The Achievement Ideology and Top-Down National Standardized Exam Policy in Indonesia: Voices from Local English Teachers

Abstract

The purpose of this qualitative inquiry was to explore and describe the perspectives of local English teachers on the National Standardized Exam [NSE] policy as a high-stakes exam to gauge student performance nationally at four senior high schools in Jambi City, Indonesia. The theoretical framework of the ethics of critique, justice, and care was used to guide this study. Data for this study are collected through a demographic background survey and in-depth interviews with fifteen local English teachers. The demographic data were analyzed descriptively. The interviews data were analyzed using within-case and cross-case displays and analyses. Two salient themes with their subthemes that emerged were (1) negative perspectives on the practices and accuracy of the NSE policy and (2) unintended consequences the NSE policy (curriculum and instruction, teaching and learning, teacher motivation, student motivation, less attention to non-tested disciplines, and widespread cheating). This study provides information for policy makers, school leaders, researchers, and teacher educators to understand how the policy is implemented at the school level. Policy implications are discussed

Keywords

• Achievement ideology
• national standardized exam policy
• Indonesia
• local English teachers
• unintended consequences

References

1. Amrein, A. L.,& Berliner, D. C. (2003). The effects of high-stakes testing on students’ motivation and learning. Educational Leadership, 60(5), 32-38.
2. Antaranews. (2013). Mendikbud umumkan hasil akhir un sma 2013. Retrieved from: http://www.antaranews.com/berita/376294/mendikbud-umumkan-hasil-akhir-un-sma-2013
3. Banks, J. A. (2002). An introduction to multicultural education. 3rd Edition. Boston: Pearson and AB Longman.
4. Bennett, C. I. (2003). Comprehensive multicultural education: Theory and practice. 5th Edition.
5. Boston: Pearson and AB Longman. Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: The cognitive domain. New
6. York: David McKay Co Inc. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998 ). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
7. Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America: Educational reform and the contradictions of economic life. New York: Basic Books.
8. Brück, M. V. (2006). An ethics of Justice in a cross-cultural context. Buddhist-Christian Studies 26.

9. Christensen, L. B. & Johnson, B. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (3rd ed.) Boston: Sage Publications.
10. Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among fivetraditions.
11. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Creswell, J, W. (2007). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Traditions. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
12. Department of Home. (2004). Law no.32/2004.Jakarta: Department of Home.
13. Department of National Education. (2003). Law for education No.20/2003. Jakarta: Department of National Education.
14. Furman, G. (2003). Moral leadership and the ethic of community. Values and Ethics in Educational
15. Administration, 2(1), 1 – 8. Greenwald, R., Hedges, L.V., and Laine, R.D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66 (3), 361-396.
16. Herman, J. L. and Golan, S. (1991). Effects of standardized testing on teachers and learning—another look. (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 344). Los Angeles, CA: University of California, National Center for
17. Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. Hoffman, J. V., Assaf, L. C., & Paris, S. G. (2001). High-stakes testing in reading: Today in Texas, tomorrow? The Reading Teacher, 54(5), 482-492.
18. Jones, G. M., Jones, B. D., Hardin, B. H., Chapman, L., Yarbrough, T., & Davis, M. (1999). The impact of high-stakes testing on teachers and students in North Carolina. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 199- 20
19. Jones, B. D., & Egley, R. J. (2004). Voices from the frontlines: Teachers’ perceptions of high-stakes testing. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(39). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v12n39/
20. Kohn, A. (2000). Standardized testing and its victims. Education Week. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/ew_printstory.cfm?slug=04kohn.h20
21. Kompas. (2010). Pengumuman UA. Retrieved from: http://www.kompas.com/lipsus052009/antasariread/2010/04/27/10064353/Hasil.UN.yang.Me ngejutkan.
22. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). It’s not the culture of poverty: It’s the poverty of culture: The problem with teacher education. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 37(2), 104-109.
23. Levin, H. M. (1995). Raising educational productivity. In Carnoy, M. (Ed.). International Encyclopedia of Economics of Education (2nd Edition). Tarrytown, NY: Pergamon.
24. Lincoln, Y., & Guba, R. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
25. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessment and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29 (2), 4 -16.
26. Madaus, G. (1988). The influence of testing on the curriculum. In L. Tanner (Ed.) Critical issues in
27. Curriculum (pp. 83-121). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Marchant, G. J., Paulson, S. E., & Shunk, A. (2006). Relationships between high-stakes testing policies and student achievement after controlling for demographic factors in aggregated
28. Data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 14 (30). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v14n30/ Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. McLaren, P. (2010). Foreword. In Valerie Hill-Jackson, Chance W. Lewis, & Peter McLaren (Eds.),
30. Transforming teacher education: What went wrong with teacher training, and HowWe Can Fix It (xi –xvii). Sterling, Virginia: Stylus. McCray, W. & Beachum, F. (2006). A critique of zero tolerance policies: An issue of justice and caring.
31. Values and Ethics in Educational Administration, 5 (1), 1-7. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
32. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook. San
33. Francisco, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Nieto, S. & Bode, P. (2008). Affirming diversity: The socio-political context of multicultural education, 5th Edition. Boston: Pearson and AB Longman.
34. Noddings, N. (1992). The Challenge to Care in Schools: An Alternative Approach to Education.
35. Advances in Contemporary Educational Thought series, vol. 8. New York: Teachers College Press. Olneck, M. (2000). Can multicultural education change what counts as cultural capital? American
36. Educational Research Journal, 37(2), 317–348. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (1998). Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues (3rd ed.).
37. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Rothstein, R. (1998). The way we were? The myths and realities of American student achievement.
38. New York: The Century Foundation Press. Sadovnik, A. (2007). Theory and research in the sociology of education. In Sadovnki, A. (ed.)
39. Sociology of education: a critical reader. New York: Routledge. Shapiro, J. & Stefkovich, J. (2005). Viewing ethical dilemmas through multiple paradigms. In J.
40. Starrat, R. (1991). Building an ethical school: A theory for practice in educational leadership.
41. Education AdministrationQuarterly, 27(2), 185-202. Starratt, R. J. (1994). Building an ethical school: A practical response to the moral crisis in schools.
42. Washington, DC: Falmer Press. Suara Pembaharuan. (2011). 16.098 Siswa Tidak Lulus UN. Retrieved from:http://www.suarapembaruan.com/home/16098-siswa-tidak-lulus-un/6802.
43. The Jakarta Post. (2008). Calls for national exam review after widespread cheating. Retrieved from:http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008.