cash central

The Teaching Profile of Matriculation College Science Teachers in Malaysia

Nooraida Yakob, Rabiatul Adawiah Ahmad Rashed

Abstract


ABSTRACT: Teaching is an important process in order to produce a meaningful learning. As an intermediate program, every teacher in Matriculation College should be able to produce an effective teaching process, particularly in teaching Science which is full with abstract concepts. To achieve that, Science teachers need the teaching profile as a guidance to develop a flexible, creative, and innovative teaching process. As a result, the learning process will meet the students’ need and the objectives of twenty-first century education. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to identify the teaching profile and sub-profile patterns of matriculation Science teachers in Malaysia. For this purpose, 344 Science teachers from eight Matriculation Colleges were selected. Data was collected by using questionnaire as a main instrument. The finding showed that the professional knowledge and the professional attitudes dominate the profile patterns. While the sub-profile patterns dominated by pedagogical content knowledge and relationship among colleagues. It is also safe to say that the professionalism profile will be the ultimate key towards upgrading teachers’ quality, the quality of the teaching process as well as the quality of the product that is the students. This study suggests that the dominated profile and sub-profile show the matriculation teachers’ strength in teaching Science.

KEY WORDS: Teaching profile, Science teacher, teacher’s knowledge, professional knowledge, professional practices, professional attitudes.

About the Authors: Nooraida Yakob and Rabiatul Adawiah Ahmad Rashed are Lecturers at the School of Educational Studies USM (Universiti Sains Malaysia or Science University of Malaysia), Pulau Pinang, Malaysia. They can be contacted via e-mails at: nooraidaya@hotmail.com and r_adawiah@usm.my

How to cite this article? Yakob, Nooraida & Rabiatul Adawiah Ahmad Rashed. (2010). “The Teaching Profile of Matriculation College Science Teachers in Malaysia” in EDUCARE: International Journal for Educational Studies, Vol.3(1) August, pp.103-114. Bandung, Indonesia: Minda Masagi Press owned by ASPENSI in Bandung, West Java; and FKIP UMP in Purwokerto, Central Java, ISSN 1979-7877.

Chronicle of the article: Accepted (June 17, 2010); Revised (July 19, 2010); and Published (August 17, 2010).


Full Text:

PDF

References


Abd. Rahim Abd. Rashid. (2000). Model dan Pendekatan Pengajaran Sejarah KBSM. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Abdul Rashid Mohamad & Zurida Ismail. (2000/2001). “Pengalaman Belajar-Mengajar Guru-guru Pelatih USM” in Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 17, pp.41-56.

Abrahamson, L. (2009). “What is Interactive Teaching?”. Also available at http://www.bedu.com/interactive.html [accessed in Pulau Pinang, Malaysia: on 20 January 2010].

ASTA [Ausralian Science Teacher Association]. (2001). Australian Science Teacher Journal, 49(4). Canbera: ERIC.

Bahagian Pendidikan Guru. (1997). Penilaian Kendiri Peserta Kursus dalam Perkhidmatan terhadap Kursus dalam Perkhidmatan. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Pendidikan Guru KPM [Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia].

Barnett, J. & D. Hodson. (2001). “Pedagogical Context Knowledge: Toward a Fuller Understanding of What Good Science Teachers Know” in Science Education, 85(4), pp.426-453.

Craft, A. (2002). Creativity and Early Years Education: A Life Wide Foundation. London: Continumm.

Indra Devi a/p Shanmuganathan. (1997). “Kesediaan Sekolah untuk Melaksanakan Kurikulum Baru Sains Sekolah Rendah” in Jurnal MPIK, 15, pp.15-25.

IPPTN [Institut Penyelidikan Pendidikan Tinggi Negara] Report. (2004). Kajian Prestasi Akademik Pelajar Lepasan Matrikulasi di Institut Pengajian Tinggi Awam. Pulau Pinang: USM [Universiti Sains Malaysia].

Juslimah Jani. (2000). “Teras Pengetahuan Mengajar Guru Matapelajaran Pendidikan Jasmani”. Also available at http://ppp.upsi.edu.my/ewancana [accessed in Pulau Pinang, Malaysia: on 23 Febuary 2007].

Lee, Moly. (2002). “Teacher Education in Malaysia: Current Issues and Future Prospects” in Teacher Education: Dilemmas and Prospects. London: Kogan Paper, pp.58-67.

McBer, H. (2000). “Research into Teacher Effectiveness: A Model of Teacher Effectiveness” in NCES [National Center for Educations Statistics]. American’s Teacher: Profile of a Professional. New York: NCES.

Mohd. Shahandri Gani Hj. Hamzah. (1998). “Perbandingan Pola Komitmen Kerja Guru Pelatih dengan Pola Pengajaran dalam Praktikum”. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Bangi, Selangor Darul Ehsan: Fakulti Pendidikan UKM [Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia].

Myers, C.B. & L.K. Myers. (1995). The Professional Educator: A New Introduction to Teaching and School. New Jersey: Wardsworth Publishing Co.

Nacino-Brown, R., F.E. Dan Oke & D.P. Brown. (1989). Curriculum and Instruction: An Introduction to Method of Teaching. London: MacMillan Publishers.

Noor Azlan Ahmad Zanzali. (1995/1996). “Isu-isu Berterusan dalam Pendidikan Matematik” in Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 14, pp.20-39.

Noorshah Saad. (2002). Teori dan Perkaedahan Matematik. Kuala Lumpur: Prentice Hall, edisi kedua.

Noraini Yaakub & Nik Noriah Nik Ibrahim. (1992). “Wawasan 2020: Program Praktikum dalam Pembentukkan Guru Cemerlang” in Minggu Budaya dan Wancana Pendidikan I. Kota Bahru, Kelantan: Maktab Perguruan Kota Bahru.

Othman Lebar. (2000). “Kreativiti dan Inovasi dalam Pendidikan Guru: Kepimpinan Profesional dan Akademik dalam Pendidikan guru Alaf Baru” in Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan JPPG, pp.75-87.

Quinn, D. (1994). “Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Four High School Teachers Reflect on Their Teaching”. Also available at http://www.aere.edu.au/a4pap/quind94402.txt [accessed in Pulau Pinang, Malaysia: on 20 June 2003].

Ramlah Mohammad. (2001). “Pre-service Training of Mathematics Teachers in Malaysia: Problem Based Learning” in Jurnal Pendidikan Guru, 14. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Pendidikan Guru KPM [Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia], pp.13-18.

Rovegno, I.C. (1992). “Learning to Teach in a Field-Based Methods Course: The Development of Pedagogical Content Knowledge” in Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(1), pp.69-82.

Salleh Abd. Rashid. (2003). “Pemikiran Profesional Keguruan terhadap Kurikulum dan Pengajaran”. Also available at http://www.mpbl.edu.my/inter/penyelidikan .pdf [accessed in Pulau Pinang, Malaysia: on 23 Febuary 2007].

Syed Anwar Aly Mohd Abu Bakar. (2000). “Hyothetics Acquisition: Deductive Reasoning and Concept”. Paper presented in the Symposium Pendidikan Sains dan Teknologi in Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, on 3 March and 2 April.

Tajul Arifin Noordin & Nor’aini Dan. (1997). “Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Menuju Abad ke-21: Realiti, Cabaran, dan Harapan” in Prosiding Seminar Kebangsaan Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik, pp.105-112.

Tajul Arifin Noordin. (1990). Pendidikan: Satu Penilaian Semula. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Tam, Yeow Kwai et al. (1999). “Pengaruh Persekitaran terhadap Perkembangan Guru ke Arah Kecemerlangan” in Jurnal Pendidikan, 24, pp.87-102.

Tan, Sok Kim & Lourdusamy. (1992). Issues and Problems in Teacher Education: An International Handbook. New York: Greenwood Press.

Turner-Bisset, R. (2004). Pengajaran Pakar. Kuala Lumpur: Institut Terjemahan Negara Malaysia Berhad.

Yaakub Yusuf. (1980). “Kualiti Guru: Peranan dan Harapan”. Paper presented in the Seminar Penilaian Kurikulum. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Pendidikan Guru KPM [Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia], pp.50-67.


EDUCARE: International Journal for Educational Studies. Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional