Madrasah Effectiveness in Sumba, NTT ACDP 040. VOLUME 2 Knowledge to Policy

ACDP 040

Strategies for Improving Basic Education School/Madrasah Effectiveness in Sumba, NTT VOLUME 2 Knowledge to Policy

The Education Sector Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP)

i

Strategies for Improving Basic Education School/Madrasah Effectiveness in Sumba Volume 2 Knowledge to Policy Published by: THE EDUCATION SECTOR ANALYTICAL AND CAPACITY DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP (ACDP) Agency for Research and Development (Balitbang), Ministry of Education and Culture Building E, 19th Floor Jl. Jendral Sudirman, Senayan, Jakarta 10270 Phone : +62-21 5785 1100, Fax: +62-21 5785 1101 Website: www.acdp-indonesia.org Secretariat email: [email protected]

Printed in December 2016 The Government of Indonesia (represented by the Ministry of Education and Culture, the Ministry of Religious Affairs, and the Ministry of National Development Planning/ BAPPENAS), the Government of Australia, through Australian Aid, the European Union (EU) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have established the Education Sector Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP). ACDP is a facility to promote policy dialogue and facilitate institutional and organizational reform to underpin policy implementation and to help reduce disparities in education performance. The facility is an integral part of the Education Sector Support Program (ESSP). EU’s support to the ESSP also includes a sector budget support along with a Minimum Service Standards capacity development program. Australia’s support is through Australia’s Education Partnership with Indonesia. This report has been prepared with grant support provided by Australian Aid and the EU through ACDP.

The consulting agency responsible for the preparation of this Inception Report is Cambridge Education. The expert team is comprised of: Mary Fearnley-Sander (Team leader and basic education specialist), Angela Cook (Specialist in School Inspection and Supervision), Maddi Mina Djara (Interpreter/ Translator and Researcher), Penelope Holden (Specialist in School Inspection and Supervision), Eko Cahyono Husein (Research Analyst), Tukiman Tarunasayoga (Policy Reviewer), Sandra Triatmoko (Education Cost and Finance Specialist), Gusti Ngurah Adhi Wibawa (Specialist in Education Statistics) ACDP Dr. David Harding, ACDP’s Lead Advisor for Education Research and Knowledge Management is Lead Advisor for the Study, which is also supported by Hironimus Sugi as ACDP’s Field Consultant. The views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Government of Indonesia, the Government of Australia, the European Union or the Asian Development Bank.

2

Strategies for Improving Basic Education School/Madrasah Effectiveness in Sumba, NTT Volume 2 Knowledge to Policy

3

4

Table of content

Table of Contents

Acronyms and Terms .................................................................................................................................. vii

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................................... ix The Knowledge to Policy Story ............................................................................................................................................ ix

Chapter 1

Policy Options Derived from the Sumba SD/MI Situation Analysis .................................... 1 Policy Domain 1: Effective Teaching ................................................................................................................................... 2 Policy Domain 2: Curricular Effectiveness.......................................................................................................................... 5 Policy Domain 3: School Leadership ................................................................................................................................... 6 Policy Domain 4: School Evaluation .................................................................................................................................... 7 Policy Domain 5: An Integrated Teacher Workforce Policy.......................................................................................... 9 Policy Domain 6: Remote School Support.......................................................................................................................10 Policy Domain 7: Children’s Readiness for School ........................................................................................................12

Chapter 2

District Policy Choices .......................................................................................................... 13 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................................................................13 The Districts’ Priority Choices ..............................................................................................................................................14 Choices and Fiscal Constraints ............................................................................................................................................22 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................................28

Chapter 3

The Jakarta-Sumba Policy Dialogue.................................................................................... 31 The Preparation of the Issues ..............................................................................................................................................31 Policy Dialogue in Jakarta and Its Outcomes..................................................................................................................35 The Institutionalisation of the FPPS...................................................................................................................................38 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................................38

Conclusion

............................................................................................................................................... 41 Achievements...........................................................................................................................................................................41 The Future .................................................................................................................................................................................42 Recommendations..................................................................................................................................................................44

Annexes

............................................................................................................................................... 47 Annex 1: District Policy Plans ...............................................................................................................................................48 Annex 2: Draft Constitution of the FPPS ..........................................................................................................................65

v

Table of Content

List of Table Table 1. Table 2. Table 3. Table 4. Table 5. Table 6. Table 7. Table 8. Table 9. Table 10. Table 11. Table 12. Table 13.

The Policy Agenda of the FPPS .................................................................................................................................................. xi Areas of Policy Taken Up by Districts ...................................................................................................................................... xii Districts 2017 Commitments for KKG .................................................................................................................................... 15 Districts’ Commitments on Quality of School Leadership .............................................................................................. 17 District Choices for Teacher Policy ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Expenditure Allocations in the Four Sumba Districts (in Billions of Rupiah) ............................................................. 22 Relative Proportions of Direct and Indirect Expenditure (in Billions of Rupiah)....................................................... 23 Direct Expenditure Budget Allocations by Large Sectors in 2016 ................................................................................ 23 Budget Allocation for 9-Year Compulsory Basic Education (in Billions of Rupiah) .................................................. 25 Budget Allocation for Expenditure on Hire of Contract (Non-PNS) Teachers ........................................................... 25 District Expenditure on the S1 Teacher Upgrade from the Direct Expenditure Budget........................................ 26 Shortfalls in Funding Policy Choices (Sumba Barat) ......................................................................................................... 27 The Affordability of Quality Improvement with Adjustment to Sectoral Direct Allocations in Favour of Education ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 27

List of Box Box 1. Box 2. Box 3.

vi

The Cycle of School Evaluation Planning and Monitoring ................................................................................................. 8 Unit cost of Technology Enabling Tablet Delivery of Professional Development ................................................... 10 The Renewed Recommendations to the Minister that were Agreed at the Waikabul Meeting.......................... 37

List of Acronyms

Acronyms and Terms ACDP

Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership

ADB

Asian Development Bank

ADD

Alokasi Anggaran Desa—Village Funds Allocation

APBD APBN ASER BOS

Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Daerah (District Revenue and Expenditure) Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Nasional (National Revenue and Expenditure) Annual Status of Education Report (non governmental household survey on children’s schooling in India) Bantuan Operasional Sekolah (school grant)

DAK

Dana Alokasi Khusus

Dinas Pendidikan

Office of Education

CPNS

Calon Pegawai Negeri Sipil (candidate civil servant)

Dapodik

Ministry of Education and Culture’s Education Data System

EDS FPPS GGD HLTF KKG K3S LPMP LPPKS

Evaluasi Diri Sekolah (school self evaluation) Forum Peduli Pendikan Sumba (Concern for Sumba Education Forum) Guru Garis Depan (Frontline teachers) High level task force Kelompok Kerja Guru (Teachers Working Group) Kelompok Kerja Kepala Sekolah (principals’ working group) Lembaga Peningkatan Mutu Pendidikan (Institute for Education Quality improvement) Lembaga Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Kepala Sekolah (Institute for the Development and Empowerment of Principals)

MCL

Minimum Conditions of Learning

MOU

Memorandum of Understanding

NTT

Nusa Tenggara Timur province

NUKS PASKA PAUD PGSD Perbup

Nomor Unik Kepala Sekolah (principal’s identity number) Pusat Analisis dan Sinkronisasi Kebijakan (Centre for policy analysis and synchronization) Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini (Early childhood education) Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar (Primary Teachers Education) Peraturan Bupati (Bupati regulation)

vii

List of Acronyms

Perda PNS PROGAS PP

Peraturan daerah (district law) Pegawai Negeri Sipil (civil servant) Program gizi anak sekolah (nutrition program for school children) Peraturan pemerintah (Government regulation)

Sisdiknas

Law concerning the national system of education

SOP

Standard operating procedure

S1 SMA SMK SPG STIKIP

Sarjana Satu (bachelor degree) Sekolah Menengah Atas (Senior secondary school) Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan (vocational secondary school) Sekolah Pendidikan Guru (Teacher training school) Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Keguruan dan Pendidikan (Higher Institute of Teacher Education)

Surat edaran

Circular letter

Surat keputusan

Decree

UKG

Uji Kompetensi Guru (Teachers’ competency test)

UMR

Upah Minimum Regional

Undana

Universitas Nusa Cendana

UT

Universitas Terbuka – Open University

viii

Executive Summary

Executive Summary

The assignment of ACDP 040 included the presentation of clear, practical and costed policy options for 1

the schools of Sumba. Those options are the subject of this volume and follow from the Situation Analysis of Sumba primary education in Volume 1. This present volume narrates the development of policy by districts to address the findings of that study on the problems of SD/MI effectiveness in Sumba.

The Knowledge to Policy Story The Sumba story is a successful story of the take-up of knowledge into policy by district stakeholders. It shows the promise of the junction of political will, a policy program based on evidence, and districts able to marshal their own resources for strategic decision-making. In summarising the profile of the program in this executive summary, it is useful to pull out the features that might have contributed to this result. A key initial one is that Sumba stakeholders played a main role in identifying the issues that were to become the basis of policy. The study itself began with their agenda, developed long before the project.

2

When ACDP 040 began in February 2016 this agenda still featured:

1

2

•

The proportion of untrained teachers

•

PNS Teacher supply and distribution

•

Sustainable resourcing for private schools

•

The quality of teaching

•

Children’s readiness to learn

3

Terms of Reference for Strategies for Improving Basic Education school /MI effectiveness in Nusa Tenggara Timur, p.1. Annexed in Vol 1. of this study. Consultations for the Sumba project began in Sumba in 2013.

ix

Executive Summary

The Terms of Reference of the ACDP 040 also required that each stage of the study be worked through with stakeholders in interactive consultations before finalization. This process early brought an insistent stakeholder voice to the interpretation of the causes of poor outcomes. The slow burning fuse of the obstacle to PNS promotion in private schools was contributed to the agenda in this way, as well as the persistent view of stakeholders that the causes of low teaching quality was the ending of the old school system of teacher training. Combining the four districts into one Sumba for the purposes of the study triggered on the part of stakeholders a policy perspective on the problems. Common problems, common disadvantaging introduced from the outset an orientation on what would be the most compelling issues to focus on for change. The school case study, the main qualitative methodology for the study, also had an influence on what were seen to be the important issues. District officers, supervisors, principals and teachers formed part of the survey team. What these officers saw in the schools—children unable to read, the incidence of untrained teachers with no strategies to help them, the difference made between an attentive and a neglectful school head; that made them advocates for change and credible witnesses with their leaders. It was the response of the district leadership to the findings of the Situation Analysis that was responsible for the rapid knowledge-to-policy trajectory of the next phase. There was immediate acceptance of the findings by the leadership. At the workshop (June 11, 2016) when the findings of the Situation Analysis were disclosed to this group, the head of the host district stated that its neutral, systematic evidence could not be ignored and he and representatives of the leadership of the other three districts all agreed to support the formation of a leadership task force to take action to reverse the situation. This was the start of the Forum Peduli Pendidikan Sumba—FPPS (Advocacy Forum for Sumba Education) which played such a large role in galvanising Sumba’s policy development. The FPPS consisted of Vice Bupati in each district, the head of the Dinas Pendidikan and Bappeda in each district as the line departments technically supporting the policy leaders. Such a leadership meant that the FPPS quickly took the initiative in identification of the policy agenda and its prosecution. Much of the work of the ACDP 040 from the foundation of the FPPS in June was to support its agenda of policy development.

3

Inaugural ACDP 040 meeting in Kupang February 19th.

x

Executive Summary

From the start, the leadership saw a future for the

Table 1. The Policy Agenda of the FPPS

FPPS beyond the trigger for its formation in the SD/MI problems. They saw it as galvanizing coordinated action where all the districts had common problems and interests. Activating this

FPPS Waikabubak, 12 June Waingapu, July

Outcomes Formation of the FPPS

Weetabula 23 September

Review of district policy take up Agreement on policy agenda for Jakarta Centre response to policy dialogue Finalisation of costed district policy commitments Endorsement of ongoing policy dialogue Commitment to sustaining the FPPS

from the first meeting, the FPPS assumed the role of monitoring the commitment of all districts to reform through policy action in relation to the SD/MI. A standing agenda item of the meetings were progress reports on the districts on their policy adoption, resourcing and regulating.

An

important example of the value of this peer

Jakarta 28/29 September Waibakul, 25 October

scrutiny was the difficult political case of improving compliance with principals’ appointments: it helped all leaders accept compliance when one

Monitoring of district development policy options Preparation of the policy areas for Sumba-Jakarta dialogue

Bupati criticised his own practice. Policy option areas were developed by the ACDP 040 team from the implications of the most salient findings of the Situation Analysis. Districts considered these in the period between the dissemination of the Situation Analysis in June and the first substantive meeting of the FPPS in July. As their choices, all districts took significant steps in policy development from three of the most important policy areas. These were inservice training to skill all early grade teachers in literacy through a reformed teacher working group system; steps towards the equalised distribution of quality teachers for disadvantaged schools; and reformed recruitment of school principals. Some of this take-up is an uncompromising adoption of policy to implement a transformative policy. The agreement of all the districts to implement Permendiknas 28/2010 is of this kind. No district has explicitly articulated development of a non-PNS teacher workforce policy, which for all districts is their majority teacher workforce. But all have taken one or other of the steps that belong to that framework: in one case, one district moves towards equalisation of wages and in the case of another, a policy development for linking remuneration with performance.

xi

Executive Summary

Take-up in other policy domains appears limited by two main factors. One was districts’ reticence in articulating the policy profile of a technically unfamiliar area but one that they recognise as important. Two examples are the development of an early grades literacy curriculum

Table 2. Areas of Policy Taken Up by Districts Significant policy take-up by the districts 1. Improved KKG operation 2.

Implementation of Principals’ recruitment regulation

3.

Principals’ training

4.

Regulation non-PNS teachers

5.

Supervisor improvement

6.

Steps towards teacher redistribution

and a policy on language of instruction. What is in their plans should not be read as the limits of their interest in these areas. A third such area is evaluation of learning as the mode of school evaluation, both unfamiliar and unprovided-for

systemically,

through

the

non-

occurrence of school evaluation. In all these cases, ACDP 040 has recognised the need for more support with operational policy and for this reason an extension of the program has been sought to allow districts the chance to master and consolidate these policy areas. A second main limitation has been fiscal. Analysis of the education budget shows how limited is districts’ fiscal capacity for quality improvement and the impact on their limited budget of having to supply from their own resources the large part of their teaching force, due to the inadequate supply of PNS teachers by the central government. Policy action on six national policy issues — with this PNS issue in the lead— was steered by the FPPS. This work of formulating policy positions for policy dialogue with the central government has played an important role in the growth of the FPPS as a policy forum. The response of the Jakarta ministry was also a key influence in the Sumba leadership’s commitment to FPPS as a policy development mechanism. There was an affirmative reception of the “Sumba model” in Jakarta, seen as solution-seeking policy difference between regions and the centre. This, but more the conclusion that Sumba have not yet prevailed in priority areas of policy, energised the Sumba leadership into affirming the continuing FPPS existence as a peak Sumba body (FPPS Waikabul meeting, 25th October) and writing its constitution. The Sumba story is unfolded in the three chapters that follow. Chapter 1 sets out the policy domains that ACDP 040 developed, drawing on the implications for policy of the findings of the Situation Analysis. Chapter 2 describes the actual policy choices made by the districts from among the options, how districts have evidenced their commitment to them, and how their budgets constrained their choices. Chapter 3 sets out the policy dialogue agenda with Jakarta that developed around the issues of Sumba education implicating national policy. The conclusion to the volume provides a reflection on the nature of the policy achievement and the reasons why it was driven by political action rather than systemic initiative. The implications of that are drawn out for the future of the new policies and their further policy growth.

xii

Executive Summary

This reflection leads into a pragmatic selection of recommendations for consolidating and securing the achievement of the Sumba districts, along with maximising their chances of support from agencies of donors interested in supporting districts so ready for change. These recommendations fall into three areas and their main components are: 1. Support for Operational policy development for new commitments: 1.

Regulatory underpinning of new policy

2.

Technical support for effective training guidelines

3.

Curriculum development support (early grades literacy and the feasibility of a mother tongue approach for rural and remote schools)

2. System Support for Policy Achievements 1.

Technical review of systemic provision for learning evaluation; and alignment of the ACDP 040 school evaluation model with review outcomes

2.

Technical support for education financing analysis to align new policy priorities—particularly costs of teacher and principal professionalization —with budget priorities.

3.

Technical support for school mapping and development of a distribution strategy for qualified teachers, based on a class-teacher ratio

3. Pursuit of opportunities for Sumba 1.

Developing the capacity of FPPS to sustain its roles in policy development monitoring of implementation and policy dialogue with the central government, including the idea of Sumba as a model for centre district policy synchronisation

2.

Advocacy with donors and external agencies for technical and implementation support to consolidate and expand its primary education improvement, through dissemination of Sumba’s achievements at the centre.

xiii

Executive Summary

xiv

Policy Options Derived from the Sumba SD/MI Situation Analysis

Chapter 1 Policy Options Derived from the Sumba SD/MI Situation Analysis

The salient findings of the Situation Analysis are summarised in the final chapter of Volume 1. Their policy implications were not difficult to discern. In line with the assignment of the ACPD study, the next step was to draw out these implications into policy options for the consideration of the four district governments. This was done by preparing policy domain papers for discussion, with options indicatively defined, at the High Level Task Force meeting held on 27 July in Waingapu, Sumba Timur. These policy options were not all ultimately chosen by the districts, as will be seen in Chapter 3. It is valuable to consider them first however, because they provide a kind of baseline against which to appraise the significance of the eventual policy choices taken by the local government. When we come to look at these eventual policy choices, the comparison provides a way of seeing what districts own as policies and the kind of steps they take in embarking in the direction of policy frameworks that are complex and demanding. The domains and their options also work as a mapping of relevant policy, useful to guide future support for districts in developing an organisational base to their reform choices. There were three guiding principles in recognising policy implications: •

the salience of the issues in relation to their impact on learning. This followed from the effective schools criteria, modified to fit Sumba conditions.

•

policy implications for making disadvantaged schools effective. What would work in such schools enables the reforms to be implemented in all schools.

•

immediately implementable change. This means building up under-utilised strengths in existing systems and resources that could be transformative and not focusing on areas where problems have been in place for a long time; and have not proved vey amenable to change.

1

Chapter 1

In the following discussion, the policy domains are ranked in order of their likely impact on resolving learning problems. They reference the summary of findings in the final chapter of the Situation Analysis and therefore the reasons for their salience are not reiterated here.

Policy Domain 1: Effective Teaching 1.1 Availability of Practitioner Training The findings on learning discussed in the previous chapter suggest that all teachers, and principals and supervisors, need training as the first immediate priority for improving outcomes and that the teachers working group (KKG) is an affordable systemic way of doing this—if reformed. For KKG to meet present urgent needs, meetings would have to be: •

organised around a literacy curriculum, delivered sequentially over a year of professional development. Sumba has such a curriculum available to it in the Save the Children Literacy Boost curriculum, a nine-month program operational in two districts from mid-2016.

•

resourced with a team of skilled teachers leading sessions. All districts have outstanding teachers of early grades, as was evidenced in the teacher members of the case study team. SAVE’s KKG pilot and its training of teachers through Literacy Boost, have provided a pool of literacyskilled teachers in Sumba Barat and Sumba Tengah. The SAVE Literacy Boost training program for teachers, adapted for the NTT context, shows it able to rapidly increase reading performance. In Belu district in the 2014-15 school year, the proportion of Year 2 students who were readers increased from 19% to 74%). Sumba districts without SAVE could engage teachers from the SAVE districts who have been through the Literacy Boost program, to train the leaders of their own KKG programs. In addition, at the provincial level SAVE has already trained PGSD lecturers from Universitas Nusa Cendana (Undana) and from the Lembaga Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik (LPMP) who could be drawn on by Sumba districts as trainers. It may even be possible to access provincial and national financial support for their availability since KKG revitalisation (Gong Belajar) is an NTT strategic priority; and literacy improvement (Gerakan Literasi) a national priority, which the LPMP facility as national support to districts should help to facilitate.

•

occurring with sufficient frequency for the KKG to operate as a training course—i.e. weekly sessions. This would incur more than the present level of support for KKG from the school grant (BOS). However, efficiencies in the use of the BOS grant would free up more school support for teacher professional development. In view of the scale of the problem of teacher capacity, district governments might view it as appropriate to prioritise the district’s supplementation of the school grant (BOS daerah) for this purpose, at least until all Sumba’s workforce has undergone

2


skilling. Such supplementation would be necessary for small schools for which the BOS does not generate sufficient resources. •

followed by incentivised classroom take-up of training. A pre-and post test of teachers’ competence in the teaching of literacy should be included in the operation of the KKG. Based on actual classroom observation it would be a a more effective way of measuring and monitoring teachers’ pedagogical competencies than the pen and paper test of the teachers’ competency test (Uji Kompetensi Guru—UKG). In addition, as a universal practice with results reported to the Dinas Pendidikan, the conduct of competency tests based on classroom observation would help develop principal and supervisor competence in teacher assessment. If performance on such a test were associated with teacher contract renewal and career development, these additional incentives might make the difference to teachers’ attitudes to participating in the KKG and implementing what they learn from it.

•

profiled as a strategic initiative of the district. As in NTT province, where KKG revitalisation has been sponsored by the Governor, the kind of KKG outlined above needs a public profile as a strategic initiative at the district level. It needs Bupati support in the form of a Peraturan Bupati (Perbup) to regulate its implementation and compliance with especially developed standard operating procedures (SOP) covering resourcing, quality implementation, participation, monitoring and evaluation. Its impacts, evaluated through the pre- and post-tests, need to be reported to Parliament as part of a strategy for gaining ongoing and increasing resourcing as the district key solution to teacher quality.

ACDP 040 has developed a model for the implementation of effective KKG. See Volume 3.

1.2. Improvement of Qualification-Based Training The teacher’s qualification (S1) is a standard that teachers and districts have to meet. But from the first consultations of ACDP 040 onward, there was a persistent urging from Sumba educators for some kind of return to the former practice-oriented, Teacher Education School (Sekolah Pendidikan Guru—SPG) model of teacher training. This model took candidates from the end of junior secondary onwards, which contributed to development of teachers who had chosen teaching as a vocation, rather than as a second best option for gaining entry to tertiary education. The PGSD S1 is regarded as having failed to deliver to classrooms teachers with pedagogical skills. The fact that most enrolees from Sumba are obliged to take this degree in a distance modality has exacerbated the problems, as practice-strengthening delivery of the curriculum is severely curtailed by the infrequency of face-to face-interaction in the S1 delivered by distance. Stakeholders recognise that any alternative to the current mandated qualification for teachers has to be compatible with the Teachers Law (2005), which specifies the S1 (though not necessarily an education major). They want to test national policy tolerance for a secondary level start to teacher preparation

3

Chapter 1

through a vocational route (SMK Keguruan) to the S1 rather than the current academic one (SMA). In this endeavour, it would be very important to retain the commitment to a post-SMK continuation to the S1 as the pre-requisite qualification for teaching. Experimentation with a similarly conceived institution, the kolese guru in Papua, shows the risks of a teacher training qualification not clearly articulated with 4

employment pre-requisites or with accrediting institutions.

In view of the challenge of this idea to existing conventions for the teacher qualification, it would be appropriate to undertake a feasibility study on the issues of the demand, accreditation and graduate employment outcomes before a policy option is developed. The ACDP 040 suggests that a more immediate and feasible policy option would be to explore better adaptation of the PGSD S1 to the Sumba context of teaching. There are two possible routes. One is to improve the relevance of the PGSD S1 in institutions already mainly servicing Sumba pre-service trainees, the NTT public university, Universitas Nusa Cendana (Undana) and Indonesia’s Open University (Universitas Terbuka—UT). While the PGSD S1 curriculum framework is standardized throughout Indonesia, there is scope to adjust the approach to the curriculum and methodology units to improve 5

teachers’ skills. As stated above, already in place is successful collaboration between Save the Children and Nusa Cendana University to develop lecturers’ literacy teaching skills. In regard to the UT, face-to-face tutors are procured at the district level and are often key educational personnel. Guidance could be developed to ensure that the weekly face–to-face sessions of the UT use a model of instruction that engages teachers in thinking about and reporting on their practice in the light of the new learning. A second option is expanding the enrolment of the Sumba-based institution already delivering the S1 in conventional mode, through an MOU arrangement. The private Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Keguruan dan Pendidikan (STIKIP) in Sumba Barat Daya district has obtained independent accreditation status as a tertiary provider. This independence gives it some opportunity to customise its curricular focus. In addition, the institution has an existing early grades specialisation in its S1 course, ready to be adapted for a literacy focus and has commenced the process of quality improvement for accreditation as a provider of a PAUD specialisation. It has preserved the quality of its pre-service qualification by not simultaneously embarking on an inservice upgrade program for the S1. The relatively high standing of the institution among NTT tertiary providers, and its influence in the professional association of primary PGSD, makes it a potential agent for leading important contextual adjustments to the degree to better fit contexts like Sumba for teaching literacy. An MOU developed between STIKIP (and any other Sumba based PGSD provider) would specify collaboration over the whole field of literacy training. It would make possible a partnership between PGSD 4

See Analytical and Capacity Development Partnership (ACDP-039), 2014. Rural and Remote Area Education Strategic Planning Study for Tanah Papua.

5

ACDP 040 discussion with the Dean of the PGSD, Universitas Nusa Cendana, 12 September 2016.

4


and advanced skills practitioners from the districts in: (1) the development of a literacy strategy for implementation of the 2013 curriculum; (2) the development of the KKG curriculum to develop teacher skills modelled on Literacy Boost; and (3) and in the re-development of the pedagogical components (mata kuliah) of the PGSD aligned with the literacy strategy and the KKG program. This collaboration would ensure mutual professional development focused on classroom realities and an aligned pre-service preparation of teachers. Other areas of the MOU might include shared planning for pre-service students’ practicum placements to ensure the practicum actually serves its purpose in giving candidate teachers access to practical guidance and mentored practice.

Policy Domain 2: Curricular Effectiveness 2.1 Greater Focus on Literacy in the Early Years’ Curriculum The following suggests improvements to the literacy curriculum in three main areas: •

Curriculum guidelines for the TK sub-sector. At present, there is no policy in Sumba regulating the TK curriculum, so the potential benefits of transition to school are at risk, especially in relation to development of children’s pre-literacy skills. The Save the Children pilot of PAUD in 68 villages in two districts of Sumba provides a model of comprehensive programing that could become the basis for a TK curriculum. At the same time, it is the case that the TK sub-sector is not resourced for the quality development of its teachers and such a strategy may not be replicable except with external support. At least, however, the districts could provide a guiding policy framework to the providers of TK, the majority of whom are from the private sector. It would also be important for the Dinas Pendidikan to learn from the approach to early learning used in the SAVE TK, by seeking inclusion by SAVE of SD supervisors in the model as part of SAVE’s strategy for knowledge transfer to the districts. This is because of the need for an approach in early grades that better bridges the distance between home and school, both for children who can and those who cannot access TK. Specifically in relation to literacy it would make it possible to scope the literacy curriculum as a continuum from TK.

•

Curriculum guidelines for teaching the basic components of reading in Years 1 and 2. Teachers do not know know how to teach reading. They will be unable on their own to ensure Year 1 students gain the component skills of reading that the Curriculum 2013 assumes. Providing such a KKG curriculum for teaching literacy means in practice providing teachers with a classroom curriculum as well as guidance in its implementation. This linkage between the training and the classroom curriculum makes sense of attaching teacher performance appraisal to classroom implementation of the KKG training. What would be necessary in the implementation of this focus on literacy in the early grades classroom is the integration of this approach into the implementation of Curriculum 2013; otherwise teachers

5

Chapter 1

will not undertake it. However, such integration may not be as difficult as it first appears. Sumba teachers who have been inducted into the Curriculum 2013 say its integrated thematic approach is not very different from the KTSP and this and its textual focus can be deployed around the teaching of the component skills of reading. A language policy governing PAUD and early grades learning. The strong indications that rural and

•

remote children are not learning because of the language of education makes it a high priority to clear this resolvable problem out of the way. The fact that Bahasa Indonesia is the default language of the PAUD sub-sector makes it matter even more urgent to confront the language of instruction issue as it undermines the potential of the whole subsector to assist learning. The development of a policy around language of instruction, however, requires a high level of technical input, as the path-finding example in Papua makes evident. It needs a knowledge base about the usage of the different Sumba languages and community attitudes, to inform the choice of languages for multi-lingual provision, costing of such provision, research-based decisions about the duration of instruction in mother tongue, pedagogical approaches for mother tongue instruction and for bridging to Bahasa Indonesia in later grades. Beyond policy development, implementation of such a policy would also like PAUD require more technical resources than Sumba could muster and would depend on the availability of external support.

Policy Domain 3: School Leadership 3.1 Principal Recruitment As with the education qualification, the issue of ineffective school leadership was a policy area that emanated from stakeholders’ concerns throughout the consultations of ACDP 040. The problems of low quality were attributed by the different groups in the consultations to misuse of the district governments’ political control over appointments. Some the Bupati themselves recognised this problem and its 6

consequences for schools.

Stakeholders want to see compliance with the Ministerial regulation for the recruitment of principals (Permendiknas 28/2010). In this regulation, the district Dinas Pendidikan performs the assessment of suitability of candidates, while the Principals’ Institute (Lembaga Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Kepala Sekolah—LPPKS) makes the academic selection of those suitable for training and issues the graduating principal with an identity number (NUKS). This identity number is a national prerequisite for principals’ appointment. The district Bupati needs to develop a related regulation (Perbup) to make a ministerial regulation enforceable.

6

Bupati attending the second HLTF meeting in Weetabula led discussion on this issue.

6


It was apparent during the consultations that local decision makers are unaware of the role the LPPKS plays in candidates’ eligibility for selection as principal or the potential of LKKKS-district MOUs to share training costs. At present, the eventual pass rate of around 50% of trained candidates is a disincentive for low resource districts to comply with the training requirement. Negotiation of cost sharing and lower cost and more effective ways of facilitating this training may result in greater compliance with the mandated recruitment requirements.

3.2 Continuous Professional Development for Principals Along with the revival of the KKG, more frequent, adequately funded, well programmed principals’ working groups (Kelompok Kerja Kepala Sekolah—K3S) should be a priority for training policy and resourcing. The K3S is fundamental to the development of a culture of school leadership among Sumba’s principals. It has a responsibility for supervising the effective implementation of the KKG program; in which principals themselves should participate. It can be an effective vehicle for developing principals’ skills for supervision of teaching and learning and teacher assessment through peer learning mentoring activities and moderation activities. Because of its intimate connection with teacher effectiveness, revivification of the K3S should also be a strategic priority of the district, affected through the same mechanism of a Peraturan Bupati to regulate implementation. It would be appropriate also to develop a mechanism for the engagement of the head of primary education in the Dinas Pendidikan in its programming and reporting. The implementation of an effective KKS system would also require budgetary allocation to enable adequate planning monitoring and reporting activities to occur.

Policy Domain 4: School Evaluation The findings of the Situation Analysis on the conduct of school evaluation showed that at present school evaluation does not inform either the school community or the Dinas Pendidikan on the performance of schools in students’ learning. More widely, it showed school evaluation is not undertaken routinely at all, due both to the complexity of the process and more fundamentally to the lack of systemic evaluation functions at the level of the Dinas. The school effectiveness framework of the Situation Analysis focussed attention on school factors that most bear on learning. An implication is that school evaluation should lead away from the current evaluation of school quality standards regardless of relevance to learning outcomes and focus on those quality factors with the most evidenced impact on learning. This would include aligning with those quality standards that are immediately relevant to learning. A ready alignment would be possible with the Minimum Conditions of Learning (MCL) indicators, if the latter are accepted as part of the revisions to the Minimum Service Standards. In order to increase the occurrence and the efficacy of school evaluation, a fit for purpose instrument and process is necessary. If the evaluation were focused on outcomes related to learning, school performance should be measured by the results of reading and numeracy tests from early grade. This should be

7

Chapter 1

through demonstration tests of learning such as the paragraph reading tests used by Pratham in its ASER assessments in South Asia. It should include drop out and repetition rates, student absenteeism rates, and the school factors most closely related to learning: indicators of effective teaching and school leadership. Relevant input factors for which the district is responsible could be measured in the separate process of the MSS evaluation, proposed as an annual occurrence. Evaluation against the standards at the MSS level is relevant in Sumba, where 65% of Sumba schools are still unaccredited. There are five elements in a fit-for-purpose process: School evaluation should be owned by the district Dinas Pendidikan as a core function necessary to

•

its effective management of education and therefore the processes relevant to effective schooling should be initiated by and reported to that level of jurisdiction. Schools should not be evaluated against standards which take no account of contextual differences,

•

but rather against baselines of their own performance. Besides being an accurate way of assessing performance, this practice may help reduce the reported tendency of school evaluations to fabricate good results so as to avoid feared consequences of poor ones.7 Evaluation

•

of

schools

for

their

effectiveness in supporting students’

Box 1. The Cycle of School Evaluation Planning and Monitoring

learning needs to be accomplished within existing assessment capacity in Sumba. Supervisors are intended by the MSS process, as they are by the EDS, to be the key agents of school evaluation. A

Year 1: Mid-First semester Year 1 First semester Year 1: Second semester

process is necessary where the quality of the assessment does not depend on technical

capacities

that

most

Year 2: Mid-First semester

School evaluation of previous year’s performance Annual School improvement planning Monitored implementation of the annual school improvement plan (formative assessment evidence accumulated) School evaluation of previous year’s performance

supervisors are unable to meet. Obvious indicators of performance are necessary. One such would be a test of oral reading capacity as in the ASER model that parents and village officials can observe. Another would be the consistency of teacher’s methodology with their KKG training which supervisors would be able to appraise. Parents and the village community should participate in the school’s evaluation, as the key

•

stakeholders. Obvious indicators of performance will also help make such participation possible. Parents’ participation is an education for families as what the school can and should do for their child, and therefore likely to greatly impact on their support of schooling, once they understand what to expect. In addition, their active involvement in the process will be providing the triangulation that 7

This practice was reported as prevalent by the LPMP representative at the ACDP 040 Inception workshop March 2016.

8


gives the results credibility. A useful role of the supervisor would be to organise parent and community participation in the evaluation event and lead-up processes. •

School evaluation needs to be linked into a purpose and a program for improvement. It needs to be not only the conceptual basis for subsequent school improvement planning, but actually timetabled so that it can serve that purpose as part of a continuous cycle of improvement. This would require a process cycle of the kind shown in Box 1.

ACDP 040 has developed a model for this fit for purpose evaluation, featuring all these indicators of effectiveness for learning and these elements of the process. The model is supported by a handbook to guide implementation. See Volume 3.

Policy Domain 5: An Integrated Teacher Workforce Policy The majority of Sumba’s workforce are non-PNS teachers, a situation that mainly arises from the exclusion of the enrolment in the private schools—historically part of Sumba’ primary education provision—from 8

consideration in the allocation of PNS teacher need. District supplementation of teacher supply, compounded by poor teacher distribution, has resulted in differing recruitment systems at national, sub national and school levels and consequently large disparities of qualification, remuneration, quality and career development within the teacher force. What is required for Sumba’s dependence on non-PNS teachers is an integrated workforce policy governing the quality, management and conditions of service of all teachers. This policy would need to cover: 1.

a recruitment policy based on the relevant teacher standards and teacher-class ratio needs 9

(including capacity to project need). Teacher recruitment by school would be regulated by quality hire criteria and supervision from the Dinas Pendidikan and permitted only where PNS and district recruited teachers were inadequate to meet need. 2.

equalisation of remuneration and conditions, at least as amongst the non-PNS cohort. The basic salary for non-PNS teachers should be set annually following the Minimum Regional Wage Standard at provincial level. Functional allowances/ additional benefits should not be based on a quota system but should be available to all or none, in keeping with the impartial standards of a professional system.

8

9

The basis for the allocation of PNS is need, to the extent that the central budget can meet. See Peraturan Kepala Badan Kepegawaian Negara, 19/2011; and the accompanying Pedoman Umum Penyusunan Kebutuhan Pegawai Negeri Sipil, While the teacher-class ratio is a more generous basis for calculation than TPR, it is also more appropriate for Sumba with its high numbers of small isolated schools. In the current context of low teacher capacity multi-grade teaching which demands high levels of skills is not an option.

9

Chapter 1

3.

the development of career paths for non-PNS teachers to support motivation and professionalism. This would include prioritising high performing non-PNS for training opportunities to enable them to compete for CPNS and contract PNS positions.

4.

management of performance. A workforce under the control of the district government has advantages for linking contract renewal with performance. Performance appraisal should include outcome indicators such as classroom assessment of capacity to implement training and student learning achievement against benchmarks (See policy domains 1 and 4)

5.

equalised distribution of qualified teachers to rural and remote schools, so as to avoid compounding the disadvantage of these schools. School mapping of over and under-supply would be a first step in a teacher supply management system.

Supporting such a a policy would require: (1) increased allocation to education from the APBD to equalise wages; (2) use of Dapodik (and improved data operator and analyst capacity) as the main source of teacher supply data with supplementation on other teacher factors from additional data bases; (3) development of performance instruments; and (4) local district regulation.

Policy Domain 6: Remote School Support A solution needs to be designed tailored to support delivery of services and communications to Sumba’s remote primary schools, 13% of the total provision, with an enrolment of around 7,500 students. Sumba Timur has by far the largest number of remote schools, so for this district such support deserves priority consideration. These schools are isolated not only through the barriers of terrain and distance but also because many lack electricity and a phone signal. Two innovations are suggested: Tablet based delivery of professional development resources. To gain access to professional development districts could consider piloting and if successful, investing in pre-programmed tablets for teachers. Preloading makes the technology independent of weak, interrupted internet signals. The concept is to enable teachers in isolated schools to conduct their own school-based KKG by access to a liverecorded, best practice version of the KKG program, preloaded on to tablets. This program would be the same literacy teaching program as that developed with the support of Save the Children for the conventional KKG. Available on the tablets, it could be the focus of a weekly or monthly session timetabled by the school and led by

10

Box 2. Unit cost of Technology Enabling Tablet Delivery of Professional Development Technology Costs Asus tablet

100

Solar panel

30

LCD projector

350

Total USD

490


the school’s principal or senior teachers. The capacity of the tablets would enable a rich array of supplementary instructional resources also to be pre-loaded to guide teachers in their daily practice. The tablets would need to be supported by a small solar panel adequate for charging the tablet and for running display for schools without electricity, as well as by an LCD projector. One tablet per school staff would promote collaborative use of the resource. This would also keep the investment affordable. On current prices, the unit could be provided at less than USD 500 per school. The district would have to ensure the success through training the capacity of remote school teachers to use the technology, and for routine maintenance of the solar panel unit. At the subdistrict level, a teacher trained in trouble shooting more serious problems with the tablets, LCDs or solar panels would help ensure continuous usage. The district would need to allocate a small budget to schools to replace the solar panel battery annually and the overall effective usage of the technology would need monitoring. The district government could cooperate with the central government (Ministry of Education and Culture – Pustekkom; Ministry of Information, Ministry of Village Development, and Ministry for Development of Disadvantaged Areas and Transmigration) to discuss the pilot and follow up support, and procurement as well as design of tablets. A technological solution of this sought is highly appropriate to Sumba’s self promotion as an island using renewable energy to meet its demands. International as well as domestic resources are being allocated for Sumba to develop its renewable energy potentials; and this pilot project, if successful, might well attract investment partners for scale-up. If the pilot were successful other usages of this simple technological could be added; for example, lantern-illumination to enable children to do homework in a village centre at dusk. A mobile service for remote schools. The suggestion is for a weeklong visit once per semester by a mobile team. The purpose would be to ensure supervision and evaluation by supervisors, updates on district policy, additional

professional

development support

from

the

district’s

curriculum

resource/training team, and provision of supplementary library resources to support the school’s literacy program. This scheme would require a remote school support team to be established at district level. It consists of teachers, principals, and supervisors with advanced skills. A specific vehicle capable of accessing remote schools should be provided. This car should: •

transport the remote school support team to and from remote schools.

•

be equipped with materials for teacher’s training, latest education policy at district, province, and national level, books for children to read, equipment for troubleshooting tablets/solar panels.

11

Chapter 1

Sumba already has models of mobile health services (posyandu keliling), mobile libraries and mobile internet services, which would provide a start for exploring the logistics and feasibility of such a service in education.

Policy Domain 7: Children’s Readiness for School National policy for PAUD development calls for coordinated cross-sectoral district-level task forces (Education, Social Welfare, Health and Bappeda) to guide village provision in the direction of integrated PAUD services. In the light of the background difficulties children face in learning at school, such task forces could advocate for and support an expanded village role in helping children be ready for learning. Exploiting village involvement in early childhood education, a district task force, supported by a Bupati decree for its establishment, could support this extension of the village role to primary education support by: 1.

Providing and disseminating information about institutional models of integrated TK and early grades learning that facilitates transition to school learning (See policy domain 2)

2.

Developing guidelines for supplementary feeding for PAUD and extending this to early grades SD students. This undertaking would require results-based information on similar program both in Indonesia and in other similar contexts to ensure that the program actually contributes to children’s nutrition and participation in school.

3.

The district task force could advocate the use of ADD fund for this purpose. In addition, with its high stunting incidence as an evidence of being disadvantaged, Sumba could be promoted with the national government as a region legitimate for central support through supplementary feeding. Supplementary feeding would also be a catalyst for better attendance at PAUD and SD.

4.

Advocating for village monitoring of student attendance to reduce high rates of absenteeism among students, particularly during harvest season.

5.

Promoting and disseminating information on school-village community initiatives to support education, such as homework supervision or activities to engage parents (mothers) in their children’s reading; or youth activity to create local reading materials for children

12

District Policy Choices

Chapter 2 District Policy Choices

Introduction An outcome of the FPPS held in Waingapu, 27th July—the first meeting since its inauguration— was the agreement by participants from all four districts to develop the policies and strategies with which they would address the problems identified by the ACDP 040 Situation Analysis. The FPPS Coordinator asked districts to be in a position to report on their progress at the next FPPS meeting. The policy development was to be of two kinds. First, districts were to identify their own scope for policy action. The policy domains and options prepared by ACDP 040 were useful to them in this undertaking. So that the choices represented demonstrable commitments, ACDP 040 also suggested that districts’ decisions be guided by what they would commit to fund in the 2017 budget year and by what order of regulation they would attach the policy to support its implementation. This has imposed a rather severe test of policy commitment, given that the development of policy choices was close to the budget prioritisation process for 2017, which begins in the districts in September. Time prevented the choices being made in the context of overall budget priorities and priori. If the new choices prove to be successful in 2017, it is likely that commitments relating to them will be amplified in the 2018 budget setting, when the districts will have had time to review the performance of budgeted priorities as a whole. (Sumba Timur, which submitted its budget to the Parliament for 2017 before the policy choices were completed, has targeted 2018 for implementation; except for certain high priority choices for which it hopes to secure funding in the 2017 mid-year budget adjustment process.) The second policy development activity was to identify and document the aspects of national policies and regulations that in districts’ perceptions hinder the achievement of quality primary education, and to make recommendations for adjustments that could become the basis for policy dialogue with the central government.

13

Chapter 2

The context of this activity was the decision taken at the time of the FPPS formation to pursue major policy issues nearing crisis point, in stakeholders’ views, with the central government. These are such issues, for example, as the undersupply of PNS teachers and obstacles to the placement of PNS teachers in private schools, which is threatening their continuing viability. With the support from ACDP Secretariat in Jakarta, meetings for the FPPS with the Minister of Education and Culture and other related ministries were set up in September for dialogue on the policy agenda. In these meetings, the districts would demonstrate to the central government their own policy initiatives to improve district management of education. This chapter discusses the districts’ policy choices and Chapter 4 discusses the development of the agenda for policy dialogue with Jakarta.

The Districts’ Priority Choices Of the seven policy domains suggested as a result of the findings of the Situation Analysis, all the districts have adopted three substantive options. Discrete actions have been taken in other domains, but substantive policy action was either limited by the resourcing implications of the problem in question or in some cases, by the lack of time available in the short period of ACDP 040 for district decision makers to assimilate the implications of new approaches to existing practices. Those that have been adopted are in areas most important for impact on learning outcomes. They are: (1) the reformation of the KKG to provide programmed professional development for teachers in teaching literacy; (2) principals’ recruitment policy to ensure capacity for school leadership; and (3) key elements of a policy framework for non-PNS teachers. The following discussion will consider these first and then district responses to other policy domains, and finally appraise the overall district response in relation to districts’ fiscal capacity for change. See Annex 3 for the district policy matrices which set out all proposed actions. These matrices were submitted to the Minister of Education and Culture by the Bupati of the four districts in October 2016.

Improved KKG Operation All districts have made a choice of improving the institution of the KKG and to use it as a professional development modality for effective teaching of literacy. All have undertaken to implement the changes in 2017. This undertaking represents five new commitments for all districts, as follows: 1.

Allocating district funding for the KKG. (KKG participation is routinely funded from the school grant— Sumba Tengah is the only district with an existing allocation for KKG)

14


2.

Re-developing the KKG as a curriculum-based professional development mechanism

3.

Mandating frequent occurrence of professional development meetings

4.

Providing for quality implementation by the provision and resourcing of a district literacy team for the KKG development

5.

Committing to regulation or Bupati instruction to ensure implementation of the operating guidelines of the reformed KKG and participation in it.

Table 3 sets out the district policies on KKG. (Note that these and subsequent tables only cite the policy relating to the policy options and not the other budget initiatives concerned with quality improvement or teacher provision in the district matrices.) Table 3. Districts 2017 Commitments for KKG

District

Policy take-up: effective KKG

•

• Sumba Barat

KKG provision as a per semester, 3-day kecamatan-based liteacy training for all teachers in each early grade level A technical team to guide the KKG at the district level will be formed

•

• •

Supervisors will monitor the operation of the KKG •

•

• Sumba Timur •

• • Sumba Tengah

Budget/planning 2017

Regulation support Bupati’s circular (Surat Edaran) for the implementation of the KKG as a strategic priority Bupati decree (surat keputusan) for the technical team Guidelines for the KKG implementation

•

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan. Included in the 2017 budget: Rp 500,000,000

Monthly cluster based implementation of KKG, incorporating Lesson Study, with a literacy focus. Specially recruited KKG curriculum development team (literacy focus) at the district level. Also responsible for monitoring and evaluation Peer selection of head of the cluster to ensure quality of leadership

•

Bupati circular for the implementation of early grades KKG (literacy focus) in line with specified operating procedures

•

Funding for training of KKG curriculum development team will be included in the 2017 budget adjustment (April 2018): Rp 63,187,500

Development of KKG curriculum based on Literacy Boost training Quality management team for the development of the KKG Standard Operational Procedures (SOP) in line with provincial Gong Belajar guidelines

•

KKG operation will be included in the new education PERDA Kepala Dinas circular for the implementation of the strategic priority of the KKG in line with SOP

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan for quality team development and piloting in one district. Included in the 2017 budget: Rp 200,000,000

•

•

15

Chapter 2

District

Policy take-up: effective KKG

• Sumba Barat Daya

• •

KKG pilot (one subdistrict) for improving early grades literacy teaching: monthly meetings District literacy team established to guide KKG Participants include principals and pengawas


Regulation support Included in the education PERDA

•

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan. Included in the 2017 budget: Rp 251,1433,000

Three of the districts will implement this enhanced KKG operation through the conventional mechanism of the cluster (gugus) system: a group of half a dozen schools around a model school as the head of the cluster and responsible for the KKG operation. One of these districts has addressed a common problem in this cluster arrangement, namely weak KKG leadership by the head of the model school. In Sumba Timur, the KKG head will be elected by peers from amongst all schools in the cluster, as a means of accessing energetic and committed leadership. Sumba Barat has innovated on the KKG organisation to better ensure quality, coverage and efficiency. Instead of a monthly provision through the traditional cluster structure, this district will convert the KKG into an in-service training modality at the sub-district level. It will provide a three-day training session for each of the early grades once a semester. This arrangement addresses the issue of variability in cluster leadership. It is also financially more efficient, since skilled resource teachers do not need to be trained for each cluster. A larger pool of teachers at meetings will generate more professional discussion and require more structured session planning than has happened with the casual cluster meetings. The subdistrict organisation of the KKG draws on the Save the Children model, which is working in Sumba Barat. The take-up of this innovation by the Dinas Pendidikan perhaps shows the need for districts to have access to support demonstration of the effectiveness of innovative solutions, before they are considered to be realistic options. If successful, this innovation can be disseminated to other districts without such support. One great value of the FPPS for Sumba as a whole is its intention to share reports on the effectiveness of strategies. Some districts will implement the changes as a pilot. While this is a prudent approach for an innovation, it is also necessitated by budgetary limitations. For this same reason, the funding support of some districts is limited to support to the provision of a capacitated district team.

Quality of School Leadership All districts have committed to implement recruitment of school principals that follows the nominated procedure in the Ministerial decree (Permendiknas 28/2010). In all but one case, this has explicitly involved a Bupati’s regulation necessary for implementation of a ministerial regulation at the district level. This

16


commitment indicates how transparently the district leadership have faced the challenge of political use of principal selection in the districts. Table 4 shows the districts statements of commitment in this area. Table 4. Districts’ Commitments on Quality of School Leadership

District Sumba Barat

Policy option: Quality of school leadership

•

•

•

Sumba Timur

• • •

Sumba Tengah

• •


Regulation support Bupati regulation (Perbup) on the prerequisites and recruitment processes for the appointment of school principals

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan.

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan.

Bupati’s decree on instructors and candidates for training

•

Rp 250,000,000

•

Rp 850,000,000

Selection of principals based on Permendiknas 28/2010 Training of candidate principals by the LPPKS Use of MoEC instrument to evaluate the performance of school principals, with easy to apply criteria and indicators

Ministerial Regulation 28/2010, supported by a Bupati regulation

Included in the 2017 district work plan

Recruitment procedure for school principals in line with Permendiknas 28/2010 Competition based performance incentives for principals

Maximalising Permendiknas 28/2010

Recruitment of school principals that properly takes competency into account, is based on the existing regulations and is free from intervention from anyone whomsoever. LKKKS training of candidate principals

General inservice training of principals and supervisors

Rp 69,250,000 (for 14% of 270 candidate principals needing training) Included in the 2017 district work plan Rp 42,000,000

Sumba Barat Daya

• • • • •

Teachers appointed as principals have to undergo the requisite process of selection. Training for candidate principals Training for principals in management and teacher supervision Increasing the effectiveness of the principals’ working groups (K3S) Performance-based incentives for school principals

Ministerial Regulation 28/2010 and district regulation on education

Rp 228,130,000

Rp 567,156,000

Three of the four districts have also addresssed the issue of improving capacity, by making the sizable budget committment for the pre-requisite training by the LPPKS. Sumba Timur’s capacity to enable the training of only 14% of principals needing to meet this requirement with its budget of Rp 62 million is evidence of the burden of this expesnive provision on the low resourced districts and the slow progress they can make. Other policy options from the school leadership domain outlined in Chapter 1 have also been taken up by individual districts: the general inservice training for principals and improvement of the K3S (though in the latter case, neither the strategy for improvement or budget is identified). The idea of performance

17

Chapter 2

indicators for principals proposed by Sumba Timur is relevant to the focus on school principals in the ACDP 040 model of school evaluation and its reference to easily measurable indicators.

Integrated Teacher Management Four of the five sub-domains of an integrated workforce policy for non-PNS teachers have been taken up, with the two sub-domains of quality and distribution predominating in district choices as urgent issues for all districts and in general reflecting their responsiveness to the needs of disadvantaged and remote schools. Table 3 sets out district choices. Three of the districts are addressing the issue of the quality of non-PNS teacher recruitment. Sumba Barat has an already activated policy of selection of the whole cohort, Sumba Tengah will prohibit the hire of unqualified teachers by the school, and Sumba Barat Daya is undertaking teacher competency mapping to feed into an as yet unspecified recruitment policy. Distribution of qualified/quality teachers is being addressed by all disricts; in all, it was a key problem. Sumba Barat has a program of supporting qualification upgrade for teachers in disadvantaged schools. Sumba Timur is equalising distribution with a policy targeting three PNS teachers per school and provision of teacher housing in distant and remote locations. Sumba Tengah is undertaking school mapping, prior to rationalising distribution. However, no district has addressed the inefficiency issue in school hire which accounts for non-PNS teacher oversupply in all districts except Sumba Barat Daya. School hire, which is where the worst pay disparities occurs, also works against the progessive professionalism of the teacher workforce around equal pay and conditions. Districts’ intervention are limited by the entitlement of schools to use a percentage of school grant funds (BOS) on local hire, but nevertheless there is no action constrainting on principals’ initiatives except in relation to the qualification level of the proposed hire. This inaction is a significant limitation on the take up of reformed teacher policy, in light of the emphasis given it in the Situation Analysis. Sumba Barat is the only district that has progressed beyond issues of basic provision in non-PNS teacher policy to explicit moves that imply an integrated vision and management of a professional workforce. It has a policy and a strategy for gradual equalisation of district-hired teacher pay and the first policy steps of a remuneration policy related to performance. However, the continued scholarship support by some districts (Sumba Tengah and Sumba Barat Daya) of non-PNS teachers to acquire the S1 could also be seen as a a strategy of pay equalisation as well as quality improvement. The S1 qualification guarantees professional allowance to graduates from the national budget, which raises non-PNS teacher pay somewhat. Table 5 sets out the policies on integrated teacher management.

18


Table 5. District Choices for Teacher Policy Policy option: integrated teacher management

District Sumba Barat

Sumba Timur

Regulation support


•

Training for non-PNS teachers including in disadvantaged schools without the teacher qualification

•

Bupati’s decree on for selection of non-PNS training candidates and trainers

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan. Rp 250,000,000

•

Selection-based recruitment of nonPNS teachers: school level as well as district hire (including re-selection round for current non-PNS)

•

Technical guidelines for the recruitment of non-PNS teachers

•

Included in the 201617 district work plan. Rp 13,569,209,340

• Raising wages of non-PNS teachers to the regional basic rates (Rp1,500,000 for 1,100 teachers).

Bupati’s regulation on remuneration standards for non-PNS teachers

•

•

Included in the 2017 district work plan. Rp 19,800,000,000

•

Remuneration policy based on length of service and performance

Distribution of PNS teachers targeting 3 PNS teachers per school, both government and private

No allocated budget during policy development Bupati Decree

Included in the 2017 district work plan. No cost implications

Provision of teacher housing for teachers at distant or remote schools

Sumba Tengah

•

• Sumba Barat Daya

School mapping to identify over and undersupply per school followed by redistribution based on teacher-class ratio needs.

Bupati Regulation and decree of the head of the Dinas Pendidikan

For 2018 Rp 1,000,000,000 requested from DAK

•

Decree of Kepala Dinas

•

Kepala Dinas Circular

Included in the 2017 district work plan. No cost implications

Prohibition on school hire of teachers without the requisite qualification.

Regulation of the recruitment of non-PNS teachers

District regulation on education

No cost implications

The Other Domains Most responses of the districts to the other policy domains and their options do not have the same significance for policy growth as those described above. Two in particular concern domains which are important because of their direct relationship with learning improvement. The first of these is the domain of evaluation of learning. Only one district (Sumba Tengah) has adopted the idea of assessment of the school’s support for learning, adding it to the process of school selfevaluation based on the eight standards; an activity which is supposedly annual. Assessment of the school for its support of learning is the model of school evaluation that was proposed by ACDP 040. The likely reason why the ACDP 040 option of school evaluation did not make a stronger showing in district policy choices is that school evaluation is not actually practiced in school systems across Sumba,

19

Chapter 2

except where occasionally activated by LPMP training. There is at present no operating evaluation system for the model to fit into. In addition, consultations throughout ACDP 040’s policy development period showed that there is very little practical knowledge at the Dinas level about what is entailed in the existing EDS system, except that it measures the eight education standards. As the standards underpin the whole quality framework of Indonesian education, there has been a firm, reactive, and largely theoretical commitment to their value as the basis of school evaluation. This reaction is nevertheless accompanied by a great deal of interest of stakeholders in knowing how effective schools are for learning, but without this being thought of as requiring an alternative to the existing system of school evaluation. An example is the monitoring and policy action proposed by Sumba Barat: Integrated and developmental monitoring and evaluation of schools by Dinas Pendidikan and other departments (Bappeda, Health Setda and the FPPS (Sumba Barat district choices, Annex 3)). The view that the FPPS should monitor schools’ effectiveness is shared by all districts and a monitoring function has been included in the development of a constitution for the FPPS.10 In the case of Sumba Barat’s policy plan, the idea is associated with an increasing interest, since the Situation Analysis, in the funding relativities of different components of school operation from the perspective of effectiveness especially in the context of constrained financing for quality improvement.

11

For these reasons, the

evaluation team proposed is cross-institutional, including Sekretaris Daerah (the financial branch of the executive government) and the proposed monitoring is funded from Bappeda’s resources rather than the Dinas Pendidikan. In the matrices, districts’ policy choices in the area of monitoring and evaluation put an emphasis on improving supervisors’ capacity and performance. This indicates that they associate evaluation for learning with the supervisors’ role rather than with the annual school evaluation event. One district (Sumba Timur) has responded to the systemic problem in supervisors’ evaluation of learning—the lack of institutional capacity to do anything with the information—and includes a policy action for coordinated evaluation and planning meetings at the Dinas level. Isolated, it may not flourish as a start on a policy framework school evaluation for the Dinas. However, while existing systems have tended to by-pass the Dinas, this policy choice represents a first articulation of the evaluation function as the core business of the Dinas Pendidikan.

10

One of the role of the FPPS in the draft constitution is: “Undertake a monitoring and evaluation function in relation to the implementation of education policy particularly for early grades.” The vice Bupati of Sumba Barat lead this topic at the FPPS meeting in Waikabul, October 25, and expressed an interest is a full financial analysis of education expenditure from a results perspective.

11

20


The other important domain for impact on learning that was not robustly reflected in district policy choices was the idea of a literacy strategy for early grades. To some extent such a strategy is implicit in the KKG provision, where the training curriculum is likely to become the classroom approach. But while all the districts see children’s reading capacity as paramount, the kind of changes needed — a continuous literacy scope and sequence from TK through to early grades, a policy on mother tongue in TK/early grades—makes technical demands on policy formation that it is realised the districts are not yet in a position to meet. They addressed the matter from within their current capacities, making policy out of good practice. For example, Sumba Tengah had SMK teachers concentrated in early grades more than other districts. Therefore an immediate response to the findings has been to reorganize the placement of senior teachers in schools so that early grades profit from their experience and technical knowledge. Sumba Barat has been guided by Save the Children on the importance of provision of reading material for children, a core component of the Literacy Boost strategy. Sumba Timur has a cadre of strong teachers as KKG leaders which it will mobilise to support curriculum orientation for literacy. A positive feature of these strategies is that they show districts to not waiting on more funding to make improvements, but as having the capacity to mobilise modest but significant resources to make a difference. Another example of “good practice policy” is Sumba Tengah’s response to the problem of poor preparation of teachers in the S1 program — in the main, an issue for national-district policy dialogue. Sumba Tengah has proposed changes to ensure much greater interactivity in the weekly face–to-face tutoring sessions in the Open University (UT) provision of the S1— an element of provision that is under Dinas control as UT tutors are mainly Dinas personnel. Sumba Barat Daya and Sumba Tengah are keen on developing the TK subsector as a key strategy for supporting a strong foundation for literacy. However, even though funding has been put up for training TK teachers (Sumba Tengah), the capacity of the districts to impact on this un-resourced sub-sector is minimal. The same applies to the wider scope of PAUD and the policy domain area of children’s readiness for school. All of the districts focus in their policy choices on school feeding, its availability in PAUD centres and its extension to early grades. But their funding strategies are dependent on DAK or school grant funding mechanisms, not on additional district support, and the proposed regulatory support does not align with the funding source. It is unclear why the child readiness policy domain did not evoke a response from districts on initiatives which could be performed without significant cost at the level of the village or school, such as greater district inter-sectoral coordination of PAUD direction or supporting school initiatives for parent involvement. Possible reasons are capacity issues. Inter-sectoral coordinated action is still an exception in line departments and is without organisational support such as coordination budgets and reporting

21

Chapter 2

responsibilities. Without modelled examples, it is also hard for bureaucrats to imagine the kind of activity to prescribe to schools to actively involve parents in children’s learning. The lack of response to the idea of a remote service to schools falls into the same category lying outside the practice norm. As with the new model of learning evaluation, it belongs to the category of policy development that needs demonstration to show its value and its feasibility before it can be confidently reflected in policy.

Choices and Fiscal Constraints In order to make an assessment of how significant the Sumba commitments are — and more fundamentally — how feasible it is for districts to carry the burden of quality improvement, the policy choices of the districts should be appraised in relation to their funding envelopes. To do this, allocation and expenditure need to be looked at on several parameters: (1) the district funding allocation to education relative to other sectors; (2) the proportions of salary related (indirect expenditure) and development funding (direct expenditure); and (3) the main usages in the direct expenditure category and whether these could be better aligned to support quality improvement. For these purposes, an education finance review of all four Sumba Districts was conducted.

District Allocations to Education Allocations for the education sector budget in the fiscal year 2016 for all four Sumba districts come to around the mandated 20%.12 Table 6 shows the education allocation in relation to other sectoral and function budgets in the four districts of Sumba. Table 6. Expenditure Allocations in the Four Sumba Districts (in Billions of Rupiah) Sumba Barat

Sumba Tengah

Sumba Barat Daya

Sumba Timur

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Education Function

157

22%

123

21%

202

22%

283

24%

Health Function

62

9%

73

12%

116

13%

209

18%

Civil Works Function

131

18%

106

18%

150

16%

166

14%

Function of District Autonomy, General Government Affairs, District Finance Administration, etc.

177

25%

171

29%

276

30%

310

26%

Other obligatory Functions

136

19%

61

10%

92

10%

104

9%

Optional Functions

50

7%

62

10%

80

9%

103

9%

12

Mandated in Constitution and SISDIKNAS, 20/ 2003. Note: the budget allocation for education function presented above excludes budget allocations for youth & sports functions which up to 2016 are included in district education office budget.

22


Sumba Barat Total Expenditure

Sumba Tengah

100 %

714

596

100%

Sumba Barat Daya 916

100%

Sumba Timur 1,175

100%

The patterns of allocation are similar across the districts. Although education has the largest sectoral allocation, this is accounted for by the fact that it is the most labour intensive. Wage related (indirect expenditure) in education covers remuneration of PNS employees assigned to the education office, while direct expenditure is the category for the development budget. The proportions of indirect and direct education expenditure are presented in the following Table 7.

Table 7. Relative Proportions of Direct and Indirect Expenditure (in Billions of Rupiah) Sumba Barat

Sumba Tengah

Sumba Barat Daya

Sumba Timur

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Indirect Expenditure

98

63%

81

66%

146

72%

218

77%

Direct Expenditure

59

37%

42

34%

56

28%

65

23%

157

100%

123

100%

202

100%

283

100%

Total Expenditure

Districts’ Dinas Pendidikans only have flexibility in the use of budget allocation for direct expenditure. Budget allocation for indirect expenditure is encumbered and as such cannot be used for expenditures other than remunerations of PNS employees. Districts are able to prioritise sectors in the allocation of their direct expenditure budget. Table 8 shows the allocation across the different sectors and functions of the four districts. Table 8. Direct Expenditure Budget Allocations by Large Sectors in 2016 Sumba Barat

Sumba Tengah

Sumba Barat Daya

Sumba Timur

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Education Function

59

13%

42

11%

56

11%

65

11%

Health Function

49

11%

56

16%

89

17%

152

26%


126

27%

104

28%

147

29%

157

27%

Functions of District Autonomy, General Government)

80

18%

71

19%

81

16%

75

13%

23

Chapter 2

Sumba Barat

Sumba Tengah

Sumba Barat Daya

Sumba Timur


105

23%

41

11%

70

14%

67

11%

Optional Functions

39

8%

53

15%

68

13%

68

12%

458

100%

367

100%

511

100%

584

100%

Total Expenditure

Looking across the districts, education has a smaller allocation compared to health function and civil works functions, indicating that perhaps more fiscal capacity could be generated for quality improvement with an upwards adjustment of the allocation to education. The allocation for direct expenditure for basic education is also where to look to see prioritisation and opportunities for reprioritisation in district budgets. The allocations for the Sumba districts for basic education are shown in Table 9.

24


Table 9. Budget Allocation for 9-Year Compulsory Basic Education (in Billions of Rupiah) Sumba Barat

Sumba Barat Daya

Sumba Tengah

Sumba Timur

Amoun t

%

Amoun t

%

Amoun t

%

Amoun t

%

Construction/repair

13.1

65.66 %

5.7

30.52 %

7.6

34.26 %

13.9

55.00 %

Books

0.5

2.53%

0.0

0.00%

0.0

0.00%

0.7

2.87%

Practice and demonstration aids

1.0

5.04%

1.3

6.86%

1.8

8.02%

1.4

5.70%

Furniture

1.2

6.27%

1.1

5.91%

1.1

5.08%

1.1

4.43%

Competition

0.3

1.46%

0.7

3.53%

0.1

0.47%

1.8

7.25%

Examinations

1.0

4.99%

1.3

7.13%

5.6

25.56 %

1.0

3.79%

3.8

14.83 %

BOSDA for SD & SMP levels Others Total Expenditure

2.8

14.04 %

8.6

46.05 %

5.9

26.61 %

1.5

6.12%

19.9

100%

18.6

100%

22.1

100%

25.3

100%

The proportion of the direct budget that basic education receives, which has the largest segment of the enrolment, seems disproportionately low: the highest (Sumba Timur) being only around 25%. With the outstanding exception of infrastructure, all the allocations within the basic education allocation are also very low. It would necessary to do a full analysis of the education budget to know whether significant increases could be made to development purpose in basic education and quality enhancing ones in particular. In view of the fact that the districts will lose the senior secondary subsector from 2018, it would be important to see what savings from that transfer to the province could be fed back into basic education rather than reallocated to other sectors.

Sumba Barat: A Case Study of the Consequences of Inadequate Provision of PNS Teachers Within the direct expenditure budgets, not highly prioritised in district allocation, the greatest shortage of funds for quality improvement is caused by the fact that the Sumba districts are not provided with sufficient number of PNS teachers. In consequence, the Dinas Pendidikans have to use a large part of their budget allocations for direct expenditure to hire non-PNS teachers. District expenditure on contract (nonPNS) teachers for various levels of education can be seen from Table 10.

25

Chapter 2

Table 10. Budget Allocation for Expenditure on Hire of Contract (Non-PNS) Teachers Amount (in millions of rupiah)

% of Education Direct Expenditure

Sumba Barat

15,944

27.1%

Sumba Tengah

10,368

23.8%

Sumba Barat Daya

12,390

21.4%

Sumba Timur

8,785

13.8%

Districts

Not only is the proportion of the non-wage budget high that spent on supplementing the work force for the district, but worse, to take the example of Sumba Barat, it draws on the budget for teacher quality improvement — the program Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan (PMPTK). This program is allocated 29% of the direct budget. But 96% of it is spent on district teacher hire. (Sumba Barat Daya is another district where remuneration of non-PNS teachers draws on the budget specifically for quality improvement) In addition, many teachers hired by the districts do not yet have S1 degree, so district education offices also have to use budget allocations for direct expenditure for enrolling their non-S1 teachers in S1 program. As discussed where non-PNS teachers are supported, accessing the S1 is also a way of reducing pay disparities. Expenditure on the teacher upgrade is as presented in Table 11. Table 11. District Expenditure on the S1 Teacher Upgrade from the Direct Expenditure Budget Amount (in millions of rupiah)

% of Education Direct Expenditure

143

0.2%

Sumba Tengah

3,226

7.1%

Sumba Barat Daya

1,050

1.8%

Sumba Timur

2,512

3.1%

Districts Sumba Barat

It is not surprising that districts struggle to support quality improvement when the intended fund has to be used to meet basic teacher provision. If the enrolment of the private schools were taken account in the PNS allocation and teachers provided from the central government were in line with the education standards for the teacher-pupil ratio, most of this fund would be available to the districts for quality improvement. As it is, there is very little possibility of augmenting quality improvement from this budget source. Taking only two of Sumba Barat’s most impressive policy choices as an example (KKG support and equalising non-PNS wages), there is a shortfall in available funds, as shown below.

26


Table 12. Shortfalls in Funding Policy Choices (Sumba Barat) KKG

Rupiah

Estimated cost

854,485,000

Allocated for 2017

500,000,000 Shortage

354,485,000

Payment of Non-PNS Teachers at Rp 1.5m/month (estimated 1100 teachers pass selection in 2017) Estimated cost

19,800,000,000

Allocated for 2017

13,569,209,340 Shortage

6,230,790,660

Total shortage

6,585,275,660.0

One possible alternative to get additional funds for the education function is by increasing its current direct expenditure budget by Rp 7 billion to cover the shortage to support the policy options, as illustrated in Table 13. Table 13. The Affordability of Quality Improvement with Adjustment to Sectoral Direct Allocations in Favour of Education (in billions of rupiah) Sumba Barat

Current Allocation New Allocation Amount

%

Amount

%

Education Function

59

13%

66

14%

Health Function

49

11%

49

11%


126

27%

119

26%

Functions of District Autonomy, General Government, District Finance Administration, etc.

80

18%

80

18%


105

23%

105

23%

Optional Functions

39

8%

39

8%

458

100%

458

100%

Total Expenditure

Increase (Decrease)

7

(7)

27

Chapter 2

Conclusion The policy choices of the districts show a strong interest in the options for reform. Where the areas of change arise urgently from the findings of the Situation Analysis, relevant choices have been made by all districts: improving the know-how of teachers, equalising access of schools to quality teachers, and ensuring appointment of principals that can lead schools in quality improvement. Policy choices intimating recognition of the potential of a more systemic change have been made by several of the districts, such as in first moves towards organizational capacity for performance management and use of evaluation information. These are all major achievements of political will and service delivery. Outside the priority areas above, responses have been modest rather than breakthrough. In key areas of curriculum development, it was expected and flagged for additional support beyond the present ACDP 040. But value has also emerged from these modest actions. This could be called good practice policy, such as Sumba Tengah’s improvement of the UT tutoring system or moving the best teachers into the early grades. It is the district level analogue to the good practices of disadvantaged schools found in the Situation Analysis school survey. Where other responses have been peripheral, one reason is likely to be need for more sustained technical modelling of the concept before more fundamental change is possible. Districts which have had the advantage of sustained technical modelling from Save the Children have assimilated more of the options in reform. The implication of all these results is the importance of looking for ways of supporting this vulnerable, change-seeking behaviour. Through the decision of the ACDP to support an extension of some months, this will be possible. One mechanism that the Sumba districts themselves have identified is the FPPS which is seen as having the potential to facilitate good policy and motivate good practice. The importance attached to this new institution calls for strong support for its functioning so that it can be firmly established in its role. Mobilising available technical support will also be necessary to give the new undertakings a chance of succeeding, especially in the all important area of the KKG reforms, to which so many expectations are attached. For this reason, Save the Children’s willingness to lend technical support to other districts in planning an effective curriculum for training teachers will be indispensable to success. Districts can be supported to galvanise their own resources among their expert teachers including the still active cadre from the former SPG training to support the KKG in the implementation of the new curriculum.

28


The extension period will also provide the opportunity to help the districts better understand and consider the two models that have been developed through ACDP 040 as guides to practice: the model of school evaluation for learning, and the model for operating KKG. The serious constraint to Sumba districts’ quality improvement is in the diverting of their resources to supply teachers for their schools as the consequence of PNS policy—private school impasse. This major policy issue and other issues entailing action at the national level are the subjects of the next chapter.

29

Chapter 2

30

The Jakarta-Sumba Policy Dialogue

Chapter 3 The Jakarta-Sumba Policy Dialogue

Policy dialogue between the representatives of the four district governments of Sumba and the central government took place over the two days of 28-29 September 2016. Through the facilitation of the ACDP in Jakarta, the policy dialogue meetings were a joint product of the Ministry of Education and Culture and the Sumba governments. In Jakarta, the development of the 13

agenda was supported by Balitbang and the office of the Secretary General of Education. The meetings were given a high profile, including an opening by the Minister of Education and Culture, and the Directorates-General were substantively engaged in discussion of the agenda issues.

14

This chapter narrates the development of the dialogue and its consequences. Its theme is the effect of the policy interaction on the resolve and capacity of the Sumba leadership to attain enabling conditions of quality education from the central government.

The Preparation of the Issues In preparation of the issues for discussion with the central government, the FPPS instructed the districts to identify the policies in contention and their regulatory bases within the overall regulatory framework of Indonesia’s education system. For this process, the Dinas Pendidikan from each district identified officers for a technical team. This team developed the statement of the issues, identified related regulation, and also formulated specific recommendations on each issue so that the policy dialogue would be oriented towards outcomes. Their

13

14

By Balitbang through the Pusat Analisis dan Sinkronisasi Kebijakan (PASKA) under the leadership of Ilza Mahyuni and the Bidang Hubungan Pusat dan Daerah (James Modouw as special advisor to the Minister) under the Secretary General. PASKA achieved this through a preparatory event (21 September) arranged to brief the Ministry on the issues and the organisation of responses.

31

Chapter 3

policy briefs were endorsed by the leadership of each district and submitted to the Jakarta organisers of the event as the Sumba text for the policy dialogue.

15

The FPPS brought six policy issues to the table. These included the three major issues that dominated Sumba concerns well prior to the ACDP 040 intervention: the under-supply of PNS teachers; the obstacles to their placement in private schools, now perceived to be threatening their survival; and frustration with the low quality of the teachers emanating from the teachers’ degree. With their corrosive effect on the whole of quality education provision in Sumba, these issues have for long been the ground on which stakeholders wanted the central government to pay heed to what was happening in Sumba. Others were issues implicating national policy which arose directly from the Situation Analysis, such as inconsistent treatment affecting the quality of the teacher workforce, conditions of work for school leadership not conducive to the exercise of leadership by principals, and the non-resourcing of the PAUD sector alongside its expected provision by districts. A strategy of the issue presentation was to feature the special characteristics of Sumba as a disadvantaged region, in line with PP 78/2014 (Acceleration of Development for Disadvantaged Regions) and its implications of special treatment. This was one reason for the inclusion of the issue of the Front Line Teachers in Sumba (Guru Garis Depan—GGD), as an exemplar of how national policy actively disadvantages when it is premised on conditions that cannot be met by the region it is applied to. The text below is the Sumba text for policy dialogue in Jakarta. It has been reproduced in its entirety from documents submitted to the sessions to show the technical capacity of the Sumba presentation of its case.

16

Policy area 1: The availability of PNS teachers. As many as 35% of schools in Sumba are community schools. However, PNS allocation is limited to government schools, leaving 40% of Sumba’s primary school enrolment without adequate teachers. Distributing available PNS teachers across the full primary enrolment results in a class-teacher ratio of 0.6—half of what is needed. The case for reconsidering the basis of allocation of PNS to Sumba is supported by several regulations. The foundation law of Sisdiknas states “Citizens of remote or disadvantaged areas have the right to special education service (Article 5, clause 3).” Sumba’s districts fall into the category of disadvantaged and the historical provision of primary education by community schools is a reason for regarding Sumba’s situation as exceptional. In addition, Government regulation (PP) 28/1981 on support for private schools,

15

Bahan-Bahan dari Sumba Forum Kebijakan Gugus Tugas Tingkat Tinggi Musyawarah antara Pemangku Kepentingan di Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan dengan di Pemangku Kepentingan di Sumba terkait masalah Pendidikan Dasar/MI Jakarta, 28 –30 September 2016. The accompanying recommendations have not been reproduced here. They appear in their updated form later in the chapter, redeveloped after the FPPS considered its response to the Ministry’s original reception of them.

16

32


states that those that meet prerequisites can be given support, including through provision of PNS staff (Article 3b). This regulation has not been rescinded. Exacerbating undersupply, a recent central instruction requires the endorsement from the principal of a government school principal for promotion for all PNS teachers. This is leading to the withdrawal of PNS teachers placed by local government in private schools. With this trend, the quality of private schools faces collapse. The Ministerial regulation (PermenPAN 17/2014), which is responsible for this instruction on PNS teacher promotion, is not consistent with PP 28/1981 or other higher order regulations including the national education law (Sisdiknas) and PP 74/2008 on the rights and responsibilities of teachers. Policy area 2: Improving teacher professionalism by reducing disparities in conditions. 2.a. There are more non-PNS than PNS teachers in Sumba. However, their work conditions vary drastically from those of PNS: between Rp 150,000 – Rp 1 million for non-PNS teachers, as compared to Rp 3-6 million for PNS. These low wages are not compatible with developing a professional teacher workforce and the disparity of conditions within a single staffroom inhibits efforts for whole school improvement. Local government is supplying the deficit of PNS teachers from its own resources. It is fiscally impossible for districts to also equalise wages. The central government should provide the same bonus payment (tunjangan fungsional) that PNS teachers receive to all eligible non-PNS staff. This would assist in alleviating the extent of the disparities between non-PNS and PNS teachers. 2.b. Not all eligible teachers who teach in remote schools receive the remote teacher allowance. This is because the central government funding is limited by a quota system and the number of teachers in remote schools in Sumba exceeds the quota. Furthermore, the identification of remote schools by the central government can be erroneous. It can differ internally as between the different ministries involved and is not consulted with local governments. Policy area 3. The teacher qualification. The S1 program of PGSD has proved an unsuitable form of teacher preparation for Sumba trainee teachers, especially as it has to be undertaken by distance mode, which limits the development of practical classroom skills. By contrast, the former teacher training school (sekolah pendidikan guru—SPG) produced teachers with strong pedagogic skills and knowledge of child development. Sumba districts would like to adopt a pathway to teaching through enrolment of trainee teachers at the end of basic education, to prepare for entry to the S1 through an SMK pre-vocational teacher stream rather than through the current SMA mode of entry. This proposal does not challenge the Teacher Law, ensuring the S1 remains the prerequisite qualification for teaching. It would attract candidates who have chosen the vocation of teaching and it would give them exposure to practical methodologies. There is no

33

Chapter 3

obstacle from SMK-related regulation. PP 19/2005 on the National Standard of Education provides for SMK graduates to further their studies to higher education, rather than enter the workforce.

17

18

Policy area 4. Expanding Sumba teachers’ access to the front line teachers’ program. Among the 500 GGD in the Sumba there are none from Sumba itself. This situation is the result of selection criteria which requires graduates from tertiary institutions accredited at level B. It is very difficult for Sumba students to meet that criterion. In addition, GGD teachers from outside Sumba have difficulty teaching the children they are meant to support because they don’t know the children’s mother tongue. This is contrary to Sisdiknas which allows primary children the right to learn in their own language (Article 33, para 2). Policy area 5. School leadership. A number of policy factors inhibit effective school leadership: (1) the difference between the remuneration of principal and teachers is very small (between Rp 150,000 – 400,000) which is incommensurate with headship responsibilities and may discourage existing principals from efforts for school improvement and deter good candidates from applying.

19

(2) principals’ frequent absence from the school, is caused by heavy administrative responsibilities. Such absences contribute to teacher absenteeism and the dominance of administration detracts from a focus on management of teaching and learning. Policy area 6. Resourcing quality education for PAUD and early grades. PAUD is especially important for disadvantaged regions because disadvantaged children benefit most from pre-school experience— provided it is of quality. However, the PAUD subsector lacks trained facilitators, teachers and supervisors, operating grants and mechanisms for teacher professional development. Without this fundamental investment, PAUD will not have impacts on children’s learning and development. In addition, many children of early childhood and early grades age in disadvantaged and isolated communities in Sumba often suffer from under-nourishment which affects their capacity to learn. More funding and guidance to village authorities needs to be available for an integrated PAUD and early grades school feeding program. The Presidential regulation (PP60/2013) on holistic integrated early childhood services specifies that the ADD can be used for PAUD.

17

Article 26 clause 3. Competence standard of vocational high school aims to develop intelligence, knowledge, personality, noble character, and skills for independent living and for participating in further education according to student’s vocational department. Announcement No 30660/A3/KP/2016 on Recruitment of CASN GGD, KepmenPAN/RB No 762 / 2014 on Formation of PNS for SM-3T, Joint Ministerial Decree of 5 Ministers on the Management and Equitable Distribution of PNS Teachers, PP No 78/ 2014 on Law No 5 /2014 on ASN, Perpres 131/ 2015 on Acceleration of Development in Disadvantaged Areas, PP 66/ 2010 on Management and Delivery of Education. Permendiknas 28/2010 on Designation of Teachers as Principals.

18

19

34


Policy Dialogue in Jakarta and Its Outcomes Three features of the encounter between the districts and the government on education policy are important for the future of policy development in Sumba.

The Jakarta Response The first of these is the engagement of the central government. In Jakarta, the September event was viewed at the outset as the beginning of a process of collaborative exploration between the centre and Sumba districts of policy solutions, of value for centre-regional policy improvement, especially for 20

disadvantaged regions. The issues and solutions brought by Sumba were seen by the Ministry leaders from the wider perspective of aligning with the President’s policy of building from the periphery (membangun dari pinggiran). There was talk of making Sumba a model of central–district policy interaction. The NTT provincial government, participating in the discussions, strongly supported the idea of Sumba representing the disadvantaged in NTT. Paska had already developed the idea of pioneer regions—regions targeted for particular support and customised experimentation, in line with the needs and capacity of the ministry. In this context, the idea of a cross-ministerial task force was raised to address the issues of unsynchronised and maladjusted policy that the Sumba cases exemplified. Various policy areas were identified as possible openers for review: certainly the GGD, even PNS policy for regions like Sumba, the lack of linkage between the ADD and education support, and the need for more regional (NTT) provision for training of principals. However, the meetings concluded in Jakarta without further development of the suggestion of a Jakarta task force on policy review for disadvantaged regions. What was provided was dedicated support to the FPPS in the form of the Special Advisor to the Minister from the Secretary-General’s Unit for CentreRegional Linkages. In addition, Balitbang undertook to make available resources to Sumba for ongoing policy analysis to help develop options.

21

The overall response of the Ministry to the specific Sumba issues could be characterized as accommodating where the concerns did not imply a change in the bases of resourcing. Thus, the key issue of the SMK entry point to the S1 received surprisingly strong endorsement as innovative thinking of wider application than Sumba alone, fitting the new Ministerial focus on vocational education as it did. There was ready recognition too of the current unsuitability of the GGD program for Sumba on equity and effectiveness considerations and an undertaking for a Sumba MOU with central ministries (Ministry for Education and Culture, Higher Education) to explore facilitation of Sumba teachers’ access to the program. 20

21

“Kabupaten di Pulau Sumba membentuk suatu Forum Peduli Pendidikan Sumba (Koordinator Forum : Wakil Bupati Sumba Barat) lintas SKPD untuk menyiasati persoalan-persoalan pendidikan yang merupakan inisiatif cemerlang yang jarang ditemui di wilayah lain.” Opening address by Bapak James Modouw / Sekretaris Jenderal. ACDP 040 Report on the Sumba-central government Policy Dialogue 28-29 September 2016 submitted to the ACDP Jakarta 12/10/2016.

35

Chapter 3

Even on the matter of obstacles to PNS teacher placement in private schools, the Ministry undertook to consider the issue in the revisions to the 2008 Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) on teachers’ rights and responsibilities.

The Sumba Response For the Sumba participants, however, the effect of the Jakarta responses was to strengthen the will to pursue better outcomes than these. At stake above all, and affecting most other quality issues, are the issues of teacher supply. Stakeholders also considered that on several issues the matter in the specifically formulated recommendations had not been directly dealt with. They considered the response on allowances for non-PNS teachers and remote service to be only a re-statement of the status quo and the removal of the specific accreditation barrier to Sumba access to the GGD program to not be necessarily implicated in the proposed solution. There were concerns too to see the suggestion of a central-Sumba policy task force actually materialise as a mechanism for review of policy for disadvantaged regions.

22

As a result, the follow-up meeting of the FPPS in Waikabul, Sumba Tengah in October, came to view the September policy meetings as only the opening of a policy dialogue and one that needs continuation. Two key decisions were taken at the October meeting. One was to respond to the Ministry’s reception of the issues at the meetings and the second was to strengthen the capacity of the FPPS to function as a policy body able to continue in dialogue with the Ministry. In pursuit of the first of these objectives, the FPPS prepared a letter to the Minister of Education requesting his support for consideration of another set of recommendations, reiterating or building on those proposed in September. This persistence in areas such as PNS supply, where the FPPS were advised that fiscal incapacity made it impossible for the central government to increase PNS allocation, indicates the strength of their commitment to continued policy engagement, to see the issues brought to a formal resolution. Only the recommendation relating to PAUD concedes the unlikelihood of the central government resourcing this sub-sector. In proposing policy analysis of the consequences of not resourcing PAUD, this recommendation arguably draws on the experience of the Sumba leadership during ACDP 040 of the spotlight that evidence can throw on policy deficiencies, as a first step in change. The letters of request and the recommendations were issued by each Bupati and submitted to the Special Advisor assigned to the FPPS for delivery to the Minister. The attachment to the letter containing the recommendations is itself are addressed to the High level Task Force of the Ministry, in this way the FPPS willing the central government to bring it into existence.

22

ACDP Report of the FPPS meeting 25 October 2016 submitted to the ACDP Jakarta, 16/11/2016.

36


Box 3. The Renewed Recommendations to the Minister that were Agreed at the Waikabul Meeting Recommendation 1: The placement of PNS in private schools

a.

A meeting of the Sumba leadership with the relevant ministries to study the matter of allocation of PNS teachers to Sumba

b.

The central government to make available sufficient funds to pay the functional allowance to all non-PNS teachers who fulfil qualification requirements

c.

Principals of private schools to be approved to sign off on the promotion of PNS teachers in their schools

d.

The Centre for Analysis and Synchronisation of Policy (PASKA) to include the issue of the placement of teachers in private schools in the revisions to PP 74/2008 on the rights and responsibilities of teachers

Recommendation 2: The functional allowance for non-PNS teachers The central government together with the local government to identify Sumba’s remote schools and the budget for the following year. Recommendation 3: Simplification of the recruitment of Front Line Teachers (GGD) The proposed MOU between the Directorates-General and Sumba for the GGD program to include amongst other things: a.

Candidates for the GGD program in the PPG Kolaborasi stream to be from accredited tertiary programs, not necessarily tertiary programs accredited level B

b.

Universitas Nusa Cendana (Undana) to be given the authority to implement the PPP Kolaborasi program for GGD candidates

Recommendation 4: Teaching stream pathway thorugh SMK The central government with the agreement of the relevant ministries and facilitated by the provincial government of NTT to develop the policy enabling a teaching stream pathway to the S1 to be offered through the institution of the SMK. Recommendation 5: Principal Leadership The Ministry team currently developing the PP on school principals to include a differentiation of the remuneration of the school principal from that of teachers in line with the different levels of responsibility. Recommendation 6: Improving the quality of PAUD and early grades: a.

The amount of the non-infrastructure DAK needs to be increased

b.

The guidelines for allocation of the non-infrastructure DAK need to be increased (should be extended to all levels of PAUD not merely children aged 5-6 years)

c.

Balitbang or PASKA to undertake studies into: i. The effectiveness of PAUD without resourcing from the central government ii. The effectiveness of the Village Fund Allocation without guidelines for its use for PAUD and early grades iii. Analysis on the effectiveness of budget allocations in basic education

37

Chapter 3

iv. The impact of the Gizi Anak Sekolah program—PROGAS (Nutrition for school students) and possible replication in disadvantaged areas including Sumba v. Longitudinal studies on the literacy continuum between PAUD and early grades as part of developing the effectiveness of the Literacy Movement

The Institutionalisation of the FPPS The centre-district policy engagement was an important influence on the value Sumba stakeholders placed on the FPPS. Its original conceptualisation as giving Sumba one voice was realised as efficacy through the Jakarta experience. Members witnessed the Ministry galvanised around responding to them for several days. Many said they had never had access to the Ministry decision makers like that before. The prospect of holding the central government to account for its policies affecting quality in Sumba schools energised their own commitment to policy improvement, so they could demonstrate corresponding efforts as part of their case to the Ministry. Last but by no means least important was the way the leadership began to use their own resources for policy development. It was the FPPS technical team which had the regulatory inconsistencies at their fingertips and knowledge of the practical effects of policy, for making the cases. This is a resource that has seemingly been under-used by local decision makers. But itwas clear by the end of the six months of the FPPS’ operation that the Vice-Bupati knew where to find the technical strengths, not necessarily aligned with positions, in their departments. The value placed on the FPPS is demonstrated by the leaderships’ decision to institutionalise it as a policy fixture on the Sumba scene. This was done by the decision of the Waikabul meeting to draft a constitution for it. See Annex 4. Draft Constitution of the FPPS. The constitution gives it two objectives, consistent with the two fronts on which it has supported policy development in Sumba: (1) coordinating and synchronising education policy in line with central and government authority; and (2) monitoring and evaluating the implementation of education policy in Sumba and good practice. The FPPS will interface with the central government, seeking participation from relevant ministries as the issues occure. It will undertake consultations with the community and with donors on Sumba’s education needs. Its decisionmaking capacity is enhanced with the inclusion of representation of local Parliaments’ education committees and the head of finance in the Bupatis’ executive office. It is empowered with a Secretariat from Bappeda and its own budget and sets out an operating procedure for meetings. Emblematically, the FPPS has been given a new name: Forum Restorasi Pendidikan Sumba (FRPS), which emphasise Sumba ownership over the institution and Sumba’s values in education which it is there to protect.

38


Conclusion The October meeting of the FPPS coincided with the end of the present term of ACDP 040. Through the proposed extension of technical support to Sumba for the consolidation of its new policy commitments, the opportunity is there for Sumba to continue to develop its capacity to work pro-actively with the centre in policy adjustment to accommodate regional difference and disadvantage. In the policy dialogue so far, there have been major gains to take forward. The main gain is the real possibility of a form of teacher training which Sumba stakeholders can shape to their needs. It is also possible that an inroad will be made into the policy impasse of private school support through Sumba’s compelling pursuit of it in the promotion issue. If the GGD program is adapted to enable Sumba teachers to compete on the basis of their merit rather than on the status of the university they attended, that will be an iconic demonstration of what equitable policy for disadvantaged regions looks like.

39

Chapter 3

40

Conclusion

Conclusion

This conclusion makes an appraisal of the policy achievement of the Sumba districts through the support of ACDP 040 and then considers implications from the process of development for the future of these gains. Finally, it proposes several recommendations that arise from the analysis of the achievement and that aimed at securing and building on it.

Achievements Critical for appraising the level of policy achievement by the districts is to remember two factors that led to the options. One is the pre-project awareness of Sumba stakeholders of the issues that mattered and their causes. The second is that ACDP 040’s focus in options was on those that could be taken up immediately, in view of the crisis state of learning found by the Situation Analysis and the short timeframe available for change. These considerations not only framed the selection of policy choices by the districts, but also the development of a political rather than a systemic lead on action. When considered in relation to the policy options in Chapter 1, the actual choices show a high level of responsiveness to the key issues of teacher quality and equity of provision. For the first of these, there is unanimity about changing the quality of the KKG, the one institution that could affordably reach all teachers and potentially change the great problem of low teaching capacity. A concern for equity of provision is shown in the new attention to non-PNS teachers, as the means of a more equitable distribution of quality teachers. In the choice of these two areas, the emphasis of the Situation Analysis on learning outcomes and on the inequitable situation of disadvantaged schools is reflected. Another key achievement is the successful follow-through on policy options that originated with stakeholders themselves. Neither the pursuit of an alternative model of teacher training nor the radical reform of principals’ recruitment were originally in the sights of the ACDP 040, deliberately not selecting areas that have proved resistant to change. However, revival of the SPG model of teacher training and

41

Conclusion

suitability-based appointment of school principals were stakeholders’ insistent choices from the beginning. Responses to the other policy option areas seem less systematic. In one of the most important areas— district curriculum reform to foreground literacy acquisition, addressing in particular the issues around language of instruction—this outcome was anticipated. It does not reflect the degree of interest in literacy improvement and language experimentation, which was promoted by the Sumba leadership itself as a key area of district commitment at the Jakarta meetings with the ministry. The Dinas Pendidikan in the districts are waiting on more capacity to know how to frame these policies. The need for more time and more demonstration of what the policies would mean in practice were the main drivers of efforts to obtain an extension to ACDP 040. In the meantime, ACDP 040 did what it could to put in place a mechanism for this ongoing technical support, through negotiations with Save the Children to extend the reach of its technical influence to other districts in curriculum planning for literacy. An asset for improved literacy teaching, lately discovered in all districts, is a still-active group of former SPG trained teachers, skilled in the teaching of reading and which all districts could readily mobilise for help in the KKG. The policy area of evaluating learning as a model for school evaluation turns out to also fit the category of options needing more demonstration time. This important option is tentative in some district plans and absent from others. One explanation given for this in Chapter 2 is the strength of standards policy in the Indonesian education system. Though school evaluation is routinely unpracticed, the idea of doing it on a basis other than the standards seemed to stakeholders to lie too much outside existing systems. In regard to the school evaluation option, more time to demonstrate the value of the model (and its compatibility with standards) is likely to result in take-up. The reason for optimism is because the wider picture of the stakeholders’ response to the evaluation of learning is very positive. It was the evaluation of learning in the school study component of the Situation Analysis that leveraged the whole political response. Political attention is now firmly focussed on results, through the inclusion of school monitoring in the constituted role of the FPPS.

The Future A reason why the school evaluation option did not slot into place as easily as the KKG reforms is the absence of an evaluation system to slot into. Supervisors have evaluation roles but they are not connected up with anything. This gap brings us to the issue of the future of the policy initiatives in the context of systemic gaps in Sumba education and what ACDP 040 has done in that regard and still can do. The value of the districts’ policy commitments lies not in the budgeted proof but in the beginnings to policy-based reform that have been made. They are still tenuous; even more so their growth into policy

42

Conclusion

frameworks adequate to the task of professionalising teachers and managing schools for the equitable and efficient improvement of learning outcomes. The ACDP 040 project was not an organizational or a system strengthening one. In line with the need for a strong and immediate response to the critical findings of the Situation Analysis, it saw the potential of political engagement. The development of the FPPS is the main reason why the districts got as far as they did with policy commitments. Not only that, but the FPPS has been a policy achievement in its own right. Sumba as a region now has a dedicated mechanism for policy review and development that it wants to apply continuously to its own districts. The FPPS also equips Sumba for negotiating policy positions with the central government, not as a petitioner but increasingly through the capacity to recognise and disrupt policy that is inconsistent with equity for disadvantaged and historically different districts. But resourcing and implementing adopted policy requires systemic capacity as well as political drivers. As with the areas of technical capacity that need more time, there are some key systems that need to operate in order to sustain the policies that districts have adopted. One is evaluation of schools and learning linked into systemic processes in the district Dinas Pendidikan, triggering intervention, strategy review and planning, and budgeting. Rethinking supevisors’ job routines and accountabilities would be an essential part of this and one that fortunately the revised MSS regulations will require. A second systemic undertaking of great importance is analysis of districts’ education financing. Districts looking at their budget prioritizations to see if the allocations for direct expenditure to and within the sector are consistent with policy commitments to improvement across all primary schools — and any significant inroad into the quality of the new PAUD sub-sector. School financing should be part of the analysis as it is critical to eliminating unnecessary teacher hire, which reduces schools’ own resources for quality improvement and which interferes with developing a professional workforce. Such a financing analysis should be a central part of the policy prioritisation process. A third system development underpinning all is the government-wide usage of Dapodik data, recognized as the comprehensive data source for planning and projection, especially in management of teacher supply. But even if those elements were supplied, the obstacles that still curtail potential are the national policies that results in the fiscal incapacity of the districts to adequately resource quality, having to divert funds to hire the greater part of their workforce. Other national policies — not only relevant to Sumba — also need significant adjustment to yield potential for quality improvement, such as the unresourced PAUD sector or the lack of connectivity between the village fund allocation and education improvement through the

43

Conclusion

community. These as well as the early wins in Sumba-centre policy negotiation show the value of continuing to support and strengthen what stakeholders refer to as their infant FPPS.

Recommendations These areas of need suggest specific recommendations in three areas for: (1) operational policy development for new commitments; (2) system support for policy achievements; and (3) exploitation of opportunities for policy conducive to Sumba and for external support. The recommendations are proposed for both the consideration of the stakeholders of the Sumba districts and for the ACDP and ADB, and have specific reference to the period of the extension.

Operational Policy Development 1. Regulatory underpinning of new policy While district policy plans have identified regulatory commitments, most of these are as yet undeveloped. The kind of technical support required will mainly be for ensuring adequate coverage of operational requirements to realise policy intentions, rather than specialist legal knowledge. 2. Technical support for effective training guidelines •

Completion of an indicative model for the transformation of the KKG into a system of ongoing professional development for literacy and development of a KKG curriculum. This would include facilitation of indicated support from Save the Children Indonesia for the KKG curriculum planning. An outline for an indicative model is included in Volume 3.

•

Technical support for operational guidelines for new training areas. Cases are training for effective school leadership and teacher supervision and assessment (principals and supervisors).

3. Curriculum development support •

Technical support for the development of a literacy–focussed implementation of the 2013 curriculum for early grades.

•

Research review into the feasibility of developing mother tongue instruction for Sumba’s rural and remote schools: linguistic, financial, political and systemic feasibilities.

44

Conclusion

System Support for Policy Achievements 1. Technical review with Dinas Pendidikan and supervisors on systemic provision for learning evaluation and its use in school and Dinas planning; development of the ACDP 040 school evaluation model in line with review outcomes; and development of policy on supervisors’ roles in the evaluation system. The school evaluation model is included in Volume 3. 2. Technical support for education financing analysis in the four districts with a view to aligning policy priorities—particularly costs of teacher and principal professionalization—with budget priorities. Such financial analysis could target the mid-year budget revision with a view to extending budget commitments mid-year and for 2018. Analysis of expenditure of all for education budgets has been conducted by ACDP 040 and is available to support this work. 3. Technical support for school mapping and development of a distribution strategy for qualified teachers, based on a class-teacher ratio. This support would include capacity building in Dapodik analysis in district Dinas Pendidikan and Bappeda. A model of school over and under supply of teachers has been adapted by ACDP 040 and is available to support this work.

Pursuit of Opportunities for Sumba 1. Developing the capacity of FPPS •

Capacity transfer to the FPPS Secretariat for developing an annual agenda based on its constitutional roles and for administrative management of the agenda.

•

Supporting the FPPS in its preparation for and conduct of interactions with the central government on the existing policy agenda (See Chapter 3).

•

Advocating for the development of the “Sumba model” task force on central-regional policy for disadvantaged regions, through ACDP leverage in the Ministry and together with the NTT Governor’s Office and NTT Dinas Pendidikan.

2. Advocacy with donors and external agencies for technical support to consolidate and expand Sumba’s primary education improvement, through dissemination of Sumba’s achievements at the centre. This would include continued dialogue with Save the Children to consider expanding support.

45

Conclusion

46

Conclusion

Annexes

Annex 1. District Policy Plans Annex 2. Draft Constitution of the FPPS

47

Annexes

Annex 1. District Policy Plans OPSI KEBIJAKAN PRIORITAS KABUPATEN SUMBA BARAT

Opsi Kebijakan Prioritas

Peraturan yang diperlukan

Anggaran 2017/18

Dari mana Sumber-sumber Biaya Tambahan?

Jumlah Biaya (Rp)

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 1: PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN GURU

Opsi 1.1: Pelaksanaan sistem KKG yang efektif 1) 2)

Optimalisasi fungsi forum KKG Sistem KKG berdasarkan tingkatan kelas yang dilakukan 1 kali setiap semester selama 3 hari untuk setiap kelompok guru kelas rendah. Pelaksanaan masing2 KKG guru per kelas rendah (1, 2, 3) dijadwalkan pada hari berbeda Pemda perlu mendanai kegiatan program penguatan KKG Perlu membentuk tim teknis tingkat kabupaten dengan melibatkan pengawas dalam rangka monev

3) 4)

• •

•

Surat Edaran Bupati tentang Optimalisasi Program KKG. Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Pembentukan Tim Teknis KKG Tingkat Kabupaten Petunjuk Teknis Pelaksanaan KKG.

Masuk dalam RKT 2017

• • •

APBD/DAU Dana BOS Lembaga Mitra

Estimasi total Biaya Rp 854.485.000 Sudah ada alokasi Rp 500.000.000, (KUA PPAS 2017) Sisanya tetap akan diperjuangkan.dari DAU.

Opsi 1.2: Penyesuaian strategy literacy untuk kelas rendah Penyediaan buku referensi program literasi yang menarik dan membangkitkan minat baca anak

Opsi 1.3: Pendidikan Calon Guru

48

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Penetapan Daftar dan Jumlah Kebutuhan Buku Program Literasi.


• • • •

APBD/DAU DAK BOS Lembaga Mitra

Sudah ada alokasi Rp 500.000.000 (KUA PPAS 2017)

Annexes



Pemda menyediakan beasiswa bagi lulusan SMA/SMK berprestasi untuk melanjutkan pendidikan dengan spesialisasi tenaga pendidik (guru)

•

Peraturan Bupati tentang Syarat dan Ketentuan Siswa Penerima Bantuan Belajar.

Anggaran 2017/18

Masuk dalam RKT 2017 untuk 40 orang setiap Tahun sampai 2021


•

APBD/DAU

Jumlah Biaya (Rp) Estimasi biaya Rp 6.000.000 (beasiswa 6 bulan untuk 50 calon guru PAUD, 100 calon guru SD, 50 calon guru SMP) Sudah ada alokasi Rp 9.600.000, (KUA PPAS 2017)

Opsi 1.4: Peningkatan mutu pelayanan sekolah terpencil 1)

Pemda perlu mengalokasikan dana tunjangan daerah terpencil bagi guru yang mengajar di sekolah-sekolah terpencil

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Penetapan Sekolah Daerah Terpencil.

2)

Pemerataan distribusi guru dengan mengutamakan kebutuhan sekolah termasuk sekolah terpencil

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Mutasi Guru dalam rangka Pemerataan Distribusi Guru.


• • •

APBN APBD Prov APBD/DAU

Biaya belum dihitung dan belum dianggarkan untuk 2017 (menunggu PERDA Pendidikan)

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 2: MENJAMIN KUALITAS KEPEMIMPINAN SEKOLAH

Opsi 2.1 Rekrutment Kepala Sekolah 1)

Pengangkatan KS harus benar-benar mempertimbangkan kompetensi dan mengacu pada regulasi yang ada dan bebas dari interpensi oleh pihak manapun

2)

Pendidikan dan pelatihan Calon Kepala Sekolah

•

Peraturan Bupati tentang Syarat dan Ketentuan Pengangkatan Kepala Sekolah.


Sudah ada alokasi Rp 250.000.000 (KUA PPAS BKPP)

49

Annexes



Anggaran 2017/18


Jumlah Biaya (Rp)

Opsi 2.2-2.3 Pengembangan profesionalisme kepala sekolah termasuk melalui penilaian kinerjanya Pelatihan penguatan kompetensi Pengawas Sekolah dan Kepala Sekolah

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Penetapan Pengawas Sekolah dan Kepala Sekolah Peserta dan Instruktur Diklat.


• •

APBD/DAU Lembaga Mitra

Estimasi Biaya Rp 849,965,000 (KS & Pengawas SD & SMP) Sudah ada alokasi Rp850.000.000 (KUA PPAS 2017)

BIDANG 3: EVALUASI SEKOLAH BERBASIS HASIL BELAJAR SISWA Evaluasi sekolah saat ini sudah dilaksanakan tetapi tidak ada analisis dan tindak lanjut. Perlu pengembangan analisis hasil pembelajan siwa yang disertai dengan program tindak lanjut.

•

Pedoman Standar Program Analisis hasil Evaluasi belajar Siswa dan Program Tindak Lanjutnya


• •


Sudah ada alokasi Rp400.000.000 (KUA PPAS 2017)

• •


Sudah ada alokasi Rp250.000.000 (KUA PPAS 2017)

Peningkatan pengawasan dan evaluasi terhadap sekolah secara berkesinambungan dan terpadu dengan SKPD (a.l. PPO, kesehatan, bappeda, setda, dan elemen terkait lainnya (terutama FPPS).

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 4: MANAJEMEN GURU TERINTEGRASI

Opsi 4.1. Ketersediaan dan distribusi guru berkualitas Diklat bagi guru non-PNS yang belum memenuhi kualifikasi sebagai guru dan yang tidak berlatar belakang keguruan

50

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Penetapan Guru Non PNS Peserta Diklat dan Instruktur Diklat.


Annexes



Anggaran 2017/18


Jumlah Biaya (Rp)

Opsi 4.2 Mengintergrasikan guru non-PNS ke dalam kebijakan tenaga guru di Kabupaten 1)

Perlu proses seleksi dalam rekrutmen guru Non-PNS (GTT kab maupun honor BOS).

•

Peraturan Bupati tentang Standar Gaji Guru Non PNS

2)

Pemberian gaji terhadap guru non-PNS sesuai UMR

•

Petunjuk Teknis tentang Rerekrutmen Guru Non PNS.

3)

Pemberian gaji disesuaikan dengan masa kerja dan kinerja


APBD/DAU

Estimasi total biaya Rp 19,800,000,000 Sudah ada alokasi Rp 13.569.209.340 (KUA PPAS 2017)

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 5: INTEGRASI LAYANAN PAUD DAN KELAS RENDAH Pengembangan Program SATAP TK-PAUD-SD berupa penyelenggaraan Pendidikan PAUD, pengadaan sarana bermain dan lomba ketrampilan

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Penetapan PAUD-TK-SD Satu Atap pada setiap Kecamatan.

Masuk dalam RKT 2017/2018

• • •

APBD/DAU Lembaga Mitra TP PKK

7.250.000

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 6: PENINGKATAN PERAN PENGAWAS Opsi 6.1. Sertifikat Calon Pengawas Sekolah dan Calon Kepala Sekolah

1) Prosedur Pekrutmen Pengawas Sekolah melalui tahapan

•

seleksi sesuai dengan regulasi yang ada

Akta Perjanjian Kerja Sama dengan LPPPS dan LPPKS yang ada.


APBD/DAU


• •

Sudah ada alokasi Rp250.000.000 (KUA PPAS BKPP)

Opsi 6.2. Program Supervisi, Monitoring dan Evaluasi

Pelaksanaan Kegiatan Supervisi, Monitoring dan Evaluasi Terpadu Dinas Pendidikan, Bappeda dan Lembaga Mitra.

•

Surat Keputusan Bupati tentang Pembentukan Tim Supervisi dan Monev Terpadu Program MBS.


Terintegrasi dengan Proker Bappeda

51

Annexes

OPSI KEBIJAKAN PRIORITAS KABUPATEN SUMBA TIMUR

No



Anggaran 2017/2018

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 1: PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN GURU Opsi 1.1:Pelaksanaan sistem KKG yang efektif

1)

Peraturan Bupati tentang kewajiban penyelenggaraan KKG literasi kelas rendah yang berisi hal sbb: a)

Ada tim ahli di Dinas yang mempersiapkan pelatihan kurikulum pra literasi dan literasi kelas rendah untuk menjadi kurikulum KKG yang sesuai dengan kebutuhan (masalah bahasa daerah)

Peraturan Bupati dan Surat Keputusan Kepala Dinas Pendidikan Pemuda dan Olah Raga

Belum dimasukkan dalam RKA 2017/2018

Estimasi biaya Rp3.797.667.500

Akan di masukkan dalam Perubahan RKA 2017

Rp.63.187.500,(hanya untuk pelatihan Tim Ahli Pengembangan Kurikulum Literasi)

52

b)

KKG dilaksanakan satu kali sebulan (10 kali dalam setahun), termasuk Lesson Study

c)

Ketua KKG (Kepala SD Inti) dipilih berdasarkan pendekatan Bottom- Up atas pendapat Kepala Sekolah lain di dalam gugus dan pengawas.

d)

Pengurus KKG diperkuat dari rekrutmen hingga pelaksanaan & monitoring dan evaluasi efektif.

APBD, APBN (sebagian kecil dari biaya, sekitar Rp 63juta bisa dianggarkan dari APBD, selebihnya ingin dimintakan dari Pusat

Annexes

No

Opsi Kebijakan Prioritas e)

2


Anggaran 2017/2018

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

Penyesuaian kurikulum KKG sesuai dengan kebutuhan daerah dan peserta didik.

Ujicoba kurikulum oleh tim sekolah

Surat Keputusan Kepala Dinas Pendidikan Pemuda dan Olah Raga

-

Ya

BOS

RKA 2017

Estimasi biaya Rp. 266.790.000,-

APBD

Rp. 81.100.000,-

APBD

Rp. 266.790.000,-

APBD

Estimasi biaya Rp. 132.405.000,-

APBD

2017

Rp. 106.800.000,Rp. 13.605.000,-

APBD BOS

2017 (Pembangunan Rumah Jabatan Kepsek/Guru)

Rp. 960.000.000,-

DAK

Opsi 1.2: Penyesuaian strategy literacy untuk kelas rendah 1)

Penyesuaian kurikulum sesuai dengan kebutuhan daerah dan peserta didik.

2)

Pengembangan kurikulum yang memasukkan strategi untuk peningkatan literasi dan numeracy dalam pelaksanaan kurikulum 2013 (untuk 56 sekolah penyelenggara K13)

Permendiknas, Surat Penegasan Bupati Sumba Timur

RKA 2018

Opsi 1.3: Pendidikan Calon Guru Program Induksi Guru Pemula (PGIP)

Surat keputusan Kepala dinas Pendidikan Pemuda dan Olah Raga

Catatan: PIGP hanya diberikan kepada guru CPNS, tidak diberikan bagi Guru Pemula Non PNS Opsi 1.4: Peningkatan mutu layanan sekolah terpencil Pemenuhan: a) tenaga pendidik, dan b) sarana prasarana

SK Bupati Sumba Timur untuk penetapan sarana dan prasana

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 2: MENJAMIN KUALITAS KEPEMIMPINAN SEKOLAH

53

Annexes

No



Anggaran 2017/2018

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

Opsi 2.1. Rekrutment Kepala Sekolah 1)

Pemilihan Kepala sekolah berdasarkan Permendiknas 28 Tahun

Permendiknas dan Perbup, Surat Bupati Penegasan Permendiknas 28 Tahun 2010 Oleh Dinas PPO dan BKD Kab. Sumba Timur

-

Tidak ada biaya

2)

Program diklat Calon Kepala sekolah oleh LPPKS

Surat Keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO

(Dihitung untuk 207 org)

Estimasi biaya Rp506.360.000,Rp. 69.250.000,-

RKA 2017

APBD, APBN APBD Sisanya ingin diminta dari Pusat.

Opsi 2.2- 2.3: Pengembangan profesionalisme kepala sekolah termasuk melalui penilaian kinerjanya. Penyusunan instrumen kinerja kepala sekolah, termasuk penyusunan kriteria (indikator) yang spesifik untuk kinerja Kepala sekolah dan mudah dilaksanakan.

Permendiknas dan Surat keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO (level Nasional dan Kabupaten)

-

Tidak ada biaya

-

-

Catatan: Aplikasi sudah ada dari Kementerian, rencana akan mulai dilaksanakan tahun 2017 BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 4: MANAJEMEN GURU TERINTEGRASI Opsi 4.1: Ketersediaan dan distribusi guru berkualitas 1)

Guru PNS akan didistribusi ulang dengan target 3 PNS per sekolah (negeri & swasta)

SK Bupati

-

Tidak ada biaya

2)

Penyediaan fasilitas rumah untuk guru disekolah yang jauh atau terpencil.

Peraturan Bupati dan Surat keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO

Belum dimasukkan dalam RKA 2017/2018

Estimasi biaya Rp1.000.000.000,-

Ingin diminta dari Pusat

Opsi 4.2: Mengintegrasikan guru non PNS kedalam kebijakan tenaga guru di Kabupaten Rekrutmen tenaga guru kontrak Daerah

54

Surat keputusan Bupati dan Kepala

2018

Rp. 1.800.000.000,-

APBD

Annexes

No


Peraturan yang diperlukan Dinas PPO

Anggaran 2017/2018

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

{(100 orang x Rp.1.450.000 x 12bulan) + Biaya Pelaksanaan}

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 5: INTEGRASI LAYANAN PAUD & KELAS RENDAH Pemberian Dana Pembinaan PAUD

Surat keputusan Bupati dan Surat keputusan kepala Dinas PPO

2017

Rp. 3.334.500.000,-

APBD, APBN (DAK Non Fisik)

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 6: PENINGKATAN PERAN PENGAWAS Opsi 6.1: Sertifikat Calon Pengawas Diklat calon pengawas

Dirjen Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan, Perbup,dan keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO

2018

Rp. 170.000.000,-

Permendiknas dan Surat Keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO

2017

Rp 234.575.000,-

APBD

Opsi 6.2: Penetapan TUPOKSI Pengawas Pelaksanaan Pengawasan

APBD

Opsi 6.3: Pertemuan monitoring dan evaluasi kegiatan supervisi bersama Kepala Dinas dan Bagian Perencanaan Pelaksanaan rapat evaluasi bersama Kepala Dinas dan bagian Perencanaan

Surat Keputusan Kepala Dinas PPO

2017

Rp. 30.000.000,(termasuk dana rutin Dinas PPO

APBD

55

Annexes

PILIHAN KEBIJAKAN KABUPATEN SUMBA TENGAH



Anggaran 2017/18

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 1 : PENINGKATAN KEMAMPUAN GURU Opsi 1.1 : Pelaksanaan system KKG yang efektif 1)

Memasukkan opsi kebijakan kunci ke dalam PERDA yang baru

2)

Mengeluarkan SE tentang KKG efektif

3)

SAVE literacy boost sebagai kurikulum untuk KKG (KKG Guru SD kelas bawah dan kelas atas) MGMP Guru SMP dan SMA

PERDA/PERBUP pada level Kabupaten (sedang dibuat bersama Univ. Satya Wacana Salatiga SK Bupati

Total Biaya Rp1.086.157.950

4)

Standard Operational Procedure yang berdasarkan Gong Belajar Provinsi NTT

Rp200.000.000 (dianggarkan untuk 100 peserta; bisa digunakan untuk mengembangkan tim ahli literasi dengan bantuan STC serta uji coba di satu kecamatan

5)

Tim manajemen KKG yang berkualitas

Rp 1.086.157.950

2017 (sudah ada di KUA PPAS 2017)

SE Kepala Dinas tentang KKG Efektif

2018

APBD

APBD, BOS dan APBN

Opsi 1.2 : Penyesuaian Strategy Literacy untuk kelas rendah

1)

Penempatan guru senior dan yang memahami karakter anak pada kelas rendah

SK Kepala Sekolah/Surat Edaran Kadis PPO (rencana dilaksanakan di 2017)

2)

Pelatihan guru TK (mungkin Tim Ahli Literasi untuk TK bisa dikembangkan dengan bantuan STC)

SK Bupati

Tidak ada biaya


Total biaya Rp439,170,000 (untuk 160 orang) Rp 100.000.000 (untuk 40 orang)

56

-

APBD

Annexes



Anggaran 2017/18

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

2018 Rp 439.170.000

APBD

Total biaya Rp 114.103.000

APBD

Opsi 1.3 : Pendidikan Calon Guru 1)

Mewajibkan guru baru untuk mengikuti program induksi sebagai prasyarat mengajar

SK Bupati

2)

Pertemuan tatap muka mingguan antara guru dalam jabatan yang sedang mengikuti program PGSD dengan dosen/tutor UT difokuskan pada praktek mengajar

MoU

3)

Penjajakan MoU dengan SAVE untuk mengintegrasikan literacy boost ke dalam kurikulum

4)

Opsi SMK : Di tunda atau mempertimbangkan menambah jurusan keguruan ke dalam SMK yang sudah ada di Sumba Tengah

2018

Tidak ada biaya tambahan

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 2 : MENJAMIN KUALITAS KEPEMIMPINAN SEKOLAH Opsi 2.1 : Rekruitmen Kepala Sekolah Prosedur rekruitmen Kepala Sekolah sesuai dengan Permendiknas 28/2010

Memaksimalkan Permendiknas no. 28/2010

Tidak ada biaya

Opsi 2.2-2.3 : Pengembangan Profesionalisme Kepala Sekolah termasuk melalui penilaian kinerjanya

1)

Memberikan insentif kepada KS berkinerja melalui APBD (melalui Lomba KS Berprestasi)



APBD

APBD 2018

57

Annexes



Anggaran 2017/18

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

Rp 42.000.000 BIDANG 3 : EVALUASI SEKOLAH BERBASIS HASIL PEMBELAJARAN SISWA 1)

EDS perlu menjadi dasar dari Rencana Pengembangan Sekolah dan penganggaran serta penyusunannya melibatkan dewan guru

2)

Pengembangan instrumen pelengkap EDS untuk mengukur hasil belajar siswa pada literacy dan numeracy (Modul akan dikembangkan dengan masukan hasil pekerjaan ACDP-040)

SK BUPATI

2018


APBD

2018

Total biaya Rp 50.000.000 (estimasi kasar untuk uji coba)

APBD

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 4 : MANAGEMEN GURU TERINTEGRASI Opsi 4.1 : Ketersediaan dan distribusi guru berkualitas 1) 2) 3)

Pelaksanaan pemetaan sekolah untuk menetukan sekolah yang kelebihan atau kekurangan guru Rasionalisasi guru melalui redistribusi berdasarkan rasio guru dan rombel Pelarangan sekolah untuk mengangkat guru baru tanpa kualifikasi

SK Kepala Dinas

2017/2018

SK Kepala Dinas

Tidak ada biaya (Data dari Dapodik) Tidak ada biaya

Surat Edaran Kepala Dinas

Tidak ada biaya

Opsi 4.2 : Mengintegrasikan guru non-PNS kedalam kebijakan tenaga guru di Kabupaten

1)

58

Kebijakan remunerasi berdasarkan kinerja (didukung APBD 2017)

Bukan biaya tambahan

-

(Di 2016 honor Guru Kontrak Daerah sudah dinaikkan dari Rp 1.250.000 menjadi Rp 1.500.000/bln/guru

-

Annexes



Anggaran 2017/18

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

(sesuai UMR) BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 5 : INTEGRASI LAYANAN PAUD DAN KELAS RENDAH 1)

PMTAS PAUD dan kelas rendah melalui ADD memerlukan koordinasi antar sektor seperti Dinas Kesehatan, Bappeda dan Dinas Pendidikan

2)

Dukungan UKS di SD/MI untuk anak usia 6-8 tahun di kelas rendah

3)

Dana BOS untuk PMTAS

Juknis Dana BOS (Minta diubah oleh Pusat)

2017/2018

1.222.800.000

50,000.000 1. 745.520.000

Dana BOS minta ditambah oleh Pusat

ADD DAK Non FISIK (Minta ditambah besarannya oleh Pusat) APBD BOS

Surat Edaran Bupati

59

Annexes

OPSI KEBIJAKAN SUMBA BARAT DAYA Opsi Kebijakan Prioritas


Anggaran 2017/2018

Biaya

Sumber Pembiayaan

Opsi 1.1: Pelaksanaan sistem KKG yang efektif 1) Uji coba KKG untuk meningkatkan kemampuan mengajar menulis dan membaca kelas rendah di 1 kecamatan 2)

Perda tentang Pendidikan pada Tingkat Kabupaten Sumba Barat Daya

Terdiri dari: a)

Estimasi biaya Rp 266.219.295 Renja 2017

Rp 251.433.000

10 kali pertemuan per tahun

b) Guru kelas rendah, kepala sekolah dan pengawas ikut serta dalam pelatihan. c) Tim ahli literasi menyusun kurikulum KKG berdasarkarkan kompetensi mengajar membaca dan menulis d)

Tim ahli melatih narasumber di tiap kecamatan.

e)

Narasumber menyediakan petunjuk pelaksanaan pertemuan gugus

f)

Pengawas mengevaluasi pelaksanaan hasil pelatihan di ruang kelas

3) Pelaksanaan KKG dengan mempertimbangkan Latar Belakang Pendidikan dan Usia Guru

2018

Estimasi biaya Rp 2.928.412.250

2017

2.080.190.500

4) Perlu dilakukan pemetaan kemampuan/kompetensi keilmuan guru dan kompetensi guru 5) Ada rapat koordinasi pada awal tahun pembelajaran untuk pelaksanaan KKG, 1 kali sebulan 6)

Dilakukan pada siang hari (setelah jam pelajaran)

Opsi 1.2: Penyesuaian strategy literacy untuk kelas rendah 1) Perlu dilaksanakan KKG di TK/PAUD dalam penyesuaian kurikulum dan pembuatan SKH (Satuan Kerja Harian) dan SKM (Satuan Kerja Mingguan)

60

Perda tentang Pendidikan pada Tingkat Kabupaten Sumba Barat Daya

APBD

Annexes

2)

Sekolah mengenalkan ke siswa budaya local seperti cerita local

3)

Ada KKG gabungan antara guru-guru TK dengan guru-guru kelas rendah

4)

Pengadaan buku/modul PGTK dan Pengadaan alat bermain untuk TK

5)

Diklat pembelajaran tematik untuk guru kelas rendah dan TK

6)

Perlu pengawas khusus TK

7)

Perlu dialokasikan dana BOS untuk TK dan PAUD

638.830.500

APBD

1.441.360.000

APBN

Opsi 1.3: Pendidikan Calon Guru 1. Perlu diberikan pembekalan berkaitan tugas pokok kepada para calon guru yang mengajar di SD; 2.

Perda Tentang Pendidikan pada Tingkat Kabupaten Sumba Barat Daya

2017

Melakukan evaluasi ketercapaian kinerja para calon guru;

3. Perlu diprogramkan kegiatan pendidikan dan pelatihan secara berkala terhadap para calon guru.

Estimasi Biaya Rp 228.130.000 Masuk dalam anggaran Rp 631.578.840 di Renja 2017

APBD

Estimasi Biaya Rp 228.130.000 Anggaran dari BKD

APBD

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 2: MENJAMIN KUALITAS KEPEMIMPINAN SEKOLAH Opsi 2.1 Rekrutment Kepala Sekolah 1) seleksi;

Guru yang diangkat sebagai Kepala Sekolah harus melalui proses

Sebagai penjabaran dari Permendiknas Nomor 28 tahun 2010 tentang pengangkatan Guru dalam Jabatan Kepala Sekolah

2) Pengangkatan Kepala Sekolah harus mengacu pada criteria sesuai Permendiknas 28/2010 3)

Perlu diadakan diklat bagi guru bakal calon Kepala Sekolah

2017

Estimasi biaya Rp228,130,000 Setiap tahun anggaran ada di BKD

APBD

61

Annexes

Opsi 2.2-2.3 Pengembangan profesionalisme kepala sekolah termasuk melalui penilaian kinerjanya

1)

Pendidikan dan Pelatihan manajemen sekolah, supervise guru, IT

Estimasi biaya Rp 1.367.592.500 2017

2) Efektivitas K3S dengan memasukkan program-program peningkatan kinerja kepala sekolah 3)

Insentif kepala sekolah berdasarkan kinerja

4)

Harus ada instrument untuk mengukur kinerja

5)

Menekankan pada penilaian standar proses

6)

Menilai kemampuan siswa bisa calistung di kelas 3

7)

Pertukaran kepala sekolah diluar provinsi NTT

Anggaran tersedia Rp 567.156.000

APBD

Rp 800.436.500

APBN

BIDANG 3: EVALUASI SEKOLAH BERBASIS HASIL PEMBELAJARAN SISWA 1) 2)

Perlu dilakukan pemetaan mutu pendidikan pada tingkat Kabupaten; Evaluasi pencapaian 8 Standar Nasional Pendidikan perlu dilakukan secara berkala BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 4: MANAJEMEN GURU TERINTEGRASI

Opsi 4.1. Ketersediaan dan distribusi guru berkualitas 1. SM 3T (Sarjana Mendidik Tertinggal, Terluar, Terdepan) 100 orang untuk guru SD dan SMP diusulkan untuk swasta

1.

Perekrutan guru lewat Program Sarjana Mendidik di Daerah Terdepan, Terluar, dan Terpencil (SM3T) sebaiknya menggunakan pendekatan kewilayahan dan persyaratan “ harus tamat dari Program Studi yang terakreditasi B” diganti dengan minimal terakreditasi. Hala ini sejalan dengan semangat pengembangan kurikulum saat ini, yakni sifatnya desentralistis dan dikembangkan sesuai dengan situasi dan kondisi

62

Permenpan RB tentang Formasi guru dan pengadaan Aparatur Sipil Negara (ASN) Guru

2017

228,924,500

APBN

Annexes

2.

setiap daerah atau satuan pendidikan GGD 344 untuk sekolah negeri SD dan SMP

2017

Rp160.000.000

APBD

Opsi 4.2 Mengintergrasikan guru non-PNS ke dalam kebijakan tenaga guru di Kabupaten

Memasukkan isu pengangkatan guru non PNS diatur dalam Perda Pendidikan

Tidak ada biaya

BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 5: INTEGRASI LAYANAN PAUD & KELAS RENDAH 1)

Program PMTAS untuk siswa kelas rendah

Juknis BOS1

2017

30.295.200.000

BOS

APBD

2) Sosialisasi peran serta orang tua dalam mempersiapkan anak memasuki jenjang SD 3)

Penyedian sanitasi dan air bersih

4)

Guru TK dan guru kelas rendah harus yang berkualitas BIDANG KEBIJAKAN 6. PENINGKATAN PERAN PENGAWAS

Opsi 6.1. Sertifikat Calon Pengawas 1) 2)

Seleksi Calon Pengawas; Pemetaan Kemampuan/Kompetensi Pengawas

Sebagai penjabaran dari Permendiknas Nomor 12 tahun 2007 tentang Standar Pengawas Sekolah perlu dijabarkan lebih lanjut dalam Perda tentang pendidikan

2017

559.208.000.00

1)

Pendampingan pengawas untuk melakukan supervisi kelas

2018

Estimasi biaya Rp 633.598.500

2)

Pelatihan penguatan kompetensi pengawas.

Sebagai penjabaran dari Permendiknas Nomor 12 tahun 2007 tentang Standar Pengawas Sekolah perlu dijabarkan lebih lanjut dalam Perda tentang pendidikan

Sebgai penjabaran dari Permendiknas Nomor 12 tahun 2007 tentang Standar

2017 dan 2018

Estimasi biaya Rp 121.175.010

Opsi 6.3. Pertemuan monitoring dan evaluasi kegiatan supervisi bersama Kadinas dan Bagian Perencanaan

Efektivitas pelaksanaan MKPS

APBD

63

Annexes

Pengawas Sekolah perlu dijabarkan lebih lanjut dalam Perda tentang pendidikan

64

Anggaran tersedia Rp 43.989.100

Annexes

Annex 2. Draft Constitution of the FPPS ANGGARAN DASAR FORUM RESTORASI PENDIDIKAN SUMBA (FRPS) SEKRETARIAT JL ………………………………… SUMBA BARAT BAB I NAMA, WAKTU DAN TEMPAT KEDUDUKAN Pasal 1 Nama Organisasi Organisasi ini bernama Forum Restorasi Pendidikan Sumba, selanjutnya disingkat “FRPS” Pasal 2 Waktu, Tempat Pendirian dan Kesekretariatan (1) (2)

(3)

Organisasi ini untuk waktu yang lamanya tidak ditentukan dan di mulai sejak tanggal XX Januari 2017. Organisasi ini berkedudukan di Waikabubak sebagai sekretariat FRPS untuk tahun pertama, Sekretariat FRPS dipindahkan setiap tahun berdasarkan giliran atau kemampuan dan ketersedian sumber daya pada tiap kabupaten anggota. Ketentuan lebih lanjut tentang tata acara pemindahan sekretariat dan penyusunan struktur FRPS diatur dalam Surat Keputusan koordinator. BAB II AZAS, SIFAT DAN CIRI ORGANISASI Pasal 3

(1) (2) (3)

Organisasi ini berazaskan Pancasila. Organisasi ini bersifat Independen. Organisasi ini bercirikan Kepedulian, Kekeluargan, Pendidikan, Profesional dan Kebudayaan. BAB III MAKSUD DAN TUJUAN Pasal 4

Organisasi ini bermaksud: (1) Menjadi Wahana Kepedulian dan Restorasi Pendidikan Dasar khususnya jenjang SD/MI di daratan Sumba. (2) Menjadi sarana koordinasi dan sinkronisasi kebijakan sesuai kewenangan antara Pemda dan Pemerintah. (3) Menjalankan fungsi monitoring dan evaluasi penerapan kebijakan pendidikan khususnya kelas rendah.

65

Annexes

Pasal 5 Tujuan Organisasi Organisasi ini bertujuan: Mengawal penerapan kebijakan untuk merespon temuan penelitian ACDP040 dan berbagi strategi dan praktik yang baik di tiap kabupaten sedaratan Sumba. BAB IV RUANG LINGKUP KEGIATAN Pasal 6 (1) (2)

Mengadakan pertemuan rutin per semester untuk memonitoring pelaksanaan enam kebijakan terkait pendidikan SD/MI. Menyelenggarakan pertemuan dengan Pemerintah, masyarakat dan donor dalam rangka mendapatkan dukungan baik tenaga maupun keuangan dalam mengatasi permalahan hasil belajar siswa SD/MI khususnya kelas rendah. BAB V KEANGGOTAAN Pasal 7 Sistem Keanggotaan

Keanggotaan FRPS terdiri dari tiga jenis keanggotaan yaitu: • Unsur Pemerintah Daerah • Unsur Pemerintah • Masyarakat Pasal 8 Unsur Pemerintah Daerah Unsur Pemerintah Daerah diwakili oleh (1) Wakil Bupati (2) Perwakilan Komisi di DPRD yang membidangi Pendidikan (3) Sekretaris Daerah (4) BAPPEDA (5) Dinas Pendidikan atau Dinas Lain yang mengelola Pendidikan Dasar

Pasal 9 Unsur Pemerintah Unsur Pemerintah dapat diwakili oleh Kementrian Terkait yang relevan dengan urusan Pendidikan dasar yaitu: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

66

Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Kmentrian Agama Kementrian Aparatur dan Reformasi Birokrasi Kementrian Dalam Negeri Kementrian Desa, Daerah Tertinggal dan Transmigrasi BAPPENAS

Annexes

Pasal 10 Unsur Masyarakat Unsur masyarakat dapat diwakili oleh: (1) Dewan pendidikan (2) Yayasan dan lembaga pendidikan penyelenggara pendidikan dasar (3) Tokoh masyarakat atau tokoh yang menaruh perhatian pada layanan pendidikan dasar Pasal 11 Kewajiban dan Hak Anggota (1) (2) (3) (4)

Anggota berkewajiban mematuhi AD dan ART, ketetapan – ketetapan dan keputusan – keputusan lainnya. Anggota dari unsur Pemerintah Daerah mempunyai hak suara, hak memilih dan ikut serta dalam menentukan keputusan yang diambil di dalam FRPS. Anggota dari unsur Pemerintah dan Masyarakat tidak mempunyai hak suara namun dibolehkan ikut serta dalam kegiatan FRPS. Tata cara pemiihan coordinator dan sekretaris di atur dalam ART BAB VI STRUKTUR ORGANISASI Pasal 10 Bentuk Struktur Organisasi

(1) (2)

FRPS diketuai oleh Wakil Bupati yang mendapat giliran kepengurusan selanjutnya disebut Koordinator FRPS. Sekretariat FRPS berada di kantor Bappeda yang mendapat giliran kepengurusan selanjutnya disebut Sekretariat FRPS. Kepala Bappeda yang kantornya ditempati sebagai secretariat FRPS menjadi sekretaris.

BAB VII KEUANGAN Pasal 11 Sumber Keuangan Biaya penyelenggaraan kegiatan FRPS yaitu pertemuan dibiayai oleh Pemerintah Kabupaten yang menjadi Koordinator. Anggota FRPS menganggarkan pada anggaran kabupaten masing-masing untuk biaya perjalanan Dinas dan lain-lain yang dibutuhkan. BAB VIII PENETAPAN, PERUBAHAN AD DAN ART, PEMBUBARAN Pasal 14 Penetapan dan Perubahan AD dan ART Penetapan dan perubahan AD dan ART FRPS dilakukan melalui Musyawarah Besar (MUBES) dan disetujui oleh sekurang – kurangnya 2/3 anggota yang hadir dan mewakili minimal 2/3 Perwakilan dari unsur Pemerintah Deaerah. Pasal 15 Pembubaran Organisasi FRPS dinyatakan bubar jika disetujui oleh 2/3 Perwakilan Pemerintah Daerah melalui Musyawarah Besar (MUBES)

67

Annexes

BAB IX ATURAN TAMBAHAN Pasal 16 Hal – hal yang diatur, ditetapkan dan dirincikan dalam Anggaran Dasar ini diatur dalam Anggaran Rumah Tangga BAB X PENUTUP Pasal 1 Pengesahan dan pemberlakuan Anggaran Dasar ini berlaku sejak Tanggal xx Januari 2017 Di Waikabubak

68

Annexes

ANGGARAN RUMAH TANGGA FORUM RESTORASI PENDIDIKAN SUMBA (FRPS) SEKRETARIAT Jl ………………………………… SUMBA BARAT BAB I STRUKTUR ORGANISASI Pasal 1 Struktur Kepemimpinan Terdiri dari: (1) Koordinator (2) Sekretaris Pasal 2 Struktur Kekuasaan Terdiri dari: (1) Musyawarah Besar (MUBES) (2) Rapat Semester (4) Rapat Tahunan Pasal 3 Peran dan Fungsi Struktur Kepemimpinan (1) Koordinator forum a. Mengkoordinasi persiapan pelaksanaan MUBES, rapat semester dan rapat tahunan. b. Mempersiapkan dan mengkoordinasikan perjalanan dinas keluar Sumba. (2) Sekretaris forum a. Menyusun agenda dan bahan pelaksanaan MUBES, rapat semester dan rapat tahunan. b. Membuat Laporan Pertanggung jawaban setiap rapat tahunan. Pasal 5 Status dan Wewenang Struktur Kekuasaan (1) Musyawarah Besar a. Musyawarah Besar adalah Forum Tertinggi Organisasi. b. Membahas dan menetapkan AD dan ART Organisasi.

(2) Rapat Semester a. Membahas perkembangan pelaksanaan penerapan enam kebijakan untuk mengatasi masalah pembelajaran di kelas rendah. b. Mensosialisasikan praktik baik atau kebijakan yang dapat berjalan baik dengan anggota forum. (3) Rapat Tahunan a. Membahas sebagaimana tercantum pada angka (2), ditambah; b. Evaluasi efektifitas strategi kebijakan. c. Perencanaan monitoring dan evaluasi tahun yang akan datang. d. Pergantian coordinator dan kesekretarian.

69

Annexes

Pasal 6 Masa Kepengurusan Koordinator dan Sekretaris Forum dijabat secara bergilir di antara anggota Forum dari unsur Pemerintah Daerah selama satu tahun. BAB III KEPUTUSAN Pasal 10 Kuorum a. Kuorum adalah batas minimal jumlah suara yang dibutuhkan untuk pengambilan suatu Keputusan. b. Untuk setiap pengambilan keputusan yang prinsip perlu dilakukan pemeriksaan kehadiran peserta Rapat untuk pengecekan kuorum. Pasal 11 Pengambilan Keputusan a. Keputusan di ambil melalui 3 (tiga) tahap yaitu Aklamasi, Musyawarah untuk Mufakat dan Voting. b. Aklamasi adalah Pengambilan Keputusan yang ditawarkan dan disetujui lebih dari 2/3 dari peserta yang hadir. c. Musyawrah untuk mufakat adalah pengambilan keputusan yang berdasarkan pemufakatan melalui proses musyawarah atau dialog terbuka. d. Voting adalah Pengambilan Keputusan yang berdasarkan pemungutan suara secara terbuka karena tidak adanya permufakatan. Ditetapkan di: Waikabubak ……………………..2016

70

Photo Credit Front cover

ACDP

Halaman xiv Halaman 28

ACDP ACDP

Halaman 38

ACDP

72

73

Madrasah Effectiveness in Sumba, NTT ACDP 040. VOLUME 2 Knowledge to Policy

Recommend Documents