IPG KAMPUS SULTAN MIZAN KURSUS KBATdrhaz.net/kbat2020/Kenapa KBAT.pdf · PENTAKSIRAN SEKOLAH...
24
IPG KAMPUS SULTAN MIZAN KURSUS KBAT KEMAHIRAN BERFIKIR ARAS TINGGI (KBAT) PELUASAN DI BAWAH INISIATIF PELAN PEMBANGUNAN PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA (PPPM): 2013-2025 . MOHAMAD BA AB KADIR JABATAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN
Transcript of IPG KAMPUS SULTAN MIZAN KURSUS KBATdrhaz.net/kbat2020/Kenapa KBAT.pdf · PENTAKSIRAN SEKOLAH...
IPG KAMPUS SULTAN MIZAN
KURSUS KBAT
KEMAHIRAN BERFIKIR ARAS TINGGI (KBAT)PELUASAN DI BAWAH INISIATIF PELAN PEMBANGUNAN
PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA (PPPM): 2013-2025 .MOHAMAD BA AB KADIR
JABATAN ILMU PENDIDIKAN
PERNYATAAN KEPUTUSANPENTAKSIRAN SEKOLAH
PENYERTAAN 1999 2003 2007 2011
Bil. Sekolah Sampel
150 150 150 180
PENYERTAAN 2009 2012
Bil. Sekolah Sampel
165
PERNYATAAN KEPUTUSANPENTAKSIRAN SEKOLAH
TIMSS 2011 menunjukkan yang skor puratapencapaian murid Malaysia berusia 14 tahundalam Sains menurun secara signifikanberbanding TIMSS 2003, 2007 dan 2011
Skor Sains1999 = 492 : 22/382003 = 510 (naik 18 mata) : 20/452007 = 471 (turun 40 mata) : 21/492011 = 426 (turun 45 mata) : 32/45
PRESTASI TIMSS (SAINS)
TIMSS 2011 menunjukkan yang skor puratapencapaian murid Malaysia berusia 14 tahundalam Matematik menurun secara signifikanberbanding TIMSS 1999, 2003, 2007 dan 2011
Skor Matematik1999 = 519 :16/382003 = 508 (turun 11 mata) : 10/452007 = 474 (turun 34 mata) : 20/492011 = 440 (turun 34 mata) : 26/45
PRESTASI TIMSS (MATEMATIK)
TIMSS 2011 menunjukkan yang skor puratapencapaian murid Malaysia berusia 14 tahundalam Matematik menurun secara signifikanberbanding TIMSS 1999, 2003, 2007 dan 2011
Skor Matematik1999 = 519 :16/382003 = 508 (turun 11 mata) : 10/452007 = 474 (turun 34 mata) : 20/492011 = 440 (turun 34 mata) : 26/45
PRESTASI TIMSS (MATEMATIK)
KEDUDUKAN PISA 2012
M
R
S
Vietnam
PENCAPAIAN TERATAS
ASIA TIMUR DAN
ASIA TENGGARA
Malaysia ranked 39 with a mean score of 422 in the PISAfirst assessment on creative problem-solving, whileneighbouring Singapore came out tops with a mean scoreof 562. The overall mean score for all countries was 500.
Malaysia had more than half of the share of lowachievers, which means the students tested lacked theskills needed in a modern workplace. In contrast,Singapore only had 8% share of low achievers. The meanshare was 21.4%.
On the other hand, Malaysia only had 0.9% share of
top performers compared with Singapore's29.3%. Average percentage of top performers is 11.4%.
(Report released by the OECD).
Kedudukan Dalam PISA
Matematik – Malaysia di tempat ke 57
1. Shanghai-China - 600
2. Singapore - 562
3. Hong Kong-China – 555
4. Korea – 546
5. Chinese Taipei - 543
6. Finland - 541
7. Liechtenstein - 536
8. Switzerland - 534
9. Japan - 529
10. Canada - 527
11. Netherlands - 526
12. Macao-China - 525
13. New Zealand - 519
14. Belgium - 515
15. Australia - 514
16. Germany – 513
17. Estonia - 512
18. Iceland - 507
19. Denmark - 503
20. Slovenia - 501
21. Norway – 498
22. France - 497
23. Slovak Republic – 497
24. Austria - 496
25. Poland - 495
26. Sweden - 494
27. Czech Republic – 493
28. United Kingdom - 492
29. Hungary - 490
30. Luxembourg - 489
31. United States - 487
32. Ireland - 487
33. Portugal - 487
34. Spain - 483
35. Italy – 483
36. Latvia - 482
37. Lithuania – 477
38. Russian Fed. – 468
39. Greece - 466
40. Malta – 463
41. Croatia - 460
42. Israel – 447
43. Turkey - 445
44. Serbia – 442
45. Azerbaijan – 431
46. Bulgaria – 428
47. Romania – 427
48. Uruguay – 427
49. UAE – 421
50. Chile – 421
51. Mauritius – 420
52. Thailand – 419
53. Mexico – 419
54. Tri. And Tobago – 414
55. Costa Rica – 409
56. Kazakhstan – 405
57. MALAYSIA - 404
58. Montenegro – 403
59. Rep. of Moldova – 397
60. Miranda–Venez. – 397
61. Argentina – 388
62. Jordan - 387
63. Brazil – 386
64. Colombia – 381
65. Georgia - 379
66. Albania – 377
67. Tunisia – 371
68. Indonesia – 371
69. Qatar – 368
70. Peru – 365
71. Panama – 360
72. Tamil Nadu India – 351
73. Himachal Pradesh India –338
74. Kyrgyzstan – 331
OECD Average – 496International Average – 458
11
11
Kedudukan Dalam PISA
Sains – Malaysia di tempat ke 52
1. Shanghai-China - 575
2. Finland - 554
3. Hong Kong-China – 549
4. Singapore - 542
5. Japan - 539
6. Korea – 538
7. New Zealand - 532
8. Canada - 529
9. Estonia - 528
10. Australia - 527
11. Netherlands - 522
12. Chinese Taipei - 520
13. Germany – 520
14. Liechtenstein - 520
15. Switzerland - 517
16. United Kingdom - 514
17. Slovenia - 512
18. Macao-China – 511
19. Poland – 508
20. Ireland – 508
21. Belgium - 507
22. Hungary - 503
23. United States - 502
24. Czech Republic – 500
25. Norway – 500
26. Denmark - 499
27. France - 498
28. Iceland - 496
29. Sweden - 495
30. Austria - 494
31. Latvia - 494
32. Portugal - 493
33. Lithuania – 491
34. Slovak Republic – 490
35. Italy – 489
36. Spain - 488
37. Croatia - 486
38. Luxembourg - 484
39. Russian Fed. – 478
40. Greece – 470
41. Malta – 461
42. Israel – 455
43. Turkey - 454
44. Chile – 447
45. Serbia – 443
46. Bulgaria – 439
47. UAE – 438
48. Costa Rica – 430
49. Romania – 428
50. Uruguay – 427
51. Thailand – 425
52. MALAYSIA - 422
53. Miranda–Venez. – 422
54. Mauritius – 417
55. Mexico – 416
56. Jordan – 415
57. Rep. of Moldova – 413
58. Tri. And Tobago – 410
59. Brazil – 405
60. Colombia – 402
61. Montenegro – 401
62. Argentina – 401
63. Tunisia – 401
64. Kazakhstan – 400
65. Albania – 391
66. Indonesia – 383
67. Qatar – 379
68. Panama – 376
69. Azerbaijan – 373
70. Georgia - 373
71. Peru – 369
72. Tamil Nadu India – 348
73. Kyrgyzstan – 330
74. Himachal Pradesh India –325
OECD Average – 501International Average – 463
12
12
Kedudukan Dalam PISA
Bacaan – Malaysia di tempat ke 55
1. Shanghai-China - 556
2. Korea - 539
3. Finland - 536
4. Hong Kong-China - 533
5. Singapore - 526
6. Canada - 524
7. New Zealand - 521
8. Japan - 520
9. Australia - 515
10. Netherlands - 508
11. Belgium - 506
12. Norway - 503
13. Estonia - 501
14. Switzerland - 501
15. Poland - 500
16. Iceland - 500
17. United States - 500
18. Liechtenstein - 499
19. Sweden - 497
20. Germany - 497
21. Ireland - 496
22. France - 496
23. Chinese Taipei - 495
24. Denmark - 495
25. United Kingdom - 494
26. Hungary - 494
27. Portugal - 489
28. Macao-China - 487
29. Italy - 486
30. Latvia - 484
31. Slovenia - 483
32. Greece - 483
33. Spain - 481
34. Czech Republic – 478
35. Slovak Republic – 477
36. Croatia - 477
37. Israel - 476
38. Luxembourg - 472
39. Austria - 470
40. Lithuania - 468
41. Turkey - 464
42. Russian Fed. – 459
43. Chile – 449
44. Costa Rica – 443
45. Malta – 442
46. Serbia – 442
47. UAE – 431
48. Bulgaria – 429
49. Uruguay – 426
50. Mexico – 425
51. Romania – 424
52. Miranda–Venez. – 422
53. Thailand – 421
54. Tri. And Tobago – 416
55. MALAYSIA - 414
56. Colombia – 413
57. Brazil – 412
58. Montenegro – 408
59. Mauritius – 407
60. Jordan - 405
61. Tunisia – 404
62. Indonesia – 402
63. Argentina – 398
64. Kazakhstan – 390
65. Rep. of Moldova – 388
66. Albania – 385
67. Georgia - 374
68. Qatar – 372
69. Panama – 371
70. Peru – 370
71. Azerbaijan – 362
72. Tamil Nadu India – 337
73. Himachal Pradesh India –317
74. Kyrgyzstan – 314
OECD Average – 493International Average – 455
13
13
JUSTERU ITU KPM TELAH MENGAMBIL INISIATIF
15
ASPIRASI PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA
Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013 – 2025 Ringkasan Eksekutif, E -13
MENAMBAH BAIK KERANGKA PENTAKSIRAN
Petikan Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013 – 2025 Ringkasan Eksekutif, E -27
√
PERBEZAAN ANTARA KEMAHIRAN BERFIKIR ARAS RENDAH(LOTS )DENGAN KEMAHIRAN BERFIKIR ARAS TINGGI ( HOTS).
1. Resnick (1987) LOT is often characterized by the recall ofinformation or the application of concepts or knowledge tofamiliar situations and contexts.
2. Schmalz (1973) LOT tasks requires a student “… to recall afact, perform a simple operation, or solve a familiar type ofproblem. It does not require the student to work outside thefamiliar”
3. Senk, Beckman, & Thompson (1997) LOT is involved whenstudents are solving tasks where the solution requiresapplying a well-known algorithm, often with no justification,explanation, or proof required, and where only a singlecorrect answer is possible
1. Resnick (1987) characterized higher-order thinking (HOT) as“non-algorithmic.”
2. Stein and Lane (1996) describe HOT as “the use of complex, non-algorithmic thinking to solve a task in which there is not apredictable, well-rehearsed approach or pathway explicitlysuggested by the task, task instruction, or a worked out example.”
3. Senk, et al (1997) characterized HOT as solving tasks where noalgorithm has been taught, where justification or explanationare required, and where more than one solution may bepossible.
4. Thompson (2008) generally characterized HOT involves solvingtasks where an algorithm has not been taught or using knownalgorithms while working in unfamiliar contexts or situations.
ITEM KBAT
STIMULUS
PELBAGAI TAHAP
PEMIKIRAN
KONTEKS BUKAN LAZIM
SITUASI SEBENAR DALAM
KEHIDUPAN SEHARIAN
ITEM
TIDAK BERULANG
Menggunakan stimulus secaraekstensif untuk menjanakemahiran inferens danpenaakulan kritis
Mentaksir pelbagai aras pemikiran dalam domain kognitif untuk memberi impak yang lebih besar
•Menggunakan situasi baharu di luar bilik darjah•Mengalakkan murid berfikir
lebih mendalam dan bukan
sekadar mengingat semula apa yang dipelajari dalam bilik darjah
Mencabar murid untuk menyelesaikan suatu masalah kehidupan sebenar dengan menggunakan pembelajaran daripada pelbagai disiplin
• Item berbeza setiap tahun•Menggunakan bahan yang
melangkaui bahan buku teks, buku kerja, buku latihan dll
