English English as a foreign language in Indonesia.

Published by admin on

English as an International language gives different impressions from the other status, as L1 or L2. The materials were collected through reading that is comprehending a number of references related to teaching. But, as stated by Phan Le Ha (2008, p. 2) while globalization heavily relies on English, and English language teaching (ELT) solely relies on English teachers and English teaching,  so what happens to English teachers and their teaching is an important question that needs to be explored, particularly in the context of mobility and transnationality. Moreover, understanding what teachers want, how they perceive themselves and how they are often represented is crucial to the success of ELT teacher training courses and EIL pedagogy in global and local contexts. For example in Indonesia, the teaching of English as an International language seems to be on the crossroads due to two different curricula implementation. Furthermore, the following section will explain the existence of teaching English as an International Language especially in Indonesia that due to those different curricula implementation.

To improve the outcomes of education in Indonesia, the Ministry of National Education has decided to bring in several new curriculum in EFL. First is the newly modified curriculum that known as Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (a School-Based Curriculum, SBC). SBC is a modification of the genre-based curriculum which was initially introduced in the 2004 Curriculum. SBC development is an intended goal in educational reform in Indonesia. It has brought many challenges to pedagogical practices in the teaching English as a foreign language in Indonesia. SBC emphasized on the standard competency, basic competency and their indicators. But, SBC has been scrutinized for its shortcomings. It has not explicitly included character education in its design. Also, it has not achieved the intended learning outcomes stipulated in the National Education Standard. Besides that, the learning programs tend to be overloaded and the learning materials are assumed to be relatively shallow in the depth. Then, the learning interaction tends to be teacher-centered and the learning evaluation is more focused on the cognitive domain than the affective and psychomotor domains (Depdiknas, 2004).

Second is the newly advocated curriculum that known as ‘K-2013’ or the 2013 Curriculum. K-2013 is designed in anticipation to modern learning in the twentieth century. The learning paradigm has shifted from ‘peserta didik diberi tahu’ (students have knowledge because they are taught by a teacher) to ‘peserta didik mencari tahu’ (students have curiosity to get knowledge by themselves). It reflects that the students are actively engaged in learning from different sources exceeding the teachers and the educational units or institutions (Kemdikbud, 2013). K-2013 focuses its learning on the attainment of Kompetensi Inti (core competence) and Kompetensi Dasar (basic competence). The core competence pivots around (1) religious belief and its application, (2) upholding good characters, (3) gaining factual, conceptual and procedural knowledge. (4) Trying, processing and presenting in concrete and abstract domains. While the basic competence transforms the core competence into observable cognition, affection and action (Kemdikbud, 2013).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

K-2013 characterizes its learning through modeling or exemplar flavored with scientific processes, namely: (1) observing, (2) questioning, (3) exploring and experimenting, (4) associating and analyzing, and (5) communicating. A theme is chosen and presented in the perspective of texts. The texts include spoken and written forms presented in social contexts. Learning a language in a social context will enable learners to understand meanings of speech acts appropriately. The central and basic skill are increased through social interactions, which allow language students to develop a source for making sense, a tool for understanding and organizing authenticity, information about language.

Furthermore, K-13  is  in  fact  the  extension  of  SBC  in  several  components.  The  main  purpose  of  this  curriculum  is  to  shape  the individuals  who  are  faithful  in  God,  good  in  characters,  confident,  successful  in  learning,  responsible  citizens  and positive contributors to the civilization (Ministry of Education and Cultures, 2012). This framework has been supported by Government Regulations Number 32 Year 2013 (The revision of Government Regulations Number 19 Year 2005 about the National Standards of Education).  This  regulation  is  elaborated  by  Education  and  Culture  Ministerial Regulations  Number  67,  68, 69,  and  70  on  Fundamental  Framework  and  Curriculum  Structure  from  Elementary  to Senior Secondary and Vocational Secondary School.

In the implementation of 2013 Curriculum, the process of assessment is conducted by considering some principles, approaches and characteristics which are stated in Permendikbud No. 81 A Tahun 2013. The principles are reliable, objective, equality, integrated and comprehensive, systematic, criteria-based, accountable, educative. The characteristics of the assessments are mastery learning, authentic, continuous, criteria-based, uses various assessment techniques. As a newly implemented curriculum, the intended policy or regulation behind the implementation is often results in discrepancy due to the process of perceiving and receiving. For the newly implemented curriculum, K-13 is perceived by the teachers in six broad perspectives, namely: (a) the view of practicality; (b) the students? acceptance; (c) learning activities; (d) learning materials; (e) scientific approach; and (f) authentic assessment. From these six areas of the policy, the major idea with regard to the teachers’ perception of the K-13 in relation to ELT practice was found.

Then, the curriculum change from SBC to K-13 in English language teaching leads into two main trends of teachers’ perception. The first trend mainly looks at the change from SBC to K-13 as a positive, innovative, and creative change in the English teaching practice for the future of Indonesia. The  change  also  gives  impact  to  the  change  in  the  way  teachers  and  students  viewed  the  English  learning  from traditional view of learning to modern pedagogic dimension.

The second trend viewed that the curriculum changes from SBC to K-13 as something superficial and conceptual, and would likely to have the same effects with the previous curriculum changes. Both the trends in teachers’ perception seem to be in line with the knowledge and the teachers’ belief system towards the change. The knowledge and belief system that the teachers have will be linked to their experiences on the implementation of the previous curriculum.  The English teachers’ interpretation to some main concepts of the curriculum change from SBC to K-13 with regards to English  teaching  in  senior  secondary  schools  leads  to  two  types  of  interpretation:  comprehensive  and  partial interpretation in viewing the change.

Therefore, to the general concepts in K-13 with regards to English teaching, the teachers had a tendency to interpret them correctly and comprehensively. However, to the applicative concepts, the teachers tended to interpret the concepts partially according to the teachers’ level of understanding and procedural knowledge and the convenience of the application offered by the changing elements. Thus, the  second  frame  of  theoretical  constructs underlying  the  curriculum  change  in  Indonesia  based  on  the  teachers’  perception  and  interpretation  is  that the teachers’ perception and interpretation on K-13 in relation to ELT is in line with their knowledge and belief, mindset in teaching practice, government policy demands in teacher administrative tasks and disregards their individual capacity to better create new learning atmospheres for students as highlighted by K-13.

Furthermore, all the teachers’ perception and interpretations were considered to be subjective. The teachers seemed to positively perceive and accept the curriculum change only if  their  knowledge  and  their  practical  skills  are  in  line  with  the  change.  Moreover, the teachers’ workload in administrative matters of the teaching and learning preparation should be reduced to the lowest level. To support this, the government should provide a detailed curriculum guideline that allows teachers to implement the curriculum in their daily teaching practice that significantly shows impact on learners’ behavioral change.  Also, the teachers have a tendency to show their lack of the subject matter knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. As stated by Richardson (1996) that mention about the teacher as they showed  a  holistic understanding  of  general  concepts  but  remain  partial  in  procedural  knowledge  and  on  some  new complex  procedures  grounded  in  teaching.

Some  teachers  have  a  tendency  to  stay  in  their  old  belief  viewing  that learning materials are above all and lead them direct the teaching and learning process. They also tended to stay in their comfort  zone  and  hold  a  belief  that  administrative  works  for  physical  evidence  are  more  important  than  genuinely planning  the  lesson  for  the  sake  of  students’ learning  experience  as  the  authoritative  gives  more  attentions  and appreciations on what were written on paper than what were practiced in class. Thus, in-service training on curriculum implementation  did  not  play  a  significant  role  to  influence  the  teachers’ knowledge  on  the  targeted  areas  of  the curriculum.

In conclusion, there are two concerting curricula that namely K-2006 (SBC) and K-2013 are implemented in Indonesia. This is one of the Ministry of National Education’s efforts to increase learner’s success in EFL. And curriculum 2013 has been the answer of policy maker to overcome problems in education. Along with its implementation, however, these changes will not meet the expected results unless accompanied by the role of teachers who apply this curriculum. How teacher perceives these changes and the government initiative has direct effect to the on-going process of curriculum 2013 implementation. Moreover, this new curriculum divides English into core and elective class. Students must study a core class for two periods of English subject and three to four periods if they are interested in English as an elective class.

Therefore, this implementation of curriculum 2013 sets the teacher’s perception especially for teaching English as International language in Indonesia. Because, in  implementing  the  K-13,  the  teachers  were  found  to  be  entangled  in  some  old  practices  and traditional view of learning and seemed to implement the curriculum incomprehensively with a number of deviations in the three levels of implementation: the teaching plans, the teaching process and the assessment process. On the other words, teacher faced many difficulties in implementing this new curriculum that the government apply as one the efforts to increase learner’s success in EFL. Furthermore, in  the  teaching  process,  the  teachers  also  seemed  to  be  dominant  and  controlling and even in  many  parts,  the  teachers  used Bahasa Indonesia at most and very few efforts to make the students understand in English lesson. The class situation was commonly quiet  and  no  enrichment  indicators  were  developed  that  aimed  to  help  the  fast  learners  achieve  more  in  the  target competence.

It  is  postulated  that  the  ultimate  goal  of  designing  and  changing  curriculum  is  not  to  design  the  best  and  ideal curriculum, but to put it into practice successfully. In order to enable the curriculum to take effects, teachers as the implementers  should  show  their  readiness,  willingness  and  absolute  capability  to  implement  the  curriculum  by changing  their  mindset  from  old  and  traditional  views  of  learning  to  modern  pedagogic  dimensions.  Through  these changes,  the  constraints  would  become  a  new  challenge  rather  than  hindrances  to  the  implementation.  The implementation of K-13 in ELT practices at the schools is considered to be partial, biased and tends to be traditional in all levels.

The English teaching process is inconsistent as it is classroom decision that the teachers execute it based on their  own  decision  or  ignore  what  have  been  described  in  their  lesson  plan.  The  assessment  is  also  partially implemented  as  they  found  it  problematical  to  deal  with  the  common  large  class  size.  Therefore, the  teachers’ implementation from the planning to the assessing process indicate a strong point that in some part of the K-13, the teachers tend to change the policy based on their classroom realities. And then, the information regarding the teacher’s knowledge might be useful for policy maker while this curriculum is being piloted. Gaining the information from the teacher will also be beneficial to see whether or not the 2013 has been implemented appropriately.

To sum up of this, the situation of the two concerting curricula that namely K-2006 (SBC) and K-2013 that are implemented in Indonesia brings little bit a chaotic atmosphere, especially in the teaching of English as an International language in Indonesia. But, those curriculum as a good decision nonetheless since the government has yet to provide the teacher a training regarding the implementation of the curriculum, even the teacher finds that it is difficult to apply the new curriculum in the classroom practice. Moreover, theoretically, learners’ success in EFL do not always depend on the curricula. And empirically, many factors play significant roles in determining learners’ success in EFL too, such as verbal, motivation, attitude, interest, etc.

Categories: Globalization


I'm Iren!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out