Perception and Practices of Mathematics Teachers in

Teaching Thinking Skills

Nur Athirah binti M Nazeri1, Nor Hasnida binti Md Ghazali2

Email: hasnida@fppm.upsi.edu.my
1,2
Fakulti Pendidikan dan Pembangunan Manusia, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Perak, MALAYSIA. Tel: 015
48797693.

Abstract

Thinking skills is one of the aspirations outlined in the Pelan Pembangunan Pendidikan
Malaysia (PPPM) 2013-2025 to improve the performance of students in the international
assessments. The purpose of this study is to identify the mathematics teachers' perception and
practices of teaching thinking skills during the teaching and learning proses in the classroom
in order to achieve the aspirations of PPPM 2013-2025. The study also looks at the
relationship between perception and practices for teaching thinking skills, and also the
difference in teaching practices of teachers by gender, teaching options and teaching
experiences. A survey is conducted following a conceptual framework developed and adapted
from Sukiman, Noor and Uzi (2013). The samples consist of 83 mathematics teachers of Year
One to Year Six from ten schools in Kelantan. It is selected by using purposive sampling. The
instrument used is a questionnaire adapted from ‘Pengajaran Kemahiran Berfikir’ (Sukiman,
Noor & Uzi, 2013). Data is analyzed using Statistical Package to Social Science (SPSS)
version 15.0. The findings showed that teachers have a positive attitude and they are at the
intermediate level in teaching practises. There is a strong, positive and significant
correlation between perception and teaching practices. Furthermore, there are no significant
differences based on gender, options and teaching experience in teaching practices. The
implications of this study is to create awareness among teachers about the importance of
teaching thinking skills during teaching and learning in the classroom to ensure that every
student is able to develop their thinking skills.

Keyword: Thinking Skills, Perceptions and Practices of Mathematics

Teachers, teaching experiences.
 Introduction
Thinking Skills are the mental activites we use to do things like solving problems,
making decisions, asking questions, constructing plans, evaluating ideas, organizing
information and creating objects. There are many frameworks of thinking including Bloom's
Taxonomy, DeBono's thinking tools and Lipman's modes (Moseley et al., 2005). According
to Swartz and Perkins (1990), thinking skills are the competencies that contribute to the
development of some kind of idea as to apply, evaluate and analyze. And, according to Costa
(1991) and Brandt (1984), thinking skills are seen to increase self-awareness, thought, effort
to think, attitude, thought processes and the smooth processes of thinking. By the 21st
century, the world is expected to experience rapid growth and challenges in the economic,
political and social issues, in either developed countries or non-developing countries. There
are opinions that the changes and the rapid development in these areas are closely related to
changes and developments in the field of education today. A famous writer, Alvin Toffler
once said in his masterpiece in this century that education is more challenging and must be
able to produce students who are creative and innovative, and are able to solve problems and
think critically. Therefore, education is one of the main factors that should be considered by
the 21st century and to achieve the Vision 2020. According to Rajendran (2001), the real
strength of a nation lies in the level of knowledge and skills mastered by the people of the
country. In achieving this goal, skilled workers must have a high level thinking skills in
addition to master the skills of scientific and technological skills to face an increasingly
challenging world (Subramaniam, 2007).
In September 2012, the Malaysian Education Blueprint (2013-2025) has been
introduced to improve the country's education system. Among the things that should be noted
in the Blueprint 2013-2025 was 11 strategic and operational shifts have been introduced to
transform the national education system in order to achieve that vision. In addition, among
the highlights through the Blueprint 2013-2025 is the emphasis on improving thinking skills,
which is one indicator of the six indicators applied to strengthen the existing system. The
education system in Malaysia is now giving more emphasis on thinking skills and problem
solving. This is clearly stated in the Smart School Curriculum implemented with a focus on
the development of cognitive ability. In charging curriculum also explicitly stated on the new
elements that should be mastered by students. These elements include thinking skills and the
skills of 'learning how to learn'. These elements are required for students of the working
world later (MOE, 2003).

Teaching thinking skills

According to Kasiran (2004), teaching is not systematic and there is no continuity
with previous lessons that lead students not afford to use higher order thinking skills such as
analysis, synthesis and evaluation properly. Students must have a list of skills to adapt to new
changes in the world and to be able to handle tasks successfully. These skills are problem
solving, thinking skills and others (Aksal et al., 2008). According to Kathryn (1988), students
who are weak in problem solving and thinking skills can be found at every level of education.
At every level of education, thinking skills must be practiced in every content area. This is
quite a challenging task for any educator. The easiest way for the teacher to teach their
students is to memorize facts, and then to assess them through multiple-choice tests. It is
difficult to teach students to analyze, synthesize and evaluate lesson content. In a course that
emphasizes critical thinking, learning objectives must include the application, synthesis and
analysis, divergent thinking and the opportunity to organize ideas. If educators are aware of
their weaknesses today, this situation can be combated to some extent. Although the
emphasis in this thinking skill has been emphasized in the curriculum, the community still
has a low intellectual level and weak in thinking. The ability of the students to criticize and to
submit ideas still do not reach the level of excellence they probably should have (Kasiran,
2004). According to Kasiran, not many teachers use questions and stimuli in accordance with
the level of development of the students. In addition, the examples given are not able to lead
students to higher-order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

Conceptual Framework
This study is to determine the perception and practice of teaching thinking skills
among mathematics teachers. Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework used in this study.
There are two things which are considered, the perception and the practice of mathematics
teachers on teaching thinking skills. There are three elements to be identified in the
perception of teachers which are teaching approaches with the support from curriculum and
school, the value and its importance in teaching thinking skills and self-efficacy. In addition,
there are five elements in the practice of teaching thinking skills which are practice of
teaching Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS),
various forms of thinking skills, teaching strategies and teachers’ attitude to encourage
students' thinking. In conclusion, this study is conducted to determine the relationship
between perception and practice of teaching thinking skills, and the differences of practices
of teaching based on gender, teaching experiences and teachers of mathematics options and
non-option.

Figure 1: Conceptual framework

Research Objectives
Among the objectives targeted by this study are as follows:
1. To identify the level of perception of math teachers on teaching thinking skills in terms of
teaching approaches with the support from curriculum and school, the value and
importance teaching thinking skills and self-efficacy.
2. To identify the level of practice of teaching thinking skills among math teachers which
are practice of teaching Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS), Lower Order Thinking
Skills (LOTS), various forms of thinking skills, teaching strategies and teachers’ attitude
to encourage students' thinking.
3. To identify the relationship between perception and practice of teaching thinking skills of
mathematics teachers.
4. To identify the differences of practice of teaching based on gender, teaching experiences
and teachers of mathematics options and non-option.

Methodology
83 primary school mathematics teachers from 10 schools in Kelantan have been involved in
the study. Data is collected using purposive sampling method. Questionnaire with a 4-Likert
scale is used as an instrument. Before the questionnaire was distributed in the actual study, a
pilot study was conducted to assess the validity and reliability of items in the questionnaire.
Cronbach Alpha (α) value from 45 samples is 0.910. The reliability index is at a high level so
all items are accepted. Descriptive statistics is conducted using Statistical Package for Social
Science (SPSS) version 21 to analyze the data.

Findings
Table 1 shows the number of respondents involved in this study. Out of 83 respondents, most
of them are females 63.9% (53) and 36.1% (30) are males. According to Table 2, 27
respondents aged between 12 years to 30 years and 31 years to 40 years where the total
percentage of both is 66% out of 83 respondents, while 34.9% of respondents aged between
41 years to 60 years.

Table 1 Distribution of Respondents by Gender

Sex Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

Male 30 36.1
Female 53 63.9
Total 83 100

Table 2 Distribution of Respondents by Age

Age Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

21 - 30 years 27 32.5
31 - 40 years 27 32.5
41 - 50 years 22 26.5
51 - 60 years 7 8.4
Total 83 100

Table 3 shows 68.7% of respondents, which is more than 50% of them are mathematics
option and 31.3% of a total of 26 respondents not mathematics option. Among the not
mathematics options, respondents are Malay, Chinese and English option. According to Table
4, more than 50% of the respondents (42 out of 83 respondents) have teaching experiences
between 1 to 10 years. While a total of 41 respondents had been teaching for more than 10
years, a total of 25 (30.1%) respondents had been teaching between 11 and 20 years, 12
(14.5%) respondents had been teaching between 21 to 30 years and 4 (4.8 %) respondents
had been teaching between 31 and 40 years old respectively.

Table 3 Distribution of Respondents by Option

Option Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

Mathematics 57 68.7
Others 26 31.3
Total 83 100
 Table 4 Distribution of Respondents by Teaching Experience

Teaching Experience Frequency (f) Percentage (%)

1 - 10 years 42 50.6
11 - 20 years 25 30.1
21 - 30 years 12 14.5
31 - 40 years 4 4.8
Total 83 100

Table 5 shows that more than 90% of teachers agree (A) and strongly agree (SA) on teaching
thinking skills through full implementation and application of indirect, respectively 95.2%
(79) and 96.4% (74). While 74.7% (62) of teachers agree (A) and strongly agree (SA) with
the application separately and independently. A total of 74 teachers (89.2%) agreed that the
existing curriculum can provide opportunities for teachers to teach thinking skills, and 58
teachers (69.8%) were agree on the use of textbooks is one of the tool to help in the teaching
of thinking skills. While the overall mean for this construct teachers' perception of the level
of teaching thinking skills approach to support the curriculum and the school is high.

Table 5 Teachers’ Perception of the Various Teaching Approaches with curriculum and School Support for the Teaching of
Thinking

Teaching Approaches with curriculum and SD D A SA

Item Mean
school support % (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
1 Thinking can be best taught by identifying
0.0 4.8 69.9 25.3
thinking skills and teaching them across the 3.20
(0) (4) (58) (21)
curriculum.
2 A separates subject that teaches thinking skills 0.0 25.3 54.2 20.5
2.95
should be introduced in school. (0) (21) (45) (17)
3
Students’ thinking skills can be improved 0.0 3.6 67.5 28.9
3.25
implicitly through teaching methods. (0) (3) (56) (24)
4 The existing curriculum provides opportunities 0.0 10.8 63.9 25.3
3.14
to teach thinking. (0) (9) (53) (21)
5 The textbook used helps in the teaching of 2.4 27.7 57.8 12.0
2.80
thinking. (2) (23) (48) (10)
Average mean 3.07
Notes, SD= Strongly Disagree, D=Disagree, A=Agree, SA=Strongly Agree

In Table 6, the results showed that over 90% of teachers agree (A) and strongly agree
(SA) for the four items in the construct of the value and importance of teaching thinking
skills. Overall, less than 10 teachers do not agree to these four items, each of them are 5
(6.0%), 7 (8.4%), 4 (4.8%) and a teacher (1.2%). The overall mean value also showed a high
level of teachers' perceptions for the value and importance of teaching thinking skills.
Therefore, thinking skills is very important to develop the students. Teaching thinking skills
are useful for the success of students in activities outside of school, it is important to help
students improve academic achievement and need to be successful in the job.

Table 6 Teachers Perceptions of the Values and Important of Developing Thinking Skills in Students

SD D A SA
Item Values and Important Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
Teaching thinking skills is useful for students’ in 0.0 6.0 43.4 50.6
1 3.45
activities outside of school. (0) (5) (36) (42)
 Teaching thinking skills is important to help 0.0 8.4 44.6 47.0
2 3.39
improve students’ achievement. (0) (7) (37) (39)

Teaching thinking skills is relevant for work 0.0 4.8 54.2 41.0
3 3.36
success. (0) (4) (45) (34)

Developing students’ thinking skills is 0.0 1.2 51.8 47.0

4 3.46
important. (0) (1) (43) (39)
Average mean 3.42

Table 7 Teachers’ Perception of Their Sense of Efficacy in Teaching of Thinking

SD D A SA
Item Sense of Efficacy Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I have adequate skills to develop students’ 0.0 13.3 75.9 10.8
1 2.98
thinking. (0) (11) (63) (9)
I have adequate knowledge to teach thinking 0.0 22.9 62.7 14.5
2 2.92
skills. (0) (19) (52) (12)
I feel competence in teaching my students how 0.0 13.3 75.9 10.8
3 2.98
to think well. (0) (11) (63) (9)
Through the subject I teach, thinking skill 0.0 3.6 71.1 25.3
4 3.22
objective could be achieved. (0) (3) (59) (21)
Average mean 3.03

Average mean of Table 7 shows the level of teachers' perceptions on self-efficacy are
high to teaching of thinking skills. Over 95% of teachers agree (A) and strongly agree (SA)
that the objective thinking skills can be achieved through the subjects taught. While there are
86.7% of the teachers have enough skills to develop students' thinking skills and the ability to
teach students how to think better. However, there were 22.9% (19) of teachers who do not
have enough understanding to teach thinking skills.

Table 8 Teachers’ Practices in Teaching Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS)

N R F A
Item Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS) Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I ask my students to look for similarities and 0.0 14.5 69.9 15.7
1 3.01
differences between two things or concept. (0) (12) (58) (13)

I require my students to categorize things or 0.0 21.7 67.5 10.8

2 2.89
subjects according to their common properties. (0) (18) (56) (9)

I insist upon my students to define major terms 0.0 18.1 60.2 21.7
3 3.04
and/or concepts used in class discussion. (0) (15) (50) (18)

I encourage my students to give reasons for their 0.0 15.7 56.6 27.7
4 3.12
answer. (0) (13) (47) (23)
I encourage my students to reason by using 1.2 25.3 55.4 18.1
5 2.90
analogy. (1) (21) (46) (15)
Average mean 2.99

Through Table 8, it is related to the teachers practice on teaching Lower Order

Thinking Skills (LOTS). Over 80% of teachers are freedom (F) and always (A) approach on
teaching thinking skills by encouraging students to look at the similarities and differences
between two objects or concepts, emphasizing the students to define the term and / or key
concepts discussed in class and encourage students to give reasons to the answers given by
the students, respectively 85.6% (71), 81.9% (68) and 83.8% (70). While 65 (78.3%) and 61
(73.6%) teachers practice teaching Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS) on encourage
students to categorize objects or subjects in order of importance based on these common
features and encourage students to give reasons for using analogy. The overall mean for this
construct showed the level of teaching teachers to Lower Order Thinking Skills (LOTS) is
moderate.

Table 9 Teachers’ Practices in Teaching Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS)

N R F A
Item Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I arrange ideas or subjects according to
sequence, chronology or importance to facilitate 1.2 18.1 63.9 16.9
1 2.96
acquisition and storage of information (1) (15) (53) (14)
efficiently and effectively.

I encourage my students to determine the 1.2 21.7 67.5 9.6

2 2.86
relationship between all the parts and the whole. (1) (18) (56) (8)

I encourage my students to examine the truth of

1.2 26.5 57.8 14.5
3 an assumption based on the validity of its 2.86
(1) (22) (48) (12)
evidence and assumption based information.

I require my students t examine the reliability of 2.4 25.3 60.2 12.0

4 2.82
the sources before accepting an argument. (2) (21) (50) (10)

I encourage my students to make inference 1.2 27.7 57.8 13.3

5 2.83
based on the available evidence and information. (1) (23) (48) (11)
Average mean 2.86

The average mean value of Table 9 shows the moderate level of teaching practice on
Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS). A total of 80.8% (67) teachers always (A) and
freedom (F) practice on teaching higher order thinking skills (HOTS) by organize ideas or
subject to the order, chronological or importance to facilitate the storage of information
efficiently and effectively. While each of 77.1% (64), 72.3% (60) 72.2 (60) and 71.1% (59)
of teachers practice teaching on higher order thinking skills (HOTS) by encourage students to
determine the relationship between all parts or as a whole , encourage students to evaluate the
truth of assumptions based on valid evidence and assumptions based on information, requires
the student to evaluate the reliability of the sources before accepting an argument and
encourage students to make inferences based on the evidence and information available.

Table 10 Practising the Various Forms of Thinking Skills

N R F A
Item Forms of Thinking Skills Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I require my students to consider all possible
1.2 13.3 71.1 14.5
1 solutions to a problem before deciding on the 2.99
(1) (11) (59) (12)
best way to solve it (Problem solving).
I encourage my students to explain how they
1.2 16.9 67.5 14.5
2 arrive at a certain decision or conclusion 2.95
(1) (4) (56) (12)
(Critical thinking)

I encourage my students to come up with new 1.2 12.0 67.5 19.3

3 3.05
ideas or solution (Creative thinking). (1) (10) (56) (16)

I encourage my students to consider all possible

0.0 12.0 73.5 14.5
4 options and their consequences before making a 3.02
(0) (10) (61) (12)
decision (Decision making).
5 I apply Bloom’s taxonomy of educational 4.8 26.5 55.4 13.3 2.77
 objectives as a guide in different levels of
(4) (22) (46) (11)
questioning.
Average mean 2.96

Table 10 shows the findings on the practices of teachers on teaching thinking skills
using a variety of thinking skills. A total of 57 (68.7%) teachers always (A) and freedom (F)
apply the of Bloom taxonomy of educational objectives as a guide in different levels
questioning, while as 26 (31.3%) teachers never (N) and rare (R) adopts Bloom taxonomy of
educational objectives as a guide in questioning different levels. Over 80% of teachers used
variety kind of thinking skills as practices during teaching in class. A total of 85.6% (71),
82% (68), 86.8% (72) and 88.0% (73) of teachers practice teaching thinking skills in the form
of problem-solving, critical thinking, creative thinking and blindly decision freedom (F) and
always (A) during classroom teaching respectively. The level of use variety forms of thinking
skills while teaching by teachers is moderate.

Table 11 Teaching Strategies employed by teachers

N R F A
Item Teaching Strategies Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I use structured questioning in my question to 1.2 15.7 63.9 19.3
1 3.01
students. (1) (13) (53) (16)
I ask open-ended higher order questioning rather
3.6 34.9 53.0 8.4
2 than open-ended lower order which can be 2.66
(3) (29) (44) (7)
answered with a specific answer.
I use specialized graphic organizer to organize
1.2 37.3 54.2 7.2
3 students’ thinking skills and verbal 2.67
(1) (31) (45) (6)
communication.
I encourage working on a thinking task in small 0.0 14.5 67.5 18.1
4 3.04
groups. (0) (12) (56) (15)
I vary my instruction between individual, small 1.2 10.8 68.7 19.3
5 3.06
group and class discussion. (1) (9) (57) (16)
Average mean 2.89

The average mean in Table 11 shows that the teaching strategies adopted by teachers
in the teaching of thinking skills are at a moderate level. There were 38.5% (32) of teachers
who have never (N) and rare (R) practice by asking open-ended higher order questioning
rather than open-ended lower order which can be answered with a specific answer and use
graphic organizer to organize students’ thinking skills and verbal communication.. However,
more than 80% of teachers use instructional strategies thinking skills using structured
questions used in my question to the students, encouraging students to complete assignments
in small groups and to diversify the direction of individual, small group and class discussion,
each are 83.2% (69), 85.6% (71) and 88.0 (73) respectively.

Table 12 Teachers’ Behaviour that Promote Thinking

N R F A
Item Teachers’ Behaviour Mean
% (N) % (N) % (N) % (N)
I ask several questions to clarify and extend a 0.0 14.5 55.4 30.1
1 3.16
student’s response. (0) (12) (46) (25)
I consider and accept ‘odd’ ideas expressed by 0.0 18.1 68.7 13.3
2 2.95
students. (0) (15) (57) (11)
I open-minded and evaluate things based on 0.0 8.4 66.3 25.3
3 3.17
good reason. (0) (7) (55) (21)
I seek for further explanation if things are not 0.0 10.8 63.9 25.3
4 3.14
clear.. (0) (9) (53) (21)
 I only use relevant information in discussion and 0.0 7.2 60.2 32.5
5 3.25
interaction. (0) (6) (50) (27)
Average mean 3.13

Table 12 shows the teachers’ behavior during lessons to promote students' thinking.
The result shows high levels of teachers’ behavior in promote students' thinking by applying
thinking skills to each student. These five items representing more than 80% of teachers
freedom (F) and always (A) used an open-minded and evaluate things based on good reason
beside using the relevant information in discussion and interaction, each was 91.6% (76) and
92.7% (77). While 85.5% (71), 82% (68) and 89.2% (74) each practice by asking a few
questions to make students' response is clear and growing, consider and accept the idea odd
expressed by students and find a more in-depth if the matter is not clear.

Table 13 The Correlation Between the Scales of Perception and Practices

Perceptions Practices
Perceptions 1.000 0.505**
Practices 0.505** 1.000
**
Significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)

Table 13 shows the Pearson correlation in determine the relationship between

mathematics teacher perception and practice in teaching thinking skills. Analysis of the data
shows that there is a strong and positive correlation between perception and practice of math
teacher in teaching thinking skills (r = 0.505, N = 83, p = 0.00, p <0.05). Therefore, the null
hypothesis for a third research question was rejected. So, there is a significant relationship
between mathematics teachers' perceptions of teaching thinking skills and practice math
teacher in teaching thinking skills. The findings in Table 14 shows the t value (81) = 0572, p
= 0569 (p> 0.05), so that the null hypothesis is fail to be rejected. Therefore, there were no
significant differences in the practice of teaching thinking skills between male and female
teachers.
Table 14 Independent-sample t-test of Teachers’ practices by gender

Standard Sig.
Sex N Mean t
Deviation (2-tailed)
Male 30 2.937 0.403 0.572 0.569*
Female 53 2.985 0.340
*
Significant at α = 0.05

Table 15 Independent-sample t-test of Teachers’ Practices by Teachers Option

Teachers’ Standard Sig.

N Mean t
Option Deviation (2-tailed)
Mathematics 57 2.961 0.400 0.233 0.816*
Others 26 2.982 0.267
*
Significant at α = 0.05

Table 15 shows the value of t (81) = 0.233, p = 0,816 (p> 0.05), the null hypothesis is
fail to be rejected. Therefore, there were no significant differences in the practice of teaching
thinking skills among teachers of mathematics options and non-option. According to Table
16, there were no significant differences between the practices of teachers on teaching
thinking skills, based on teaching experience (F (3, 79) = 0.557, p = 0645 (p <0.05)).
 Table 16 ANOVA of Teacher’ Practices by Teaching Experience

Teacher’ Practices by Sum of Mean

df F Sig.
Teaching Experience square Square
Between Groups 0.223 3 0.074 0.557 0.645
Within Groups 10.543 79 0.133
Total 10.766 82

Discussion
Nowadays, teaching thinking skills is very important and should be given serious
attention in the education system in Malaysia to produce young people who have the thinking
skill and be able to compete in the future. This is supported by Rajendran (2001) who argued
that among the factors to ensure the appreciation of the thinking skills of each student is
through an emphasis on teaching the skills itself.

Perception of teachers on teaching thinking skills

Table 4 shows that most of the teachers agreed that the existing curriculum provides
an opportunity for teachers to teach thinking skills. But, there are some teachers who do not
agree on using textbooks to teach the skills. It is undeniable that the possibility of teachers to
handle the process of teaching and learning in the classroom creatively depends on several
factors (Sukiman, Noor, and Uzzi, 2013). In addition, according to Mohd and Hassan (2005),
there are three approaches that can be applied during the process of teaching and learning,
which are full implementation, partial implementation and application of indirect. The results
of this study found that more than 90% of teachers agreed with the approach to teaching
thinking skills by full implementation and application of indirect, compare to the separately
and independence implementation which is only 70%. The study conducted by Sukiman,
Noor, and Uzi (2013), also showed that the implementation of teaching thinking skills
separately and independently also not well-received as compared to the other three existing
implementation of full implementation, the application of indirect and partial implementation,
where each received more than 90 percent. The overall mean value obtained in Table 6
proved that it was in line with the Malaysian Education Development Plan (2013-2025),
which also stress about the importance of thinking skills among students. Application of
teaching thinking skills to students today is very important and useful. According to Abdul
Said Ambotang in ‘Minda Pendidik’ dated March 5, 2014, a major factor and the importance
of thinking skills in life today should be applied to students starting from now, in order to
ensure they are able to ensure the stability and improvement of living standards of Malaysian
society from the economic aspect.
Teacher efficacy is teachers’ beliefs in the ability to teach in a teaching situation
(Ahmad et al., 2005). In Table 7, the average mean value of self-efficacy of teachers of
mathematics to the teaching of thinking skills is at a high level. It shows the teachers have the
skills, knowledge and abilities to teach and develop students' thinking skills. However, 96.4%
of teachers agreed that the objective thinking skills can also be achieved through the subjects
taught. According Sa-U and Abdurrahman (2008), the effectiveness of teaching thinking
skills depend also on the enjoyment of teachers in the teaching of thinking skills. The
teaching of thinking skills does not only depend on how the teaching approach is needed or
support from curriculum and school but self-efficacy of teachers themselves. But, in applying
thinking skills to students during the learning process, there are still other factors which are
needed. Those factors are knowledge, pedagogical skills and attitudes of teachers toward
teaching thinking skills (Rajendran, 2001).
Practises of mathematics teacher for teaching thinking skills

Descriptive analysis was conducted on the practices of mathematics teachers on

teaching thinking skills. It is found that the practice of mathematics teachers in the teaching
of lower order of thinking skills (LOTS), higher order thinking skills (HOTS), various forms
of teaching thinking skills and teaching strategies used by teachers during teaching in the
classroom is at moderate level. However, the attitude in practices of mathematics teacher is
high. It shows that the teacher teaching mathematics skills is practising thinking skills during
the process of teaching and learning in the classroom, but do not have a science related forms
of teaching thinking skills used. These findings contradict from the findings obtained by
Sukiman Saad, Saad and Mohd Noor Shah Uzi Dollah (2013), who found that the level of
teachers teaching lower order thinking skills (LOTS) was high. A study conducted by Kassim
Zakaria (2015) shows that teachers are still having problem in applying the use of Bloom's
Taxonomy in the top three levels of the cognitive domain, which are evaluation, synthesis
and analysis. In addition, their findings also showed that teachers less emphasis on the
application of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (RBT) are introduced while they attend the
course. According to Anderson, Kathwohl and Bloom (2001), teachers are still not ready and
lack of clarity about the application of the RBT.
Items 11, 12, 13 and 14 showed more than 80% of teachers use various forms of
thinking skills during the process of teaching and learning. Among the skills practiced by
teachers in teaching mathematics are problem-solving, critical thinking, creative thinking and
making decision. A study conducted by Che Ghazali Md Ariffin Abdul Hamid, and Ariffin
(2010) found that the level in mastery of critical skills and problem-solving of Form four
science students are at a moderate level. In line with the findings of this study, teachers who
lack teaching practice in the form of problem-solving and critical thinking or critical will
produce students who lack proficiency in both skills. Therefore, teachers must adopt a
teaching thinking skills to produce students who have the skills to think.
A survey conducted by Kassim Zakaria (2015) has identified several problems faced
by teachers, which is a basic knowledge of the students, the difficulty of students to
understand the questions and the difficulty teachers challenged to build high unfounded
questions. Therefore, most of the teachers build the questions challenged lower than the
questions challenged with higher (Supramani, 2006). Table 4.11 shows that the attitude
towards the teaching of thinking skills is high through the overall mean value obtained was
3.13. According to Sukiman, Noor, and Uzi (2013) studies, it showed that awareness of
teachers about the attitudes held by their need to stimulate students' thinking. A teacher who
has a positive attitude may stimulate students' thinking (Rosnani & Suhailah, 2003). In
addition, teachers' pedagogical practices can be influenced by general pedagogical knowledge
possessed apart from the willingness of teachers to control the process and learning
penagajaran (Rajendran, 2001).

The relationship between perception and practice math teacher for teaching thinking
skills

Results showed that there was a strong relationship between perception and practice
teaching thinking skills by mathematics teachers. This study is in line with the findings of a
study conducted by Sukiman, Noor, and Uzzi (2013) and Rosnani and Suhailah (2003) also
obtained a positive and strong relationship. This positive correlation indicates that
perceptions affect teaching practices. Through studies conducted by many researchers they
found that teachers are able to influence the behavior of students in terms of achievement,
self-concept, social relationships and the ability student thinking (Sukiman et al., 2013). After
many studies conducted to examine the influence of teachers through teacher beliefs and
practices with teachers find it affect the students primarily on student achievement.
Therefore, if a teacher has left the perception level perception in the teaching of thinking
skills, it will affect the practice of teachers on teaching thinking skills to develop students'
thinking.

Differences practice teacher towards teaching thinking skills between the gender,
teaching experience and mathematic options

T values from data analysis for the practice of teachers on teaching thinking skills between
the genders showed that there were no significant differences in the practice of teaching
thinking skills between male and female teachers. The result of t-test for teachers on teaching
practice thinking skills among teachers’ options also found that there were no significant
differences in the practice of teaching thinking skills among mathematics teachers and non-
option mathematics teachers. The findings are in line with the findings obtained by Sukiman,
Noor, and Uzzi (2013) and Will (2003), which showed no significant difference between the
teachers' practices on teaching thinking skills between male and female teachers than there,
are differences significant between male and female teachers in improving the thinking skills
among school students. The finding is also supported by a study run by Mahamod, Yusoff
and Ibrahim (2009) which made comparisons between their teaching Malay language and
English teachers find that it does not come with a significant difference between teaching
styles and options the teacher is not an option. This is because not all teachers of non-
mathematics options do not have content or pedagogy cannot teach well. Thus, gender
differences, option and non-option teacher is not a factor that should be brought in if the
application of thinking skills among student cannot be successful.
Through the analysis of data using ANOVA there were no significant between the
practise of teachers on teaching thinking skills, based on teaching experience. The finding
contradicts a study conducted by Othman (1994) which states that less experienced teachers
who were teaching less than 20 years are likely to use teaching practices directly during the
teaching of thinking skills. But the results of this study have been supported by a study
conducted by Zainal and colleagues (2009) in which the teaching experience does not
guarantee the development and stability of content knowledge (CMAM). Teaching teachers
do not have to do with teaching experience as if the teacher does not seek to change the
pattern fatherly instruction to better (Sukiman, Noor, and Uzzi, 2013) think that good
teaching is not going to happen.

Conclusion
The needs of the young people to have skills such as information technology literacy
skills, communication skills, thinking skills and various other skills are essential to achieve a
developed country status by 2020. This is due to the challenging world inhabited by young
people today. Thinking skill is one of the skills required to be used by the students today to
ensure they are able to develop our country. Based on this study, the perception of teachers
and teacher practices on teaching thinking skills in teaching and learning plays a very
important role and is indispensable to develop students' thinking. Therefore, to produce
young people who are skilled think in the future, it must begin at the school level and it is the
responsibility of the Ministry of Education to ensure that the education system today are able
to produce students who are competitive and responsible. In mathematics, thinking is a skill
that is indispensable especially for solving mathematical problem. Thinking skills are needed
in the present and the future ahead, therefore, the teaching of thinking skills is one of the
most important mission that should be emphasized in the educational system of our country.

References
Aksal, F.A., & Isman, A. (2008). A Comprehensive Look into the Learners‟ Transferable
Skills Related to Constructivist Approach. World Applied Sciences Journal, 4(4), 558–
567.
Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R. & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching,
and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
Brandt, R (1984). Editorial, Educational Leadership, 41. Dipetik dari Swartz dan Perkins,
1990, 166-68.
Che Md Ghazali, N.H., Ariffin, S.R., Abdul Hamid, N.A. & Ariffin, R. (2010, August).
Kemahiran Pemikiran Kritikal dan Penyelesaian Masalah Pelajar-pelajar Sains. Paper
presented at SKEPEN Edisi Ke-4, anjuran Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM),
Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi Malaysia (KPTM), Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia
(KPM) and MARA, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM).
Costa, A. L. (1991). Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching Thinking. Revised
Edition. United State, US.
Kasiran, N. (2004). Penguasaan Aspek Kemahiran Berfikir Secara Kritis dan Kreatif di dalam
Matapelajaran Sains Kbsm di Kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan Empat di Daerah Kuala Langat
(Ijazah Sarjana Muda). Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor.
Kassim, N., & Zakaria, E. (2015). Integrasi Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi Dalam
Pengajaran Dan Pembelajaran Matematik: Analisis Keperluan Guru (Integration of
Higher Order Thinking Skills in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics: Teachers'
Needs Analysis). Jurnal Pendidikan Matematik, 3(1), 1-12
Mahamod, Z., Yusoff, N.M.R.N., & Ibrahim, J. (2009). Perbandingan gaya pengajaran guru
bahasa melayu dan guru bahasa inggeris. Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia, 34(1), 67-92.
Mohd, A., & Hassan, A. (2005). Pemikiran Rekacipta: kaedah mengajar dan bahan latihan
untuk guru dan jurulatih. Bentong: PTS Publications & Distributors Sdn Bhd.
Rajendran, N. (2001). Pengajaran Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi: Kesediaan Guru
Mengendalikan Proses Pengajaran Pembelajaran. Seminar Projek KBKK: Poster
“Warisan-Pendidikan-Wawasan” Anjuran Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.
Rosnani, H., & Suhailah, H. (2003). The teaching of thinking in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur:
International Islamic University Malaysia, 11(1), 668–676. doi:10.1086/442722
Sa-U, S., & Abdurrahman, N. (2008). Factors influencing teachers’ perceptions on teaching
thinking: A case study in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The Journal of Behavioral
Science, 3(1), 146-155.
Subramaniam, S. R. (2007). Penyebatian Kemahiran Berfikir dalam Pengajaran Kimia Secara
Kontekstual [Assimilation of thinking skills in the teaching of chemistry through
contextual]. Jurnal Pendidikan, 27(1), 85-99. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Sukiman, Noor, & Uzi. (2013). Pengajaran Kemahiran Berfikir: Persepsi dan Amalan Guru
Matematik Semasa Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran di Bilik Darjah. Jurnal Pendidikan
Sains & Matematik Malaysia, 2(1), 18–36. 114.
Supramani, S. (2006). Penyoalan guru: pemangkin pemikiran aras tinggi murid. Jurnal
Pendidikan Universiti Malaya. Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Malaya.
Swartz, R.J., & Perkins, D.N. (1990). Teaching Thinking: Issues and Approaches. Revised
Edition. The Practitioners' Guide to Teaching Thinking Series. Midwest Publications.
Zainal, T.Z.T., Mustapha, R., & Habib, A.R. (2009). Pengetahuan pedagogi isi kandungan
guru Matematik bagi tajuk Pecahan: Kajian kes di sekolah rendah. Jurnal Pendidikan
Malaysia, 34(1), 131-153.