Ministry of National Education 1 Indonesia Reading Proficiency and Influencing Factors



Descargar 68,28 Kb.
Fecha de conversión01.02.2017
Tamaño68,28 Kb.
  • 1
  • Indonesia Reading Proficiency and Influencing Factors
  • Jakarta, June 28-29, 2011
  • 1
  • Contents
  • 2
  • 2
  • A. Introduction
  • B. National Policies Implementation
  • C. Trends in Indonesia Student’s Reading
  • Performance, PISA 2000-2009
  • E. Influencing Factors
  • F. Conclusions and Recommendations
  • G. Glossary
  • A. INTRODUCTION
  • A
  • 3
  • 3
  • THE IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS AND THE QUALITY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL AND THE RELEVANCE OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION/POLYTECHNIC
  • 4
  • Secondary Education consist of general secondary education and vocational secondary education (Educ. Low 20/2003; article: 18). Vocational education is a subsystem education which specially help the student to prepare themselves in their future workplace (US National Council for Research into Vocational Education)
  • ECE: 28, 8 million students
  • ES : 39,5 million
  • students
  • JHS: 13,38 million Students
  • SHS: 9,11 million students
  • HE: 5,2 million
  • students
  • Accelerating and expanding of Indonesia economic development in 2011-2025
  • THE IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS AND THE QUALITY OF SECONDARY SCHOOL AND THE RELEVANCE OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION
  • Stock Supply of HDR
  • National energy shed
  • National main gate tourism
  • Population: 240 million (2009 estimate)
  • Eslands: 17.504
  • Mother Tongue: 583 languages/dialects
  • National industrial &manufacture stimulant
  • National NDR overflow &HDR prosperous
  • National production & earth products processing
  • THE IMPROVEMENT OF ACCESS AND QUALITY OF THE EARLY CHILDHOOD AND BASIC EDUCATION
  • 5
  • ...early childhood period is the golden age in the child’s growth period. This is a valuable period and determines a child to recognize various facts around as the stimulant to the personality, psychomotor, cognitive and social development...
  • “The early childhood education is held before the primary education ”
  • (Educ. Low No 20/2003, article: 28)
  • Early Childhood Educ. 0-6 year: 28,8 million
  • Basic Edu. 7-15 year: 44.712 million
  • Sense of hearing & visibling
  • A g e
  • year
  • language
  • Higher cognitive function
  • month
  • month
  • born
  • Literacy Studies:
  • PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS, ICCS, INAP, SABER, NE, SBM
  • BE
  • Adul
  • t
  • D
  • eath
  • decade
  • Concep
  • t
  • 1,5 %
  • 8,6 %
  • ES/MI
  • 1.8 %
  • 24,0 %
  • JHS/MTs
  • 4,27 %
  • 51.7 %
  • SHS/VOC
  • /MA
  • HE
  • 31,05 juta
  • 12,69 juta
  • 9,11 juta
  • 5,2 juta
  • = % drop out
  • = % Graduation don’t continue to the
  • higher level of education
  • GER EC Educ = 56.7%
  • GER ES-other = 117.2%
  • NER ES-other = 95.2%
  • GER JHS-other = 98.3%
  • GRE SHS-other = 73.0 %
  • GRE HE = 26.3%
  • Distribution of budget directly to school (BOS and BOMM) on time, on use and amount.
  • Integration of NE with the selection of HE.
  • National policy for completion of acces and
  • stock supplay
  • 6
  • BOS
  • BOS
  • BOMM

B. National Policies Implementation

  • 7
  • The Focuss of National Educational Development Policies Year 2010-2014
  • BE
  • HE
  • exploring – strengthening - empowering
  • SHS
  • CHARACTER Education
  • INTEGRATION & HABITUATION
  • ECE
  • ACADEMICAL Education
  • IMPROVED ACCESS AND SECONDARY EDUCATION QUALITY AND RELEVANCE GENERAL VOCATIONAL EDUCATION (VS+POLITECHNIC).
  • IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF EDUCATOR AND EDUCATION PERSONNEL
  • IMPROVED ACCESS AND COMPETITIVENESS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
  • IMPROVED ACCESS & QUALITY OF THE EARLY CHILDHOOD OF EDUCATION
  • COMPLETION BASIC EDUCATION NINE YEARS OF QUALITY
  • 4
  • 5
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 5 PROGRAM PRIORITIES POLICIES
  • ...educational development is addressed to develop Indonesian intelligent and competitive people through increased availability, affordability, quality and relevance, equality and certainty of obtaining educational services….
  • Literacy Studies:
  • PISA, TIMSS, PIRLS, ICCS, INAP, SABER, NE & SBM
  • 8
  • SPM ( Minim Services Standard)
  • SSN (Nastional School Stadard)
  • RSBI
  • SBI (International Based School)
  • (0%)
  •  SPM (Minimum Services Standard)
  • (41,31%)
  • (10,15%)
  • (50,39%)
  • (0,65%)
  • National Policy for Completion of MSS Into
  • ES and JHS
  • THE IMPROVEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL SERVICE QUALITY
  • School
  • Amount of Standardized School
  • SPM
  • SSN
  • RSBI
  • SBI
  • TOTAL
  • ES
  • 65.869
  • 75.965
  • 4.831
  • 239
  • 0
  • 146.904
  • %
  • 44,84
  • 51,71
  • 3,29
  • 0,16
  • 0
  •  
  • JHS
  • 8.892
  • 15.226
  • 9.711
  • 356
  • 0
  • 34.185
  • %
  • 26,01
  • 44,54
  • 28,41
  • 1,04
  • 0
  •  
  • TOTAL
  • 74.806
  • 91.243
  • 14.545
  • 595
  • 0
  • 181.089
  • %
  • 41,31
  • 50,39
  • 8,03
  • 0,33
  • 0
  •  
  • Completion of SPM Educational Unit ES and JHS
  • Will be completed in 2014
  • 9
  • (International Based School Pioneer)
  • Quality Assurance (QA), Quality Control (QC), and Quality Improvement (QI)
  • National Policy for Improvement Of the Educators and the Education Personnel
  • 10
  • Teachers are required to have academic qualifications, competency, educator certificate, physically and mentally health, and have the ability to achieve national education goals (Gov. Low 14/2005 Act. 8)
  • Teachers who do not have academic qualifications and educator certificate referred to in this Act shall meet the academic qualifications and certificates of educators at the latest 10 (ten) years since the enactment of this Act. (Gov Low 14/2005 Act 82)
  • > S1/D4
  • < S1/D4
  • Certified
  • Not Yet Certified
  • TREND % QUALIFIED TEACHER S1/4
  • TREND % CERTIFIED TEACHER
  • Note: Target is already consider the passing in and passing out teacher until 2014
  • 223.000 guru=
  • 325.000 guru = 

National policy of learning resources and instruction facilities development

  • Teaching learning models development
  • Instruction materials models development
  • Standard development of educational textbook assessment
  • Remedial book assessment that standardized
  • Supporting on education book writers
  • Textbooks translating
  • Competency development of education book writers
  • 11

Strengthening the weakest link (affirmative action).

  • National Policy Recommendation of Educational Budget Allocation for QA, QC and QI
  • Strengthening the weakest link (affirmative action).
  • The benefit is felt directly by student /community (impact).
  • Achieve the goals mandated by the Strategic Plan of MONE, RKP/priority activities plan 2012 , and RPJMN/national middle educational plan 2010-2014.
  • Answering solving the problem at hand (relevance).
  • Ensure accuracy and use of budget allocations to be transferred to the regions (Standard procedure 0peration).
  • Strengthening quality assurance, quality control, and quality improvement through monitoring and evaluation.
  • 12
  • C. TRENDS IN INDONESIA STUDENT’S
  • READING PERFORMANCE,
  • PISA 2000-2009
  • B
  • 6
  • 13

The objective of Indonesia participating PISA study

  • To find the information of student performance in term of reading, mathematic and science literacy for benchmarking with other countries, so that the PISA results could be implemented as a set of tool for policy recommendation formulation for improving the quality of education
  • 14
  • The scope PISA
  • • The focus of Program for International Student Assessment
  • (PISA) 2009 is reading literacy. The scope of PISA study 2009:
  • a)
  • A profile of reading knowledge and skills, including digital literacy;
  • b) Contextual indicators relating reading performance results to student
  • & school characteristics;
  • c)
  • d)
  • Students’ engagement in reading activities, and learning strategies; and
  • Trend data on change in student attitudes and in socio-economic
  • indicators, and also on the impact of some indicators on the reading
  • performance results.
  • • The Coverage of the study: 470.000 out of 26 million students age
  • 15 from 65 countries(34 OECD & 31 partner countries) are involved
  • in PISA2009.
  • 15

Sample, Domain and Test Design

  • sample
  • Domain
  • Science (35 items)
    • Reading (28 items)
    • Problem solving (19 items)
  • Type of items: Multiple Choice, Shot Answer, Essay
  • Test Design
    • 167 items  13 items cluster (M7, S2, R2, PS2)
    • 13 test books (4 cluster/test book)
    • Use linking items for setting items calibrating
  • Indonesia have participated in PISA study since 2000.
  • 5.136 students from 183 schools are involved in the study
  • Schools are located in rural (22,2%), small town (43%), town (14,7%), city (13,24%) & large city (6,74%).
  • 16
  • Level
  • Lower score
  • limit
  • Characteristics of tasks
  • 6
  • 698
  • Tasks at this level typically require the reader: to make multiple inferences, comparisons and contrasts; to
  • demonstrate a full and detailed understanding of one or more texts; to deal with unfamiliar ideas, in the
  • presence of prominent competing information; and to generate abstract categories for interpretations.
  • Reflective tasks may require the reader to hypothesize about or critically evaluate a complex text on an
  • unfamiliar topic, and applying sophisticated understandings from beyond the text
  • 5
  • 626
  • Tasks at this level that involve the reader to locate and organize several pieces of deeply embedded
  • information, inferring which information in the text is relevant. Reflective tasks require critical evaluation or
  • hypothesis, drawing on specialized knowledge. For all aspects of reading, tasks at this level typically involve
  • dealing with concepts that are contrary to expectations.
  • 4
  • 553
  • Tasks at this level that involve the reader to locate and organize several pieces of embedded information.
  • Reflective tasks at this level require readers to use formal or public knowledge to hypothesize about or critically
  • evaluate a text. Readers must demonstrate an accurate understanding of long or complex texts whose content
  • or form may be unfamiliar.
  • 3
  • 480
  • Tasks at this level require the reader to locate, and in some cases recognise the relationship between several
  • pieces of information. Interpretative tasks at this level require the reader to integrate several parts of a text in
  • order to identify a main idea, understand a relationship or construe the meaning of a word or phrase. Reflective
  • tasks at this level may require connections, comparisons, and explanations, or they may require the reader to
  • evaluate a feature of the text.
  • 2
  • 407
  • Some tasks at this level require the reader to locate one or more pieces of information; and to recognize the
  • main idea in a text. Tasks at this level may involve comparisons or contrasts based on a single feature in the
  • text. Typical reflective tasks at this level require readers to make a comparison or several connections between
  • the text and outside knowledge.
  • 1a
  • 335
  • Tasks at this level require the reader: to locate one or more independent pieces of explicitly stated information;
  • to recognise the main theme or author’s purpose in a text about a familiar topic; and to make a simple
  • connection between information. Typically the required information in the text is prominent and there is little, if
  • any, competing information.
  • 1b
  • 262
  • Tasks at this level require the reader to locate a single piece of explicitly stated information in a prominent
  • position in a short, syntactically simple text with a familiar context and text type. The text typically provides
  • support to the reader, such as repetition of information, pictures or familiar symbols. There is minimal
  • competing information.
  • 12
  • Summary descriptions for the seven levels of
  • proficiency in reading
  • 17
  • 2009 PISA Reading Scores
  • Some national policies:
  • Completion of MSS Into ES and JHS
  • Improvement of the Educators and the Education Personnel
  • learning resources and instruction facilities development
  • Recommendation of Educational Budget Allocation for QA, QC and QI activities
  • 18

GNI/GDP Non-OECD dan PISA Literasi

  • No.
  • Country / Territory
  • GNI/GDP
  • PISA 2000
  • PISA 2003
  • PISA 2006
  • 1.
  • Liechtenstein
  • 65,000
  • 519
  • 538
  • 526
  • 2.
  • Latvia
  • 8,100
  • 466
  • 485
  • 488
  • 3.
  • Russian Federation
  • 5,780/8,030
  • 480
  • 469
  • 477
  • 4.
  • Argentina
  • 5,150
  • 394
  • -
  • 387
  • 5.
  • Brazil
  • 4,730
  • 338
  • 361
  • 372
  • 6.
  • Thailand
  • 2,990/3,420
  • 435
  • 419
  • 420
  • 7.
  • Tunisia
  • 2,970
  • -
  • 360
  • 367
  • 8.
  • Columbia
  • 2,740
  • -
  • -
  • 372
  • 9.
  • Jordan
  • -/2,480
  • -
  • -
  • 395
  • 10.
  • Indonesia
  • 1,420/369
  • 369
  • 362
  • 393
  • 11.
  • Kyrgyzstan
  • 490
  • -
  • -
  • 316
  • 19
  • Indonesia students’ performance will be better rather than other countries if Gross National Income (GNI) or Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has to be increased
  • Score point change in reading performance between 2000 and 2009
  • Peru
  • Chile
  • Albania
  • Indonesia
  • Latvia
  • Israel
  • Poland
  • Portugal
  • Liechtenstein
  • Brazil
  • Korea
  • Hungary
  • Germany
  • Greece
  • Hong Kong-China
  • Switzerland
  • Mexico
  • OECD average-26
  • Belgium
  • Bulgaria
  • Italy
  • Denmark
  • Norway
  • Russian Federation
  • Japan
  • Romania
  • United States
  • Iceland
  • New Zealand
  • France
  • Thailand
  • Canada
  • Finland
  • Spain
  • Australia
  • Czech Republic
  • Sweden
  • Argentina
  • Ireland
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
  • 4
  • 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 3
  • 28
  • 21
  • 38
  • 60
  • 90
  • 86
  • 89
  • 81
  • 74
  • 74
  • 74
  • 77
  • 63
  • 62
  • 21
  • 20
  • 17
  • 15
  • 6
  • 8
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 0
  • 9
  • 0
  • Change in Reading Performance in PISA 2000-2009
  • 5
  • 0
  • -5
  • -10
  • -15
  • -20
  • -25
  • -30
  • -35
  • 50
  • 45
  • 40
  • 35
  • 30
  • 25
  • 20
  • 15
  • 10
  • 8
  • 20
  • Change in treading performance PISA 2000-2009 is 31 point
  • 31
  • Thailand
  • Tunisia
  • Albania
  • Hong Kong-China
  • Uruguay
  • Azerbaijan
  • Trinidad and Tobago
  • Jordan
  • Shanghai-China
  • Romania
  • Portugal
  • Poland
  • Russian Federation
  • Croatia
  • France
  • Italy
  • Slovak Republic
  • Lithuania
  • Greece
  • Ireland
  • Serbia
  • Switzerland
  • New Zealand
  • United States
  • Luxembourg
  • United Kingdom
  • Denmark
  • Australia
  • Dubai (UAE)
  • Canada
  • Iceland
  • Brazil
  • Indonesia
  • 1.00
  • 0.50
  • 0.00
  • -0.50
  • -1.00
  • -1.50
  • Indonesia
  • -2.00
  • Note: Economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) index was derived from three indices:
  • highest occupational status of parents, (2) highest educational level of parents in years of education, and (3) home possessions
  • Economic, Social and Cultural Status (ESCS) Index
  • 21
  • Year
  • Average Score
  • Rank
  • Number of
  • Countries
  • 2000
  • 371
  • 39
  • 41
  • 2003
  • 382
  • 39
  • 40
  • 2006
  • 393
  • 48
  • 56
  • 2009
  • 402
  • 57
  • 65
  • Indonesia’s Rank in Reading Performance,
  • PISA 2000-2009
  • Source: OECD Reports
  • 9
  • Indonesia students’ reading performance have steadily improved during
  • 2000-2009 period. While, its rank depends upon the number of
  • 22
  • Level
  • 2000
  • 2009
  • ≤ Level 1
  • 68.7
  • 53.5
  • Level 2
  • 24,8
  • 34,3
  • Level 3
  • 6,1
  • 11,2
  • Level 4
  • 0,4
  • 1,0
  • Level 5
  • 0,0
  • 0,0
  • Level 6
  • -
  • 0,0
  • Indonesia student’s literacy proficiency levels (%)
  • PISA 2000-20089
  • 13
  • During 2000-2009, Indonesia students’ reading performance have consistently improved.
  • Percentage of students proficient at level 2 or above has increased.
  • While, students proficient at level 1 or less ( ≤ level 1) have decreased
  • 23
  • 501
  • 499
  • 497
  • 495
  • 402
  • 393
  • 382
  • 371
  • Indonesia
  • OECD Average
  • 2000
  • 2003
  • 2006
  • 2009
  • Indonesia students’ reading performance have steadily improved from 2000-2009.
  • While OECD students’ performance have been stagnant during the same period
  • 7
  • Indonesia Student’s Reading Performance
  • in PISA 2000-2009
  • 24
  • Indonesia
  • OECD Average
  • 402
  • 499
  • 383
  • 474
  • 420
  • Indonesia Student’s Reading Performance
  • in PISA 2009: By Gender
  • Total
  • Boys
  • Girls
  • Girls performed better than boys in reading performance
  • 10
  • 513
  • 25
  • Percentage of Indonesian student’s at each proficiency level on
  • the reading scale in PISA 2009
  • 0.0
  • 20.0
  • 40.0
  • 60.0
  • 80.0
  • 100.0
  • OECD Average
  • OECD/Girls
  • OECD/Boys
  • Indonesia
  • Indonesia/Girls
  • Indonesia/Boys
  • Level < 1b
  • level 1b
  • level 1a
  • level 2
  • level 3
  • level 4
  • level 5
  • level 6
  • The higher the proficiency level, the better student’s reading
  • competency. In PISA 2009, over 50% of the Indonesian student’s reading
  • proficiency is at level 1 or below
  • 11
  • 26
  • 494
  • 494
  • 495
  • 493
  • 493
  • 493
  • 409
  • 402
  • 405
  • 399
  • 399
  • 397
  • 14
  • Indonesia
  • OECD
  • Access & Retrieve
  • Integrate & Interpret
  • Reflect & Evaluate
  • Continous Texts
  • Non-Continous Texts
  • Total
  • 27
  • 501
  • 492
  • 533
  • 501
  • 513
  • 480
  • 495
  • 480
  • 486
  • 492
  • 407
  • 407
  • 408
  • 410
  • 420
  • 390
  • 398
  • 394
  • 392
  • 373
  • Yes
  • No
  • Yes
  • No
  • Indonesia
  • OECD
  • Read non fictions*
  • Read magazine*
  • Read fictions*
  • Read comic books
  • Read newspapers*
  • Students who are engaged in reading activities performed better in reading competency
  • 18
  • 28
  • Student’s Reading Performance and Reading Materials
  • D. INFLUENCING FACTORS
  • C
  • 15
  • 29
  • Logical Framework of the Influencing Factors of
  • Reading Performance
  • 16
  • Socio-economic
  • background
  • Gender
  • Reading habits
  • Approaches
  • to learning
  • Reading
  • performance
  • Source: Derived from OECD Report 2010
  • 30
  • Parent educ level
  • Language at home
  • Reading Performance and Socio-Economic Factors
  • Reading performance Vs. GDP
  • Score
  • GDP/ Capita (000 US$)
  • Reading perform. Vs. parents’ education
  • score
  • % Pop in the age 35-44 w/ tertiary ed.
  • Reading perform. Vs. spending on education
  • Score
  • Cumulative expenditure (000 US$)
  • Reading perform. Vs. share of socio-
  • Score economically disadvantage student
  • Share of student ESCS Index below -1
  • 28
  • Parents’ education and socio-economic conditions of students show important
  • determinants of students’ reading performance
  • 31
  • Detailed Social-Economic Factors Influencing Reading Performance
  • 29
  • increase 17 points in students’
  • reading performance
  • 32
  • Engagement in Reading, Learning Strategies and
  • Reading Performance
  • 30
  • Diversity of reading materials and memorization strategy contribute to
  • improvement of student’s reading performance
  • 33
  • Student parents education level
  • Country
  • Fulfilled the Higher Education Level
  • %
  • Fulfilled the Academy Level
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Fulfilled the Secondary/Vocational Level
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Japan
  • 45
  • 576
  • 18
  • 555
  • 36
  • 536
  • Korea
  • 35
  • 580
  • 15
  • 560
  • 41
  • 551
  • Malaysia
  • 11
  • 548
  • 20
  • 526
  • 27
  • 518
  • Indonesia
  • 9
  • 465
  • 6
  • 438
  • 24
  • 433
  • Chili
  • 16
  • 480
  • 10
  • 444
  • 32
  • 415
  • Saudi Arabia
  • 27
  • 424
  • 0
  • 0
  • 12
  • 404
  • South Africa
  • 11
  • 341
  • 13
  • 280
  • 30
  • 250
  • Rata2 Internasional
  • 28
  • 507
  • 17
  • 487
  • 28
  • 472
  • 34

Language students in accordance with tests used in the house

  • Country
  • Always
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Almost always
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Sometimes
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Never
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Japan
  • 94
  • 554
  • 4
  • 553
  • 1
  • --
  • 0
  • --
  • Korea
  • 71
  • 558
  • 28
  • 562
  • 1
  • --
  • 0
  • --
  • Malaysia
  • 51
  • 502
  • 14
  • 521
  • 28
  • 518
  • 7
  • 523
  • Indonesia
  • 22
  • 421
  • 11
  • 427
  • 57
  • 419
  • 10
  • 417
  • Chili
  • 87
  • 416
  • 9
  • 408
  • 4
  • 357
  • 0
  • --
  • Saudi Arabia
  • 100
  • 398
  • 0
  • --
  • --
  • --
  • --
  • --
  • South Africa
  • 18
  • 347
  • 9
  • 310
  • 57
  • 252
  • 15
  • 153
  • Rata2 Internasional
  • 68
  • 482
  • 11
  • 483
  • 17
  • 442
  • 4
  • 389
  • 35

The amount of books at home

  • Country
  • > 200
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • 1001-200
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • 26-100
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • 11-25
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • 0-10
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Japan
  • 17
  • 584
  • 17
  • 567
  • 32
  • 552
  • 22
  • 539
  • 13
  • 517
  • Korea
  • 19
  • 596
  • 22
  • 572
  • 33
  • 556
  • 10
  • 533
  • 15
  • 514
  • Malaysia
  • 5
  • 557
  • 9
  • 540
  • 28
  • 524
  • 40
  • 501
  • 17
  • 482
  • Indonesia
  • 1
  • --
  • 3
  • 449
  • 19
  • 431
  • 45
  • 416
  • 32
  • 416
  • Chili
  • 5
  • 484
  • 7
  • 458
  • 27
  • 437
  • 37
  • 402
  • 23
  • 374
  • Saudi Arabia
  • 10
  • 422
  • 9
  • 414
  • 25
  • 410
  • 33
  • 391
  • 23
  • 382
  • South Africa
  • 6
  • 315
  • 5
  • 316
  • 14
  • 288
  • 31
  • 241
  • 44
  • 218
  • Rata2 Internasional
  • 15
  • 506
  • 13
  • 498
  • 27
  • 483
  • 26
  • 458
  • 18
  • 438
  • 36

The confidence of students in reading

  • Country
  • High Confidence
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Average Confidence
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Less Confidence
  • %
  • Average Achievement
  • Japan
  • 20
  • 595
  • 46
  • 551
  • 34
  • 529
  • Korea
  • 20
  • 612
  • 42
  • 556
  • 38
  • 553
  • Malaysia
  • 38
  • 530
  • 48
  • 500
  • 14
  • 496
  • Indonesia
  • 40
  • 418
  • 53
  • 421
  • 7
  • 442
  • Chili
  • 46
  • 434
  • 44
  • 393
  • 10
  • 407
  • Saudi Arabia
  • 58
  • 418
  • 36
  • 378
  • 6
  • 366
  • South Africa
  • 45
  • 282
  • 45
  • 215
  • 9
  • 207
  • Rata2 Internasional
  • 48
  • 490
  • 38
  • 445
  • 13
  • 430
  • 37
  • D
  • 19
  • 38

Conclusion

  • The position of Indonesian students' literacy skills compared with literacy benchmarking in the developing and growing countries in the world through the results of the PISA assessment study has given both valuable lessons learn for policy makers at the national and regional formulation of the policy in order to improve the quality of national education.
  • 39
  • Continues …..
  • • Since 2000, Indonesian student’s performance in reading
  • have improved steadily. The score increase from 371
  • in PISA 2000 to 402 in PISA 2009.
  • • Indonesia is one of few countries that has made a
  • significant improvement in student reading
  • performance during 2000-2009.
  • • During the same period, variation in the student ‘s
  • performance has also decreased. It is partly due to
  • improvements among low-achieving students.
  • • Important determining factors of the student’s reading performance include: a) economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) index, b) availability of full-time certified teachers, c) student’s learning strategy, and d) student ICT activities.
  • 40

continue ….

  • The results of quality of inputs, processes, and outputs of education were: (1) the level of student competence, (2) deep levels of the material/syllabus, (3) conditions of the learning activities, (4) the ability of teachers, (5) utilization of the school environment for learning activities, (6) implementation of standards and practices of assessment activities, (7) the function of the leadership at the schools in term of school quality improvement, and (8) the formulation of policies to involve students , teachers, principals, parents, and school committees.
  • 41

Recommendation

  • National policies propose the systemic reform in aspects:
  • The creation of the school environment, teachers quality, the curriculum reform, teaching learning activities, learning resources, higher stage assessment and other supporting aspects.
  • The teachers have to develop their competence in academic, professional, social, and also personal through teacher certification development.
  • The organization of pre-service and in-service training would be controlled and managed more professionally with due respect to the quality and meaningfulness of the goal of increasing the professionalism of teachers.
  • 42
  • (4) Student learning strategy has to be focused
  • on three main areas: summarizing,
  • understanding, remembering, and
  • controlling.
  • (5) The availability of full-time and quality
  • teachers, quality books, and access to
  • internet needs to be improved.
  • 22
  • (6) Student reading performance, the efforts to
  • improve education quality should also be
  • considered as an integral part of policies for
  • improving household welfare
  • Continue
  • 43
  • G. GLOSSARY
  • D
  • 23
  • 44
  • GLOSSARY
  • • The PISA index of economic, social and cultural status (ESCS) was derived
  • from the following three indices: highest occupational status of
  • parents, highest educational level of parents in years of education, home
  • possessions
  • • The index of family wealth is based on the students’ responses on whether
  • they had the following at home: a room of their own, a link to the
  • Internet, a dishwasher, a DVD player; and their responses on the number
  • of cellular phones, televisions, computers, cars and the rooms with a bath
  • or shower
  • • The index of home educational resources is based on the items measuring
  • the existence of educational resources at home including a desk and a
  • quiet place to study, computer, software, books, technical reference
  • books, & dictionary;
  • • The index of cultural possessions is based on the students’ responses to
  • whether they had the following at home: classic literature, books of
  • poetry and works of art.
  • 24
  • 45
  • GLOSSARY Continued …
  • The index of teacher shortage was derived from items measuring school principals’
  • perceptions about qualified teachers
  • The index of memorization was derived from the frequency with which students did
  • the following when they were studying: i) try to memorize everything that is
  • covered in the text; ii) try to memorize as many details as possible; iii) read the text
  • so many times that they can recite it; and iv) read the text over and over again.
  • The index of elaboration was derived from the frequency with which students did
  • the following when they were studying: i) try to relate new information to prior
  • knowledge acquired in other subjects; ii) figure out how the information might be
  • useful outside school; iii) try to understand the material better by relating it to my
  • own experiences; and iv) figure out how the text information fits in with what
  • happens in real life.
  • The index of control strategies was derived from students’ reports on how often
  • they did the following statements: i) when I study, I start by figuring out what
  • exactly I need to learn; ii) when I study, I check if I understand what I have read; iii)
  • when I study, I try to figure out which concepts I still haven’t really understood; iv)
  • when I study, I make sure that I remember the most important points in the text;
  • and v) when I study and I don’t understand something, I look for additional
  • information to clarify this.
  • 25
  • 46


La base de datos está protegida por derechos de autor ©absta.info 2016
enviar mensaje

    Página principal