I have been informed that there are ongoing legal actions between the management of UPI and 'former' members of their teaching staff. As others may be joining the action and prosecutions under the Criminal Code of Indonesia are being considered by government officials, any comment regarding UPI is considered to be sub judice.
There are, however, parallels with other education/schooling institutions in Indonesia.
Following krismon (the economic meltdown in Asia of 1996/7), education was semi-privatized and a number of entrepreneurs, many with connections to Singapore, entered the schools 'market'. This has resulted in a management system which, when it talks about 'result' and 'stake-holders', is motivated by financial profits.
Salaries are a major expense, hence the notion of productivity. Native speaker teachers are employed because of their 'entertainment value', because "parents want to see a white face in the classroom". This, of course, negates the notion of teaching being a caring profession.
Read this thread to see how disenchanted many teachers are with their employers. It is a scenario which is far too common in Jakarta.
Sunday 10 December 2006
Tuesday 28 November 2006
Keeping up with the Widjayas - Part 1
Over the past 10 years or so, Indonesia has seen a proliferation of so-called National Plus schools. These purport to offer an alternative to the Indonesian curriculum which is only now moving towards 'student-centred' education. In adopted a curriculum from, say, Singapore, it is hoped that Indonesian students will graduate with a more worldly knowledge, a sense of curiosity/experimentation and the skills to compete "in this globalisation era", whatever that may be.
Of course, these schools are more expensive than state schools because they do offer more facilities and, hey, expatriate teachers. The majority of these schools offer a bilingual education and some are mono-lingual, that language being English, albeit with classes in bahasa Indonesia and Mandarin.
The better schools are offering the International Baccalaureat or the IGCSE (International General Certificate of Secondary Education); these schools have been accredited externally and are not the subject of this particular polemic.
Not all schools, however, have been established with the primary aim of ensuring educational excellence. For many, it is but one way of creating a profitable business. Hence the number of franchise businesses, e.g. HighScope, Singapore International Schools and the many kindergartens such as Tiny Tots.
(NB. Language Schools have also followed the franchise route as pioneered by EF. ILP and TBI are two examples of long established organisations which have remodeled their core business post-krismon in order to compete.)
One cannot argue against the notion of a school more than covering its costs. Without the excess of income over expenditure, there would be little further investment in what has to be a dynamic enterprise. Schooling, both in theory and practice, is in a state of constant flux and that is for the good.
Where major problems lie is when a school (or network of schools) preaches a philosophy to its clients, the parents, yet does not understand the principles underlying that concept or the need to employ those who do.
For example, let us consider the Penabur organisation which has reprinted on its website an article about bilingual education originally published in the Jakarta Post.
One of the most distinctive, yet the least understood 'pluses' of the national-plus school is bilingual education. Though the public is not unfamiliar with such type of education, little is known about what bilingual educational is, what its goals are, how it can be implemented and how effective and successful it is. Worse still, even its practitioners and professional organizations are not really sure about the concept of bilingual education. This is indeed bad news.
The following is a public misconception about bilingual education which tends to be associated with orality (speaking), not literacy (writing). To engage in bilingual education is tantamount to pursuing fluency in speaking. In the case of early bilingual education, writing is taught, but only as a means to reinforce speaking, not an end in itself.
Furthemore, students' first language is perceived as interference rather than a facilitator in learning a second language. Thus, whenever possible, the former should be avoided at all costs to learn the latter. However, research has convincingly disclosed that students' first language provides a shortcut to learning the second language.
So, having published the article Penabur presumably agrees with the author's contention that focussing on developing speaking skills alone is not sufficient. Neither is the insistence on forsakling the use of the students' first language, Indonesian.
Yet, those are the two focuses of their programme to raise the level of English in their network of schools, from kindergarden to senior high school, throughout Indonesia. Known as UPI, which stands for Ukrida Penabur Internasional, this is a collaboration between the Penabur university, Ukrida, the main Penabur board and Curtin University in Australia.
UPI employs westerners as English teachers because they are native speakers (NETs). Every class in nearly every Penabur school is taught by a UPI teacher as part of their English syllabus. The NET is expected to focus on Speaking, with local teachers of English sharing the other language skills, primarily seen as Grammar, Listening and Reading. Writing is not taught.
There are a number of sound educational reasons for employing expatriate school teachers, not least that because they have undergone extensive training in classroom methodology as well as further training in specialist subjects.
Of course, these schools are more expensive than state schools because they do offer more facilities and, hey, expatriate teachers. The majority of these schools offer a bilingual education and some are mono-lingual, that language being English, albeit with classes in bahasa Indonesia and Mandarin.
The better schools are offering the International Baccalaureat or the IGCSE (International General Certificate of Secondary Education); these schools have been accredited externally and are not the subject of this particular polemic.
Not all schools, however, have been established with the primary aim of ensuring educational excellence. For many, it is but one way of creating a profitable business. Hence the number of franchise businesses, e.g. HighScope, Singapore International Schools and the many kindergartens such as Tiny Tots.
(NB. Language Schools have also followed the franchise route as pioneered by EF. ILP and TBI are two examples of long established organisations which have remodeled their core business post-krismon in order to compete.)
One cannot argue against the notion of a school more than covering its costs. Without the excess of income over expenditure, there would be little further investment in what has to be a dynamic enterprise. Schooling, both in theory and practice, is in a state of constant flux and that is for the good.
Where major problems lie is when a school (or network of schools) preaches a philosophy to its clients, the parents, yet does not understand the principles underlying that concept or the need to employ those who do.
For example, let us consider the Penabur organisation which has reprinted on its website an article about bilingual education originally published in the Jakarta Post.
One of the most distinctive, yet the least understood 'pluses' of the national-plus school is bilingual education. Though the public is not unfamiliar with such type of education, little is known about what bilingual educational is, what its goals are, how it can be implemented and how effective and successful it is. Worse still, even its practitioners and professional organizations are not really sure about the concept of bilingual education. This is indeed bad news.
The following is a public misconception about bilingual education which tends to be associated with orality (speaking), not literacy (writing). To engage in bilingual education is tantamount to pursuing fluency in speaking. In the case of early bilingual education, writing is taught, but only as a means to reinforce speaking, not an end in itself.
Furthemore, students' first language is perceived as interference rather than a facilitator in learning a second language. Thus, whenever possible, the former should be avoided at all costs to learn the latter. However, research has convincingly disclosed that students' first language provides a shortcut to learning the second language.
So, having published the article Penabur presumably agrees with the author's contention that focussing on developing speaking skills alone is not sufficient. Neither is the insistence on forsakling the use of the students' first language, Indonesian.
Yet, those are the two focuses of their programme to raise the level of English in their network of schools, from kindergarden to senior high school, throughout Indonesia. Known as UPI, which stands for Ukrida Penabur Internasional, this is a collaboration between the Penabur university, Ukrida, the main Penabur board and Curtin University in Australia.
UPI employs westerners as English teachers because they are native speakers (NETs). Every class in nearly every Penabur school is taught by a UPI teacher as part of their English syllabus. The NET is expected to focus on Speaking, with local teachers of English sharing the other language skills, primarily seen as Grammar, Listening and Reading. Writing is not taught.
There are a number of sound educational reasons for employing expatriate school teachers, not least that because they have undergone extensive training in classroom methodology as well as further training in specialist subjects.
Saturday 25 November 2006
Opening Post
This blog is intended to offer a forum for the many TEFLers in Indonesia who believe that being a token bule in a classroom is demeaning.
A teacher, by definition, has something to offer other than entertainment value. It is my hope that this site will demonstrate the potential for good education that we offer to Indonesians rather than (or in spite of) a substantial profit for the owners of the establishments we work in.
I would be pleased to extend 'membership' to all who wish to contribute.
Miss Brodie
A teacher, by definition, has something to offer other than entertainment value. It is my hope that this site will demonstrate the potential for good education that we offer to Indonesians rather than (or in spite of) a substantial profit for the owners of the establishments we work in.
I would be pleased to extend 'membership' to all who wish to contribute.
Miss Brodie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)