celebrating diversity to enhance progressive pedagogical practices

THE FIFTH BIENNIAL INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON TEACHING AND LEARNING OF ENGLISH IN ASIA (TLEIA5)

CELEBRATING DIVERSITY TO ENHANCE PROGRESSIVE PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES

27 – 29 OCTOBER 2014 HOLIDAY VILLA LANGKAWI MALAYSIA

ORGANISED BY: SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND MODERN LANGUAGES UUM COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

1

TEACHING AND LEARNING OF ENGLISH IN ASIA (TLEIA):

CELEBRATING DIVERSITY TO ENHANCE PROGRESSIVE PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES

CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS

Published by School of Education and Modern Languages UUM College of Arts and Sciences Universiti Utara Malaysia

2

Copyright © 2014 by School of Education and Modern Languages UUM College of Arts and Sciences Universiti Utara Malaysia 06010 Sintok Kedah Malaysia

ISBN: 978-983-44150-9-9

3

FOREWORD TLEiA International Conference was initiated in 2005 to encourage research activities that are aimed to help us understand issues and appreciate new findings and approaches and innovative ways in the teaching and learning of English. The papers submitted to this fifth biennial conference (27 - 29 October 2014) have now been compiled in this CD. It is hoped that these papers would serve as an invaluable reference to researchers, educationists and students, not only in Malaysia, but also for the rest of the world. I would also like to thank Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mohd Izam Ghazali (Dean of the School of Education and Modern Languages) and all the staff of the School of Education and Modern Languages for their consistent support, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hisham Dzakiria (Chairperson of the organising committee), Dr. Hariharan N. Krishnasamy (Ex-officio member) and members of the organising committee for their dedication and commitment, and all presenters and participants for their contributions to the conference discussions. Finally, let me convey my special thanks to the other member of the Paper and Proceedings Committee, Ms. Haryati Bakrin, for her hard work and dedication.

Dr. Lee Seung Chun Chairperson Paper and Proceedings Committee

*The linguistic and factual correctness of the papers compiled in this CD is the full responsibility of the authors. 4

CONTENTS PARALLEL SESSION PAPERS 3. Peer Tutoring as an Approach in Analysing Case Studies in a Business English Course Lin Siew Fong 7. The Development of English Vocabulary Reading Achievement Using PhonicsBased Exercises for Prathomsuksa2 Students at Sukhanaree School Sudaporn Ronyut 8. A Study of English Reading Comprehension Achievement by Using Task-Based Learning of Matthayomsuksa 4 Students at Thoenwittaya School Arissara Pinjai 9. A Study of English Reading Comprehension Achievement Using Cooperative Learning Method by Jigsaw Technique of Matthayomsuksa 2 Students at Watwungwiwakaram School Pariya Silangon 10. Application of Spoken Discourse Analysis to Conversation Teaching in Malaysian Polytechnic Context Nalanie Raja Gobal 12. Students' Perception on the Use Peer Feedback Sheet (PFS) in Peer Feedback Activity Nur Izzati Bt. Zarin 13. Synthesizing Researches in Methods of Teaching English of Graduate Students of Faculty of Education from Bansoddejchaopraya Rajabhat University from Academic Year 2012 to 2013 Areewan Iamsa-ard & Wapee Kong-in 14. Development of English Speaking Ability Using Task-Based Learning: A Case Study of Prathomsuksa 3 Students at Santa Cruz Suksa School Amara Wongkumkhao 15. The Use of Articulatory Analysis of Sound as a Simulation for Improving English Pronunciation Panornuang Sudasna Na Ayudhya 16. Learning Ability and the Retention of English Vocabulary through Games of Prathomsuksa 6 Students Watphratandongrung School Kanchanaburi Province Apissara Khenkhom 17. The Development of English Speaking Ability through Storyline Approach of Matthayomsuksa 2 Students at Santa Cruz Suksa School Pornprom Khemtrakul 5

18. Development of Listening-Speaking Abilities of Muay Thai Teachers through the Method of Communicative Language Teaching Sawang Vithayapitaks 19. The Development of English Listening and Speaking Abilities by Using the Natural Approach for Prathomsuksa I Students Suwannee Chopchuen 26. The Impact of Technology on Reading Foundation: An Essential Investment Mohammad Husam Alhumsi & Ahmad Affendi Shabdin 28. Visual, Computer-Based, Instruction for Post Critical Period Phonological Production in L2 Learners Raswan Sockol 31. Sources of Language Anxiety among Postgraduate Students Nayef Jomaa & Rohaiza Jupri 32. Acquisition of L2 Words and their Connotations through the Translation of Culture-specific Lexis: Findings from a Pilot Study Vivian Lee 40. English Language Learning and Popular Music: A Study in the Indian Context Sharda Acharya & Warlita S. Mina 43. Vocabulary Acquisition of ESL Kindergarteners through Storybook Reading Activity Farahnaz Mohd Khalib 48. Affective Literacy Framework for Rural Young Learners (ALFRYL) Fauziah Abdul Rahim, Seung Chun Lee, Husniza Husni, Sobihatun Nur Abdul Salem, & Ahmad Affendi Shabdin 50. The Influence of Native-Like Parsing Practice on Reading Comprehension Hyowon Song & Younghyon Heo 55. Gender Roles Representation in Indonesian School Textbooks: A Visual Content Analysis Ouda Teda Ena 56. The Effect of Wh-Questions Teaching Method towards Anxiety in Speaking Activity Mahanim Bt. Hasnan & Norzalina Bt. Nor Hasin 58. Challenges of Teacher Certification in Indonesia Paulus Kuswandono 61. Research on Visual Feedback Design Principles for Learning English Mina Yoo, Haeseon Yun, & Sunjoo Lee 64. TOEFL Response Templates 6

Patrick Rates 79. Second Language Learning Anxiety among Malaysian Tertiary ESL Learners Pei Hwa Siew, Kim Peck Wee, & Seet Leng Wong 82. Essay Writing among Pre-University Medical Students: Critical Thinking or Ready Made Structure? Farah Azizah Omar, Nurhafizah Shahruddin, & Norhasimah Alias 85. Learners’ Perceptions of the Effectiveness of Two Newly Implemented Active Reading Assessments Aiming to Achieve English for Academic Purposes Department Syllabus Goals Using Specific Purpose Texts Michelle Louise Oates 92. Cultural Dimension in Teaching/Learning English T. Sai Chandra Mouli 93. Chetti People: Insights from the Perspective of an Ethnographer Nurul Huda Hamzah & Rahmat Abd. Rashid 94. Vocabulary Instruction in Early Education: Findings from a Systematic Review of the Literature Freda Paulino & Amabel Palangyos 95. Who/What is Responsible for Speaking Proficiency Barriers in a Tertiary English Course in Oman? Sumaya Ambu-Saidi 96. Investigating the Reciprocal Teaching Strategies (RTS) among the EFL Learners in Malaysia Hadis Habibi & Manvender K. Chahal 112. Diversifying Tasks in the English Language Classroom Ramiaida Darmi, Juliana Niza Ismail Adnan, Akhdiat Abd Malik, & Kartini Mohamad Amin 204. Moving towards Student-Centred Learning in a Collaborative ASEAN English Language Training Program Hariharan N.Krishnasamy 208. An Integrated Instruction in English for Nursing (EN): EN Classes at a Japanese College of Nursing Akihiko Higuchi 212. Analysing College Students’ Voices in their English Language Learning through WhatsApp Application Aizan Yaacob, Chor Ping Ping, Harishini A/P Asokumaran, Lee Foo Ai, & Noorlidyawani Mat Rani 213. Is Writing Difficult? Exploring Teachers’ Strategies in Teaching Descriptive Writing in Indonesia Sufatmi Suriyanthi & Aizan Yaacob 7

214. Students’ and Teachers’ Perceptions on the Role of Grammar Instruction and Corrective Feedback Nurahimah Mohd.Yusoff, Aspalila Shapii, & Noor Azizah Sulaiman 215. A Survey on Vocabulary Learning Strategies Employed by ESL Learners Zaleha Esa & Zarina Ashikin Zakaria 219. The Influence of Chat Language on Student’s Language Nathasha Dharwahne A/P Balachandran 224. Technology: An Innovative Approach in English Language Teaching & Learning Gunjan Jain 226. Vocabulary Learning Opportunities: How Far is the Treasure Trove Explored? Naginder Kaur 238. The Effectiveness of PPSMTI in Malaysian Polytechnics: Administrators, Lecturers and Students Perspectives Aishah Bt. Muslim 239. Incorporating Asean Cultures into EFL Content-Based Units Puangpen Intraprawat 243. Students' Perceptions of Teachers' Corrective Feedback Gokillavani Subramaniam & Eny Haziany binti Hamzah

8

CHALLENGES OF TEACHER CERTIFICATION IN INDONESIA Paulus Kuswandono Sanata Dharma University Indonesia Email: [email protected] Mobile: +6289650322916 Abstract Teacher certification policy nowadays has been adopted by countries, such as the US, England, and Indonesia to standardise teachers’ competences with the rationale that it will increase the accountability of educational services. To achieve the accountability which can arguably improve the education national standard, the Indonesian government has undertaken the teacher certification policy since 2007 for the in-service teachers and since 2010 targeted for the pre-service teachers. This teacher certification is one part of the bigger scheme for education standardisation in Indonesia, including assessment of students’ academic outcomes. Along with this program, the government claims that teacher certification is to better reward teaching as a profession by improving the remuneration scheme for teachers which has long been considered as underpaid, thus cannot attract bright students into the profession. This paper seeks to identify and analyse some emerging problems of the teacher certification process, namely teachers’ motivation and limited resources and facilities which impede the implementation of such teacher standardisation reform. This is also a response following previous studies which have shown important issues whether or not certified teachers do better in their teaching in comparison to those not (yet) certified. The discussion also includes the challenges of professional development (PD) in the era of accountability and the suggestions proposed by some Indonesian scholars. Keywords: Teacher certification, professional development (PD), remuneration, Indonesia.

Introduction Following a two-hour “workshop” for teachers, I recently received an email from my mailing list group which was sent by a teacher to the administrator of the group, “Could you please provide our last workshop with a certificate of attendance?” It should be noted that this “workshop” was not particularly a formal workshop as it would more resemble a gathering. And yet, this spontaneous expression from one teacher made me stop and think. Why should certificates be provided available for such a small scale gathering? If there is no certificate, would the teachers go voluntarily to contribute in a workshop? This experience is an evident phenomenon of the age of accountability (Groundwater-Smith & Mockler, 2009) where professional and personal experiences should be documented neatly for promotion and supervision purposes. This is where the problem of teacher certification often resides, that is to say, formality of documents over quality (cf. Hastuti et al., 2009). Professional development (henceforth abbreviated as PD) nowadays has become a standard for teachers whether this is imposed or internally motivated. Some key phrases from standards discourse, namely ‘benchmarks’, ‘guidelines’, ‘effective teacher performance’, and ‘teacher certification’ have become a popular measurement of teacher quality in many countries, such as England, US and Indonesia. These countries have undertaken teacher certification policy as a benchmark for teachers’ continuous PD and to ensure the national education quality. Examples of such benchmarks are those specified in the Teacher Training 1

Agency (TTA) Standards discourse in England (Atkinson, 2004) or National Board of Professional teaching Standards (NBPTS) and National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) in the US (Cochran-Smith & Fries, 2001). Following some other developed countries, Indonesia also jumps into the bandwagon of sanctioning teacher certification as a means to improve the national education quality(Jalal et al., 2009). With the implementation of teacher certification, this paper seeks to explore two questions: why does Indonesian government decide to implement teacher certification as an education reform? What do the studies say about the impacts of teacher certification in some countries including Indonesia? Early discussion of this paper will initially highlight issues related to background and rationale of teacher certification in Indonesia from socio-historical perspectives as a developmental part of teacher professionalism. This includes an evaluation which specifically looks at the Indonesian political structures which require teachers to first comply with managerial and bureaucratic demands before they begin thinking about educating children. The underlying argument of this paper is that, borrowing from Gannon’s (2012) statement in the beginning of this writing, teaching is a complex work which cannot be easily expressed by a set of generic standards statements, nor can it be simply contained in an education reform such as a teacher certification (cf. Atkinson, 2004). The discussion in this paper aims to expand the horizon and perspectives of teacher certification in Indonesia because, responding to the concern of Fahmi, Maulana, and Yusuf (2011), the studies on impacts of teacher certification in developing countries are very limited. Background of Teacher Certification in Indonesia Teachers in Indonesia have been used to hearing rhetoric of ‘appreciation’ for their work: “heroes without medals” (see Sugianto, 2009). They are heroes, apparently, because they are dutifully willing to work hard to educate the next generation although the remuneration which can be provided by the government has tended to be very small. Although such teachers’ dedication may characterise their intrinsic motivation as an educator for young generation, it is also intricately linked with some external factors which makes this profession high in retention rate, such as difficulties to get a (better) job, therefore, job transfer to other non-teaching profession rarely occurs (cf. Soetjipto & Kosasi, 2009). Such a high retention rate, which partially indicates the frequently-reported Indonesian teachers’ compliance, endurance and hard work (Bjork, 2003), was unfortunately often used as a political tool to maintain the status quo of the incumbent regime of the New Order, such as with the implementation of centralised curriculum and high-stake testing for students, and recently teacher certification since 2007. These measures show that the government has tight control on the work of teachers, stressing that they are the key contributor for education quality improvement. After all, the Indonesian government regards that education is about outcomes (standard competencies) rather than an on-going constructive process of learning. Although the Indonesian policy makers may reject this claim, this view is evident in their persistence to carry out standardised curriculum and highstakes testing in all school levels1 across Indonesia regardless its diverse culture and social structures. The Indonesian government’s persistence to implement such measures as teacher certification emerges from the recent survey of Indonesian students ‘competitiveness in international testing regimes such as Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA). From these two tests, the competence of Eighth-Grade Indonesian students in 2011 was ranked 38 and 40 respectively in Mathematics and science test scores from 45 countries being observed. In comparison to students’ achievement in other countries, the government is clearly unsatisfied with the low 1

According to MONE, the high stakes-testing for elementary school will no longer be implemented in 2014.

2

academic outcome of the Indonesian students. For example, responding to the 2007 results of TIMSS and PISA, the government perceives the need to improve standards or benchmarks of teaching profession through certification: If one accepts the premise that quality teachers produce quality students, then the poor achievements of students can be attributed to the poor quality of teachers in Indonesia. Thus, students’ poor performance in both TIMSS [the Third International Mathematics and Science Study] and PISA [Program for International Student Assessment] presumably reflects an inadequate standard of teaching throughout Indonesian schools. (Jalal et al., 2009, p. 7) With the low results of Indonesian students achievement in TIMSS and PISA and considered ‘low quality of teachers’, the government has designed two measures, namely a teacher certification program and the high-stakes testing “National Examination” (based on Indonesia’s Law of National Education System, No 20/2003 and National Education Standard, PP 19/2005). The Indonesia’s teacher certification, as in some other parts of the world, imposes the standard competences for teachers. The government strongly believes that to improve the students’ achievement means to standardise teachers’ competences which have been subject to criticisms from the view of the Indonesian Ministry of Education (MONE). The policy makers of teacher certification in Indonesia as expressed in the report of Jalal et al. (2009) clearly argue that the rationale of this reform is prompted by the need to improve teachers’ standards and accountability. According to Darling-Hammond (2004), professional accountability is a requirement for teachers to possess specific knowledge, to have academic qualification to enter the profession, and ability to maintain the practice of the professional standards in their schools. Teachers’ specific knowledge should display what they should know and should do in their professional work – in relation to what students should achieve in a standardised examination (cf. Darling-Hammond, 2004). Likewise, the Indonesian educational laws mentioned above require teachers to demonstrate that they have acquired what are described as the four “standard competences”: i.e., pedagogical competence, personality competence, professional competence, and social competence. This certification is to ensure that all teachers across Indonesia will have the same standardised professional competences: Certification has been adopted as a requirement for both in-service and preservice teachers, and is designed to establish a quality benchmark for all teachers, including government and non-government teachers. It will provide a public guarantee of the standards of training and competency required from teachers (Jalal et al., 2009, p. 1). Jalal et al. (2009) further explain that this teacher certification is undertaken against the diminishing quality of national education which engenders the government to review the teacher formation in teacher education. Apart from the problem of students’ low achievement in international tests, just in the recent years, the policy makers dare to acknowledge that the cause of ‘low’ quality of teachers goes along with their low remuneration. As their limited salary is insufficient to meet their families’ needs, let alone to gain access for continuous PD, many teachers usually have a second job (Jalal et al., 2009). Accordingly, this resulted in higher rates of teacher absenteeism and low teaching competences since they had fewer opportunities to upgrade 3

their skills and knowledge. This is congruent with the report of the World Bank in 2008 that the teaching profession in Indonesia was poorly paid, and consequently could not attract highly potential students to enter the profession. From the government’s point of view, however, Jalal et al. (2009) reason that the poor remuneration for teachers are because of the limited budget and the oversupply of teachers: … low teachers’ salaries have been caused by a combination of the oversupply of teachers and limited government funding. According to MONE [Ministry of National Education] (2008) statistics, of the 2.78 million teachers in Indonesia, more than 50 percent of teachers (approximately 1.5 million) are civil servants. Expenditure on salaries has put heavy pressure on the government’s annual budget. (p.11) According to Jalal et al. (2009), the New Order era concentrated on the expansive development of primary education (SD Inpres) due to the urgent need for improved literacy levels across the country which explains the reasons why there was a high demand to acquire the large number of teachers. However, they argue that in some ways this has resulted in a decline in the quality of teachers because, in their view, “quality was sacrificed for quantity” (p. 10). Nonetheless, this situation was expected to improve with the declaration of the new standardised education and assessment programs prevailing for all school teachers, with each certified teacher promised to receive an incentive of double remuneration (Jalal et al., 2009). Using the metaphor of ‘stick and carrot’, Broekman (2013) illustrates that the Indonesian government attempts to lure teachers to improve their professional quality through the financial reward, “where setting standards, monitoring and appraising teachers, and forging closer links between performance and reward are considered as effective ways to increase the quality, motivation and accountability of teachers” (p. 19). This implies that if teachers still do not achieve a set of standardised competences for an extended period of time, the teachers can receive a consequence. This policy is taken to ensure that Indonesian education follows the accountability movement which characterise ‘modern’ education system. Broekman (2013) explains further that the policy makers in Indonesia are influenced by educational best practices in the international context to issue certain policies, such as Better Education through Reformed Management and Universal Teacher Upgrading Project (BERMUTU) which is funded by the World Bank and the Dutch government. This project aims to improve the teachers’ professional quality by honing their pedagogical skills and knowledge of the subject matter and can support the accountability of teachers’ PD undertaken through teacher certification. This project also guides the increased remuneration for the certified teachers. Thus, teachers are expected to receive income between Rp. 3 million and Rp 5 million, the amount which significantly improves their welfare (Hastuti et al., 2009). For the in-service teachers, the certification process is enacted in Indonesia through two modes: firstly, assessment of individual teachers’ portfolios that are expected to demonstrate competence and also growth through their PD and secondly, a PLPG (teacher professional training and education) by a selected teacher education faculty if a teacher does not pass the portfolio assessment. In both modes, if the assessors agree that the teachers have met the requirements, they will be given an educator certificate. As for the pre-service teachers, Jalal et al. (2009) explain that the scheme for their certification requires the reconstruction of the curriculum for teacher education. All teachers are required to hold an S1 degree and pass the Pendidikan Profesi Guru (teacher professional education). This is a post-graduate program which consists of 36-40 credits for students to complete in two semesters. While the process of teacher professional training and education (PLPG) in district and portfolio assessment has not undergone much change, a new schema for teacher 4

certification has seen some changes in the process of registration and the recruitment of teachers to be certified. Under this new schema, teachers need to upload their own data online, from which they are then ranked and called up for certification. The criteria of recruitment are also based on the results of teachers’ online test (for the portfolio track) and preliminary test (for the PLPG track). Beyond this, there are quotas for each province and district: these quotas are based on, for example, the candidates’ age and the proportion of the number of participants across the province. By all these measures the government expects that the process of certification will be objective, accountable, and transparent (Government Regulation No. 74/2008, Teacher, Article 8, p. 11). Problems on Indonesian teacher certification It is evident that the Indonesian government’s measures for the education reform are based on some studies in a number of countries which have shown that the quality of education depends largely on the quality of teachers, with an expectation that the national education improvement will also affect their economy competitiveness (cf. Tatto, 2006). In contrast, many education practitioners argue that the certification program cannot be considered as a panacea for the improvement of the national education quality (e.g., Broekman, 2013; Fahmi, Maulana, & Yusuf, 2011). In general, the criticisms at least address several problems such as, the problematic nature of standardisation as a result of ‘deficit model’ approach of PD, an elusive link between performance and reward, an external motivation, “one shot program” and limited resources and facilities. ‘Deficit model’ approach The government’s persistence on displaying students’ underachievement in international tests as the rationale for teacher certification receives various criticisms from different background of educators such as Surakhmad (2009), Tilaar (2009), and Broekman (2013). This rationale implies that the Indonesian government holds a ‘deficit model’ approach to criticise teachers’ poor competencies and the low academic outcomes of students learning in order to build a case for setting higher standards for both the teachers and the students. This standardisation, as can be predicted, results in more narrow concerns for academic outcomes rather than on concerns for the holistic aspects of students’ learning. Particularly with the diverse socio-cultural backgrounds of students in Indonesia and across countries, the government should avoid their inclination to uncritically compare the academic outcome of Indonesian students with those of other countries (Surakhmad, 2009). For Surakhmad, the national education system was not created to surpass the academic achievement of other countries, but to respond to the existential needs of the nation. Surakhmad (2009) maintains that it is misleading to view the outcomes of students’ tests as representing Indonesia’s education quality as the indicator of the nation’s education. Within such a deficit model approach, the Indonesian government invariably imposes intervention and control of what teachers should and should not do. Should these practices continue, Broekman (2013) criticises that teachers may one day lose their freedom and engagement to see the current needs of their students as they are busy responding the topdown requirements imposed to them. Under such a controlled mechanism, the quality of how teachers educate in class is restricted to what the standards say rather than attending on the various needs of students in a given context. Elusive link between performance and reward It would seem that the fundamental problems of teacher certification reside on the emphasis of performance and reward. Broekman (2013) relates this emphasis with “market rhetoric logic” (p. 25). If external motivation, such as reward or punishment, becomes the 5

hegemony of PD, teachers may feel ‘senseless’ and not fully-committed to their profession. In turn, it can engender formalistic approach of PD rather than emerging from their selfawareness. The argument which stresses the importance of reward and performance seems to be weak. Although the teachers’ welfare is improved by the new remuneration within the certification scheme, many educators still doubt that teacher certification can directly upgrade teachers’ quality. Indeed, the Indonesian teachers’ salary increase have improved the motivation of students to become teachers, but unfortunately it does not enhance the quality of the in-service teachers (Napitupulu, 2012b). Some studies have demonstrated that the teacher certification policy has not resulted in clear and positive outcomes for students’ learning, particularly when enhancing teacher quality is lured simply by external motivation, e.g., an increase in salary. For example, studies on the impact of teacher certification, such as in the US (Angrist & Guryan, 2008; Goldhaber & Brewer, 2000; Kane, Rockoff, & Staiger, 2008) and in Indonesia (Fahmi et al., 2011; Hastuti et al., 2009), find that the logic behind certification which links the students’ achievement and improved teachers’ competencies through certification is difficult to verify. For Angrist and Guryan (2008), teacher certification with the detailed and intricate process in it, only acts as a barrier to enter teaching profession, but does not screen the quality. Likewise, Indonesian scholars such as Hastuti et al. (2009) discover that there is no direct link that the certified teachers can improve their teaching quality. Some of the participants believe that it is true that teacher certification which rewards better financial incentives may be able to improve the teachers’ concentration on teaching (as there is not financial pressure to take a second job). However, some other participants doubt that the certification can improve their teaching because the quality of teaching skills is invariably determined more by personal commitments than externally imposed. This result corroborates the findings from Fahmi et al. (2011), as they claim that “there is no evidence that the teacher certification has an impact on student’s performance, as measured by national standard students exam score” (p. 2). They argue that there is a mismatch between the goals and means of teacher certification since the goals of teacher certification is not constructed for teachers’ day-to-day teaching quality, but for increasing teachers’ standard of life. In this way, Fahmi et al. (2011) question that the attainment of an ‘educator certificate’ is simply an issue of time. Sooner or later, teachers will obtain the certificate when the basis of its endowment is on the portfolio and PLPG (teacher professional training and education) rather than on their day-to-day engagement and enthusiastic work of teaching. In contrast, it is not plausible to expect teachers to improve their teaching performance when they realise that every teacher at one point will be certified regardless of their improvement (Fahmi et al., 2011). In other words, some teachers, at least, believe that it is a matter of time that they are eventually certified. Teachers’ Motivation Closely related to the previous argument regarding the elusive link between performance and reward, it is problematic to claim that teachers’ motivation to undertake certification is entirely intrinsic. It has been stated before that the Indonesian government claims the certification policy and the double remuneration for the certified teachers are ways to improve the education quality. In contrast, previous studies have shown that the claimed direct link between quality and remuneration as incentives may be a mismatch if teachers are merely motivated for PD based on financial reason. For example, while acknowledging that a good salary for teachers is undoubtedly important, Broekman (2013) argues that remuneration strategy may not be a direct solution to improve teachers’ professional quality. He provides at least two fundamental weaknesses of this scheme. Firstly, he maintains that it is true that teachers may not be adequately motivated if they are underpaid. In contrast, 6

money no longer becomes a motivation (which means stagnant PD) when teachers arrive to a satisfaction level of their salary. Secondly, it seems that the teachers and the policy makers have different approach in understanding motivation. For teachers, their motivation is often governed by the concept of ‘discipline’ model, while the policy makers perceive “motivation and performance from a ‘professionalism’ paradigm” (Broekman, 2013, p. 33). If this discrepancy continues, as Broekman maintains, the goals of certification program and the underlying concept of PD will be understood superficially and this means that the teachers will see their PD as merely conforming to the policy rather than their intrinsic needs as professional teachers. Broekman (2013) is anxious that the amplified bureaucratisation and workload on teachers’ job can demotivate them if they only see the suggested efforts for PD as conformity to the policy makers based on the discipline paradigm (also see Bjork, 2003). There is actually a more fundamental problem than the demotivation related to discipline paradigm as Broekman (2013) and Bjork (2003) have observed. The problem of teacher certification as an integral part of PD, according to Sari (2012), is caused by the policy makers’ lack of attention paid to existing socio-cultural values of learning. Sari (2012) criticises the commonly-held pragmatic belief that education is a ticket to get higher status in society rather than self-esteem as a result of enhancing their professional knowledge. Sari’s argument on this is based on her observation as an education researcher. She asserts that some teachers who have been in the profession for few years may consider themselves ‘senior’ in terms of knowledge and may not have motivation for life-long learning. While this continuous professional learning is exactly the aim of the Indonesian government to encourage teachers’ PD, the scheme of reward for performance as reflected in gaining an educator certificate may have a superficial impact. Being externally motivated, teachers may be compliant to the standard bureaucracy of certification and PD although they just ‘superficially’ follow it as a matter of abiding the regulation rather than addressing their real needs as teachers in the context of schooling across the nation. Given all these factors from the teacher, improving the teachers’ quality can be very challenging when this program does not have sustainability structure as explained in the following section. Broekman (2013) wishes that the Indonesian policy makers need also to look into other relevant motivations and alternatives to improve PD than merely a proposed financial strategy. “One shot program” The problem of teacher certification is exacerbated since, according to Halim (2011), “the majority of the programs are ‘one shot’ programs without any monitoring or evaluation process” (p. 105) and furthermore, “once certified, teachers retain this status for the rest of their careers” (Suryadarma & Sumarto, 2011, p. 19). This means that after the teachers receive their educator certificate, there is no clear, continuous support for PD to maintain any learning they did during the certification process or to improve the quality of their teaching. There is not comprehensive and continuous monitoring and appraisal system whether the certified teachers can maintain their improvement in comparison to those uncertified teachers (Fahmi et al., 2011). This supports the concern that the teaching certification is more concerned with the input process, such as academic qualification and trainings, rather than on the continuous process of PD (Hastuti et al., 2009; Suryadarma & Sumarto, 2011). In contrast, the government has claimed that they have monitored the quality development of the certified teachers through the teacher competency examination (UKG) in July 2012. In this test, the certified teachers are required to complete a multiple choice test (Napitupulu, 2012a). Although many have criticised the UKG as only testing a small portion of the cognitive aspect of teachers’ knowledge, the government argues that the mapping of teacher competency examination in 2012 will be used to determine the needs of teachers’ 7

continuous professional development. According to Gultom (2012), one expert staff from the education ministry, UKG is an integral part of the performance appraisal process to get a complete picture of the implementation of all teachers’ standards of competences. Nonetheless, although the Indonesian government has recently claimed that they have monitored the quality development of the certified teachers through a competency test, it is hard to substantiate this claim because in this monitoring, teaching is considered merely as a cognitive exercise rather than an emotional and psycho-motoric entity as a person. In place of this one shot program, Broekman (2013) believes that it would have been more favourable if teachers could be supported for their PD within their school setting through a good mentoring system. In this way, teachers can be assisted to identify and tackle their problems more directly and more personally. This is in response to the current PD practice which requires teachers to leave their schools in order to attend training programs which possibly do not closely relate to the tangible and intangible contexts mediating their teaching. Limited resources and facilities The government’s program for teacher certification is severely inhibited by the lack of resources and facilities which make it even more difficult for the government to monitor teachers who are underperforming (Broekman, 2013). As Broekman (2013) argues, “this approach [close monitoring] to underperforming teachers requires adequate facilities and opportunities for teachers to improve their competencies” (p. 31). Meanwhile, Broekman (2013) found that the chances and infrastructure to improve teachers’ PD are really limited. Although the government has emphasised that teachers have the right to “receive and use learning facilities and infrastructure to support their professional tasks” (Jalal et al., 2009, p. 33), it would seem that this statement remains to become rhetoric without clear agenda of its realisation. This implies that the evaluation for teachers under this program cannot be fairly judged accountable because teachers do not equally have access to the facilities and resource needed to develop their professionalism. This can mean that even though teachers are able to identify their areas to improve their professionalism, they can be helpless when they realise that they have no access to those resources and facilities. This argument is evident in the case of teachers whose schools are located in remote areas, usually outside of Java island, where the modes for information distribution are scarce, e.g., internet and library (cf. Halim, 2011; Sari, 2012). Those teachers often need to travel long hours to reach the nearby town where they can possibly have more resources for their PD, for example attending teachers working group or seminars. This is the reason why unequal distribution of access across Indonesia can be unfavourable for the standardised and centrally-imposed teacher certification. If the gaps between the teachers’ reality and the predetermined criteria for teacher certification are too wide, the teachers can feel that the teacher certification is a threat rather than an opportunity to develop their professionalism. In turn, this limited resource can result in self-blame and “a feeling of being incompetent… [which] in turn, can be demoralising and de-motivating” (Broekman, 2013, p. 33). Although the policy makers think that the “stick and carrot” model can really lure the teachers to improve their professionalism, Broekman (2013) is also right in saying that there is a discrepancy of needs perceived by the policy makers and the teachers. While the policy makers consider that the teachers need more incentives and financial reward for their profession, the teachers feel that they desire better resources and facilities for their school, which is not integrated within the certification policy. Conclusions and Suggestions Drawing from the literature that is critical of standards in teacher professional work as discussed above, teacher certification is indeed important. The government’s response on the 8

teachers’ need for a better remuneration is also worth appreciating as this can significantly improve their welfare. However, it should be noted that the penalty system is really problematic and debatable if viewed from the context of continuous PD because it places teachers as if teachers have no proactive agency in their profession. Another problem is luring as penalty implies that teachers do their job well because they are threatened with consequences rather than purely from their intrinsic motivation to dedicate for education. In such a situation, standardisation can be effective for teachers to reconsider whether their motivation is for teaching or simply to have a job to survive. Nevertheless, such standardisation often results in quantity and formality being overemphasised; and, where they are mechanically implemented without a view for the cultural and critical implications for this, then much research across the world is showing that they can adversely affect the whole educational process. With all the pros and cons of teacher certification and continuous PD, implementing standards also suggests a collegial and constructive dialog with all educational stakeholders, such as teachers, school principals, and educational authorities. Because standards alone often cannot depict the contingency of real-life teaching, this paper suggests that such a dialogue should be aimed to establish a common ground of context and understanding on the complex task of teaching. Next, rather than simply raising educational standards and incentives for teachers to overcome the educational problems, teachers need government’s support, e.g., on their school condition and accessible resource for their professionalism, which can increase their teaching motivation. It would seem that the solution of Indonesia’s educational problems cannot be approached as a one-to-one analogy, such as performance and reward in teacher certification scheme, but comprehensive and intersectoral. It follows that increasing teachers’ intrinsic motivation for continuous PD seems to be more challenging and yet more worthwhile than simply adopting reward and performance scheme as a model of teacher professional development in Indonesia. References: Angrist, Joshua D., & Guryan, Jonathan. (2008). Does teacher testing raise teacher quality? Evidence from state certification requirements. Economics of Education Review, 27(5), 483-503. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2007.03.002 Atkinson, Dennis. (2004). Theorizing how student teachers form their identities in initial teacher education. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 379-394. Bjork, Christopher. (2003). Local responses to decentralization policy in Indonesia. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 184-216. Broekman, Art. (2013). The rationale and effects o accountability policies on the work and motivation of teachers: Evidence from Indonesia. Global Managerial Education Reforms and Teachers, 19. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn, & Fries, Mary Kim. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The discourse of reform in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15. doi: 10.3102/0013189x030008003 Darling-Hammond, Linda. (2004). Standards, accountability, and school reform. The Teachers College Record, 106(6), 1047-1085. Fahmi, Mohamad, Maulana, Achmad, & Yusuf, Arief Anshory. (2011). Teacher Certification in Indonesia: A Confusion of Means and Ends: Department of Economics, Padjadjaran University. Gannon, Susanne. (2012). Changing lives and standardising teachers: The possibilities and limits of professional standards. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 11(3).

9

Goldhaber, Dan D., & Brewer, Dominic J. (2000). Does Teacher Certification Matter? High School Teacher Certification Status and Student Achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2), 129-145. doi: 10.3102/01623737022002129 Government Regulation No. 74/2008. (Teacher). Jakarta. Groundwater-Smith, S., & Mockler, N. (2009). Teacher Professional Learning in an Age of Compliance: Mind the Gap. Rotterdam: Springer. Gultom, Syawal. (2012). BPSDMPK-PMP Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Retrieved 15 July 2013, 2013, from http://ukg.kemdikbud.go.id/info/ Halim, T. (2011). Teacher certification in Indonesia. International Journal on Social Science, Economics and Art, 1(2), 103-106. Hastuti, Bambang, Soelaksono, Akhmadi, Syukri, Muhammad, Sabainingrum, Upik, & Ruhmaniyati. (2009). Implementation of the 2007 certification program for practicing teachers: A case study of Jambi, West Java, and West Kalimantan provinces. Jakarta: SMERU Research Institute. Jalal, Fasli, Samani, Muchlas, Chang, Mae Chu, Stevenson, Ritchie, Ragatz, Andrew B, & Negara, Siwage D. (2009). Teacher Certification in Indonesia: A strategy for teacher quality improvement. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. Kane, Thomas J, Rockoff, Jonah E, & Staiger, Douglas O. (2008). What does certification tell us about teacher effectiveness? Evidence from New York City. Economics of Education Review, 27(6), 615-631. Napitupulu, Ester Lince. (2012a). Juli, guru bersertifikat dites ulang [July, certified teachers retested], Kompas. Napitupulu, Ester Lince. (2012b). Sertifikasi guru tak kunjung angkat prestasi [Teacher certification never improve achievement], Kompas. Sari, Eunice R. (2012). Teacher professional development in an online learning community: a case study in Indonesia. Soetjipto, & Kosasi, Raflis. (2009). Profesi keguruan [Teaching profession]. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. Sugianto, Arief. (2009). Mengkaji pahlawan tanpa tanda jasa [Scrutinising heroes withour medals], Koran Surya, p. 9. Surakhmad, Winarno. (2009). Pendidikan nasional: Strategi dan tragedi. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas. Suryadarma, Daniel, & Sumarto, Sudarno. (2011). Survey of recent developments. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 47(2), 155-181. Tatto, Maria Teresa. (2006). Education reform and the global regulation of teachers’ education, development and work: A cross-cultural analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(4), 231-241. Tilaar, H.A.R. (2009). Kekuasaan dan pendidikan: Manajemen pendidikan nasional. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

10