THE PROMOTION OF CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS

IN THE KSSR CLASSROOMS:

A CASE STUDY OF SELECTED PRIMARY SCHOOL

TEACHERS

BY

WIRAWANI BINTI KAMARULZAMAN

A dissertation submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for

the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Education

Kulliyyah of Education

International Islamic University Malaysia

NOVEMBER 2017

ii

ABSTRACT

The Malaysia Ministry of Education (MOE) made a huge paradigm shift in 2011 by

introducing a new curriculum, Primary School Standard curriculum/ Kurikulum

Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR) to primary school level. Teaching of critical

thinking skills is one of the attributes introduced in the new curriculum. Researches on

KSSR were mainly focused on School- Based Assessment (SBA) which is the

assessment method accompanying KSSR and none were found to explore how the

curriculum may enhance critical thinking skills among students. Thus, the main aim of

the case study is to explore the means teachers employed in KSSR to promote critical

thinking among students. Six teachers were selected from a primary school from

Gombak district as participants of the study. The mixed method research designs were

used to study the phenomenon. Quantitative design was used to determine teachers’

thinking styles where a measurement tool called MSG Thinking Style Inventory was

administered to participants. Interviews were conducted with teachers to explore their

understanding of critical thinking skills and its importance to students; their teaching

approaches conducted in classrooms as well as the challenges they face in

implementing KSSR in classrooms. Classroom observations were also done as a

triangulation procedure to interview data in addition to investigating teachers’ ways to

monitor student metacognition and students’ critical thinking dispositions. Hikmah

checklist was also utilised as a data collection method during observation. Result from

the inventory found that teachers preferred executive thinking style. Findings from

interviews suggested that teachers were able to lay down a few definitions of critical

thinking skills, and its importance. Teachers also utilised questioning teaching method

and i-Think tools in their teaching approach. Observation data suggested that

questioning method and class discussions were some of the ways to monitor student

metacognitive skills. Students also displayed some critical thinking dispositions such

as open-mindedness and communicative skills. Teachers felt that the large number of

students per class, the increase content syllabus and the decrease time allocation for

lessons were the challenges they faced in implementing KSSR in classrooms. Finally,

a model for promoting critical thinking skills in classrooms is proposed as guidelines

for teachers in addition to other recommendation for future research.

iii

خلاصة البحث

من خلال تقديم منهاج تعليمي جديد 2011قامت وزارة التربية والتعليم الماليزية بنقلة نوعية كبيرة عام ( على مستوى التعليم KSSRكسر)-للمدارس الابتدائية / كوريكولوم ستاندارد سيكولا رنداه

إدخالها في المنهاج الجديد. الابتدائي. وأن تدريس مهارات التفكير النقدي هو أحد السمات التي تموالبحوث التي تمت على المنهاج الجديد ركزت أساسا على التقييم القائم على المدرسة )سبا( أسلوب التقييم المصاحب لـ )كسر( ولم تظهر الدراسات كيف تعزز المناهج الدراسية الجديدة مهارات التفكير

هذه الدراسة هو استكشاف وسائل المعلمين الذين النقدي بين الطلاب. وبالتالي، فإن الهدف الرئيس يقومون بتدريس منهاج )كسر( في تعزيز التفكير النقدي بين الطلاب. وتم اختيار ستة مدرسين من مدرسة ابتدائية من منطقة غومباك كمشاركين في الدراسة. واستخدمت الدراسة المنهج المختلط لدراسة

هج الكمي لتحديد أنماط التفكير لدى المعلمين من خلال أداة هذه الظاهرة. واستخدمت الدراسة المن(. وأجريت مقابلات مع المعلمين لاستكشاف فهمهم لمهارات التفكير النقدي وأهميته MSG) القياس

التدريس التي يطبقونها في الفصول الدراسية، فضلا عن التحديات التي يواجهونها في طريقةللطلاب؛ و الفصول الدراسية. كما تم إجرا ملاحظة الفصول الدراسية كعملية تللي لجمع تنفيذ منهاج )كسر( في

، البيانات، بالإضافة إلى التحقيق في طرق المعلمين لمراقبة ما ورا الإدراك والتفكير النقدي للطلاب. وأظهرت نتيجة التحليل أن المعلمين وكذلك تم استخدام أسلوب الحكمة أثنا ملاحظة الفصول

ون أسلوب التفكير التنفيذي. وأشارت النتائج التي توصلت إليها المقابلات إلى أن المعلمين يفضلاستطاعوا وضع بعض التعاريف لمهارات التفكير النقدي وأهميتها. واستخدم المعلمون أيضا طريقة الأسئلة

ناقشات الصفية هي وأسلوب أنا أفكر في تدريسهم. وأشارت بيانات المراقبة إلى أن طريقة االأسئلة والمبعض الطرق لمراقبة مهارات الطلاب المعرفية. كما أظهر الطلاب بعض التفكر النقدي ملل الانفتاح العقلي والمهارات التواصلية. ورأى المعلمون أن زيادة عدد للطلاب في كل صف، وزيادة محتوى المقرر وقلة

فيذ منهاج )كسر( في الفصول الدراسية. الوقت المخصص للدروس من التحديات التي يواجهونها في تنوأخيرا، يتقترح الدراسة نموذجاً لتعزيز مهارات التفكير النقدي في الفصول الدراسية كتوجيه للمعلمين،

كما توصي الدراسة بإجرا بحوث مستقبلية.

iv

APPROVAL PAGE

The dissertation of Wirawani binti Kamarulzaman has been approved by the

following:

_____________________________

Rosnani Hashim

Supervisor

_____________________________

Ainol Madziah Zubairi

Co-Supervisor

_____________________________

Suhailah Hussein

Internal Examiner

_____________________________

Najib Ahmad Marzuki

External Examiner

_____________________________

Rohany Nasir

External Examiner

_____________________________

Radwan Jamal Elatrash

Chairman

v

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this dissertation is the result of my own investigations, except

where otherwise stated. I also declare that it has not been previously or concurrently

submitted as a whole for any other degrees at IIUM or other institutions.

Wirawani binti Kamarulzaman

Signature ........................................................... Date .........................................

vi

INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC UNIVERSITY MALAYSIA

DECLARATION OF COPYRIGHT AND AFFIRMATION

OF FAIR USE OF UNPUBLISHED RESEARCH

THE PROMOTION OF CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS IN THE

KSSR CLASSROOMS: A CASE STUDY OF SELECTED

PRIMARY SCHOOL TEACHERS

I declare that the copyright holders of this dissertation are jointly owned by the student

and International Islamic University Malaysia.

Copyright © 2017 by Wirawani binti Kamarulzaman and International Islamic University Malaysia. All

rights reserved.

No part of this unpublished research may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system,

or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,

recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the copyright holder except

as provided below

1. Any material contained in or derived from this unpublished research may only

used by others in their writing with due acknowledgement.

2. IIUM or its library will have the right to make and transmit copies (print or

electronic) for institutional and academic purpose.

3. The IIUM library will have the right to make, store in a retrieval system and

supply copies of this unpublished research if requested by other universities

and research libraries.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that I have read and understand the IIUM

Intellectual Property Right and Commercialization policy.

Affirmed by Wirawani binti Kamarulzaman.

……………………………. ……………………..

Signature Date

vii

DEDICATION PAGE

This dissertation is dedicated to my late parents for laying the great foundation of who

and what I turned out to be in my life.

viii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Praise be to Allah, His majesty for His uncountable blessings. I am so very grateful to

Allah for His mercy of giving me the permission and bestowed upon me the physical,

mental, psychological health to start and complete my Ph.D journey. Alhamdulillah.

Best prayers and peace be upon His best messenger, Muhammad S.A.W., his pure

descendant, and his family and his noble companions.

It is my utmost pleasure to dedicate this work to my dear parents who have

taught me to be a great deal of things about life and for believing in me to pursue my

study. I also would like to thank my husband, who has been very supportive and

understanding of the need of time I have to spend away from my family to write my

research. My appreciation also goes to my three lovely daughters who were very

understanding of the responsibities that I need to fulfil to complete this study, Thank

you very much to my family who granted me the gift of their unwavering belief in my

ability to accomplish this goal: thank you for your support and patience. Without their

love and support over the years, none of this would have been possible.

Special thanks to my supervisor, Prof. Dr. Rosnani Hashim for her continuous

support, encouragement and leadership. Thank you for her time and expertise in

teaching and coaching me throughout the years, and for being patient with me, and for

that, I will be forever grateful. Thank you very much.

Finally, I wish to express my appreciation and thanks to those who provided

their time, effort and support for this research. I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Ismail

Sheikh Ahmad, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ainol Madziah Zubairi, Prof. Dr. Mohamad Sahari

Nordin, and Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ismaiel Hassanein Ahmed Mohamed for their assistance.

This work would not have been possible without their help and input. Thank you too

to the members of my dissertation committee, thank you for sticking with me.

.

ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstract ... ................................................................................................................ ii

Abstract in Arabic .................................................................................................... iii

Approval page .......................................................................................................... iv Declaration ............................................................................................................... v

Copyright Page ......................................................................................................... vi

Dedication Page ....................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgement ................................................................................................... viii

List of Tables ........................................................................................................... xiii List of Figures .......................................................................................................... xiv

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 1 1.1 Background of the Study ........................................................................ 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem........................................................................ 9 1.3 Purpose of the Study ............................................................................... 13 1.4 Research Objectives................................................................................ 14 1.5 Research Questions ................................................................................. 14

1.6 Significance of the Study ........................................................................ 15 1.7 Definition of Terms ................................................................................ 16

1.7.1 Critical Thinking ........................................................................... 16 1.7.2 Curriculum .................................................................................... 17

1.7.3 Teaching and Learning Process .................................................... 18 1.7.4 Assessment .................................................................................... 20

1.7.5 Students ......................................................................................... 21 1.7.6 Teachers ........................................................................................ 21

1.8 Delimitations of the Study ...................................................................... 21

1.9 Chapter Summary ................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................... 23 2.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 23

2.2 Cognition, Metacognitions and Thinking Styles .................................... 23

2.2.1 Cognition ....................................................................................... 23 2.2.2 Metacognition ............................................................................... 25

2.2.3 Sternberg Thinking Styles ............................................................. 31 2.2.4 Thinking Skills .............................................................................. 34

2.3 Importance of Critical Thinking Skills ................................................... 36

2.4 Importance of Critical Thinking Skills in the Islamic Perspectives ....... 40 2.4.1 Objective Thinking Style .............................................................. 41

2.4.2 Reflective/Contemplative Thinking .............................................. 42 2.5 Critical Thinking Theories and Definitions ............................................ 44 2.6 Critical Thinking Skills Teaching Methods ............................................ 52

2.6.1 Infused and Stand-Alone Methods ................................................ 52 2.6.2 Socratic Method ............................................................................ 53

2.6.3 Lipman Philosophy for Children (P4C) ........................................ 55 2.6.4 The Hikmah Pedagogy .................................................................. 60 2.6.5 Halpern Four-Part Model .............................................................. 65

x

2.6.6 Reflection, Reasons, Alternatives (RRA) ..................................... 69 2.6.7 Bloom’s Taxonomy....................................................................... 70 2.6.8 De Bono’s CoRT ........................................................................... 72 2.6.9 Habits of Mind (HoM) .................................................................. 73

2.6.10 Problem-Based Learning (PBL), Inquiry-Based Learning and

Active Learning ............................................................................ 77 2.6.11 . i-Think ....................................................................................... 80

2.7 Standard-Based Curriculum.................................................................... 83 2.8 Primary School Standard-Based Curriculum in Malaysia (KSSR) ........ 85

2.9 Assessment Theory ................................................................................. 88 2.10 Relationship between Standards and Assessments ............................... 90

2.11 Assessment Practices ............................................................................ 92 2.12 Assessment of Critical Thinking Skills ................................................ 95 2.13 School-Based Assessment (SBA) Practices ......................................... 99

2.13.1 SBA in Finland and Sweden ....................................................... 100 2.13.2 SBA in Australia and Hong Kong............................................... 101

2.14 School-Based Assessment (SBA) Practices in Malaysia ..................... 105 2.15 Research Related to Critical Thinking, SBA and KSSR in Malaysia .. 109 2.16 Conceptual Framework ......................................................................... 117 2.17 Chapter Summary ................................................................................. 120

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................... 121 3.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 121

3.2 Research Design: Mixed Method Design ............................................... 121

3.3 Quantitative Design ................................................................................ 122 3.3.1 Inventory Questionnaire Survey Method ...................................... 122 3.3.2 Measurement Tool ........................................................................ 123

3.3.3 Data Analysis ................................................................................ 125 3.4 Qualitative Design .................................................................................. 125

3.4.1 Case Study..................................................................................... 128 3.4.2 Qualitative Data Collection Techniques ....................................... 130 3.4.3 Qualitative Data Analysis Framework .......................................... 133

3.5 The Setting .............................................................................................. 141 3.5.1 Procedures for Selecting Participants for the Study ...................... 142

3.5.2 The Procedures for the Selection of Samples ............................... 145 3.6 Research Procedures: Mixed Method Design ........................................ 146

3.6.1 Conducting the Research: The Distribution of the

Questionnaire ................................................................................ 146 3.6.2 The Interview ................................................................................ 146 3.6.3 The Observation ............................................................................ 147

3.7 Rigour, Credibility and Trustworthiness of the Data ............................. 148

3.7.1 Data Collection Procedures ........................................................... 148 3.7.2 Data Triangulation ........................................................................ 149 3.7.3 Data Analysis Procedures ............................................................. 150

3.8 Ethical Consideration.............................................................................. 151

3.8.1 Informed Consent .......................................................................... 152 3.8.2 Harm and Risk .............................................................................. 152 3.8.3 Privacy, Confidentiality, and Anonymity ..................................... 152

3.9 Chapter Summary ................................................................................... 152

xi

CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ................ 154 4.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 154

4.1.1 Reporting the Results and Findings .............................................. 155 4.2 Teachers’ Thinking Style ........................................................................ 156

4.3 Teachers’ Understanding of Critical Thinking Skills in KSSR

Classrooms and its Importance to Students ............................................ 158 4.3.1 Teachers' Understanding of Critical Thinking Skills in KSSR

Classrooms.................................................................................... 159 4.3.2 Teachers’ Views on the Importance of Critical Thinking Skills

to Students .................................................................................... 165 4.3.3 Discussions on Teachers’ Understandings of Critical Thinking

Skills in KSSR Classrooms and Its Importance to Students ........ 168 4.4 Teaching and Learning Processes in KSSR Classrooms ........................ 172

4.4.1 Discussion on Teaching and Learning Process Conducted By

Teachers in KSSR Classrooms ..................................................... 188 4.5 The Critical Thinking Dispositions Displayed by Students in the

KSSR Classrooms .................................................................................. 193 4.5.1 Discussions on the Critical Thinking Dispositions Displayed

By Students in KSSR Classrooms ................................................ 201 4.6 Teachers’ Method of Monitoring Student Metacognition ...................... 205

4.6.1 Discussions on the Methods Teachers Used to Monitor

Student Metacognition .................................................................. 211 4.7 Challenges Teachers Faced in Implementing KSSR in Classrooms ...... 215

4.7.1 Discussions on the Challenges Teachers Face in Implementing

KSSR in Classroom ...................................................................... 227

CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND

RECOMMENDATION ......................................................................................... 231 5.1 Introduction............................................................................................. 231

5.2 Summary of the Study ............................................................................ 231 5.3 Summary of the Major Findings ............................................................. 235

5.3.1 Teacher Thinking Skills ................................................................ 235

5.3.2 Teachers’ Perceptions of Critical Thinking Skills in KSSR

Classrooms and Its Importance to Students .................................. 237

5.3.3 Process of Teaching and Learning in KSSR Classroom ............... 238 5.3.4 Critical Thinking Disposition Displayed By Students .................. 240

5.3.5 Methods of Monitoring Student Metacognition............................ 241 5.3.6 Challenges in Implementing KSSR in Classrooms....................... 242

5.4 Contributions of the Research ................................................................ 244 5.4.1 Generalisation of the Findings ...................................................... 248

5.5 Pedagogical Implication ......................................................................... 251

5.6 Recommendations for Education Policy Maker ..................................... 252 5.7 Limitations of the Study ......................................................................... 254 5.8 Recommendations for Future Research .................................................. 255

xii

REFERENCES………. .......................................................................................... 257

APPENDIX I: APPROVAL LETTER FROM KPM.................................. 272

APPENDIX II: SAMPLE OF CONSENT FORM ........................................ 274 APPENDIX III: AUDIL TRAIL ...................................................................... 275 APPENDIX IV: SAMPLE QUESTIONAIRE ................................................ 277 APPENDIX V: SAMPLE COI CHECKLIST............................................... 281 APPENDIX VI: CODING TEMPLATE: GENERATING MAIN

IDEAS .................................................................................... 284 APPENDIX VII: GENERATING SUBTHEMES AND THEMES ............... 287 APPENDIX VIII: SAMPLE OF INTERRATER RELIABILITY SHEET .... 288

xiii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1 Malaysian students’ performance in PISA and TIMSS 10

Table 2.1 Phases of the Implementation of i-Think maps in Malaysia 82

Table 2.2 Differences between KSSR and KBSR 87

Table 2.3 Thinking Styles and Methods of Assessments 98

Table 2.4 Thinking Styles and Instructional/Assessment Methods 98

Table 2.5 Summary of SBA Practices in Selected Countries. 104

Table 2.6 Performance Standards (Translated from Figure 2.6) 107

Table 3.1 Sample Items in The Questionnaire 124

Table 3.2 Reliability score for MSG Thinking Styles Inventory Construct 124

Table 3.3 MSG Thinking Styles Inventory Interpretation for Non-Student

Adults by Gender 125

Table 3.4 Research Questions and Interview Questions 131

Table 3.5 Research Questions and Data Collection Tools 133

Table 3.6 Colour Coding 137

Table 3.7 Demographic Information of the Informants 146

Table 3.8 Inter-rater Reliability 151

Table 3.9 Member Checking Score 151

Table 4.1 Descriptive Table of Teacher Thinking Styles 156

Table 4.2 Themes for Teachers’ Understanding of Critical Thinking Skills 159

Table 4.3 Themes of Importance of Critical Thinking Skills to Students 165

Table 4.4 Themes of Teaching and Learning Processes in KSSR

Classroom 172

Table 4.5 Themes of Critical Thinking Skills Dispositions of Students 194

Table 4.6 Themes of Methods of Monitoring Student Metacognition 206

Table 4.7 Themes of Challenges in Implementing The KSSR 216

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Levels of Metacognition 27

Figure 2.2 Elements of Thoughts (Paul & Elder, 2012) 48

Figure 2.3 Bloom’s Taxonomy 71

Figure 2.4 Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. 72

Figure 2.5 Examples of Content and Learning Standards of KSSR 87

Figure 2.6 Performance Standards. 107

Figure 2.7 English Language Performance Standard 108

Figure 2.8 Conceptual Framework 119

Figure 3.1 Data Analysis Spiral (Creswell 2007) 134

Figure 3.2 Data Analysis Framework, adopted from Creswell (2007) 135

Figure 3.3 Generating Themes Model 139

Figure 3.4 Generating Themes Process adopted from Creswell (2014a) 140

Figure 3.5 Convergence of Multiple Sources of Evidence 149

Figure 5.1 Teachers’ Model for Critical Thinking in Classrooms. 250

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

Teaching and learning is a dynamic process that requires adaptation to the changing

world. Globalisation of the economy, increasingly diverse and interconnected

populations, and rapid technological change are posing new and demanding

challenges to individuals and societies alike. The technology forces change and

change is uncomfortable as it pushes people out of their comfort zone. McCain and

Jukes (2001) believed that the future success does not lie within the technology but

rather on the mind-set of people who use the technology. Due to those, school systems

need to change to adapt to such mind-set development. McCain and Jukes (2001) also

added that educators should teach students higher order thinking skills – the skills

such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation that are important to effective problem

solving. Thus, to adapt to the need to change the mind-set and the new roles of

teachers, school systems need to improve in the curriculum policy to be able to teach

students new skills for the future survival.

This necessity of change is supported by Darling-Hammond and McCloskey

(2008) who suggested that in developing curriculum guidelines, the authorities,

government and schools, should focus on what they called 21st century skills, those

are “the ability to find and organize information to solve problems, frame and conduct

investigation, analyse and synthesize data, apply learning to new situation, self-

monitor and improve one’s own learning and performance, communicate well in

multiple forms, work in teams and learn independently” Saavendra and Opfer (2012)

also stated in their research that 21st century skills include creativity and innovation,

2

critical thinking, problem solving, decision making, and learning to learn (or

metacognition). This implies that it is crucial for critical thinking skills (CTS) to be

included in the school curriculum because it benefits students’ academic achievement

and also helps students to come to correct conclusions. Furthermore, it will also aid

them to select the appropriate input from the internet and cope with such demands and

challenges of the new world as critical thinking skills lead students to make wise

decisions (Moore & Parker, 2012).

It is fundamental to be aware that thinking and critical thinking are two

different terms. According to Alfaro-LeFevre (2013), thinking refers to any mental

activity whereas critical thinking is controlled and purposeful, and using well-

reasoned strategies to get the needed results. This is supported by Lai (2011) who

stated that critical thinking is not just a mere mental activity but more than that. She

also added that critical thinking is a deliberation of how actually people think and how

they could or should think under varying circumstances.

Lipman (2003), the founder of the Philosophy for Children (P4C) which is for

developing critical, creative, and ethical thinking, believed that critical thinking is

skilful, responsible thinking that is self-correcting. In other words, critical thinking is

responsible thinking that contributes to thinking, making speech, action and creation

(good judgment), that are sensitive to context, and relies on reliable reasons (criteria).

We always reflect upon our own thinking to discover weaknesses and to rectify what

is at fault in its own procedures.

A lot of teaching approaches could be employed to enhance critical thinking in

children. Among them is the Problem-based Learning (PBL) where problems are

initiated by teachers to stimulate, contextualized, and integrates learning (Newman,

2005). In PBL, a problem is the starting point of the learning process. Another

3

approach is the Philosophy for Children (P4C) (Lipman, 2003) and its offshoot the

Hikmah pedagogy (Rosnani, 2013) which aimed to provide some fundamental

reasoning skills that are applicable to various contexts. The Bloom’s taxonomy is also

widely used as a classroom planning tool in education for preparing learning

objectives. Details of each of the teaching approach and more will be discussed in

Chapter Two.

Developing critical thinkers has become central to the education system.

Changes in the assessment of students at classroom level and school levels to high

stakes are required for the development of critical thinkers among students (Tsheko,

2000). Student assessment is an important component, if it is not fundamental in

improving or reforming education, other than instructions. Assessment is needed since

it is the process of gathering evidences of student learning to inform instructional

decisions (Stiggins & Chappuis, 2011).

There are two basic functions of assessment; 1) to evaluate students’ progress

and understanding during the instruction process, and 2) to support students’ learning

to achieve the best possible results (“Guide on school based assessment in primary

education,” 2008). The purposes of assessment are to promote, assist and improve

student learning, to inform programmes of teaching and learning, to provide

information to students, parents and teachers on the progress and achievement of

individual students, to support them achieve the best of their qualities and to provide

information on certificates of achievement (Queensland government, 2008).

Having explained how crucial critical thinking skill is in the 21st century; a new

curriculum model should be established to replace the current one as a means for a

paradigm shift in education. To succeed in the 21st century, students need to reach a

high standard of academic achievements and acquire mastery of vigorous core

4

subjects’ materials. Thus, standard-based curriculum was introduced in America in

1990’s with the policy of ‘No Child Left Behind (NCLB)’ which seek to hold

educators and students accountable for high quality standards of education. Simply

defined as “what students should know and be able to do”, standards support the

current curriculum framework which describes what teachers should teach, in the one

hand, and content standards serve to describe the knowledge and skills demanded of

each student, on the other hand (Shepard, Hannaway & Baker, 2009).

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in the USA required

that every state sets challenging and vigorous content standards for all students and

develop assessments which are aligned with the standards (Shepard et al., 2009). The

act urged schools as accountable for meeting the standards, and it was expected that

teachers and stake holders of the educational system would make more efforts to

improve student performance. Furthermore, President Clinton in 1994 signed the

Goals 2000: Educate America Act which called for education reform and the

development and certifications of high quality, internationally competitive content and

student performance standards. Content standard is defined as the broad descriptions

of knowledge and skills students should acquire in a particular subject area while

performance standards are the concrete examples and explicit definitions of what

students have to know and able to do in order to demonstrate proficiency of the

content standards (Shepard, 2000). Hence, this showed the need to shift to a standard-

based curriculum to achieve better students in terms of critical thinking abilities.

Similarly in Malaysia, the change from the New Primary School Curriculum

(Kurikulum Baru Sekolah Rendah) or KBSR to the new Primary School Standard

Curriculum (Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah) or KSSR in 2011 beginning with

the Year One students no longer emphasised the importance of knowledge only, but

5

also on developing higher order thinking skills (Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-

2025 p.E-4). This seems to be a move in the right direction for teaching critical

thinking skills. KSSR was introduced as an effort to restructure and improve the

existing curriculum to ensure students are provided with the knowledge, skills and

values that are relevant to meet current needs and challenges of the 21st century

(KPM, 2012a). The previous primary school curriculum, KBSR emphasised three

skills; reading, writing and arithmetic, whereas with the current curriculum, KSSR,

another skill is added to; that is reasoning (menaakul). Reasoning is thinking,

specifically, critical thinking.

Moreover, the KSSR is developed to produce a balanced and holistic student

who is able to think creatively, critically, and to be innovative through six strands; i)

communication, ii) science and technology, iii) physical and esthetical development,

iv) self-exposure, v) humanity, and vi) spirituality, attitudes and values (Malaysia

Education Blueprint 2013 - 2025, 2013). One of the aspirations introduced in the

KSSR is thinking skills, which emphasises that every student will be instilled with the

love for inquiry and long life learning and to be able to connect different pieces of

knowledge (p.E-4). Every student will need to master a range of cognitive skills that

include critical thinking, reasoning, creative and innovation skills. Thus, this

curriculum is expected to promote critical thinking skills among students.

The Malaysia Blueprint 2013-2025 also stated that by 2016, 40% of questions

in the Year 6 national examination, Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) will be at

the higher-order thinking level. This means that teachers need to focus less on

predicting topics and questions that will come out in the exam, and drill students for

content recall, but to focus more on training students to think critically and apply

knowledge in different settings (p.E-11). Due to this change, the result of the latest

6

2016 UPSR was also a bit unexpected among parents, teachers and students because

less students scored A, with only 1.11% of Year Six students scored all As (Berita

Harian Online, 17 November, 2016), since the questions in the exam was of higher-

order thinking level, and students were still learning to think critically.

The combination of teaching instructions and assessment methods is the key in

any teaching and learning processes. Considering this, the school-based assessment

(SBA) was established, widely accepted and comprehensively implemented in

countries such as Australia, New Zealand, England, Scotland, Canada, Hong Kong

and South Africa (Barley, 2013). School-based assessment provides rooms for higher

order thinking skills to be incorporated in the teaching and learning process since it

covers a wider range of students’ knowledge and abilities through its nature of

formative assessments, than previous curriculum which emphasise largely on

summative assessments such as national examinations that measure students’ abilities

mostly on the cognitive skills only; specifically memorisations. According to Barley

(2013), SBA is regarded as a tool to assess student true ability accurately, reduce the

“exam fright” and increases student confidence as they have learnt subject-matter and

skills during the conduct of their group projects under SBA. Moreover, students will

also feel less anxious as they have achieved a certain percentage of their final marks

prior to their final exam (Kerr-Phillips, 2007). In Australia for example, Queensland’s

assessment approach is ranked as internationally competitive given that its

implementation of school-based assessment was introduced since early the 1970s

(Darling-Hammond & McCloskey, 2008). In 2003, Queensland introduced the “New

Basics” and “Rich Tasks” approach to assessment which offer extended, multi-

disciplinary tasks that are developed centrally and used locally; the teachers will

7

determine the right time to integrate the central developed curriculum with the locally-

oriented curriculum (Darling-Hammond & McCloskey, 2008).

The school-based assessment which is introduced within the KSSR is to

promote holistic assessment whereby all the cognitive, affective and psychomotor

abilities are evaluated (KPM, 2014b). The school-based assessment is divided into

two components, the academic component and the non-academic component. Each of

these components consists of two other sub-components, both of which are assessed at

the central and school levels. The non-academic component is assessed based on (i)

the physical activities, sports and curriculum areas, and (ii) the psychometric

characteristics. Psychometric component also includes the assessment of students’

innate and acquired abilities, problem solving skills, interests, traits aptitude and

personality by means of aptitude tests.

The psychometric assessment is done at the end of the stage 1 and stage 2 of

primary schooling that is, when the students are in Year 3 and Year 6 (KPM, 2014b).

The Examinations Syndicate with the assistance of professional psychologists and

counsellors prepare the psychometric test instruments and guidelines. According to

Norzila (2013), school counsellors are responsible for administering the psychometric

assessment in school and based on the results, will offer appropriate professional

advice. The report of the assessment is done at the school level. The results of

personality inventory are confidential but will be shared with the class or subject

teachers to help learners in their learning process. The results will not be used to

influence learners’ overall achievements or grades. Therefore, teachers’ knowledge

and creativity are necessary to ensure the assessment is reliable.

Apart from psychometric assessment, critical thinking skills are also evaluated

through formative assessment which is done continuously, and integrated within the

8

teaching and learning processes as part of the evaluation for academic achievements

(Suzana & Jamil, 2012). Among the formative assessment that are used are classroom

discussion, observation, oral questions and answer sessions, homework, group

projects, quizzes, assignments, and dialogue (Andrade, 2010, as cited in Suzana and

Jamil, 2012).

To be able to answer higher-order thinking skills level of questions in SBA, a

lot of trainings through participation in classroom teaching and learning process are

expected. Full participation of students can be achieved through classroom discussions

where it serves two goals; i) provides insights into students’ thinking, and ii) ensures

all students are participating and working to understand and learn and that no student

is invisible in the class (Burns, 2005). According to Burns (2005), classroom

discussion can be done by asking students to justify their views on certain ideas,

whether or not they are correct. Students may also be asked to share their solution

strategies to the questions with the group or in small-group work. Besides, students

may be asked to restate others’ ideas in their own words which lead to more thinking

ability since alternative explanations are needed. This is supported by Darling-

Hammond et al., (2010) who found that in order to develop an assessment system that

supports high quality learning, students should be allowed to fully participate and

demonstrate what they know and able to do in the environment.

Observing how students persuade and argue in discussions may also be another

method of assessing critical thinking skills (Brink-Budgen, 2005). Students need to

persuade with reasons, and concluding remarks should be made after the arguments

are stated. Teachers may probe students with more questions to see how they reason

and argue, which are parts of critical thinking skills.

9

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Curran and Wetherbee (2014) stated that, in the 19th

century, education was entirely to

prepare children to work on how to run a farm. The 20th

century model of curriculum

prepared children to work on an assembly line and it was obvious that the line jobs

were becoming a career in the past. However, working on an assembly line is no

longer a ticket to a stable, middle-class life. Thus, children today are not supposed to

be prepared for that career, but they need to be prepared to technology-aged jobs that

have been created and help produce flexible children who can adapt to fill the jobs

that are not yet created. Students should not be consumers to education anymore, who

just consumed knowledge, but they need to focus on production of knowledge itself.

The 21st century model focuses on creativity, collaborations and knowledge

acquisitions through production, not consumption (Curran & Wetherbee, 2014). The

new model of curriculum requires relevant skills, mentioned by Darling-Hammond

(2009). Therefore, a paradigm shift in education is crucial.

Consequently, Malaysian Ministry of Education has come up with the

Malaysian Education Blueprint (MEB) 2013-2025 which is supposed to lead in the

paradigm shift in education. The Blueprint recognised six attributes needed by every

student to be globally competitive. The attributes are 1) knowledge – every child has

to be fully literate and numerate with a rounded general knowledge of Malaysia, Asia

and the world; 2) thinking skills – every child should master a range of important

cognitive skills including problem solving, reasoning, creative thinking and

innovation; 3) leadership skills - which encompasses four dimensions:

entrepreneurship, resilience emotional intelligence and strong communication skills;

4) bilingual proficiency – every child should operationally proficient in Bahasa

Malaysia and English; 5) ethic and spirituality – to inculcate strong ethics and

10

spirituality in every child to prepare them to rise to the challenges they will inevitably

face in adult life; and 6) national identity – to instil unshakeable sense of national

identity tied to the principles of Rukunegara. It is clearly mentioned that thinking

skills are included in the Blueprint as to prepare students for 21st century skills.

The Blueprint also highlighted Malaysian students’ performance in the

previous Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and The Trends in

International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). PISA is an international

evaluation for science, mathematics and reading and the Malaysian students

performed badly where the performances on all subjects were found to be below

average (Table 1.1). In fact, Malaysia was in the bottom third of all the Organisation

for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries that participated in

the exercise.

Table 1.1 Malaysian students’ performance in PISA and TIMSS.

Subject

PISA Points TIMSS* Ranking (Points)

OECD

Mean Score

2009 2012 2007 2011

Math 498 404 421 20 (474) 26 (440)

Science 501 422 420 21 (471) 32 (426)

Reading 496 414 398

Source: Malaysian Education Blueprint (MEB) 2013-2025

*TIMSS only for science and mathematics

Hence, MEB became an aspiration to turn Malaysia’s ranking to top one third

in both PISA and TIMSS. According to the then Deputy Minister of Education, Mrs.

Mary Yap, it is crucial to introduce higher-level thinking skills in students’ teaching