As English Spreads, Indonesians Fear for Their Language

JAKARTA, Indonesia — Paulina Sugiarto’s three children played together at a mall here the other day, chattering not in Indonesia’s national language, but English. Their fluency often draws admiring questions from other Indonesian parents Ms. Sugiarto encounters in this city’s upscale malls.

But the children’s ability in English obscured the fact that, though born and raised in Indonesia, they were struggling with the Indonesian language, known as Bahasa Indonesia. Their parents, who grew up speaking the Indonesian language but went to college in the United States and Australia, talk to their children in English. And the children attend a private school where English is the main language of instruction.
“They know they’re Indonesian,” Ms. Sugiarto, 34, said. “They love Indonesia. They just can’t speak Bahasa Indonesia. It’s tragic.”
Indonesia’s linguistic legacy is increasingly under threat as growing numbers of wealthy and upper-middle-class families shun public schools where Indonesian remains the main language but English is often taught poorly. They are turning, instead, to private schools that focus on English and devote little time, if any, to Indonesian.
For some Indonesians, as mastery of English has become increasingly tied to social standing, Indonesian has been relegated to second-class status. In extreme cases, people take pride in speaking Indonesian poorly.
The global spread of English, with its sometimes corrosive effects on local languages, has caused much hand-wringing in many non-English-speaking corners of the world. But the implications may be more far-reaching in Indonesia, where generations of political leaders promoted Indonesian to unite the nation and forge a national identity out of countless ethnic groups, ancient cultures and disparate dialects.
The government recently announced that it would require all private schools to teach the nation’s official language to its Indonesian students by 2013. Details remain sketchy, though.
“These schools operate here, but don’t offer Bahasa to our citizens,” said Suyanto, who oversees primary and secondary education at the Education Ministry.
“If we don’t regulate them, in the long run this could be dangerous for the continuity of our language,” said Mr. Suyanto, who like many Indonesians uses one name. “If this big country doesn’t have a strong language to unite it, it could be dangerous.”
The seemingly reflexive preference for English has begun to attract criticism in the popular culture. Last year, a woman, whose father is Indonesian and her mother American, was crowned Miss Indonesia despite her poor command of Indonesian. The judges were later denounced in the news media and in the blogosphere for being impressed by her English fluency and for disregarding the fact that, despite growing up here, she needed interpreters to translate the judges’ questions.
In 1928, nationalists seeking independence from Dutch rule chose Indonesian, a form of Malay, as the language of civic unity. While a small percentage of educated Indonesians spoke Dutch, Indonesian became the preferred language of intellectuals.
Each language had a social rank, said Arief Rachman, an education expert. “If you spoke Javanese, you were below,” he said, referring to the main language on the island of Java. “If you spoke Indonesian, you were a bit above. If you spoke Dutch, you were at the top.”
Leaders, especially Suharto, the general who ruled Indonesia until 1998, enforced teaching of Indonesian and curbed use of English.
“During the Suharto era, Bahasa Indonesia was the only language that we could see or read. English was at the bottom of the rung,” said Aimee Dawis, who teaches communications at Universitas Indonesia. “It was used to create a national identity, and it worked, because all of us spoke Bahasa Indonesia. Now the dilution of Bahasa Indonesia is not the result of a deliberate government policy. It’s just occurring naturally.”
With Indonesia’s democratization in the past decade, experts say, English became the new Dutch. Regulations were loosened, allowing Indonesian children to attend private schools that did not follow the national curriculum, but offered English. The more expensive ones, with tuition costing several thousand dollars a year, usually employ native speakers of English, said Elena Racho, vice chairwoman of the Association of National Plus Schools, an umbrella organization for private schools.
But with the popularity of private schools booming, hundreds have opened in recent years, Ms. Racho said. The less expensive ones, unable to hire foreigners, are often staffed with Indonesians teaching all subjects in English, if often imperfect English, she added.
Many children attending those schools end up speaking Indonesian poorly, experts said. Uchu Riza — who owns a private school that teaches both languages and also owns the local franchise of Kidzania, an amusement park where children can try out different professions — said some Indonesians were willing to sacrifice Indonesian for a language with perceived higher status.
“Sometimes they look down on people who don’t speak English,” she said.
She added: “In some families, the grandchildren cannot speak with the grandmother because they don’t speak Bahasa Indonesia. That’s sad.”
Anna Surti Ariani, a psychologist who provides counseling at private schools and in her own practice, said some parents even displayed “a negative pride” that their children spoke poor Indonesian. Schools typically advise the parents to speak to their children in English at home even though the parents may be far from fluent in the language.
“Sometimes the parents even ask the baby sitters not to speak in Indonesian but in English,” Ms. Ariani said.
It is a sight often seen in this city’s malls on weekends: Indonesian parents addressing their children in sometimes halting English, followed by nannies using what English words they know.
But Della Raymena Jovanka, 30, a mother of two preschoolers, has developed misgivings. Her son Fathiy, 4, attended an English play group and was enrolled in a kindergarten focusing on English; Ms. Jovanka allowed him to watch only English TV programs.
The result was that her son responded to his parents only in English and had difficulties with Indonesian. Ms. Jovanka was considering sending her son to a regular public school next year. But friends and relatives were pressing her to choose a private school so that her son could become fluent in English.
Asked whether she would rather have her son become fluent in English or Indonesian, Ms. Jovanka said, “To be honest, English. But this can become a big problem in his socialization. He’s Indonesian. He lives in Indonesia. If he can’t communicate with people, it’ll be a big problem.”

Ruminations on a Distant Homeland Michel's thoughts on Indonesia

Indonesians adopting English: but in what way?Posted on July 28, 2010 by Michel S.

As recently posted in the New York Times:

Indonesia’s linguistic legacy is increasingly under threat as growing numbers of wealthy and upper-middle-class families shun public schools where Indonesian remains the main language but English is often taught poorly. They are turning, instead, to private schools that focus on English and devote little time, if any, to Indonesian.
As English Spreads, Indonesians Fear for Their Language, by Norimitsu Onishi

I guess it is a bit ironic that, on a post about Indonesians’ new fetish for the English language, I am writing this in English myself. While, in this case, it’s because this article gets syndicated in an English-speaking blog, it also happens to be true that I am more fluent in English than Indonesian. Though for a different reason than stated in the linked article…

Live in Indonesia for long enough, and you’d likely have experienced the situation described in the article. By its omissions, however, it might portray the wrong picture to those unfamiliar with Indonesian history.

The country has been independent for slightly less than 65 years — if you live in a developed country and was born when we declared independence, you’d only have reached retirement age! As the article described, Indonesia was adopted as the national language — it did not say when, but this was in 1928; again, within the lifetime of long-lived octogenarians.

Most Indonesians come from families that, within one or two generations, do not speak Indonesian as their mother tongue (p.s. NYT, it’s “Bahasa Indonesia” or “Indonesian”, never “Bahasa” — don’t perpetuate this error made mostly by English speakers). Unless you speak Malay at home (about 8% of the population), your mother tongue would be as different from Indonesian as, say, Dutch is to German. And that’s the best-case scenario. If you (or your parents) come from a Chinese, Papuan, etc. language then the languages are not even in the same linguistic family.

What I’m getting at is that even “native” Indonesian speakers speak a pidgin form of the language. We spend years getting the proper use of affixes (a delightful feature of the language) drilled into our heads. I challenge you to observe, in spoken conversations, how often this is actually used. Even in written communication: our broadsheets often drop in English words unnecessarily, or use Indonesian words without proper conjugations and declensions.

The article does not, interestingly, explicitly express concern that the new English-speaking generation it describes might end up speaking English as badly as the previous generation speaks (or butchers) Indonesian itself. The upper-middle class that can afford proper international schools might not have this problem, but a child growing up in a family where the parents speak broken English, and the nanny speaks a smattering of English words? Heaven forbid. Given that it’s now fashionable for children to learn Mandarin as well, one could imagine some children growing up speaking three languages equally badly.

A personal anecdote: in the university town of Bloomington, Indiana in the United States, one would from time to time bump into a group of Indonesians — normally in Chinese restaurants. They’re a very close-knit group, speak Indonesians among themselves (despite most of them being of Chinese descent — forced assimilation sometimes does work), and I’d often amuse myself by doing a running translation to English for the benefits of close friends (given the volume of the conversation, one could do this easily while sitting at a nearby table). The grammar is atrocious — and this, sadly, tends to be replicated when they speak English. Indonesian is easy to learn but hard to master — the declension of nouns with affixes is wondrously complex — and since the language lacks tenses, necessitating using adverbial phrases, Indonesians can be infuriatingly vague sometimes on the issue of time.

And after more of a decade in English-speaking countries, one tends to find it much easier to use English whenever one has this need for precision — after all, it’s not a very satisfactory conversation if one speaks really formal Indonesian and gets an unclear, imprecise reply back

Pak Sugeng FIB Universitas Brawijaya

Communicative Language Teaching: Is it appropriate for Indonesian Context?

Posted by Sugeng Susilo Adi  Published in Education

Abstract
With the development of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching in Indonesia, we have become more aware that the use of the communicative language teaching (CLT) does not always suit all English teaching situations. Teachers have also discovered that there is no single teaching method that deals with everything that concerns the form, the use, and the content of English. The approach is in many ways a commitment to eclecticism in practice. English teaching should be partly communicatively oriented, so students can acquaint themselves with appropriate language usage. This article tries to search for the appropriate teaching model for the Indonesian context. Although the CLT has been applied in some public schools in Indonesia, some barriers are often found in its implementation. Eclecticism is an alternative that could be tried.
Introduction
The general debate regarding how education is conceptualized, and the question of whether learning is a process of mastering abilities and knowledge “acquired” from the previous generation, is reflected in contemporary thinking in second language learning. The communicative approach or what is known as CLT (Communicative Language Teaching), learner-centered instruction, and task-based teaching are three concepts in second language learning that have been influential over the past two decades. The three concepts are part of the interpretative view of education. This viewpoint conflicts with another that assumes that learning is a process of acquiring abilities and knowledge transmitted from teacher to student. The interpretative tradition regarding learning, which is strongly rooted in the humanistic psychology tradition, argues that in order to allow learning to occur, students must reconstruct abilities and knowledge for themselves, the two of which are not easily obtained from external sources.
A second, quite significant paradigm shift in language teaching occurred in the 1970s when language and language-teaching experts adopted a new viewpoint regarding language itself. In the previous era (the 1960s) language was seen as a set of systems of rules and the main goal of language learners were to approximate the native speakers of the language they were taught. The priority for a language learner was to master the language structure, and in the learning process, emphasis on the language meaning itself was seen as a lesser goal. In that era language teaching emphasized syntax and grammar, ignoring or at least minimizing vocabulary development and semantics. However, in the 1970s, the conceptualization of language teaching became richer with the appearance of new ideas which are based on humanistic and experiential psychology. Linguists saw language more as a system of meaning expression rather than an abstract system of syntax rules.

The Indonesian Context
There are three important issues related to the context of English teaching in Indonesian public schools: the role of English in the people, the national curriculum of English language classes, and the practice of English language teaching in public schools.
The context of English language teaching in Indonesia is inescapable from its role, considered more as a foreign language rather than a second language. In a setting where English is a foreign language, students usually learn with low intrinsic motivation; English may be deemed irrelevant with students’ needs because the language is not part of their everyday life. In this setting students usually learn in one large class consisting of 40-50 students with a limited number of meetings. On the other hand, in a setting where English is a second language, students have high intrinsic motivation because the language is a part of everyday life. By living in a second language environment, students have a higher chance to use the language whether to communicate with others or for professional needs, as in searching for a job. Even though the use of English in Indonesia – whether written or spoken – is increasing as evidenced by print and electronic media, the language still has not shifted its position from being a foreign language to becoming a second language.
Meanwhile, the curriculum for English classes in Indonesia has undergone many changes over the years. It started with grammar-translation (1945), followed by oral (1968), audio-lingual (1975), communicative (1984), and finally meaning-based (1994). In 2004, the government published a new curriculum – the 2004 Curriculum – which is more well-known as the Competence-Based Curriculum (Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi – KBK). Within two years of the implementation of the curriculum, in 2006 the government published another curriculum, the Unified Education Curriculum (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan – KTSP), by Ministry of Education Regulations number 22, 23, and 24 of 2006, each regarding content standards for elementary and middle education units (Regulation 22, 2006), passing competence standards for elementary and middle education units (Regulation 23, 2006), and the execution of said regulations (Regulation 24, 2006). As an example, for a middle school-level English class, in contrast to the 2004 curriculum which sets standards for competence, indicators, and core materials, the 2006 curriculum only sets competence standards with the intent to give teachers the freedom to develop themselves with their own creativity instead of being tied down to the curriculum.
No empirical research as of yet has been conducted that evaluates the effectiveness of the changing curriculums on student learning results or even the increase in teachers’ competence or performance. In the meantime, despite the lack of empirical research that compares the effectiveness of learning English in courses and formal schooling, it has become a public understanding that learning English in courses is believed to be more effective and beneficial to students than learning through formal schooling. English language courses have expanded quite significantly, from those that are managed by official foreign country representatives such as The British Council, Indonesian Australia Language Foundation-IALF, English First-EF, and others, to private ones managed by individuals. While schools still struggle with teaching grammar and committing language rules to memory, courses instead stress speaking skills, with more meetings compared to classes in schools. Some courses even go as far as to advertise claims of “fluent speaking in three months” to draw consumers. Not only that, some courses utilize native-speaking teachers to accelerate speaking skills. Usually, programs with such teachers are offered at a steeper price compared to ones with local teachers, even though native speakers may not be any more competent. More often, the people appreciate inexperienced or even unskilled English native speaker teachers than local instructors who are fluent in English, experienced, and skilled in this field.
The praxis of English language teaching in Indonesia varies from schools that teach English well to those that lack such a quality. Generally, these schools can be divided into three groups.
First are the public and private schools in major cities which are able to teach English effectively. Schools in this group have advanced English laboratories, teaching materials on par with the international standard, quality teachers, communicative teaching methods, students learning in ideal but not-too-large groups, and even the use of English as a teaching language in other classes. Students in these schools tend to have good communicative competence, so the national exams do not become a problem for them and the school. Most of the students in this group of schools also take English courses outside of their schools. Quite often, these schools require a certain TOEFL score as part of their standards for passing.
Second are the public and private schools that do have adequate language laboratories, sufficient teaching materials, and quality English teachers, but are hindered by the government policy regarding the national exams so that the only purpose for English classes is to help students answer the questions on the exam, especially for students of the last grade. The communication aspect of the students’ learning of English in this group is often ignored. Moreover, schools in this group have very high numbers of students in a single classroom, between 40-50. Only a small portion of students also take English courses.
Third are the schools that do not have a language laboratory, have many students in a single classroom, do not have sufficient teaching materials, have low-quality English teachers, and use ineffective teaching methods. Students learning in this group of schools usually have low learning motivation and low starting competence, which they may carry even up to graduation. Schools that fall into this group are private schools in the outskirts of towns or public and private schools in villages, rural areas, and remote locations.
The majority of schools in Indonesia fall into the second and third groups. Teaching English in these schools are not effective for a variety of reasons including lack of facilities, unavailability of materials, low-quality teachers, many students in a single class, non-communicative teaching methods, and stiff and exam question-answering-oriented curriculums, among others.
The factor of Indonesian culture as part of Asian culture is often considered as a barrier in creating a communicative form of English learning. In this context, “culture” means the relationship between teacher and student, viewpoints on learning, and communication patterns. The formal relationship between teacher and student where the teacher is assumed to be a superior, omniscient figure while the students are a group of individuals who must obey and receive the teacher’s explanations as they are clearly will not create a communicative learning environment. The high-considerateness nature of Asian communicative patterns where students are not encouraged to interrupt, must respond positively, and speak in a flat intonation, also make it less likely for communicative interactions to occur in language learning. Coleman (1996) sees that the learning process in an Indonesian class is highly related to two Javanese local cultural products: shadow puppets and the greeting at a wedding reception or other celebrations. According to Coleman, the classroom English learning process is not unlike that of the shadow puppet show. The teacher is analogous to the actively-talking puppeteer (dalang) and the students are analogous to the large audience that freely relaxes, eats, drinks, and even sleeps, only to awaken and pay attention during the funny and active parts. Such is also the case with the wedding reception greeting: not much of the audience pays attention. For Coleman, English language classes in Indonesia are just rituals. What is interesting is that when Coleman interviewed several English language curriculum experts in Indonesia, including Sadtono, the experts do not consider such classroom behavior as to be a problem.
The Communicative Approach: Between Concept and Reality
This method is also called Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). The goal of teaching with this method is to use the language as a medium of communication. Learning stresses interaction, conversation, and language use rather than “about” language. Topics discussed in class usually consist of general ones familiar to students, such as TV programs, daily activities, or newspaper ads; topics could also relate to other classes a student has, such as mathematics, history, or literature. However, the topics are only used as discussion materials to practice using language as a medium of communication, not to study them.
CLT was recognized in the early 1960s and into the 70s. This learning model surfaced as a reaction to what could be called a failure of previous teaching models, namely the structural situational and audiolingual methods. This period was a period where second language teaching practitioners spoke about the “going communicative” jargon, where language teaching must be stressed on the communicative competence aspect. Additionally, CLT appeared as a response to developments in linguistics in the 70s, and at the same time a response to the need for a new method in second language teaching, expressed by a group of European linguists who were a part of the Council of Europe (Richards, 2001:37).
CLT stresses that language teaching is more than just knowing about grammar, vocabulary, and phonetics. Language learning needs to develop the communicative competence, which is the ability to use the language being learned in social interactions. Communicative competence does not mean setting aside the role of grammar, but instead it is a combining of several competencies, among them grammatical competence (covering language structure), sociolinguistic competence (covering the ability to understand the social context where the language is used, including the goal of communication), discourse competence (covering the ability to understand the message presented in the language), and strategic competence (covering the ability to create good communicative tactics to begin, respond, and end conversations).
In the teaching praxis, CLT requires several conditions: content focused on language knowledge relevant to students’ needs, a cyclical (not step-by-step) content order, division of content into several activities and tasks requiring communicative interaction, a relationship between said activities and tasks, and learning goals chosen by negotiation between students and the teacher. CLT can occur if communicative activities happen while working in pairs and groups, language input is authentic language used in everyday life, students are compelled to dare to produce genuine language and meaningful communication, and classroom tasks are oriented to prepare the student to be able to use the language outside of the classroom.
Conceptually, CLT seems to be the ideal learning model, especially if the target of foreign language teaching is to use the language. However, CLT is more suited for teaching English as a second language rather than as a foreign language. The application of the communicative approach (and thus CLT) in teaching English as a foreign language is often criticized by language teaching experts, mainly because CLT was first developed in western, English-speaking countries, which when applied in a developing country, the method becomes inappropriate for the local context. The problem encountered in the application of CLT in developing countries, specifically Asian ones, is that the method conflicts with the social, cultural, and economic conditions of the subject country. The difference in eastern and western communication style and the difference in classroom conditions, teaching facilities, and teacher quality are some examples of the particular problems faced.
Some cases of the application of CLT can be found in Asian countries. The following are such cases, including the problems:
• Deckert (2004) found that the failure of the application of CLT in the United Arab Emirates was caused by excessive teacher talk and teacher and student perceptions about effective English teaching. Observations showed that excessive teacher talk in explaining to and correcting students causes them to miss opportunities to actively participate using English in communication.
• A research by Gahin &Mayhill (2001) showed two roadblocks in the application of CLT in Egypt. First are extrinsic barriers covering economic factors which include low wages, lack of resources, and large classes without adequate facilities; pressure from parents, students, principals, and supervisors cause teachers to sacrifice an ideal CLT syllabus. Second are intrinsic barriers covering cultural factors which include passive-student traditions, negative-to-group-work attitudes, and influences of colleagues in other, teacher-dominated subjects. Furthermore, the ability of teachers, in particular 41% of English teachers of which are non-specialists lacking in pedagogical performance and speaking, as well as inconsistencies between syllabus and exams also contribute to the intrinsic barriers.
• Zhang (2004) in CLT in China: Frustrations, Misconceptions, and Clarifications, mentions a few cultural barriers in applying CLT across mainland China, such as the unsupportive environment where English usage lacks, the inability of teachers to communicate using English, and the examination system which still focuses on grammar. Even though China has now economically shifted to liberal capitalism, the remnants of communism can still be found in education, like in permanent and unchangeable class seating, which does not allow group work to happen – a requirement for CLT to occur.
• Liao (2004) adds that the Chinese local cultural context, as agreed upon by other researchers, is Confucianism, which assumes the teacher as the central figure that must be honored and that students must passively listen to the teacher. This general Asian culture prevents genuine communication from happening in class, making it a hindrance in the application of CLT.
• Miller (2000) in “Student Teachers’ Perceptions about Communicative Language Teaching Methods”, RELC Journal, Vol. 31, No. 1, concludes that the perceptions of students of English teaching academies in Taiwan regarding CLT are influenced by several factors such as their experience as student teachers, their Chinese culture, and their learning experience as language learners. Their perceptions vary, from those that view CLT positively, to those that see it negatively. Those with positive perceptions are optimistic that CLT will increase the English communicative competence of Hong Kong students because students will learn English more actively, CLT is appropriate to the goal of language learning which is as a medium of communication, CLT makes the learning atmosphere more fun, and teachers will increase students’ interest in learning English, among other reasons. On the other hand, those with negative perceptions are pessimistic that CLT is hard to apply in the Hong Kong context because classrooms are small while the number of students are large, grammar is hard to teach with CLT, CLT slows down the learning process, CLT needs preparation and teachers do not have the time, examinations do not support CLT, and students have low communication skills, among other reasons.
Eclecticism: From Method to Principle
The failure of the application of CLT in some Asian countries because of such context incompatibilities has brought up the idea that CLT has to be modified to suit the Asian, and especially Indonesian, context. As a method, some of the principles of CLT need to be modified so that it can be applied in our socio-cultural context, like small classrooms with students of various skill levels, the position of English as a foreign language, the custom of students learning in a traditional class, the custom of teachers using traditional teaching methods, the lack of quality teaching materials, and the low quality of teachers in English or English teaching skills.
What is needed to be applied in Indonesia right now is an eclectic teaching method. Gone is the era where learning is tied to only one stiff teaching method. Methods were criticized because of their claim of universality with no consideration of the uniqueness of certain groups so that they lose their context. The CLT method that is needed is one that adopts good foreign language teaching principles that result from research and observation.
Methods have been criticized for claiming universality of application as well as uniqueness in their individual properties and particular insights. … [M]ethodology should comprise putting into practice certain general principles of good language teaching derived from research and observation. (Rodgers, 2004: 2-12)
Foreign language teaching methods in classes should not be tied to just one method, but instead teachers can apply different methods at one time to adjust with their students. When a teacher wants to apply a foreign language teaching method, what matters is that they apply the principles of that method, not the method itself. Even the Grammar Translation Method sometimes needs to be applied in certain class contexts.
The following are foreign language teaching principles that teachers, writers of teaching media and materials, and even developers of foreign language curriculums can expand upon (Vale et.al. 1991).
• Students will learn a foreign language best if they are treated as individuals with their own needs and interests, they are given a chance to participate in communication by using the language in various activities, the communicative activities given to them are comprehensible and relevant to their needs and interests, they focus on various language forms and skills, as well as various learning strategies to support language acquisition, they are aware of the role, function, and nature of that language, they are given appropriate feedback regarding their achievement.
• Students will learn a foreign language well if they are given a chance to arrange their own conversations.
• Students will learn a foreign language well if they practice using the language in the cultural context of that foreign language.
By applying the above principles, teachers are challenged to apply CLT which is appropriate to our context. For example, to treat students as individuals in a large classroom consisting of 40-50 students is not an easy task. However, teachers can group them into several groups based on their English proficiency level. What was applied to Vietnam (Pham, 2005) can also be applied in the Indonesian context. Considering that one of the requirements of CLT is “real communication”, Pham thus required conditions like directing real communication to answer the teacher in an “oral symphony”, knowing that the students preferred to converse as a single large classroom instead of doing group work. Similarly, in China (Liao, 2000), the CLT model was complemented with innovations such as task-based exercises that stress teacher-assisted exercises which then impacted communicative competence. Liao adds that teaching can be started with listening exercises. Thus being the case, there is a need to increase usage of learning media such as audio, video, and pictures.
Conclusion
The communicative approach to language learning (CLT) is needed for teaching English in the Indonesian context, mainly because the approach stresses the importance of the communicative aspect of the language. However, research has shown that there are a few barriers in the implementation of the approach in several Asian countries, such that it brings up the idea that CLT should be modified to suit the local context. For the Indonesian socio-cultural context, teachers are challenged to be able to apply CLT so that it can be used within our socio-cultural context like large classrooms, the position of English as a foreign language, the custom of students learning in a traditional class, the custom of teachers using traditional teaching methods, the lack of quality teaching materials, changing curriculums, and the demands of a national examination.
References
Coleman, H. (1996) Shadow puppets and language lessons: Interpreting classroom behaviour in its cultural context in H.Coleman (Ed) Society and the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Competence-Based Curriculum. (2004) Competence Standard of English Lessons for Junior High Schools. The Indonesian Department of National Education.
Deckert, Glenn. (2004) The Communicative Approach: Addressing Frequent
Failure English Teaching Forum Journal, Vol.42, No:1 (121-143)
Gahin, G & Myhill, D. (2001) The Communicative Approach in Egypt: Exploring the Secrets of the Pyramids TEFL Journal, Volume 1, No: 2 ( 72-81)
Krashen, Stephen D. & Terrel, Tracy D. (1993) The Natural Approach. New York: Pergamon Press
Liao, Xiao Q. (2000) How Communicative Language Teaching Became Acceptable in Secondary Schools in China. The TESL Journal, Vol. 6, No:10
Miller, Lindsay. (2000) Student Teachers’ Perceptions about Communicative Language Teaching Methods RELC Journal, Vol. 31, No:1 (1-22)
National Education Ministry’s Regulation No: 22. (2006) about standard of contents for primary and secondary education
National Education Ministry’s Regulation No: 23. (2006) about standard of graduates’ competence for primary and secondary education
National Education Ministry’s Regulation No: 24. (2006) about the implementation of Ministry’s Regulation No.22 and 23 (2006)
Pham, Hoa. H. (2005) “Imported” Communicative Language Teaching: Implications
for Local Teachers English Teaching Forum, Vol 43. No: 4 (2-13)
Rogers, Ted. (2003) Methodology in the New Millennium English Teaching Forum. Vol. 38, No: 2 (1-14)
Vale, D., Scarino, A. & McKay P. (1991) The Eight Principles of Language Learning in Pocket all : a users’ guide to the teaching of languages and ESL. Carlton: Curriculum Corporation
Zhang, L. (2004) CLT in China: Frustration, Misconceptions, and Clarifications Hwa Kang Journal of TEFL Vol X, No: 9
Zhenhui, R., (2001). Matching Teaching Styles with Learning Styles in East Asian Contexts The TESL Journal, Vol. VII, No: 7

Top 5 tips to help your child learn English at home

Here are our five top tips:

Picture book time

This method can open up a whole new world to young children learning English. Choosing the right books can be tricky, but it is important to understand the benefits of having this one-to-one interaction with your child. Picture books provide parents and children with an obvious reason for switching from their home language to speaking English. Parents who lack confidence in English find that the fixed text of a picture book is a useful prop.

Songs and rhymes

A fun way to pick up words in English, through repetition of rhymes and songs. You can put together a playlist with songs that can be played over and over again for your child to become familiar with certain words.

Reading aloud

Practice reading the picture book aloud and decide how you are going to bring the story to life. Introduce some of the new words before reading the book and be prepared to whisper translations for difficult words until your child gets used to them!

English corner or English table

You can set up an area of the house that provides a focus for anything related to English sessions: games, a mini-library of picture books, displays of English culture such as pictures and flags, displays of drawings, home-made books or craft work.

Celebrate family birthdays and festivals

Making birthday cards is a fun activity. Birthdays and family festivals are good occasions to give small shows and to play games with family and friends who also speak English.

It is essential to have fun while helping your child learn a new language. You can find many more tips on our LearnEnglish kids site.

INDONESIAN BASIC EDUCATION CURRICULUM CURRENT CONTENT AND REFORM

Agus Dharma, PhD

Board Member from Indonesia

Background

1.        The vision of Indonesian education is the realization of educational system as a solid and authoritative social institution to empower Indonesian citizen to become intelligent persons that are able and proactive to stand facing the ever changing challenges of the era. They are bright (spiritually, emotionally, socially, intellectually, and kinesthetically) and competitive citizens. The educational system encompasses all form, type, and level of education: formal, non-formal, and in-formal.

2.        Basic education in Indonesia provides nine years learning experience in both formal and non-formal education for 7- 15 school age children. The goal of basic education is to develop learners’ basic intelligence, knowledge, personality, noble character, as well as skills to live independently and to continue their education.

3.        Basic education is conducted in elementary school and junior high school (both public and religious type of schooling called madrasah = madrasah ibtidaiyah for elementary school and madrasah tsanawiyah for junior high school). While public elementary and junior high scholl are managed based on the policies established by the Ministry of National Education (MONE) and operationally controlled by otonomous local/district/town administration, the madrasahs are managed by the Ministry of Religious Affairs through its local (district/town) offices troughout Indonesia.

4.        The nine years basic education is compulsory. At present the number of student attending elementary and junior high school is 7.864.650 and 3.839.023 consecutively and the number of elementary school is 44.154 and junior high school is 12.932 (public and private). Net participation rate at elementary school is about 95% and gross participation rate at junior high is 92%. This include students attending the madrasah. The total number of teachers at elementary and junior high scholl (public and private) is 1.531.193.

5.        The successful implementation of basic education program is, among other things, relied heavily on qualified teachers in managing their students learning experience based on well developed curriculum.

6.        Traditionally the MONE played a central role of curriculum development in Indonesia. Schools (teachers) involvement played only small operational portion of the role. The teachers were supposed to go along with all instructions neatly prepared guidance of curriculum implementation by the MONE. The main task specified to teachers in curriculum planning was to merely prepare lesson plan of a subject based on implementation and technical instruction. The old curriculum is subject (materials) and teacher oriented regardless learners potential, development stage, needs, interest, and environment.

7.        Since 2006 (in decentralization era) Indonesia has been implementing competency base school level curriculum based on national standard of education (content and competence standards in particular) considering the goal of a certain level of education, learning experiences that should be provided to achieve the goal, the methods used to manage the learning experiences, and methods of evaluation to measure the goal achievement. The new curriculum is learners’ and competency oriented and implemented by paying attention to learners potential, development stage, needs, interest, and environment.

8.        The new policy on curriculum, among other things, is intended to empower teachers to develop down to earth learning activities relevant to the learners’ need, actual condition of the school, as well as the necessity to link it to the environment. Central Government provides guidance in developing competency base school level curriculum. The Curriculum Center at the Office of Educational Research and Development of the MONE helps the schools develop their own curriculum by providing curriculum models that can be implemented at school level. Training centers of the MONE have been conducting training sessions for school principals and teachers in developing competency base school level curriculum.

Legal Framework of School Curriculum

1.        The National Education System Act (No 20/2003) provides legal framework of curriculum implemented in Indonesia. The Minister of National Education decrees No 22 and 23/2006 establish the content standard and graduate competences standard in developing curriculum. The standards are established by the Office of National Standard of Education.

2.        The Act defines curriculum as a set of plan with regard to the objectives, content, and learning materials as well as the methods employed as guideline in conducting learning activities in order to achieve the goal of a certain education.

3.        The curriculum of primary (basic) and secondary education must include religious education, citizenship, languages, mathematics, natural science, social science, art and culture, physical education and sport, skills/vocational education, and local content. The curriculum is basically developed  based on diversified principles related to educational unit, regional potential, and the learners.

4.        The curriculum is developed according to the level of education in the frame of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia in the efforts to improve religious faith, character; learners’ potential, intelligence, and interest; the variety of regional potential and environment; the demand of regional and national development; the employment demand, the development of science, knowledge, technology, and art; religion, the dynamic of global development, national unity and values.

5.        Basic framework and structure of primary and secondary education curriculum are established by the Central Government. Primary education curriculum is developed in accordance with its relevance by individual school (or alike)/madrasah committee (school level curriculum) coordinated and supervised by the district office of education  (local government) and district office of the Ministry of Religious Affairs.

Basic Framework of Curriculum and Competency

1.        Subject Cluster and Scope

a.     Religion and noble character  

This subject is intended to develop learners to become religiously devoted individuals who posses noble character. The noble characters consist of ethics, good conduct in life, or morality as the realization of religious education.

b.    Citizenship and personality

This subject is intended to develop learners’ awareness and knowledge with regard to their status, rights, and obligations in community, state, and nation; as well as to improve their quality as human being. The awareness and knowledge include nationality, spirit and patriotism in defending their nation, appreciation of human rights, nation diversity, environment conservation, gender equality, democracy, social responsibility, as well as the promotion of behaviors against corruption, collusion, and nepotism.

c.     Science and technology

Science and technology at elementary school is intended to introduce, react, and appreciate science and technology, as well as to instill habits of critical, creative, and independent scientific thinking and behavior. Science and technology at junior high school is intended to develop basic competency in knowledge and science as well as to enhance the learners’ habit of scientific thinking critically, creatively, and independently.           

d.    Aesthetics

This subject cluster is intended to develop learners’ sensitivity as well as ability to express and appreciate beauty and harmony. The ability to appreciate and express beauty and harmony consists of appreciation and expression, both in individual life that enable learners to enjoy and be grateful of life and in community that enable them to create togetherness and harmony.

e.     Physical, sport, and health

This subject cluster at elementary school is intended to develop learners’ physical potential as well as to implant the spirit of sportsmanship and awareness of healthy life. This subject cluster at junior high school is intended to enhance the learners’ physical potential as well as to strengthen the habits of sportive and healthy life.

2.    Curriculum Structure of Elementary and Junior High School

Curriculum structure of elementary school includes learning content learned in six years education started from Grade I until Grade VI and three years at junior high school started from Grade VII to Grade IX. The curriculum structure is developed based on graduate competency standard and subjects competency standard by considering the following guideline.

a.     Elementary and junior school curriculum consists of 8 and 10 subjects consecutively, local content, and self development. Local content is curricular activities in order to develop competency adjusted with unique local characteristics and potential, including local advantages where the content cannot be clustered into the existing subjects. Local content is determined by individual educational unit (school or alike). Self development is not a subject that must be taught solely by teacher. Self development is intended to provide opportunity for learners to develop and express themselves corresponding to each learner’s need, talent, and interest. Self development activities could be facilitated by counselor, teacher, or other educational staffs that can be conducted in the forms of extra-curricular activities. Self development activities, among other things, can be performed through counseling services related to learners’ personal problems, social life, learning, and career development.

b.    The content of natural and social science at elementary and junior high school is integrated natural and social science.

c.     Learning process at Grade I, II, and III is conducted through thematic approach, while at Grade IV, V, and VI is carried out through subject approach.

d.    Average learning hour for Grade I, II, and III is 27 and Grade IV, V, and VI is 32 a week, while average learning hour at junior high school is 32. Educational unit could add maximum 4 learning hours per week. The length of one learning hour is 35 minutes at elementary school and 40 minutes at junior high school.

f.     Effective learning period in one year of schooling is 34-38 weeks for both elementary school and junior high school divided into two semesters.

General Principles of Curriculum Development

1.        Focused on learners’ potential, development, needs, and interest; and their environment

Curriculum is developed based on the principle that learners have their own unique potential to develop their competence to become religiously devoted, bright, competitive, and responsible citizens. It is, therefore, the development of this potential is done based on the learners potentials and develomental needs. The learners are supposed to be the central attention of learning activities (learners oriented curriculum).

2.        Varied and integrated

Curriculum is developed by keeping in mind the diversity of learners characteristic, geography condition, level and type of education, as well as appreciating differences in religion, ethnics, culture, tradition, socio-economics status, and gender.  Curriculum must contain required subjects, local content, and integrated self development and is developed in a meaningful and right intersubjects integration.

3.        Responsive to the development of science, knowledge, technology, and art

Curriculum is developed based on awareness that science, knowledge, technology, and art is developing dynamically. Therefore, the curriculum spirit and content are required to provide learners with learning experience that enable them to keep up with and utilize science, knowledge, technology, and art development.

4.        Relevant to the need of life

Curriculum is developed by involving the stakeholders to ensure its relevance to the needs of life which include social life, business, and employment. It is, therefore, educational institutions have to include the development of personal, thinking, social, academic, and vocational skills.

5.        Comprehensive and continued

Curriculum content includes the whole dimensions of competences and subjects that are planned and presented continously through all educational level. It means, therefore, that the same subject may be presented at different level, but with diverse depth and scope.

6.        Life long learning

Curricullum is directed toward the process of learners’ development, aculturation, and empowerment in the frame of life long learning. The curricullum reflects the interrelation of formal, non-formal, and informal education by paying attention to the ever changing environment condition and demand.

7.        Balancing national and regional interests

Curriculum is developed by paying attention to the national and regional interest in order to develop a well balanced life in community, nation, and state. National and regional interests must be kept in balance on a par with the motto of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia: unity through diversity.

Principles of Curriculum Implementation

1.    Curriculum implementation is based on the learners’ potential, development, and condition to master useful competency. Learners must have quality educational services and opportunity to freely, dynamically, and comfortably express themselves.

2.    Curriculum is implemented by maintaining five learning pillars: (a) learning to be faithful and devoted to God, (b) learning to understand and fully comprehend, (c) learning to be able to perform effectively, (d) learning to live with and be useful for other people, and (e) learning to identify and develop own identity through active, creative, and contented learning process.  

3.    Curriculum implementation enables learners to have remedial, enriched, and/or accelerated educational program on a par with learners’ potential, developmental stage, and condition by paying attention to learners’ integrated personal development containing spirituality, individuality, community, and morality.

4.    Curriculum is implemented in situations where there are mutually respectful, close, open, and warm relationship between learners and educators by keeping in mind the principles of good modeling, motivating, and empowering.

5.    Curriculum is implemented by employing multi-strategy and multi-media approach, sufficient learning and technology sources, and by utilizing immediate environment as learning source.

6.    Curriculum is implemented by utilizing natural, socio-cultural, and regional sources for successful educational programs containing useful subjects in optimal learning process.

7.    Curriculum consisting of all components of subjects’ competency, local content, and self development is managed in appropriate and sufficient balance, interrelation, and continuity between grade, type, and level of education.

Closing Remark

1.        The world is changing and so is educational endeavor to empower individuals to develop their potentials to live responsible and healthy life so as to be able to perform independently and cooperatively and help each other in harmony.

2.        Curriculum serves as the substance that gives the soul to learning process. Curriculum should be primarily based on the consideration of promoting learners’ interest in identifying and developing their full potential.

3.        Nationally established curriculum in Indonesia has experienced several changes. The new curriculum has been implemented nationally since 2006. The so called competency base school level curriculum is developed based on content and competency standards. It is in line with the implementation of educational policy regarding school base management.

4.        The successful implementation of the new policy on curriculum depends on the readiness of all parties involved in learning process at operational level, especially the teachers.

5.        Central government (Ministry of National Education) has been conducting various programs to assist schools in developing, implementing, and evaluating their own curriculum by taking advantage of advanced information and communication technology.

6.        It is necessary to conduct evaluation research in order to see the effectiveness of the new curriculum related to the learners’ achievement measured through multi-dimensional approach.

---

* Presented in Roundtable Discussion in Retrac Governing Board Meeting at Institut Aminuddin Baki, Genting Highland, Malaysia, 27 August 2008. Agus Dharma is Director of the Personnel Education and Training Center, Ministry of National Education, Republic of Indonesia.