Curriculum blues :
Struggling for solid ground
Pandaya ; A Jakarta Post staff writer
|
JAKARTA
POST, 14 Desember 2014
Culture
and Elementary and Secondary Education Minister Anies Baswedan has, in the
end, put on hold the highly controversial 2013 curriculum on the grounds that
it was created without an in-depth study of its urgency, conception and
substance.
The
curriculum was rushed through by his predecessor, then education and culture
minister Mohammad Nuh, in his final year in office, and has been tried out as
a pilot project in 6,221 schools across the archipelago since 2013.
Nuh
claimed that the drafting of the curriculum began in 2010, but it was not
made public until 2012 before being tested on the 6,000-plus elementary,
junior and high schools that had adequate resources.
The
canceled curriculum was meant to replace the 2006 curriculum, but apparently
the ministry had yet to conduct the research necessary to convince the public
that the seven-year-old curriculum needed refinement.
The lack
of public consultation and the hasty drafting process have resulted in a
short-lived curriculum. Had Nuh done it properly, it could have been his
legacy, as might well have been his intention.
The
ill-prepared curriculum has caused confusion in its implementation. The
training period was nothing but too short; many teachers were left untrained;
the books were hastily written and logistical supplies to the regions were a
nightmare.
Anies’
bold move has won public support although it has, unavoidably, caused
problems in the pilot-project schools. It has also angered the contractors
with book-printing contracts worth some Rp 5 trillion. And the government is
yet to decide what to do with the millions of books already printed.
But in
view of the long-term educational development intended to produce a “golden
generation” by 2045, all the sacrifice is worth it. The government’s
curriculum-revision team should have a free hand and enough time to perfect
it through research, ample public consultation and intensive tryouts.
The
government has required that schools that have used the 2013 curriculum for
less than three semesters go back to the 2006 curriculum, and those who have
used it longer than three months continue with it before a final decision is
made.
Already,
the enforcement of two curricula is provoking fresh debate on whether the
government will go ahead with national exams next year.
The 2013
curriculum needs overhauling. As the Indonesian Teachers Union (PGRI) points
out, the curriculum has fundamental flaws that the government has to rework
to make it implementable in schools.
PGRI
chairman Sulistyo said the mind-frame with which the curriculum was created
was “difficult to comprehend”. The recommended teaching methods were
impracticable, teachers’ training programs ineffective and the prescribed
appraisal system highly burdensome to teachers.
The lack
of competence on the part of the teachers, coupled with the late delivery of
the badly needed books in many schools, especially those in far-flung
regions, have made it impossible to implement the hastily-devised curriculum.
The
curriculum is still in the early stages of implementation in pilot projects
and it needs more time for an objective review.
Among
the most criticized content is the fusion of closely related subjects, which
may result in teachers losing their jobs, over-emphasis on morality,
religious lessons that do not support plurality and longer school hours
feared to deny students a social life.
Critics
say the curriculum prescribes too many subjects, forcing the students to
spend four hours longer at school per week. Besides, the substance lacks
character building qualities — something commonly blamed for notorious youth
delinquency, such as student brawls.
For its
advocates, the 2013 curriculum is suitable for the long term as part of
efforts to create the so-called golden generation by 2045, because it trains
students to become creative, critical and analytical. The problem is that it
was enforced too soon and prepared poorly.
For the
laypeople, the latest curriculum debacle is testament to the old, tired adage
that a new education minister means a new curriculum. Indonesia is forever
struggling to build a solid foundation for its education system.
The
education system is designed according to the political interests of the
ruling regime. During the 32 years of the authoritarian rule of Soeharto, for
example, the state ideology Pancasila was a requisite subject. In the Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono era, when religious conservatism thrived, lessons of
religious morality took over from Pancasila, which Soeharto abused to keep
his political grip strong.
While
our education is lagging behind other more prosperous Asian countries,
Indonesia remains busy refining its curriculum. Parents complain they have to
spend a lot of money buying their children textbooks treated as hot
commodity. In the cities, parents have to spend a lot more money for their
children to take extra or private lessons.
It is high time the Jokowi administration initiates a curriculum that
can last beyond his term in office. Perhaps the best thing Anies can do is to
combine the best elements of the past curricula with the one he is
envisioning. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar