Matlamat Pendidikan untuk Pembangunan Lestari (ESD) daripada Perspektif Guru Geografi KSSM

Nurul Adilla Md Zain; Kadaruddin Aiyub

doi:10.47405/mjssh.v6i10.1110

Nurul Adilla Md Zain Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia
Kadaruddin Aiyub Fakulti Sains Sosial dan Kemanusiaan, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), Malaysia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v6i10.1110

Keywords: pendidikan untuk pembangunan lestari, kelayakan, sosialisasi, subjektifikasi

Abstract

Pendidikan untuk Pembangunan Lestari (ESD) merupakan satu konsep pendidikan global yang berperanan untuk meningkatkan keupayaan dan kompetensi generasi muda sebagai warganegara global yang mampu merealisasikan Matlamat Pembangunan Lestari (SDG). Kerajaan Malaysia telah menerima dan menyatakan komitmen untuk bersama-sama berusaha menjayakan SDG menjelang tahun 2030. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia (KPM) juga turut mempromosikan ESD dalam sistem pendidikan formal di Malaysia termasuk pendidikan sekolah menengah. Bagaimanapun, matlamat sebenar ESD diterapkan dalam pendidikan sekolah menengah di Malaysia masih belum dapat dipastikan lagi. Oleh itu, kajian ini bertujuan untuk meneliti matlamat ESD diterapkan dalam pendidikan geografi sekolah KSSM daripada perspektif guru-guru geografi di Malaysia. Pengkaji menggunakan tiga matlamat atau fungsi pendidikan yang dicadangkan oleh Gert Biesta iaitu kelayakan (qualification), sosialisasi dan subjektifikasi sebagai kerangka teoretikal yang akan menjadi panduan kepada pelaksanaan kajian ini. Kajian ini dijalankan menggunakan reka bentuk kajian kualitatif. Pengkaji menggunakan kaedah temu bual separa berstruktur bagi memperoleh data kajian. Sampel kajian terdiri daripada 11 orang guru geografi yang dipilih menggunakan kaedah persampelan bertujuan daripada 11 buah sekolah menengah di Malaysia. Data kajian dianalisis menggunakan kaedah analisis tematik yang dilakukan secara manual. Dapatan kajian menunjukkan matlamat guru menerapkan konsep ESD dalam mata pelajaran geografi KSSM di Malaysia lebih dominan kepada matlamat kelayakan dan sosialisasi. Manakala matlamat penerapan ESD untuk subjektifikasi masih belum begitu menonjol dalam landskap pendidikan geografi di Malaysia.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: On the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9

Biesta, G. (2015). What is education for? On good education, teacher judgement, and educational professionalism. European Journal of Education, 50(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12109

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research : Practical Guide for Beginners (1st edit). SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bürgener, L., & Barth, M. (2017). Sustainability competencies in teacher education: making teacher education count in everyday school practice. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.263

Cottafava, D., Cavaglià, G., & Corazza, L. (2019). Education of Sustainable Development Goals through students’ active engagement: A transformative learning experience. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 10(3), 521–544. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-05-2018-0152

Hasslöf, H., Ekborg, M., & Malmberg, C. (2014). Discussing sustainable development among teachers: An analysis from a conflict perspective. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9, 41–57. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2014.202a

Hasslöf, H., Lundegård, I., & Malmberg, C. (2016). Students’ qualification in environmental and sustainability education—epistemic gaps or composites of critical thinking? International Journal of Science Education, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1139756

Hasslöf, H., & Malmberg, C. (2015). Critical thinking as room for subjectification in Education for Sustainable Development. Environmental Education Research, 21(2), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2014.940854

Jickling, B., & Wals, A. E. J. (2012). Debating Education for Sustainable Development 20 Years after Rio: A conversation between Bob Jickling and Arjen Wals. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, 6(1), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/097340821100600111

Julien, M. P., Chalmeau, R., Vergnolle Mainar, C., & Léna, J. Y. (2018). An innovative framework for encouraging future thinking in ESD: A case study in a French school. Futures, 101, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.04.012

Letchumanan, K., & Che Rose, R. A. (2021). Cabaran dan isu yang dihadapi dalam pelaksanaan Program Sekolah Lestari di Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Society and Space, 17(1), 238–254.

Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: a practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. AISHE-J: All Ireland Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 3, 3351–33514.

Mahat, H., Hashim, M., Nayan, N., Norkhaidi, S. B., & Saleh, Y. (2019). Development Of environmental awareness measurement instruments through Education for Sustainable Development. 8th UPI-UPSI International Conference (UPI-UPSI 2018), 239, 73–86. https://doi.org/10.2991/upiupsi-18.2019.13

Mahat, H., Hashim, M., Saleh, Y., Nayan, N., & Norkhaidi, S. B. (2017). Pengetahuan dan amalan hijau dalam kalangan murid sekolah rendah. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia (Malaysian Journal of Education), 42(1), 41–49.

Mahat, H., Hashim, M., Saleh, Y., Nayan, N., & Norkhaidi, S. B. (2018). Program komuniti sekolah karbon rendah melalui aktiviti Pendidikan Pembangunan Lestari. Journal of Human Capital Development, 11(1), 36–49.

Meadows, M. E. (2020). Geography Education for Sustainable Development. Geography and Sustainability, 1, 88–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2020.02.001

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research : A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed., Vol. 148).

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Nguyen, T. P. (2019). Searching for Education for Sustainable Development in Vietnam. Environmental Education Research, 25(7), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1569202

O’Flaherty, J., & Liddy, M. (2018). The impact of Development Education and Education for Sustainable Development interventions: a synthesis of the research. Environmental Education Research, 24(7), 1031–1049. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2017.1392484

Ofei-Manu, P., & Didham, R. J. (2018). Identifying the factors for sustainability learning performance. Journal of Cleaner Production, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.06.126

Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods : Integrating Theory and Practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Singer-Brodowski, M., Etzkorn, N., & von Seggern, J. (2019). One transformation path does not fit all-insights into the diffusion processes of Education for Sustainable Development in different educational areas in Germany. Sustainability (Switzerland), 11(269), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010269

Sund, P. J., & Gericke, N. (2021). More than two decades of research on selective traditions in environmental and sustainability education—seven functions of the concept. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(6524), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126524

Van Poeck, K. (2019). Environmental sustainability education in a post-truth era. An exploration of epistemology and didactics beyond the objectivism-relativism dualism. Environmental Education Research, 25(4), 472–491.

Yli-Panula, E., Jeronen, E., & Lemmetty, P. (2020). Teaching and learning methods in geography promoting sustainability. Education Sciences, 10(1).