design common formative pre-and post-assessments—aligned to
one another—that assess student understanding of the concepts, skills, and Big
Ideas from the ―unwrapped‖ Power Standards.

 Include both selected-response and constructed-response items.

 Review items to determine if student assessment results will provide evidence
of proficiency regarding the Power Standards in focus; modify items as needed.

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 159

What Are the Benefits of Using Common Formative Assessments?

 Regular and timely feedback regarding student attainment of most critical
standards, which allows teachers to modify instruction to better meet the
diverse learning needs of all students

 Multiple-measure assessments that allow students to demonstrate their
understanding in a variety of formats

 Ongoing collaboration opportunities for grade-level, course, and department
teachers

 Consistent expectations within a grade level, course, and department regarding
standards, instruction, and assessment priorities

 Agreed-upon criteria for proficiency to be met within each individual classroom,
grade level, school, and district

 Deliberate alignment of classroom, school, district, and state assessments to
better prepare students for success on state assessments

 Results that have predictive value as to how students are likely to do on each
succeeding assessment, in time to make instructional modifications

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 160

PROBLEM
SOLVING GROUP

(PSG)

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 161

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 162

Satu kumpulan guru

yang bersama-sama

membincangkan suatu
masalah/isu. Guru

memberi deskripsi tentang
suatu masalah. Guru-guru
yang lain bersama-sama
meminta penjelasan dan

mengemukakan cadangan
penyelesaian masalah/isu.

Naa

OBJEKTIF PSG

1. Mewujudkan amalan kolaboratif di
kalangan guru dengan menganalisis
isu dan keputusan secara bersama-
sama.

2. Meningkatkan pencapaian murid
dengan menyelesaikan isu / masalah
dalam bilik darjah.

3. Membantu guru mencapai hasil
yang diingini daripada piawai yang

ditetapkan.

5

Kategori masalah

1. Masalah rutin - masalah yang biasa dan kerap berlaku, perlu
diselesaikan segera, sifat masalah diketahui, cara
penyelesaian mudah serta sedia diketahui.

2. Masalah bukan Rutin – timbul bila sesuatu itu menyimpang
dari yang sepatutnya, punca tidak diketahui tetapi
memerlukan kaedah penyelesaian masalah untuk atasinya.

3. Masalah kreatif / inovatif – masalah berkaitan dengan
usaha untuk menigkatkan prestasi sesuatu keadaaan atau
sistem (pengurusan)
Beebe & Masterson (1994)

Naa

AHLI PSG

Ahli dalam kumpulan penyelesai masalah
tidak tetap. Ia boleh berubah mengikut
isu /masalah yang hendak diselesaikan.
Ahli kumpulan boleh terdiri daripada
Fasilitator (ketua)
Pencatat
Ahli

KRITERIA /PROTOKOL
Bersikap telus
Tanya soalan
Hormat idea/rakan
Turut serta perbincangan

5



Peranan fasilitator
dalam kumpulan

• Fasilitator menjana, memantapkan dan kukuhkan
pasukan/ahli kumpulan dalam mengolah, mencorak sumber
sedia ada , bersedia membuat keputusan serta mengambil
tindakan untuk mencapai matlamat

• Membina hubungan baik antara ahli
• Berperanan sebagai `role model` untuk dorongan dan kuatan
• Memberikan ganjaran positif atau kesungguhan dan

komitmen yang ditunjukkan oleh ahli.
• Perunding dan penyelesai masalah jika timbul perbezaan

pendekatan, pendapat dan jangkaan sesame ahli.

Naa

01 Mengenalpasti masalah dan

menganalisis masalah
berdasarkan maklumat/data

02 Mencadang penyelesaian

masalah seberapa banyak yang

mungkin

Proses 03 Menilai dan meramal akibat
setiap pilihan. Perlu

Penyeles mempertimbangkan semua
aian pilihan yang mungkin

Masalah 04 Melaksasenbaekalunmcamdeangatnaysiamngasalah

terbaik. Pastikan penyelesaian

yang dipilih dapat dijayakan

05

Membuat tindakan

susulan. 5

Mengenalpasti masalah dan

01 menganalisis masalah

berdasarkan maklumat/data

PEPERIKSAAN HEADCOUNT

MAKLUMAT

ATAU DATA

UNTUK

REKOD CPD ANALISIS

BAGI KEHADIRAN

MENGENAL

PASTI

REKOD MASLAH

DISIPLIN SKPMg2

02 Mencadang penyelesaian 5

masalah seberapa banyak yang

AKTIVITI 1mungkin

LOTUS BLOSSOM
TECHNIQUE

Menilai dan meramal

03 akibat setiap pilihan.

Perlu
mempertimbangkan
semua pilihan yang
mungkin sebelum
mengatasi masalah

04 Melaksanakan cadangan yang

terbaik. Pastikan penyelesaian
yang dipilih dapat dijayakan

Punca Masalah Inisiatif/Strategi

Brainstorming

Soalan Masalah:
Bagaimanakah kita boleh

meningkatkan kualiti
sekolah dan kemenjadian
murid pada 2019?

Pusingan 1:

Fasilitator: Terangkan ground rules.

Cara: Di meja anda, janakan lebih
daripada 30 idea dengan secepat
mungkin

Berapa idea yang dijanakan?

Brainstorming

Pusingan 2:
Fasilitator baru: Terangkan ground rules.
Cara: Bangunkan idea yang dijana oleh

orang lain

Bangunkan idea untuk menyediakan PPD
1. Mengenalpasti isu dan punca masalah
2. Engage pemimpin sekolah untuk

program intervensi
3. Ukur impak intervensi

Brainstorming

Pusingan 3:
1. Apakah kemahiran dan kompetensi

yang kita perlukan?
2. Apakah perubahan yang perlu

dibuat
3. Apakah yang diperlukan?

Cara: Pusingan senyap
Tuliskan satu idea dalam satu post it

note

Analisis Tin
ggi
Cara: Pilihkan 3 idea yang
berimpak tinggi IMPAK

(Satu idea dalam satu post-it)
Letakkan idea pada Right Fight

Matrix.
Gerakkan post-its ke quadrant

sehingga terdapat 3 dalam
Star Quadrant.
Jangan keluarkan post-its dan
gabungkan idea yang sama
Bincangkan nilai untuk setiap
idea

Rend Tin
ah KOS ggi

Decision Making

1. Rumusan: Tuliskan 2-3 idea yang disetujui ramai
dalam kertas A4

2. Polling: Pilih idea yang paling bernilai dan berimpak
tinggi

3. Bentang: Umumkan keputusan kumpulan
4. Apakah nasihat yang akan anda dapatkan daripada

JPN dan BPSH?
Debrief:
Apakah yang berjalan lancar?

Apakah yang patut dibuat dengan cara yang lain?

Aplikasikan cara-cara ini dalam DTP program di setiap
peringkat.

Closing:

Ucapkan terima kasih kepada 3 orang untuk sumbangan
mereka secara spesifik.

Cadangan alat-alat untuk
penyelesaian masalah dan membuat
keputusan yang boleh digunakan

1. MATRIKS KEUTAMAAN
2. FISHBONE DIAGRAM
3. SWOT
4. PMI
5. PETA MINDA
6. DIAMOND 9
7. FORCEFIELD ANALYSIS
8. DIAGRAM POKOK

5

CRITICAL
FRIENDS GROUP

(CFG)

UNIT PENGURUSAN AKADEMIK PPDJJ 179



DEFINISI

• Merujuk kepada kumpulan guru yang komited
untuk meningkatkan prestasi sekolah. Ahli
kumpulan merupakan mereka yang menyokong
dan menggalakkan rakan-rakan lain melalui
maklumbalas yang ikhlas.

• Ahli kumpulan adalah mereka yang boleh
dipercayai dan mengutarakan soalan-soalan yang
bersifat provokotif dari perspektif yang berbeza
dan memberi kritikan membina sebagai seorang
kawan.

DEFINISI

• CFG merupakan hubungan professional yang
berasaskan kepada persefahaman dan
kesanggupan ahli kumpulan untuk dicabar dan
disoal berkenaan profesionalisme masing-masing.

KRK DARI SUDUT PLC

l“eaArncirnigticcaol mfrmieunndistygcroounpsisistinag professional
of up to 7
members who are committed to improve
their practice through collaborative learning
and structured instructions (Protocol). CFG
members meet at least once a month for
about an hour ”

NCRF, 2012



Apakah impak CFG kepada
sekolah?

• Menjadi model kepada • Menggalakkan
pembelajaran abad ke pemikiran baharu
21
• Meningkatkan
• Build Trust kemahiran
penyelesaian masalah
• Merubah budaya
sekolah • CFG adalah kolaborasi
antara guru-guru bagi
• Menyokong meningkatkan kualiti
perancangan strategik tugas secara
sekolah berterusan melalui
perkongsian matlamat,
• Membuka ruang norma dan nilai.
kepada penyelesaian
masalah

Kualiti-kualiti Penting dalam
CFG

• Berkolaborasi secara professional
• Terlibat secara khusus dalam aktiviti pdpc
• Mengetahui bahawa semua ahli CFG memiliki

kemahiran, pengalaman dan perspektif yang
berbeza
• Fokus perbincangan sangat signifikan kepada
ahli kumpulan
• Ahli CFG komited dengan pembelajaran kendiri
dan pembelajaran ahli kumpulan yang lain

KEPENTINGAN CGF

Melihat semula

hasil guru seperti RPH dan keputusan
yang dibuat oleh guru

hasil kerja murid
dilema yang wujud dalam bilik darjah dan

sekolah
kaedah sumbangsaran yang digunakan

untuk menjana idea baru dalam
perancangan RPH

Peranan Ahli Kumpulan CFG

SEBAGAI FASILITATOR

 menentukan jangka waktu dan mengawal
selia
waktu perbincangan

 menggalakkan penglibatan ahli yang lain
 mengingatkan ahli CFG peranan,

maklumbalas dan
fokus yang ditetapkan oleh pembentang

 memimpin sesi maklumbalas

Peranan Ahli Kumpulan CFG

SEBAGAI PEMBENTANG
• Membawa isu/masalah (pdpc , disiplin etc )

yang perlu dibantu
• Memahami dengan jelas soalan-soalan

yang diutarakan
• Tidak terlibat dalam perbincangan
• Membuat nota dan mendengar

perbincangan yang dijalankan

Peranan Ahli Kumpulan CFG

SEBAGAI AHLI KUMPULAN
• Fokus kepada isu/masalah yang

dibentangkan
• Memberi maklumbalas yang positif dan

kritikal
• Maklumbalas hendaklah diberi dalam

nada yang berhemah dan memberi
cadangan yang praktikal

PANDUAN PELAKSANAAN
CFG

Ahli kumpulan terdiri daripada 4 - 7 orang
Sesi pertemuan dan masa ditentukan oleh

Fasilitator
Pembentang akan mengutarakan satu isu dan ahli

kumpulan akan memberi pandangan mereka
terhadap isu tersebut
Pembentang TIDAK terlibat dalam perbincangan
isu yang dibincangkan tetapi boleh mengambil
nota semasa perbincangan dijalankan
Ahli kumpulan memberi cadangan berpandukan
kepada pengalaman dan kepakaran mereka
Perbincangan tidak merujuk kepada nama
pembentang



PROTOKOL CFG

LANGKAH 1 : TAKLIMAT FASILITATOR ( 3 MINIT )
1. Fasilitator menetapkan masa untuk perbincangan
2. Fasilitator membuat penerangan mengenai proses KRK

LANGKAH 2 : PEMBENTANGAN ISU/MASALAH OLEH
PEMBENTANG (5 MINIT)
1. Isu dibentang untuk perkongsian
2. Pembentang menerangkan konteks isu
3. Pembentang menyenaraikan beberapa soalan berkaitan
isu yang

ingin ditangani untuk mendapat pandangan dan
cadangan daripada

ahli kumpulan.

PROTOKOL CFG

LANGKAH 3 : PERSOALAN BERKAITAN ISU DAN
PENJELASAN ( 5 MINIT)

• uAnhtlui kkummepmualahnabmeiritsaundyaensgoaanlalnebkiehpjaedlaaspembentang

• Ahli kumpulan tidak dibenarkan memberi cadangan
atau memulakan perbincangan

LANGKAH 4 : PERBINCANGAN AHLI KUMPULAN ( 12
MINIT)
• Ahli kumpulan berbincang mengenai isu yang telah

dibentangkan secara positif dan kritikal
• bPoemlehbemnetanncgattaidt ankottaerlibat dengan perbincangan tetapi
• Ahli kumpulan memberi beberapa cadangan untuk

menangani isu

PROTOKOL CFG

LANGKAH 5 : MAKLUMBALAS PEMBENTANG (
5 MINIT)
• Pembentang memberi maklumbalas kepada

cadangan ahli kumpulan

LANGKAH 6 : RUMUSAN ( 5 MINIT)
• Fasilitator membuat rumusan dan memberi

penekanan terhadap proses yang berlaku
semasa perbincangan

PROTOKOL CFG

LANGKAH 7 : REFLEKSI TERHADAP
MAKLUMBALAS AHLI KUMPULAN
Contoh soalah refleksi;
1. Apakah yang difahami daripada
perbincangan ahli kumpulan yang menarik
perhatian anda?
2. Apakah perspektif baru yang telah anda
fahami daripada perbincangan kumpulan
3. Bagaimana anada boleh menggunakan idea
yang telah dikongsi oleh ahli kumpulan

TINDAKAN SUSULAN

• Menetapkan tarikh pertemuan untuk sesi
akan datang

• Menentukan pembentang yang seterusnya
• Mempersiapsiagakan keperluan bagi

memastikan kejayaan sesi seterusnya
• Membuat laporan ringkas pelaksanaan sesi

Apakah kemungkinan hasil
daripada perbincangan
kumpulan?

• Pembacaan berkaitan dengan isu
• Menangani dilema yang wujud
• Merekacipta innovasi bagi menangani isu
• Latihan Dalam Perkhidmatan berkaitan isu

berkenaan
• Merujuk kepada pakar

CFG dalam pelbagai situasi pendidikan

1. Situasi bilik darjah mendapatkan
CFG boleh dijadikan satu platform bagi guru
maklumbalas tentang tugas hakiki mereka

2. Program Perkembangan Staf
Guru boleh mendapat bantuan CFG dalam aspek perancangan dan
refleksi tentang pembangunan profesional kendiri

3. Pelbagai aspek pendidikan
Selain daripada situasi bilik darjah dan program perkembangan staf,
CFG juga boleh berperanan dalam membantu guru dalam aspek
pendidikan seperti disiplin pelajar, teknik pengajaran etc.

CFG : APA YANG ANDA PERLU
TAHU

• Konsep kritikan sering membawa kepada
fahaman yang berbentuk negatif.

• CFG perlu dibina atas dasar kepercayaan
terhadap rakan

• Perhubungan antara rakan kritikal tidak di
salah tafsirkan dengan penilaian

• Perlu mempunyai kemahiran mendengar
yang baik, boleh memperjelaskan idea dan
memberi penilaian bersifat konstruktif

• Berintergriti dalam tugas