{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1668185,
        "msgid": "foreign-workers-and-the-direction-of-literacy-1775775041",
        "date": "2026-04-10 05:10:00",
        "title": "Foreign Workers and the Direction of Literacy",
        "author": "Riky Wismiron",
        "source": "MEDIA_INDONESIA",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Social Policy",
        "summary": "The results of the 2025 Academic Ability Test (TKA) for high school students reveal significant shortcomings in Indonesian language education, with average scores hovering around mediocre levels despite daily language use, highlighting the need for a shift from rote memorisation to critical thinking and text interpretation. Regional disparities are evident, with western areas outperforming eastern regions like Papua, underscoring issues in the conventional 'banking system' of education that treats students as passive recipients. Reforms must integrate oral and written skills through collaborative efforts involving families, schools, communities, and the government to foster true literacy and address these educational inequities.",
        "content": "<p>Speaking the language every day does not automatically make us adept\nat interpreting it. This fact is revealed by the results of the Academic\nAbility Test (TKA) for high school\/SMK and equivalent levels, which\nindicate that the quality of Indonesian language learning still leaves\nmuch to be done. On a scale of 0\u2013100, the Indonesian language subject\nrecorded an average score that is merely \u2018average\u2019.<\/p>\n<p>This is ironic amid daily language practices. Education should be a\nprocess of liberating consciousness that lifts learners from \u2018magical\nunawareness\u2019 to \u2018critical awareness\u2019 (Freire, 1970).<\/p>\n<p>The TKA results should be read as an educational alarm. Language\nlearning is not merely about mastering forms, but further about the\nability to reason and interpret texts. Restructuring classroom practices\nto policy directions cannot be delayed so that the perspective of TKA as\nan annual numerical evaluation ritual can be mitigated.<\/p>\n<p>THE IRONY OF TKA<\/p>\n<p>The release of 2025 TKA data by the Ministry of Education provides\nfacts worth reflecting on. The Special Region of Yogyakarta recorded an\naverage of 65.89, surpassing Jakarta at 63.39. Visually, Jakarta\u2019s\nchildren live in an environment almost entirely in Indonesian.\nMeanwhile, Yogyakarta\u2019s children are familiar with Javanese from an\nearly age in their daily lives.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, closeness to language does not necessarily correlate\ndirectly with proficiency in understanding texts. Frequency of use is\napparently not the main determinant. Perhaps the issue is not what\nlanguage is used, but how it is taught and lived. Language used without\nprocessing will not grow into reasoning power.<\/p>\n<p>The gap in disparities becomes even clearer when reading the TKA\nresults map from west to east. In eastern Indonesia, the highest\nIndonesian language score is in Southwest Papua with an average of\n52.19. Conversely, the lowest is in Papua Pegunungan at 44.26. Compare\nwith the west. Riau Islands recorded the highest average of 58.07, while\nNorth Sumatra, the lowest in this area, is still at 53.19. In other\nwords, the lowest score in the west is about 8.93 points higher than the\nlowest in the east, or a difference of around 20.2%. This means the\neastern region is still lagging.<\/p>\n<p>BANKING EDUCATION SYSTEM<\/p>\n<p>Conventional learning still dominates classrooms. Learning still\npositions students passively. Knowledge is treated as something already\nformed to be \u2018deposited\u2019 by the teacher and \u2018stored\u2019 by the\nstudents.<\/p>\n<p>In learning practices, material is presented through student\nworksheets that demand short and uniform answers. The teacher delivers\nthe topic, students take notes, then work on questions with a single\nreference to the textbook. This pattern actually reduces space for\nquestioning and discussion and demands only material completion.<\/p>\n<p>These practices show that language is treated as an object to be\nmastered, not as a tool for thinking and understanding experiences. As a\nresult, the ability to repeat information stands out more than the\nproficiency to interpret texts. This kind of formula is known as the\nbanking system of education (Paulo Freire, 1970). The teacher plays a\ncentral role as the depositor of knowledge, while students are\npositioned as empty containers. This one-way learning formula has taken\nroot in most of our classrooms.<\/p>\n<p>The impact is reflected in TKA achievements. Students may be\naccustomed to using spoken language, but they struggle to reason through\nreading content and draw conclusions. As long as learning relies on\nmemorisation, any evaluation risks only recording the same problems.<\/p>\n<p>ORAL AND WRITTEN<\/p>\n<p>The difference between students\u2019 oral and written language abilities\nalso affects TKA achievements. The use of vernacular is often equated\nwith full language mastery, whereas fluency in speaking does not always\ncorrelate with proficiency in reading academic texts.<\/p>\n<p>The use of spoken language in writing often occurs in social media\nposts. Unfortunately, awareness to switch to standard language in\nacademic and formal contexts is minimal, thus considering them the\nsame.<\/p>\n<p>This difference is also intertwined with language traditions in\nIndonesia. In western regions, literacy is relatively more rooted\nthrough reading and writing habits. Conversely, in some eastern regions,\noral traditions grow stronger as the main medium for knowledge\ntransmission.<\/p>\n<p>This linguistic ecology difference creates disparities in TKA scores.\nStudents in western regions will more easily solve academic questions\nthan those in eastern regions. This issue cannot be read simply as a\ndifference in education quality alone. TKA more records written language\nproficiency within the formal school framework, while oral reasoning\npotential and communication skills in oral traditions have not received\nadequate space.<\/p>\n<p>Worse still, language learning still emphasises memorising rules.\nOrality has not been utilised as a bridge to written literacy, while\nreading and writing are treated as technical skills. As a result,\nstudents rich in ideas and fluent in speaking actually struggle to\nexpress them in written texts.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, improving language learning is not enough by fixing\nquestions or raising assessment standards. More fundamentally, building\nlearning that integrates oral and written abilities in a balanced\nway.<\/p>\n<p>COLLABORATION TOGETHER<\/p>\n<p>TKA Indonesian language achievements should not drag us into blaming\nanyone. The numbers are not a final verdict, but a portrait of\ninterconnected policies, learning practices, and academic culture.<\/p>\n<p>Improving language quality demands collaborative work involving the\nfour centres of education: family, school, community, and state.\nLanguage grows at home, is honed at school, tested<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/foreign-workers-and-the-direction-of-literacy-1775775041",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}