Page 170 - Jurnal Kurikulum BPK 2020

Classroom Assessment 5 3.91 0.49 Moderately High
Based on DSKP
Student Learning 3 3.63 0.66 Moderately High

In KSSR (Revised 2017), under the construct ‘Understanding of the DSKP’, the highest
mean was ‘I understand the Learning Standards that were set in the DSKP’ (4.07) and the
lowest mean was ‘I understand the six frameworks stated in the DSKP’ (3.99). The highest
mean and lowest mean under the construct ‘Implementation On Teaching and Learning Based
on the DSKP’ was ‘I implement student-based activities’ (4.03) and ‘I instill global
sustainability in T&L’ (3.60). Under the construct ‘Classroom Assessment’, the highest mean
was ‘I am able to carry out assessments through T&L activities’ (4.07) and the lowest mean
was ‘I can determine the student’s mastery level after completing a set of Learning Standards’
(3.91) whereas under the construct ‘Students’ Learning’, the highest mean was
‘Implementation of KSSR (Revised 2017) increases the level of students’ knowledge’ (3.78) and
the lowest mean was ‘Implementation of KSSR (Revised 2017) brings positive effect in
students’ behaviour’ (3.70).
In KSSM, under the construct ‘Understanding of the DSKP’, the highest mean was ‘I
understand the Content Standard stated in the DSKP’ as well as ‘I understand the Learning
Standard stated in DSKP’ (4.00) and the lowest mean was ‘I understand the six frameworks
stated in DSKP’ (3.92). The highest mean and the lowest mean under the construct
‘Implementation On Teaching and Learning Based On the DSKP’ was ‘I use suitable study
aids to improve students’ thinking skills’ (3.93) and ‘I instill global sustainability in T&L’
(3.66). Under the construct ‘Classroom Assessment’, the highest mean was ‘I am able to carry
out assessments through T&L activities’ (3.97) and the lowest mean was ‘I can determine the
student’s mastery level after completing a set of Learning Standards’ (3.82) whereas under the
construct ‘Students’ Learning’, the highest mean was ‘Implementation of KSSM increases the
level of students’ knowledge’ (3.68) and the lowest mean was ‘Implementation of KSSM brings
positive effect in students’ behaviour’ (3.57).

DISCUSSIONS
In general, teachers implementing KSSR (Revised 2017) and KSSM perceived themselves to
be able to understand the DSKP produced by CDD. This is based on moderately high to high
mean scores obtained. Every year beginning 2016, the delivery of the curriculum or DSKP
content has been cascaded through three tiers from central (CDD) to master trainers (officers
recomended by the respective state departments), master trainers to state trainers and state
trainers to selected teachers in every school. The selected teachers were then required to
conduct in-house training sessions once their training at the district level was completed.
Efforts to enhance the teachers’ understanding of the DSKP is still on-going. This could
indicate that the present way of disseminating the curriculum is effective.
In terms of teaching and learning practices, the moderately high mean revealed that
teachers in both KSSR (Revised 2017) and KSSM generally are able to conduct their teaching
and learning based on the document according to the subjects taught. They perceived that they
are able to conduct student-based activities and are able to instill higher order thinking skills
(HOTS) in the teaching and learning process during their lessons. In instilling HOTS, teachers
themselves need to have acquired the competencies and appropriate pedagogical knowledge in
teaching the creative and critical thinking skills. In contrast to this, a study done in 2003 showed
that teachers perceived themselves as not being competent to teach critical thinking skills based
on the mean score of 3.07 (Hashim, 2003). Perhaps, a number of courses and workshops were
160