Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan

Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan

The main purpose of the study was to investigate how systematic, effective and excellent is the curriculum management in the secondary schools today and to find out whether curriculum management in school influence performance of schools in the Public Examination. Two sets of questionaire from Mala...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal
Format: Thesis
Language:eng
eng
Published: 2010
Subjects:
LB2801-3095 School administration and organization
Online Access:https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/1/s802742.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/2/s802742_abstract.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my-uum-etd.4830
record_format uketd_dc
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
collection UUM ETD
language eng
eng
advisor Ghazali, Mohd Izam
topic LB2801-3095 School administration and organization
spellingShingle LB2801-3095 School administration and organization
Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal
Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
description The main purpose of the study was to investigate how systematic, effective and excellent is the curriculum management in the secondary schools today and to find out whether curriculum management in school influence performance of schools in the Public Examination. Two sets of questionaire from Malaysian High Standard Quality Of Education (KPM, 2000) were used to assess the curriculum management system. The respondents of the study were 75 teachers from 3 secondary schools in Daerah Asajaya, Kota Samarahan. All teachers are involved in curiculum management in their schools. The data collected was analyzed based on descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and percentage using SPSS for windows version 12.0. The data was also analyzed by using inferential statistics involving Pearson Correlation Coefficient. The effectiveness of the curriculum management system in the school is one of the factor that influenced the achievement of the school in the Public Examination. Based upon the findings, it is recommended that those involved in education especially in the curriculum management to review the curriculum management system of their schools with the purpose of improving it. Moreover, the result, of the study had shown strong significant relationship (a= 0.01) between curriculum management and schools achievement (r = .992(**). Some recommendation and improvement were suggested for future study
format Thesis
qualification_name masters
qualification_level Master's degree
author Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal
author_facet Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal
author_sort Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal
title Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
title_short Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
title_full Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
title_fullStr Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
title_full_unstemmed Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan
title_sort hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah asajaya kota samarahan
granting_institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
granting_department College of Arts and Sciences (CAS)
publishDate 2010
url https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/1/s802742.pdf
https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/2/s802742_abstract.pdf
_version_ 1747827810823569408
spelling my-uum-etd.48302015-08-09T01:48:30Z Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar sekolah menengah di daerah Asajaya Kota Samarahan 2010 Khamisiah, Mohamed Kamal Ghazali, Mohd Izam College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) Awang Had Salleh Graduate School of Arts and Sciences LB2801-3095 School administration and organization The main purpose of the study was to investigate how systematic, effective and excellent is the curriculum management in the secondary schools today and to find out whether curriculum management in school influence performance of schools in the Public Examination. Two sets of questionaire from Malaysian High Standard Quality Of Education (KPM, 2000) were used to assess the curriculum management system. The respondents of the study were 75 teachers from 3 secondary schools in Daerah Asajaya, Kota Samarahan. All teachers are involved in curiculum management in their schools. The data collected was analyzed based on descriptive statistics, such as frequencies and percentage using SPSS for windows version 12.0. The data was also analyzed by using inferential statistics involving Pearson Correlation Coefficient. The effectiveness of the curriculum management system in the school is one of the factor that influenced the achievement of the school in the Public Examination. Based upon the findings, it is recommended that those involved in education especially in the curriculum management to review the curriculum management system of their schools with the purpose of improving it. Moreover, the result, of the study had shown strong significant relationship (a= 0.01) between curriculum management and schools achievement (r = .992(**). Some recommendation and improvement were suggested for future study 2010 Thesis https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/ https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/1/s802742.pdf text eng validuser https://etd.uum.edu.my/4830/2/s802742_abstract.pdf text eng public http://lintas.uum.edu.my:8080/elmu/index.jsp?module=webopac-l&action=fullDisplayRetriever.jsp&szMaterialNo=0000805269 masters masters Universiti Utara Malaysia Abdul Aziz Yusuf (2000). Penilaian prestasi, kepentingan dan permasalahan. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publication & Distributors Sdn. Bhd. Abdul Shukor Abdullah (1996). Membina sekolah yang berkesan: pengurusan setempat, empowerment dan kepimpinan sebagai inisiatif polisi. Kertas kerja sekolah efektif ke-2. Institut Aminuddin Baki, Genting Highlands, 14-16 November. Anis Salwani (2008). Hubungan Kepimpinan teknologi guru besar, kesediaan ict guru dan implementasi ict sekolah perspektif guru. Projek Sarjana Pendidikan. Universiti Utara Malaysia. Sintok Bass, B, M, (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectation. New York: The Free Press. Bass, B. M. (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: learning To share vision. Organizasional Dynamics 18(3) 19-31. Bass, B. M Q Avolio, B. J. (1997). Full range leadership development, manual for Multifactor Leadership Questionnairre. Polo Alto. California: Mind Garden, Inc. Bossert, S. T, Dwyer, D. C., Rowan, B & Lee, G. V. (1982). The instructional management role. Brain, G, B, (1966). Increasing your administrative skills in dealing with the instructional programme, successful school management series. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper Colophon Books. Conger, J, A. & Kanungo, R. N. (1992).Perceived behavioral attributes of charismatic Leadership. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science 24(1): 66-102. De Bovoise, W. (1984). Synthesis of research on principal as instructional leader. Educational leadership 41(5): 14-21. Edais Abbu Bakri (2004). Pengurusan Strategik: Konsep dan Aplikasi untuk Pendidikan. Siri Pengurusan dan Pentadbiran Utusan-Utusan Publications dan Distrubutors Sdn Bhd. Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective school for the urban poor. Educational leadership 37(1): 15-23. Fadzilah b. Md. Noor (1990). Tingkahlaku pentadbiran dan Kepimpinan pengetua Sekolah menengah di Pahang Darul Makmur. Tesis Sajana Universiti Malaya. Grenfield, W. (1987). Preface. Dlm. Greenfield, W. (pnyt.), Instructional Leadership Concepts, issuss and controversies. hlm. xi-xiii. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Hallinger, P & Murphy, J. (1985). Assesing the instructional management behaviour of principles. The Elementary School Journal. 86(2): 217-247. Hussein Mahmood (1993). Kepimpinan dan Keberkesanan Sekolah, KL: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Jurnal Pendidikan Guru (2000) Bil. 13, ISSN: 0127-7316, Bahagian Pendidikan Guru, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. Kerr, S, (1977). Subtitutes for leadership; some implications for organizational design. Organizational and Administration Science 8: 135-146. Kerr, S, &, Jermier, J. M. (1978) Subtitutes for leadership: their meaning and Measurement Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance 22: 375-403. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2000). Instrumen pemeriksaan peningkatan standard tinggi kualiti pendidikan. Kuala Lumpur: Jemaah Nazir Malaysia. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (2001). Falsafah pendidikan kebangsaan, matlamat dan Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum. krejcie, R.V and Morgan, D.W. Determining sampel Size For Research Education and Psychological Measurement, 1970, 30, 607-610. Khairul (2004). Hubungan pengurusan kurikulum dengan tahap pencapaian pelajar. Projek Sarjana Pendidikan. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi. Marsh, C. J, (1997). Planning, management & ideology, Key concepts for understanding curriculum. London. Falmer Press. Mohd. Daud Hamzah (1993). Penerokaan teori kurikulum. Kuala Lumpur; Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Mohd. Majid Konting (1993). Kaedah penyelidikan pendidikan, Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Mok Soon Sang (2008). Pengurusan Kurikulum, Multimedia-ES Resources Sdn Bhd, Kuala Lumpur. Murphy, J. , & Harllingger, P. (1985) Effective high school: What are the common characteristics. NASSP, 69(447), 18-22. Peterson, K, D. (1987). Administrative control and instructional leadership. Dlm. Greenfield, W. (pnyt.), Instructional leadership concepts, issues and controversies. hlm. xi-xiii. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S.B & Bower, W.H. (1996). Meta-analysis of the relationship between Kerr and Jermier's subtitutes for leadership and employee job attitudes, role perceptions, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 59(5) 503-609. Purkey, S. C & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective school: conversation with John Goodlad, Educational Leadership 42 (6): 16-19. Robbins, S. A. (1998). Organizational behaviour; concepts; contraversies and application. Ed. Ke-8. Eaglewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. Spinks, J. M. (1990). Collaborative decision- making at the school managemnet. Dlm. Chapman, J.(pnyt.). School-based decision making and management. hlm. 4-5. Basingstoke: Falmer Press. Sharifah Alawiyah Al-Sagoff (1984). Falsafah Pendidikan, Selangor: Petaling Jaya, Longman Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. Smyth, C. J. (1994). A society critical view of the managing school, London: Palmer Press. Turney C, Hatton N., Laws S. K, &, Smith K. S. (1992). Educational management role and tasks, the school manager. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Wallace, M. (1990). Cunisulum management and organisation. The collegite approach Dlm. South, G & Lofthouse (pnyt.). The study of primary education source book 3(4) 11-13. London: Palmer Press. Whitney, B. (1994). The truth about truancy. London. Dlm. Kogan Page, Zainal Abidin Mohamed (pnyt). Pengurusan strategik di sektor pendidikan. hlm. 44-45. Serdang: Universiti Pertanian Malaysia

Similar Items