Page 167 - Jurnal Kurikulum BPK 2020

Order Thinking Skills in Teaching and Learning’ and ‘I instilled Elements Across Curriculum
in Teaching and Learning’. On the ‘Implementation of Classroom Assessment’, items set were
‘I assess through various teaching and learning activities’, ‘I measure students’ achievements
through various assessment methods’ and ‘I determine the students’ mastery level based on
professional judgement’ whereas on ‘Students’ Learning’, items set were ‘Implementation of
KSSR/KSSM increases the level of students’ knowledge’, ‘Implementation of KSSR/KSSM
increases the level of students’ skills’ and ‘Implementation of KSSR/KSSM brings positive
effect in students’ behaviour.’
In order to validate the revised instrument, pre-testing and pilot testing were done. Four
teachers (2 primary schools and 2 secondary schools) were conferred with to identify whether
the items had clarity, complied to the needs of each construct, proposed a sufficient number of
items to explain each of the construct and displayed instructions that were comprehensible.
Words and sentences considered to be complex were replaced with straightforward and
uncomplicated ones. So as to obtain face validity, three university lecturers who are experts in
the development of instruments were consulted to refine the instrument in terms of item clarity
and suitability as well as scale suitability. Comments and suggestions by the experts were taken
into consideration and items were refined for the pilot testing stage.
The instrument was administered in 3 primary schools and 3 secondary schools. After
data screening, a total of 231 respondents from the primary and secondary schools who
participated in the survey were accepted as samples for the pilot study. The respondents took
approximately 10 minutes to complete the survey. The data gathered was analysed using the
Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23 to obtain descriptive results and
internal consistency.
The Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted to identify and verify the items
in the instrument. The potential factorability of the 21 items was examined through several
criteria. All scores were correlated at 0.4 with one another score. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
measure of sampling adequacy was 0.91, above the recommended 0.6, and the Bartlett’s test
of sphericity was significant (X ² = 2801.36, p < .000).
Principal axis factoring was applied to determine underlying factors. The first four
factors explained 43%, 8%, 7% and 6% of the variance respectively. All the four factors had
Eigenvalues over one. The four-factor solution, which accounted for 63% of the total variance,
was ultimately retained because it had the highest loading and the number of Eigenvalues over
one. The four-factor solution indicated that the initial 5 constructs be reduced to 4 constructs.
Furthermore, three items were deleted namely 2.1 ‘Language in DSKP easily understood’, 3.1
‘I conducted teaching and learning based on Learning Standards in DSKP, and 4.6 ‘I used the
template to record students’ achievements’ as items 2.1 and 3.1 showed reduncy with items
from other variables although the readings were not weakly cross-loaded. Item 4.6 was deleted
as the item did not reflect the mastery of assessment skills but only a tool to record students’
achievement.
After deletion of the three items, the principal axis factoring of the remaining 18 items
using varimax rotation produced four factors explaining 65% of the variance. The factor-
loading matrix is presented in Table 2. Constructs 1 and 2 were then combined as one construct
and known as ‘Understanding of the DSKP’. The other three constructs were ‘Implementation
of Teaching and Learning Based On DSKP’, ‘Implementation of Classroom Assessment based
on DSKP’ and ‘Student Learning’. The refined instrument was used to conduct the pilot testing.
Data analyses resulted in the internal consistencies as shown in Table 3.

157