Education Survey (3) : 2013 Curriculum, (Not Just) Empty Words

Kompas, Page 14

By: Indah Surya Wardhani/Kompas R&D

Translated from Kompas article dated 11 May 2013

There are many things to be prepared in the two months leading to the “targeted” implementation of 2013 Curriculum in the coming July. Teachers’ knowledge on the curriculum change is still superficial, the technical understanding on the teaching method is still lagging. Without sufficient preparation, the structural change of the curriculum could potentially cause management chaos in schools.

The Kompas survey regarding Teachers and Quality of 2013 National Education showed that SD and SMP teachers do not have sufficient understanding on the content of the 2013 Curriculum. Out of groups of ten respondents, seven do not know the content of the curriculum. Three respondents admitted that they know, but only the outline. From the eight cities of the survey location, the city of Kupang, NTT, is the area with the lowest level of understanding on the curriculum.

The teachers’ knowledge is only on the surface, which can be seen from three aspects. In the conceptual aspect, there are more than half of the teacher respondents that do not know the content difference between the 2006 and 2013 Curriculum.

Such lack of knowledge on the concept entails weak planning. Almost half of the teachers admitted that they don’t understand how to technically describe the 2013 Curriculum content into education delivery plan (RPP).

Finally, at the operational level, almost half of the teachers acknowledged they were confused regarding the technical method for teaching using the new curriculum, particularly the teaching method using thematic-integrative approach. A number of questions surfaced, such as how to teach physcial science, social science and Bahasa Indonesia materials simultaneously, how to divide the portion of teaching hours for the three subjects and which subject teacher is able to teach that integrated subject.

The age factor and teachers’ “experience” are inversely proportional with the teachers’ level of knowledge on the 2013 Curriculum. The longer the working period of teachers, the lesser is their level of knowledge on the new curriculum. Only 22 percent of the senior teacher group with a teaching experience of more than 24 years understood the content of the 2013 Curriculum. On the other hand, 41 percent of the young teacher group with less than 8 year teaching experience had higher proportion of understanding.

The grading orientation that teachers possess also affect the level of knowledge on the curriculum. Teachers with moderate state of mind tend to have better level of understanding (35 percent) compared to conservative teachers (31 percent). There are more than half of the teachers’ proportion (57.5 percent) in this survey, who have a moderate way of thinking. The teachers that fall under this category among others believe that the quality of education is determined by education practice which consist of dialogues between student and teachers, whereas the cost and certification factors of teachers are not the major issues. Moderate teachers are mainly within the 36-43 age range, whereas conservative teachers are on average between 44-50 years old.

Media discourse

The low level of understanding of teachers on the 2013 Curriculum is also part of the minimal official socialization by the government. Since the government for the first time launched public testing on the curriculum change back in November 2012, the gusto of the socialization seems to be lacking. The survey showed that socialization to the teachers were conducted once in average and tended to aim SD and SMP with “A” and “B” accreditations in major cities. Out of ten teachers, only two received socialization and those were not seen as providing adquate understanding.

To date, the government stated that it will commence mass teacher training for core teachers and national instructors this May. About 46,000 core teachers will be trained to become the forefront for socialization and will be followed up by mass training for 713,000 teachers. Additionally the government will publish guidebooks for the implementation of 2013 Curriculum, both for teachers and students. The distribution is planned to commence prior the new 2013/2014 school year.

Lack of formal guidance and socialization has caused the mass media to take over the discourse of the curriculum change in the last few months. Newspapers (31.8 percent), television (27.5 percent) and the internet (15.8 percent) are the main source of information for teachers. Formal institutions such as principals (10.4 percent) and fellow teachers (7.4 percent) followed as source of information. The result is the general knowledge of teachers on the 2013 Curriculum is only partial and tend to be swayed by discourses.

The impact of the new curriculum implementation on the school institution is also worrisome for teachers. In terms of school condition and status, the change of the curriculum structure could potentially cause problems for state SD and SMP (50.2 percent) compared to private ones (46.2 percent).

This is because there are more certified teachers in state schools. While seven out of ten teachers from state SD and SMP are certified, only five in ten private schools are so. The reduction of learning hours makes it hard for certified teachers to meet the minimum number for weekly teaching hours.

Implications

The ambiguity between conviction and concern fills the public opinion and teachers’ attitude on the implications of the curriculum change. As an ideal concept, in general teachers are optimistic that the 2013 Curriculum will enhance the competency of the graduates when seen from the spirituality, intellectuality and mentality aspects. However, at the operational level, it is more problematic. The majority of teachers (64.8 percent) considers 2013 Curriculum as not so different with 2006 Curriculum. Respondents felt that the load of 2006 Curriculum was high, thus the concern was that it would be burdening for the students.

The thematic integrative approach was also highlighted. Half of the teachers (51.6 percent) was concerned that integrating physical science and social science material into Bahasa Indonesia would weaken national values and national identity of the students. About half of the teachers were also concerned that on one hand that would lessen the students’ congnitive ability in physical and social sciences (56.1 percent) and the students’ grammatical comprehension (49.8 percent) on the other. Referring to the education observer, M. Abduhzen, integrating physcial science, social science and Bahasa Indonesia could potentially cause confusion in the studtents’ way of thinking (Kompas, 12/12/2012).

The pros and cons that surround the curriculum change show that this policy is not entirely ready to be implemented. The impression that it is a hasty and forced policy is hard to ignore. It is more than appropriate that the strategy for implementing the 2013 Curriculum needs to be reviewed with sufficient socialization and training strategy in order to avoid 2013 Curriculum to become empty words.

Teachers’ knowledge on the content of 2013 Curriculum

Teachers’ conviction that the Curriculum will enhance the quality of education (percent)

Teachers’ opinion (percent)	Highly Agree	Agree	Disagree	Highly Disagree
The content of the 2013 Curriculum is already balanced, mentality, spirtuality and intellectuality	5.9	59.2	24.0	2.7
2013 Curriculum is already adjusted to the age of students’ development	6.3	56.3	26.2	2.1
2013 Curriculum is adjusted to the needs of students from various culutral backgrounds	5.9	57.4	25.2	3.3
Reduction of subjects would not cause problems	4.3	43.8	40.0	5.3
2013 Curriculum provides more flexibility in the teaching and learning process	7.6	56.1	25.0	2.3
2013 Curriculum provides more flexibility in developing teaching methods	9.4	62.5	18.2	1.9
The demand for teacher competency is higher in 2013 Curriculum	10.5	64.6	14.3	3.3

Survey Method

The survey was conducted from 24 March to 7 April 2013. As many as 512 teacher respondents were selected from 64 SD and 64 SMP from the cities of Medan, Palembang, Jakarta, Yogyakarta, Bandung, Surabaya, Makassar and Kupang. The selection of state/private SD and SMP were systematic after having grouped schools with “B” accreditation (55%), “A” accreditation (30%) and “C” accreditation (15%). The teacher respondents are form teachers from grades 1 and 4 at the SD level and from grade 7 at the SMP level with a 5-year minimum teaching experience. The heterogeneity of teachers and areas could probably cause error outside the sample selection. The result of this survey is not intended to depict the opinion of all teachers in Indonesia.

Source: Kompas R&D

Education Survey (3) : 2013 Curriculum, (Not Just) Empty Words