Curriculum in for a trimming to cut the workload of students

By Stevie Emilia

JAKARTA (JP): After working as a teacher for 35 years, Ratno Hadi still thinks his job as an elementary school teacher is not easy, and carries huge responsibilities.

He has to make his students understand every subject he teaches. Unfortunately, the current 1994 curriculum is not on his side.

"The curriculum aims too high... (it is) very idealistic, but difficult to achieve," said the teacher from the state-run SDN Selong 03 in South Jakarta. He teaches a range of subjects to the sixth graders, ranging from math to bahasa Indonesia.

He drew attention to some "pointless" materials, such as those used for math.

He said previously students could easily understand the subject because it took practical examples from daily living, such as those drawn from trading.

"But these days, elementary school students are taught about curves or lines, which are hard for them to grasp," said Ratno, who, also teaches in the afternoon at a private elementary school SD Budi Wanita in Central Jakarta.

He also questioned why third graders should learn about stars, or other objects from space in the subject earth and space.

"If you read the questions, you'll find that the subject's questions are too difficult for the students to understand. They might answer the questions as they like... I think it would be better for the subject to be taught to fifth graders instead."

Just like other teachers, he is in a rush every year to meet the curriculum's target, such as to finish teaching all six graders' subjects two months prior to the final exam.

"We find no problem with it (the target). We hold a course two days a week to help six graders catch up," Ratno said.

The number of complaints regarding the heavy curriculum imposed on elementary to high school students have recently mounted.

Some parents have complained about their children's workload, both at home and at school. Among the complaints were the great number of subjects taught at schools, substantial amounts of homework and the long study hours.

For example, a second grader must learn a range of subjects, including the state ideology Pancasila, Bahasa Indonesia, math, local language, religion, health and physical exercises and art and creativity.

As the student moves to the next grade, he or she must also learn English, social sciences and natural sciences, further contributing to their heavy workload.

Education expert H.A.R. Tilaar acknowledged the heavy burden imposed by the present curriculum, which he referred as "too good" leading to difficulty for teachers to implement it.

"But in my opinion, it's not the curriculum that matters. The most important thing is to prepare those who will execute the curriculum, like teachers. Are they ready?" asked the professor from the Jakarta Teachers Training Institute and the University of Indonesia.

Education, he said, was a determining factor to ensure the country's success. Unfortunately, it did not receive the support it needed in terms of funds and resources, he said.

He contributed Malaysia and Singapore's strong governmental support as the reason for their successful educational system. "That's what we don't have," Tilaar said.

He suggested the creation of teaching materials that were related to the students' daily activities, such as the need for discipline.

"In a bus, one is required to enter from the bus' front door and get out from the back door. But every day, we see people get in and get out from the front door. This happens because discipline is not being taught at school. We prefer to teach complicated matters instead...," Tilaar said.

Head of the Jakarta Ministry of Education and Culture Alwi Nurdin blamed teachers inadequate teaching techniques.

"If the present curriculum is considered too strenuous, maybe (there's something wrong) with its implementation ... Maybe it's the teachers who don't have adequate teaching techniques, making them think that all materials in every subjects should be mastered by students," Alwi told The Jakarta Post.

He said a subject should be taught based on its purposes and available time. "Good teachers will evaluate each subject, finding out the purpose behind each subject and determining the essential materials. (The correct method) is not by asking students to memorize page after page. It's not like that."

But he believed that the present learning process would not waste students' time. "Only there's a need for teachers to evaluate (the material), to learn which learning material is essential... "

Revision

The ministry is currently revising the curriculum in stages to meet the present changes and future demands.

The ministry's Director General of Basic and Middle Level Education Indra Djati Sidi said the program to revise the 1994 curriculum started last year.

The first stage of the revision is scheduled for implementation in the 1999/2000 school term, which starts on July 19.

"We are only revising the curriculum, not completely changing it. If we completely changed it, it means that we have to change all the books and prepare the teachers. We're not ready for that yet," he told the Post by phone.

"Besides, it will take sometime (to make the changes)."

Although the curriculum has not been completely replaced, irrelevant and overlapping teaching materials would be dropped, he said.

For instance, subjects that are taught at both elementary school and junior high school will be scrapped.

"What we're trying to maintain here is continuity and a compatible teaching process," Indra said.

He expected the streamlining of teaching materials would ease the current burden experienced by students and teachers. "If we completely change the curriculum, they will get confused."

He said one thing was a certainty: students' homework load would be reduced.

"If at the moment students have to do homework for four subjects... it's too much. It means that there's no coordination between teachers. In my opinion, two hours a day for homework is enough. If it's more than that, it will not give students time to interact with their community, their friends and especially with their own family."

When asked whether the problem resulted from teachers' efforts to meet the curriculum target, he said: "Targets or goals are good. The problem is, how teachers try to meet the targets. (It requires) careful planning (and) consideration of the students' ability."

Tilaar praised the endeavor to revise the current curriculum in stages, saying he understood the difficulties of changing curriculum quicky. But he urged the ministry not to simply boast about the plan without planning its implementation.

"Don't just talk. We've seen too many times already that many plans look good on paper, but lack careful preparation for their implementation.

"The most important thing is to prepare those who will deliver the curriculum, in this case, the teachers. It doesn't matter if it's the 1994 curriculum or not, the most important thing is that those who will perform it are ready."