Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

New Ministry of Education regulations - Indonesian culture, Pancasila, religion etc

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Chotto Matte View Post
    I think most Indonesians agree that the DoE is a corrupt mess. They treat Indonesian students like guinea pigs. My friends told me, back in Suharto's era, the curriculum was quite reasonable and the students were less stressed.
    I think a better animal analogy is that each person who rises to become head of a dept or ministry feels the need to pee on the post to prove his/her presence.

    As for Suharto era, yes, SD kids would walk *home* at 9 am, with very light schedules, still learned to read. However, after the piggy ran wee wee wee all the way home to Cendana, the sleeping giant woke up. Unfortunately, self-appointed "defenders of national destiny" took over various committees in MoE, with their pretentiousness and delusions about catching up to Singapore simply by adding more hours to the school day.

    Stress was less for students but not for parents, who had to scramble for fees and clothing at a lower standard of living than we see today. Dress code was subject to sudden changes. For example, in 1997, only one brand of black shoe was acceptable, by decree "from the top". Thus, black shoe by itself (a basic part of the uniform) was not enough -- it had to be the (overpriced) type manufactured by a crony.

    Comment


    • How bad is Indonesian Curriculum?

      Recent discussion about Indonesian Curriculum is really interesting. As an Indonesian that went through Indonesian education system till graduated, my experience proved that the education I have received not at all holding me back to compete with other country nationals in term of getting a job. I've seen my fellow Indonesians abroad are all successful to build his career in either multinational or local companies.

      What is it exactly the criteria of bad curriculum? I think Indonesian curriculum and education system (like how to grade the students, Unas, UMPTN) is perfectly fine. The real problem I found that MOE doesn't do enough training for their teachers. I found during my school time there were fantastic teachers that able to guide you to think creatively, understanding subjects easily and making the subject interesting, but I don't deny the fact that lots of teachers are happy with just teaching one way.

      There are many good teachers out there but even more who wants to work a civil servant (PNS). The corrupt recruiting system prevent the real good teacher to get the job making it unfair competitions. That's the real problem. I feel that I had always attended a good school, especially, in Senior High School. The approach of the teaching was really to let us solve the problem ourselves by giving the base of understanding and rules that can not be ignored. For example in social studies, we were taught about democracy (again it's demokrasi Pancasila) by implementing it at schools in the running for Ketua OSIS, we were thought about Pancasila Economy by having Koperasi at school run by students (in my days we suppose to be 'penganut' economy Pancasila not Capitalist, because according UUD 1945, Ekonomi Pancasila is suits our value and culture).

      In Math, beside drilling by doing hundreds of exercises everyday (in my schools we started half hour before the regular school just to do this drilling), teachers also encourage us to solve the problem ourselves by giving us the basic understanding and rules.

      Basically, my days was like, start half an hour before normal time to do the drilling exercise then school started with scheduled program following Indonesian curriculum, after school I had academic enrichment base on your choice of study, then we would have activities after school like sports, art, writing, doing the koperasi thing, or become the school politician (OSIS) whatever you like. I finished my school by 6pm, all my time were well used.

      So really, talking about Indonesia has bad curriculum is not all true. I think what they need to change is the teaching style and approach to the students.

      I was enrolled in the same high school as Minister Susie where she decided to quit. Rumours say that she was expelled because too 'creative'. Actually I was in the same position as her, I was too 'creative' too but fortunately they let me stay. This high school required a certain standard of manner and obedience.

      Comment


      • Very interesting. I wonder if we should ask students what (and how) they would like to be taught?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by johntap View Post
          Very interesting. I wonder if we should ask students what (and how) they would like to be taught?
          About the How: Probably not asking directly. A few doctors I know have told me about the problems they experience with patients and self-diagnosis, coming to the doctor and more or less demanding the prescription they want. Sometimes the patient is right, sometimes they need another six years of training.

          Hindsight is another matter. If you feel like you could have been taught better, or to continue the doctor-patient analogy, would have rather had a different treatment, your opinion seems more likely to be valid. If you are happy with the results (ie your life has worked out well), I'd tend to discount that, saying there are a number of factors... (I mean that you can be a success without education, or get better without treatment). I know it seems like I am giving a double standard... but most people have no Idea of the complexity of the systems at work when a (good) professional designs a course. It's one thing to say, "Method 1 didn't work for me, because of factor X", it's another thing to say, "I want Method 1, because of factor X", without taking into account factors Y,Z, AA, AB, ect.
          Last edited by Happyman; 03-12-14, 09:48. Reason: I forgot to say What I was talking about...

          Comment


          • Originally posted by johntap View Post
            Very interesting. I wonder if we should ask students what (and how) they would like to be taught?
            Isn't that the philosophy of Montessori?

            Comment


            • Thanks Norty and H'man

              I am not sure it is a bad idea. It is certainly not a new idea to education. I guess I was prompted to suggest that because the students I know are not keen on learning religion, ideology, history and sociology at school.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by johntap View Post
                Thanks Norty and H'man

                I am not sure it is a bad idea. It is certainly not a new idea to education. I guess I was prompted to suggest that because the students I know are not keen on learning religion, ideology, history and sociology at school.
                Please don't get me wrong, the education should be made to fit the student, rather than the other way around. I don't mean that students should "be good little robots" and learn with the methods the robot teacher learned with. But I also think they are not very well informed. In spite of urgings from my academic adviser, I opted out of Statistics and just passed an Excel course (by making no attempt to learn the material and seldom attending the class). Now I kick myself every time I try to analyze my market. Dude was right, that was seriously useful stuff, and I just left it on the table.

                I'll agree with you that some of the subjects you mentioned are of questionable utility, but I'm not sure I trust a 13 year old to decide which subjects are of the most importance.

                Comment


                • At least the rule of "not being allowed to force the hiljab" should be considered as a good point. Which don't support the idea of high religious pressure inside the bureaucracy.
                  La motivation vient en se motivant ~ Motivation come by self-motivation

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by PhilippeD View Post
                    At least the rule of "not being allowed to force the hiljab" should be considered as a good point. Which don't support the idea of high religious pressure inside the bureaucracy.
                    Not yet. The foot in the door could lean to many other influences in time.
                    [COLOR=#333333][FONT=Verdana]Some love to milk Apostate.[/FONT][/COLOR]

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by fastpitch17 View Post
                      Not yet. The foot in the door could lean to many other influences in time.
                      With a population at 88% Muslim, I can't hardly see how it won't have any influence of Islamic value inside the school system.

                      But, I can't see how Hard Islamic line could have influence in the "religious course for everyone" and in same time let go the addition of a "not able to force hijab". This simply don't make sense and goes contre-courant (at reverse?) of the present evolution of hijab in the population (now allowed in police force, etc.).
                      La motivation vient en se motivant ~ Motivation come by self-motivation

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Missnaughty View Post
                        So really, talking about Indonesia has bad curriculum is not all true. I think what they need to change is the teaching style and approach to the students.
                        Absolutely true. And yes, JohnT, I asked my 11-year-old who is in 6th grade of public SD: "The teachers talk too fast and none of the kids understand." In particular, homework assignments have incomplete info -- either skipped by the teacher during rush or glossed over, like asking kids to calculate volume when you only give two dimensions of measurements.

                        IMO, this is directly rooted in the exam obsession. Like Alice in Wonderland,* the typical teacher (urged and/or threatened by her/his principal) rushes thru the curriculum in order to "get everything done" but the rush means LESS info is getting conveyed than if one took a "normal" pace. Quite inefficient, and the persistence of that inefficiency can only be called "stupidity" at the highest levels.

                        *It takes all the running you can do just to stay in place.

                        Comment


                        • The 2013 Curriculum focuses on the acquisition of contextual knowledge in respective areas and environments. The curriculum seeks to develop students' evaluation skills in three areas: attitude (honesty, politeness, and discipline), technical skills (through practical work/school projects), and scientific knowledge. At the elementary level, the curriculum emphasizes the formation of attitudes and functional skills over scientific knowledge, which receives more attention at higher educational levels. At the junior and senior high school levels, the academic rigor is increased since the students’ personalities were emphasized at the primary level. According to Musliar, the new curriculum will be applied to elementary students' grade 1, 2, 4 and 5, junior high school students’ grade 8 and 9, as well as high school students’ grade 10 and 11.
                          And there's nothing wrong with the Curriculum? Combine that with a compulsory education of only 9 years and measures to replace Information Technology and Communication by other subjects like Religion, and it doesn't surprise me we don't score well compared to neighboring countries.

                          But hey, when someone drops out at age 14/15, at least (s)he is polite.
                          Last edited by jstar; 03-12-14, 15:50.
                          [FONT=arial black]
                          [/FONT]

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by martindo View Post
                            Absolutely true. And yes, JohnT, I asked my 11-year-old who is in 6th grade of public SD: "The teachers talk too fast and none of the kids understand." In particular, homework assignments have incomplete info -- either skipped by the teacher during rush or glossed over, like asking kids to calculate volume when you only give two dimensions of measurements.

                            IMO, this is directly rooted in the exam obsession. Like Alice in Wonderland,* the typical teacher (urged and/or threatened by her/his principal) rushes thru the curriculum in order to "get everything done" but the rush means LESS info is getting conveyed than if one took a "normal" pace. Quite inefficient, and the persistence of that inefficiency can only be called "stupidity" at the highest levels.

                            *It takes all the running you can do just to stay in place.
                            Same seems to happen at our school. Proud claims of finishing the year 8 or 9 curriculum by the end of year 7 -type thing (especially it seems for maths!) - yet they have glossed over so much... I just cannot understand this. Especially for maths where layering of solid foundations is just so important.
                            Things happen for a reason...

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X