Perbezaan Gender dalam Pengajaran Matematik menggunakan Pendekatan Gaya Pengajaran Grasha-Riechmann (The Gender Differences in Teaching Mathematics using Grasha-Riechmann Teaching Style Approach)
Abstract
Gaya Pengajaran Grasha-Riechmann berpotensi tinggi untuk diaplikasikan dalam Matematik khususnya untuk membantu meningkatkan pengetahuan pendidik guru. Namun begitu, tidak banyak perhatian diberikan kepada usaha mengenal pasti corak gaya pengajaran guru Matematik di Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) serta menjawab persoalan tentang perbezaan gaya pengajaran mengikut gender. Sehubungan itu, kajian ini bertujuan mengenal pasti corak Gaya Pengajaran Grasha-Riechmann dalam kalangan guru Matematik sekolah rendah dan perbezaannya mengikut gender. Pendekatan kuantitatif melalui tinjauan telah diaplikasikan kepada 97 orang guru Matematik SJKC Kepong, Kuala Lumpur menggunakan teknik persampelan rawak mudah. Instrumen ini diadaptasi daripada Soal Selidik Gaya Pengajaran Grasha-Riechmann (1996) yang mengukur lima gaya pengajaran iaitu Gaya Pengajaran Pakar, Gaya Pengajaran Autoriti Formal, Gaya Pengajaran Model Personal, Gaya Pengajaran Delegator. dan Gaya Pengajaran Fasilitator. Dapatan menunjukkan Gaya Pengajaran Model Peribadi adalah yang paling dominan, dan Gaya Pengajaran Fasilitator sebagai gaya yang paling tidak dominan. Ujian Mann-Whitney U mendapati perbezaan Gaya Pengajaran Grasha-Riechmann yang signifikan dalam kalangan guru Matematik berdasarkan gender, khususnya untuk Gaya Pengajaran Kuasa Formal, Gaya Pengajaran Fasilitator dan Gaya Pengajaran Delegator. Kajian ini memberikan implikasi praktikal terhadap pembangunan profesional pendidik untuk mempelbagaikan gaya pengajaran mereka dan menyesuaikannya seiring keperluan pembelajaran murid. Penemuan ini mencetuskan idea untuk mendapatkan pemahaman yang lebih baik tentang pengetahuan pendidik guru matematik kepada topik Matematik yang lebih spesifik dan kompleks.
Kata Kunci: Grasha-Riechmann; Gaya Pengajaran; Gender; Matematik; Sekolah Rendah
Abstract
Grasha-Riechmann's Teaching Styles have a high potential to be applied in Mathematics specially to help increase teacher educators’ knowledge. However, very little attention has been paid to the study in identifying the teaching styles patterns of Mathematics teachers at the primary school National-Type Chinese Primary Schools (SJKC) as well as to see this teaching style differs by the role of gender. This study aims to identify the patterns of Grasha-Riechmann Teaching Styles among primary school Mathematics teachers and their differences according to gender. The quantitative approach through a survey was applied to 97 Mathematics teachers of SJKC Kepong, Kuala Lumpur using the simple random sampling method. The instrument was adapted from the Grasha-Riechmann Teaching Styles Questionnaire (1996), which measures five teaching styles such as Personal Model Teaching Style, Expert Teaching Style, Formal Authority Teaching Style, Delegator Teaching Style, and Facilitator Teaching Style. The results showed that the Personal Model Teaching Style is the most dominant, and Facilitator Teaching Style as the least dominant style. The Mann-Whitney U Test found significant differences in the Grasha-Riechmann Teaching Styles among Mathematics teachers based on gender, particularly for Formal Authority Teaching Style, Facilitator Teaching Style, and Delegator Teaching Style. The study provides practical implications for educators’ professional development to diversify their teaching styles and adapt them to the needs of student learning. These findings trigger ideas to get a better understanding of the mathematics teacher educators’ knowledge to another more specific and complex Mathematics topic.
Keywords: Grasha-Riechmann; Teaching Style; Gender; Mathematics; Primary School.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Adams, D. 2018. Mastering Theories of Educational Leadership and Management, University of Malaya Press: Kuala Lumpur.
Ainonmadiah, M.N.; Awanis, M.; Norhana, M.S.; Juliana, B.; Siti Noor, I. 2016. Hubungan antara gaya pengajaran guru dengan tahap ponteng sekolah menengah di Daerah Bachok, Kelantan. Proceeding of ICECRS, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Kedah, Malaysia. 25-27 October 2016; pp. 341-358. http://dx.doi.org/10.21070/picecrs.v1i1.503
Alami, M., & Ivaturi, P. 2016. Typical teaching styles among ELC lecturers at Salalah College of technology, Oman. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(7), 251-261.
Ambusaidi, A.; Al-Farei, K. 2017. Investigating Omani science teachers’ attitudes towards teaching science: The role of gender and teaching experiences. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 15(1), 71-88.
Anis Humaira, M.M.; Nurhazwani, M.S.; Hafsah, H. 2019. Gaya pengajaran Grasha dalam kalangan pensyarah sains di Kolej Pra-Universiti di Pulau Pinang. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Dan Matematik Malaysia 2019, 9(2), 16-24.
Astuti, N.P.E. 2018. Teacher’s instructional behaviour in instructional management at elementary school reviewed from Piaget’s cognitive development theory. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 52(1), 138-153.
Baleghizadeh, S.; Shakouri, M. 2014. The effect of gender and teaching experience on Iranian ESP instructors’ teaching styles. Journal of Education and Human Development 3(2), 979-989.
Baleghizadeh, S.; Shakouri, M. 2017. Investigating the relationship between teaching styles and teacher self-efficacy among some Iranian ESP university instructors. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 54(4), 394-402.
Bandura, A. Social Learning Through Imitation; Nebraska Press: Univer, 1962.
Baradaran, A. 2016. The relationship between teaching styles and autonomy among Iranian female EFL teachers teaching at advanced levels. English Language Teaching 9(3), 223.
Bashir, L. 2017. Job satisfaction of teachers in relation to professional commitment. The International Journal of Indian Psychology 4(4), 1-8.
Beers, C. 2016. Early Childhood Preservice Teachers’ Knowledge of Children’s Cognitive Development and Developmentally Appropriate Pedagogical Practices: Understanding the Role of Clinical Experiences. Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida.
Bennett, N., Jordan, J., Long, G.; Wade. B. 1976. Teaching Styles and Pupil Progress, Open Books Publishing Limited: London.
Bergil, A. S.; Erçevik, A. 2019. The prospective EFL teachers' impressions towards teaching styles: Foresights for their professions. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 15(4), 1236-1251.
Dawes, J. 2008. Do data characteristics change according to the number of scale points used? An experiment using 5-point, 7-point and 10-point scales. International Journal of Market Research, 50(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/147078530805000106
Dole, S.; Bloom, L.; Kowalske, K. 2016. Transforming pedagogy: Changing perspectives from teacher-centered to learner-centered. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 10(1), 1-15.
Donkor, A. 2018. In-service teachers’ use of ICT in teaching Mathematics in Ghana. A case study in the Cape Coast Metropolis. Doctorate Thesis, University of Cape Coast.
El-Emadi, A. A.; Said, Z.; Friesen, H. L. 2019. Teaching style differences between male and female science teachers in Qatari schools: Possible impact on student achievement. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 15(12), 1800-1816.
Erdogan, E.; Cavli, E. 2019. Investigation of organizational commitment levels of physical education and classroom teachers. Universal Journal of Educational Research 7(1), 259-265.
Faruji, L. F. 2012. Teachers' teaching styles at English language institutes in Iran. International Journal of Social Sciences and Education 2(1), 364-373.
Flanders, N.A. 1970 Analyzing teacher behavior, Addison Wesley: Reading, MA, 1970.
Ghanizadeh, A.; Jahedizadeh, S. 2016. EFL teachers’ teaching style, creativity, and burnout: A path analysis approach. Cogent Education 3(1), 115-127.
Goff, K. G. 2016. Investigation of learner-centered instruction and teacher-centered instruction in a high school wind band class. Doctorate Thesis, University of Florida State, Florida.
Grasha, A.F. 1994. A matter of style: The teacher as an expert, formal authority, personal model, facilitator and delegator. College Teaching 48(1), 21-31.
Grasha, A.F. 1996. Teaching with Styles: A Practical Guide to Enhance Learning by Understanding Learning and Teaching Styles; Alliance Publisher: New York.
Grasha, A.F. 2002. Teaching with Style: A Practical Guide to Enhancing Learning by Understanding Teaching and Learning Styles; Alliance Publisher: San Bernadino, CA.
Heydarnejad, T.; Hosseini Fatemi, A.; Ghonsooly, B. 2017. An exploration of EFL teachers' teaching styles and emotions. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research 4(2), 26-46.
Joseph, C.M.; Buela, S.; Rajalakshmi, V.R. 2017. Work motivation and organizational commitment of college teachers. Splint International Journal of Professionals 4(1), 67.
Kalthom, H.; Puziah A.W.; Haniza, O.; Mohamad Nor Hisyam, M.; Hafizul Amin, N. 2021. Pedagogical Practices of Sustainability and Society Course Delivery in Higher Education. Akademika. 91(Isu Khas), 119-129. https://doi.org/10.17576/akad-2021-91IK-11
Karimnia, A.; Mohammdi, N. 2019. The effects of teachers’ gender, teaching experience, and brain dominance on their teaching styles. International Journal of Research in English Education 4(1), 37-46.
Kazemi, A.; Soleimani, N. 2016. On the relationship between EFL teachers’ classroom management approaches and the dominant teaching style: A mixed method study. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research 4(2), 87-103.
Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 2020. Bilangan guru sekolah rendah mengikut pembahagian zon Kuala Lumpur. https://www.moe.gov.my/ [25 Jun 2020].
Khalid, M.; Akhter, M.; Hashmi, A. 2017. Teaching styles of secondary school english teachers and learning styles of their students and relationship of teaching learning style match with students' achievement. Bulletin of Education and Research 39(3), 203-220.
Kong, S.F.; Mohd Matore, M.E.E. 2022. Can a Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Approach Enhance Students’ Mathematics Performance? Sustainability 14, 379.https://doi.org/10.3390/su14010379
Kothari, T. P.; Pingle, S. S. 2015. Personality traits and teaching style of management teachers: An empirical study. Journal of Contemporary Management Research 9(2), 16-38.
Lak, M.; Soleimani, H.; Parvaneh, F. 2017. The effect of teacher-centeredness method vs. learner-centeredness method on reading comprehension among Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching 5(1), 1-10.
Lowman, J. 1995. Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, 2nd ed, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.
Lutz, C., Berges, M., Hafemann, J.; Sticha, C. 2018. Piaget’s cognitive development in bebras tasks: A descriptive analysis by age groups. Proceeding of International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives. Springer, Cham. October 2018; pp. 259-270.
Martin, J. E. 2019. Perceived teaching style and academic growth in an international school setting. Doctorate Thesis, University of Western Kentucky.
Massaada, M. 2016. The analysis of English teachers ‘teaching styles and their effects on students ‘motivation at SMA Negeri 2 Majene. Doctorate Thesis, Universiti Negeri Makassar.
Mazaheri, S.; Ayatollahi, M. A. 2019. Relationship between Iranian EFL teachers' brain dominance, teaching experience and their teaching style. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research 7(25), 115-126.
Mazeni, I., & Hasmadi, H. (2017). Gaya pengajaran dalam kalangan guru tabika Kemas di Kelantan. Jurnal Pendidikan Awal Kanak-Kanak Kebangsaan, 6, 1 - 15. https://doi.org/10.37134/jpak.vol6.sp.1.2017
Mohammed Afandi, Z.; Mohd Effendi Ewan, M.M.; Wan Norshuhadah, W.M.; Noor Hashimah, H. 2020. Kesahan Kandungan Instrumen Pengukuran Tingkah Laku Inovatif Guru Menggunakan Kaedah Nisbah Kesahan Kandungan (CVR). Akademika. 90(Isu Khas 3), 43-54. https://doi.org/10.17576/akad-2020-90IK3-04
Nouraey, P.; Karimnia, A. 2016. The impact of rhythm and gender on spelling output of Iranian EFL learners: A cross-sectional study.
Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences 19(2), 53-63.
Nur Farhah, M.S.; Fatimah Wati, H. 2018. Pengaruh personaliti lima faktor terhadap tingkah laku kewargaan organisasi (TKO) dalam kalangan guru. Jurnal Psikologi Malaysia 32(2), 1-11.
Nur Fatahiyah, M.H.; Siti Nur Diyana, M. 2020. Kesediaan Guru Sains dan Matematik dalam Melaksanakan Pendidikan Stem dari Aspek Pengetahuan, Sikap dan Pengalaman Mengajar. Akademika. 90(Isu Khas 3), 85-101. https://doi.org/10.17576/akad-2020-90IK3-07
Nur Liyana, M. I.; Zakiah, M. A. 2017. Relationship between motivation and teachers’ teaching style among secondary school students’ in Kulai. Man In India 97(12): 299-307.
Oritz, M. J. 2018. Gangs and environment: A comparative analysis of prison and street gangs. American Journal of Qualitative Research 2(1), 97–117.
Piaget, J. 1936. The Origins of Intelligence in Children, International Universities Press: New York,
Rosalia, H. 2017. The analysis of English teachers’ teaching styles and their effects on students’ interest. Doctorate Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Rumainah, I.I.; Faridah M.K. 2017. Dorongan autonomi guru dalam pembentukan motivasi intrinsik murid. Proceedings of the Seminar on Transdisiplin Education (STEd2017), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Selangor, 16 – 17 Januari 2017; pp. 308–314.
Sabado, R. R.; Allan, O. 2019. Junior and senior technical vocational education teachers’ performance and teaching styles: A comparison. International Journal of Latest Research in Humanities and Social Science 2(6), 32-42.
Salhani, I. 2019. Jumlah pelajar mengambil STEM kian merosot. Berita Harian, 12 Mac: 18.
Sansone, D. 2017. Why does teacher gender matter? Economics of Education Review 61, 9-18.
Seng, C. L., Sii, N. Y., Isawasan, P., Chen, K. L. & Seng, P. L. 2018. Factors influencing teachers’ intention to adopt ICT into teaching using partial least square technique methods. AIP Conference Proceedings 020076 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5055478
Shaukat, S., Vishnumolakala, V. R., & Al Bustami, G. 2019. The impact of teachers’ characteristics on their self‐efficacy and job satisfaction: A perspective from teachers engaging students with disabilities. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs 19(1), 68-76.
Solomon, D.; Kendall, A. J. 1979. Children in Classrooms: An Investigation of Person-Environment Interaction, Prager Publishers: New York.
Tavakoli, M.; Karimnia, A. 2017. Dominant and gender-specific tendencies in the use of discourse markers: Insights from EFL learners. World Journal of English Language 7(2), 1-9.
Upadhya, P.; Lynch, R. A 2019. Comparative study of student motivation and academic achievement in Grade 8 Science under teacher-centered and student-centered instructional methods in Triamudomsuksa Pattanakarn School, Thailand. Scholar: Human Sciences 11(1), 108-119.
Wan Faizal, I. 2019. Kerajaan risau penurunan pelajar pilih aliran STEM. Berita Harian, 27 September: 16.
Wood, T. D. 2012. Teacher perceptions of gender-based differences among elementary school teachers. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education 4(2), 317-345.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
ISSN: 0126-5008
eISSN: 0126-8694