vol 6 issue 2 dec 2014

LEMBAGA PENGARANG

JURNAL PENDIDIKAN DAN LATIHAN

Jilid 6 Bil. 02 Disember 2014 ISSN: 1985-9597

Penaung

Datuk Ibrahim bin Ahmad

Ketua Pengarah

Majlis Amanah Rakyat

Ketua Editor

Kamaruzaman Jaffar, KMN

Editor

Dr. Dewi Izzwi Abdul Manan Dr. Faridah Salleh Dr. Fatimah Ehsan

Dr. Noorzalina Mohd Noor Dr. Sarinah Sulaiman

Faizah Abu Bakar Hanirus Osman

Hasmah Markom Khairiah Abdullah Mazni Suleiman

Rodina Kamaruddin Roskhairul Hanafi bin Subiran

Sharida Hashim Siti Rosezaimah Ismail

Pewasit

Prof Dr. Haslinda Abdullah, Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia

Dr. Jainabee Kassim

ii

Jurnal Pendidikan dan Latihan

Jilid 6 Bil. 02, Disember 2014

Diterbitkan oleh:

Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA)

d/a: d/a Unit Inovasi dan Penyelidikan MARA

Tingkat 9, Ibu Pejabat MARA

No. 21, Jalan Raja Laut

50609 Kuala Lumpur

Tel : (03) 26134480

Faks : (03) 26910486

©Hak Cipta MARA 2014

Hak cipta terpelihara. Tiada mana-mana bahagian daripada penerbitan ini boleh

diterbitkan semula atau disimpan dalam bentuk yang boleh diperoleh semula atau

disiar dalam bentuk dengan apa cara sekalipun, sama ada secara elektronik, fotokopi,

mekanikal, rakaman atau sebaliknya tanpa mendapat izin bertulis daripada MAJLIS

AMANAH RAKYAT (MARA).

Lembaga Pengarang Jurnal Pendidikan dan Latihan Majlis Amanah Rakyat (MARA)

menjemput para pembaca untuk menyumbang artikel dalam bidang pendidikan dan

teknikal. Maklumat lanjut berkaitan artikel boleh dilayari melalui:

http://journal.mara.gov.my/Innovation/articles.html

iii

Kandungan Muka surat

Prestasi dan Potensi Akademik serta Bidang Kerjaya yang Diminati 1 - 18

dan Dipilih oleh Pelajar Maktab Rendah Sains MARA (MRSM)

Prof. Madya Dr. Suria Baba

Dr. Jainabee Md Kassim

Implementation of Chemistry Lecturer Junior Programme to Enhance 19 - 29

Students’ Achievement in Chemistry

Nurul Elyani Elleas

Maria Ilyana Muhammed

Siti Zubaidah Azizan

Norrisalha Mohamad Tahir

Using the Process Approach to Teach Academic Writing to First-Year

Undergraduates of University of Selangor 30 - 45

Dr. Zarihan Samsudin

Jurnal Pendidikan & Latihan ISSN : 1985-9597, Jilid 6, Bil. 02 (Dis 2014), http://journal.mara.gov.my/education/articles.html

1

Prestasi Dan Potensi Akademik Serta Bidang Kerjaya Yang

Diminati Dan Dipilih Oleh Pelajar Maktab Rendah Sains

MARA (MRSM)

Prof. Madya Dr. Suria Baba1, Dr. Jainabee Md Kassim 1(Universiti Malaysia Kelantan)

Abstrak

Kajian bertujuan meneroka pandangan pelajar MRSM mengenai prestasi dan potensi mereka khususnya

dalam aspek-aspek kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor, di samping meninjau bidang kerjaya yang diminati

dan yang menjadi pilihan mereka. Sampel kajian berjumlah 1170 pelajar Tingkatan I, II dan III yang dipilih

dari 14 MRSM Semenanjung Malaysia, mengikut empat zon iaitu dari Zon Utara, Tengah, Selatan dan

Timur. Pengumpulan data mengenai prestasi dan potensi menggunakan soal selidik yang dibina pengkaji

berdasarkan literatur, manakala data bagi kerjaya yang diminati dan yang dijadikan pilihan menggunakan

soal selidik Inventori Minat Kerjaya Sidek 2012 (IMKS). Perisian Statistical Package for Social Science

(SPSS) versi 22 digunakan untuk menganalisis data. Bagi prestasi dan potensi dari aspek kognitif, kajian

mendapati pelajar menguasai pengetahuan ilmu asas, pencapaian akademik khususnya kebolehan

berfikir secara kritis dan kreatif serta memiliki pemikiran positif. Bagi aspek afektif, pelajar memiliki nilai

perkembangan diri yang baik, manakala nilai patriotisme adalah cemerlang khususnya kecintaan kepada

Negara, kesetiaan kepada Raja dan Negara serta penghormatan pada rakan-rakan berlainan agama dan

budaya, tetapi hanya baik dari segi kesanggupan berkorban untuk Negara dan pemahaman tentang

Rukun Negara. Bagi aspek psikomotor, pelajar MRSM memiliki kemahiran komunikasi, kemahiran berfikir,

kemahiran kerja berpasukan, kemahiran kepimpinan dan kemahiran pembelajaran pada tahap amat

memuaskan. Kajian juga mendapati pelajar berminat dengan tujuh bidang pekerjaan, iaitu Pertanian dan

Perhutanan, Perkhidmatan Perlindungan, Seni dan Hiburan, Persuratan dan Perundangan, Perkhidmatan

Sosial, Urusniaga dan Konvensional, tetapi bidang-bidang tersebut kurang diminati untuk dijadikan pilihan

kerjaya. Pelajar didapati berminat dengan bidang-bidang Sains dan Matematik, bidang berkaitan dengan

Perubatan, Perubatan, Sukan dan Pentadbiran Perniagaan dan juga menunjukkan minat untuk memilih

kerjaya yang berkaitan bidang-bidang ini sahaja manakala bidang-bidang yang berkaitan Pekerjaan

Berkemahiran, Kejuruteraan, Perkhidmatan Persendirian, Analisis Perniagaan dan Pekerjaan Perkeranian

didapati kurang diminati sebagai pilihan kerjaya. Justeru, kajian mempunyai implikasi penting kepada

kaunselor dan kumpulan pengurusan MRSM untuk menggerak, memantau dan menilai pelajar MARA

membuat pilihan kerjaya yang tepat, sesuai dengan kebolehan, kemahiran dan personaliti pelajar, sekali

gus membantu dalam pengurusan bakat untuk mendapatkan “the right people to do the right job”.

Kata kunci: Prestasi dan potensi, kerjaya

Jurnal Pendidikan dan Latihan Jilid 6, Bil. 02 (Dis 2014)

2

Pengenalan

Pemilihan bidang kerjaya khususnya dalam bidang pendidikan menjadi semakin kompleks

ketika ini ekoran terdapatnya kebolehan manusia yang pelbagai dan keperluan pelajar yang

begitu kritikal selaras dengan ciri pembangunan dan pembentukan insan yang berdaya saing.

Justeru, sekolah turut dilingkari dengan paradigma untuk memenuhi perubahan yang kian

mendesak bagi melahirkan generasi yang berpengetahuan, berkemahiran, berdaya fikir dan

beraspirasi tinggi.

Pemilihan kerjaya sesuai merupakan salah satu permasalahan terbesar dalam kalangan

remaja di Malaysia. Tidak dinafikan ramai pelajar berhadapan dengan masalah apabila mahu

membuat keputusan untuk memilih sesuatu kerjaya. Menurut pandangan Amir Awang (1983)

terdapat tiga sebab utama mengapa berlakunya kesukaran dalam membuat keputusan

mengenai pemilihan kerjaya dalam kalangan individu. Antara kesukaran yang dikemukakan

Amir Awang adalah a) masalah tidak boleh membuat keputusan disebabkan seseorang itu

mempunyai minat dalam pelbagai bidang, minat tidak jelas atau tidak mempunyai minat

langsung terhadap apa jua kerjaya; b) ketiadaan kesempurnaan semasa membuat pilihan iaitu

pelajar tidak dapat mengagak dengan baik akan personalitinya, minatnya, nilainya,

kebolehannya dan pencapaiannya menyebabkan pilihan kerjaya yang dibuat tidak setimpal

dengan sifat peribadinya; dan c) kekurangan pengetahuan dan maklumat tentang dunia

pendidikan dan pekerjaan yang akhirnya menimbulkan masalah identiti kepada para pelajar

atau para remaja.

Oleh itu, beberapa Ujian Minat Kerjaya, boleh digunakan untuk mengenal pasti potensi

minat individu terhadap sesuatu aktiviti dalam pekerjaan, khususnya berdasarkan persekitaran

kerja (Nowak 1986). Antara ujian minat kerjaya yang lazim digunakan adalah Vocational

Preference Inventory (VPI), Self-Directed Search (SDS), Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory

(SCII), Inventori Minat Kerjaya Sidek (IMKS), Borang Minat Rothwell-Miller (BMRM) dan Kuder

Preference Records-Vocational (KPRV). Alat ukuran VPI dan SDS misalnya boleh digunakan

untuk mengenal pasti minat individu sama ada dalam bidang Realistik (R), Investigatif (I), Artistik

(A), Sosial (S), Enterprising (E) atau Conventional (C).

Sehubungan itu, kajian ini dijalankan dengan tujuan untuk meneroka pandangan pelajar

MRSM Tingkatan I, II dan III di Semenanjung Malaysia mengenai prestasi dan potensi mereka

khususnya dalam aspek-aspek kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor di samping meninjau bidang

kerjaya yang diminati dan yang menjadi pilihan mereka. Sekali gus, kajian ini akan dapat

memberi maklumat terkini mengenai laluan kerjaya (career path) pelajar-pelajar MRSM.

Kajian yang telah mula dijalankan antara tahun 2013 – 2014 ini bertujuan mendapatkan

maklum balas daripada 1170 pelajar Tingkatan I, II dan III MRSM Semenanjung Malaysia,

yang dipilih daripada seramai 286 dari Zon Utara, 136 dari Zon Tengah, 328 dari Zon Selatan

dan 420 pelajar dari Zon Timur . Secara khusus, artikel ini mengemukakan dapatan kajian

berdasarkan tiga soalan seperti berikut:

i. Bagaimanakah prestasi dan potensi pelajar MRSM Tingkatan I, II dan III

berdasarkan dimensi kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor?

ii Apakah bidang kerjaya yang diminati oleh pelajar MRSM Tingkatan I, II dan III?

iii. Apakah jenis pekerjaan yang dipilih oleh pelajar MRSM Tingkatan I, II dan III?


3

Kerangka Konseptual Kajian

Kerangka Konseptual Kajian yang dibina mengemukakan tiga dimensi (Rajah 1). Maklumat diri

dari aspek jantina, etnik, tingkatan, keputusan UPSR, PNGK, kelulusan akademik ibu/bapa dan

kerjaya ibu/bapa tergolong dalam dimensi pertama manakala dimensi kedua pula mengambil

kira tiga elemen pembangunan modal insan berkualiti iaitu Kognitif, Afektif dan

Psikomotor/Generik. Elemen Kognitif merujuk kepada aspek-aspek pengetahuan ilmu asas,

pencapaian akademik pelajar dan pemikiran pelajar. Elemen Afektif pula merujuk kepada aspek-

aspek nilai perkembangan diri dan nilai patriotisme, manakala elemen psikomotor merujuk

kepada kemahiran komunikasi, kemahiran berfikir, kemahiran kerja berpasukan, kemahiran

kepimpinan dan kemahiran pembelajaran.

Dimensi ketiga dalam kajian ini menggunakan Inventori Minat Kerjaya Sidek - IMKS

(2012) yang mengemukakan 17 bidang atau kluster kerjaya iaitu i) Pertanian dan Perhutanan,

ii) Perkhidmatan Perlindungan, iii) Pekerjaan Berkemahiran, iv) Kejuruteraan, v) Matematik dan

Sains, vi) Bidang Berkaitan Perubatan, vii) Perubatan, viii) Seni dan Hiburan, ix) Persuratan

dan Perundangan, x) Sukan, xi) Perkhidmatan Persendirian, xii) Perkhidmatan Sosial, xiii)

Pentadbiran Perniagaan, xiv) Analisis Perniagaan, xv) Urusniaga, xvi) Pekerjaan Perkeranian

dan xvii) Pekerjaan Konvensional.

Rajah 1. Kerangka Konseptual Kajian

Metodologi

Dari segi metodologi, rekabentuk kajian menggunakan kaedah kuantitatif, dengan soal selidik

sebagai instrumen utama bagi mengumpul maklumat daripada pelajar Tingkatan I, II dan III

MRSM di Semenanjung Malaysia. Soal selidik mengenai prestasi dan potensi dibina sendiri oleh

pengkaji berdasarkan literatur, manakala bidang kerjaya yang diminati dan yang dipilih pelajar

menggunakan soal selidik Inventori Minat Kerjaya Sidek 2012 (IMKS).

Bidang kerjaya yang diminati & dipilih pelajar MRSM

Maklumat diri Jantina Etnik Tingkatan UPSR PNGK Kelulusan akademik

ibu/bapa

Pekerjaan ibu/bapa

Prestasi dan Potensi: Kognitif:

Pengetahuan ilmu asas

Pencapaian akademik

Pemikiran pelajar Afektif:

Nilai perkembangan diri

Nilai patriotisme Psikomotor/Kemahiran generik:

Kemahiran komunikasi

Kemahiran berfikir

Kemahiran kerja pasukan

Kemahiran kepimpinan

Kemahiran pembelajaran


4

Item soal selidik mempunyai nilai kebolehpercayaan yang tinggi dengan konstruk

Prestasi dan Potensi pelajar keseluruhan (108 item) mempunyai nilai alfa Cronbach 0.974

(kognitif 0.939; afektif 0.917 dan psikomotor 0.960. Nilai alfa bagi Inventori Minat Kerjaya (85

item) ialah 0.969, manakala Nama Pekerjaan Dipilih (85 item) mempunyai nilai alfa 0.973.

Skala Likert seperti berikut digunakan untuk mengukur konstruk Prestasi dan Potensi; Kerjaya diminati dan Kerjaya dipilih: I. Domain Kognitif: a. Pengetahuan Ilmu Asas: Skala Likert 5 markat (1. Tidak memperolehi sama sekali, 2. Sedikit

memperolehi, 3. Sederhana memperolehi, 4. Banyak memperolehi dan 5. Banyak sekali memperolehi).

b. Pencapaian Akademik: Skala Likert 5 markat (1. Tidak memuaskan, 2. Kurang memuaskan, 3. Memuaskan, 4. Amat memuaskan dan 5. Cemerlang).

c. Pemikiran Pelajar: Respons pelajar diukur berdasarkan dua kategori, menggunakan skala seperti berikut:

Pendapat Anda Status Diri Sendiri

1. Tidak penting 1. Tidak mempunyai 2. Kurang penting 2. Kurang mempunyai 3. Sederhana penting 3. Sederhana 4. Penting 4. Tinggi 5. Sangat penting 5. Sangat tinggi

II. Domain Afektif: Respons pelajar bagi kedua-dua aspek iaitu i) Nilai perkembangan diri dan

ii) Nilai patriotism diukur berdasarkan Skala Likert 5 markat (1. Tidak memuaskan, 2. Kurang memuaskan, 3. Memuaskan, 4. Amat memuaskan dan 5. Cemerlang).

III. Domain Psikomotor: Respons pelajar berdasarkan lima aspek iaitu Kemahiran Komunikasi,

Kemahiran Berfikir, Kemahiran Kerja Pasukan, Kemahiran Kepimpinan dan Kemahiran Pembelajaran diukur berdasarkan Skala Likert 5 markat (1. Tidak memuaskan, 2. Kurang memuaskan, 3. Memuaskan, 4. Amat memuaskan dan 5. Cemerlang).

IV. Bidang kerjaya diminati dan dipilih pelajar: Respons pelajar diukur menggunakan empat

skala 1. Tidak Minat (Not Interested), 2. Kurang Minat (Less Interested), 3. Minat (Interested) dan 4. Amat Minat (Very Interested).

Data soal selidik dianalisis menggunakan Perisian Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) versi 22. Statistik deskriptif dalam bentuk frekuensi, peratusan, min dan sisihan piawai digunakan bagi menjawab soalan kajian mengenai prestasi dan potensi pelajar MRSM berdasarkan aspek-aspek kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor, bidang kerjaya yang diminati dan jenis pekerjaan yang menjadi pilihan.

Perbincangan Dapatan Kajian

Perbincangan mengenai dapatan kajian meliputi profil, prestasi dan potensi pelajar, bidang

kerjaya yang diminati dan yang menjadi pilihan pelajar Tingkatan I, II dan III MRSM,

Semenanjung Malaysia. Prestasi dan potensi pelajar dikaji berdasarkan tiga aspek iaitu kognitif,


5

afektif dan psikomotor. Manakala, bidang kerjaya dan kerjaya pilihan, masing-masing dikaji

mengikut 17 bidang kerjaya yang dikenal pasti.

Profil responden pelajar meliputi jantina, tingkatan, keputusan UPSR, PNGK, kelulusan

akademik dan pekerjaan ibu serta bapa, dipilih dari 14 MRSM yang terdiri daripada seramai

1170 orang pelajar. Dari jumlah ini, seramai 623 orang adalah lelaki dan 547 perempuan;

seramai 162 pelajar Tingkatan 1; 695 pelajar Tingkatan 2 dan 313 pelajar Tingkatan 3. Mengikut

keputusan UPSR, seramai 1093 pelajar mendapat 5A, 67 mendapat 4A, 6 mendapat 3A dan 4

mendapat 2A. Seramai 420 orang pelajar mencapai PNGK antara 3.4 hingga 3.6, 395 antara

3.7 hingga 4.00; 214 antara 3.0 hingga 3.3 dan hanya 39 antara 2.7 hingga 2.9. Dari segi

kelulusan akademik ibu dan bapa, seramai 476 ibu dan 417 bapa berkelulusan SPM; 122 ibu

dan 137 bapa berkelulusan STPM; 518 ibu dan 557 bapa mempunyai ijazah. Dari segi

pekerjaan, seramai 414 ibu dan 417 bapa bekerja dengan kerajaan, 430 ibu dan 341 bapa

bekerja sendiri, 191 ibu dan 361 bapa bekerja dengan swasta.

Maklumat dalam Jadual 1 menjelaskan secara keseluruhannya, prestasi dan potensi

pelajar MRSM adalah amat memuaskan (min=4.03; SP=0.39). Pelajar mengakui banyak

memperolehi pengetahuan kognitif semasa belajar di MRSM (min=4.13; SP=0.37). Dimensi

afektif dan psikomotor pada keseluruhannya adalah amat memuaskan dengan skor min masing-

masing (min=4.21; SP=0.55) dan (min=3.96; SP=0.54).

Jadual 1. Prestasi dan Potensi Pelajar Keseluruhan Prestasi & Potensi Min SP Interpretasi

Kognitif 4.13 0.37 Banyak memperolehi

Afektif 4.21 0.55 Amat memuaskan

Psikomotor 3.96 0.54 Amat memuaskan

Prestasi & Potensi Keseluruhan 4.03 0.39 Amat memuaskan

Maklumat berdasarkan Jadual 2 menjelaskan dimensi pertama prestasi dan potensi iaitu

Kognitif yang dikaji berdasarkan tiga aspek iaitu i) Pengetahuan ilmu asas, ii) Pencapaian

akademik dan iii) Pemikiran pelajar. Bagi aspek pertama, pelajar MRSM mengakui banyak

dibantu dalam memperolehi pengetahuan ilmu asas (min=4.12; SP=0.54), membuktikan

semasa mempelajari subjek-subjek di MRSM, mereka memperolehi kemahiran-kemahiran

Bahasa Malaysia Pertuturan, Bahasa Malaysia Penulisan, Bahasa Inggeris Pertuturan dan

Bahasa Inggeris Penulisan. Pelajar MRSM juga mengakui memperolehi kemahiran kepimpinan,

kemahiran menggunakan komputer, bekerja dalam kumpulan, membuat analisis dan kemahiran

menyelesaikan masalah.


6

Jadual 2. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Kognitif: Pengetahuan Ilmu Asas

Dimensi kognitif Pengetahuan Ilmu Asas

Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TMSA SM SDM BM BSM

Kemahiran Bahasa Malaysia (Pertuturan)

0

24

151 470

525

4.27 0.76 BM

Kemahiran Bahasa Malaysia (Penulisan)

1

17 173

531

448

4.20 0.74 BM

Kemahiran Bahasa Inggeris (Pertuturan)

4

49

254

467

396

4.02 0.86 BM

Kemahiran Bahasa Inggeris (Penulisan)

2

37

251

534

346

4.01 0.80 BM

Kemahiran kepimpinan 10 42 241 479 398 4.03 0.87 BM

Kemahiran menggunakan komputer

2

31

180

499

458

4.17 0.79 BM

Kemahiran bekerja dalam kumpulan

6

19

117

415

613

4.37 0.77 BM

Kemahiran membuat analisis

3

39

309

528

291

3.91 0.81 BM

Kemahiran menyelesaikan masalah

10

29

221

521

389

4.06 0.83 BM

Pengetahuan Ilmu Asas 1 11 133 534 491 4.12 0.54 BM

TMSA- Tidak memperolehi sama sekali: SM- Sedikit memperolehi: SDM- Sederhana

Memperolehi: BM - Banyak memperolehi: BSM - Banyak sekali memperolehi: I- Interpretasi

Penilaian pelajar MRSM terhadap aspek kedua dalam dimensi Kognitif iaitu Pencapaian

akademik (Jadual 3) adalah amat memuaskan (min=3.90 ; SP=0.54). Dapatan membuktikan

bahawa sepanjang pengalaman belajar di MRSM, pelajar secara keseluruhannya mengakui

pencapaian akademik amat memuaskan dalam aspek-aspek kualiti dalam pencapaian

akademik, prestasi pembelajaran dalam kelas, pengetahuan dalam ilmu asas, minat terhadap

pelajaran dalam kelas, motivasi dalaman untuk belajar, inisiatif terhadap pelajaran dan kualiti

tugasan yang dihasilkan. Pelajar MRSM mengakui pencapaian akademik adalah amat

memuaskan dari segi kebolehan berfikir secara kritis dan kebolehan berfikir secara kreatif,

kebolehan menggunakan teknologi dalam perkongsian maklumat, kebolehan menyampaikan

pendapat dengan jelas, kepekaan akan isu-isu alam sekitar, kemampuan mengingati isi

pelajaran, kemampuan membezakan isi penting dan isi sokongan serta kemampuan

membezakan faktor penyebab dan akibat. Dua aspek terakhir mengenai pencapaian akademik

yang didapati amat memuaskan ialah kemampuan menilai sesuatu cadangan dan kemampuan

merumuskan pengetahuan.


7

Jadual 3. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Kognitif: Pencapaian Akademik Aspek kognitif

Pencapaian akademik Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TM KM M AM C

Kualiti dalam pencapaian akademik

12

112

408

454

184

3.58 0.90 AM

Prestasi pembelajaran dalam kelas

5

40

342

564

219

3.81 0.78 AM

Pengetahuan dalam ilmu asas (Sains/Sains Sosial)

2 40 251 587 290 3.95 0.78 AM

Minat terhadap pelajaran dalam kelas

1

21

153

510

485

4.24 0.75 AM

Motivasi dalaman untuk belajar

1

30

251

520

368

4.04 0.79 AM

Inisiatif terhadap pelajaran 1 21 287 543 318 3.98 0.77 AM

Kualiti tugasan yang dihasilkan

0

31

322

592

225

3.86 0.74 AM

Kebolehan berfikir secara kritis

2 34

358

517

259

3.85 0.79 AM

Kebolehan berfikir secara kreatif

3

45

302

482

338

3.94 0.85 AM

Kebolehan menggunakan teknologi dalam perkongsian maklumat

2

36

266

535

331

3.98 0.80 AM

Kebolehan menyampaikan pendapat dengan jelas

1

49

322

502

296

3.89 0.83 AM

Kepekaan akan isu-isu alam sekitar

6

61

392

488

223

3.73 0.84 AM

Kemampuan mengingati isi pelajaran

5

85

413

515

149

3.60 0.83 AM

Kemampuan memahami fakta berbentuk grafik

4

35

236

556

336

4.00 0.82 AM

Kemampuan aplikasi pengetahuan

2 31

283

542

308

3.94 0.82 AM

Kemampuan analisis maklumat

4

39

397

529

196

3.73 0.81 AM

Kemampuan bezakan isi penting dan isi sokongan

3

45

417

478

223

3.73 0.84 AM

Kemampuan bezakan faktor penyebab dan akibat

1

40

279

550

297 3.93 0.82 AM

Kemampuan menilai sesuatu cadangan

2

30

324

545

266

3.88 0.80 AM

Kemampuan rumuskan pengetahuan

3

46

361

511

246

3.80 0.83

AM

Pencapaian Akademik 0 15 226 625 304 3.90 0.54 AM

TM- Tidak memuaskan: KM- Kurang memuaskan: M- Memuaskan: AM- Amat memuaskan C-

Cemerlang: I- Interpretasi

Aspek ketiga dalam dimensi Kognitif iaitu Pemikiran Pelajar memerlukan pelajar

memberi respons tentang kepentingan beberapa sifat peribadi untuk sesuatu pekerjaan serta

menilai sejauh mana sifat-sifat tersebut dimiliki (Jadual 4 & Jadual 5).


8

Berdasarkan maklumat dalam Jadual 4, pelajar MRSM mengakui adalah sangat penting

memiliki sifat-sifat peribadi seperti yakin diri, imej diri yang positif, boleh menyelesaikan

masalah, mahir berkomunikasi secara lisan dan bertulis, bermotivasi untuk belajar, mahir

merancang kerja, mahir bekerja dalam pasukan, boleh menyesuaikan diri, beriltizam untuk

memperbaiki diri, sanggup menerima arahan, boleh dipercayai, mahir mengurus masa, boleh

memimpin, mahir ICT dan sanggup membuat perubahan. Secara keseluruhannya, pelajar

MRSM mempunyai pemikiran bahawa sifat-sifat peribadi yang dinyatakan di atas adalah sangat

penting (min=4.66; SP=0.37).

Jadual 4. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Kognitif: Pemikiran Pelajar (Pendapat) Pendapat Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TP KP SP P SP

Yakin diri 3 1 19 169 977 4.80 0.49 SP

Mempunyai imej diri yang positif

2

1

23

203

941

4.77 0.48 SP

Boleh menyelesaikan masalah

2

3

45

300

820

4.65 0.58 SP

Mahir berkomunukasi (lisan)

2

1

36

207

924

4.75 0.52 SP

Mahir berkomunukasi (bertulis)

2

7

83

329

749

4.55 0.66 SP

Motivasi untuk terus belajar

2 7

61

209

891 4.69 0.61 SP

Mahir merancang kerj 2 4 66 314 784 4.60 0.62 SP

Mahir bekerja dalam pasukan

0

18

54

282

816

4.62 0.64 SP

Boleh menyesuaikan diri 0 7 53 239 871 4.68 0.58 SP

Iltizam untuk memperbaiki diri

1

3

50

180

936

4.74 0.54 SP

Sanggup menerima arahan

6 6 89 341 728 4.52 0.70 ST

Boleh dipercayai 2 5 35 141 987 4.80 0.51 SP

Mahir mengurus masa 0 7 40 154 969 4.78 0.52 SP

Boleh memimpin 4 4 50 226 886 4.69 0.59 SP

Mahir ICT 9 12 127 355 667 4.41 0.78 SP

Sanggup membuat perubahan

7

12

76

275

800

4.58 0.71 SP

Pemikiran Pelajar (Pendapat)

2 0 12 134 1022 4.66 0.37 SP

TP- Tidak penting: KP- Kurang penting: SP- Sederhana penting: P- Penting: SP- Sangat

penting: I- Interpretasi

Apabila diminta menilai status diri, secara keseluruhannya, pelajar MRSM mengakui

memiliki sifat-sifat peribadi pada tahap Tinggi (min=3.93 SP=0.49). Pelajar mengakui memiliki

sifat-sifat peribadi seperti yakin diri, imej diri, boleh menyelesaikan masalah, mahir

berkomunikasi secara lisan dan bertulis, bermotivasi untuk belajar, mahir merancang kerja,

mahir bekerja dalam pasukan, boleh menyesuaikan diri, beriltizam untuk memperbaiki diri,


9

sanggup menerima arahan, boleh dipercayai, mahir mengurus masa, boleh memimpin, mahir

ICT dan sanggup membuat perubahan pada tahap Tinggi.

Jadual 5. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Kognitif: Pemikiran Pelajar (Status) Status Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TM KM S T ST

Yakin diri 0 29 462 513 166 3.69 0.73 T

Mempunyai imej diri yang positif

1

26

329

572

242

3.87 0.75 T

Boleh menyelesaikan masalah

0

46

390

543

191

3.75 0.76 T

Mahir berkomunukasi (lisan)

3

43

278

510

336

3.96 0.83 T

Mahir berkomunukasi (bertulis)

1

20

284

561

304

3.98 0.76 T

Motivasi untuk terus belajar

3 39 245 508 375 4.03 0.83 T

Mahir merancang kerja 7 60 407 481 215 3.71 0.84 T

Mahir bekerja dalam pasukan

2 23 235 534 376 4.07 0.78 T

Boleh menyesuaikan diri 3 22 185 456 504 4.22 0.79 T

Iltizam untuk memperbaiki diri

3 18 188 478 483 4.21 0.78 T

Sanggup menerima arahan

6 50 318 430 366 3.94 0.89 T

Boleh dipercayai 2 14 180 516 458 4.20 0.75 T

Mahir mengurus masa 11 45 343 522 249 3.81 0.84 T

Boleh memimpin 15 53 341 495 266 3.80 0.88 T

Mahir ICT 9 84 435 430 212 3.64 0.88 T

Sanggup membuat perubahan

11

35

261

472

391

4.02 0.87 T

Pemikiran Pelajar (Status)

0

9

188

654

318

3.93 0.49 T

TM- Tidak mempunyai: KM- Kurang mempunyai: S- Sederhana: T- Tinggi: ST- Sangat

tinggi: I- Interpretasi

Dimensi kedua prestasi dan potensi iaitu Afektif dikaji berdasarkan dua aspek iaitu i)

Nilai perkembangan diri dan ii) Nilai patriotisme. Berdasarkan maklumat dalam Jadual 6, pelajar

MRSM mengakui secara keseluruhannya memiliki nilai perkembangan diri pada tahap amat

memuaskan (min=4.13; SP=0.57). Nilai perkembangan diri pelajar MRSM amat memuaskan

dalam kesemua aspek yang dikaji iaitu i) Tanggungjawab terhadap keluarga, ii) Mempunyai

sikap amanah, iii) Bersikap toleransi dengan warga sekolah, iv) Rajin melaksanakan tugas

kelas, v) Boleh berdikari, vi) Berfikiran rasional dalam tindakan seharian, vii) Menepati masa, viii)

Menghargai alam sekitar dan ix) Mempertimbangkan masalah secara waras.


10

Jadual 6. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Afektif: Nilai Perkembangan Diri

Aspek Afektif Nilai Perkembangan Diri


TM KM M AM C

Tanggungjawab terhadap keluarga

4

9

102

503

552

4.35 0.71 AM

Mempunyai sikap amanah 4 15 192 511 448 4.18 0.78 AM

Bersikap toleransi dengan warga sekolah

4

18

206

561

381

4.10 0.77 AM

Rajin melaksanakan tugas 6 37 296 533 298 3.92 0.83 AM

Boleh berdikari 5 13 93 435 624 4.41 0.73 AM

Berfikiran rasional dalam tindakan seharian

4

15

228

521

402

4.11 0.79 AM

Menepati masa 6 48 346 518 252 3.81 0.84 AM

Menghargai alam sekitar 5 35 249 495 386 4.04 0.84 AM

Mempertimbangkan masalah secara waras

4

15

173

477

501

4.24 0.78 AM

Nilai perkembangan diri 4 9 128 518 511 4.13 0.57 AM

TM- Tidak memuaskan: KM- Kurang memuaskan: M- Memuaskan: AM- Amat memuaskan C- Cemerlang: I- Interpretasi

Pelajar MRSM mengakui memiliki nilai patriotisme iaitu aspek kedua dalam dimensi

Afektif, pada tahap cemerlang (min=4.37; SP=0.66). Maklumat dalam Jadual 7 menjelaskan

bahawa nilai patriotisme pelajar MRSM adalah Cemerlang dalam tiga aspek iaitu i) Kecintaan

pada Negara, ii) Kesetiaan kepada Raja dan Negara dan iii) Penghormatan pada rakan-rakan

berlainan agama dan budaya. Bagaimanapun, nilai patriotisme pelajar MRSM dari segi

kesanggupan berkorban untuk Negara dan pemahaman tentang Rukun Negara adalah Amat

Memuaskan.

Jadual 7 Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Afektif: Nilai Patriotisme Aspek Afektif

Nilai Patriotisme Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TM KM M AM C

Kecintaan pada Negara 9 10 130 364 657 4.40 0.79 C

Kesetiaan kepada Raja dan Negara

4

19

119

328

700

4.45 0.78 C

Kesanggupan berkorban untuk Negara

9

21

186

382

573

4.27 0.78 AM

Pemahaman tentang Rukun Negara

6

23

154

417

570

4.29 0.82 AM

Penghormatan pada rakan-rakan berlainan agama & budaya

5

21

106

369

669

4.42 0.77 C

Nilai Patriotisme 6 10 102 333 719 4.37 0.66 C



11

Bagi dimensi ketiga prestasi dan potensi iaitu Psikomotor, pelajar mengakui bahawa

sepanjang belajar di MRSM, mereka menguasai kemahiran komunikasi, kemahiran berfikir,

kemahiran kerja berpasukan, kemahiran kepimpinan dan kemahiran pembelajaran pada tahap

amat memuaskan. Bagi aspek kemahiran komunikasi, penguasaan pelajar MRSM adalah Amat

Memuaskan dalam aspek-aspek seperti i) Kebolehan menyampaikan idea secara lisan, ii)

Kebolehan menyampaikan idea secara bertulis, iii) Kebolehan memberi maklum balas yang

relevan pada soalan-soalan guru, iv) Kebolehan membentang tugasan secara sistematik dalam

kelas, v) Kebolehan berinteraksi dengan ahli kumpulan dalam kelas dan vi) Kebolehan

berinteraksi dengan pelajar pelbagai kaum dalam kelas (Jadual 8).

Jadual 8. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Psikomotor: Kemahiran Komunikasi

Aspek Psikomotor Kemahiran Komunikasi


TM KM M AM C

Kebolehan menyampaikan idea secara lisan

3

41

308

513

305

3.91 0.82 AM

Kebolehan menyampaikan idea secara bertulis

2

27

254

577

310

3.99 0.76 AM

Kebolehan memberi maklum balas yang relevan pada soalan-soalan guru

0

43

380

510

237

3.80 0.79 AM

Kebolehan membentang tugasan secara sistematik dalam kelas

0

42

333

511

284

3.88 0.81 AM

Kebolehan berinteraksi dengan ahli kumpulan dalam kelas

2

14

164

499

491

4.25 0.74 AM

Kebolehan berinteraksi dengan pelajar pelbagai kaum dalam kelas

8

37

210

448

467

4.13 0.86 AM

Kemahiran komunikasi 1 26 167 553 423 3.99 0.59 AM


Penguasaan pelajar MRSM dalam kemahiran berfikir seperti yang digambarkan dalam

Jadual 9 adalah Amat Memuaskan (min=3.86; SP=0.61) khususnya dalam aspek-aspek i)

Kebolehan mengenal pasti masalah dalam situasi kompleks, ii) Kebolehan membuat penilaian

terhadap masalah yang sukar, iii) Kebolehan membuat keputusan berdasarkan bukti-bukti yang

kukuh, iv) Kebolehan berhujah untuk mempertahankan sesuatu idea, v) Kebolehan menjana

idea baru, vi) Kebolehan menilai sesuatu perbincangan dan vii) Kebolehan mencari

penyelesaian alternatif.


12

Jadual 9. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Psikomotor: Kemahiran Berfikir Aspek Psikomotor Kemahiran Berfikir


TM KM M AM C

Kebolehan mengenal pasti masalah dalam situasi kompleks

4

38

377

524

227

3.79 0.79 AM

Kebolehan membuat penilaian terhadap masalah yang sukar

3

37

280

546

304

3.94 0.80 AM

Kebolehan membuat keputusan berdasarkan bukti-bukti yang kukuh

0

46

321

564

239

3.85 0.78 AM

Kebolehan berhujah untuk mempertahankan sesuatu ide

3

82

307

471

307

3.85 0.89 AM

Kebolehan menjana ide baru

4

52

336

498

280

3.85 0.84 AM

Kebolehan menilai sesuatu perbincangan

4

35

314

553

264

3.88 0.79 AM

Kebolehan mencari penyelesaian alternatif

5

41

318

549

257

3.86 0.80 AM

Kemahiran Berfikir 2 26 290 584 268 3.86 0.61 AM


Pelajar MRSM mengakui menguasai Kemahiran kerja berpasukan yang Amat

Memuaskan secara keseluruhannya (min=4.17; SP=0.61). Secara khusus, mereka mengakui

kemahiran kerja berpasukan adalah Amat Memuaskan dalam aspek-aspek i) Kebolehan

bekerjasama dengan orang lain secara berpasukan, ii) Kebolehan memimpin dalam pasukan,

iii) Kebolehan bertolak ansur dengan ahli-ahli pasukan dan iv) Kebolehan menyelaras kerja

berpasukan. Bagaimana pun, aspek menghormati idea dan sumbangan kerja ahli pasukan

adalah pada tahap Cemerlang (Jadual 10).

Jadual 10. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Psikomotor: Kemahiran Kerja Pasukan Aspek Psikomotor

Kemahiran Kerja Pasukan


TM KM M AM C

Kebolehan bekerjasama dengan orang lain secara berpasukan

4

19

169

467

511

4.24 0.78 AM

Kebolehan memimpin dalam pasukan

7

57

266

470

370

3.97 0.89 AM

Kebolehan bertolak ansur dengan ahli-ahli pasukan

2

16

161

511

480

4.24 0.74 AM

Kebolehan menghormati ide dan sumbangan kerja ahli pasukan

5

12

137

452

564

4.33 0.75 C

Kebolehan menyelaras kerja berpasukan

2

24

237

540

367

4.06 0.78 AM

Kemahiran Kerja Pasukan 1

20

141

484

524

4.17 0.61 AM



13

Pelajar MRSM juga mengakui bahawa kemahiran kepimpinan dalam kalangan mereka

secara keseluruhannya adalah Amat Memuaskan (min=3.88; SP=0.67), khususnya dalam

aspek-aspek i) Kebolehan membimbing orang lain, ii) Kebolehan mengagihkan tugas dan

tanggungjawab, iii) Kebolehan mempengaruhi orang lain, iv) Kebolehan memotivasi ahli

pasukan, v) Kebolehan membuat keputusan yang sesuai untuk kepentingan bersama, vi)

Kebolehan membawa ahli kepada satu kesepakatan, vii) Kebolehan memimpin sesuatu projek

dan viii) Kebolehan memainkan peranan sebagai ketua pasukan (Jadual 11).

Jadual 11. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Psikomotor: Kemahiran Kepimpinan Aspek Psikomotor

Kemahiran Kepimpinan Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TM KM M AM C

Kebolehan membimbing orang lain

8

57

309

550

246

3.82 0.83 AM

Kebolehan mengagihkan tugas dan tanggungjawab

1

44

257

518

350

4.00 0.82 AM

Kebolehan mempengaruhi orang lain

9

74

376

483

228

3.72 0.87 AM

Kebolehan memotivasi ahli pasukan

4 58 312 506 290 3.87 0.85 AM

Kebolehan membuat keputusan yang sesuai untuk kepentingan bersama

6

36

270

537

321

3.96 0.82 AM

Kebolehan membawa ahli kepada satu kesepakatan

5

47

323

497

298

3.88 0.84 AM

Kebolehan memimpin sesuatu projek

6

58

334

480

292

3.84 0.87 AM

Kebolehan memainkan peranan sebagai ketua pasukan

11

68

274

440

377

3.94 0.93 AM

Kemahiran Kepimpinan 4 49 238 551 328 3.88 0.67 AM

TM- Tidak memuaskan: KM- Kurang memuaskan: M- Memuaskan: AM- Amat memuaskan C- Cemerlang: I- Interpretasi Pelajar MRSM menguasai Kemahiran Pembelajaran pada tahap yang Amat Memuaskan

secara keseluruhannya (min=3.98; SP=0.61). Maklumat dalam Jadual 12 menjelaskan

kemahiran pembelajaran pelajar MRSM adalah Amat Memuaskan dalam aspek-aspek i)

Kebolehan belajar secara kendiri, ii) Kebolehan mencari maklumat dari pelbagai sumber, iii)

Kebolehan mengurus maklumat, iv) Kebolehan menilai idea baru, v) Kebolehan menilai

maklumat mengenai isu-isu semasa, vi) Kebolehan mengembangkan minda ingin tahu melalui

internet dan vii) Kebolehan mengaplikasi maklumat.


14

Jadual 12. Prestasi dan Potensi Dimensi Psikomotor: Kemahiran Pembelajaran Aspek Psikomotor

Kemahiran Pembelajaran Kekerapan & Peratusan Min SP I

TM KM M AM C

Kebolehan belajar secara kendiri

5

48

316

474

327

3.91 0.86 AM

Kebolehan mencari maklumat dari pelbagai sumber

1

49

238

522

360

4.01 0.82 AM

Kebolehan mengurus maklumat

2

40

294

535

299

3.93 0.80 AM

Kebolehan menilai idea baru

1

39

290

559

281

3.92 0.78 AM

Kebolehan menilai maklumat mengenai isu-isu semasa

2

40

333

498

297

3.89 0.82 AM

Kebolehan mengembangkan minda ingin tahu melalui internet

3

23

180

427

537

4.25 0.80 AM

Kebolehan mengaplikasi maklumat

4

32

274

536

324

3.97 0.80 AM

Kemahiran Pembelajaran 1 18 220 568 363 3.98 0.61 AM


Kajian ini turut meninjau bidang kerjaya yang diminati dan yang menjadi pilihan pelajar

MRSM, berdasarkan 17 tema atau kluster pekerjaan yang disenaraikan dalam Inventori Minat

Kerjaya (Sidek 2012). Pelajar menggambarkan tahap minat menggunakan empat skala iaitu 1.

Tidak Minat (Not Interested); 2. Kurang Minat (Less Interested); 3. Minat (Interested) dan 4.

Amat Minat (Very Interested).

Tinjauan mengenai minat pelajar MRSM dalam sesuatu bidang kerjaya seperti yang

dilaporkan dalam Jadual 13 menjelaskan pelajar berminat dengan bidang-bidang kerjaya seperti

i) Pertanian & Perhutanan (min=2.71; SP=0.71), ii) Perkhidmatan Perlindungan (min=2.86;

SP=0.69), iii) Sains dan Matematik (min=3.05; SP=0.72), iv) Kaitan dengan Perubatan

Matematik (min=3.00; SP=0.84), v) Perubatan (min=2.67; SP=0.94), vi) Seni dan Hiburan

(min=2.51; SP=0.84), vii) Persuratan dan Perundangan (min=2.74; SP=0.71), viii) Sukan

(min=2.86; SP=0.81), ix) Perkhidmatan Sosial (min=2.73; SP=0.79), x) Pentadbiran Perniagaan

(min=2.72;SP=0.90), xi) Urusniaga (min=2.56;SP=0.88) dan xii) Pekerjaan Konvensional

(min=2.59 ; SP=0.86).


15

Jadual 13. Bidang Kerjaya Diminati Pelajar MRSM Kerjaya Diminati Kekerapan & Peratusan

TM KM M AM Min SP I

Kluster 1: Pertanian & Perhutanan 136 459 393 182 2.71 0.71 M Kluster 2: Perkhidmatan Perlindungan 68 280 463 359 2.86 0.69 M Kluster 3: Pekerjaan Berkemahiran 221 404 377 168 2.43 0.79 KM Kluster 4: Kejuruteraan 263 370 333 204 2.40 0.85 KM Kluster 5: Sains dan Matematik 46 223 419 482 3.05 0.72 M Kluster 6: Kaitan dengan Perubatan 95 241 333 501 3.00 0.84 M Kluster 7: Perubatan 197 313 300 360 2.67 0.94 M Kluster 8: Seni dan Hiburan 209 367 347 247 2.51 0.84 M Kluster 9: Persuratan dan Perundangan 93 352 423 302 2.74 0.71 M Kluster 10: Sukan 101 274 399 396 2.86 0.81 M Kluster 11: Perkhidmatan Persendirian 391 340 253 186 2.21 0.91 KM Kluster 12: Perkhidmatan Sosial 126 327 402 315 2.73 0.79 M Kluster 13: Pentadbiran Perniagaan 161 311 345 353 2.72 0.90 M Kluster 14: Analisis Perniagaan 257 347 326 240 2.45 0.91 KM Kluster 15: Urusniaga 212 315 376 267 2.56 0.88 M Kluster 16: Pekerjaan Perkeranian 278 388 344 160 2.33 0.84 KM Kluster 17: Pekerjaan Konvensional 182 337 365 286 2.59 0.86 M

TM- Tidak minat: KM- Kurang minat: M- Minat: AM- Amat minat I- Interpretasi

Bagaimanapun, pelajar MRSM kurang berminat dengan lima bidang kerjaya iaitu i)

Pekerjaan Berkemahiran (min=2.43; SP=0.79), ii) Kejuruteraan (min=2.40; SP=0.85), iii)

Perkhidmatan Persendirian (min=2.21; SP=0.91), iv) Analisis Perniagaan (min=2.45; SP=0.91)

dan v) Pekerjaan Perkeranian (min=2.33; SP=0.84).

Seterusnya, maklumat dalam Jadual 14 menunjukkan pelajar berminat untuk memilih

bdang-bidang kerjaya seperti i) Sains dan Matematik (min=2.69 ; SP=0.83), ii) Bidang Berkaitan

Perubatan (min=3.00 ; SP=0.84), iii) Perubatan (min=2.58 ; SP=0.96), iv) Sukan (min=2.86 ;

SP=0.81) dan v) Pentadbiran Perniagaan (min=2.79 ; SP=0.95).

Jadual 14. Bidang Kerjaya Pilihan Pelajar MRSM Kerjaya Pilihan Kekerapan & Peratusan

TM KM M AM Min SP I

Kluster 1: Pertanian & Perhutanan 421 383 253 113 2.09 0.85 KM Kluster 2: Perkhidmatan Perlindungan 321 371 293 185 2.32 0.88 KM Kluster 3: Pekerjaan Berkemahiran 336 393 290 151 2.24 0.85 KM Kluster 4: Kejuruteraan 163 370 333 204 2.40 0.85 KM Kluster 5: Sains dan Matematik 160 299 412 299 2.69 0.83 M Kluster 6: Bidang Berkaitan Perubatan 259 324 363 224 3.00 0.84 M Kluster 7: Perubatan 254 289 291 336 2.58 0.96 M Kluster 8: Seni dan Hiburan 233 375 330 232 2.47 0.86 KM Kluster 9: Persuratan dan Perundangan 272 413 328 157 2.32 0.82 KM Kluster 10: Sukan 101 274 399 396 2.86 0.81 M Kluster 11: Perkhidmatan Persendirian 391 340 253 186 2.21 0.91 KM Kluster 12: Perkhidmatan Sosial 344 359 315 152 2.25 0.88 KM Kluster 13: Pentadbiran Perniagaan 187 253 300 430 2.79 0.95 M Kluster 14: Analisis Perniagaan 367 334 272 197 2.26 0.96 KM Kluster 15: Urusniaga 320 346 305 199 2.32 0.90 KM Kluster 16: Pekerjaan Perkeranian 298 355 342 175 2.35 0.85 KM Kluster 17: Pekerjaan Konvensional 315 340 311 204 2.38 0.90 KM

TM- Tidak minat: KM- Kurang minat: M- Minat: AM- Amat minat I- Interpretasi


16

Walau bagaimanapun, pelajar MRSM kurang berminat dengan bidang-bidang kerjaya

berikut: i) Pertanian & Perhutanan (min=2.09 ; SP=0.85), ii) Perkhidmatan Perlindungan

(min=2.32 ; SP=0.88), iii) Pekerjaan Berkemahiran (min=2.24 ; SP=0.85), iv) Kejuruteraan

(min=2.40 ; SP=0.85), v) Seni dan Hiburan (min=2.47 ; SP=0.86), vi) Persuratan dan

Perundangan (min=2.32 ; SP=0.82), vii) Perkhidmatan Persendirian (min=2.21 ; SP=0.91), viii)

Perkhidmatan Sosial (min=2.25 ; SP=0.88), ix) Analisis Perniagaan (min=2.26 ; SP=0.96), x)

Urusniaga (min=2.32 ; SP=0.90), xi) Pekerjaan Perkeranian (min=2.35 ; SP=0.85) dan xii)

Pekerjaan Konvensional (min=2.38 ; SP=0.90).

Rumusan

Kajian ini telah membuahkan beberapa dapatan yang boleh menyumbangkan maklumat kepada

Bahagian Pendidikan MARA secara amnya dan kepada pengetua Maktab Rendah Sains MARA

secara khususnya.

Pelajar MRSM mempunyai pandangan positif terhadap prestasi dan potensi bagi ketiga-

tiga aspek iaitu kognitif, afektif dan psikomotor. Bagi dimensi kognitif, pelajar banyak

memperolehi pengetahuan ilmu asas, khususnya kemahiran bertutur dan menulis Bahasa

Melayu dan Bahasa Inggeris, di samping kemahiran-kemahiran kepimpinan, mengguna

komputer, bekerja dalam kumpulan, membuat analisis dan kemahiran menyelesaikan masalah.

Dari segi pencapaian akademik, pelajar turut berpuas hati dengan kualiti dalam pencapaian

akademik, prestasi pembelajaran dalam kelas, pengetahuan dalam ilmu asas, minat terhadap

pelajaran dalam kelas, motivasi dalaman untuk belajar, inisiatif terhadap pelajaran, kualiti

tugasan yang dihasilkan, kebolehan berfikir secara kritis dan kreatif, kebolehan menggunakan

teknologi dalam perkongsian maklumat, kebolehan menyampaikan pendapat dengan jelas dan

kepekaan akan isu-isu alam sekitar serta kemampuan memahami fakta berbentuk grafik,

kemampuan mengaplikasi pengetahuan, kemampuan menganalisis maklumat, kemampuan

membezakan isi-isi penting dan sokongan, kemampuan membezakan faktor penyebab dan

akibat, kemampuan menilai sesuatu cadangan dan kemampuan merumuskan pengetahuan.

Bagi dimensi afektif, pelajar MRSM memiliki nilai perkembangan diri seperti tanggungjawab terhadap keluarga, bersikap amanah, toleransi dengan warga sekolah, rajin melaksanakan tugas kelas, boleh berdikari, berfikiran rasional dalam tindakan seharian, menepati masa, menghargai alam sekitar dan mempertimbangkan masalah secara waras. Walaupun begitu, nilai patriotisme mereka belum pula sampai pada tahap cemerlang, khususnya dari segi kesanggupan berkorban untuk Negara dan pemahaman tentang Rukun Negara. Justeru, dapatan seperti ini memerlukan perhatian pihak pengurusan MARA untuk meningkatkan semangat patriotik dalam kalangan pelajar MRSM. Dapatan mengenai kerjaya menjelaskan bahawa pelajar MRSM meminati bidang-bidang Pertanian dan Perhutanan, Perkhidmatan Perlindungan, Seni dan Hiburan, Persuratan dan Perundangan, Perkhidmatan Sosial, Urusniaga dan Konvensional, tetapi mereka kurang berminat untuk memilih kerjaya-kerjaya tersebut. Walaupun dapatan seperti ini tidak menghairankan, memandangkan kecenderungan kurikulum MRSM pada aliran sains, tetapi mismatch yang berlaku ini memerlukan pertimbangan pihak pengurusan MARA untuk menyelidiki dan mencari sebab mengapa pelajar meminati bidang-bidang berkaitan tetapi kurang berminat untuk dipilih sebagai kerjaya.


17

Pelajar MRSM didapati kurang berminat dengan bidang-bidang Pekerjaan Berkemahiran, Kejuruteraan, Perkhidmatan Persendirian, Analisis Perniagaan dan Pekerjaan Perkeranian. Mereka juga kurang berminat untuk memilih jawatan-jawatan dalam bidang tersebut. Sebagai contoh, dalam bidang Pekerjaan Berkemahiran, pelajar MRSM hanya berminat memilih mekanik kapalterbang, tetapi kurang meminati juruteknik peralatan, mekanik kenderaan, pelukis plan dan juruukur bahan. Dalam bidang kejuruteraan pula, pelajar hanya berminat dengan kejuruteraan kimia, tetapi kurang berminat dengan kejuruteraan aeronautikal, kejuruteraan awam, kejuruteraan automotif dan kejuruteraan elektrik. Justeru, adalah penting bagi pihak pengurusan MARA mencari punca mengapa pelajar MARA kurang berminat memilih jawatan-jawatan berkaitan terutamanya bidang Kejuruteraan.

Pelajar didapati berminat dengan bidang-bidang Sains dan Matematik, Bidang Berkaitan dengan Perubatan, Perubatan, Sukan dan Pentadbiran Perniagaan malah mereka juga berminat untuk memilih kerjaya yang berkaitan dengan bidang-bidang tersebut. Justeru, pihak pengurusan MARA boleh memberi perhatian khusus pada dapatan kajian yang menjelaskan bahawa pelajar kurang berminat untuk menjadi doktor gigi dan pakar sakit puan, tetapi berminat memilih kerjaya sebagai pegawai perubatan, pakar bedah dan doktor kanak-kanak. Dalam bidang Sukan, pelajar MRSM berminat menjalankan tugas-tugas berkaitan sukan dan juga berminat untuk memilih semua jenis kerjaya dalam bidang Sukan seperti ahli olahraga, pegawai sukan, jurulatih sukan dan guru pendidikan jasmani. Justeru, adalah penting bagi pihak pengurusan MARA mengambil kira dapatan kajian,

sekali gus mencari jawapan dan kaedah penyelesaian kepada persoalan-persoalan yang

berfokus pada perkara-perkara seperti i) Mengapa pelajar MRSM meminati bidang-bidang Sains

dan Matematik, Bidang Berkaitan dengan Perubatan, Perubatan, Sukan dan Pentadbiran

Perniagaan dan menunjukkan minat untuk memilih kerjaya yang berkaitan dengan bidang-

bidang tersebut; ii) Mengapa pelajar MRSM meminati bidang-bidang Pertanian dan Perhutanan,

Perkhidmatan Perlindungan, Seni dan Hiburan, Persuratan dan Perundangan, Perkhidmatan

Sosial, Urusniaga dan Konvensional, tetapi kurang berminat untuk memilih kerjaya berkaitan

dan iii) Mengapa pelajar MRSM kurang meminati bidang-bidang Pekerjaan Berkemahiran,

Kejuruteraan, Perkhidmatan Persendirian, Analisis Perniagaan dan Pekerjaan Perkeranian serta

kurang minat memilih kerjaya-kerjaya yang berkaitan bidang-bidang berkenaan.

Penutup

Dapatan kajian ini memberi maklumat kepada pihak pengurusan MARA mengenai status

semasa prestasi dan potensi serta minat dan pilihan kerjaya dalam kalangan pelajar Tingkatan I,

II dan III MRSM di Semenanjung Malaysia. Maklumat ini penting untuk pihak berwajib

mengambil kira pandangan pelajar agar kekuatan yang ada dapat diperkukuhkan, manakala

kelemahan yang dikesan dapat diperbaiki sebagai usaha untuk membantu pelajar, menentukan

minat dan membuat pilihan kerjaya secara lebih tepat, khusus dan realistik. Maklumat mengenai

minat dan pilihan kerjaya serta mismatch yang terdapat boleh diambil kira dalam membantu

pelajar membuat pilihan kerjaya yang sesuai, berasaskan minat, bakat dan kebolehan.

Sehubungan itu, pihak yang berwajib boleh membuat pertimbangan dan mengambil tindakan

untuk membantu mempertingkatkan prestasi dan potensi, di samping membimbing pelajar untuk

meminati dan membuat pilihan kerjaya yang tepat. Dengan itu, MARA bukan sahaja berjaya

menghasilkan pelajar yang cemerlang akademik, tetapi juga berjaya dalam menjuruskan laluan

kerjaya (career path) pelajarnya.


18

Penghargaan

Penulis ingin merakamkan penghargaan kepada MARA atas sokongan kewangan melalui Skim Geran

Penyelidikan dan Inovasi MARA (SGPIM) 2013 – 2014.

Rujukan

Carmeli, A & Gefen, D. (2005). The Relationship Between Work Commitment Models and Employee Withdrawal Intentions, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20 (2), 63-86.

Chua, Y.P. (2006). Kaedah dan statistik penyelidikan. Kaedah Penyelidikan. Buku 1. Kuala Lumpur.

McGraw-Hill Education. Faridah Mohd Sopah. (2001). Hubungan Antara Keselarasan Personaliti Dengan Kepuasan Kerja di

Kalangan Kaunselor Sekolah Menengah di Negeri Selangor. Projek Master yang tidak diterbitkan. Fakulti Pengajian Pendidikan. UPM, Serdang.

Gwinn, R P., Swanson, C. E., Carmeli, A & Gefen, D. (2005). The Relationship Between Work

Commitment Models and Employee Withdrawal Intentions, Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20 (2), 63-86.

Kevin A. J. et al. (2009). Identifying student potential for ICT entrepreneurship. Myer-Briggs Personaliti

Type Indicators. Jurnal of Information Technology Education, 8, 2005. Kim Hoque, Scott Taylor dan Emma Bell. (2005). Investors in people,: market-led voluntarism in vocational education and training. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43, 135-153. Nor Asikin bt. Salleh. (2007). Memperkasa sekolah kebangsaan: organisasi pembelajaran sebagai satu

sebagai satu faktor di sekolah-sekolah berkesan. Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan. Isu-isu Pendidikan Negara Ketiga: Dasar dan Perlaksanaan 2007, Fakulti Pendidikan UKM. Hal. 259-266.

Sidek Mohd Noah. (2005). Pengujian dan penilaian dalam kaunseling: Teori dan aplikasi. Serdang:

Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia. Sidek Mohd Noah. (2006). Perkembangan kerjaya: Teori dan praktis. Serdang: Penerbit Universiti Putra

Malaysia. Sidek Mohd Noah. (2012). Inventori Minat Kerjaya SIdek - IMKS (Sidek Career Interest Inventory). SMN

Psuchological Testing & Resources. bandar Baru bangi, Selangor D.E. http://timesandpirls.be edu/PDF/Po6_Student questinnaire.pdf. Student Questionnaire, 2006.

Jurnal Pendidikan & Latihan

ISSN : 1985-9597, Jilid 6, Bil. 02 (Dis 2014),

http://journal.mara.gov.my/education/articles.html

19

Implementation of Chemistry Lecturer Junior Programme to

Enhance Students’ Achievement in Chemistry

Nurul Elyani Elleas1, Maria Ilyana Muhammed1, Siti Zubaidah Azizan1,

Norrisalha Mohamad Tahir1 1(Kolej MARA Kulim)

Abstract

This study aims to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of Chemistry Lecturer Junior

Programme (CLJP) to enhance students’ achievement in Chemistry in Kolej MARA Kulim. In addition, this

study aims to identify whether there are differences in the increase of achievement among male and

female students after CLJP was implemented. This study employed the quantitative research using the

quasi-experimental pre-test and post-test research design. A total number of 108 students of Kolej MARA

Kulim were purposively sampled. Data were analysed using paired sample t-test and independent sample

t-test. The finding showed that students’ achievement in Chemistry increased when CLJP was

implemented. It also revealed no significant difference between male and female students’ achievement.

Keyword: peer teaching, students’ achievement

Introduction

It has been perceived that knowledge management (K-Management) has become so important

in today‟s educational organization. Information practices and learning strategies known as K-

Management are gaining acceptance in the field of education and can be described as a set of

practices that helps to improve the use and sharing of data or information in decision making at

the most basic level (Petrirides & Guiney, 2002). This is in line with Vision 2020 which is a

crucial agenda for Malaysia to transform Malaysian society from a knowledge society and

ultimately into a “value-based” knowledge society by the year 2020. In order to achieve this

vision, changes need to be made in how people work within their respective educational

institutions as well as on the ongoing and effective professional development. At the same time,

teachers are also required to remain abreast of a wide variety of changing standards, curricula,

and pedagogical methods.

K-Management can be used as a strategy to encounter current competitive challenges

(Chu et al., 2011). According to Hooff et al. (2003), knowledge sharing is a process where

individuals mutually exchange their knowledge and jointly create new knowledge. Increasing

knowledge sharing would have positive effect on organization performance. According to Zhao

(2010), K-Management school can facilitate the acquisition, sharing and application of

knowledge in school, especially the professional knowledge, experiences and competencies of

teachers. Unfortunately, intellectual property is often not shared because it is considered as a

Jurnal Pendidikan & Latihan Jilid 6, Bil. 02 (Dis 2014)

20

source of power (Quinn et al., 1996). Moreover, Cho et al. (2007) reported that people do not

share their knowledge under all circumstances. At the classroom level, knowledge sharing

occurs when the teachers engage students in intellectual discussions, and how the students

behave in terms of knowledge sharing behaviour is influenced on how the instructors conducts

the class (Chen et al., 2007).

According to Marinah et al. (2011) knowledge sharing will be effective through social

discussions, teamwork or work projects, as well as through individual activities such as reading

and self-reflection. As such, the establishment of conducive environment for knowledge sharing

between students and their colleagues need to be initiated. This initiative is considered important

since students experience numerous content knowledge to be covered in limited time. There are

many subjects to be taken and much syllabus to be covered within short time-span. They have

to attend classes for eight hours each day and this situation can cause cognitive overload

among them. Moreover, they also need to complete their tutorials, assignment, and laboratory

reports. At the same time, matriculation students have to be prepared for quizzes, tests and

examinations. This situation leads to a very stressful life in matriculation, and sharing knowledge

is incontrovertibly one of the helpful ways to overcome this situation.

By sharing knowledge, the time taken to do revisions can be reduced. Unfortunately,

from our observation, we believe that knowledge sharing among matriculation students is not

really practised since most of them are afraid to lose their exclusiveness. Furthermore, the

knowledge that individuals possess is considered as their intellectual property and the breadth of

knowledge gives them a personal advantage. Within a classroom context, most students may

keep their knowledge against classmates to gain a competitive advantage in grades.

Based on the Mid-Semester Examination results in Chemistry, we found that the

percentage of low achievers or failures is higher compared to high achievers (Malaysia

Examination Council, 2011). The gap between high achievers and low achievers can be caused

by either the students themselves or lecturers. One of the suggested approaches to overcome

this problem is through knowledge sharing. Thus, CLJP is introduced. We strongly believe that

when these students, also known as „junior lecturers‟ in this CLJP context, share their

knowledge with their group members, they manage to reduce the number of failures.

One of the subjects taught in Matriculation level is Chemistry which is one of the most

important branches of Science. It enables learners to understand what happens or revolves

around them. In addition, Chemistry is generally related to the matter; its atomic and electronic

structure, chemical reactions, organic chemistry and many more. Chemistry curricula commonly

incorporate many abstract concepts (Taber, 2002). These abstract concepts are very important

since more advanced chemistry concepts or theories cannot be easily understood if these

underpinning concepts are not sufficiently grasped by the students (Coll & Treagust, 2001). The

abstract nature of Chemistry along with other content learning difficulties means that Chemistry

classes require a high-level thinking skill (Taber, 2002). Many students claim that Science is

generally difficult and Chemistry is one of the most difficult subjects to learn because the

psychology for the formation of most Chemistry concepts is quite difficult from that of the normal

world (Johnstone, 2000). That is why learning Chemistry places insurmountable demands on

both the students and teachers. (Stieff & Wilensky, 2002). Sirhan (2007) concluded that

Chemistry proves to be a difficult subject for many students and sometimes repel learners from


21

continuing their studies in Chemistry. Based from the findings above, we realised that the

difficulties in learning Chemistry will demotivate the students and gradually affect their grades.

Mazur (1997) pointed out that the students must be involved in group work or peer

instruction, where the students help each other in challenging each other‟s ideas through

discussions. Through the peer tutoring, the tutors and tutees can increase their self confidence,

skills and satisfaction of knowledge obtained (Chen, Ching & Liu, 2009). Miller et al. (1995)

found that peer learning can benefit both the tutor and tutee, socially and educationally by

motivating them to learn. Besides, it is also an effective intervention for low achievers. This is

because when tutors and tutees are organized to help each other in structured ways, there are

possibilities that both groups will improve their skills and knowledge. One of the examples of

peer tutoring programme is through a programme called Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies

(PALS). Through PALS, the questioning technique that is employed within pairs generates

deeper understanding that creates meaningful abstract representations (Fuchs et al., 2007).

Basically, CLJP and PALS programme are almost similar where the tutors are chosen from

students who have obtained good results in Chemistry and they volunteer to become the tutors.

The tutors also need to meet their lecturer (who acts as the supervisor) to report the progress,

discuss problems and innovations. Basically, CLJP adopts the PALS programme. However,

several changes are made to suit the matriculation syllabus.

In order to implement peer tutoring effectively, tutors play an important role in the peer

tutoring programme. A tutor has three functions as outlined by Sobral (2007): (a) to help the

tutees in the study task; (b) to aid the colleague in teaching tasks compatible with his/her

knowledge experience; and (c) to act as a link between lecturers and tutees.

Several studies have shown that peer tutoring is effective in a range of educational

environments. Susan et al. (2008) reported that Peer Led Team Learning (PLTL) has shown

improved performance in Chemistry and attitude among students. Kunsch (2007) states that

peer tutoring in Mathematics is effective in improving Mathematical performance for students

who experience Mathematical disability. Another study by Lazaro et al. (2006) observed how the

differences between the pre- and post- scores in the peer tutoring programme were highly

significant. Some established positive outcomes were reported through Peer Assisted Study

Sessions (PASS) that helped the students‟ performance by promoting an inquiring, analytical

and creative approach in Chemistry. (Miller et al., 2010). It is also proven that peer tutoring

benefits both tutors and students in improving students‟ perseverance and retention (Tinto,

2000).

Several studies also reported similar findings on the effect of peer tutoring on academic

performance in Chemistry. Van Lanen et al. (2000) reported that when students help each other,

they tend to gain impressive grades in Chemistry. The differences between the scores before

and after peer tutoring programmes were also found highly significant (Lazaro et al., 2006).

Meanwhile, Michael Parkinson (2009) found that there is a significant increase, more than 13%

in students‟ performance in their Chemistry examination marks and the failure rates were

observed to reduce dramatically.


22

Research Objectives

The objectives of the study are:

1. To investigate the effect of CLJP on students‟ achievement score in Chemistry.

2. To examine the differences between male and female students on the Chemistry

achievement scores after the CLJP is implemented.

Research Questions

1. Is there any effect of CLJP on students‟ achievement score in Chemistry?

2. Is there any difference between male and female students on the Chemistry achievement

scores after the CLJP is implemented?

Research Hypothesis

1. There is no significant improvement on students‟ achievement score in Chemistry after the

implementation of CLJP.

2. There is no significant difference on the Chemistry achievement scores between male and

female students after the CLJP is implemented.

Research Methodology

This study employed the quantitative research approach which applies the experimental pre-test

and post-test research design. The design is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Legend : O1 = Pre-test (Mid Semester Exam)

X = Intervention (CLJP)

O2 = Post-test (A test which have the same questions

as in the Mid Semester Exam)

This study adopted the Action Research Technique. This technique involved several steps

namely (a) Planning, (b) Action, (c) Observation; and (d) Reflection, and explained as follows:

Planning: In this step, a group of lecturers teaching Chemistry subject in Kolej MARA

Kulim carried out a meeting to discuss problems related to the quality of the results in

Chemistry during the Mid-Semester Exam. The results indicate that something needs to

O1 X O2


23

be done to overcome the problem and there is a consensus agreeing to implement the

CLJP. A permission from the college Director was warranted before the study started.

This step involved in selecting the sample of this study and developing the instrument to

measure students‟ achievement in Chemistry. The targeted samples are students who

obtained poor results in their standardized quizzes. The standardized quizzes were given

to the students once the lecturers completed covering lectures after each chapter. Based

from the results, a total number of 108 students from four lecture classes were purposely

selected. Meanwhile, students that had higher score were chosen as the Lecturer

Juniors. The Lecturer Juniors were then trained to help their peers for the mastery of

Chemistry content as stipulated in the matriculation syllabus.

Action : In short, this program carried out as follows:

Step 1

High achiever students from each class were selected by their respective lecturer to be a

tutor which is also known as Junior Lecturers. They will act as the tutor for four to five

students in a group. They have to attend Training for Trainer session (TOT) conducted

by the lecturer. The purpose of this session is to help tutors to understand the answer

scheme of each question which will later be discussed with other group members.

Step 2

The Junior Lecturer would meet their group members after academic hours (8pm to

10pm) once a week and they discussed the solutions of the questions given by the

lecturers. The questions were adapted by the lecturers using past years‟ examination

questions. In this meeting, the Junior Lecturers did not only help their group members to

answer the question, but they were also expected to understand certain related

concepts. On that day, two lecturers on duty would monitor the meeting which was held

concurrently for all classes. The lecturer also helped Junior Lecturers if they faced any

problems. The Junior Lecturers were required to submit a report to their lecturer on the

next day of meeting. At the end of semester, the certificate of recognition was given to

the Junior Lecturer as a token of appreciation.

Step 3

The pre-test which is Mid Semester Examination was conducted on 4 August 2011. The

paper contains four subjective questions. Each question was set from four different

chapters which are Matter, Atomic Structure, Periodic Table and Chemical Bonds. After

the examinations, the 8-week intervention was carried out by implementing CLJP. On the

ninth week, students were given post-test which comprised the same items as in the pre

test. The results from the two examinations were compared to investigate the

effectiveness of the CLJP in improving the students‟ achievement in Chemistry.

Observation : The results from both pre-test and post-test were compared to

investigate the effectiveness of the intervention program.


24

Reflection : Based from the data analysed, the researchers reflected on the

effectiveness of this programme.

Research Analysis and Finding

Data were analysed using SPSS version 16. The inferential statistical analysis was carried out

using paired sample t-test in order to determine the improvement of students‟ achievement in

pre test and post test. Independent sample t-test was performed to investigate the significant

differences on the academic performances among male and female students when the CLJP

was implemented.

The findings of the study are as explained below:

1. Achievement Differences between Pre and Post Test

To answer Research Question 1, paired sample t-test was performed. The achievement score is

categorized into low (M= 0.0-1.6), moderate (M= 1.7-3.3), good (M= 3.4-5.0) and excellent (M=

5.1-6.7). Table 1 showed that the post test mean score is higher (M= 6.45, SD=1.75) compared

to the pre test mean score (M= 1.83, SD=0.87). The result also indicated that the difference is

significant t(107)= -27.62, p=.00, p<0.05 as shown in Table 2. Thus, the null hypothesis is

rejected. It shows that there is significant improvement on students‟ achievement score in

Chemistry after the implementation of CLJP

Table 1. Mean score students’ achievement in pre test and post test

Dimension Mean score Standard deviations

pre test 1.83 0.87 post test 6.45 1.75

Table 2. Paired Sample T-Test Analysis on Students’ Achievement

Mean Standard Dev 95% CI t df Sig (2 tailed) Lower Upper

Post-pre -4.62 1.74 -4.95 -4.29 -27.62 107 0.00

*Paired sample t test significant at significant level .05

2. Achievement Difference among Male and Female Students

With regard to Research Question 2, the independent sample t-test was conducted in order to

examine the difference between the males and females on the test gain score. The result

indicates that there was no significant difference between the males and females t(106) =.95,

p=.344 (p>.05) as shown in Table 3. Thus, the null hypothesis which showed no significant

differences on the Chemistry achievement scores between male and female students after the

implementation of CLJP failed to be rejected.


25

Table 3. Analysis achievement in pre test and post test among male and female students

Dimension Levene Test equal mean t test

F Sig t df sig Mean Std Error 95% CI

(2 tailed) Diff Diff Lower Upper

gain score Equal .881 .350 .950 106 .344 .35149 .3699 -.3821 1.085

variance

assumed

Equal 1.06 72.5 .290 .35149 .3295 -.3053 1.154

variance

not assumed

*Independent sample t test significant at significant level .05

Discussion, Reflection and Recommendation

In summary, the researchers who were the lecturers of this study were impressed by the positive

improvement of students‟ achievement from moderate (M=1.83, SD=0.87) to (M= 6.45,

SD=1.75) excellent level after the implementation of CLJP. This finding is similar as reported by

Coe, McDougall and McKeown (1999) which stated that there is a positive effect of peer tutoring

in Chemistry. This study also reported that the positive impact of this programme is the same

between male and female students. Thus, this showed that this programme benefited all

students regardless of their gender.

However, the sample of this study involved students who were studying in Kolej MARA

Kulim in academic year 2011/2012. As such, the findings and the results cannot be generalized

to the Matriculation colleges nationwide. The findings obtained only applicable for the four

classes which were the sample in the study. The result analysis only focuses on four chapters in

Chemistry (Matter, Atomic Structure, Periodic table and Chemical Bonds). Other than that, the

students‟ achievement in Chemistry for the intact group might also be influenced by other factors

such as surrounding, student's personality, lecturers‟ commitment in teaching and learning

process in class and etc. The researchers also planned to get the reflection from the junior

lecturers, their group members and also the Chemistry lecturers. However, time constraint has

become the limitation factor in this study.

From this study, it is noted that the implementation of this programme had created closer

relationship among the students. It happened because the co-operation and the rapport that

had actually existed among the high and low achievers students. In the class, students no longer

worked individually because they had tried to improve their achievement as a group. This

innovative approach can improve students‟ examination results with enjoyment and enthusiasm.

From the observation, it is found that students are more comfortable with the informal

language used by their friends rather than formal language used by their lecturers. Thus, the

contents can be delivered easily. The success of CLJP is not just a measurement to improve

grades. Rather, it lies in its potential to encourage higher order thinking skill, independent

learning, creativity, team work, confidence and communication among the students. Relying on

students to teach their peers does not mean repudiates the role and duty of the lecturers.


26

Furthermore, lecturers have to guide and monitor the junior lecturer in their Training of Trainer

classes (TOT). In fact, the lecturers, as a mentor and trainer, bear a heavy responsibility to

ensure that the junior lecturer understand the concepts of the lessons, and in turn, right

instructions and explanations can be delivered to their group members.

Based on the positive impact of this programme, it is recommended that besides having

discussion in a small group, this programme can be expanded to bigger groups where the junior

lecturers would conduct lectures after academic hours. Even though the topics would have been

taught by their Chemistry lecturers in formal classes, the help of junior lecturers would enable

their peers to understand the content of the topic better. This method works more effectively

because the teaching and learning are carried out in an informal, friendly and approachable way.

Indirectly, interesting learning environment is inculcated.

Other than that, junior lecturers are suggested to form discussion groups among

themselves. The purpose of this group is to provide a place for high achiever students to

strengthen their knowledge. It will be better if the discussions are held before they meet their

group members so that they will become more prepared for the topic that they are going to

discuss.

Lastly, it is suggested that for further research, the qualitative analysis be carried out to

understand better the impact of this programme to the students other than their academic

achievement. It is suggested that reflections be taken from the perspectives of lecturers, junior

lecturers and students.

Conclusions

It should be noted that this Chemistry Lecturer Junior Programme is one approach which can

help students to improve their academic achievement in Chemistry. Thus, this programme

should be continued in the next, new sessions for the betterment of students‟ performance.

However, certain adjustments should be carried out to this programme to improve students‟

behavioural and social aspect, not only focusing on the academic aspect. The impact of

Chemistry Lecturer Junior Programme will lead to holistic learning environment and collaborative

interaction.


27

References

Bidgood, P. (1994). The success of Supplemental Instruction: Statistical evidence. Helping students to

learn from each other: Supplemental Instruction, 71-79.

Chen, J., Koch, P., Chung, M., & Lee, C. (2007). Exploring contributory factors in student-to-student

knowledge sharing: A Singaporean perspective. NCA 93rd Annual Convention.

Chen, Ching L., & Chang, C. (2009). A case study of peer tutoring program in higher education. Research

in Higher Education Journal.

Cho, N., Li, G. Z., & Su, C. Z. (2007). An empirical study on the effect of individual factors on knowledge

sharing by knowledge type. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 3(2), 1-15.

Chu, K.W., Wang, M., & Yuen, A.H.K. (2011). Implementing Knowledge Management in school

environment: Teacher‟s perception. Knowledge Management & E-Learning: An International

Journal, 3(2).

Coe, E., McDougall, A.O., & McKeown, N.B. (1999). Is peer assisted learning of benefit to undergraduate

chemist. Retrieved 23 September, 2009, from www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/pal/

Collins, W. (1982). Some correlates of achievement among students in a Supplemental Instruction

program. Journal of learning skills, 2(1), 19–28.

Coll, R.K., & Treagust, D.F. (2001). Learners' mental models of chemical bonding. Research in Science

Education, 31, 357-382.

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2007). Increasing strategic reading comprehension with Peer-Assisted

Learning activities. In D. McNamara (Ed.), Reading comprehension strategies: Theories,

interventions, and technologies. New York: Psychology Press.

Ghassan, S. (2007). Learning Difficulties in Chemistry. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 2(20).

Hooff, B., Elving, W., Michiel, J. & Dumoulin, C. (2003). Knowledge Sharing in Knowledge Communities.

Hussein, F., & Reid, N. (2009). Working memory and difficulties in school chemistry. Research in Science

& Technological Education, 27(2), 161-185.

Ian, J. Quitadamo, C. Jayne, B., Gregory, J. C. (2009). Peer-Led Team Learning: A Prospective Method

for Increasing Critical Thinking in Undergraduate Science Courses.

Johnstone, A. H. (2000). Teaching of chemistry-logical or psychological?.Chemistry Education Research

and Practice, 1(1), 9-15.

Kohler, E.W., Richardson, T., Mina, C., Dinwiddie, G., & Greenwood, C. (1985). Establishing cooperative

relations in the classroom, 29, 12-16.

Kunsch, C.A., Jitendra, A.K., & Sood, S. (2007). The Effects of Peer-Mediated instruction in Mathematics

for Students with Learning Problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice,1-12.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/epd/pal/


28

Lassegard, J.P. (2008). The effects of peer tutoring between domestic and international students: the

tutor system at Japanese universities. Higher Education Research & Development, 27(4), 357–

369.

Lazaro, Serafin, C., Umagat & Myrna, R. (2006). Peer tutoring and performance in chemistry.

Luca, J. & Clarkson, B. (2002) Promoting Student Learning through a Peer Tutoring. World Conference

on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications.

Malaysia Examination Council.(2011).Matriculation Examination Achievement Report. Ministry of

Education.

Marinah, A., Ramlee, I., Peter, F. & Adrienne, C. (2011). Knowledge management in Malaysian school

education: Do the smart schools do it better?. Quality Assurance in Education, 19(3), 263 – 282.

Mazur E. (1997). Peer Instruction; A User‟s Manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order

thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55-65.

Miller, S.R., Miller, P.F., Armentrout, Flannagan, J.A., &, J.W. (1995). Cross-age peer tutoring: A strategy

for promoting self-determination in students with severe emotional disabilities/behavior disorders.

Preventing School Failure, 39(4), 32-37.

Miller, D., K. Topping, & Thurston, A. (2010). Peer tutoring in reading: The effects of role and organization

on two dimensions of self-esteem. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 417-433.

Miller, V., Oldfield, E., & Bulmer, M. (2012). Peer Assisted Study Session (PASS) in first year chemistry

and statiatics courses: insight and evaluations. Australian Conference on Sciences and

Mathematic Education.

Parkinson, M.(2009). The effect of peer assisted learning support (PALS) on performance in Mathematics

and Chemistry. Innovations in Education and Teaching International Conference, 46(4), 381–392.

Petrirides, L.A, & Guiney,S.(2002). Knowledge Management for School Leaders: An Ecological

Framework for Thinking Schools (Vol. 104). Institute for the Study of Knowledge Management in

Education.

Quinn, J.B., Philip, A. & Sydney, F. (1996), Leveraging intellect. Academy of Management Executive,

10(3),7-26.

Sirhan, G. (2007). Learning difficulties in chemistry: An overview. Journal of Turkish Science

Education, 4(2), 2-20.

Sobral, D. (2002). Cross-year peer tutoring experience in a medical school: Conditions and outcomes for

student tutors. Medical Education, 36, 1064-1070.

Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2002). Modeling chemistry as an emergent phenomenon. Poster session

presented at the Gordon Conference on Innovations in College Chemistry Teaching, New

London,CT.


29

Susan, C.H., Karen, J.D., & Regina, F.F. (2008). Peer led team learning in general chemistry:

Implimentation and evaluation, Journal of Chemistry Education.

Taber, K. (2002). Chemical misconception: Prevention, diagnosis and cure. Royal Society of Chemistry.

Tinto, V. (2000). Learning better together: The impact of learning communities on students success in

higher education. Journal of Institutitional Research, 9(1), 48-53.

Van Lanen R & Mc Gannon T. (2000). Predictors of Nursing Students’ Performance in a One Semester

Organic and Biochemistry Course. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(6), 767-770.

Van den Hooff, B., Elving, W., Meeuwsen, M., & Dumoulin, C. (2003). Knowledge sharing in knowledge

communities.

Van Lanen, R., & Lockie, N.M., & Mc Gannon, T. (2000). Predictor of nursing students‟ performance in

one semester organic and biochemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(6), 767-770.

Zhao, J. (2010). School knowledge management framework and strategies: The new perspective on

teacher professional development. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 168–175.

Jurnal Pendidikan & Latihan ISSN : 1985-9597, Jilid 6, Bil. 02 (Dis 2014), http://journal.mara.gov.my/education/articles.html

30

Using the Process Approach to Teach Academic Writing to

First-Year Undergraduates of University of Selangor

Zarihan Samsudin, Ed.D (Kolej Poly-Tech MARA, Kuala Lumpur)

Abstract

This current study is an experimental research to find out whether the process approach is able to

develop the skills needed by first-year undergraduates to write academic texts. An intact group of 25

first-year Bachelor of Education TESL students in University of Selangor who were taking the course

of Academic Writing Skills had participated in this study. Using t-tests, the results from the

participants’ pre-test were compared with the results of their post-test which was administered to them

after the treatment sessions. Based on the findings, the study reveals that the process approach helps

to develop the participants’ skills in writing academic texts because it is the way to teach the process

of writing that closely resembles the natural writing process.

Keywords – Academic writing skills, process approach, natural writing process, undergraduates

1. Introduction

Writing has always been regarded as a burdensome and demanding endeavor (Chitravelu,

Sithamparam, & Teh, 2005). As such, learners are often unhappy and anxious when they are

assigned any writing task. Moreover, “very little help is given on how to write a formally

structured and coherent product” (Britton, Burgess, Martin, McLeod and Rosen, 1975, p. 27).

As a result, learners are unable to meet the demand of their writing assignments, thus

intensifying their dread of writing. Fortunately, recent developments in writing pedagogy and

a renewed interest in the field of writing have come to acknowledge the complexities and

difficulties involved in learning to write. Conceding that many beginning writers are dubious

about the writing process as they do not know how writers behave (Shaughnessy, 1977),

White and Arndt (1991) propose that teachers and educators learn more about the writing

process.

White and Arndt (1991) claimed that they have evidence which they had obtained

from differing types of observations of writers. The transcripts from these observations

disclose that there is much more to writing than just learning and utilizing linguistic or

rhetorical rules. More precisely, writing is an act of solving a problem which involves

processes like generating ideas, discovering a „voice‟ with which to write, planning, goal-

setting, monitoring and evaluating what is going to be written as well as what has been

written, and searching for language with which to express exact meanings. Furthermore,

writers normally do not know at the outset exactly what it is they intend to write as many

ideas only come forth during the act of writing itself (White and Arndt, 1991). Hence, the

growing popularity of an approach in the writing pedagogy, which is often referred to as the

process approach, is being perceived as the answer to all of these problems.


31

The ability to write academic texts is of foremost importance to students in institutions

of higher learning because their academic performance greatly depends on it. Unfortunately,

many students are unable to master the skills to write academic texts even after they have

undergone a course in academic writing during their first semester at the university. This

problem is common among undergraduates of many Malaysian universities, hence, those of

University of Selangor (UNISEL).

In view of this, many local institutions of higher learning try to help their

undergraduates to deal with these problems by insisting that they take a subject called

English for Academic Purposes (EAP) at the beginning of their courses. The belief is that

EAP could at least provide the rudiments to write an academic paper stipulated by all

disciplines. Prompted by the realization of the problems faced by undergraduates in writing

academic texts in English, this study, therefore, seeks to find out whether the process writing

approach can be employed to help undergraduates of UNISEL to develop the ability to write

academic texts.

This current study is an experimental research to find out whether the process

approach is able to help to develop the skills needed by first-year undergraduates to produce

academic texts. Therefore, the objective of this study is to identify whether there are any

improvements in the students‟ ability in writing academic text after they have been taught

using the process approach.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Academic Writing

For most researchers in the academic discourse, mastery of academic writing is the main

goal of composition pedagogy. Unfortunately, many students of various disciplines are not

able to do so, thus, they are pleading for assistance to master academic writing. Responding

to such concerns, many researchers started to investigate college students‟ initiation into

academic discourses and their ways of thinking (Durst, 2006).

Beginning from the middle to late 1980s, these researchers undertook studies to

examine the demands of the specific writing tasks and situations students were confronted

with in colleges and universities, and how they comprehended and managed academic

writing in general. Harowitz (1986), for example, tried to narrow down the gap between the

skills needed in content courses and those of English for Academic Purpose (EAP) which

emphasize more on types of rhetorical skills required to complete writing tasks in university

writing classes. Leki and Carson (1994), on the other hand, studied the reactions of the

students‟ faculty to their writing, students‟ writing needs and their perceptions of these needs

while Johns (2006), Flowerdew (2005), and Cotterall and Cohen (2003) discussed the

methods, challenges and possibilities of teaching research skills to students who studied

English language.

In addition, many researchers agree with Flowerdew (2005a) and Cotterall and

Cohen (2003) that in order to write academic texts efficiently, students need to first learn

several complex strategies and skills which they learn and use in content classes. Johns

(2006) and Cotterall and Cohen (2003) pointed out that students require instructions on how

to choose, evaluate, and integrate information and its sources into their own writing. It is also

found that besides the skills to read and respond to texts in university content classes are

inadequate; students also need to have the skills to manipulate data from different sources


32

like interviews and questionnaires (Cotterall and Cohen, 2003; Spack, 1988; Horowitz,

1986)). Spack (1988), nonetheless, recommended students learn to formulate and test

generalizations, observe and report noteworthy pieces of information, or produce points of

reference for comparing homogenous phenomena. Horowitz (1986) asserted that students

are sometimes required to relate theory to data that they obtain from their research.

2.2 The Writing Process in Academic Context

According to Spack (1988), the process of composing academic texts requires strategies

such as planning, pre-writing, drafting, consulting, revising, and editing. Spack (1988)

referred to planning as the process of assigning of tasks and constructing timetable for

studying and composing while pre-writing is the process of gathering, exploring, and

organizing information. Drafting, on other hand, is the process of structuring of ideas into

linear discourse. Consulting is the process of ensuring aims and objectives are achieved.

Last but not least, the process of revising and that of editing are carried out together during

phases called re-writing that occur recursively throughout the act of composing (Spack,

1988; Shih, 1986).

Speaking of recursiveness, the composing process itself is, in fact, recursive (Flower

and Hayes, 1981). According to White and Arndt (1991), the complex and recursive nature of

writing and the reciprocal action of the different phases of writing occur concurrently.

Humans do not think in a linear manner, but writing is linear and because of this a writer

needs to know how to match his thoughts to his intended messages in an appropriate

manner. It is extremely rare for writers to know exactly what they will write ahead of time.

This is because many ideas only emerge once they have begun to write. They then retract

and revise, and make alterations in words or structures they have used before they move

forward to proceed with their writing. Writers normally do this repeatedly until they are

satisfied with the end result. Since writing entails a process of creating meaning through

generating, constructing, and improving one‟s ideas, writing practice in the ESL classroom

should mirror the same process where focus and sufficient time are provided for students to

revise and re-draft their text with the teacher interposing to facilitate the process of writing.

The writer is allowed to visit and revisit each stage of the writing process as many times as

he finds necessary and as he does this, he makes changes and alterations in order to get his

message across as effectively as possible. As discovered by Perl (1980), the success of

writing greatly depends upon the recursive quality of composing.

The new millennium, however, marks a different trend in composing. Al Husseini

(2014), for example, feels that ESL students should learn several of those complex strategies

and skills practiced in university content classes so that they can write academic texts

effectively. Baxter, Hughes and Tight (1998), DeLyser (2003), and Antoniou and Moriarty

(2008) claimed that although writing is the basis of an academic practice, writing is a skill that

is seldom explicitly taught. Consequently, many academics have to battle not only with

technical writing skills but with the emotions that writing arouses and with the demanding

process of developing a sense of self as an academic writer. It needs not be like this.

Cameron, Nairn, and Higgings (2009) identify three strategies that can help learners to make

sense of academic writing and its relationship with writing. One of the strategies is to confront

and talk about the emotional turmoil that writing arouses so that they can take charge of such

emotions in order to help them in the writing process. The second strategy is to address

procedural know-how explicitly and disclose what goes on in the process of writing. This

renders information about strategies for productive writing to novices, and convinces them


33

that what they perceive as failings (for example, having to write and rewrite again and again)

are actually the means of producing good writing. The third strategy is to provide novices

with opportunity to assume themselves as experienced writers in the presence of others.

Santangelo, Harris, and Graham (2007) also pointed out that the reason why many

students find writing extremely difficult and frustrating is because they are not able to learn

and apply the strategies used by skilled writers. They found that Self-Regulated Strategy

Development (SRSD) has led to significant and meaningful improvements in writing

knowledge and skills as students learn strategies that can help them manage the writing

process. In addition, SRSD also increased motivation and self-regulation which occurred due

to a few reasons. The first of these reasons was the collaboration among students that took

place during instruction enhanced their sense of ownership over the strategy and allowed

them to make sense of why the use of strategy was beneficial. Secondly, introducing self-

regulation techniques into instruction made the students see how their effort and attitudes

influenced learning. Finally, positive reinforcement by the teachers fostered students‟ belief in

their ability to improve. Similarly, Weisendanger, Perry, and Braun (2011) came up with a

strategy called Suggest-Choose-Plan-Compose (SCPC). They conclude that SCPC is a

strategy that supports students‟ development of creative writing and construction of text in a

sequential manner. However, for the strategy to be fully mastered and utilized effectively by

most of the learners, repeated practice and varying amount of gradually reduced teacher

support are necessary. Independent mastery, then, can only be achieved with repeated use

of SCPS with prompting and continued support from teachers (Weisendanger, Perry, and

Braun, 2011).

Another researcher who has high regard for the use of strategy is Keen (2010) who

used a certain concept called strategic revision to analyze drafts and revise texts in order to

look into strategies and techniques deployed in the process of revision. The findings of

Keen‟s study indicate that some students are aware of a range of goals for writing and are

able to use these goals as reference points when redrafting in response to peer

assessments. Besides that, students are capable of generalizing from specific examples to

identify characteristics of interesting and effective writing. Yet, there are students who can

use the characteristics selectively and creatively as writing goals. Other than that, there are

indications to show that students can produce peer assessments which are quite accurate to

be used by writers in redrafting their accounts. In fact, some students may have combined

peer assessments, judgments, and recommendations with goals attained from their

knowledge of writers‟ motivation or assessment criteria or of both, to create strategies for

enhancing or creating drafts of their writing. The findings further showed that students were

able to use a range of types of alteration to develop their drafts. There are even students

who can use one or more of these alteration types strategically. Finally, there is also an

indication to show that some students are able to redraft in order to affect shifts in major

elements in texts or sections of text (Keen, 2010).

Last but not least, Watson (2010) carried out a study to investigate the use of

reflective journaling in the teaching of academic writing as a strategy to enhance students'

understanding of the different expository methods employed as part of the writing process.

The results of Watson's (2010) study indicate an overall improvement in students'

conceptualization of the expository method. Throughout his study, Watson was able to see

how reflective journals reveal what their writers had learnt, how writers had learnt to express

themselves in journals, how journals can help people learn. The study also brought up the

usefulness of reflective journaling by promoting thorough understanding of a situation, clearly

identifying goals, viewing and assessing possible options and thinking before acting


34

(Nicholls, 2001). Liuoliene and Metiueniene (2009) who had also done a study on reflective

journaling, however, found that it is not just a log of events but a collection of specific topics

that provide favorable conditions for learning via reflection. This type of journaling

encourages learners to participate actively in the learning process which facilitates the

exploration of self-constructs of meaning. In other words, reflective journaling is a strategy

that can be used to help learners to acquire knowledge through the questioning of

instructional or learning practices geared towards the formulation of meaning (Liuoliene and

Metiueniene, 2009).

2.3 The Process Approach

The process approach views composing a piece of writing as a process in which the writer

explores, generates ideas, and continuously moves back and forth to uncover and

reconstruct his ideas in an attempt to define meaning (Zamel, 1983 a). Composing is thinking

(Raimes, 1983 a), thus, in the context of a writing class, the process approach entails the

provision of an assertive, supportive, and collaborative workshop setting within which

students, with sufficient time and little intervention, can work through their composing

processes. The teacher‟s role is only to facilitate students to develop workable strategies for

“getting started (finding topics, generating ideas and information, focusing, planning

structure, and procedure), for drafting (encouraging multiple drafts), for revising (adding,

deleting, modifying, and rearranging ideas), and for editing (attending to vocabulary,

sentence structure, grammar, and mechanics)” (Silva, 1990, p. 15).

In addition, the process approach also acknowledges that writing is a complex,

recursive, and creative process and regards these characteristics of writing as a set of

behaviors that is indistinguishable in the broad outlines for first and second language writers

(Friedlander, 1990). According to Mather and Jaffe (2002), writing should be viewed as

process that consists of stages that are interactive, overlapping and recursive. These stages

are prewriting (planning), writing (composing), rewriting (revising and editing), and sharing.

During prewriting, students are helped to generate topics through brainstorming and sharing

of ideas with others. They also consider the purpose for the writing as well as the audience it

is written for. Once they have decided on a topic, they start writing their first draft. Any time

during this writing stage, students may go back to researching for information for the topic

they have chosen when they find they do not have enough information about it or selecting a

new topic if they realize they are not interested in their earlier chosen topic. During the

rewriting stage, students revise their draft focusing their attention on their organization of

ideas and selection of vocabulary. Besides that, they proofread for mistakes and correct

errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and usage. Mather and Jaffe (2002)

recommend teachers to help their students at this stage by encouraging them to do peer-

editing, using a thesaurus, learning to use proof reading symbols, learning an editing strategy

or using a revision guide.

Another important feature of composing in academic context is collaborative learning.

Holmes (2004) came up with some suggestions to develop activities that involved discussion

and collaboration in an effort to make writing a more positive and effective experience. Ariza

Martinez (2005) found that brainstorming was very helpful in generating many ideas or words

that were related to a specific topic and that the activities of using picture sequence and

cartoons fostered personal expressions that proved to be a catalyst for vocabulary

development. Ariza Martinez also noticed that the adolescent low-achievers who were

extremely weak in writing who had participated in her study liked the process writing positive,


35

motivating and collaborative atmosphere. Therefore, EFL and ESL writing classes have

started to accept and make use of the process approach because it is found successful

(Onozawa, 2010).

3. Methodology

The research that employs the true experimental design described in Cresswell (2012) was

carried out on a class of 25 first year students of Bachelor of Education (TESL) of University

of Selangor who were taking the course of “Academic Writing Skills”. There was only one

class of first year students of Bachelor of Education (TESL) who were taking the course for

the second semester of the 2011/2012 session, the researcher was not able to select the

participants through random sampling, instead the researcher had to opt for convenience

sampling. The sampling method was chosen due to the fact that the courses offered for that

particular semester were all fixed and to choose participants at random was not possible as it

would disrupt the students‟ and department‟s schedules. In addition, the research was going

to take up the whole semester; it was easier to use the students of one class as they were

easily accessible and were unlike to withdraw from the study. This group consisted of twenty-

five students, eight males and seventeen females.

As shown in Table 3.1, the participants were given three weeks of class time to write

the essay for the pre-test. They were allowed to collect materials for the test but were not

allowed to write the essay at home. All materials and writing drafts were kept in a folder and

had to be submitted to the lecturer at the end of every class session. The pre-test essays

had to be handed over to the lecturer at the end of the class session on the third week. Next,

the intervention or treatment was administered to the participants over a period of seven

weeks from Week 4 to Week 10, with each weekly lesson consisting of three hours. The

skills imparted to the participants during each weekly lesson is as stated in Table 3.2.

Table 3.1. Adaptation of One Group Designs – True-Experimental Design

(Source: Cresswell, 2010, p. 310)

Pre and Post-test Design Time

Before the experiment 1st – 3rd

week of

research

4th to 10th week of

research

11th – 13th

week of

research

Select Experimental Group Pretest Experimental Treatment Posttest

Table 3.2. Weekly Schedules of Skills Taught Using the Process Approach

Week Skills Taught

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Topic selection.

Selection and organisation of information.

Outlining.

Drafting.

Drafting (continued).

Revising: Editing and Proofreading.

Revising: Editing and Proofreading (continued).


36

The instructor who taught the participants was given special training on how to teach

using the process approach. Then the instructor was provided with the relevant teaching

materials which can be referred to in the references section.

Lastly, the post-test was administered on the participants in the eleventh week. In the

post-test, the participants were allowed to apply all the strategies that they had learned in the

process approach. For example, students were allowed to do group revision or conferencing

in class during the revision, editing, and proofreading stage during class session on Week

11, 12 and 13 before the final written product was finalized and submitted at the end of that

class session along with all materials and drafts that were to be kept in a folder. The

materials and drafts were later analysed. The composing behaviors of the participants during

the pre-test and post-test were also noted. Thus, data from the pre-test and post-test were

triangulated with the data obtained from the observations of the participants‟ composing

behaviors and data obtained from analysing participants‟ folders.

First, the instructor was asked to provide participants‟ pre-test and post-test scores.

Subsequently, an examiner who had more than twenty years of experience in marking was

engaged to moderate the scores provided by the instructor. The marking scheme used to

mark the participants‟ pre-test and post-test scripts was adopted from Hughey, Wormuth,

Hartfield and Jacobs (1983) which was taken from a book entitled Teaching ESL

Composition - Principles and Techniques written by Jane B. Hughey, Deanna R. Wormuth,

V. Faye Hartfield, and Holly L. Jacobs in 1983. The participants‟ essays were evaluated in

terms of content, organization, vocabulary, language use, and mechanics.

The first set of which was obtained from the pre and post –tests was analyzed using

the Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) for Windows Version 19.0. Two different

types of data analysis methods were utilized, which included descriptive statistics, by

portraying frequencies and percentages and differential statistics by using a paired-sample t-

test. On the other hand, the second set of data for this study was obtained from observations

of the participants‟ composing behaviors during the pre-test and the post-test. This set of

qualitative data was analyzed manually by matching the behaviors of the participants with the

patterns of behaviors of expert writers. Last but least, the third set of data was obtained from

the participants‟ writing folders. These folders were also manually analyzed for evidences of

participants‟ use of the strategies learnt from the process approach. The second and third

sets of data were used next used to strengthen the first set or statistical data.

4. Findings

4.1 Pre- and Post-Tests

Using several differential analyses of the t-test, the participants‟ performances in the six main

criteria related to this study were analyzed. These criteria were content, organization,

vocabulary, language use, mechanics, and the overall results to find out whether there were

any significant differences between the performances of the participants in the six criteria in

the pretest and their performances in the same criteria in the post-test (before and after

employing the process approach).

Table 4.3.1 shows the t-test differential analysis between the performances of the

participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of content.

Findings from the analysis indicate that the participants‟ post-test results had a significantly


37

higher score than those of their pre-test, t (24) =-39.2, p=.000, d=-7.85. The difference is

large according to Cohen‟s (1988) guidelines.

Table 4.3.1 The t-Test Differential Analysis between the Pre-test and the Post-test of

the Participants in Terms of Content

Type Mean Mean diff. t df Sig. (2-

tailed)

Pretest 15.12 -6.12 -39.179 24 .000

Posttest 21.24


participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of organization.





the Participants in Terms of Organization


tailed)

Pretest 10.04 -2.72 -14.525 24 .000

Posttest 12.76


participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of vocabulary.

Findings from the analysis indicate that the respondents‟ post-test results had a significantly




the Participants in Terms of Vocabulary


tailed)

Pretest 10.44 -3.28 -22.249 24 .000

Posttest 13.72


participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of language use.



38




the Participants in Terms of Language Use


tailed)

Pretest 11.56 -3.24 -20.799 24 .000

Posttest 14.80


participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of mechanics.


higher score than those their pre-test, t (24) =-12.6, p=.000, d=-2.53. The difference is large

according to Cohen‟s (1988) guidelines.


the Participants in Terms of Mechanics


tailed)

Pretest 2.40 -1.48 -12.629 24 .000

Posttest 3.88


participants in the pre-test and their performances in the post-test in terms of the overall

results. Findings from the analysis indicate that the participants‟ post-test had a significantly

higher score than their pre-test, t (24) =-45.2, p=.000, d=-9.04. The difference is large

according to Cohen‟s (1988) guidelines.

Table 4.3.6 The t-Test Differential Analysis between the Pretest and the Posttest of

the Participants in Terms of the Overall Results


tailed)

Pretest 49.56 -1.68 -45.179 24 .000

Posttest 66.40


39

4.2 Data from Observation

4.2.1 During the Pre-Test

A few of the participants were seen scribbling on their drafts while the others embarked

almost immediately on their essays. Although they were advised to read up and bring

materials for their content, only some of them did so. There were participants who brought

only thesauruses and dictionaries but there were several who did not bother to bring anything

except some papers to write the essay on. These were the ones who wrote and stopped and

wrote again on the same paper or on a new sheet of paper. While some of the participants

were seen discussing with their friends, others were asking their friends to provide them with

specific words or to correct their sentences or to correct the spelling of words or their

grammar that they were unsure of. No one bothered to edit or revise anybody‟s work before

handing in their work.

4.2.2 During Post-Test

All the participants brought many kinds of materials ranging from magazines and journal

articles to newspaper clippings to books. They also brought dictionaries, thesauruses, their

notes and handouts that were given to them during the treatment sessions. The process of

writing could be seen taking place in stages that are interactive, overlapping and recursive.

During the pre-writing stage, the participants were seen reading the materials and making

notes while others discussed and exchanged opinions with their friends. Then, they

constructed outlines before they started writing their essays. Based on the outline, they

wrote their drafts and stopped to refer to materials or their friends or to discuss with their

friends. A few participants were seen to go forth and back amidst their writing. Although

revision and edition were done throughout the entire process of writing the final drafts, the

participants still carried out peer revising and proofreading before they submitted their essays

to the instructor.

4.3. Analyses of Pre-Test Materials and Drafts

Five participants brought articles retrieved from the internet, two brought magazine articles

and two brought newspaper clippings. No one brought any books except five who brought

either a dictionary or thesaurus.

Twelve participants had more than one draft in their folder. Four of the drafts were

trial and error sheets of the participants‟ essays; six were drafts containing content points

while the remainders were midway-abandoned essays. Not a single outline was found in any

of the participants‟ folders. There were no peer revised or edited drafts. All revision and

edition were undertaken by individual participant himself or herself.

4.3.2 Analyses of Post-Test Materials and Drafts

All the participants brought more than one kind of material. Twenty-one participants brought

magazine or journal articles; twenty brought articles retrieved from the internet; fifteen

brought newspaper clippings; and twenty-four brought photocopied pages of books and

encyclopedias. Ten participants brought either a dictionary or a thesaurus.


40

All the participants had more than one draft in their folders. Each of them had draft

showing brainstorming of content points; outline; first draft; a second draft; peer conferencing

draft; his/her own revised or edited draft; and peer revised or edited draft.

5. Discussions

Based on the paired sample t-test analysis of the participants, it was found that the

respondents‟ post-test results had a higher score than those of their pretest in terms of all

criteria namely, content, organization, vocabulary, language use, mechanics, and overall

results. This means that the process approach has contributed towards the improvement of

scores in the participants‟ performance. There are a number of reasons why the researcher

makes this assertion.

First and foremost, the participants‟ marks for content and organization at the post-

test are higher than their marks for the same criteria at the pre-test because the pre-writing

phase of the process approach was like the pre-writing stage mentioned in the review of

related literature above, that is, it was a process of gathering, exploring, and organizing of

information (Spack, 1988). They were taught to obtain ideas through brainstorming

techniques like listing, clustering, and free writing; and also through library and internet

searches. This is in line with what Johns (2006) and Cotterall and Cohen (2003) pointed out

that students require instructions on how to choose, evaluate, and integrate information and

its sources into their own writing. As for organization, they were taught to create outlines of

the information that they had decided to include in their essays. Other than that, the process

approach to teaching writing advocates the use of strategies which is in accord with names

such as Al Husseini (2014), Weisendanger, Perry, and Braun (2011), Keen (2010), Cameron,

Nairn, and Higgings (2009), Santangelo, Harris, and Graham (2007), Flowerdew (2005), and

Cotterall and Cohen (2003). Examples of strategies that are utilized in the process approach

are brainstorming for pre-writing, refreshing students‟ memory on problematic grammatical

items, outlining, conferencing during drafting, teacher and peer editing during editing and

revising.

Furthermore, there are also other recommendations that are put forth by these

researchers that are upheld and practiced by the process approach employed in this study.

Al Husseini (2014) and Cameron, Nairn and Higgings (2009), for example, recommended

that students be provided with procedural know-how and what goes on in the process of

writing. Weisendanger, Perry, and Braun (2011) and Santangelo, Harris, and Graham

(2007), on the other hand, proposed that students be given varying amount of gradually

reduced teacher support. Then, there is Keen who maintained that students can produce

peer assessments which are quite accurate and some students may combine peer

assessments, judgments and recommendations with goals attained from their knowledge of

writers‟ motivation or assessment criteria or of both, to create strategies for enhancing drafts

of their writing. Flowerdew(2005) and Cotterall and Cohen(2003) asserted that students use

some complex strategies and skills which they have learn in content classes to write

academic texts.

Other than that, the participants‟ marks for vocabulary, language use, mechanics and

overall results at the post-test are higher than their marks for the same criteria at the pre-test

because they had been taught and encouraged to constantly upgrade and refine their essays

in terms of ideas (content) as well as language use during all the stages in the treatment

sessions. This shows that the process approach resembles the real composing process


41

which is recursive (Friedlander, 1990; Flower and Hayes, 1981). The observation made by

the researcher during the post-test also reveals that the participants went back and forth

while they were writing until they were satisfied with the end product, hence, providing the

evidence that the process approach is in line with Mather and Jaffe‟s (2002) claim that writing

is a process that consists of stages that are interactive, overlapping and recursive. It also

proves the truth of what White and Arndt (1991) said about humans do not think in a linear

manner, but writing is linear and because of this a writer needs to know how to match his

thoughts to his intended messages in an appropriate manner. This is because many ideas

only emerge once they have begun to write and that was why the participants retracted and

revised, and made alterations in words or structures they had used before they moved

forward to proceed with their writing. The process approach to teaching writing

acknowledges this process of creating meaning through generating, constructing, and

improving one‟s idea. In other words, the process approach mimics the recursive nature of

the natural writing process, thus providing the participants with the opportunity to revise and

improve their content as well as language use, hence higher marks for their overall results.

Therefore, this proves that the success of the writing as noted by Perl (1980) greatly

depends upon the recursive quality of composing.

In addition, the instructor who was using the process approach in this study helped

and encouraged the participants to do peer-editing, using a thesaurus through the use of

proofreading symbols and an editing strategy (Mather and Jaffe, 2002). Unsurprisingly,

when the participants‟ drafts were done, the analyses showed that the participants were

able to produce accurate peer assessments when they were instructed to redraft their essays

(Keen, 2010). In a way, the positive reinforcement given in a facilitative rather than the

teacher-like authoritarian nature of the instructor helped to foster the participants‟ belief in

their ability to improve (Santangelo, Harris, and Graham, 2007).

Another feature of the process approach worth mentioning here is collaborative

learning. Many of the activities in the process approach in this study involved discussion and

collaboration in an effort to make writing a more positive and effective experience (Holmes,

2004). This study also reveals that brainstorming was very helpful in generating many ideas

or words that are related to a specific topic. Brainstorming is proven to be a catalyst for

vocabulary development. Many participants who were weak in writing liked the process

writing which provided positive, motivating and collaborative atmosphere (Ariza Martinez,

2005). Hence, not only EFL and ESL writing classes should make use of the process

approach but academic writing classes should also do the same because it is found

successful (Onozawa, 2010).

6. Conclusion

The process approach as found by this study had encouraged and enlivened the

recursiveness of natural writing and helped the participants to perform better in their writing

especially content-wise. This suggests that teachers should encourage their student writers

to revise and refine their ideas even when in the stage of writing their final draft so that they

can produce a good academic text. Another way of putting this is teachers should always

encourage their students to develop the best work they can possibly produce. One of the

reasons why the participants performed better in their content is because they were taught

new ways to thoroughly search for ideas to include in their essays. This indicates that

teachers need to acquaint their students with the various means of obtaining information.


42

Undergraduates need to write comprehensive academic texts within their own disciplines so

that they can obtain better grades in their CGPAs. Thus, this is indeed a better way to start

teaching undergraduates how to write a comprehensive academic text than to teach them

how to research comprehensively for their subject matter. In this way, not only will they

accumulate knowledge in the subject matter, but they will also improve their language skills.

Another reason why the participants did better in terms of content indirectly implies

that undergraduates need to be taught and coached on how to write a thesis statement and

topic sentences as well as how to develop them. Teachers should not only analyze these

statements but guide their development as well with the hope that their students can imitate

and learn to do these difficult tasks on their own. Academic writing is not about accuracy of

language, per se, but about the fluency of it. The importance of correctness of form is

undeniable, but the ability to get the message across is even more significant in academic

writing. So, teachers should insist on accuracy but should not be preoccupied or obsessed

by it to the point where they overlook a student's brilliant subject-matter and skills to write

academic text

7. Limitations of the Study

Due to the intensiveness of the instruction and monitoring at every step of the way in

producing an academic text through the process approach, only one group consisting of 25

participants was involved in this study. Secondly, the participants selected were only

Bachelor of Education (TESL) students. Thirdly, due to the setting of the class schedule and

courses offered for that semester, the participants were the only ones who were taking the

Academic Writing Skills course in UNISEL. These are the reasons why the selection of the

method of sampling was that of convenience sampling rather than that of random sampling.

Therefore, the findings of this research cannot be generalized to all students undertaking

similar or different programs in UNISEL or other universities.

8. Recommendations for Further Research

The sample size of this research was only 25 students of Bachelor of Education (TESL) in

University of Selangor. Furthermore, due to some restrictions in this study, random sampling

was not possible, instead convenience sampling was selected. Therefore, the findings of this

research cannot be generalized to all students of institutions of higher learning in Malaysia or

elsewhere. As such, for the purpose of generalization of the findings, a larger scale research

involving a bigger sample size from various programs and institutions of higher learning is

suggested for future studies. In addition, it is suggested that future studies could explore

employing a more robust sampling methodology.

Other than that, there were only five components of the written essays were

assessed, namely: content, organization, vocabulary, language use and mechanics. This

study did not assess the ability of students in citing information from other sources and

writing references specifically. This could be another area to dwell upon in future research for

this type of writing as citation and referencing are important parts of writing an academic text.

The ability of writing an academic text should be developed not only at tertiary level

but should start with students at school level. As writing folios is part of the evaluation of

students‟ performance in schools in subjects like History, Geography and Living Skills, it is


43

appropriate to teach students in schools how to write academic texts. Therefore, it is

suggested that the use of the process approach to teach academic writing in schools could

also be experimented by future researchers.


44

References

Al Husseini, S. S. (2014). Academic Writing Skills Demonstrated in University Students‟ Final Year Project Reports, and Implications on the Teaching of English For Academic Purposes, in the Arab World. European Scientific Journal, 1, 378 - 386.

Antoniou, M. & Moriarty, J. (2008). What can academic writers learn from creative writers? Developing guidance and support for lecturers in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(2), 157-167.

Ariza Martinez, A.V. (2005). The Process-Writing Approach: An Alternative to Guide the Students‟ Composition. PROFILE, 6, 37 – 46.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C., & Tight, M. (1998). Writing on academic careers. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 281 - 295.

Britton, J.L., Burgess, T., Martin, N., McLeod, A., Rosen, H. (1975). The Development of Writing Abilities. London: MacMillan Education.

Cameron, J., Nairn, K., & Higging, J. (2009). Demystifying Academic Writing : Reflections on Emotions, Know-How and Academic Identity. Journal of Geography in Higher Education. 33(2), 269 – 284.

Chitravelu, N., Sithamparam, S., & The, S.C. (2005). ELT Methodology, Principles and Practice (2nd

ed.). Shah Alam: Oxford Fajar.

Cresswell, J.W. (2012). Educational Research - Planning and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

DeLyser, D. (2003). Teaching graduate students to write: a seminar for thesis and dissertation writers. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27(2), 169 -181.

Durst, R.K. (2006). Writing at the Postsecondary Level. In P. Smagorinsky (ed.), Research on Composition: Multiple Perspectives on Two Decades of Change (78 - 107). New York: Teachers College Press.

Flower, L. and Hayes, J. (1981). A Cognitive Process Theory of Writing. College Composition and Communication, 38(4), 365-87.

Flowerdew, L. (2005a). Integrating traditional and critical approaches to syllabus design: the what, the how and the why?. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 135 -147

Friedlander, A. (1990). Composing in English: Effects of a First Language on Writing in English as a Second Language. In B. Kroll (ed.) Second language Writing: Research Insight for Classman. 109 – 125, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Grace Regina Devi Michael, Paramjeet Kaur Dhillon, Haliza Hirza Jaffar, S. Umadevi, Roszalina Askandar, Nurzeti Ghafar, Angelina Subrayan @ Michael, & Sathiyaperba Subramaniam (2010). EAP – Crossing Borders. Petaling Jaya: Pearson Longman.

Harowitz, D. (1986). What professors actually require: academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20 (3), 445 – 462.

Holmes, N. (2004). The use of a process-oriented approach to facilitate the planning and production stages of writing for adult students of English as a Foreign or Second Language. http://www.developingteachers.com/articles/tchtraining/processw2_nicola.htm (Retrieved January 02, 2013)

http://www.developingteachers.com/articles/tchtraining/processw2_nicola.htm


45

Hughey, J.B., Wormuth, D.R., Hartfield, V.F. and Jacobs, H.L. (1983). Teaching ESL Composition - Principles and Techniques. Rowley, Massachusetts: Newbury House Publishers, Inc.

Johns, A. M. (2006). Text, Role, and Context: Developing Academic Literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keen, J. (2010). Strategic revisions in the writing of Year 7 students in the UK. The Curriculum Journal, 21( 3), 255 – 280.

Leki, I. & Carson, J. (1994). Students‟ perceptions of EAP writng instruction and writing needs across the disciplines. TESOL Quarterly, 28 (1), 81 – 101.

Liuoliene, A. & Metiuniene, R. (2009). Students' Learning Through Reflective Journaling. Sankalka, 17, 32 - 37.

Mather, N., & Jaffe, L. (2002). Woodcock-Johnson III = Reposts, Recommendations, and Strategies. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Nicholls, G. (2001) Professional Development in Higher Education. Lodon: Kogan Page Limited.

Onozawa, C. (2010). A Study of the Process Writing Approach: A Suggestion for an Eclectic Writing Approach. Proceedings of Kyoai Gakuen College, Japan, 10, 158-162

Perl, S. (1980) Understanding Composing. College Composition and Communication, 31 December, 363-369.

Raimes, A. (1983 a). Anguish as a second language? Remedies for composition teachers. In A. Freedman, (ed.), Learning to Write: First Language/Second Language, London: Longman, 258-272.

Santangelo, T., Harris, K.K. & Graham, S. (2007). Self-Regulated Strategy Development : A Validated Model to Support Students Who Struggle with Writing. Learning Disabilities : A Contemporary Journal, 5(1) 2007, 1 – 20.

Shaughnessy, M.P. (1977). Errors and Expectations. New York: Oxford University Press.

Shih, M. (1986). Content-Based Approaches to Teaching Academic Writing. TESOL Quarterly, 20(4), 617 – 648.

Silva, T. (1990). Second Language Composition Instructions Developments, Issues, and Directions in ESL. In B. Kroll (Eds.), Second Language Writing – Research Insights for the Classroom, pp. 11-23, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL Students into the Academic Discourse Community: how far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29 – 51.

Watson, D. (2010). Teaching Teachers to Think: Reflective Journaling As A Strategy To Enhance Students‟ Understanding and Practice of Academic Writings. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 7 (12), 11 – 18.

White, R. & Arndt, V. (1991). Process Writing. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.

Weisendanger, K. D., Perry, J.R., & Braun, G. (2011). Suggest-Choose-Plan-Compose. A Strategy to Help Students learn to Write. The Reading Teacher, 64(6), 451 – 455.

Zamel, V. (1983 a). The Composing Process of Advanced ESL students: Six Case Studies. TESOL Quarterly,17,165-187.

vol 6 issue 2 dec 2014

Documents