The national curriculum of Indonesia

The subject field program of IndonesiaIn the course of history since 1945 (Independence grade), the content syllabus of Indonesia had undergone change nigh(prenominal) times, videlicet in 1947, 1952, 1964, 1968, 1975, 1984, 1994, 2004 and the latest program of KTSP 2006 (best understood as shoal found Currriculum), those amendments atomic number 18 logic e genuinely last(predicate)y consequences of political issue, governance protrudeline, social cultural, economic, science and technology change in the animated of state comm whole of measurementy (Soekisno, 2007,). Therefore, the political program as a set of readingal plans should be mystifyed dynamically in pact with the demands and changes that occur in society. All Indonesias national curricula were designed based on the same foundation, to wit Pancasila (Philosophical foundation of the Indonesian Republic) and the 1945 constitution the principal differences among those curriculums were only on punctuate of educational goals and approaches to touchableize it.Continuing to improve the quality of education in rules of order commensurate with new-fangled(prenominal) suffering countries, the Indonesian organisation has do various changes, and continues to review the carrying into action of education in Indonesia. The internal precept mensurations of Indonesia (BSNP) had regulated through political science linguistic rule (PP) none 19 Year 2005 and set eight subject fields of the Standards of Education, special(prenominal)ally sum Standard, Standard Process, Graduates qualification Standards, Educators Standards and Education Workforce, Infra mental synthesis Standards , Management Standards, pecuniary Standards and Evaluation Standards. at the same time the Government Regulation zero(prenominal)19 yr 2005 affected the direction of Indonesian curriculum growing policies to implement its Content Standard (SK) and Graduate Competency Standard (SKL) as established through the Regulation of The parson of National Education consequence 22, 23, 24 year 2006. These three regulations then farther elaborated KTSP ( school day Based platform) which is built and actual by for each one educational unit or civilizehouse in Indonesia.According to Azumardi Azra (2006), explained that the changes in education in Indonesia way that in that location are two new ikons emerged in education, shifting the p theatrical role of the insurance insurance form _or_ system of government where previously macrocosm centralized to decentralized, then national education is more than oriented to the learning mathematical carry come turn disclose of the closet rather than vector sums. modify schema marrow to implement the new breakthrough School-Based course of instruction kn make as KTSP in Indonesia.Change of curriculum had affected the national education system of Indonesia it had non only affected the learning climate in the classroom, only the r eadiness of the principal and subject teachers in efforts to find and apply the curriculum in radiation pattern. In addition, Sutrisno and Nuryanto (2008) viewed that the slaying has non been optimally practiced as educational practitioners think KTSP differs with KBK. Mean patch Suhadi (2006) argued that such an assumption was due to a prior locatings and psychological resistance against the changes. The changes enhanced the operational practice of curriculum which are developed and enforced by each school consisting of their grant individual goals, topical anesthetic bailiwick perspectives, educational calendar and syllabus.KTSP which was being mandated by the Ministry of National Education Indonesia (MoNE) through The National Education Standard refuge (BSNP) means to reinforce the implementation of its predecessor (read KBK), it implies that KTSP hitherto put squeeze on exploitation students competencies. According to Fasli and Bachruddin (2007) said that KTSP im plementation entrust non be undergoing a public test, be manage this curriculum had been tested through KBK which was being applied by several schools in a pilot square off before the birth of KTSP. This is then a following-up toward curriculum change in the context of regional autonomy and decentralization of education programmed by the government of Indonesia. The implementation of this curriculum is center on three dimensions of students enrichment of knowledge (cognitive), attitude formation (affective) and behavior (psychomotor).Under KTSP the school and teacher hurl the authorisation to decide the educational goals based on their deliver schools perspective, in other reciprocations, teacher have duties on (1) constructing and formulating the proper goal, (2) choosing and constructing the fair(a) lesson material fit in to the inescapably, interest and childrens tuition phase, (3) using various methods and teaching media, (4) and constructing the program and the ri ght paygrade. A curriculum should be make systematically and detail, which willing crop the teachers in its implementation.However, KTSP faces major challenges related to integration of local anaesthetic anesthetic tuition, national, and international. Combining these integrations whitethorn only be solved by having resources which are prepared ahead of time, not by the teachers who prepared instantly through a shape of curriculum ripening assistance programs. It is more dangerous if the schools eventually just offered cheat or trace the guidelines offered by National Education Standard (BSNP). If so, KTSP will create the instant schools and result in stunted creativity, impertinent to the mandate of the KTSP.Some of the reasons behind the of necessity for this look for include (a) KTSP implementation needs to be evaluated simultaneously in qualitative and quantitative call and (b) the results of that evaluation can be made as the basic information for all policy decisio ns related to educational elements in Riau Province peculiarly at Indragiri Hilir Regency.Research ProblemHowever, having been launched on 2006, on that point were many issues discussed by experts and parties whose responsible for education, particular(a)ly in the implementation of School Based computer program (KTSP) which has inadequate human resources whose capable to interpret even elaborate it into the practice of educational unit , incompleteness of the certifying facilities of its implementation, the teachers do not understand KTSP as a whole, both in endpoints of concept and its implementation in schools and even still busy using the previous theory in the process of teaching and learning in classroom.In ossification with the principal of KTSP, all levels and types of education in Indonesia must develop their own curriculum based on their electromotive force areas and students. This is supported by Minister of National Education Regulation No. 22 of 2006 on the Cont ent Standards, as well as Minister of National Education Regulation No. 23 of 2006 on Graduates Competency Standards (SKL) these regulations mandate to the schools in order being required to prepare their own curriculum. However, this policy is not accompanied by teachers readiness or even taking into custody. These generate confusion among them darn applying the KTSP.As informed by Curriculum Center 2010, the monitoring find the implementation of KTSP has been conducted mostly in large areas, although bulk of them still adopting from brisk stick of curriculum. Hope fully, with technical assistances undertaken by various parties will ensure the dominance of its development and help improve reason of the concept and philosophy, and encourage them to develop the curriculum based on their respective conditions.Various obstacles occurred during satisfyingizing the empowerment of schools and KTSP. First, need of ability is the main construct, exploitation of staffs members c apabilities while providing technical assistance to particular regions could lead them to learn by doing. The instability of funding for the dissemination and acculturation of KTSP wooings the Curriculum Center to experience substantial cost-cutting measures it impacts the perfect planning that has been initially organized became severely hampered in its implementation and in like manner creates distrust betwixt local education authorities and Curriculum Center. But the best odour in welcoming this new curriculum to be extremely orderive for the Curriculum Center to do the best in accordance with the beguile quality needs, likelys and regional particularities.Therefore, any problems arise due to the implementation of KTSP suppose to comprise more serious concern of Indonesian Government, especially Indonesian Ministry of National Education. The aspects to be visualiseed include the followingImproving teachers quality and understanding toward relevant concepts of KTSP imp lementation.Providing such of facilities and infrastructure that can support the successful of KTSP implementation.Simultaneously help any educational unit in developing KTSP.Evaluating its process at idyl level to local dominion and regions.Whatever the responses from the concerning psyche/social in regard to the implementation of KTSP, school and teacher are the central to implement this school based curriculum they themselves have the potential to overcome any weaknesses occurring, if not it will be in vain.As suggested by Nana (2001) no matter on how veracious the curriculum, the results are gamyly dependent on what is being done by teachers and pupils in the classroom. It means the success of education through curriculum reformation will eventually be determined by the teacher as an executor of the curriculum, and school as a learning provider.Research ObjectivesThis speculate aims to see how the implementation of School-Based Curriculum (KTSP) is carried out in Junior High Schools and Senior High Schools as well as Madrasah at Riau nation Indonesia. Specifically it will be conducted in one part of Riau Province namely Indragiri Hilir Regency. curiously the objective of this composition is to assess the status of KTSP implementation in the dimensions of context, input, process and product (CIPP model by Daniel Stufflebeam).To figure out the extent to which KTSP has been implemented in High Schools and MadrasahTo investigate the complexities of its implementation during 4 historic period runningTo find out the supporting facilities provided by national and local government in its implementationOverall purpose of this study is to see the implementation of the KTSP in terms of context, input, process and product.Significance of the StudyThe result of this study will give some of practical benefits as followsThe policy recommendations to Indonesian Ministry of Education (especially for Indragiri Hilir Ministry of Education) based on the objectives data that will be resulted at the end of the study.Information to the public (stakeholder and parents)For basic development of relevant curriculum materials accordance with local potentials and teacher competency standard.As reference to the theoretical basis for the development of KTSP paradigm based on schools potential needs on respect to its planning, implementation, and evaluation.Research QuestionsIn overall objectives, this study will formulate the research questions based on the evaluation model of curriculum developed by Stufflebeam (1972) those are Context, Input, Process and Product. Thus the research questions are formulated as the followingDimension of ContextHow do the face teachers at Indragiri Hilir Regency develop their own curriculum based on schools desires, students needs and local needs?How do they implement and integrate all aspects of KTSP into their lesson plan and teaching?Dimension of InputHow does the Indragiri Hilir Education Ministry assist the schools in developing their teachers capability in implementing KTSP?Dimension of ProcessHow is the implementation of KTSP in Junior High School, Senior High Schools and Madrasah at Indragiri Hilir Regency Riau?How do they (Schools and teachers) evaluate its implementation?Dimension of ProductHow are the results of KTSP implementation?What is the effect of KTSP implementation on students competence in English (Impact of teachers creativities in purpose their own curriculum development)CHAPTER IITHEORETICAL FRAMEWORKLiterature studyAs the latest curriculum on 2006 which is derived from KBK (CBC-Competence-Based Curriculum, 2004), KTSP becomes a new breakthrough in the history of Indonesian education curriculum, which to progress its development to down-top approach. Contextually, KTSP develop by any groups or missions of the education unit or school/madrasah those under coordination and supervision of the National Indonesian Education Ministry and local anesthetic Indonesian Education Mini stry. It emphasizes on developing the ability to perform competences and childbeds with precise standards, so the results affect the students on mastery of a set of specific knowledge competencies, and values used in many fields of life. Indeed, KTSP is the curriculum that reflects the knowledge, skills and attitudes and also refers to the concept of education in turning to improve students potentialities.Moreover, fit to historical records, following the independence of the Republic of Indonesia, the Dutch language was replaced by English as the first unusual language, and has been recognized as such in Indonesia since 1955 (Alisjabana, 1976 de Han, 2003 as cited in Mochtar Marhum, n.d.). Since the 1980s, English has been considered to be the most of the spirit(p) foreign language in Indonesia. The governments and communitys interest in English has been maturation since the early 1990s (Alwasilah, 1997). This position of English can be traced from government documents on the results of Parliaments meetings. In the GBHN (The Guidelines of the State Policy) 1983 and 1988, foreign language policy was not integrated. However, in the GBHN 1993, the policy on foreign languages, particularly English, was clearly stipulated. The policy related to the use and mastery of English. In 1988, Government Regulation No. 55, 56 and 57/1988 changing Government Regulation No. 28, 29/990 was introduced. It substantiate the use of English in schools. Moreover, Government Regulation of No 57/1957/1988 confirmed the use of English as a foreign language and as a means of communication in the university. Subsequently, it was incorporated into Government Regulation No 60/1999 on the use of English in all higher education. Alwasilah (1997) suggested that the need for mastery of English in the globalization era was absolutely necessary. In addition, it would be ideal if the mastery of English became the mastery of second language (p. 89). Yet, the uniqueness of this KTSP hopefu lly brings the new education model to the success of Indonesian education.The development of a KTSP is a new phenomenon for the school community in Indonesia, consequently, in the early set of its implementation some obstacles were found in a number of schools. The license of schools to create their own curriculum which is relevant with the needs of students cannot be fully implemented (Harry Burhanudin, 2008). The general model of it which is being developed as a model and fully adopted by a number of schools has run awayed to cause a similar curriculum among schools as to what was being implemented in the centralistic era. The change in the role of schools from curriculum implementer to curriculum developer has made the school community confused. The capacity of school community to analyze the conditions and needs of the students and implement them in school curriculum needs to be only improved. Therefore, school assistance through professional development programs provided f or the head teachers and teachers in the context of this kind of school based curriculum is still considered grievous for several years to come. In line with the school assistance, capacity twist of the educational management in autonomous regions (regency/municipality) managing the curriculum development still remains to be completedA number of studies have been carried out to investigate KTSP implementation a study conducted in 2008 in Jambi province of Indonesia revealed (Sutrisno Nuryanto, 2008) that KTSP to all levels (Elementary Schools, Junior and Senior High Schools) having less applicable in term of (a) KTSP developmental preparation, (b) syllabus development, (c) teachers self development, (d) integrated learning, (e) local nub development, (f) outcomes assessment, and (g) report process (p. 27).As such the issue above, implementation in this context leads to the true readiness of Jambi province in anticipating of changes toward educational paradigm from a previously c entralized to decentralized model. For example, KTSP which was launched in late 2006 gave more emphasis on school autonomy through developing their own curriculum according to local needs and wisdom. This means Indonesian curricula is no longer centralized nationally and it is mandated under Indonesian Regulation No. 22 legislated in 1999 by the republic of Indonesia (R.I). Regarding local government, decentralization implies that the part to implement and manage education shall be transferred from the national government to local districts or municipal government levels. At this point Sutrisno and Nuryanto (1998) also maintain that the teachers rules as facilitator in KTSP elements have not been working as the schools and committees first moments.Furthermore, on incompatible angle was reported as in the followingThe real condition shows that the paradigm shift is not necessarily accompanied by better result. A number of problems still advance in Jambi while on level of province s, cities and countries. First, not all sectors which are directed to educational policy have human resources competent to formulate the technical policy and its implementation. Second, the increasingly of dominant political intervention in determining of policy and implementation, contextually in line with the trend of autonomy, bureaucratic chain is very closely possible to having dominantly power to education. (Sutrisno Nuryanto, 1998 p. 24).In a sense, it is important to consider the argument rose on where the KTSP developed, Endo viewed from this perspective that KTSP is similar to the concept of School-Based Curriculum training (SBCD) in Australia which had begun to set on the mid-1970s, the discourse was in essence of giving more freedom in determining the curricula by the schools members (Endo, 1997). SBCD has several characteristics that are generally similar to SBC development in Indonesia, proved on through the participation of teachers, participation of the whole or pa rt of school staffs range of activities including selection (choice of a number of alternative curriculum), adaptation (modification of actual curriculum), and creation (designing a new curriculum) responsibilities transformation from centralist to decentralist (not terminating of responsibilities) and a extension process among the community and stake-holders (to assist teachers and schools).Other studies have indicated, however, Indonesian KTSP is not derived from SBCD in Australia. Wachyu (2009) argued KTSP is having the differentials factors from SBCD in Australia, KTSP is an integrated curriculum combining between the top-down and Bottom-Up approach that was being confirmed in USPN (Legislation of Indonesian National Education Standard) on chapter X, article 36 and 37. USPN revealed that Indonesian curriculum development is based on National Education Standard (SNP) and considerately reconcile attention on learners potential diversities, schools diversities and local needs. C hapter 38 also states that the structure and framework of the curriculum of primary and secondary schools are determined by the government. Therefore, KTSP was divided into core (subjects tested nationally) and local subjects that are developed by each educational unit based on the assessment of its potential, including the content to develop learners personality and potential based on his interest in the form of extra-curricular activities.While SBCD in Australia tend to apply bottom-up approach, the built-in process and the stages of curriculum based on the potential school. As confirmed by Skillbeck (1991) that School based curriculum is a process when some or all members of a school take part on planning, implementation, and evaluation on the aspects or elements of the curriculum (Sklill beck, 1991, as cited in Wachyu, 2009, p. 2).Decentralized curriculum such of designing, implementing and controlling (evaluation and improvement) carried out through locally by each educational unit, teachers who design its curriculum working together with experts, schools committee/madrasah and others part of society. KTSP development could include all components of the curriculum or some only, instead of compilation can be done by a group or all teachers with regard to the needs of each school in accordance with the conditions in each educational unit or its surrounding communities. KTSP will be more meaningful because of the different situations in a certain(a) local condition that lead to the fulfillment of needs, demands and local development. It will produce a variety of design tho is easier to understand, master and implement by teachers by virtue of their involvement in expanding KTSP.Particularly the kernel of curriculum by Indonesian Education Ministry (2007) has pointed out also the advantages and its shortcomings, the advantages are taking on (a) KTSP is accordance with the needs, conditions, and on diversities which every local communities have, auto assi st in developing society, (b) easier to carry out due to the designs that have been prepared by teachers considering the local factors that really support to develop. Instead, it has also several shortcomings, (a) not all teachers have the expertise or skills in curriculum development then, not every local schools have the teachers or an expert that proficiently in developing such of it, (b) with content being localized, the graduate can have lack of ability to accede in national competitiveness, (c) various designs that lead to the complexity of monitoring and evaluating in term of national learning outcomes, (d) transferring students from certain schools to another schools can cause difficulties (Center for the Development of Curriculum, 2007).ListenRead phoneticallyRecent reports have noted, 60 English teachers from petty(prenominal) and senior high schools spread of 24 regencies and cities in West Java Indonesia were being selected, most teachers who participated in this study had learn and socialized more or less KTSP (Wachyu Sundayana, 2009). Wachyu explored the research questions on (a) How are English teachers understanding virtually KTSP, (b) How are their perceptions on the development of KTSP, (c) What complexities were raising during implementing and developing its curriculum. This study showed the development of KTSP in every unit of education especially junior high schools and MTs (Madrasah) in West Java is still not in line with the stages of development as suggested in the guidelines of BSNP (Institution of National Education Standard). data collection showed most teachers (74%) know what KTSP was, but they were not clear to what endure they have in practice, implement and develop KTSP for the same reason Faizah and Ismono investigated the readiness of chemistry teachers in Bangkalan district of Madura and found that Chemistry teachers from five schools were not ready to apply, the percentage just reached on 60% (Faizah Ismono, 2008, as cited in Yuli Eko Siswono, n.d).Simultaneously with the decision of Wachyu Sundayana study, the complexities on its implementation concluded as follows (a) lack of supporting facilities of the schools, (b) incompleteness of KTSP guidance received by teachers, (c) KTSP guideline was not detailed and clear, (d) teachers understanding on KTSP documents. These data are consistent with the finding of research conducted by Miftahul Jannah (2008) showing teachers abilities are low in developing syllabus and lesson plan most of respondents (75%) stated about their inabilities in developing syllabus but just copying and duplicating the examples from BSNP without having a preliminary investigation throughout students potentials and schools needs. Most of interviewing respondents admit to their complexities in making a good syllabus and lesson plan lines with the students and schools needs. This fact showed that teachers having many difficulties in developing varieties stages on KTSP (Miftahul Jannah, 2008, as cited in Wachyu Sundayana, 2009. p. 7).Regarding Riau province, whole schools on current educational year 2009/2010 are progressing to adapt KTSP, such socialization have always done, it tangle as complexity because the entire process of transforming from being centralize to decentralized was not much understand by some teachers, referring to the function of teachers on KTSP, teachers are together with schools members to develop KTSP based on students potential and local needs (UUD No. 20 year 2003/article 37).In fact, it is of accomplishment importance to examine what we could learn from prior and present efforts to bring about the strategies that are shortly progressed by BSNP to help every educational unit in developing its curriculum.Harianti (2008) explained although the authority of national curriculum development has changed, it is not making a sense for curriculum center to lose their jobs, the task change progressively to assist schools to prepare their own respective curricula. Furthermore, Harianti pointed out the job responsibility does not seem to be easy where there are a large number of schools in Indonesia contains 43.461 (elementary schools), 12.731 (junior high schools), 4.499 (senior high school) and 2.655 (vocational high schools), yet, not including Early Childhood education, Extraordinary Schools and Madrasah (Harianti, 2008). It does not allow for curriculum center helps one by one, there should be a strategy then schools can develop their own curricula. The expectation is that they can develop a curriculum, becoming true backbone in better local human resources through education in national or even in international competitiveness.Empowering the schools and community in developing KTSP done through a technical assistance, both at the provincial level as well as at the level of district/city, at the provincial level expected to present a TPK (Curriculum Development Team) whose responsibility to provide the informatio n and give assistance on the development of KTSP to TPK at the district level. Empowering at the provincial level such as Riau is concentrated in the area of curriculum development till the groups do evaluation and monitoring its implementation based on their own respective regions, beside at the district level is concentrated on the ability of the team to perform in school curriculum development assistance.KTSP where commonly cognize as school based curriculum gone to be discussed for a long, the broad study of Marsh Collin (1990) on their final finding of School based curriculum development had suggested through sub of specifics SBCD issuesThe key actors regard in political decisions about schooling in their respective countries tend to use several terms to describe or promote their efforts. such(prenominal) term include quality of schooling, school-improvement, school-focused improvement, self-managing school, and many others. Be that as it may, there are a number of interest ing issues about SBCD and (its synonyms) which are currently of considerable interest and are likely to remain so in the immediate future. They includeThe role of parents and students in decision makingFinancial management by schoolsProfessional development for teachersTeacher appraisalSchool evaluationPressure of tightening central control(Marsh Colin, 1990, pp. 206-207)The Curriculum center in its official website released about the uniqueness of KTSP implementation in term of diversity of schools needs, although the two junior high schools are located in the adjacent neighborhood both were very much different in term of pupils conditions. The A school whose current learners come from upper and mall class of socio-economic level had high academic achievement all of them trust to continue on to university. On the other hand, the B school where the majority of learners come from disadvantaged of socio-economic groups planned to graduate soon and earning money is a primary goal of schooling. Both of these two schools will develop a very different curriculum. School A will focus on studies with higher order mentation that enables learners to have high academic thinking in leading them to continue university, while school B will enrich the subjects with several activities that cultivate the skills to work so that learners feel a sense of great beneficial skills after graduating from school B.Many researchers have investigated KTSP, Specifically on its implementation, based on the reviewing above some researchers had focused on the effectiveness on its evaluation based on the real phenomenon which occurred in the real situation of the schools, the writer although cannot find the way of their investigation by using several methods of curriculum evaluation models, where known on several studies like Glatthorn Allan, Floyd Bruce (2006) studied in their books that curriculum evaluation should be concerned with assessing the value of a program studies, a field of s tudies, and a course of study, furthermore, they argued of all these three levels of curriculum work are important. Hereafter, the evaluation models of curriculum as best known are practical such as Tylers Objectives-Centered Model, Stufflebeams Context-Input-Process-Product Model, Scrivens Goal-Free Model, Stakes Responsive Model and Eisners Connoisseurship Model (Glatthorn, Floyd Bruce, 2006 pp. 302-306).For further study, the writer will focus on the evaluation model developed by Stufflebeams on Context-Input-Process-Product Model 1971. The context-input-process-product (abbreviated as CIPP) model, has several attractive features, namely its emphasis on decision making seems appropriate for administrators concerned with improving curricula, its concern for the formative evaluation remedies. However the CIPP model has some associated drawbacks its main weaknesses seems to be its failure to recognize the complexity of the decision making process in organizations. It assumes more r ationality than exists in such situations and ignores the political factors that knead a large part in these decisions (Glatthorn et al., 2006).Definition of the Termsseveral(prenominal) operational definitions used by the researcher to conduct and focus on this study are as followsCurriculumThe original derivation of the word curriculum is from the Latin verb currere, to run curriculum, a diminutive form, came to mean a racing chariot or race track (David Pratt, 1994, p. 5).Curriculum also can be defined as prescriptive, descriptive, or both. Ellis explained that Prescriptive definitions provide us with what ought to happen, and they more often than not to take the form of plan, an mean program, or some kind of expert opinion about what needs to take place in the course of study (Glatthorn et al., 2006, pp . 3-5).According to the Indonesian Institution of National Education Standards (2006) curriculum is a set of plans and rules about the goals, content, teaching materials, and t he methods used to guide the implementation of instructional activities on achieving certain educational goals, its certain goals include the national education goals in accordance with the local potential