KAJIAN LITERATUR
2.3 Perbezaan Domain-domain Psikomotor
Tahap –tahap yang dibangunkan dalam setiap domain psikomotor telah diterangkan secara ringkas dan rumusan berkenaan perbezaan dari aspek kesesuaian aplikasi domain-domain psikomotor telah dibincangkan dalam Jadual 2.5. Penerangan dalam jadual ini lebih menjurus kepada kesesuaian domain-domain untuk diintegrasikan
Jadual 2.5: Perbezaan aplikasi domain-domain psikomotor
Aplikasi Domain Psikomotor
Domain Psikomotor Dave (1967): Relevan diaplikasikan kepada pembelajaran kemahiran atau
pembangunan melibatkan kerja dan kehidupan khusus untuk golongan dewasa.
Domain Psikomotor Simpson (1972): Sesuai digunakan untuk pembelajaran kanak-kanak mahupun
dewasa yang melibatkan pembelajaran kemahiran fizikal yang mencabar serta memerlukan persiapan yang mantap dari aspek kesedaran, persepsi dan mental.
Domain Psikomotor Harrow (1972): Kesesuaian aplikasi Domain Psikomotor Harrow ini hampir
setara dengan Domain Psikomotor Simpson iaitu relevan untuk pembelajaran kanak-kanak mahupun dewasa yang melibatkan pembelajaran kemahiran fizikal yang mencabar. Malah, ia turut memberi tumpuan kepada cetusan emosi yang diterjemahkan daripada pelaksanaan aktiviti-aktiviti fizikal.
Domain Psikomotor Ferris dan Aziz (2005): Domain ini dibangunkan khusus untuk bidang
kejuruteraan dan pengajian peringkat tinggi yang melibatkan pelajar golongan remaja dan dewasa.
Jadual 2.6 pula menyenaraikan perbezaan dari aspek komposit tahap-tahap dalam setiap domain psikomotor. Senarai perbezaan ini menunjukkan beberapa tahap yang setara bagi keempat-empat domain psikomotor.
Jadual 2.6: Komposit perbezaan tahap-tahap Domain Psikomotor Dave (1970), Domain Psikomotor Simpson (1972), Domain Psikomotor Harrow (1972) dan
Domain Psikomotor Ferris dan Aziz (2005)
Domain Ferris & Aziz (2005) Harrow (1972) Simpson (1972) Dave (1970) 1. Pengecaman peralatan
dan bahan
Meniru
2. Persepsi
3. Pengendalian peralatan
dan bahan Pergerakan reflex Set 4. Pengoperasian
peralatan-asas
Pergerakan asas Pergerakan awal
5. Keupayaan tanggapan Mekanisme Manipulasi
6. Pengoperasian
peralatan-kompeten Keupayaan fizikal 7. Pengoperasian
peralatan-mahir
Pergerakan kemahiran (complex operation)
Gerak balas nyata
yang kompleks Ketepatan 8. Perancangan operasi
kerja Adaptasi Fleksibel
9.
Penilaian hasil kerja dan merancang penambahbaikan
Original Semulajadi
RUJUKAN
Abtholuddin, F. (2013). Hubungan antara Efikasi Kendiri dan Kemahiran Belajar
dalam Kalangan Pelajar Kejuruteraan. Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia.
Tesis Sarjana.
Akilli, M. (2015). Regression Levels of Selected Affective Factors on Science Achievement: a Structural Equation Model with TIMSS 2011 Data. Electronic
Journal of Science Education, 19(1), 1–16.
Al-Amoush, S. A. (2012). Jordanian Chemistry (Student) Teachers’ Beliefs about
Chemistry Teaching and Their Views on Educational Reform.University of
Bremen: Tesis Ph.D.
Artino, A. R. (2012). Academic self-efficacy: from educational theory to instructional practice. Perspectives on Medical Education, 1(2), 76–85. http://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-012-0012-5
Baharom, S., Khoiry, M. A., Hamid, R., A.Mutalib, A., & Hamzah, N. (2015). Assessment Of Psychomotor Domain In A Problem-Based Concrete Labrotary.
Journal Of Engineering Science And Technology, (Special Issue On UKM
Teaching And Learning Congress 2013, June (2015), 1–10.
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating Competence, Self-Efficacy, and Intrinsic Interest throughProximal Self-Motivation. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598
Cawangan Pengajian Bahagian Kemahiran dan Teknikal MARA. (2012). Dasar
Pembangunan Kurikulum Program Sijil dan Diploma. Edisi Pertama. Bahagian
Kemahiran Teknikal MARA. Kuala Lumpur.
Ahmad, C. N. C., Osman, K., & Halim, L. (2010). Hubungan Ramalan Persekitaran Pembelajaran Makmal Sains dengan Tahap Kepuasan Pelajar. Jurnal
Chua, L. C. (2006). Sample Size Estimation Using Krejcie and Morgan and Cohen Statistical Power Analysis: A Comparison. Jurnal Penyelidikan IPBL, Jilid 7. Chua, Y.P. (2011). Kaedah dan Statistik Penyelidikan. Edisi Kedua. Kuala Lumpur:
McGraw Hill Education (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
Cohen, J. (1992). Quantitative Methods in Psychology: A Power Primer.
Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.
Darus, Z. (2012). Status Pencapaian Malaysia dalam TIMSS dan PISA : Satu
Refleksi. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Demirel, M., & Caymaz, B. (2015). Prospective Science and Primary School Teachers ’ Self -efficacy Beliefs in Scientific Literacy. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1903–1908
Duit, R., & Tesch, M. (2010). On The Role Of The Experiment in Science Teaching And Learning – Visions And The Reality Of Instructional Practice *.
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Hands-on Science, (25-31
July), 17–30.
Ferris, T. L. J., & Aziz, S. M. (2005). A Psychomotor Skills Extension to Bloom’s Taxonomy of Education Objectives for Engineering Education. Exploring
Innovation in Education and Research Tainan, Taiwan.
Feyzioglu, B. (2009). An Investigation of the Relationship between Science Process Skills with Efficient Laboratory Use and Science Achievement in Chemistry Education. Turkish Science Education, 6(3), 114–132.
Gliem, J. a, & Gliem, R. R. (2003). Calculating, Interpreting, and Reporting Cronbach’s Alpha Reliability Coefficient for Likert-Type Scales,. 2003 Midwest
Research to Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, (1992), 82–88.
Gezer, S. U. (2015). A Case Study on Preservice Science Teachers’ Laboratory Usage Self Efficacy and Scientific Process Skills. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1158–1165.
Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-naaman, R. (2007). The Laboratory in Science Education : The State of The Art. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 105– 107.
Idris, N. (2013). Penyelidikan dalam Pendidikan. Edisi Kedua. Kuala Lumpur: McGraw Hill Education (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
Kamarudin, N., Halim, L., Osman, K., & Mohd. Meerah, T. S. (2009). Pengurusan Penglibatan Pelajar dalam Amali Sains. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 34(1), 205–217.
Kamaruddin, M. I., & Wahab, N. (2010). Tahap Penguasaan Kemahiran Manipulatif
Dan Hubungannya Dengan Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar Fakulti Pendidikan, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. Tarikh capaian pada 12 September 2015,
daripada http://eprints.utm.my/11545/
Kırbaşlara, F. G., Veyisoğlub, A., & Özsoy-Güneşa, Z. (2015). Investigating The Relationships between Pre-Service Science Teachers ’ Self- Efficacy in Laboratory and Anxiety Towards Chemistry Laboratory. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 43–50.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). Revision of Bloom ’ s Taxonomy: An Overview. THEORY
INTO PRACTICE, 41(4), 212–218.
Kurbanoglu, N. I., & Akim, A. (2010). The Relationships between University Students’ Chemistry Laboratory Anxiety, Attitudes, and Self- Efficacy Beliefs.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 35(8)
Kurbanoğlu, N. İ., & Yücel, E. (2015). Development of Chemistry Laboratory Anxiety Scale for University Students. The Online Journal of Counseling and
Education.
Luimnigh, O. (2007). Writing Learning Outcomes: A Guide for Academics. Ireland: University Of Limerick Pres.
Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Foy, P., & Stanco, G. M. (2011). TIMSS 2011
International Results in Science: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. United States: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center
Mohd Fadzil, H. (2014). Students ’ Science Manipulative Skills During Transition
from Primary to Secondary School. Universiti Malaya: Tesis Ph.D.
Mohd Fadzil, H., & Mohd Saat, R. (2014). Enhancing STEM Education during School Transition : Bridging the Gap in Science Manipulative Skills. Eurasia
Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 209–218.
O’Neill, G., & Murphy, F. (2010). Guide to Taxonomies of Learning Outcomes.
Othman, T. (2013). Asas Penulisan Tesis Penyelidikan & Statistik. Serdang: Penerbit Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Salim, K. R., Haron, H. N., Hussain, N. H., & Ali, R. (2013). The Achievement of Laboratory Work Learning Outcomes : Students’ Perceptions. Proceedings of
the Reseach in Engineering Education Symposium, Kuala Lumpur.
Salim, K. R., Puteh, M., & Daud, S. M. (2012). Assessing Students’ Practical Skills in Basic Electronic Laboratory based on Psychomotor Domain Model. Procedia
- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 56(Ictlhe), 546–555.
Shakor, N. A., & Mat Noor, S. (2013). Keberkesanan Alat Drip-Drop Bagi Meningkatkan Kemahiran Manipulatif Dalam Eksperimen. Seminar Penyelidikan Tindakan Pismp 2013 Keberkesanan, 185–191.
Pallant, J. (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using
SPSS (4th ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill.
Phang, F. A., Abu, M. S., Ali, M. B., & Salleh, S. (2014). Faktor Penyumbang Kepada Kemerosotan Penyertaan Pelajar Dalam Aliran Sains: Satu Analisis Sorotan Tesis. Seminar Kebangsaan Majlis Dekan Pendidikan IPTA, 2:4, 63– 71. http://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n3.2
Ponton, M. K. (2002). Motivating Students by Building Self-Efficacy. Journal of
Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 128(1), 1–3.
http://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2002)128:1(1)
Trujillo, G., & Tanner, K. D. (2014). Considering the role of affect in learning: Monitoring students’ self-efficacy, sense of belonging, and science identity.
CBE Life Sciences Education, 13(1), 6–15.
http://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.13-12-0241
Tüysüz, M., Demet, Y. Õ., & Demirci, N. (2010). What is the motivation difference between university students and high school students ? Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010), 2, 1543–1548.
http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.232
Unit Perancang Eknomi. (2015). Mentransformasi Pendidikan dan Latihan Teknikal
dan Vokasional untuk Memenuhi Permintaan Industri. Rancangan Malaysia Kesebelas 2016 - 2020. Malaysia: Jabatan Perdana Menteri
Yaacob, H. F., & Md Shah, I. (2009). Efikasi Diri dan Hubungannya dengan Pencapaian Akademik Pelajar IPTA, 47–71. Tarikh capaian pada 10 November
2015, daripada
http://eprints.utm.my/14464/1/IshakMd.Shah2009_EfikasiDiridanHubungannya DenganPencapaianAkademik.pdf