Hubungan kepimpinan guru pemulihan khas dengan pencapaian asas 3M murid pemulihan khas tahun dua di Negeri Kelantan

Authors

  • Mohd Abd Malik Abdullah School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Gelugor, Penang, Malaysia
  • Rozniza Zaharudin School of Educational Studies, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Gelugor, Penang, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55573/JISED.118739

Keywords:

Kepimpinan guru, Pemulihan Khas, pencapaian 3M, membaca, menulis, mengira, guru sekolah rendah

Abstract

Masalah penguasaan asas membaca, menulis dan mengira (3M) dalam kalangan murid sekolah rendah di Malaysia terus menjadi isu yang signifikan, terutamanya dalam kalangan murid Pemulihan Khas. Kajian ini bertujuan menilai tahap pencapaian 3M murid Pemulihan Khas Tahun Dua di Kelantan, tahap kepimpinan guru Pemulihan Khas, perbezaan kepimpinan guru berdasarkan faktor demografi dan lokasi sekolah, serta hubungan antara kepimpinan guru dengan pencapaian 3M. Kajian kuantitatif ini melibatkan 252 orang Guru Pemulihan Khas dari seluruh negeri Kelantan. Instrumen soal selidik digunakan, dan analisis data dijalankan menggunakan statistik deskriptif, ujian-t, ANOVA, dan Korelasi Pearson. Dapatan menunjukkan pencapaian membaca, menulis dan mengira murid berada pada tahap sederhana, manakala tahap kepimpinan guru berada pada tahap tinggi (min=4.20). Tiada perbezaan signifikan didapati berdasarkan umur, jantina, kelayakan akademik, pengalaman mengajar atau lokasi sekolah. Namun, terdapat hubungan signifikan yang lemah tetapi positif antara kepimpinan guru dan pencapaian 3M murid. Kajian ini menegaskan kepentingan kepimpinan instruksional dalam menyokong murid pemulihan khas serta perlunya intervensi pedagogi berstruktur untuk meningkatkan kemahiran asas mereka.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdul Rasid Jamian. (2016). Amalan pengajaran guru Bahasa Melayu dalam program pemulihan khas. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Melayu, 6(1), 1–10.

Black, Paul, & Wiliam, Dylan. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

Brookhart, Susan M.. (2013). How to create and use rubrics for formative assessment and grading. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1–12.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.

Chew Fong Peng. (2018). Literacy and numeracy performance among primary school students in Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 15(2), 83–105.

Darling-Hammond, Linda., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140.

Day, Christopher., Sammons, P., Hopkins, D., Harris, A., Leithwood, K., Gu, Q., & Brown, E. (2010). 10 strong claims about successful school leadership. Nottingham, UK: National College for School Leadership.

Fadhlina Sidek. (2024). Kenyataan media mengenai penguasaan kemahiran asas 3M murid sekolah rendah. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Fadhlina Sidek. (2026). Laporan intervensi awal dan Program Pemulihan Khas murid Tahun Satu. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Grissom, Jason A.., Egalite, A. J., & Lindsay, C. A. (2021). How principals affect students and schools: A systematic synthesis of two decades of research. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.

Guskey, Thomas R.. (2003). How classroom assessments improve learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 6–11.

Guskey, Thomas R.. (2007). Closing achievement gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom’s “Learning for Mastery”. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(1), 8–31.

Hallinger, Philip. (2011). Leadership for learning: Lessons from 40 years of empirical research. Journal of Educational Administration, 49(2), 125–142.

Hallinger, P., & Murphy, Joseph. (1985). Assessing the instructional management behavior of principals. The Elementary School Journal, 86(2), 217–247.

Hattie, John. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

Jabatan Pelajaran Pulau Pinang. (2002). Laporan masalah membaca dan memahami murid Tahun 1. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. (2019). Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan Malaysia 2013–2025 (Semakan). Putrajaya: Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Leithwood, Kenneth., Harris, A., & Hopkins, D. (2008). Seven strong claims about successful school leadership. School Leadership & Management, 28(1), 27–42.

Leithwood, K., Seashore Louis, K., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership influences student learning. New York, NY: The Wallace Foundation.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2020). School leadership for learning: Insights from TALIS 2018. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Robinson, Viviane M. J.., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(5), 635–674.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2011). Student-centered leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Slavin, R. E. (2018). Evidence-based reform in education. Educational Researcher, 47(2), 123–129.

Unit Sekolah Rendah. (1992). Laporan penguasaan kemahiran asas membaca dalam kalangan murid sekolah rendah. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-29

How to Cite

Abdullah, M. A. M., & Zaharudin, R. (2026). Hubungan kepimpinan guru pemulihan khas dengan pencapaian asas 3M murid pemulihan khas tahun dua di Negeri Kelantan. Journal of Islamic, Social, Economics and Development, 11(87), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.55573/JISED.118739