A COMPARISON OF FORM 2 ENGLISH CURRICULUM CHANGE IN MALAYSIAN SECONDARY SCHOOLS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v2i4.77Keywords:
curriculum change, Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah (KSSM), whatsapp interview, qualitative, secondary students, English Language curriculumAbstract
This study investigates the curriculum change of Form 2 English syllabus and compares the mentioned curriculum between two Malaysian public secondary schools. Study on the curriculum change in teaching, learning and assessment of Form 2 KSSM English Language curriculum in the two public secondary schools is discussed. A curriculum change is being implemented because the current curriculum is needed to be revised. The schools have been using the current curriculum for many years. However, recent research has shown that better, more innovative methods help students succeed in the curriculum. A team looked at new learning priorities earlier in the year, and another looked at classroom tools and materials. It is time to develop and revise aspects of the curriculum in Form 2 English. In-depth interview was carried out to obtain the findings. An English teacher from an urban secondary school and another English teacher from a rural secondary school were selected as the participants. Three interview sessions were conducted with each respondent over a period of one month. Interview sessions via Whatsapp were conducted on one-to-one basis between the researcher and the participants. After the interview, follow-up information correspondence via email was accomplished. Items in the interview were developed by the researchers. Three experts in related field were involved in validating the interview protocol and appropriacy of the language employed for this study. Findings on comparison between the curriculum change in urban secondary school and rural secondary school are discussed. This study provides the overview of Form 2 English Language curriculum of the 21st century educational setting, especially for other researchers and practitioners.
References
Anuar, A.F., Ismail, M.J. (2021): Infusing Dalcroze Eurhythmics in Improving Singing Skills Among Primary School Students. – Quantum Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 2(1): 24-38.
Arifin, S.R.M. (2018): Ethical considerations in qualitative study. – International Journal of Care Scholars 1(2): 30-33.
Blackmore, P., Kandiko, C.B. (2012): Strategic Curriculum change in universities: Global trends. – Oxford, UK: Routledge 217p.
Connelly, L. (2014): Ethical considerations in research studies. – Medsurg Nursing 23(1): 54-56.
Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., Sheikh, A. (2011): The case study approach. – BMC Medical Research Methodology 11(1): 1-9.
Dom, A.M. (2019): KSSM perkasakan pelajar secara holistik. – Berita Harian Official Portal. Available on:
https://www.bharian.com.my/kolumnis/2019/12/636767/kssm-perkasakan-pelajar-secara-holistik
Fullan, M. (1993): Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. – London: Falmer 172p.
Fullan, M. (1991): The new meaning of educational change. – New York, NY: Teachers College Press 312p.
Horton, E.G., Diaz, N. (2011): Learning to write and writing to learn social work concepts: Application of writing across the curriculum strategies and techniques to a course for undergraduate social work students. – Journal of Teaching in Social Work 31(1): 53-64.
Hoyle, R.H. (1995): The structural equation modeling approach: Basic concepts and fundamental issues and applications. – Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc. 15p.
Ismail, M.J., Chiat, L.F., Anuar, A.F. (2021a): Learning music through rhythmic movements in Malaysia. – Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction 18(1): 241-263.
Ismail, M.J., Anuar, A.F., Yusof, R., Mohd Yon, N.F., Peter, O. (2021b): Exerting inquiry based learning method in improving gifted students’ music recorder skill. – Quantum Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 2(2): 11-24.
Ismail, M.J., Anuar, A.F. (2020): The significance of music to gifted students. – Quantum Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 1(4): 33-43.
Jacobs, H.H. (1989): Interdisciplinary curriculum: design and implementation. – Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA 99p.
Jenkins, G. (2020): Teacher agency: the effects of active and passive responses to curriculum change. – Australian Educational Researcher 47(1): 167-181.
Kamis, M.S., Alias, M.N., Ishak, N.M., Ismail, M.J. (2019): The characteristics of the cognitively gifted learners: Guidelines for Malaysian teachers in teaching language. – International Journal of Education 4(29): 46-52.
Leonard, E.E., Maulding, G.W. (2019): Leadership and Leadership Intelligence. – Journal of School Leadership 29(4): 295-315.
Mbarushimana, N., Allida, D. (2017): Curriculum change and teacher participation in technical and vocational education training programs (TVET): experiences of Groupe Scolaire Aiper Nyandungu, Rwanda. – Baraton Interdisciplinary Research Journal 7: 1-10.
Md Jais, I., Rorlinda, Y., Loo, F.C. (2018): Aktiviti muzikal yang sesuai dijalankan semasa proses pengajaran dan pembelajaran muzik murid-murid pintar dan berbakat di Malaysia. – Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH) 3(5): 30-40.
Md Jais, B.I. (2017): The effectiveness of dalcroze music approach in enhancing musical coordination skill among year 4 students in urban area. – Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH) 2(1): 54-65.
Miles, M.B. (Ed.)(1964): Innovation in education. – New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University 689p.
Ministry of Education (MOE) (2017): Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Menengah Bahasa Inggeris Tingkatan 2. – Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum, KPM, Putrajaya 80p.
Ministry of Education (MOE) (2013): The Malaysia’s Education Blueprints 2013-2025 (MEB). – Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia 292p.
Nicholls, A. (1983): Managing educational innovation. – London: Allen and Unwin 99p.
Oliva, P.F., Gordon, W. (2012): Developing the curriculum, student value. – Pearson 8th Edition 528p.
Ong, P., Ismail, M.J.B., Pei, C.S.P. (2021): Performance Appraisal Management in A Malaysian Secondary School. – Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH) 6(4): 297-307.
Reinholz, D.L., Andrews, T.C. (2020): Change theory and theory of change: what’s the difference anyway? International Journal of STEM Education 7(1): 1-12.
Rogers, E.M. (2003): Diffusion of Innovations. – 5th Ed. New York: Free Press 576p.
Rudduck, J. (1991): Innovation and change. – Buckingham: Open University Press 156p.
Rus, C.M., Talaghir, L.G., Iconomescu, T.M., Petrea, R.G. (2019): Curriculum changes in secondary school physical education and sport subject in the Romanian education system. – Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala 66: 342-363.
Sahlberg, P. (2005): Curriculum change as learning: In search of better implementation. – Curriculum Reform and Implementation in the 21st century: Policies, Perspectives, and Implementation 12p.
Stenhouse, L. (1975): An introduction to curriculum research and development. – London: Heinemann 248p.
Taba, H. (1962): Curriculum development: Theory and practice. – New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich 526p.
Tanner, D., Tanner, L. (1995): Curriculum Development: Theory into Practice. – Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill 746p.
Tyler, R.W. (1957): The curriculum-then and now. – The Elementary School Journal 57(7): 364-374.
Wiles, J., Bondi, J. (2015): Curriculum development: A guide to practice. – Pearson 9th Edition 352p
Yidana, M.B., Aboagye, G.K. (2018): Management of Curriculum Change: A Mechanism for Ensuring Continuous Academic Improvement in Ghanaian Universities. – International Journal for Innovation Education and Research 6(2): 41-60.
Yunos, J.M., Sern, L.C., Hamdan, N.H. (2019): Criteria for sustainable curriculum of TVET teacher education programme in Malaysia. – Journal of Technical Education and Training 11(3): 49-54.
