KONVENSYEN PENYELIDIKAN PENDIDIKAN KALI KE-10 (2019) BAHAGIAN 1

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

6.3 Penilaian dan Analisis
6.3.1 Ujian Pasca Pencapaian Kimia

Min markah bagi pencapaian dalam Ujian Pasca adalah 71.41 dengan peningkatan min
daripada Ujian Pra sebanyak 4.71. Ini menunjukkan kesan intervensi yang dijalankan kurang
ketara dalam melonjakkan pencapaian peserta kajian dalam topik Elektrokimia.

Jadual 6: Perubahan markah antara ujian pra dan ujian pasca

Peserta Kajian Ujian Pra Ujian Pasca Perubahan Markah

1 58 75 +17
+33
2 67 100 +46
+4
3 50 96 +16
+4
4 71 75 -4
+17
5 67 83 +13
-5
6 75 79 +4

7 71 67 0
-25
8 75 92 -25
+12
9 79 92 0
+13
10 63 58 0
+8
11 67 71 +17
+8
12 75 75 +8
0
13 67 42 +13
-17
14 63 38 -37
+8
15 71 83 +4.74

16 79 79

17 50 63

18 67 67

19 63 71

20 54 71

21 63 71

22 63 71

23 79 79

24 58 71

25 75 58

26 67 30

27 63 71

Min 66.67 71.41

8

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

6.3.2 Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap
Analisis data yang dikumpul melalui Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap
ditunjukkan dalam Jadual 7. Dalam soal selidik tersebut, skala likert yang digunakan adalah:

1 = sangat tidak setuju 2 = tidak setuju 3 = kurang setuju 4 = setuju 5 = sangat setuju

Jadual 7: Analisis Maklum balas terhadap Soal Selidik keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap

Item Soal selidik % Min

Skala 12 3 4 5 (S.P)
1 Saya berasa seronok menggunakan Cmap dalam 59.26 14.81
0.00 0.00 25.95 59.26 14.81 3.89
pembelajaran bagi topik “Elektrokimia”. (0.64)
3.70 3.70 18.52 70.37 14.81
2 Saya dapat bekerjasama dan berkongsi idea dengan 59.26 25.95 3.78
rakan lain selepas menggunakan Cmap. (0.89)
70.37 18.52
3 Cmap membantu saya mengamalkan pembelajaran 0.00 0.00 14.81 74.07 18.52 4.00
kendiri. 0.00 0.00 14.81 (0.55)
66.67 7.41
4 Cmap membantu saya mendapatkan rujukan untuk 44.44 29.63 4.11
topik “Elektrokimia”. 55.56 18.52 (0.64)
70.37 3.70
5 Saya lebih mamahami topik “Elektrokimia” selepas 0.00 0.00 11.11 4.07
(0.55)
menggunakan Cmap.
4.11
6 Cmap memudahkan saya menghubungkaitkan 0.00 0.00 7.41 (0.51)

konsep-konsep penting dalam topik “Elektrokimia” 3.81
(0.56)
. 4.04
(0.76)
7 Cmap membantu saya menjawab soalan berkaitan 0.00 0.00 25.95 3.93
topik “Elektrokimia” dengan lebih yakin. (0.68)
3.78
8 Pendekatan ini perlu diteruskan untuk mempelajari 0.00 0.00 25.95 (0.51)
topik kimia lain 0.00 0.00 25.95 3.95
(0.63)
9 Selepas aktiviti ini, saya lebih berminat untuk
mempelajari kimia.

10 Saya sangat suka menggunakan Cmap. 0.00 0.00 25.95

Didapati ada 5 item atau 50 % daripada keseluruhan item berkenaan memperolehi min
kurang daripada 4, iaitu menghampiri skala 3 (kurang setuju). Antara kekuatan dan kelemahan
Cmap yang dapat dikenalpasti daripada ulasan yang dibuat dalam soal selidik tersebut adalah
seperti berikut:

Jadual 8 : Kekuatan dan Kelemahan Cmap Elektrokimia

Kekuatan Kelemahan

 Dapat lihat keseluruhan bab dan tahu  Sediakan map yang boleh dibaca
offline.
perbezaan setiap subtopik
 Kerana ia memudahkan saya untuk membuat  Kadar internet yang lambat
menyukarkan akses kepada Cmap.
rujukan tanpa membuat selakan yang banyak
 Memudahkan saya untuk memahami konsep  Lebihkan visual dan grafik.

dalam topik Elektrokimia  Menambahkan lebih banyak contoh
 Ringkas dan menghubungkaitkan konsep- soalan.

konsep berkenaan.  Banyakkan jenis soalan KBAT supaya
 Cmap amat membantu dan saya lebih tahu cara jawab soalan dengan betul.

bersemangat untuk belajar kerana ia berada

di hujung jari (handphone)
 Cmap memberi pautan kepada video di

youtube yang membolehkan saya menonton

untuk lebih memahami subjek kimia.
 Saya dapat maklumat untuk membimbing

saya menjawab esei

9

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

Pada keseluruhannya, maklumbalas peserta kajian adalah positif dan menunjukkan
penggunaan Cmap mendapat sambutan yang menggalakkan. Namun, pelaksanaan perlu
dilakukan penambahbaikan agar dapat meningkatkan pencapaian kimia secara berkesan.

6.4 Refleksi dan Intervensi gelung kedua
Sungguhpun Cmap menyediakan alternatif yang menarik dengan melibatkan peta
konsep, video dan grafik, penggunaan Cmap masih tidak dapat melonjakkan pencapaian kimia
peserta kajian secara ketara. Pembelajaran kendiri tidak dapat memberi input kepada peserta
kajian seperti yang dijangkakan kerana banyak kekangan lain yang sukar dikawal seperti
inisiatif pelajar. Justeru, kami merancang untuk mengubah intervensi kami daripada
pembelajaran kendiri kepada pembelajaran kolaboratif memandangkan pembelajaran
kolaboratif juga diberi penekanan pada pembelajaran abad ke-21.
Di samping itu, kami cuba mengatasi beberapa kelemahan pada Cmap dengan
memurnikannya berdasarkan maklum balas daripada Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan
Cmap. Susunan peta konsep dan warna dalam Cmap telah diperbaiki dengan memberi warna
berlainan untuk subtopik berlainan. Di samping itu, bahan bacaan telah dilabel dengan lebih
jelas mengikut kategori nota, soalan dan video. Dan yang penting sekali, soalan telah diselitkan
pada akhir setiap konsep penting supaya pelajar boleh membuat penilaian setiap kali tamat
mempelajari konsep yang penting. Jawapan kepada soalan berkenaan disediakan dalam
helaian yang berasingan. Pentaksiran rakan sebaya juga akan diselitkan dalam intervensi
gelung kedua.
Tiga minggu selepas gelung pertama, intervensi telah dijalankan ke atas kumpulan
sasaran yang sama untuk gelung kedua. Untuk pelaksanaan kajian gelung kedua, Ujian Pasca
2 turut digubal berdasarkan bentuk dan aras kesukaran yang ditetapkan untuk Ujian Pasca 1
yang lepas. Item dalam Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap pula dikekalkan untuk
mengumpul maklumbalas peserta kajian selepas intervensi.

10

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

Jadual 9: Jadual Pelaksanaan Intervensi Gelung kedua

Peringkat Pelaksanaan

1 Peserta kajian dikumpulkan dan diberi taklimat mengenai penggunaan
(10 min) Cmap. Peserta kajian diberikan pautan baharu kepada topik Elektrokimia.

2 Aktiviti:
(1 jam 30 min) Peserta kajian dibahagikan kepada kumpulan kecil (3 atau 4 orang) dan
dikehendaki menyelesaikan soalan yang dibekalkan melalui Cmap bersama
ahli kumpulan. Setiap kumpulan diketuai oleh ketua kumpulan yang dipilih
dalam kalangan ahli kumpulan.
Peserta kajian diberi masa untuk menyelesaikan tugasan dan menyemak
jawapan mereka dengan merujuk kepada skema yang diberi.

Pemerhatian:
Peserta kajian memuat turun fail dari Cmap dan berkongsi bahan dengan
ahli kumpulan supaya dapat dibaca offline. Peserta kajian membaca bahan
berkenaan dan mengadakan sumbang-saran dengan ahli kumpulan sebelum
cuba menyelesaikan tugasan. Diperhatikan kebanyakan peserta kajian lebih
gemar menggunakan telefon bimbit daripada komputer riba.

Refleksi:
Pembelajaran kolaboratif berjalan lancar dan dapat menjimatkan data
peserta kajian melalui perkongsian bahan. Peserta kajian kelihatan selesa
dan lebih yakin dalam pembelajaran topik Elektrokimia. Kebanyakan
kumpulan dapat selesaikan tugasan lebih awal daripada masa yang
ditetapkan. Skema jawapan yang dilampirkan dalam Cmap memudahkan
peserta kajian mengenal pasti kesilapan mereka, justeru dapat
meningkatkan kefahaman mereka dan memperbetulkan miskonsepsi.

6.5 Analisis Data Kajian Gelung kedua
Min markah yang diperolehi peserta kajian dalam Ujian Pasca 2 adalah 88.48. Keputusan
ini sangat baik berbanding dengan min 66.67 dan 71.41 yang diperolehi dalam Ujian Pra dan
Ujian Pasca 1 masing-masing. Rajah 2 menunjukkan terdapat peningkatan dalam pencapaian
kimia yang ketara dalam Ujian Pasca 2 selepas intervensi. Majoriti peserta kajian memperolehi
gred A dan A- dalam Ujian Pasca 2 manakala pola taburan gred bagi Ujian Pasca 1 adalah
dalam julat A hingga C-.

11

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

Bilangan 25
20
15 A- B+ B B- C+ C C- dan
10

5
0

A

ke

Gred Pencapaian bawah

Ujian Pra Ujian Pasca 1 Ujian Pasca 2

Rajah 2: Perbandingan Pencapaian dalam Ujian Pencapaian Kimia

Analisis maklumbalas yang dikumpul melalui Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan
Cmap menunjukkan lonjakan min daripada 3.95 (gelung pertama) ke 4.11 (gelung kedua).
Kesemua item soal selidik berjaya memperolehi min melebihi 4.00, di mana skala Likert yang
digunakan adalah:

1 = sangat tidak setuju 2 = tidak setuju 3 = kurang setuju 4 = setuju 5 = amat setuju

Jadual 10: Perbandingan min dan sisihan antara Gelung Pertama dan Gelung kedua
bagi data Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap

Item Soal selidik Gelung 1 Gelung 2

Min Sisihan Min Sisihan
4.00 piawai
piawai
0.56
1 Saya berasa seronok menggunakan Cmap dalam 3.89 0.64

pembelajaran bagi topik “Elektrokimia”.

2 Saya dapat bekerjasama dan berkongsi idea 3.78` 0.89 4.00 0.56
4.00 0.55 4.03 0.59
dengan rakan lain selepas menggunakan Cmap. 4.11 0.64 4.21 0.70
4.07 0.55 4.23 0.68
3 Cmap membantu saya mengamalkan

pembelajaran kendiri.

4 Cmap membantu saya mendapatkan rujukan

untuk topik “Elektrokimia”.

5 Saya lebih memahami konsep dalam topik

“Elektrokimia” selepas menggunakan Cmap.

6 Cmap memudahkan saya menghubungkaitkan 4.11 0.51 4.26 0.66

konsep-konsep penting dalam topik 3.81 0.56 4.11 0.64
“Elektrokimia” .
4.04 0.76 4.18 0.77
7 Cmap membantu saya menjawab soalan 3.93 0.68 4.09 0.77
3.78 0.51 4.00 0.66
berkaitan topik “Elektrokimia” dengan lebih 3.95 0.63 4.11 0.66
yakin.

8 Pendekatan ini perlu diteruskan untuk

mempelajari topik kimia lain

9 Selepas aktiviti ini, saya lebih berminat untuk

mempelajari kimia.

10 Saya sangat suka menggunakan Cmap.

Keseluruhan

12

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

Tiga item yang memperolehi min tertinggi selepas intervensi gelung kedua adalah seperti
berikut:

Item 4: Cmap membantu saya mendapatkan rujukan untuk topik “Elektrokimia”.

Item 5: Saya lebih memahami konsep dalam topik “Elektrokimia” selepas
menggunakan Cmap.

Item 6: Cmap memudahkan saya menghubungkaitkan konsep-konsep penting dalam
topik “Elektrokimia”.

6.6 Dapatan Temu bual Kajian Gelung kedua
Lima peserta kajian yang telah mendapat peningkatan tertinggi dalam Ujian Pasca 2 telah
ditemu bual. Maklum balas yang diberi mengenai Cmap telah dirumuskan mengikut kategori
seperti Jadual 11.

Jadual 11: Rumusan maklumbalas temu bual

Maklumbalas Kekerapan

A. Peta konsep 1
 Cmap 1 lebih ringkas dan mudah difahami 5
 Warna Cmap 2 adalah lebih menarik. 2
 Pelbagai warna pada Cmap memudahkan pelajar mencari sesuatu
4
subtopik dan bahan bacaan berkaitan.
 Susunan dan hubungkait konsep dalam Cmap 2 lebih padat dan

teratur.

B. Nota 5
 Nota yang disediakan dalam Cmap 1 dan Cmap 2 mudah difahami. 2
 Gambar berwarna memudahkan pemahaman konsep. 1
 Nota yand dipautkan boleh dimuat turun dan dismpan dalam telefon

untuk bacaan.

C. Video 3
 Video yang dipautkan dalam Cmap 2 dapat memberi penerangan 2

yang jelas tentang proses yang berlaku dalam sel elektrokimia

melalui animasi 3D.
 Video yang dipautkan dalam Cmap 2 mudah diakses kerana ada

label yang jelas atau tidak perlu dimuat turun.

D. Soalan 2
 Cmap 1 tiada soalan. 3
 Soalan dan skema yang dilampirkan dalam Cmap 2 memantapkan
1
pengetahuan dan kefahaman pelajar.
 Soalan dan skema dalam Cmap 2 boleh digunakan untuk belajar 1

sendiri. 1
 Soalan dan skema dalam Cmap 2 boleh digunakan untuk penilaian

kendiri.
 Soalan Cmap 2 dapat meningkatkan kebolehan pelajar dalam

menyelesaikan masalah KBAT.

E. Kaedah 3
 Perbincangan dalam kumpulan yang dijalankan semasa penggunaan 1
1
Cmap 2 adalah lebih menarik daripada belajar sendiri.
 Perbincangan dalam kumpulan membolehkan tugasan diselesaikan

dengan cepat.
 Pembelajaran dalam kumpulan dapat menjimat penggunaan data

internet.

13

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

7.0 Kesan Penyelidikan
Dapatan kajian ini menunjukkan Cmap berjaya meningkatkan pencapaian pelajar dalam topik
Elektrokimia. Pencapaian yang amat memberangsangkan dalam Ujian Pasca 2 menunjukkan
pelajar dapat membezakan operasi bagi sel galvani dan sel elektrolitik dan menulis persamaan
serta melakukan pengiraan yang berkaitan dengan tindak balas kimia dalam setiap sel tersebut.
Selaras dengan dapatan kajian Kamisah dan Lee (2013), kajian ini menunjukkan kefahaman
pelajar dalam aras mikroskopik dapat ditingkatkan dengan menggunakan animasi 3D bagi ion
dan elektron yang bergerak dalam sel elektrokimia. Cmap juga memberikan satu gambaran
yang menyeluruh tentang konsep penting yang terkandung dalam setiap subtopik.
Berpandukan Cmap, pelajar dapat mengembangkan sub-konsep secara terperinci dengan
membina peta konsep sendiri. Dapatan ini konsisten dengan kajian Indra (2015) yang
melaporkan keberkesanan penggunaan peta konsep dalam membantu pelajar
menghubungkaitkan konsep-konsep kimia dan meningkatkan pencapaian mereka dalam topik
tertentu.

Kajian ini juga mendapati soalan berserta skema yang dilampirkan dalam Cmap dapat
membantu pelajar melaksanakan penilaian kendiri atau secara kolaboratif selepas tamat
mempelajari sesuatu subtopik dan meningkatkan kemahiran KBAT pelajar dalam menjawab
soalan. Dapatan soal selidik serta temu bual menunjukkan penggunaan Cmap dalam suasana
pembelajaran kolaboratif lebih digemari pelajar daripada pembelajaran kendiri. Juga terdapat
perubahan ketara dari segi minat dan keyakinan terhadap pembelajaran. Semasa pembelajaran
kolaboratif dilaksanakan, pelajar kelihatan selesa, lebih yakin dan bermotivasi untuk
mempelajari topik Elektrokimia.

Penggunaan Cmap membolehkan pengukuhan konsep pelajar dalam topik Elektrokimia
dilakukan di luar jadual waktu secara guided NF2F (non-face-to-face). Dengan menggalakkan
pembelajaran kolaboratif dalam kalangan pelajar, justeru Cmap dapat mengurangkan
kebergantungan pelajar kepada pensyarah. Oleh demikian, pensyarah akan mempunyai lebih
masa untuk merancang aktiviti dan menyediakan bahan PdP untuk topik akan datang.

8.0 Refleksi Dan Kesimpulan Kajian
Cmap merupakan sumber rujukan alternatif yang baik untuk pelajar dalam mempelajari topik
“Elektrokimia”. Melalui Cmap yang dimuat naik oleh penyelidik, pelajar boleh akses
maklumat di hujung jari bila-bila masa mengikut kesesuaian. Ini menjimatkan masa dan data
pelajar kerana pelajar tidak perlu menghabiskan banyak masa untuk melayari internet bagi
mencari bahan bacaan yang sesuai. Penggunaan Cmap bukan sahaja berjaya menimbulkan
impak yang positif dalam pelajar dari segi sikap, malah meningkatkan motivasi pelajar untuk
mempelajari topik Elektrokimia. Untuk pelajar yang tidak suka bertanya soalan dalam kelas
disebabkan sifat segan atau ego, Cmap sangat membantu kerana ia membolehkan mereka
membuat ulangkaji sendiri.

Tidak dapat dinafikan gaya pembelajaran pelajar juga memainkan peranan penting
dalam menentukan cara pembelajaran yang diamalkan. Pelajar perlu ada disiplin diri yang
tinggi untuk mengamalkan pembelajaran kendiri. Dapatan kajian ini menunjukkan kumpulan
sasaran yang terlibat lebih menggemari pembelajaran kolaboratif daripada pembelajaran
kendiri. Kelemahan kajian ini adalah gaya pembelajaran pelajar tidak dikenalpasti lebih awal
semasa tinjauan awal. Maka, pembelajaran kendiri yang dilaksanakan dalam intervensi gelung
pertama kurang memberi kesan kepada pencapaian dalam Ujian Pasca 1. Maklumbalas pelajar
dalam Soal Selidik Keberkesanan Penggunaan Cmap bagi gelung pertama kajian ini juga
menunjukkan proses pentaksiran tidak boleh diabaikan dalam proses pembelajaran dan
pengajaran. Kedua-dua pihak pelajar dan pensyarah memerlukan maklumbalas mengenai
perkembangan dalam penguasaan konsep pelajar serta keberkesanan kaedah yang digunakan.

14

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

Kesimpulannya, penggunaan Cmap berjaya meningkatkan kefahaman pelajar dalam
konteks mikroskopik dan seterusnya meningkatkan pencapaian mereka dalam topik
“Elektrokimia”. Walau bagaimanapun, banyak masa dan usaha diperlukan oleh pensyarah
untuk mencari, menyediakan serta memuatnaik soalan, nota dan video. Dalam penyediaan
Cmap, kadang-kadang talian internet yang terlalu lambat menyukarkan proses muatnaik fail.
Dicadangkan pada masa akan datang, kolaborasi antara pensyarah dapat diwujudkan dalam
unit kimia supaya dapat menyediakan Cmap bagi subtopik kimia yang lain yang sesuai seiring
dengan pembelajaran abad ke-21.

Rujukan

Brown, T.L., LeMay, H.E., Bursten, B.E., Murphy, C.J, Woodward, P.M., Stoltzfus, M.W.
(2018). Chemistry-The Central Science, 14th edition. United Kingdom : Pearson
Education Limited, p 893.

Matriculation Division (2018). SK025 : Chemistry 2 Curriculum Specification, Ministry of
Education Malaysia.

Indra, S. S. (2015). The Effect of using Concept Maps on Student Achievement in Selected
Topics in Chemistry at Tertiary Level. Journal Of Education And Practice,
6(15), 106-117.

Johnstone, A. H. (2006). Chemical education research in Glasgow in perpective. Chemistry
Education Research and Practice, 2006, 7(2), 49-63.

Kamisah Osman & Lee, T.T (2013). Impact of Interactive Multimedia Module with
Pedagogical Agents on Students' Understanding and Motivation in the Learning of
Electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education.
Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lee_Tien_Tien/publication/237149718

Novak, J. D., & Canas, A. J. (2006). The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How To

Construct Them, Technical Report Ihmc Cmaptools.

Retrieved from http://cmap.ihmc.us/docs/theory-of-concept-maps

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.

Sistem Guru Online (2017). Apakah pendidikan abad ke-21.
Retrieved from https://www.sistemguruonline.my/2017/03/pendidikan-abad-ke-21.

Silberberg & Amateis. (2018). Chemistry: The Molecular Nature of Matter and Change, 8th
Edition, New York : MacGraw-Hill. p 946.

15

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

LAMPIRAN
SEBAHAGIAN DARIPADA CMAP 2

16

THE EFFECT OF SCHÖN’S REFLECTIVE MODEL IN
ENHANCING ASSESSMENT INTEGRITY OF ENGLISH PROJECT

REPORT AMONG KEDAH MATRICULATION COLLEGE
STUDENTS

Ang Beng Im

Unit Bahasa Inggeris, Kedah Matriculation College
Ministry of Education
06010 Changlun
Kedah Darul Aman

,

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

This research aims at investigating the effect of Schön’s reflective model in enhancing
assessment integrity of English project report among Kedah Matriculation College
students. A qualitative method was used to conduct this research. Data collection was
conducted through students’ reflective writing using Schön’s framework based on their
English community projects during Semester 2 and observation conducted during the
activity. The samples were 79 matriculation students from 4 classes. The data was coded
and analysed using thematic analysis. The students’ cognitive learning was coded into four
themes: i) knowledge ii) problem-solving iii) communication and iv) creativity. Their
psychomotor learning was coded into two themes: i) practical skills and ii) organizing
skills. Affective learning was coded into eight themes: i) leadership ii) resilience iii) life-
long values iv) responsibility v) socialization vi) team skills vii) self-confidence ix) sense of
achievement. The research results show that Schön’s reflective model enhances assessment
integrity of the project report among Kedah Matriculation College students.

Keywords: Reflective writing, Assessment Integrity, Cognitive Learning, Psychomotor
Learning, Affective Learning

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study
In 2017, the matriculation curriculum was reviewed and an outcome-based education
(OBE) was implemented in a move to obtain accreditation from Malaysian Qualifications
Agency (MQA). Matriculation colleges are applying the Malaysian Qualifications Agency
(MQA) curriculum specifications starting from Academic Session 2018/2019. According
to Salter, Pang & Sharman (2009), student-centred approaches to teaching and learning
while meeting national and international accreditation standards means that institutions of
higher education are increasingly focused on ‘outcomes-centred assessment’ and
‘constructive alignment’, defined by Biggs and Tang (2009) as a process wherein we:

Systematically align the teaching/learning activities, and the assessment tasks to the
intended learning outcomes, according to the learning activities required in the outcomes.
(p. 7)

to ensure learning that is more sustainable through development of skills valued in real-life
situations. Constructive alignment is not about the cosmetic changes one brings to
designing curriculum and subject outlines in alignment with learning outcomes at the level

1

of the subject and program or degree. The true test of constructive alignment is reflected
when students pursuing a program acquire and internalize the knowledge and the skills that
the outcomes state the students will achieve at the completion of the program.
The Programme Educational Objectives (PEO) of the English subject are as follows:
Upon a year of graduation from the programme, graduates are:
PEO 1: Knowledgeable and technically competent in disciplines in-line with higher

educational institution requirement (MQF LOD 1 & MQF LOD 2)
PEO 2: Able to communicate competently and collaborate effectively in group work to

compete in higher education environment (MQF LOD 5)
PEO 3: Able to solve discipline related problems innovatively and creatively (MQF LOD

6)
PEO 4: Able to engage in life-long learning with strong commitment to continue the

acquisition of new knowledge and skills (MQF LOD 7)
In terms of assessment, English Language lecturers are teaching English using the
domains set in the Foundation Standards by the Malaysian Qualifications Agency (MQA
2014) which are as follows:
LOD 1: Knowledge
LOD 2: Practical Skills
LOD 5: Communication, leadership and team skills
LOD 6: Problem solving and scientific skills
LOD 7: Information management and life-long learning skills
As this research is focusing only on the project report assessment, thus assessment
objectives, learning outcomes domain, taxonomy level, transferable skills and assessment
criteria are vital for us to understand the background of the MQA assessment. The table
below shows the following :-

Table 1.0: Assessment Objectives, Learning Outcomes Domain, Taxonomy Level,
Transferable Skills and Assessment Criteria

ASSESSMENT LEARNING TAXONOMY TRANSFE- ASSESS-
OBJECTIVES OUTCOMES LEVEL RABLE MENT
SKILLS CRITERIA
Students should be DOMAIN A3 CS 3
able to: MQF LOD 5 Valuing Scoring
Communication, Communica rubric
I. Write for leadership and -tion skills
different team skills
modes and
expressions
(cause
&effect,
compare
&contrast and
express point
of views)

II. Select,
summarise and
synthesise
relevant
information

III. Paraphrase

2

IV. Demonstrate
understanding
of information
to transfer
from linear to
non-linear and
from non-
linear to linear
forms

The course learning outcomes (CLO) for writing a report on community projects
are stated below :-

i) Demonstrate listening, speaking, reading and writing skills accurately, fluently and
effectively as proficient English language users in both academic and social
contexts up to C1 level in the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR).
(CLO1)

ii) Synthesise information and arguments from a number of sources (CLO 2)
Assessment is based on students’ submission of written work as evidence of their

planning, implementation and feedback stages during their community projects. Lecturers
grade students’ project work based on the course learning outcomes (CLO), that is, students
demonstrate writing skills accurately, fluently and effectively as proficient English
language users in both academic and social contexts up to C1 level in the Common
European Framework of Reference (CEFR) (CLO1) and they are able to synthesise
information and arguments from a number of sources (CLO 2).

There is an increasing level of consciousness among academics about the
significance of outcome-centred assessment in response to growing competition and
increasing pressure from accrediting bodies. Thus, there is a growing awareness that
assessment design needs to enable deeper approaches to learning among students.

There is an urgent need, therefore, for academics to identify mechanisms by which
approaches to teaching and assessment design can engage a wider spectrum of students and
stimulate deep, as opposed to surface learning, while ensuring that the students are attaining
learning outcomes for the subject and the programme.

1.2 Statement of Problem
The problematic state of affairs in the students’ community projects report was students
usually copy other students’ work and submit their projects as their own work to the
lecturer. Thus, the accuracy of the lecturer in assessing and grading students’ projects are
skewed and the A’s that many students obtain do not reflect their actual writing ability.

According to Nitko (2004), in an assessment situation, students have
responsibilities, that is, of studying and preparing for tests and examinations in their classes.
Plagiarism in the form of copying homework and take home assignments should not be
tolerated by the teachers. Cheating and intellectual dishonesty should be prevented. “While
teachers must do their part, they also have the right to expect ethical behaviour from their
students and to not be pressured to lower standards, water down courses or give high grades
for minimal work (S.E. Phillips, personal communication, May 1999). There seems to be
little doubt that the problem of academic dishonesty is prevalent in most institutions and is
significant globally. Moreover, the current literature leads one to believe the problem is
alarmingly growing. In a recent review of the literature, Ercegovac (2004) found that:

3

 58.3 percent of high school students allow someone else copy their work in
1969.

 97.5 percent did so in 1989 and the percentage of students who report ever
using a cheat sheet doubled from 34 to 68 percent.

 A massive study of high achievers conducted by “Who’s Who among High
School Students” in 1993 that found that “nearly 80% admitted to some form
of dishonesty”.

 Surveys of 422 college students at a mid-sized four-year public university, 91.7
percent reported they had engaged in at least one type of academic misconduct
during the surveyed year.

 Virginia Polytechnic Institute reported that various forms of academic cheating
have more than tripled, from 80 in 1995/96 to 280 in 1997/98.

 ETS studies (n.d.) further revealed several compelling indicators. The general
perception is that cheating is widespread. They see it in every facet of life:
politics, business, home and school.

 The perception is that cheating is changing.
 Collaborative academic (team) environments like the Internet are making the

definition of cheating even more blurry.
 Many who have engaged in cheating cite the following as rationales:

o It's a victimless crime
o It's o.k. if you don't get caught
o It has its own language (using shortcuts, whatever it takes, everybody does

it, part of life)
o It makes up for unfair tests or lack of opportunity
 73% of all test takers, including prospective graduate students and teachers
agree that most students do cheat at some point; 86% of high school of students
agreed.
The research gap in this study was no research has been conducted at the
matriculation level to find an alternative assessment to establish students’ learning
outcomes with integrity for their projects. The current research attempts to fill this gap by
analysing the reciprocal relationships of reflective practice in enhancing integrity of the
project report assessment among Kedah Matriculation College students.

1.3 Research Objectives
The main objective of the research was to investigate the effect of reflective practice in
enhancing integrity of the project report assessment among Kedah Matriculation College
students. The current study aimed to establish :-

RO 1) students display knowledge in their projects
RO 2) students display practical skills in their projects
RO 3) students display communication, leadership and team skills in their projects
RO 4) students display problem-solving and scientific skills in their projects
RO 5) students display information management and life-long learning skills in their

projects

1.4 Research Questions
The current study aimed to answer the research questions below:
RQ 1) How did the students exhibit knowledge in their projects?
RQ 2) How did the students display practical skills in their projects?

4

RQ 3) How did the students display communication, leadership and team skills in their
projects?

RQ 4) How did the students display problem-solving and scientific skills in their projects?
RQ 5) How did the students display information management and life-long learning skills

in their projects?

1.5 Significance of the Study
The significance of designing assessments that support life-long learning as opposed to
learning that results in short-term outcomes is increasingly being focused on in assessment
literature as stated by Boud & Falchikov (2006), Gibbs & Simpson (2004–2005) and Boud
(2000). Intense debate also centres on how to facilitate deep approaches to learning through
teaching, learning and assessment. The shared focus is on designing assessments that
stimulate students to take an active role in their learning as evidenced by their attempts to
engage in in-depth learning as opposed to piecemeal and short-cut approaches that at best
lead to surface-level learning stated by Marton & Salijo (1976a, 1976b, 1984), Biggs &
Tang (2009), Ramsden (2003), Gibbs & Simpson (2004–2005). These concerns provide
the impetus for this study, which examines the influence of reflection as a tool in helping
students write their reports.

According to Payyazhi Jayashree and Sumit Mitra (2012), a popular technique to
address this lack of shared responsibility and accountability is to incorporate reflection into
the assessment design. Specifically, this study examines the impact of this reflection
technique on a deep versus surface approach to learning as adopted by students, besides
developing relevant work and life skills. The fundamental motivation that drove this
research was to investigate the effect of reflective practice on enhancing the integrity of the
project report assessment among Kedah Matriculation College students.

1.6 Scope of Study
In Kedah Matriculation College, there are two batches of students, the one-year
programme and the two-year programme students. In this research, only one year
programme students from the four classes of the researcher were involved.

1.7 Theoretical underpinning for the Study
The framework used was Schön’s reflective framework (1983). Schön defined reflective
practice as the practice by which professionals become aware of their implicit knowledge
base and learn from their experience. He explained reflection in action and reflection on
action. Reflection in action is to reflect on behaviour as it happens whereas reflection on
action reflecting after the event that is to review, analyze and evaluate the
situation. Another term he introduced is “knowing in action” to describe tacit knowledge
because to him every design task is unique and the basic problem for designers is to
determine how to approach such a unique task.

2.0 Literature Review

2.1 Reflective Practice
In the context of this paper, the term “reflective practice” pointed out by Moon (2004), was
coined by Schön in 1983 and has “emphasized use of reflection in professional or other
complex activities as a means of coping with situations that are ill-structured
and/unpredictable”. Schön’s model lists a set of questions that one asks oneself about an
experience inclusive of a process by which we apply and learn from our reflection. In this

5

paper, the reflective practice directs our focus on the practice of thinking metacognitively

leading to deeper learning.
There are many frameworks of reflective practice. In this research, Schön’s model

(1983) is used as the framework for reflection before, during and after a learning process.

Table 1.1: Schön’s Reflective Model

Before an experience During an experience After an experience
What do you think might What’s happening now as What are your insights
happen? you make rapid decisions? immediately after and /or
later when you have more
What might be the Is it working out as I emotional distance from
challenges? expected? the event?
What do I need to know or Am I dealing with the In retrospect, how did it
do in order to be best challenges well? go?
prepared for these What did I particularly
experiences? Is there anything I should value and why?
do, say or think to make
the experience successful? Is there anything I would
What am I learning from do differently before or
this? during a similar event?
What have I learnt?

2.2 Cognitive Learning
According to Bruner (1960), learning involves three ‘almost simultaneous processors’:

a) Acquisition of new information

b) Transformation of knowledge

c) Check of the pertinence and adequacy of knowledge

Cognition is the process of acquiring and understanding knowledge through our

thoughts, experiences, and senses. Learning involves acquiring knowledge through

experience, study or being taught. Both are linked as learning requires cognition and

cognition involves learning. Whenever you see or hear something new, you go through a

series of cognitive processes and these are the processes that result in learning. The head

accumulates intellectual functions to understand the surroundings and arrive to a conclusion
pertaining to daily life issues. Dewey (1944) and Kolb (1984) found that cognitive
functions as a medium to create meaningful learning experience by connecting previous
knowledge and ideas. Continuity from previous experience and knowledge provide
significant educational experience to the learners (Dewey, 1910).

Research conducted by Jensen (2008) and Rose and Olsen (1993) show that
human’s brain naturally extract meaning and integrate new knowledge by comparing prior
knowledge and new learning experiences. Dewey (1910) and Kolb (1984) claimed that
children’s learning experience is highly interrelated with their cognitive learning domain.
Combination of these elements allows learners to ask question, reframe values and beliefs,
make assumptions and identify strengths and weakness (see Figure 2.1). Cognitive learning
domain is an important element of student-centred and metacognitive learning practices but
it’s often ignored in most classroom settings due to lack of time and lack of training for

6

teachers (Baviskar, Hartle & Whitney, 2009). This scenario blocks the learner’s cognitive
learning process.

According to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy (Anderson, 2001), there are six levels
of cognitive domain: remember, understand, apply, analyse, evaluate and create. Higher
level of mental operation is required as the cognitive level increases. For example, a child
is only required to remember or recall information in the remembering level but during
creating level he or she must be able to design, produce, organize and blend and rewrite a
concept (Borich, 1996).

2.3 Psychomotor Learning
Neuroscientists Henrietta Leiner and Alan Leiner, proved the connection between human
body and mind in their research several decades ago. The key part of the research focused
on the cerebellum, a part of the brain that plays a role in maintaining coordination, balance,
movement and posture. The cerebellum also plays an important role in learning process.
Thus it creates an interconnection between movements and learning. The psychometric area
is vital for the development of physical skills, coordination and manipulation. The body
works as a complex structure which collects information from all the sensors for learning
purposes. It also gives a sense and basic knowledge regarding the surrounding environment.
A famous Chinese Confucius Master Kong, said “I hear things and I forget them, I see
things and I remember them, I do things and I understand them” because hearing is not as
good as seeing, seeing is not as good as experiencing and true learning only occurs when
experience produces an action and output as per in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1. Learning heads
Source: Educating for a change (1991)

2.4 Affective Learning
Apart from mental process, learning is also influenced by learners’ feelings (Eric Jensen,
2003). Thinking, feeling, perception and sensation are four main categories of the affective
domain (Cajete, 1999). Similar findings were found by Baumeister and Leary (1995) that
affective learning has an effect on children’s emotion, behaviour and thought. A significant
emotional experience or event creates a path for impetus to change and to transform. The
link between emotion and self-knowledge motivate children to accept needs for changing
behaviour and critical thinking (Zembylas, 2003). Critical thinking is a cognitive process
meanwhile motivation to think is an affective learning process. Children need to be
mentally and emotionally balanced to take part in self-assessment and transformation.

7

Emotions stimulate learners’ learning and determine their confidence in learning
new things. Children will do and learn something new when they have strong feelings and
believe about it. In this context, the affective domain includes expressing values, feelings,
attitudes and responses (Jenson, 2003). Similar to cognitive domain, affective domain also
consists of several levels of behaviour; receiving, responding, valuing, organization and
characterization. At the bottom level (receiving), a child is expected to be aware of or
respond to certain stimuli. Simply listening, observing and being attentive are the minimal
expectations in this level. At the characterization level, a child has developed a consistent
philosophy of life. As an example, children will be able to exhibit respect for the dignity of
human beings in all situations.

2.5 Constructive Approach and Reflective Practice
Constructive approach defines learning as achieving understanding through active
discovery. People learn by actively exploring the world around them, receiving feedback
on their actions and drawing conclusions. Constructive theories are more concerned with
how knowledge and skills are internalized than the way they manifest in external behaviour.
The implications for learning is active construction and integration of concepts, ill
structured problems, opportunities for reflection and ownership of the task.
Experimentation or experiential learning (Kolb’s cycle) is an example of typical
constructive approaches. The implications for assessment is conceptual understanding
(applied knowledge and skills), extended performance, processes as well as outcomes,
credit varieties of excellence and develop self-evaluation and autonomy in learning.

2.6 Assessment and Integrity
According to Miller, Linn and Gronlund (2009), classroom assessment is a formal process
that involves a deliberate effort to get information about a students’ status in relation to
course content and objectives. The key question in a particular assessment practice is ‘How
does this assessment practice support learning?’ At the heart of Biggs’ (1999) notion of
‘constructive alignment’ is the close link of assessment tasks with learning activity. Biggs
and Tang (2009) further state that ‘it is not what teachers do, but what students do that’s
important’ (p. 19) thus reiterating that higher levels of learning can only be achieved when
we first articulate desired levels of understanding to be achieved by students and then
design assessment-tools to facilitate the same. According to Biggs and Tang (2009),
teaching and assessment that stimulate students to take an active role in their own learning
is reflected when students ask informed questions, hypothesize, engage, apply and present
problems. Ramsden (1992/2003) further suggests that it is the design of assessments that
influence students’ perception of task requirements, which in turn will determine what type
of learning approach they take. Ramsden (1992/2003) and Ellmers, Foley, and Bennett
(2007) also provide evidence that change of learning context such as curriculum, teaching
methods and assessment procedures will change the approach students use to learn. This
view is supported by Boud and Falchikov (2007) when they state that ‘assessment rather
than teaching has a major influence on learning’ (p. 4). They express concern at the
traditional conceptualization of assessment, which reduces students to passive recipients as
opposed to enabling students to take ownership of their own learning, thus failing to
enhance higher levels of learning.

Marton and Salijo (1984, 1997) highlight students feeling of resentment, depression
and anxiety when they are obliged to use a surface approach to learning. In contrast, the
deep approach relates to a sense of involvement, challenge and achievement, together with
feeling of personal fulfilment and pleasure. Svensson (1977) attributes better performance
in exams to higher interest level students experience in the deep approach and vice-versa

8

(Booth, Luckett, & Mladenovic,1999). Esposto and Weaver (2011) has also reported
enhanced student attendance and engagement as an outcome of continuous assessments
combined with feedback among tutorial groups. Gibbs and Simpson (2004–2005) also
provides a set of guidelines that need to be met before assessment can foster deep learning.
These include designing assessments in a way that require students to spend sufficient time
and effort of a kind that engages them in productive learning activities.

A related focus in assessment literature is the urgency for designing sustainable
assessments that enable the development of skills required to succeed in real-life according
to Von der Heidt & Lamberton (2011) and McDonald (2010). Drawing on cues from the
conception of a learning society and sustainable development, Boud (2000), for example
proposed the need to design ‘sustainable assessments’, which he defined as ‘assessments
that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of students to meet
their own future learning needs’ (p. 151). This essentially means that assessment design
must foster the kind of contextualized learning reflective of real-life challenges. For
example, Boud and Falchikov (2006) contend that as opposed to learning through
acquisition of knowledge, which most traditional assessments focus on, real-life learning
often occurs through collaboration and participation within the communities of practice as
real life remains embedded in the specific contexts of socially embedded situations. One of
the ways in which this capability may be developed includes providing student
communities with opportunity to collaborate, while familiarizing them with criteria and
standards of assessment.

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Research Design
According to Patton (2002), qualitative method is the most suitable technique for
interpreting young participant’s responses about their experiences in an activity. This
research is a qualitative research using thematic analysis. It aims at investigating the effect
of using reflective practice in enhancing integrity of the project report assessment among
Kedah Matriculation College students.

3.2 Population and Sample
The subjects were 79 mixed ability teenagers aged 17 to 20 years old studying in a
matriculation college in Changlun, Kedah Darul Aman. They were from the northern states
of Perlis, Kedah, Penang and northern Perak. The students were from the one-year
programme (PST), Academic Session 2018/2019. Majority of the students were Malays
while 10% of the students were non-Malays.

3.3 Sampling
Purposive sampling was used in this research. It is one of the most common sampling
strategies used in research. In purposive sampling, participants of the study were selected
based on preselected criteria relevant to a particular research. The students were from 4
classes taught by the same lecturer and were from similar backgrounds and exposure.

3.4 Research Instrument
The research instrument used in this research was the respondents’ reflective writing.

9

3.5 Data Collection
Class A2T4 came up with their community project to help the “We Care” group that
prepares free breakfast for needy students at the mosque every Friday. Class F2T5
organized a Colour Charity Run to raise funds for cancer patients in Sultan Abdul Halim
Hospital while in S1T9, a group prepared free toast and tea breakfast while the second
group organized a badminton competition. Finally, class S4T2 organized an Explorace for
all students. As this is a qualitative research, data was collected through document analysis
(students’ reflective writing) and observation.

Data collection took place in Kedah Matriculation College during the first week of
March 2019. Respondents were PST students in Semester 2, Academic Session 2018/2019.
Their age group ranged between 17-20 years old and they were from the northern region of
Malaysia (Perlis, Kedah, Penang and northern Perak). Respondents were given handouts
on reflective writing and a 2-hour lesson was taught on reflective writing. Schön’s reflective
model was the main framework and students were given a period of a week to write and e-
mail their reflections to the researcher.

Moreover, for observation, the researcher walked around during the writing
reflective sessions and made meticulous observation on teenager’s interest and social
behaviour in their community projects. The observations were noted in a note pad.

3.6 Data Collection Procedure
Data were collected during the two hours English Language class and this data were
collected through analysing students’ reflective writing and observation by the researcher.
The data collected was then coded into several themes. The students’ cognitive learning
was coded into 4 themes: i) knowledge ii) problem-solving iii) communication and iv)
creativity. The psychomotor learning was coded into 2 themes: i) practical skills and ii)
organizing and running an event. Affective learning was coded into 8 themes: i) leadership
ii) resilience iii) life-long values iv) responsibility v) socialization vi) team skills vii) self-
confidence ix) sense of achievement.

4.0 Findings

4.1 Themes on teenagers’ cognitive skills
The data from the reflective practice was transcribed together for coding. A total of 4
patterns were identified in the reflection of 79 participants. All the data was coded and
classified into four categories of teenagers’ cognitive skills which are knowledge, problem-
solving, communication and creativity. The chosen categories gave a comprehensive
answer to the research question one (RQ1) of this study. The themes that emerged from the
observation and reflection are shown in Table 4.1.1.

Table 4.1.1
Themes on teenagers’ cognitive skills

Themes

1. Knowledge

2. Problem-solving

3. Communication

4. Creativity
________________________________________________________________

10

The theme “Knowledge” describes students’ ability to discuss ideas and planning
through group discussions during the planning stage. “Problem-solving” provides
information on students ‘ability to ask questions to the lecturer when they encountered
problems in planning their projects. “Communication” give information on students’ ability
to discuss actions needed in the planning stage and giving instructions to participants. Next,
“creativity” explains teenagers’ interest in terms of creativity, critical thinking and higher
order thinking skills.

4.1.2 Knowledge
In their reflective writing, students expressed that the opportunity to be involved in
conducting a community project activates learning interest. The thought of planning a
community project activates their desire to know more. Their minds are boggling with
numerous questions. For example, choices of projects, the items that they had to purchase
and the facilities they had to book. The students came up with various projects that they
were interested in. Common choices were Explorace, free movie screenings, cleaning
tutorial rooms and cleaning hostel rooms.

4.1.3 Problem-solving
Most of the students were active learners. The students were actively asking questions
relevant to their activities throughout the sessions. As the lecturer explained the purpose of
the projects and the cost of the project, students were asking questions to confirm with the
lecturer whether their choices were viable and whether they could charge the participants a
nominal fee. When the lecturer addressed the questions, the other students listened to the
explanation and learnt. For certain matters such as the reservation of the Mahawangsa Hall,
students had to ask the lecturer to reserve the venue for them through the online reservation
system. One group had to deal with a sudden blackout in their hostels on the morning of
their project to provide free breakfast to students (toast bread and tea). As an alternative,
they had to use the facilities at the cafeteria to toast the bread and prepare tea.

4.1.4 Communication
The students were asked questions regularly by the lecturer to evaluate their understanding.
For several lessons, the lecturer would ask questions to determine the progress of their
projects. Several students answered voluntarily. These students usually ‘demonstrate
confidence in them. They were usually fluent in English. Less than half of the students gave
non voluntary response. They had to be asked directly and prompted for answer. They were
certainly actively listening and engaged because they responded correctly or positively to
the questions asked. They just did not voluntarily answer questions asked by the lecturer.
They were used to a teacher-centred classroom. Therefore, they stayed quiet at their desks
and listened to instructions. Then, they carried out their task to their best ability.

4.1.5 Creativity
For the class in charge of Explorace, the students had to use their creativity to come up with
questions and props for each station. All the students were determined to complete their
activities. They had to come up with riddles, find suitable prizes within their budget to be
presented to the winners, create google doc forms and design posters to promote their
projects to students.

11

4.2 Themes on teenagers’ psychomotor skills

Table 4.2.1
Themes on psychomotor skills

Themes

1. Practical skills
2. Organising skills
________________________________________________________________________

4.2.2 Practical Skills
Several video clips made for their projects showed students using their practical skills in
cutting vegetables, washing and cleaning the blood and dirt from the raw chickens and
stirring a huge pot of porridge to help the “We Care” crew prepare breakfast for 200 needy
students on Friday morning at the mosque. Another group put their skills into practice by
conducting aerobic activity to warm-up students for a Colour Charity Run as shown in their
videos. Students felt that coordinating and organizing a project requires good leadership
skills and coordination between tutorial members.

4.2.3 Organising Skills
In their reflective writing, students learnt to write formal letters to request for use of
facilities like the audio system at the ‘Astaka” and had to liase with the technician to teach
them to use the audio system. Students learnt to order T-shirts for the participants, distribute
the T-shirts and contact the KMK co-op to order their buns for the Explorace participants.

4.3 Themes on teenagers’ affective skill

Table 4.3.1
Themes on affective skills

Themes

1. Leadership skill
2. Resilience
3. Life-long values
4. Responsibility
5. Socialization
6. Team skills
7. Self-confidence
8. Sense of achievement

12

4.3.2 Leadership Skills

Students reflected that they needed to learn to lead and give instructions to other group
members. The confidence in giving directions to participants was another area for
improvement.

4.3.3 Resilience
All of the students were determined to carry out their projects successfully. They had to
face last-minute problems such as teams withdrawing from the Explorace on the day of the
event and dealing with drizzle on the actual day. One group faced punctuality issues when
their team members turned up late for the “We Care” breakfast event and cooking gas ran
out midway when they were cooking. Thus, they were late in serving breakfast by 30
minutes. Finally, the porridge was served to 200 students. The group felt proud that the
porridge was finished off completely.

4.3.4 Life-long values
All of the students felt that they would like to organise another event in future and felt
grateful to be given this platform. They learnt empathy, patience, perseverance and
responsibility. For the class helping the ‘We Care’ group, they had to google for recipes to
choose a breakfast dish to cook.

4.3.5 Confidence
Before the project, students lacked confidence in organizing their events but gained self-
confidence through the project because they had to deal with the college staff, participants
and lecturers. They learnt persuasive skills in order to deal with college staff.

4.3.6 Responsibility
Students learnt to be responsible in carrying out their tasks well. For the class helping the
‘We Care’ crew to prepare breakfast, they had to wake up early on a weekend (Friday
morning) and boys learnt to perform kitchen chores that they were not used to, for example,
washing and cleaning chicken pieces in order to cook a huge pot of porridge to feed 200
students.

4.3.7 Socialization
Students learnt to socialize with their class members during the event. They befriended
other participants while having fun during their projects. They got to know other students
from different classes.

4.3.8 Team skills
Students learnt the importance of co-operation. They learnt that to organize and run a
project successfully requires good teamwork between different committees and members.
Even though there were disagreements, everyone learnt to be patient and compromise.

4.3.9 Sense of achievement
Students felt a sense of accomplishment and satisfaction after their events. They were happy
that participants enjoyed taking part in their activities. For the group preparing free
breakfast under the “We Care” crew, they felt fortunate that they were able to give back to
society.

13

5.0 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1 Conclusion
Based on research question 1 (RQ1) of how did the students exhibit knowledge in their
projects, the knowledge was exhibited through knowledge applied, problem-solving,
communication and creativity. Based on cognitive learning, the implications for assessment
is conceptual understanding (applied knowledge and skills), extended performance,
processes as well as outcomes, credit varieties of excellence and develop self-evaluation
and autonomy in learning. According to today's cognitive researchers and theorists,
Bransford & Vye (1989); Davis & Maher (1990), Marzano, Brandt, & Hughes (1988) and
Wittrock (1991)., meaningful learning is reflective, constructive, and self-regulated as
participants are seen not as mere recorders of factual information but as creators of their
own unique knowledge structures.

Based on research question 2 (RQ 2) of how did the students display practical skills
in their projects, practical and organizing skills were shown when students applied
problem-solving skills to come up with props for their Explorace project. Each committee
leader had to lead different committees and coordinate the activities between different
committees while several video clips showed students using their practical skills of cutting
vegetables, cleaning the blood and dirt from the raw chickens and stirring a huge pot of
porridge to help the “We Care” crew prepare breakfast for 200 needy students on Friday
morning at the mosque. Another group put their skills into practice by conducting aerobic
activity to warm-up students for a Colour Charity Run as shown in their videos.

Based on research question 3 (RQ 3) of how did the students display
communication, leadership and team skills in their projects, students felt that coordinating
and organizing a project requires good leadership skills and coordination between tutorial
members. They promoted their events through viralling their projects through social media
like Whatsapp and created Google forms for students to register.

Based on research question 4 (RQ 4) how did the students display problem-solving
and scientific skills in their projects, students applied problem-solving skills when one class
had to deal with a sudden blackout in their hostels during the early morning of their project
to provide free breakfast to students (toast bread and tea). As an alternative, they had to use
the facilities at the cafeteria to toast the bread and prepare tea.

Based on research question 5 (RQ 5) of how did the students display information
management and life-long learning skills in their projects, they googled for information on
setting up an event, googled for recipes to cook and clarified solutions with the lecturer.

Based on the outcome of the research, it is clear that reflective writing supports
learning in many ways as doing a reflective writing depicted learning processes and values
before, during and after the activity. Together with observation, therefore, the lecturer was
able to code their reflective writing to support that cognitive, psychomotor and affective
learning occurred.

5.2 Implication of the study
The present study provides information to matriculation lecturers on reflective writing as a
tool to assess integrity of project report assessment. Through reflective writing, the lecturer
was able to teach experiential learning and keep track of students’ progress before, while
and after their projects. By keeping track of students’ progress through written reflective
reports, the lecturer would know the cognitive, psychomotor and affective learning of
students as they proceeded with their projects. Moreover, the process of metacognitive
learning was a platform for students themselves to discover the way they thought and
solutions to solve challenges or find ways to improve their future organization of projects.

14

5.3 Limitation and Recommendations
This research has certain limitations. The results obtained in this study only involved
student population from KMK, aged 17-20 years old. For preschool and lower primary
school children, the instrument of reflective writing applied in this research would be
deemed inappropriate. Moreover, this research was based on curriculum specifications in
the matriculation syllabus, therefore, the results cannot be generalised to represent the
student population in Malaysia. Thus, with gender, age, educational background and
experience variation in class composition, it is suggested that similar assessment exercises
be conducted with a different cohort of students in the same subject/course or different
subject/course.

15

REFERENCES

Agensi Kelayakan Malaysia (2018). Spesikasi Kurikulum Bahagian Matrikulasi KPM.
Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Matrikulasi, KPM.

Akella, D. (2010). Learning Together: Kolb’s Experiential Theory and its Application.
Journal of Management and Organization, 16(1), 100–112.

Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and
Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York:
Longman.

Baumeister, R.F.& Leary, M.R. (1995). The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal
Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117 (3),
497-529.

Baviskar, S.N., Hartle R.T. & Whitney, T. (2009). Essential Criteria to Characterize
Constructivist Teaching: Derived from a Review of the Literature and Applied to
Five Constructivist-Teaching Method Articles. International Journal of Science
Education, 31(4), 541-550.

Bigge, Morris L. & Shermis Samuel S. (1992). Learning Theories for Teachers. United
States of America: Harpers Collins.

Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Buckingham, England:
Open University Press.

Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2009). Teaching for Quality Learning at University (3rd Ed.).
Maidenhead, England: Open University Press, McGraw-Hill.

Booth, P., Luckett, P., & Mladenovic, R. (1999). The Quality of Learning in Accounting
Education: The Impact of Approaches to Learning on Academic Performance.
Accounting Education, 8(4), 277–30.

Borich, G.D. (1996). Effective Teaching Methods (3rd Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Merrill.

Boud, D. (2000). Sustainable Assessment: Rethinking Assessment for the Learning
Society. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(2), 151–167.

Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning Assessment with Long-Term Learning.
Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399–413.

Bransford, J.D., & Vye, N. (1989). A Perspective on Cognitive Research and Its
Implications in Instruction. In L.B. Resnick & L.E. Klopfer (Eds.), Toward
The Thinking Curriculum: Current Cognitive Research (pp. 173-205).
Alexandria, VA: Association For Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

16

Bruner J.S. (1960). The Process of Education. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Cajete, Gregory A. (1999). Igniting the Spark: An Indigenous Science Education Model.
United States: Kivaki Press Incorporated.

Davis, R.B., & Maher, C.A. (1990). Constructivist View on the Teaching of Mathematics
(Monograph #4). Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Reston, VA:
NCTM.

Dewey, J. (1944). Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan.

Dunwoodie, K., & Ainsworth, M. (1999). Acknowledging Student Diversity: Modifying
the MBA Experience for International Students. Journal of Management and
Organization, 5(1), 35–45

Eftah Moh (2016). Pembudayaan Integriti dalam Pentaksiran Berasaskan Sekolah (PBS).
Kuala Lumpur: Leras Creative Concept.

Ellmers, G., Foley, M., & Bennett, S. (20n08). Graphic Design Education: A Revised
Assessment Approach to Encourage Deep Learning. Journal of University Teaching
and Learning Practice, 5(1), 77–87

Ercegovac, Z. and Richardson, J.V. (2004) Academic Dishonesty, Plagiarism Included, in
the Digital Age: A Literature Review. College and Research Libraries 65 (4).

Esposto, A. S., & Weaver, D. C. (2011). Team Assessment to Improve Student Engagement
and Active Learning. Journal Of University Teaching And Learning
Practice, 8(1), 1–11.

Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004–2005). Conditions under which Assessment Supports
Student’s Learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 1–31.

Herman, Joan L. (1992). Accountability and Alternative Assessment: Research
and Development Issues. CSE Technical Report 348.

Jensen Eric. (2008). Brain-Based Learning: The New Paradigm in Learning. Thousand
Oaks, Ca: Corwin Press.

Kolb, D. A (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and
Development (Vol 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Marton, F., & Säliiö, R. (1984). The Experience of Learning. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell, &
N. Entwistle (Eds.), Approaches to Learning (pp. 36–55), Edinburgh, Scotland:
Scottish Academic Press.

Marzano, R., Brandt, R, & Hughes, C.S. (1988). Dimensions of Thinking: A Framework
for Curriculum and Instruction. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.

17

Marzano, Robert J., Pickering, Debra & Mctighe Jay (1993). Assessing Students’
Outcomes: Performance Assessment Writing Using the Dimensions of Learning
Model. Alexandra, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.

Miller, M.D., Linn, R.L. & Gronlund N.E. (2009). Measurement and Assessment in
Teaching (10th Ed.) Upper Sadle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Nitko, Anthony J. (2004). Educational Assessment of Students. New Jersey: Pearson.

Patton, Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Payyazhi Jayashree, Sumit Mitra (2012). Facilitating a Deep Approach to Learning: An
Innovative Case Assessment Technique. Journal of Management and Organization
18(4): 555–572.

McDonald, P. (2010). Essay: Teaching the Concept of Management: Perspectives from
‘six honest serving men’. Journal of Management and Organization,16(5), 626–
640.

Moon, J.A. (2004). A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning, Theory and
Practice. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Ramsden, P. (1992/2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London, England:
Routledge.

Salter, D., Pang, M. Y. C., & Sharma, P. (2009). Active Tasks to Change the Use of Class
Time within an Outcomes Based Approach to Curriculum Design. Journal of
University Teaching and Learning Practice, 6 (1), 1–38.

Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey
Bass.

Selvarajah, C., Chelliah, J., Meyer, D., Pio, E., & Anurit, P. (2010). The Impact of Social
Motivation on Cooperative Learning and Assessment Preferences. Journal of
Management and Organization, 16(1), 113–126.

Svensson, L. (1977). On Qualitative Difference in Learning: III – Study Skill and Learning.
British Journal of Educational Psychology, 47, 233–243.

Von der Heidt, T., & Lamberton, G. (2011). Sustainability in the Undergraduate and
Postgraduate Business Curriculum of a Regional University: A Critical Perspective.
Journal of Management and Organization,17(5), 670–690.

Wittrock, M.C. (1991). Testing and Recent Research in Cognition. In M.C.
Wittrock, & E. L. Baker (Eds.), Testing and Cognition (pp. 5-16). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

18

Zembylas, M. (2003). Discomforting Truths: The Emotional Terrain of Understanding
Difference in P. Trifonas (Ed) Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking Education for
Social Justice, 110-36. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

19

APPENDICES
20

APPENDIX 1

Class: S4T2

Project: Fit for Green Challenge Explorace

On the 5th January 2019, our class S4T2 had organised an explorace called “Fit for
Green Challenge”. The theme was based on Health and Environment. I was one of the
member in prize committee, mainly handled and prepared the prizes for the participants.
Besides, I was also assigned to in charge the last station in the explorace with two other
members. Before the explorace, I was really excited and delighted as it was my first project
that I had never do before. I also attended the meetings for the explorace that held one day
before the explorace to ensure the explorace was best prepared. Through this project, I have
learned several aspects of qualities that needed to be placed in order for a group to reach
their goals smoothly and successfully which I have realised the importance of
communication skills, teamwork and being open-minded to accept others opinions.

First and foremost, the most important skill that I have learnt through this explorace
was communication skills. Undoubtedly, the communication skills was imperative to
someone in order to give opinions and suggestions to this project. I knew that one of my
weakness was communication skills, I was not confidence and not able to maintain a face-
to-face conversation with others. However, through this explorace, I have realise that the
importance of communication skill. I have learnt to become braver to give suggestions and
I was glad as some of my suggestions had accepted by group members. Thus,
communication skills is important to make the project more smoothly.

Besides, the obvious thing that I discovered was the advantage of working as part
of a group. Undeniably. I learned that good teamwork is the key to success in design
activities when time and resources were limited. Vividly, group often divide the workload
among its members to move closer to final goal. For example, each group members had to
be flexible in scheduling meeting times to discuss and work on our project. As a result, the
project could be completed as many hands make light work. Thus, I have learnt that if one
person does not complete their individual part, the whole group suffers, and therefore it is
important that each person fulfil their role according to the group’s established timeline.

Finally, I have learnt to respect other and be open-minded to accept other idea. As
everyone had their own point of view, many different ideas could be produced. It was not
possible to accept all suggestions. Thus, we have to open-minded and accept other
suggestion although our suggestion was not accepted. As a consequences, discussing
among classmates had made much effective solution for the explorace. Therefore, we had
to be flexible with other’s ideas to make the work more better.

All in all, I have learnt lots of things through this Fit for Green explorace. In
retrospect, it went smoothly as there was no big problems occurred. Although we faced
some that was out of exceptions such as the game might be too simple for participants,
causing the times used for this project ended up much earlier than our estimated time.

21

Besides, there had short of hands in the last station, but we immediately called members in
other group to lend a helping hand. I was glad as I had made some contributions to this
project. In the future, I hope I become braver to communicate with others. It was a
meaningful project as I have learnt the importance of communication skills, teamwork and
being open-minded to accept others opinions.

Class: F2T5

Project: Colour Charity Run

After the community project that we held, I took some time to self reflect and have
learned some things about myself. I’ve learnt to better myself after the activity. Before the
activities, I would say that most times in group projects I would only solely focus on my
part of the project and didn’t do much to help others in the group. Up till now, that is still
the case as not much problem has arisen from my attitude because why fix what is not
broken. There was one scenario that I’ve been through that did made me realise my attitude
which was during the first co-curriculum project of class in the first semester of
matriculation college. Back then, I only did what I was assigned but I somewhat felt useless,
and not as satisfied seeing my other classmates work together so fluently and seeming to
enjoy their time so much.

When it came to the community project, I knew I wanted to contribute more to the
project by helping out with things other than those that were assigned to me, maybe by
helping other classmates with their tasks or doing tasks that no one wanted to do. During
the planning, I was assigned to clean up after the event which was my main task but I also
volunteered myself to help with the public announcement (PA) system when no one wanted
to do it. I went and got the permission to use the college’s PA system by writing a letter to
the college engineer. I also went and learnt how to operate it. On the day of the event, I
played accompanying music on the PA system to the activities and made sure it was always
working. After that, I also helped my classmates out with distribution of the coloured
powder to the participants. It went without a hitch but when it came to cleaning up, I found
that I forgot to prepare any buckets for the clean up. Luckily, some of the classmates who
were tasked with clean up had already brought buckets. I then continued to help clean up.
My classmate did told me that I did a great job even though I didn’t felt that satisfied as
I’ve focused less on my main task. It did make me feel better as he saw that I’ve tried to
contribute as much as I could.

I felt happy with myself because I managed to contribute more to a project but at
the same time I feel disappointed as I forsaken my main task which was to clean up after
the event. By trying to hard to contribute to things other than my main task, I have slightly
forsaken my initial task. I think I should have focused more on cleaning up after the event
as it was the main task assigned to me, I should have better managed my tasks as to not
focus less on one task. In short, I’ve learnt to contribute more in a project and also not to
forsaken any task given. Next time, I will split my time between my activities properly and
l ;make sure my tasks gets done better.

22

23

24

25

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

USING STRUCTURED QUESTIONING MODEL TO IMPROVE
STUDENTS’ DEVELOPMENT OF MAIN IDEA IN PARAGRAPH

WRITING

Oh Chen May

English Language Unit, Kolej Matrikulasi Negeri Sembilan
[email protected]

ABSTRACT

This is a case study which investigates the extent of the use of the Structured Questioning Model in
assisting 10 students from Kolej Matrikulasi Negeri Sembilan in paragraph writing for essays so
that they are in line with the writing assessment specifications. The focus of the Model is to improve
the organisation and development of the students’ main idea in a paragraph according to the scoring
guide. Data analysis included the pre-test and post-test scores, number of sentences students wrote,
types of sentences written and students’ responses to the use of the Model in terms of cohesion,
elaboration, examples and coherence. Findings suggest that the Structured Questioning Model
helped students to follow the assessment requirements more closely by helping them to form more
specific ideas, write more and varied sentences. Overall, the students had positive perceptions
towards the use of the Model as a guide to develop their paragraphs in essay writing.

Keywords: structured questioning model, content paragraph, writing skills, paragraph assessment,
wh-questions

1.0 Introduction
Students who enrol into a national government matriculation college in Malaysia undergo a
pre-university programme which prepares them for further studies in a public university after
the term. The duration of the term is one year. In this one year, the students are expected to sit
for various English Language assessments and one of the tested component is essay writing.
When it comes to essay writing, skills involved such as generating relevant ideas, constructing
appropriate elaboration and organising ideas coherently are very important. The quality of a
good essay is one which shows ideas which are highly relevant, well-developed and have very
good discussions and explanations (Andrade 2000). This rule is not an exception for the
students in the matriculation college who are also expected to produce good quality essays in
their writing assessment. The college writing assessment involves four parts comprising an
outline of the essay, an introductory paragraph, a content paragraph and a concluding
paragraph. For the purpose of this study, only the assessment part for the content paragraph
was focused upon. The assessment components for the content paragraph assess the students
based on the Topic Sentence, Supporting Sentences and Language and Organisation. These
components evaluate the students’ ability to produce a paragraph that has relevant points,
sufficient elaboration, largely accurate language and is organised. However, in an academic
setting, although a student may have good writing skills, he or she may still not be able to do
well due to the misinterpretation of the assessment guidelines for writing. This is because they
must still adhere to the assessment specifications required by the scoring guide. This is even
more of a concern especially for the low proficiency students because minimal scores are
needed as entry requirements to certain critical courses in public universities. This means that
in order to achieve a satisfactory grade in the writing paper, the students are required to present
essays which demonstrate a logical and consistent flow of ideas according to the assessment
specifications. This include linking their ideas effectively to the task and having concise,
cohesive and coherent essays according to the scoring guide. For this reason, this study aims
to investigate the use of a Structured Questioning Model to assist 10 students in writing their

1

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

content paragraphs in order that they follow the requirements needed in the assessment
specifications.
2.0 Reflection on Past Teaching and Learning
Based on the daily experiences in teaching paragraph writing to students and from the
submission of their work, it was found that these students did not perform well in the writing
task. This was due to the lack of ideas presented and poor organisation and planning of their
ideas in the paragraph, all of which did not follow the requirements of the assessment
specifications. Hence, the paragraph often appears disjointed, incoherent and awkward.
Sullivan (1980) noted that a proper paragraph is usually composed of a group of sentences
which express a central idea. This is usually eight to twelve sentences long (Sullivan 1980). A
majority of the students’ paragraphs in this study only showed an average of 5 sentences and
the information presented were not concise. Also the ideas were occasionally not linked to the
task and meaning was sometimes unclear. Read (1990) pointed out that in order for students to
generate enough ideas to write satisfactory essays according to assessment requirements, help
from the teachers in terms of content and knowledge is needed. Therefore, this study aims to
help students develop concrete ideas in order to present better organised paragraphs in their
essays using a Structured Questioning Model based on Wh-questions. Initially, before this
Model was created, students were only prompted with all Wh-questions such as “Who? What?
When? Where? Why? How?”. Hence, the paragraphs were still poorly organised and there
were repetitions at times. The Structured Questioning Model improves the Wh-questions by
organising them systematically in order that students answer them accordingly and this method
fulfils the requirements needed in the scoring guide for the writing assessment specifications.

3.0 Focus of the study
The Structured Questioning Model organises selected Wh-questions in order that the students
answer them systematically in the process of elaborating their main idea in the paragraph. The
aim of the Model is to help students generate and organise ideas systematically and from there,
transfer and compose their written elaboration from the Model into a paragraph based on the
same order. Figure 1 shows how the Structured Questioning Model organises selected Wh-
questions. Appendix A and appendix B may be referred to for further specific details.

Paragraph Content:

Figure 1: Structured Questioning Model

In this Model, the questions “who”, “where” and “when” were removed but implied
instead into “what”. An additional “so” was added because the answers to “so” would reflect a
higher level in Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956). According to the revised version of Bloom’s
Taxonomy by Anderson & Krathwohl (2001), when students write essays, they mainly engage
with the first three levels which is remembering (knowledge), understanding (comprehension)
and applying (application) what they have learnt. In order to bring students to the next three
levels, the use of “why”, “how” and “so” questions would engage the analysing (analysis),
evaluating (evaluation) and creating (synthesis) levels of Bloom’s taxonomy. By going to a

2

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

higher level, this would then demonstrate a deeper level of maturity in their ideas and this
would further help in terms of obtaining higher scores in the assessment. This is in alignment
with the scoring guide in the assessment specification which require students to justify their
points and demonstrate maturity in their explanations.

In order to use the Model to write a paragraph, students first begin by forming a main
idea which answers the essay question and this is referred to as the “Topic sentence”. The
students then move on to section “a) What?” and use this question to write a sentence to explain
“what” they meant by their main idea in the topic sentence. Then, students progress to section
“b) Why?” to explain “why” they meant so, from “what” was written. Next, students explain
“c) How?” they did the “what” by giving specific examples. Subsequently, students explain the
“d) So?” or impact or the effect of their main idea. Finally, students summarise their paragraph
in “e) Mini conclusion” by linking their main idea to the question. The effectiveness of the
Model is measured based on the scores obtained from students’ written paragraphs, the number
of sentences produced and the types of sentences written based on the depth of meaning.

4.0 Objectives of the study
The objective of the research is as follows:

1. To investigate the effectiveness of the Structured Questioning Model as a tool in
developing and organising students’ main ideas in paragraph writing according to
assessment specifications.

5.0 Target group
The selection of the sample was based on purposive sampling, where only 10 students with low
language proficiency levels were selected. They were labelled as ‘S1’ for student 1, ‘S2’ for
student 2, ‘S3’ for student 3 and so on. These 18-year-old students were all Asian, L2 speakers
and came from different states in West Malaysia with diverse backgrounds but are living in the
hostels in the college grounds. The high proficiency students were not selected because based
on previous essay submissions, they were already able to form their ideas independently.
Therefore, the sample consisted of students who obtained a 6C, 7D or 8E in their English
language paper in O’level examinations. They were also selected based on the researcher’s
evaluation of the students’ classroom essay writing assignments. Students whose essays
reflected a lack of cohesion and coherence in their ideas were selected.

6.0 Action Plan and Procedures
Before the intervention began, four instruments were prepared for data collection. These
included a pre-test essay question, a post-test essay question, a questionnaire and a reflection
log. The pre-test and post-test essay questions were created with similar levels. The pre-test
was initially used to determine how far the students were able to perform in their paragraph
writing according to the scoring guide in the assessment specifications. Then, the post-test
determined if students were able to perform more closely to the requirements of the scoring
guide after the intervention using the Structured Questioning Model. The pre-test and post-test
focused solely on the development of one main point where students were to write only one
paragraph based on the essay topic given rather than a full essay of three points. This was so
that more focus could be given towards the development of that particular paragraph. No
introduction and conclusion were needed in the essay. Thereafter, a student questionnaire
consisting of 13 items was used to obtain feedback from the students regarding the effect from
the use of the Structured Questioning Model on their paragraph development skill in essay
writing. The questionnaire was given at the end of the final lesson. At the same time, a
reflection log was used to record observations as the research was carried out. This log was
used as a reference in deciding steps to be taken for the next research cycle if needed.

3

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

In order to answer the research questions, 4 lesson plans of 1 hour each were conducted.
The first lesson started off with the pre-test essay writing by which the students wrote a
paragraph independently without the teacher’s help. This paragraph consisted of only one a
main point based on the essay topic given (refer to Appendix C.1). In this initial stage of the
research, the students complained that they did not have ideas to elaborate their points or knew
how to organise them coherently. Many of them indicated that they did not know how to
develop their main point and were confused with what was considered an appropriate
elaboration. Nevertheless, they still produced the paragraph needed for the pre-test.

In the second and third lesson, the lessons were conducted using the Structured
Questioning Model which focused on paragraph development according to the assessment
specifications. Students were taught the method to utilise this Model in the development of
their paragraph in order that they could follow closely to the scoring guide. They were also
given enrichment exercises to apply this Model to their paragraph writing exercise. Throughout
the intervention lessons, it was observed that students became more eager and interested to try
the method taught and to explore with developing a new paragraph using the help of the Model.
Verbal feedback from the students indicated that they found it easier to form ideas and
elaboration and to organise them accordingly to make the paragraph more coherent.

The final lesson comprised of the post-test where based on what they have learnt,
students wrote another paragraph independently without any help and this paragraph also
contained only one a main point based on a different but similar essay topic given (refer to
Appendix C.2). Thereafter, a questionnaire (refer to Appendix D) was distributed to the
students in order to gather feedback from their use of the Structured Questioning Model.

In order to analyse the data effectively, a few strategies were used. Firstly, scores from
the students’ pre-test and post-test were compared with to determine how far the Model assisted
the students in developing their main idea. These scores were given based on the scoring guide
in the assessment specifications and it took into consideration of several factors such as task
fulfilment, the relevancy of ideas, organisation, cohesion and coherence of the ideas in the
paragraph. Additionally, the number supporting details, quality of elaboration and examples
which were written in the paragraph were taken into consideration. The language errors
however, did not play a major role in affecting the scores as this research focused mainly on
content. The next strategy that was used to determine if the Model encouraged the students to
write more, was to compare the differences in total number of sentences written in the pre-test
and post-test. Besides, the changes in the specific types of sentences written in the paragraph
were also analysed to demonstrate if students were able to attain higher levels of thinking in
Bloom’s taxonomy (1956) after using the Structured Questioning Model. And finally, the
feedback given by the students in the questionnaire based on their use of the Structured
Questioning Model for paragraph development was analysed to confirm or negate the findings
from other data sources.

In order to assure the credibility and reliability of the study, inter-rater reliability was
established where the pre-test and post-test marked scores were also confirmed by another
teaching expert. At the same time, the scores were triangulated with the responses from the
questionnaire and these responses were further validated with the reflection logs which
recorded the observation of the lessons together with notations of students’ verbal feedback
regarding the intervention lessons.

7.0 Findings and Discussion
The results from the pre-test and post-test scores indicated a significant improvement where
before, the mean scores that the students have obtained in their pre-test was 5.3 and this
increased to 9.7 in their post-test. This demonstrates that the Structured Questioning Model
was able to assist students’ in writing a better paragraph by helping them develop their main

4

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

idea according to the scoring guide as required in the assessment. Figure 2 illustrates the
differences in scores for each of the students.

Scores Pre-Test & Post-Test Scores Pre-Test Score
Post-Test Score
20
10

0
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10
Student

Figure 2: Pre-test & post-test scores

S10 had the highest difference in the scores, leaping from 7 to 15, a difference of 8
marks and an increase of 53%. S1 and S5 however only had an increase of 2 marks which was
only an increase of 13%. Nevertheless, this still demonstrated that the Model was able to assist
students in producing and developing their main idea better compared to without it. This was
confirmed by Khwaileh (2011) who stated that in order to write better compositions, a
structured guide is needed. The students confirmed that by answering the questions first and
using its structure as a guide, it was easier for them to figure out the outline of their paragraph
and to link their ideas more effectively from one to another. This was affirmed in the written
product that was submitted. Reid & Kroll (1995) affirmed that part of the writing process is
creating content and when students in this study were provided with the help that they need,
their written ideas were better organised and there were improved details in the elaboration and
examples. The paragraphs also showed better cohesion and coherence.

Besides obtaining better scores due to better developed ideas and improved
organisation, the use of the Structured Questioning Model also guided the students to write
more sentences from an average of 5 sentences in a paragraph in the pre-test and leaping double
to 10 sentences after the intervention. Figure 3 shows a general overview of the total number
of sentences written in the students’ paragraphs. It can be seen that all students wrote less
sentences in the pre-test, but after the intervention, the number of sentences in the post-test
increased considerably. This finding was substantiated by Leki & Carson’s (1997) study, which
stated that a source text, whether it was a set of wh-questions or any other type, could assist
students in overcoming the difficulties they face in developing more and better ideas for
writing.

No.of sentences Number of sentences written Total Pre-Test
Total Post-Test
15
10

5
0

S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 S10
Students

Figure 3: Number of sentences written

Overall, after the students’ use of the Structured Questioning Model, it was found that
the total number of sentences which the students wrote in their paragraph increased in the post-
test compared to the pre-test. S3 had the most increase in the number of sentences from 6 to 13
sentences, an extra 6 sentences more. However, S8 only had an increase of 1 sentence. Even

5

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

S4, who wrote the least number of sentences, from a minimal 4, increased to 6 sentences. From

here, it can be seen that the use of the Model encouraged students to write more sentences in

their paragraphs even with an extra 1. With a structured guide, students had more confidence

to write more. They noted that this was because it was easier to answer questions first and
utilise them as ideas rather than to “plainly come up with ideas”. From the feedback in the

questionnaire, students expressed that with the use of the Model, it facilitated them in
constructing their main points in a more concrete manner and to expand them. The “why”
question helped them to generate meaningful explanations to support their points and the “how”

question inspired relevant and clearer examples to illustrate their elaboration.

Finally, the Structured Questioning Model was also able to help students to write more

meaningful supporting details, elaboration and examples in their paragraphs. This is based on
the different types of sentences produced in the students’ paragraphs based on the questions

from the Model. The different types of sentences refer to the questions which the sentences

answer, which were what, why, how, so and a mini-conclusion. Figure 4 to Figure 8 illustrates

the 5 different types of sentences written by the students and their total number before and after

the intervention.

What? Why?

4 6
3 4
2 2
1 0
0
Students
Students
No. of sentences Pre-test No. of sentences Pre-test
S1 Post-test S1 Post-test
S2 S2
S3 S3
S4 S4
S5 S5
S6 S6
S7 S7
S8 S8
S9 S9

S10 S10

Figure 4: “What?” sentences Figure 5: “Why?” sentences

How? So?

6 6
4 4
2 2 Pre-test
0 0 Post-test

Students Students
No. of sentences Pre-test No. of sentences
S1 Post-test S1
S2 S2
S3 S3
S4 S4
S5 S5
S6 S6
S7 S7
S8 S8
S9 S9

S10 S10

Figure 6: “How?” sentences Figure 7: “So?” sentences

6

No. of sentences Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
S1
S2 Mini-conclusion
S3
S4 2
S5
S6 1
S7 0 Pre-test
S8
S9 Post-test

S10 Students

Figure 8: Mini-conclusion

According to Figure 4, generally, it can be seen that all except one student (S9) wrote
more or equal number of “what?” sentences in the post-test compared to the pre-test. S3 and
S7 had the biggest leap from 0 to 3 sentences. This showed that the Model could prompt
students to think up of essential points needed to describe the topic sentence.

However, for S9, the “what?” sentences decreased 1 instead in the post-test.
Nevertheless, for S9, this deficiency was remediated with more sentences written for “why?”
and “so?” questions. In fact, S9 had the highest number of sentences for “why?”, a leap from
2 to 5 sentences. This was even better than having more “what?” sentences because it reflects
a higher order thinking skill and gives more depth and meaning to the elaboration. Other
students, except S7, recorded an increase or equal number of “why?” sentences too. This
demonstrated that through the “what?” questions, students were better able to formulate
explanations and reasons to justify their “what?” points. Only S7 decreased in the number of
explanations but this was because they were replaced with more “how?” sentences.

It was observed that all students increased in the number of “how?” sentences as well
to illustrate examples in support of their elaboration, except S8 who wrote less. Nevertheless,
compared to the pre-test which did not even have any “what?” explanations, S8’s post-test was
still considered a better one.

For “so?” sentences, all students except S3, S5 and S10 produced more sentences in the
post-test. Establishing a “so?” (impact/effect) is very important for any essay as it reflects
higher order of thinking in Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956). Additionally, these sentences often
display a level of maturity and is more aligned with requirements in the assessment
specifications. However, for S3, this number decreased but this was no cause for alarm as S3
managed to produce more why? sentences in the post-test which were not present in the pre-
test. S10 on the other hand added more examples for how? instead. S5 did not show much
significance to deal with the decrease.

It was also very encouraging to note that 6 students who initially did not write mini-
conclusions for their paragraphs in the pre-test, managed to generate one in the post-test,
leading to 100% students who wrote mini-conclusions to summarise their main point.

In summary, the data shown here demonstrate that students were able to produce more
varied ideas and better elaboration and work towards higher order thinking skills using the
Structured Questioning Model. Additionally, the Model helped students to better organise their
elaboration so that they are more coherent and well-linked.

Next, students’ feedback from the questionnaire regarding the use of the Structured
Questioning Model shows a whopping 72% who totally agreed and 28% agreed to the use of
the Model in guiding them with paragraph development. None of the students felt unsure or
disagreed with the use of the Model for writing tasks. All of students either agreed or totally
agreed that the use of the Structured Questioning Model assisted them in terms of cohesion and
organisation, producing more elaboration and examples and improving the coherence of their
ideas. Additionally, they indicated that the use of the Structured Questioning Model helped

7

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

them to think of their three main points more easily in essay writing and to organise their main
points and supporting details better. They also noted that it was easier to provide specific
reasons to support the main point, give detailed explanations about the point, develop better
elaboration for the point and to establish a rationale for the elaboration. Moreover, they were
able to give more relevant, clearer and specific examples compared to before. Finally, by using
the Structured Questioning Model as a guide, it was able to help them link their ideas more
effectively from one to another, summarise and link their main point to the question and to
produce a better paragraph compared to previous attempts.

8.0 Reflections and Conclusion
The results of the research indicated that students had positive perceptions towards the use of
the Structured Questioning Model as a guide to help them improve the development of ideas
for their paragraphs in essay writing. All of the students in the study agreed that the Model
assisted them in forming better paragraphs according to assessment specifications and this was
evidenced by the results from the pre-test and post-test. Detailed analysis of the paragraphs that
the students have written demonstrated that the use of the Model helped them to write more
and varied sentences in a paragraph and enabled them to form more complex ideas which
reflected higher order thinking in Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956). Clearly, the Structured
Questioning Model is useful for students who currently struggle to form ideas, develop
appropriate supporting details and relevant elaboration and establish examples for essay
writing. By using this Model, students can be more confident with forming and linking relevant
elaboration to their main ideas. They do not have to waste time staring into a blank space but
are guided with what to think of through the wh-question prompt from the Model. Hence, the
students would then have no complains about having no ideas.

Through further observation of the students, it was revealed that this group of new
generation students do have a lot of ideas which are already formed in their minds but they
struggle with not knowing how to produce them in academic essays in accordance to the
assessment specifications. This could be due to L2 restrains and L1 interferences (Derakhshan
& Karimi 2015). Therefore, it is with hope that through the results from this study, other
teachers would be inspired to try this out with their own classes and to investigate how far the
Structured Questioning Model may work in their context.

Although the Structured Questioning Model worked in this study, in order to further
validate and endorse the effectiveness of the Structured Questioning Model, a bigger sample is
recommended so that the value of the Model can be further substantiated. At the same time, to
further enhance the use of the Model, it is recommended that teachers allocate more time to
train the students in getting used to utilising the Model until it is memorised and internalised.
Students can be encouraged to work independently with the Model at their own time to make
it effective in helping them create and to organise their ideas. Teachers could also continually
remind them to write fearlessly, without the worry of having their work graded academically
or judged by peers as the components Model are already in line with the requirements needed
in the assessment specifications. It is with hope that with the introduction of the Structured
Questioning Model, there would be no more moans and groans coming from students anymore
about not knowing how to develop ideas when it comes to essay writing.

8

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

References
Anderson, L. W. & Krathwohl, D. R., et al (Eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning,

Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.
Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon (Pearson Education Group)
Andrade, H. G. (2000). Using Rubrics to Promote Thinking and Learning. Educational
Leadership, 57(5): 13-18.
Bloom, B. S. & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The
classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York:
Longmans, Green and Co.
Derakhshan, A. & Karimi, E. (2015). The Interference of First Language and Second Language
Acquisition. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 5(10): 2112-2117
Khwaileh, F.M. (2011). The Effect of Wh-Questions on the Quantity and Quality of Low-Level
Achieving Students’ Paragraph Writing At the University Level. Dirasat: Educational
Sciences, 38(1), 359-371.
Leki, I., & Carson, J. (1997). “Completely different worlds”: EAP and the writing experiences
of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1): 39-69.
Read, J. (1990). Providing relevant content in an EAP writing test. ESP, 9: 109-121.
Reid, J. & Kroll, B. (1995). Designing and assessing effective classroom writing
assignments for NES and ESL writing students. Journal of Second Language Writing,
4(1): 17-41.
Sullivan, K. E. (1980). Paragraph practice: Writing the paragraph and the short composition.
4th edition. Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.: New York.

9

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

APPENDIX A
The purpose of the Structured Questioning Model is to guide students through the development of their
Paragraph Content in essay writing. From the main idea, also known as the Topic Sentence, students are to
develop and organise their paragraph based on structured questions (refer to the sample in APPENDIX B):

The Structured Questioning Model

Paragraph Content:

Legend:

What? – students uFsiegtuhries t1oTexhpelaSitnru“wcthuarte”dthQeyuemsteiaonnbinygthMeiordmeal in idea in the topic sentence.

Why? – students explain “why” they mean so (“what”).

How? – students explain “how” they do the “what” by giving specific examples.

So? – students explain the impact or the effect of their main idea.
Mini conclusion – students summarise their paragraph by linking their main idea to the

question.

ohchenmay/paragraphwriting/elu/kmns/2019

APPENDIX B
Sample of a Used Structured Questioning Model

Paragraph Content:

ohchenmay/paragraphwriting/elu/kmns/2019

10

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019

APPENDIX C
1. Pre-test essay question
Discipline is important in your day-to-day life. How do you practise discipline daily? Discuss.
2. Post-test essay question
Managing yourself is crucial in your everyday life. How do you manage yourself every day? Discuss.

APPENDIX D
The Structured Questioning Model

Paragraph Content:

Dear students,

The objective of the Structured Questioning Model is to assist students in developing the paragraphs in essay
writing. Please take a moment to complete this questionnaire by putting a tick (√) at the most appropriate response.

Thank you.

Class :

Sex :

1- Totally disagree 2- Disagree 3- Unsure 4- Agree 5- Totally agree

No. This activity helped me to: 12345
Cohesion and Organisation

1 think of three main points easily
2 organise my main points better
3 organise my supporting details

Elaboration
4 give specific reasons to support the point
5 give detailed explanations about the point
6 develop better elaboration for the point
7 establish a rationale for the elaboration

Examples
8 give more relevant examples
9 give clearer examples
10 give specific examples

Coherence
11 link my ideas more effectively from one to another
12 summarise and link my main point to the question
13 produce a better paragraph compared to previous attempts

Thank you very much for your participation. ☺

ohchenmay/paragraphwriting/elu/kmns/2019

11

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Integriti Pensyarah Dalam Pentaksiran Rubrik Perbincangan
Berkumpulan Matematik Kolej Matrikulasi Pulau Pinang

Asiahwati Awi
Muhamad Nizam @ Abdul Hafiz Hilmi

Lim Ai Hui
Md Rodhi Md Rejab

Unit Matematik, Kolej Matrikulasi Pulau Pinang
[email protected]

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji tahap integriti pensyarah dalam melaksanakan
pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan Matematik bagi pelajar sistem dua semester
Kolej Matrikulasi Pulau Pinang. Reka bentuk kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif
dengan melaksanakan pengumpulan data dalam dua kaedah. Kaedah pertama melibatkan
empat orang pensyarah menilai perbincangan pelajar dengan menggunakan borang
pemarkahan mengikut rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan. Data dianalisis dengan mengambil
nilai min dan sisihan piawai. Kaedah kedua pula ialah soal selidik yang mempunyai 9 item
melibatkan semua (18) pensyarah yang mengajar pelajar sistem dua semester. Data dianalisis
dengan mengambil nilai kekerapan, peratus dan min. Dapatan pertama menunjukkan tahap
perbezaan dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan matematik adalah kecil.
Dapatan kedua menunjukkan tahap pemahaman dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan matematik adalah tinggi dengan boxplot pencong ke kanan. Manakala dapatan
ketiga menunjukkan tahap sifat berintegriti dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan matematik adalah tinggi. Secara kesimpulannya, kajian menunjukkan
sememangnya integriti pensyarah dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan
matematik adalah tinggi. Implikasinya, tahap integriti yang tinggi akan menjurus kepada
pemarkahan penilaian berterusan yang tepat dan dipercayai.

Kata Kunci: integriti, rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan, perbezaan dalam pentaksiran,
pemahaman dalam pentaksiran, sifat berintegriti dalam pentaksiran

1.0 Pendahuluan
Pengiktirafan sijil matrikulasi membawa kepada perubahan dalam sistem pendidikan di
peringkat matrikulasi Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. Perubahan ini adalah untuk
meningkatkan kualiti pendidikan matrikulasi supaya menjadi lebih baik dan mengikut standard
yang ditetapkan. Seterusnya, ia akan menjadi pilihan pertama pelajar lepasan Sijil Pelajaran
Malaysia untuk menyambung pelajaran sebelum memasuki universiti. Antara perubahan yang
dibuat ialah penambahbaikan dalam penilaian berterusan. Dalam subjek Matematik, selain
peperiksaan akhir, penilaian berterusan juga telah beri perhatian yang sewajarnya. Penilaian
berterusan adalah proses berterusan yang mengukur pencapaian pelajar semasa kelas,
menyediakan maklumat yang diguna untuk menyokong perkembangan pelajar dan
membolehkan penambahbaikan dibuat dalam proses pembelajaran (Department of Education.
National Curriculum Statement, 2007). Selain itu, penilaian berterusan juga merupakan
penilaian mengenai penggredan dan pelaporan pencapaian pelajar dan mengenai perkara yang
menyokong pelajar dalam pembelajaran mereka. Oleh itu, amalan penilaian berterusan
umumnya mempunyai fungsi formatif untuk pembelajaran dan fungsi sumatif untuk pensijilan
(Hernández, 2012). Terdapat beberapa komponen yang mendasari penilaian berterusan.
Antaranya ialah komponen perbincangan kumpulan. Perbincangan kumpulan bagi subjek
Matematik mengambil kira pengiraan berkenaan integriti akademik yang akan menghasilkan
sebanyak 5% markah penilaian berterusan. Rubrik pemarkahan untuk menilai integriti
akademik ini perlu jelas supaya pemarkahan dibuat dengan tepat dan selayaknya. Dalam pada
itu, integriti yang ada pada pensyarah juga perlu tinggi supaya pemarkahan menjadi lebih adil.

1

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
__________________________________________________________________________________________

Pensyarah berprofesional tinggi akan melambangkan nilai integriti yang tinggi dalam
melaksanakan pekerjaan mereka.

Dalam kajian ini pensyarah dikatakan mempunyai integriti yang tinggi apabila
memenuhi tiga komponen iaitu menunjukkan perbezaan dalam pentaksiran rubrik yang kecil
atau sifar. pemahaman dalam pentaksiran rubrik dan sifat berintegriti pensyarah dalam
melaksanakan pentaksiran yang tinggi. Sifat berintegriti dalam kajian ini dikatakan wujud
apabila pensyarah mengetahui cara membuat penilaian mengikut rubrik, bersikap amanah,
bertanggungjawab dan adil. Apabila ketiga-tiga komponen ini dipenuhi, maka integriti
pensyarah dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan matematik Kolej Matrikulasi
Pulau Pinang dikatakan tinggi.

1.1 Pernyataan masalah
Dalam Spesifikasi Kurikulum baharu, peratusan markah penilaian berterusan subjek
Matematik menjadi 40%. Antara komponen penilaian berterusan ialah tugasan 1 (10%),
tugasan 2 (25%) dan perbincangan berkumpulan (5%). Peperiksaan akhir akan menyumbang
sebanyak 60% markah untuk penggredan. Sebelum Spesifikasi Kurikulum baharu diperkenal,
penilaian berterusan hanya menyumbang sebanyak 20% manakala peperiksaan akhir pula
menyumbang sebanyak 80%. Ini menunjukkan peratusan penilaian berterusan bagi Spesifikasi
Kurikulum baharu telah naik sekali ganda berbanding yang sebelum ini. Penilaian berterusan
penting memandangkan ia berpotensi untuk menyokong pembelajaran pelajar melalui maklum
balas dan dalam masa yang sama ia dapat meningkatkan motivasi pelajar untuk belajar
(Hernández, 2012). Perbincangan berkumpulan antara komponen yang diambil kira untuk
penilaian berterusan. Susulan itu, pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan perlu
dilakukan dengan betul supaya markah yang diberi adalah selayaknya.

Pensyarah perlu faham setiap atribut dalam rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan. Semasa
membuat penilaian, integriti pensyarah amat penting dan dilihat sebagai satu komitmen
terhadap prinsip moral yang tinggi dalam memikul dan menjalankan sesuatu tugas sama ada
pada peringkat individu atau organsisasi. Integriti merupakan produk budaya, dan ia tidak
boleh diwujudkan oleh peraturan atau prosedur mekanikal. Integriti dipamerkan dalam sesuatu
bentuk realiti kerohanian individu, bukan realiti mekanikal mereka. Integriti timbul dari
budaya dan merujuk kepada keadaan dalaman tetapi komprehensif, bukan sekadar mematuhi
peraturan dan prosedur luaran (Nillsen, 2005). Sebaliknya, kelemahan berintegriti dan akan
menyumbang kepada keruntuhan nilai moral dan kerosakan sesuatu profesion pekerjaan
(Hardingham, 2004). Oleh itu, kajian ini dijalankan untuk mengetahui tahap kefahaman dan
integriti pensyarah dalam mentaksir rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan matematik. Sekiranya
pensyarah telah faham, pemarkahan perbincangan berkumpulan menjadi benar-benar tepat,
dan selayaknya serta dipercayai.

1.2 Objektif Kajian
Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji integriti pensyarah dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran
rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan bagi pelajar sistem dua semester Kolej Matrikulasi Pulau
Pinang. Objektif kajian dapat dicapai melalui tiga objektif khusus iaitu:

(a) Mengenalpasti tahap perbezaan dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan
Matematik.

(b) Mengenalpasti tahap pemahaman pensyarah dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan Matematik.

(c) Mengenalpasti tahap sifat berintegriti pensyarah dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran
rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan Matematik.

2

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
__________________________________________________________________________________________

1.3 Soalan Kajian
Kajian ini diharap dapat menjawab soalan kajian iaitu:

(a) Apakah tahap perbezaan dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan
Matematik?

(b) Apakah tahap pemahaman pensyarah dalam pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan Matematik;
mengikut pengalaman mengajar di kolej matrikulasi?
keseluruhan?

(c) Apakah tahap sifat berintegriti pensyarah dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran rubrik
perbincangan berkumpulan Matematik;
mengikut pengalaman mengajar di kolej matrikulasi?
keseluruhan?

1.4 Hipotesis Kajian
Rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan disediakan bagi menilai aktiviti yang berlaku dalam
perbincangan berkumpulan. Walaupun rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan ini baru didedahkan
kepada pensyarah untuk digunapakai, namun integriti pensyarah sebagai pendidik seharusnya
wujud dan berada dalam tahap yang tinggi. Dengan ini pemarkahan yang dibuat oleh
pensyarah apabila mengikut rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan adalah tepat dan pelajar
mendapat markah selayaknya. Kajian ini mengambil hipotesis bahawa integriti pensyarah
dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran rubrik perbincangan berkumpulan adalah tinggi.

1.5 Kepentingan Kajian
Kajian ini akan menggambarkan integriti dan kefahaman pensyarah dalam menaksir rubrik
perbincangan berkumpulan. Dapatan kajian ini akan memberi maklumat dan input kepada
pihak pengurusan dan pensyarah serta pelajar. Pihak pengurusan perlu mengambil langkah
penambahbaikan sekiranya dapatan yang diperolehi kurang memuaskan demi memastikan
kesemua pensyarah tahu menaksir rubrik tersebut.

Pensyarah juga dapat mengetahui sama ada proses memberi maklum balas kepada
aktiviti pelajar dapat dilaksana dengan jayanya atau tidak. Ini akan menjadi petunjuk prestasi
sama ada pensyarah benar–benar berintegriti atau sebaliknya, bersedia atau tidak ketika
menjalankan proses pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Tambahan lagi, apabila pensyarah boleh
menaksir rubrik tersebut dengan betul dan tepat, pelajar akan diberi pemarkahan yang adil dan
saksama.

1.6 Skop dan Batasan Kajian
Kajian tertumpu kepada aspek keintegritian pensyarah dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran rubrik
perbincangan berkumpulan matematik bagi pelajar dua semester. Rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan telah disediakan oleh pihak pengurusan dengan mengambil kira integriti
akademik. Terdapat dua atribut yang diberi perhatian iaitu atribut 2: kerja berkumpulan
(Kepimpinan, membuat keputusan dan kemahiran kolaboratif), dan atribut 4: sikap dan nilai.

1.7 Kerangka Konsep Kajian
Integriti didefinisikan dalam Kamus Dwibahasa DBP (1985) sebagai kejujuran dan ketulusan;
kesempurnaan; dan keutuhan. Dari maksud yang didapati dari kamus di atas, integriti adalah
sifat jati diri yang merangkumi juga keikhlasan, keterbukaan, ketelusan, amanah, benar,
berpegang kepada prinsip, tidak mudah dipengaruhi, boleh dipercayai, boleh pegang apa yang
dicakapkannya. Nilai integriti ini merangkumi pengetahuan, kesedaran, penghayatan dan
pegangan teguh yang bersifat konsisten dalam setiap tindakan bagi mencapai kecemerlangan
diri dan organisasi (Zalinah, 2014). Integriti ialah melakukan sesuatu dengan penuh

3

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
__________________________________________________________________________________________

tanggungjawab tanpa penyelewengan atau pengabaian. Ia juga satu bentuk pernyataan tingkah
laku individu yang agak kompleks dan sukar untuk dihuraikan. Tetapi integriti menentukan jati
diri seseorang dalam melaksanakan tugas dan amanah yang digalas (Noor Su`Adah, 2014,
Eftah, 2016). Dalam kajian ini integriti pensyarah dalam pentaksiran merangkumi tiga
komponen iaitu; perbezaan dalam pentaksiran, pemahaman dalam pentaksiran dan sifat
berintegriti pensyarah dalam melaksanakan pentaksiran. Perbezaan dalam pentaksiran
sepatutnya boleh dikawal apabila rubrik pemarkahan dapat ditaksir dengan baik. Untuk
menaksir dengan baik, rubrik pemarkahan yang disediakan perlu difahami sejelas-jelasnya oleh
pentaksir. Walaupun perbezaan dalam pentaksiran terkawal dan pemahaman dalam
pentaksiran adalah baik, sifat berintegriti semasa melaksanakan pentaksiran juga perlu tinggi
untuk seseorang itu dilabelkan berintegriti dalam pentaksiran. Rajah 1 menunjukkan tiga
komponen dalam integriti pentaksiran yang menjadi mendasari kajian ini.

Perbezaan Dalam Pentaksiran Pemahaman Dalam Pentaksiran

Sifat Berintegriti Pensyarah Dalam
Melaksanakan Pentaksiran

Integriti Dalam Pentaksiran

Rajah 1. Tiga komponen dalam integriti pentaksiran.

2.0 KAJIAN LITERATUR
Istilah integriti berasal dari perkataan Latin ‘integritas’ yang bermakna ‘tidak terjejas’, ‘kukuh’,
‘benar’ atau boleh diharapkan (IIM, 2009 dalam Eftah, 2016). Integriti dilihat sebagai satu
kualiti diri yang mulia yang dapat diukur melalui tingkah laku (Eftah, 2016). Ia juga
merupakan antara elemen utama dalam kesejahteraan hidup. Integriti mempunyai hubungan
yang positif dengan kesejahteraan hidup individu dan juga organisasi. Tahap integriti
menunjukkan kepada tahap pencapaian hasil kerja berkualiti yang dipertanggungjawabkan
kepada individu atau organsiasi dengan berlandaskan ciri-ciri kerja bersepadu dan menyeluruh.
Pada peringkat individu, penghayatan konsep integriti bererti seseorang kakitangan perlu
menunjukkan keselarasan di antara apa yang dikatakan dengan apa yang dilakukan, bertindak
menurut prinsip moral, etika dan undang-undang, mengutamakan kepentingan umum melebihi
kehendak dirinya sendiri dan melakukan kerja dengan kualiti yang bermutu dan tepat.
Sementara di peringkat organisasi, penghayatan integriti perkhidmatan terjelma dalam bentuk
perumusan dan pelaksanaan kod etika, piagam pelanggan, proses kerja dan pematuhan terhadap
amalan terbaik (Jamiah et.al., 2005).

Kajian oleh Noor Su`Adah (2014) dalam mengenal pasti tahap integriti guru dalam
penilaian berasaskan Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR) di Sekolah Kebangsaan
(SK) dan Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) serta mengenal pasti kewujudan dalam
perbezaan tahap integriti guru antara SK dan SJKC. Dengan responden seramai 60 orang yang
mempunyai pengalaman mengajar pelbagai peringkat, mendapati tahap integriti guru SK ialah
3.69, manakala tahap integriti guru SJKC ialah 3.84. Kedua-duanya berada dalam tahap

4

Konvensyen Penyelidikan Pendidikan Program Matrikulasi Tahun 2019
__________________________________________________________________________________________

integriti sederhana. Dalam kajian perbandingan tahap berintegriti antara guru SK dan SJKC
pula, keputusan menunjukkan bahawa perbezaan tahap integriti yang ketara di antara SK dan
SJKC adalah tidak signifikan. Kajian ini mendapati tahap integriti guru SK dan SJKC adalah
sama. Hasil kajian bagi pengalaman mengajar pula memperlihatkan dapatan yang agak
berbeza kerana semakin lama mengajar didapati tahap integriti guru semakin menurun.

3.0 METODOLOGI
Bahagian ini membincangkan reka bentuk kajian, populasi dan penentuan sampel, instrumen
kajian serta kutipan dan analisis data.

3.1 Reka Bentuk Kajian
Kajian ini menggunakan reka bentuk penyelidikan kuantitatif. Ia mementingkan keobjektifan
dalam pengumpulan data berdasarkan andaian setiap fenomena dapat diterangkan dengan
mengukur elemen-elemen yang wujud dalam fenomena tersebut (Noraini, 2013). Data
deskriptif yang diperolehi daripada penyelidikan kuantitatif ini berbentuk numerika yang nyata
dan ringkas. Statistik deskriptif yang menggunakan prosedur numerika dan grafik dalam
meringkas data yang banyak dengan cara yang jelas dan mudah difahami serta boleh diguna
untuk membuat kesimpulan (Chua, 2012). Selain itu, melalui ukuran-ukuran statistik deskriptif
ini, pengolahan statistik yang sesuai dengan ciri-ciri data mudah dilakukan. Akhirnya, analisis
data boleh digeneralisasikan untuk menampung keperluan populasi yang lebih besar tetapi
mempunyai ciri-ciri yang sama.

3.2 Populasi dan Penentuan Persampelan
Kajian ini dilaksanakan dalam dua peringkat. Pada peringkat pertama, kajian ini melibatkan
empat orang pensyarah daripada 14 orang pensyarah yang mengendalikan pengajaran dan
pembelajaran (PdP) pelajar program sains dalam sistem dua semester sesi 2018/2019. Sampel
yang diperolehi daripada empat orang pensyarah ini digunapakai untuk analisis dapatan kajian.
Kesemua empat orang pensyarah tersebut memenuhi kriteria-kriteria pemilihan sampel kajian.
Antara kriteria tersebut ialah mereka merupakan pensyarah yang mengendalikan PdP pelajar
sistem dua semester untuk kedua-dua semester sesi 2018/2019. Tambahan pula mereka
mempunyai pengalaman mengajar yang pelbagai iaitu antara lima hingga 20 tahun. Di
samping itu kesediaan mereka untuk memberi kerjasama dalam kajian ini.

Pada peringkat kedua kajian ini mengambil kesemua 18 orang pensyarah yang
mengendalikan PdP pelajar sistem dua semester sesi 2018/2019. Terdapat empat orang
pensyarah yang mengendalikan program perakaunan manakala 14 orang pensyarah
mengendalikan program sains. Kesemua populasi (18) ini menggunakan rubrik perbincangan
berkumpulan yang sama untuk pelajar sistem dua semester sesi 2018/2019.

3.3 Instrumen Kajian
Terdapat dua jenis instrumen yang digunakan dalam kajian ini. Instrumen pertama merupakan
borang pemarkahan untuk perbincangan berkumpulan. Borang pemarkahan ini menggunakan
rubrik pemarkahan yang terdiri daripada dua atribut iaitu atribut 2: kerja berkumpulan
(Kepimpinan, membuat keputusan dan kemahiran kolaboratif) dan atribut 4: sikap dan nilai.

Atribut 2 mengenai kerja berkumpulan ini disokong oleh tiga sub atribut iaitu: 2.1
Kerjasama antara ahli kumpulan, 2.2 Sumbangan Idea dan Perkongsian Maklumat, dan 2.3
Interaksi pelajar di dalam kumpulan. Manakala, atribut 4 mengenai sikap dan nilai ini disokong
oleh dua sub atribut iaitu: 4.1 Keyakinan diri, dan 4.2 Usaha.

Rubrik Perbincangan Berkumpulan yang terdiri daripada lima sub atribut disediakan
oleh pihak pengurusan untuk digunapakai oleh semua pensyarah yang mengelolakan pelajar
sistem dua semester sesi 2018/2019. Setiap sub atribut mengandungi lima skalar pemarkahan

5