ENGLISH EDUCATION IN INDONESIA

      

 ENGLISH EDUCATION IN INDONESIA

 This writing deals with the teaching of English for Indonesian Senior High Schools covering a span of 63 years from post independence in 1945 right through to 2008. The country has already implemented nine curricula known as the 1950 curriculum, 1958, 1962, 1968, 1975, 1984, 1994, 2004 and the current one being the 2006 curriculum (Bire, 2003; 2007). When Indonesia first took control of its own education system in 1945, almost all study programs at every level were Dutch oriented. It took five years before Indonesia managed to develop its own educational orientation. Interestingly enough, Indonesia people throughout the archipelago speak and understand English rather than Dutch despite the reality that the nation was colonized by the Dutch for 350 years.

The pertinent question in this writing is whether or not there is a case of mismatch in terms of objective and outcome of teaching/learning English as a foreign language in Indonesia. The investigative question is applicable to all the implemented curricula from the 1950 curriculum right through to the 2004 curriculum. The current curriculum, 2006, is excluded in the discussion in this 2009/2010 academic year (BNSP, 2006:iii). The materials highlighted are those designed for SMA in relation to: the objective of TEFL, the content of English being taught as a foreign language, methods of TEFL as well as the evaluation recommended in the curricula. The final examination conducted in May 2008 marks the end of the implementation 2004 curriculum.

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULA ACROSS DECADES

There are four major points to be critically investigated in the discussion about the ‘how’ English language being taught as a foreign language in high schools in Indonesia (SMA). They are objective, contents, methods and evaluation. For every curriculum under investigation each of these four points will be highlighted. The success or failure of Teaching/Learning English as a foreign language in SMA will be pinpointed in the discussion on each of these four major points.

The 1950 and the 1958 SMA English Curricula

Objective: The 1950 and the 1958 curricula are similarly considered to be old curricula and both equally implement similar approaches to teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) in Indonesian High School. That being the case both curricula are grouped together under the same sub-heading for the purpose of discussion in this paper. English as a foreign language taught within the context of Indonesian education system in 1950 and 1958 were stated in the 1950 and 1958 curricula (Bire, 1996). These curricula were planned in Jakarta, the Capital of Indonesia, and subsequently implemented at high school (SMA) throughout the country. The objective outcome of the TEFL within these curricula as deduced from teaching/learning materials in the said curricula is to enhance reading skills. The enhancement of reading skills as intended in these curricula is to help Indonesian students to be able to read books written in English language.

Contents: The old curricula, the 1950 and the 1958, consisted of teaching materials which are basically lessons on English grammar. Teachers of English language throughout the country have freedom to develop their own lesson plans on the basis of items listed in the curricula. The main difference between the 1950 curriculum and the 1958 curriculum is that the later contains list of items to be taught where as the former does not.

Method: Method as a deliberate adopted strategy to achieve objective outcome also plays its role in the field of teaching English as a foreign language. There are various methods that could be used in teaching a language and in these curricula the teachers of English as a foreign language in Indonesia used a ‘grammar-translation method’.

…. The method of teaching English used by these instructors though it varied somewhat among them, tended to emphasis the formal study of grammar and the translation of written English passage into the local instructional language which was either Dutch or Indonesian (Murray et al. 1968: 289).

The statement above indicates that the method of teaching English as a foreign language in Indonesia during the period of 1950 and 1958 curricula was grammar-translation oriented. Grammar-translation method was the chosen method to achieve the objective outcome of the curricula which was basically ‘reading oriented’ namely to help Indonesian students to be able to read books written in English.

Evaluation: Evaluation at the end of study period, testing students’ English language comprehension after three years of study, reveals that grammar translation method had been the dominant factor in the whole process (Bire, 1996). Even the evaluation does not match with the objective of teaching.

The 1962 and 1968 Curricula

The 1962 and the 1968 curricula were known as ‘new curriculum’ and ‘a new modified curriculum’ respectively. Due to the fact that both curricula were labeled within the same category, ‘new’, and both possess strikingly similar process of application, these curricula are grouped together under one sub-heading for the purpose of discussion in this paper.

Objective: The 1962 and the 1968 curricula known respectively as ‘new curriculum’ and ‘a new modified curriculum’ have the same objective as that of 1950 and 1958 curricula discussed earlier, namely the enhancement of reading skills. It is intended to help Indonesian graduates to be able to read 90% of books and other materials printed in English that are housed in the libraries throughout the country. This objective outcome is specifically stated in the 1968 curriculum (Depdikbud R.I., a: Bire, 1966).

Contents: During the period of the implementation of the1962 and 1968 curricula, the government provided text books for high schools. All departments are required to use the materials made available as laid out in the text books (Bire, 1966:103). It was clearly stated that all high school students in all streams, -Humanities, Arts and Science- are required to use the same text books and materials provided by the government. Materials contained in the text books, however, were basically structure oriented. Thus, even though the objective is to enhance reading skills the materials provided were basically structure oriented and therefore, indicates a case mismatch.

Methods: In order to achieve the goals of teaching English in Indonesia, the government preferential option was to favor the oral or the audio lingual approach for TEFL (Bire, 1966:103). Unfortunately, there was no text books yet made available to correspond this methodological approach, this approach was tried only at the senior high school level (Tjokrosujoso, 1944:4). When the text books became available, it was apparent that materials contained in the text books were apparently structure and reading oriented.

For the 1998 curriculum in particular where English language as a subject was made obligatory, the curriculum mentioned English as a tool to develop and deepen the students’ knowledge that aimed at:

a. Educating students to be careful, diligent and systematic and to enable them to use active and passive English for social and cultural department.

b. Helping students to continue their study at a higher educational institution and enable them to write and read English books; reading skill, however, was the main aim.

c. Making oral and written international communications easy (Depdikbud R.I., a, 1968: 29).

The quotation above indicates that both the 1962 an the 1968 curricula implement what is known as Direct Method, often referred to as Salatiga Approach.

Evaluation: The evaluation process within this curriculum was based on structure and reading oriented (Bire, 1966). This is due to the fact that the teachers at schools throughout the country were products of the old fashioned curriculum, grammar translation methodological approach. Naturally the way they teach would reflect and replicate what they themselves have learnt. It is noticeable that there were some teachers who chose to use direct method. However, they were faced with difficulties at the end of academic year because materials for final examination was based on structure and reading oriented.

The 1975 Curriculum

The 1975 curriculum was endorsed after the evaluation on the previous Indonesian national education program. The endorsement in the government policy was made with the intention to increase the quality of education nationally, an innovational measure in the educational system. This is to respond to the demands and immediate needs within the community. This curriculum was introduced to produce graduates who would be equipped with necessary skills and abilities relevant and appropriately to respond the most urgent and immediate needs within the community. There are five important factors of consideration behind the introduction of the 1975 curriculum:

1.         The result of the analysis of the National Education assessment led the Department of Education and Culture to revise the direction of national education.

2.         The policy of Indonesian Government for National education as stated in the broad outline of the state policy.

3.         The existence of new ideas during the first Five Years Development plan inspired the educational system.

4.         Innovation for efficient and effective teaching-learning learning system.

5.         The complaints for the society about the quality of the school graduates

(The General Guide of the 1975 Curriculum in Rudiyanto, 1988)

Convincing arguments that underpin the idea that necessitates the introduction of the 1975 national curriculum were clearly stated in the curriculum itself as a package. Its explanatory manual (Rudiyanto, 1988, Nababan, 1984, Hartoyo, 2006) indicates that the development of the curriculum was intended to enhance Indonesian Educational quality in terms of the students’ ability, knowledge and desire to pursue further and higher education in science and technology relevant for their future field of employment.

Objective: The fundamental aim of teaching English as a foreign language in high schools in Indonesia as clearly stated in the 1975 curriculum itself is to enhance students’ reading ability (Depdikbud, b 1975). It corresponds with the points elucidated by Tomlison (1987:1): “(1). To enable students to develop a reading competence appropriate for the study in the tertiary education and (2). To give students working knowledge of English” This objective was adopted as stated in the light of the importance of English language as the primary foreign language in Indonesia dominating trades, transportation, foreign affairs, science and technology. Alishahbana (1990:315) stated:

Meanwhile after World War II through the unification of the world by the fast development of air transportation, tremendous expansion of electro-communication and by the spread of printed materials, the English language has spread tremendous as never before and become the first obligatory foreign language in high schools in many parts of the world.

This has been the case in Indonesia since the independence in 1945 where English was taught as the firt obligatory foreign language in Indonesian high schools (Alishahbana, 1990:320). Furthermore, Nababan (1984:162), in quoting Ministerial Decree number 096/1967, stated that the decree in question makes a specific reference to the function and objective of teaching English in Indonesian High Schools exactly the same as that deliberated by Alishahbana. However, as observed by Nababan, the expressed objective contained in the ministerial decree was not conducive to the desired objective outcome due to the fact that greater and primary emphasis was still on ‘grammar/ structure oriented’. Hence, concerning the functions and objectives of English language teaching in secondary schools it only states that the objectives of English language teaching are:

1.Effective reading ability;

2. Ability to understand spoken English;

3.writing ability;

4.Speaking ability. (Nababan, 1984, 162).

Contents: Teaching materials in the 1975 curriculum were prepared in a way that they are contextual and reflect the language level of the students. Each individual teacher is advised to follow the sequential order of topical materials laid out in the curriculum and to match each sub-topics of the lesson plan with his/her specific defined objective and or interest. The curriculum materials were described as follows:

1.      Information in Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian language) about English grammar and vocabulary.

2.      Focused on controlled practice of structure

3.      Focus on language form

4.      Text contrived to illustrate language points

5.      Activities made as easy as possible for the learner

6.      Many activities testing the practice points of a unit

7.      No use made of authentic materials

8.      No materials designed to develop communication skills

9.      No discovery activities

10.  Focus on increasing the students knowledge of perspective grammar and vocabulary

11.  Translation frequently used as aid to learning

12.  Most English texts and examples in semi-formal, neutral expository style

13.  Topic and linguistic content entirely prescribed by the curriculum

14.  No existence reading or listening (Tomlinson, 1987: 3)

On the basis of the description above it is evidently apparent that English language teaching materials in the 1975 curriculum were basically Reading and Structure oriented (Bire, 1993: 11)

Methods: The teaching of English as a foreign language using the 1975 curriculum follows the ‘Eclectic approach’, with special emphasis on the improving of the efficiency of teaching learning process (Rudiyanto, 1988: 52). It means that teachers are required to use a combination of related methods of TEFL. In addition to this, Rudiyanto claims that the curriculum only provides guidelines and but not the details of how to implement the approach. In normal practice in the curriculum would have the following methodological are features:

1.      Eclectric

2.      Mixtures of Audio-Lingual, Grammar Translation, Structuralist and Situational Approaches

3.      Focus on accuracy

4.      Rule and practice oriented

5.      Focus on formal learning

6.      Teacher centered

7.      Learning by listening and reading information about the language

8.      No exposure to authentic English

9.      Frequent correction in all lessons

10.  No teaching of communication skills

11.  Frequent use of choral reading aloud and choral drilling

12.  Focus on class testing

13.  Focus on remember knowledge and on imitation (Tomlinson, 1987: 2)

The above reference shows that each teacher tends to interpret the eclectic approach from his or her point of view, knowledge and experience. However, due to the lack of details and instruction about the ‘how’ to implement the eclectic approach, the nation was not able to establish uniformity of lesson plan and strategy of delivery, resulting in each teachers making his/her own strategy consisting of any combination of some of the methodological features stated above.

Evaluation: The 1975 curriculum recommended the type of test that measures the students’ achievements. For this aim, the teachers are advised to follow the evaluation guidelines provided by the department of education and culture, consisting of the elements of the purpose of evaluation andthe kinds of evaluation to be used. The recommended kinds of evaluation are the form of formative, summative, placement and diagnostic tests that comprise the cognitive domains of recall, comprehension and application (Rudiyanto, 1988). Furthermore, tests could be conducted in the form of written essays or objective test which is conducted either orally or in the written form.

The objective test was the highly recommended test in the curriculum. This is varied in form from the multiple choice test, true false statements, matching statements, short answer to question test and completion item test. In relation to the final evaluation, should majority of the students fail, (60% or more) the lesson must be repeated for all students. If there are less than 60% of the students fail, only those who fail may be required to repeat the lesson individually. But if more that 75% of the students passed, then those who fail within that particular group may continue to take next lesson with the provision that they will be given extra attention by the teacher (Depdikbud R.I.b, 1975). The final grade is gained by the average of formative and summative test results.

During the period of the implementation of the 1975 curriculum both teachers and students became concerned about the stark reality that the level of English proficiency at schools and at universities throughout the country was inadequate, fall short from the objective outcome set out by the government policy. This concern and awareness led to the development of the 1984 curriculum. Among the main critics of the 1975curriculum was the government Department of Education And Culture (Depdikbud):

Dalam kurikulum 1975, ternyata struktur yang menjadi pusat perhatian dan inti kurikulum. Semua penyajian pelajaran berkisar sekitar struktur itu. Untuk mewujudkan pendekatan komunikatif diatas, dalam kurikulum ini penguasaan/ dominasi struktur dilepaskan dan bahasa Inggris disajikan sebagai alat komunikasi secara ilmiah (Depdikbud R.I. c, 1986: 1)

It appears that in the 1975 curriculum “structure” was the core of the curriculum and was the central focus. The entire lesson plan is about structure. In order to implement the communicative approach the structure dominated lesson plan was abandoned and English is taught as a tool for authentic communication (The writer’s translation).

The 1984 and the 1994 Curricula

The 1984 National curriculum endorsed at the beginning of 1985 consists of four main sources:

1.      The 1984 Senior High School National Curriculum, Basis, Programs and Development, covers general ideas of the curriculum, its implementation, the basis, program, the objectives and the development principles of senior high school education.

2.      The instructional guide and the management of the 1984 Senior High School Curriculum deals with the teaching program, curriculum process, administration and supervision.

3.      The second instructional guide for the senior high school counseling career is comprised of an introduction, a basic counseling and a career package.

4.      The basis course outline (BCO) for each lesson comprises of an introduction to the program, some important notes for the implementation of the 1984 curriculum, the structure of the program and the course outlines.

The curriculum is based on a credit system, system that offers two distinctive program courses: ‘Core subjects’ and ‘Electives’. “Core subjects” comprises of 15 subjects which are compulsory for all students and are offered in the first and the second semesters. In the third semester through the sixth semester, some of the subjects were dropped and the students may choose electives which may reflect the students’ areas of interest and or natural talent. The amount of credits that can be gained by students would be the same for all, even for those who dropped some of the core subjects. This is due to the fact that, while they drop some of the subjects on the one hand, they pick up the difference by doing selective subjects on the other.

Having completed the first second semesters the students may proceed into the third semester choosing either package A or package B. Package A consists of program streams such as: (i). Physics, (ii). Biology, (iii). Social science, and (iv) Art and Culture. These prepare the students for tertiary education (Depdikbud R. I. d. 1984). Alternately, package B prepares students to enter the workforce after leaving school. While package A was realistic, practical and achievable, the implementation of package B which was designed for students to pursue their education at non-degree institutions or to enter into workforce was unrealistic and doomed to fail due to lack of funds. There is yet another argument opposing the implementation of this curriculum. Nationally, there are less than 50% of high school graduates gained entry into universities (Indonesia, 1990:99). Consequently they have no choice but to plunge themselves into workforce even though being certificated package A stream. The 1984 curriculum recommends English language as a compulsory subject to be taught at senior high schools just as in the case of the previous curricula.

The 1994 curriculum was endorsed in the academic year 1994/1995 in response to the decree of Ministry of Education and Culture No. 061/U/1993 dated 25 February 1993 (Depdikbud R.I. d, 1994). This curriculum applied similar methodological approach, communicative approach, as that of 1984 curriculum.

Objective: The curriculum has only one common objective for all program streams. The students must possess both the willingness and the ability to use English, especially in reading, comprehension, speaking and in writing essays up to 4000 words demonstrating knowledge of complex English sentence structure (Depdikbud R. I. c, 1986). Ideally, the communicative principle implemented in the 1984 curriculum to be based on the goal of learning English (Tomlinson 1987). This means the teacher is to act as a facilitator, an independent participant, an organizer, a guide, a researcher, a needed analyst, a counselor and a group process manager as required in the communicative approach. However, all the aforementioned ideas are considered to be barriers for the English Language teacher in Indonesia.

The English language teachers in Indonesia have all been educated in the structural behaviouristic Audio-Lingual method of TEFL. They have been ‘indoctrinated’ in the drill method of teaching English that they might feel disoriented if they had to use communicative textbook like In Touch (Nababan, 1984: 161).

The objective of teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) according to the 1994 curriculum is that: at the end of the secondary education students would have gained skills in reading, understanding, speaking and writing essays in English of self-selected topics that reflect students’ interest and experience as well as a displayed wealth of vocabulary and knowledge of structure. Therefore, the main aim of the TEFL is reading ability that includes only language skills.

Contents: The suggested way of presenting materials based on the communicative approach are the group activities, language games and role plays (Savigon, 1983 in Richards et al., 1990: 81). Linguists such as Finnochiaro and Brumfit suggest the presentation of brief dialogue, homework assignments and oral evaluation (Richards et al., 1990: 81). The 1984 curriculum does not contain language games or similar activities. On the contrary, the presentation of structure in this curriculum is similar to the grammar-oriented approach.

The scope of English materials in the 1994 curriculum contained of integrated skills of reading, listening, speaking and writing with greater emphasis on the reading skill (Bire, 1996: 123). Other aspects of language such as structure, vocabulary, pronunciation and spelling are included in the teaching to support the four language skills that are presented in the scopes of discussions themes in the BCO.

Methods of TEFL: A literature review of the national high school basic curriculum shows that the TEFL in Indonesia prior to 1984 was grammar-translation oriented, that is, teaching of English was not communication oriented. The ministry of Education and Culture recognized the inefficiency of the 1975 curriculum and officially implemented a new policy to replace that curriculum. Accordingly, the government of Indonesia changed the practical teaching of English in Indonesia to concentrate more on both form and function in communication. Consequently, the national curriculum ideas, the form and function were implemented (Depdikbud R.I. c, 1986). The 1984 Curriculum that was implemented to replace the 1975 curriculum was based on communicative approach which deals with assumptions, beliefs and ideas developed from a theory of language as a tool of communication (Richards et al., 1990). This approach which is well known and widely used in language teaching is based on ideas from British and American linguists, John Firth (1972); M.A.K. Hallliday, (1970,1973); Dell Hymes, (1972) and John Gumperz, (1972). This approach was chosen as a result of dissatisfaction with the previous approaches.

The communicative approach can be identified by its characteristics as. Firstly, Littlewood (1987: 1) defines the approach as one that demands from learners the ability to use language in real communication. It concentrates on the use and the appropriateness rather than simply on the structures. Secondly, the communicative approach puts greater emphasis on learners’ needs. With this in mind, the communicative approach places a high value on “authentic” language and “authentic” communicative behavior. Thirdly, it focuses on how language is learned and gives weight to sub-conscious as well as conscious acquisition of language. The fourth, it proposes a wide range of teaching and learning activities. Lastly, the teacher’s role is crucial and monitoring the students’ activities. To support the communicative approach, a teacher is expected to be creative in organizing exercises and activities as described in the ten principles to clarify the ideas of the communicative approach by Freeman (1986: 131-135).

There are different approaches for the implementation of the communicative approach (i). The communicative approach leads to specific objectives in the domain of reading, writing, listening or speaking (Richards et al, 1990:73), but the 1984 curriculum included two other domains namely structure and vocabulary (Depdikbud R.I. c, 1986). These two are actually belonged in the domain of structural approach (Richards et al, 1990:3-4). In the context of EFL, these two domains belong to the aspect of conscious learning (Dullay et al, 1982: 11; Littlewood in Das, 1985: 1). Hence one can see that the 1984 curriculum, while it is designed to focus on communicative approach, it is in fact still show its roots in the structural approach.

The 1994 curriculum was implemented with some modifications in the form, content and presentation. This curriculum is user friendly in helping teachers to be creative in preparing lesson plans and teaching activities. The approach used is communicative, the same as that in the previous curriculum but with more emphasis on language skills rather than on components of language.

Evaluation: The 1984 curriculum recommends the following assessment in the TEFL:

1.      Written test : Objective and Subjective

2.      Oral

3.      Dramatization

4.      Role play

5.      Homework

Compairing the two types of tests, written and oral tests, written test is favored in comparison to oral test at the ratio of 2:1 (Bire, 1993: 28-29). Even the evaluation recommended in the communicative approach is based on the accuracy and fluency of the language, the recommended tests in the 1984 curriculum, BCO, show that 66% of the whole evaluation is given in a written form. Therefore, the evaluation of the fluency of using the language is overlooked in the curriculum while structure and reading evaluations are favored in the curriculum and in its implementation (Bire, 1993: 34;1996: 131).

The 1994 curriculum used integrative evaluation whereas the 1984 curriculum used discrete evaluation. Even evaluation in this curriculum is considered integrative, listening and speaking skills were excluded and Reading and structure still dominates the evaluation exactly as what took place in the previous curriculum.

The 2004 Curriculum

Competency- Based curriculum (CBC) for Junior and Senior high schools was utilized when the 2004 curriculum was introduced to replace the 1994 curriculum. CBC started with competency-based teaching/learning assumptions as: a systematic approach to teaching and learning benefits learners and self, learning is personal, teaching profile is first than subject matter follows, teaching is a rewarding process, risks are worth taking, the development takes courage and flexibility process is the most desirable attributes in the process. Due to autonomy granted to regency, regional government take part in curriculum development. Teaching learning process starts with identifying students’ need, developing learners’ basic capabilities, and developing teaching materials based on indicators to be used as guide to prepare examination questions based on students’ competencies. Students’ competencies are continually examined and, therefore, remedial and enrichment teachings are needed for educational acceleration. Thus, this curriculum shows learners’ individual and collective characteristics, it shows learning result orientation, it uses various methods, it uses educative resources and reaches competency.

Language teaching in this curriculum is based on CBC by using Communicative Language Competency model (Celce-Murcia, et al, 1995), Semiotic social (Halliday, 1978) and integrated literacy Perspective modification based on “Kem’s Model” (2000). Language teaching with these models’ oriented are developed for CBC in Indonesia in its entirety.

The objectives of teaching/learning English in Indonesia according to the 2004 curriculum are clearly stated in the curriculum document (Depdiknas b, 2003: 14) as:

·         Mengembangkan kemampuan berkomunikasi dalam bahasa tersebut dalam bentuk lisan dan tulisan. Kemampuan berkomunikasi melipti mendengar (listening), berbicara (speaking), membaca (reading), dan menulis (writing)

·         Menumbuhkan kesadaran tentang hakikat dan pentingnya Bahasa Inggris sebagai slah satu Bahasa asing untuk menjadi alat utama belajar

·         Mengembangkan pemahaman tentang saling keterkaitan antar bahasa dan budaya serta memperluas cakrawala budaya. Dengan demikian siswa memiliki wawasan lintas budaya dan melibatkan diri dalam keragaman budaya.

The above objective statement clearly describes Indonesian intention to develop students’ ability to be able to communicate in English either through oral or written form. The idea imbedded in the objective was the teaching and learning of English should be done through all four-language skills(both oral and written communications).

Contents of TEFL: In the 2004 curriculum, teaching learning activities developed to enlarge students’ continuing skills development are based on “Remedial” and “Enrichment” Programs to alleviate quality of education in the country.

Competency

Competency is considered as knowledge, skills and basic value reflected on attitude and action, Example: rubbish, cigarette butt, etc. In thought and words: all should go into rubbish bin: In act:

·         Provide rubbish bin if there is not any

·         How do children make rubbish bin from local materials available?

·         All rubbish around should be collected and put in the right place

·         Wherever they see rubbish, similar action should be done

These concepts are meant to develop students’ ability to do things in various contexts, given enough skills to be competent, have learning outcomes and should be clearly defined with a reachable and measurable working standard (Depdiknas a, 2002) A competency-Based definition related to students’ knowledge, performance at each level and the description of students’ step by step continual development can be described as follows:

·         Emphasized on either individual or collective students’ competence

·         Variety of learning outcomes oriented

·         Various approaches and Methods of teaching

·         Use all educational resources

·         Evaluation is done based of competency based objectives

There are some practical principles used in developing the 2004 curriculum as:

·         Competency based model

·         Language model

·         Literacy degree of the graduated students

·         The development of language competence from listening to writing

Various language competence Model seen from various perspectives have been experimented in Language Teaching and Learning, however, the 2004 Curriculum applied language competency by Celce-Murcia, Domyei and Thurrell (1996).

a.      Discourse Competence

b.      Actional Competence

c.       Sociocultural Competence

d.      Strategic Competence

Pedagogically speaking, in English teaching, the above components support the reaching of the main competence, discourse competence. Language experts agree that when one communicates with others either orally or in written form, the speakers/writers are engaged in a discourse (Communication event influenced by a topic being communicated, interpersonal relations among those who are engaged in the communications used in a cultural context).

One is able to gain Discourse competence, whenever he/she possesses supported competence:

·         Linguistic Competence

·         Actional Competence

·         Sociocultural Competence

·         Strategic Competence

The above Supported competences are called indicators and they are inseparable. It means, that when teaching a discourse, all indicators should be included.

Besides the above-mentioned Competence model, Language Model in communication which is also known as semiotic social system (Halliday, 1978) is also being used in the 2004 Curriculum. This shows that in communication, there are at least three important aspects to be considered and they are: content, text and language system.

a. Content

Language when used contextually influences, decides and interrelates with the language someone chooses to use when he/she creates and interprets a text. In any given context, everybody uses language to do three main functions:

·                               Ideasional function

·                               Interpersonal function

·                               Textual function

Pedagogically speaking, each language teaching should use these three functions to reach a Language teaching and learning in both cultural and situational context. In a teaching learning English, concept of genre dominated all texts in the 2004 curriculum.

Situational contexts are the topics being discussed in the 2004 curriculum as:

·                               Field

·                               Tenor

·                               Mode

These three points are considered as help for anybody to choose formal, informal, close, distance, etc. they are chosen to help students to be able to communicate with others in any given context, circumstance and situation.

b. Text

Verbal communication activity is a process of creating message either oral or written as a response and an interpretation within a discourse. It shows that a text is a combination of situational context and cultural context to be understood by others in the language context (compare listening and written forms). Therefore, the 2004 curriculum aims at preparing students with good and acceptable language organization (Depdiknas c, 2003: 5). The English language subject for Junior High School Standard Competency is described as follow: (Understanding various meaning of interpersonal, ideasional, and contextual) language features, such as:

1.      Descriptive

2.      Narrative

3.      Spoof/recount

4.      Procedure

5.      Report

6.      Anecdote: (Nos. 1-6 plus Nos plus 7-12 for Senior High Schools)

7.      Explanations

8.      Exposition

9.      Discussions

10.  News Items

11.  Commentary

12.  Review (Depdiknas b, 2003)

Talking about Literacy, the 2004 curriculum considers theoretical and practical language teaching/learning for various levels. The following is the example of Teaching/Learning English Literacy by Wells (1987):

¨  Performative (Speaking for writing and speaking for listening for Junior High)

¨  Functional (Manual reading for daily use for Junior High)

¨  Informational (Accessing knowledge for Senior High)

¨  Epistemic (Transforming knowledge in certain language)

Through the above descriptions, it is hoped that the materials to be developed at schools are materials around the stated genre for literacy.

Literacy perspective (Talking and Alphabets) being developed here in the Competency Based Curriculum in modified diagram proposed by “Kern” (2000) who only developed three competencies: Reading, Talking and Writing. In the 2004 curriculum, the four known capabilities are equally developed.

The four language skills are treated as integrated learning interaction. Hence, the type of teaching, where each skill being treated independently, is not being suggested in this curriculum. On the contrary, it stands as a challenge for teachers to find out the best way to overcome literacy problem for beginners by offering integrated skills teaching. Therefore, a syllabus designer needs to provide various learning experiences which are based on Competence Model, Language Model, Literacy level and different language skills pertaining to written and spoken language. This is considered to be an extremely difficult task for a language teacher.

Methods of TEFL: This curriculum is elaborated according to eight basic assumptions about teaching/learning competencies as:

1.      that a systematic approach to teaching is beneficial to your learners, your colleges and yourself;

2.      that learning is a deeply personal, individual process, for each of us;

3.      that you teach people first, and subject matter second;

4.      that learning is richer and more reward process if it can be shared with other people;

5.      that risks are worth taking and mistake can be growth points;

6.      that experience only leads to change if it is filtered through reflection;

7.      that development take courage as well as imagination;

8.      that the most useful attribute you can develop as a teacher or trainer is flexibility (Castling, 1996: 2)

The above assumptions are taken as basic Curriculum development prepared in accordance with Indonesian context and it’s identified needs.

In the teaching/learning interaction, it is advisable for teachers to begin teaching activities by identifying learners’ needs so that all teaching/learning activities are focused on the stated objectives and there is no time wasted. There is an interlinking process where each level has a logical connection with the next process. Each teacher starts his/her work with learners’ need analysis that naturally directs the teachers to plan a learning process. This plan directs programmer to present a variety of teaching and the learners can be monitored easily to attain what they want to reach. Then evaluate each level’s affectivity of the cycle. Therefore, the duty of a teacher is to adapt teaching practice starting from identifying learners’ needs, followed by the teaching/learning procedure and then repeat the process.

For many people, learning motivation is for socialization in contrast to academic needs or professional work. What they would do will depend very much on their friends, and this is done as their learning points. A teacher needs to observe that the learners are learning, and it is not the teacher who does the learning. Therefore, as a teacher, one need to know each students needs before teaching and the observation should include:

·                                   objective of learning

·                                   recent knowledge

·                                   prior knowledge

·                                   special needs (learning gaps, difficulties, and disabilities)

·                                   personal environment, such as personal working and learning hours

·                                   willingness to learn (group or individual)

·                                   the level of confidence as a learner (degrees of confidence and hope)

·                                   their attitude to study

·                                   their hope and expectation from a teacher (Castling, 1996: 10-11).

Therefore, Approach and methods used in this curriculum are flexible, enabling students thereby to enhance their ability to use language in communication (Depdikbud c, 2003; Bire, 2006: 132).

Evaluation. Evaluating the entire process of teaching/learning is done by monitoring the students’ activity from the beginning to the end. For students’ ability in oral and written product, a checklist is used for a long-term evaluation, while for indicators’ prove, a portfolio is used to monitor the students’ competency. Those who are competent can proceed to the next activities, while those who fail are advised to do remedial. In reality, the valuation that was done nationally related to three skills namely Listening, Reading, Writing excluding Speaking.

The above description concerning objective, contents, approach/methods and evaluation of TEFL in Indonesia based on the 2004 curriculum shows that hard works have been performed and time and money have been well spent for the success of teaching/learning English in this country. However, an argument for the implementation of the 2004 curriculum showed that a mismatch among the above items still happened as it did in the previous curricula two years prior to the implementation the 2004 curriculum. This failure has led Indonesian Educational authorities and experts to take action to apply what is called the 2006 curriculum, which is currently being implemented. Therefore, all Senior High School students who sit for the final examination in the year 2008 are being the last group of the products of the 2004 curriculum. Obviously it is stated that at the 2006 curriculum should be further developed to be used by all schools in the academic year 2009/2010 (BSNP, 2006).

The changes of curriculum in the country shows that we are finding out and pin pointing main idea of the curriculum change which is in accordance to an organization of curriculum mentioned as:

An approach that emphasized context and use, rather than isolated skills, required an integrated approach to curriculum structure, rather than the fragmentary approach of treating different skills on different days of the week. Thus the integrated curriculum becomes a key stone to the growth model. Alongside this and replacing the single-minded lesson plan was an approach of the teacher’s being prepared for the many possible avenues that a lesson might take. Flexibility to structure was the key (Sawyer, 2004: 24)

Therefore, the curriculum used in the country is developed into a way to meet the demand of the community. Reviewing the latest curriculum, the implementation of the 2006 curriculum matches the above suggested approach.

CONCLUSION

The success and the failure of teaching English as a foreign language in Indonesia after the independence from the Dutch in 1945 showed huge and progressive development from one implemented curriculum to the next. Since the writing deals with mismatch TEFL in Indonesia, the discussion is concentrated on four major points as: Objectives of TEFL, Contents of TEFL, Approach/Methods of TEFL and Evaluation of TEFL in the 1950 curriculum up to the latest one, the 2004 curriculum.

The analysis of TEFL here is classified into five discussions on account of some similarities in the implementations of the curricula and they are as:

(i). Curricula 1950 and 1958

(ii). Curricula 1962 and 1968

(iii). Curriculum 1975

(iv). Curriculum 1984 and 1994

(v). Curriculum 2004 and 2006.

Curriculum 1950 and curriculum 1958 show a mismatch among the four mentioned curriculum items. The objective of TEFL is reading ability, while the content to be taught, methods of TEFL and the evaluation were based on grammar-translation method. The four points mentioned as “Objective of TEFL”, “Contents of TEFL”’ “Methods of TEFL” and evaluation in both the 1962 and the 1968 show a mismatch. All the four points mentioned should be directed to its objective that is “Reading ability Oriented”

Concerning the 1975 curriculum, it is obvious that the aim of teaching was still reading oriented as stated across previous curricula; the content of TEFL for this curriculum shows deviation from its objective of reading into reading and structure oriented; Since Eclectic method was used in this curriculum, deviation from its objective looks broader and its evaluation was based on structure oriented. Therefore, the four points above show a mismatch for the TEFL in Indonesia based on the 1975 curriculum.

The implementation of 1984 and the 1994 English curricula, the objective is reading ability, the contents provided for TEFL deals with reading and grammar, the approach and methods of TEFL deals with communicative approach and the evaluation deals with reading and grammar. Therefore there is a match between materials and evaluation of TEFL, but the objective and the approach/method of TEFL are different. Hence the teaching of English at this decade was considered mismatch.

The description concerning objective, contents, approach/methods and evaluation of TEFL in Indonesia based on the 2004 curriculum shows that hard work has been performed; time and money have been well spent for the success of the teaching and learning in this country. However, an argument for the implementation of the 2004 curriculum showed a mismatch among the above items as happened in the previous curricula. This failure has led Indonesian Educational authorities and experts to take action to implement what is called the 2006 curriculum, which is currently being implemented.

REFERENCE

Alisyahbana, S. T. (1990) “The teaching of English in Indonesia”. In James Britton, Roberts E. Sheffer and Ken Watson (Eds.) Teaching and Learning English World wide.

Bire, J (1996) The Success and the Failure of Senior High school students Learning English as a foreign language: An unpublished PhD Thesis, LaTrobe University, Melbourne.

-------------- (2003) Perkembangan Kurikulum Bahasa Inggris di Kupang. Bulletin Penelitian dan Pengembangan, Vol. 4 No. 2, Nop. 2003, Undana Kupang.

-------------- (2007) Bahasa Inggris untuk anak-anak Kasus NTT. Jurnal Nusa Cendana Vol. 8. No. 1 (April 2007): 755- 764 Undana, Kupang.

------------- (2007) Collonial occupations and Indonesian Education, Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa dan Sastra FKIP Universitas Nusa Cendana Kupang Vol. 11 No. 20 (Juni 2007).

BNSP (2006). Panduan Penyusunan Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan:Jenjang Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Jakarta.

Canale, M. and Merile Swain (1980) Theoretical bases for Communicative Approach to Language Learning and Testing: Applied Linguistics, 1: 1-39.

Castling, Ann (1996) Competence-based Teaching and Training. Macmillan Press, Ltd., London.

Das, B.K. (1985) Communicative Language Teaching: Anthology 14., Singapore UP: SEAMEO RELC, Singapore.

Depdikbud RI. a (1968) Kurikulum Sekolah Menengah Atas (SMA)(General High School Curriculum), PN. Balai Pustaka, Jakarta.

--------------- b. Kurikulum Sekolah Dasar tahun 1975 (Elementary School Curricula 1975). Jakarta.

-------------- c. (1986) Kurikum Sekolah Menengah Umum: Garis-garis Besar Program Pengajaran (GBPP) Department of Education and Culture, Jakarta.

--------------- d. (1994) Kurikulum Sekolah Menengah Umum: Garis-garis Besar Program Pengajaran (GBPP) (General High School Curricula 1993)

Depdiknas, RI.a. (2002) Kurikulum 2004 SMA dan Madrasah Aliyah: Pedoman Umum, Depdiknas, Jakarta.

-------------- b ((2003) Kurikulum 2004 SMA dan Madrasah Aliyah: Pedoman Khusus, Depdiknas, Jakarta.

--------------- c. (2003) Kurikulum 2004 SMA dan Madrasah Aliyah: Standard , Kompetensi Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris, Depdiknas, Jakarta

Dikbud, (2006) Pengembangan Silabus KTSP Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Inggris Dikbud, Jakarta.

Freeman, D.L., (1986) Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New York, Oxford UP.

Halliday, M. A. K.(1970) Language Structure and Language Function in J. Lyons (Ed.) New Horizon in linguistics. Hamsworth: Pinguin, 140-165.

--------------- (1973) Exploration in the Function of Languag. London Edwards Arnold.

--------------- (1978) Language as Social Semiotic. London Edwards Arnold.

Hymes, D. (1972) On Communicative Competence, in J.B. Pride and L. Holms (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. Hamsworth: Pinguin, 269-293.

Hartoyo (2006) Grammar in the Teaching of EFL in Indonesia: Theories and findings, Unnes Press, Semarang.

Kem, Richard (2000) Literacy and Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University press

LPMP.DIY (2006) Mata Pena: Majalah Berita Pendidikan Aktual, Vol 2 Tahun II 2006, LPMP DIY, Yogyakarta.