Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
TOWARDS BETTER EDUCATION IN
RURAL INDONESIA: LESSON LEARNED
FROM INDONESIA MENGAJAR’S
COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION
PROGRAM
Poli...
2ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
A very thank you to Dr Suzaina Kadir from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy for be...
3Executive Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Policy Analysis Exercise (PAE) seeks to analyze the policy problem of lack of sy...
4Executive Summary
Sulawesi), and Halmahera Selatan (North Maluku), have been received PM community
participation program ...
5Executive Summary
Recommendations
According to our findings, we have formulated four policy options for IM and relevant
g...
6TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT.........................................................................
7TABLE OF CONTENTS
7.5 The Opportunity to Sustain the Community Participation Program........................................
8LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Education Level of Primary School Teacher in Indonesia by Location ..............
9Introduction
1. INTRODUCTION
Education is vital for the intellectual and professional development of the Indonesians. It
...
10BACKGROUND
2 BACKGROUND
2.1 Country Profile: Indonesia
Indonesia is an emerging country, categorized as lower-middle inc...
11BACKGROUND
Since new-order regime (1966-1998) until the reform era (1998-2013), a Wajar 9 Tahun
program has been vigorou...
12BACKGROUND
but received the salary from the central government on par with other civil servants’ benefit
package, includ...
13BACKGROUND
percent of primary schools in Indonesia were overstaffed and 34 understaffed. In this
regards, rural and remo...
14BACKGROUND
enrollment rate for rural and urban has almost on a par in 90 percent, the continuity of
higher education bet...
15BACKGROUND
instruction in accordance with local norms and culture (RAND, 2012). The objective was to
create more conduci...
16BACKGROUND
Government has committed to put big investment in this policy, with estimated around total
IDR 250 trillion (...
17PROBLEM DEFINITION
Figure 2 - Pengajar Muda (PM) Community Participation Program
3 PROBLEM DEFINITION
3.1 Lack of Synerg...
18RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
particularly in rural area. Considering all these factors, it leads us to our policy problem that
is ...
19LITERATURE REVIEW
5 LITERATURE REVIEW
5.1 Literature on Theoretical Framework Components
Young Teachers Program
Sending ...
20LITERATURE REVIEW
Definition and History of Community Participation Approach in Development
Program
The community partic...
21LITERATURE REVIEW
Table 2 - Summary of Type of Community Involvement Program
Type of
Community
Involvement
Program
Frame...
22LITERATURE REVIEW
Community Participation Approach in Education Program in Indonesia
Community participation in educatio...
23METHODOLOGY
Figure 3 - Framework on PAE Report
Using the SWOT matrix, we determine the policy options and assessment. Fi...
24METHODOLOGY
Table 3 - Summary of Five Pioneer Districts of IM Program
Indicators Bengkalis Tulang
Bawang Barat
Paser Maj...
25METHODOLOGY
6.2 Primary and Secondary Research
The existing data obtained from IM self-evaluation report and the support...
26FINDINGS
Analysis of progress report (self-evaluation form)
To grasp the evaluation of PM program, this research analyze...
27FINDINGS
shows a mixed finding on the level of collaboration among stakeholders as depicted in
Figure 4. Among all the s...
28FINDINGS
Local Government. However, it is common to see that all stakeholders prefer to
collaborate in non-burdensome ac...
29FINDINGS
Figure 6: The Challenges in Collaboration among Stakeholders
In the process of forging the collaboration, it is...
30FINDINGS
7.2 The Behavioral Change among Stakeholders
As the level of collaboration shows positive results in addressing...
31FINDINGS
Local
Community)
potential and behavior
of their children
school principals
 People are starting to
initiate l...
32FINDINGS
especially in higher involvement in teacher’s capacity building as well as peer learning
projected by the Penga...
33FINDINGS
education movement such as Majene Mengajar, Paser Mengajar and etc. These local
movements have been led by the ...
34FINDINGS
According to the self-evaluation report and survey form, majority of the respondents raised
concern over three ...
35FINDINGS
3) Failure to integrate the role of stakeholders and national policy into component and
material of training
Ac...
36FINDINGS
stakeholder and to nurture and support them in their efforts to influence positive change
in community particip...
37FINDINGS
Figure 9: Limitation of Local Education Governance
Source: The World Bank 2012
In regards to our findings on th...
38FINDINGS
ready to embrace new ideas and change; 2) Local community group is on the rise and 3)
Higher trust from the loc...
39FINDINGS
7.6 Viability Studies
Furthermore, to assess the impact of IM in generating synergy among the education
stakeho...
40FINDINGS
1) Positive Net Benefit: Socially Viable
Overall, the total cost is 404 billion and the total benefit is 6,398 ...
41FINDINGS
Figure 11: Breakdown of Cost (in Percentage)
Second, we look at unit level. IM’s PM program expense per year pe...
42FINDINGS
Figure 12: Breakdown of Benefit (in Percentage)
Second, we look at unit level. The net benefit per student is 2...
43FINDINGS
In conclusion, the result of the CBA shows first, IM’s PM Program is socially viable and
beneficial with high n...
44POLICY OPTIONS
8 POLICY OPTIONS
Based on the SWOT Matrix tabulated in the previous section, we recognized the strengths,...
45POLICY OPTIONS
teacher’s management particularly recruitment and training are abysmal, IM has to
strategize the capacity...
46POLICY OPTIONS
8.2 Towards Community Driven Approach
Weakness to be
addressed
 Failure to Suit
Local Context
 Weak Pol...
47POLICY OPTIONS
From the roadmap in Figure 15, PM program has reached positive level of community
participation during th...
48POLICY OPTIONS
8.3 Empower Local Education Governance
Weakness
Failure to Suit
Local Context
Weak Policy
Communication
F...
49POLICY OPTIONS
Figure 16: The link between intermediate outcomes and district education performance
Source: The World Ba...
50POLICY OPTIONS
survey shows that the distribution of teachers also appears to be better in districts
with better governa...
51POLICY OPTIONS
Case Box 2: Example of Best Practice for Empowered Local Governance
The Philippines manage to empower the...
52POLICY OPTIONS
possibilities in teacher’s deployment system, targeted recruitment plus incentive and peer
system.
A) Div...
53POLICY OPTIONS
local people. For these five (5) districts under study, this model is viable as there are
pools of young ...
54POLICY ASSESSMENT
9 POLICY ASSESSMENT
The complex policy problem as shown by the previous section cannot be addressed by...
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program

3,892 views

Published on

This Policy Analysis Exercise (PAE) seeks to analyze the policy problem of lack of synergy among education policy stakeholders, in rural area in Indonesia. The case generated from the Indonesia Mengajar (IM) for its Pengajar Muda (PM) Program. Policymakers from the following bureaucracies may find the report particularly relevant: Education Council in District Government, District Government, and Directorate General of Elementary Education Ministry of Education and Culture, The Republic of Indonesia.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Towards Better Education in Rural Indonesia: Lesson Learned from Indonesia Mengajar's Community Participation Program

  1. 1. TOWARDS BETTER EDUCATION IN RURAL INDONESIA: LESSON LEARNED FROM INDONESIA MENGAJAR’S COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION PROGRAM Policy Analysis Exercise (PAE) Conducted by: Raisa Annisa (A0109494X) Chenhong Peng (A0109488R) Salwa Izani Kamarzaman (A0109630M)
  2. 2. 2ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT A very thank you to Dr Suzaina Kadir from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy for being our supervisor. Despite your hectic schedule, you have spared your time to guide and provide us with invaluable insights and knowledge on the PAE report. Thank you for being very approachable and so encouraging. This report would not have come to fruition without your assistance and supervision. We would like to thank Ibu Nia Kurnianingtyas and Yunita Fransisca from Gerakan Indonesia Mengajar for giving us the opportunity and great collaboration throughout the completion of this report. A heartfelt thank you to the Management Team, Operation Team and the Alumni of Gerakan Indonesia Mengajar for their time, patience and incredible support for our research. Not forgetting the Pengajar Muda Cohort 1-Cohort 7 for sharing your valuable feedback in the self- evaluation form as well as all the participants from the 13 Districts all over Indonesia whom tirelessly participating in the discussions and surveys. Without them, we will not be able to complete our analysis of the responses and observations gathered throughout this journey. Indeed, this year long journey has been the most amazing one. Exploring Jakarta and Purwakarta to understand the life of the NGOs in the education field, the continuous effort of the Government of Indonesia to reform the education system and each and every layer of the society whom zestfully driving the education movement in the rural areas. Yes, some efforts were fruitful but some are not without hindrance. Yet, they keep striving to deliver the best. Hence, this experience was priceless, especially when we return to our home country. The networking, the friendships, and many more we do not have the space to write it down. Last but not least, to Ivy Chan for your constructive feedback on the report structure, language, coherence and readability of this report. We will definitely miss your technical support and mentorship. Thank you again and enjoy your reading! Chenhong Peng, Raisa Annisa, Salwa Izani Kamarzaman
  3. 3. 3Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Policy Analysis Exercise (PAE) seeks to analyze the policy problem of lack of synergy among education policy stakeholders, in rural area in Indonesia. The case generated from the Indonesia Mengajar (IM) for its Pengajar Muda (PM) Program. Policymakers from the following bureaucracies may find the report particularly relevant: Education Council in District Government, District Government, and Directorate General of Elementary Education Ministry of Education and Culture, The Republic of Indonesia. Policy Issue: Lack of Synergy among Education Stakeholders Indonesia, the world’s 10th largest economy, ranked 64 out of 120 countries in education quality (UNESCO 2011). The low performance in education has its root in the inequality between Greater Jakarta area and rural area (USAID, 2013). Government of Indonesia has implemented several policies to address the low quality of education in rural area. Most of the program tailored specifically for particular policy stakeholders for instance the teacher certification for teacher, the Operational Aid Assistance (BOS), and the School Based Management (SBM) for principals and community. However, most of these policies do not improve the quality of education in rural area due to the lack of synergy among the education stakeholders in school (student, teacher, principal and school committee), village community as well as local government. Indonesia Mengajar (IM), as a non-governmental organization is taking part to help the government to improve education quality in rural Indonesia through community participation approach. Over the past five years, IM has been sending 1,724 Pengajar Muda (young teacher) to 17 districts and teaching 22,808 primary school students. Besides teaching, the Pengajar Muda (PM) also engaged with education stakeholders through participation approach to generate the synergy among them to improve education quality in their area. Research Focus: Five Pioneer Districts of PM Program To have specific focus of research, as well as the impact on the PM Community participation program, five districts were selected as a research focus in this report. These five districts consist of Bengkalis (Riau), Tulang Bawang Barat (Lampung), Paser (East Kalimantan), Majene (West
  4. 4. 4Executive Summary Sulawesi), and Halmahera Selatan (North Maluku), have been received PM community participation program for almost five years. These districts would also be the pilot project of how IM establish the strategy to leave the districts and sustain the impact on education quality improvement. Findings This study finds that PM Community Participation Program has generated synergy and created positive behavior changes among the stakeholders with a relatively low social cost and high benefit. Despite these positive impacts, the program has its own weaknesses which are failure to implement program that suits local context and culture, weak policy communication between IM and stakeholders, and failure to integrate the role of stakeholders and national policy into component and material of training. In addition, the implementation of the program is also constrained by the lack of capacity and resource in district level as well as geographic obstacles. Despite the weaknesses and limitations, the restructuring of local education council, the rising of local community group and the growing trust from community are shedding the light of opportunities to PM Community Participation Approach. All the findings summarized in matrix below:
  5. 5. 5Executive Summary Recommendations According to our findings, we have formulated four policy options for IM and relevant government institution to better improve education in rural Indonesia. Four policy recommendations are as follow, in the order of implementation priority: 1. IM to Improve Program Implementation IM is advised to improve three (3) implementation mechanisms that deemed crucial in the operation of their community participation program; particularly in 1) Supporting and Transition Mechanism; 2) Policy Communication with stakeholders in rural area, and 3) Training Content Improvement. 2. Towards Community Driven Approach As IM intended to end their program after five (5) years in operation at these districts, it is crucial that IM needs to initiate the community driven model for the districts in the long term. In this community development approach, local communities and local education councils are encouraged to participate in choosing development priorities and designing project, as well as engaged in co-financing and technical support provision. 3. Empower Local Education Governance The need to empower local education governance is vital to improve education performance particularly in rural area. To improve the education performance, we recommend local government to have better management regarding resources, governance, transparency and accountability of the system. 4. Grassroots’ Model Approach. To address the teacher deployment issue in rural Indonesia, government is advised to adopt the grassroots’ model which consists of 1) centralized and market model of teacher recruitment, 2) incentive for locals to be teacher, and 3) peer system of teacher deployed in rural. By assessing these four policy options in terms of utility, feasibility and equity, we suggested a timeline to implement these four policy options step by step and take into account the possible barriers and enablers in policy implementation.
  6. 6. 6TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENT..........................................................................................................................2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................................................6 LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................................................................................8 LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................................................8 LIST OF APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................8 1. INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................9 1.1 Client Information.........................................................................................................................9 1.2 Structure of the PAE .....................................................................................................................9 2 BACKGROUND ..............................................................................................................................10 2.1 Country Profile: Indonesia..........................................................................................................10 2.2 Indonesia Basic Education Policy...............................................................................................10 2.3 Indonesia’s education poor quality: the urban vs rural area .......................................................12 2.4 Review on Education Policy to Address Problem in Rural Area................................................14 2.5 The role of Indonesia Mengajar Community Participation Program..........................................16 3 PROBLEM DEFINITION..............................................................................................................17 3.1 Lack of Synergy amidst Stakeholders.........................................................................................17 4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE.............................................................................................................18 4.1 Research Questions.....................................................................................................................18 5 LITERATURE REVIEW ...............................................................................................................19 5.1 Literature on Theoretical Framework Components ....................................................................19 5.2 Limitation of Literature...............................................................................................................22 5.3 Analytical Framework on This Research....................................................................................22 6 METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................................23 6.1 Focus of Research.......................................................................................................................23 6.2 Primary and Secondary Research ...............................................................................................25 7 FINDINGS ........................................................................................................................................26 7.1 The Level of Collaboration among Stakeholders........................................................................26 7.2 The Behavioral Change among Stakeholders .............................................................................30 7.3 Weakness of the Program ...........................................................................................................33 7.4 Limitation of Local Government ................................................................................................36
  7. 7. 7TABLE OF CONTENTS 7.5 The Opportunity to Sustain the Community Participation Program...........................................37 7.6 Viability Studies..........................................................................................................................39 7.7 Summary of Findings: SWOT Matrix ........................................................................................43 8 POLICY OPTIONS.........................................................................................................................44 8.1 IM to Improve Program Implementation....................................................................................44 8.2 Towards Community Driven Approach......................................................................................46 8.3 Empower Local Education Governance .....................................................................................48 8.4 The Grassroots’ Model Approach...............................................................................................51 9 POLICY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................................................54 9.1 Assessment Criteria ....................................................................................................................54 9.2 Assessment of Policy Options.....................................................................................................54 9.2.1 IM to Improve Program Implementation............................................................................55 9.2.2 Towards Community Driven Approach..............................................................................55 9.2.3 Empower Local Education Governance..............................................................................56 9.2.4 The Grassroots’ Model Approach.......................................................................................57 9.3 Policy Assessment Summary......................................................................................................58 9.4 Key trade-offs .............................................................................................................................58 10 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................................59 11 IMPLEMENTATION .................................................................................................................60 11.1 Implementation Priority..............................................................................................................60 11.2 Possible Barrier and Enablers in Policy Implementation............................................................62 12 REPORT LIMITATIONS..........................................................................................................63 12.1 Validity .......................................................................................................................................63 12.2 Generalizability...........................................................................................................................63 13 CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................64 14 APPENDIX....................................................................................................................................66 15 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................101
  8. 8. 8LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Education Level of Primary School Teacher in Indonesia by Location .............. 13 Figure 2 - Pengajar Muda (PM) Community Participation Program................................... 17 Figure 3 - Framework on PAE Report ..................................................................................... 23 Figure 4: The Level of Collaboration among Stakeholders.................................................... 27 Figure 5: The Form of Collaboration between Stakeholders ................................................. 28 Figure 6: The Challenges in Collaboration among Stakeholders........................................... 29 Figure 7: Weaknesses of IM Program ...................................................................................... 33 Figure 8: Limitation of the Local Education Governance ...................................................... 36 Figure 9: Limitation of Local Education Governance............................................................. 37 Figure 10: The Opportunity to Sustain IM Program.............................................................. 38 Figure 11: Breakdown of Cost (in Percentage) ....................................................................... 41 Figure 12: Breakdown of Benefit (in Percentage).................................................................... 42 Figure 13: Rate of Return of IM’s PM Program for student and PM................................... 42 Figure 14: The SWOT Matrix of PM Program ....................................................................... 43 Figure 15: Roadmap towards Community Driven Approach................................................ 46 Figure 16: The link between intermediate outcomes and district education performance . 49 Figure 17: Road Map of Policy Implementation...................................................................... 61 LIST OF TABLES Table 1- Compulsory Education in Indonesia.......................................................................... 11 Table 2 - Summary of Type of Community Involvement Program ....................................... 21 Table 3 - Summary of Five Pioneer Districts of IM Program ................................................ 24 Table 4: The Behavioral Change of Stakeholders and Its Causes.......................................... 30 Table 5: The Summary of Method for CBA Items .................................................................. 39 Table 6: Summary of Cost and Benefit Analysis (in billions)................................................ 40 Table 7: Policy Assessment Criteria.......................................................................................... 54 Table 8: Summary of Policy Assessment .................................................................................. 58 Table 9: Summary of Policy Recommendations ...................................................................... 59 LIST OF APPENDIX Appendix 1: List of Participants in Interview, Survey, and Observations............................ 66 Appendix 2: Interview and Survey Questions.......................................................................... 69 Appendix 3: IM Outcome Mapping.......................................................................................... 71 Appendix 4: Qualitative Analysis (Self-evaluation report and Survey Form)...................... 73 Appendix 5: Cost and Benefit Analysis..................................................................................... 89
  9. 9. 9Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION Education is vital for the intellectual and professional development of the Indonesians. It plays an essential role in building a stronger and competitive Indonesia in the world. Indonesia would be the 7th economy in the world by 2030, as predicted by Mckinsey. However, education in Indonesia still faces several problems such as quality, equal accessibility, and well-trained teachers. Indonesia ranked 64 of 120 countries in education quality (UNESCO, 2012) and 69th out of 127 countries in Education Development Index (UNESCO, 2011). The complex education problems had its roots in the limited access to education in rural areas due to disproportionate number of education facilities, primarily the number of teachers, between Greater Jakarta area (Jabodetabek) and the rural areas (USAID, 2013). Indonesia Mengajar (IM), as an NGO, is taking part to help the government to address the problem in the rural area through community participation approach to improve education quality. 1.1 Client Information Starting in 2010, IM as a civil society, takes part to help the government in improving education quality in rural area through Pengajar Muda (PM) community participation program. IM mission is to create the behavioral change in education stakeholders, and prepare the future leaders to have global competence with grass-root understanding. 1.2 Structure of the PAE This PAE will evaluate the community participation approach delivered by IM to improve education quality in rural Indonesia. It attempts to analyze the impact of Pengajar Muda (PM) community participation program within four years, and identify this program’s feasibility at the local government level. Finally, this PAE will present policy options and provide final recommendations. Recommendations in this PAE are mainly targeted at four major stakeholders: 1) Indonesia Mengajar (IM) as an NGO, 2) Education Council in District Government, 3) District Government (including Mayor), and 4) Directorate General of Elementary Education Ministry of Education and Culture the Republic of Indonesia.
  10. 10. 10BACKGROUND 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 Country Profile: Indonesia Indonesia is an emerging country, categorized as lower-middle income towards middle income group according to the World Bank per 2014. The GDP per capita is US $3,475 in 2013, occupied by more than 250 million people population making Indonesia as the most populous country in ASEAN with 39% of GDP share in the district. In term of demographic, Indonesia has enjoyed the window of opportunity with 66.5 per cent of Productive age in 2012, and predicted to have the peak point of demographic bonus in 2025. As a nation, Indonesia is a very culturally diverse country with more than 300 ethnicities and local languages. It stands as unitary democratic country and has implemented decentralization for seventeen years to the 34 provinces and 544 municipalities. 2.2 Indonesia Basic Education Policy In order to accomplish the universal primary education, Suharto (second president of Indonesia) has instructed the Nine Years Compulsory Education (Wajar 9 Tahun) program. Responding to the instruction, Government through Minister of Education and Minister of Religious affair formulated the education system through two dimensions based on track and level. This scheme comprised public school (Sekolah Negeri) and Islamic Religious Based School (Madrasah). For the track point of view, it consists of Formal, Non-formal and informal tracks. Meanwhile in the level based, it consists of basic education, secondary education and higher education, as summarized in Table 1.
  11. 11. 11BACKGROUND Since new-order regime (1966-1998) until the reform era (1998-2013), a Wajar 9 Tahun program has been vigorously implemented. During the implementation of compulsory education, Indonesia has been successful in expanding education sector to serve wider population. Government has implemented two significant policies in order to make the universal primary education achievable. First policy was SD Instruksi Presiden (SD Inpres) school construction program which consist of building around 60,000 primary schools. Second policy was the National Compulsory Nine Year Education Program that has been explained above. As a result of these policies, the literacy rate has increased significantly from 67.31% in 1980 to 92.58% in 2009, with 99.6% of the children went to primary school and this made Indonesia achieved the universal primary education since 1988 (World Bank, 2013). This condition drifts Indonesia’s primary enrolment rates in par with those of most developing countries in East Asia and the Pacific (Suryadarma, 2011). To support the basic education provision, public schools and religious based schools had two types of teachers: civil servant teachers and contract teachers. After the enactment of decentralization law, the civil servant teachers were supervised under district government Table 1- Compulsory Education in Indonesia No table of figures entries found. Track School Age Supervisor Basic Education (9-year compulsory education) Formal Primary (6 Years) 1. Primary School 7-12 Years Old Ministry of National Education 2. Islamic Primary School (Madrasah Ibtidaiyah) Ministry of Religious Affairs Formal Junior Secondary (3 Years) 1. Junior Secondary School 12-15 years old Ministry of National Education 2. Islamic Junior Secondary School (Madrasah Tsawaniwiyah) Ministry of Religious Affairs Non Formal Package A (same level as primary school) 7 – 12 years old Ministry of National Education Package B 13-15 years old Ministry of National Education Informal Community based activity Unlimited Ministry of National Education
  12. 12. 12BACKGROUND but received the salary from the central government on par with other civil servants’ benefit package, including a pension plan. On the other hand, contract teachers are usually employed on a short-term basis by school or district government to fill the gap of teacher shortages. The salary for the contract teachers would be settled by the principal, or the district education authority. Contract teachers would not receive such benefit provided to civil servants teachers. 2.3 Indonesia’s education poor quality: the urban vs rural area To achieve significant higher literacy and enrollment rate in the nation, massive physical school development and large teacher recruitment (including those with minimum qualifications) were taken during 1970-1990s. These actions have led to the condition of oversupplied teachers and brought Indonesia to be one of the lowest student-teacher ratios in Southeast Asia (Chang, et. al 2013). Nonetheless, it does not necessarily lead Indonesia to have better education quality. The latest result on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) in 2011 showed that more than half of year 8 Indonesian students are deficient in basic mathematics skills (Suryadarma and Sumarto, 2011:166) with overall score are below the international average, and was positioned below the neighboring countries especially Thailand and Malaysia. Furthermore, there has been no significant improvement in learning outcomes over the decades, except in reading. Both teachers and students are still scrambling in the uncertain policy and low quality of learning process. It is getting worst with the imbalance of socio-economic, demographic and geographical condition to deliver the education. Furthermore, as an archipelago, Indonesia is facing the issue of supplying and distributing teachers. Before 2000s Indonesia has no attempt to match the teacher education institutions’ intake with demand for teachers (World Bank, 2013). Ragatz (2010) showed that only 53 percent of graduating students from teaching institution could be employed as teachers. Moreover, albeit Indonesia has faced the over-hire and low student-teacher ratios, the distribution of teachers remains uneven. A study by World Bank (2008) showed that in 2004, the primary student-teacher ratio can be varied ranging from 10 to 1 in some districts to more than 30 to 1 in others. A survey conducted by World Bank in 2005 showed that 55
  13. 13. 13BACKGROUND percent of primary schools in Indonesia were overstaffed and 34 understaffed. In this regards, rural and remote areas tended to become less fortunate by facing greater shortage of teachers particularly in primary school. Even worse, the quality of teachers particularly in primary school is facing a problem with the degree qualification imbalance. As shown by Figure 1 below, a study by The World Bank in 2008 showed that less than 10 percent of primary school teachers in remote areas had a four year degree compared to 27 percent of urban primary school teachers. Hence, there has been an imbalance, both in quality and quantity for distribution of teachers in Indonesia. Figure 1 - Education Level of Primary School Teacher in Indonesia by Location Source: The World Bank, 2008 Furthermore, a research by SMERU in 2010 showed that half of the country’s teachers do not meet qualification to teach properly with absenteeism hovers at around 15 per cents in 2008. As observed by this research, many teachers in the public school system, especially in the rural area were working outside the classroom to improve their income. Hence, it is no doubt that quality in the classroom was affected because of the high absenteeism eminently to the student performance. Lastly, the imbalance of education quality can be seen through the survival school probability indicated by years of schooling. Despite the fact that the gross primary
  14. 14. 14BACKGROUND enrollment rate for rural and urban has almost on a par in 90 percent, the continuity of higher education between them still matters (UNICEF, 2012). Furthermore, the average year of schooling in urban areas is 8 years, while in rural areas, it capped only in 6 years (Center of Economic Development Studies, Univeristy Padjajaran, 2012). 2.4 Review on Education Policy to Address Problem in Rural Area To address the low quality of education that is more prevalent in rural area, Government of Indonesia through the Ministry of Education has implemented several policies. Four key policies were highlighted to identify the effort of Indonesia’s government to improve education in rural area. #1: Education and School Assistance: BOS and BSM Through the enactment of Law No 20/20031 Government of Indonesia has increased the commitment to improve education quality. To deliver more equitable education access, Ministry of Education committed to provide school assistance through School Operational Assistance (Bantuan Operasional Sekolah, BOS). According to the official document from the Ministry of Education and Culture, the objective of this program is to provide free tuition for the students to access primary and secondary education, with the subsidy for non- salary operational expenditures pegged at IDR 580,000/students/year for primary students and IDR 710,000/students/year. The school will manage the BOS administration under certain criteria related to curricular and extracurricular activities, in the periodic distribution. Additional assistance for poor students provided through the cash transfer for poor students (Bantuan Siswa Miskin, BSM). This is the non-merit cash transfer provided directly to students pegged at IDR 450,000/students/year for primary schools, and 750,000/students/year. #2: Greater Authority of School Policy: School Based Management Following other developing countries, School Based Management (SBM) has been implemented in Indonesia in tandem with decentralization of education. Schools were given more authority to design, implement, and manage their educational programs and classroom 1 Law No. 20/2003 about National Education System to allocate 20% of National Budget for education
  15. 15. 15BACKGROUND instruction in accordance with local norms and culture (RAND, 2012). The objective was to create more conducive learning process in school by letting school management to formulate vision, mission, goals, and more importantly to have authority to organize the Operational School Assistance (BOS). This program allows schools, including those located in remote area, to have a chance to develop their own school management design. Additionally, the implementation of SBM has encouraged more participation from teachers, principals, and steering committee (parents, village authority) to be involved in formulating strategy at school. #3: Remote area allowance To support more equitable distribution to the rural area, Ministry of Education and Culture provided additional allowance to support teachers on service in rural-remote area. Teachers under civil servants scheme received the particular benefit, which the number determined by District Education Council according to criteria under Minister Decree number 34/20122 . In this program, Government allocated IDR 1.5 million/month/teachers by 2012 (SMERU, 2011). The objectives of this allowance are to attract teachers to be deployed and retained in the remote area. #4: Teacher Certification Program In order to attract teachers’ candidate and incentivize qualified teacher, Government launched teacher certification program since 2006. Under the certification program, certified teachers are eligible to get doubled the base salaries, plus the additional remote allowance for those who served in remote area. There are three ways for teachers to obtain certification: 1) direct certification for teachers who had master and doctorate degree, and have IV-b civil servants rank; 2) portfolio assessment for teachers who hold supervisory positions; 3) teacher profession retraining for teachers who has qualified by certain criteria and based on district quota. 2 About Special Criteria for Special Teacher Additional Allowance (Minister of Culture and Education, Republic of Indonesia)
  16. 16. 16BACKGROUND Government has committed to put big investment in this policy, with estimated around total IDR 250 trillion (in constant 2006 prices) will be spent for this program. The objectives of this program are to make big improvement to learning quality and raise the standard of education as a whole (SMERU, 2011). Through this program, it is expected that universal qualified teachers can be achieved and decrease the gap of education outcome between rural and urban area in Indonesia. 2.5 The role of Indonesia Mengajar Community Participation Program To support the government’s effort, starting in 2011, IM has stepped in to help improving the education problem in rural area, with focus on primary school education. IM as an independent NGO sent the best university graduates to teach as Pengajar Muda (PM. Literally translated as “Young Teachers”) for one year in the primary schools located in some of Indonesia’s remote areas. Since 2011, more than 19,000 young Indonesians have applied this program and 127 of them3 have been selected periodically as Pengajar Muda (PM) to serve 19,234 students in 134 villages in 17 districts4 all over Indonesia. As depicted in Figure 2, to deliver the program, PM have been sent to respective village in the district. One district can have four (4) to ten (10) PM, with each of them distributed to one village. PM will permanently teach in selected primary school for one year. Besides teaching, PM is also engaged with stakeholders in school (students, teachers, principals, school committee) as well as involve in the village community, and local government where they live. The engagement with community attempts to create the synergy among all stakeholders in education so that it can create the positive behavioral changes in order to improve the education quality, in the village and district level. The PM community participation program is to be implemented in each district within 5 years. 3 PM in service. Using the data as the report is written (October 2014). 4 According to last update from Indonesia Mengajar Profile (www.indonesiamengajar.org)
  17. 17. 17PROBLEM DEFINITION Figure 2 - Pengajar Muda (PM) Community Participation Program 3 PROBLEM DEFINITION 3.1 Lack of Synergy amidst Stakeholders The importance of parents and community engagement is significant in supporting student performance (Fraser et. al, 1987; Wang, Haertel, & Walberg, 1993). Furthermore, parental engagement, community participation, families support and participation, community and agencies positively affect student outcomes (Chrispeels, 1996). Nonetheless in rural Indonesia, the supporting system to create conducive environment for education has not existed yet. Even though the government has enforced policy to improve education quality in rural area (as mentioned in previous section), the impediments in the respective policy recipient hampered the progress of education improvement. Furthermore, a study conducted by Pradhan et.al (2011) showed that the designated school committee participation (School Based Management Program) made little improvement and have not successfully bring the synergy amidst all of education stakeholders. Lack of coordination, communication, and awareness about significant role of respective stakeholders has been perceived to hamper the process towards better education quality,
  18. 18. 18RESEARCH OBJECTIVE particularly in rural area. Considering all these factors, it leads us to our policy problem that is stated below: Lack of Synergy amidst stakeholders to improve education quality in rural area 4 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE 4.1 Research Questions The lack of synergy among stakeholders has hampered the effort to improve education quality in rural area. Policies that have been taken by the government have not met the expected result (as mentioned in previous section). Considering the urgency to address the lack of synergy amidst policy actors, this study focuses on community participation approach as a solution to improve education quality in rural area. This Policy Analysis Excersie (PAE) aims to evaluate the Pengajar Muda community participation program, initiated by Indonesia Mengajar as a part to improve education quality in rural area. To achieve this objective, this paper attempt to address these questions: 1. Would community participation approach taken by IM address the lack of synergy among education stakeholders in rural area? This question is to evaluate the program of PM implemented in district level including challenges and opportunity of this approach 2. Is the community participation approach viable to be adopted at the local government level? This question is to assess the viability of community participation program at district level under cost and benefit analysis 3. How the community participation program in education can be implemented in the local government level? This question is to provide policy options, assessment, recommendation, as well as implementation priorities.
  19. 19. 19LITERATURE REVIEW 5 LITERATURE REVIEW 5.1 Literature on Theoretical Framework Components Young Teachers Program Sending young graduates to the disadvantaged areas as teachers has become a trend to address education inequality in the past decades. European countries, Latin America, Australia, China, India and Southeast Asian countries have such similar young teacher schemes (Economist, 2015). Teach for America (TFA), an American nonprofit organization, was the leader among these young teacher schemes. Their mission is to "eliminate educational inequity by enlisting high-achieving recent college graduates and professionals to teach" for at least two years in low-income communities throughout the United States. Since its first establishment, several impact evaluations have been conducted to gauge the effectiveness of TFA corps members relative to other teachers. MATHEMATICA Policy Research (2012) has conducted a national evaluation of Teach for America and found that TFA teachers had a positive impact on students' math achievement. Average math scores were higher in classes taught by TFA teachers than in classes taught by non-TFA teachers.5 A recent evaluation done by Tennessee Higher Education Commission, State Board of Education (2012) also found that there is no case where TFA teachers found to do worse than other teachers.6 Pengajar Muda Community Participation Program Despite adopting the same method of sending the high profile graduates to the disadvantaged area, Pengajar Muda community participation program is taking a different approach to achieve its mission. PM was sent to involve and engage with the students, local teachers, principals, parents and other education stakeholders to participate in the education activities and create positive changes. This program is unique among other young teacher schemes because it is not purely aiming to improve the student’s test score and education stakeholders are actively involved in the education improvement activities. 5 Mathematica-mpr.com, 2012. 'National Evaluation Of Teach For America'. http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/our- publications-and-findings/projects/teach-for-america. 6 Raymond, Margaret, Stephen Fletcher, and Javier Luque. 2001. An Evaluation of Teacher Differences And Student Outcomes In Houston, Texas. Standford: Credo, Hoover Institution.
  20. 20. 20LITERATURE REVIEW Definition and History of Community Participation Approach in Development Program The community participation approach adopted by IM has been widely adopted in the development program. The definition of community participation approach is varied depending on the context in which it occurs. The most popular definition of community participation is by Oakley and Marsden (1987) who defined community participation as the process by which individuals, families, or communities assume responsibility for their own welfare and develop a capacity to contribute to their own and the community’s development. In the context of development, community participation refers to an active process whereby beneficiaries influence the direction and execution of development projects rather than merely receive a share of project benefits (Paul, in Bamberger, 1986) Community participation approach is a part of the evolution to involve community in the development program, which can be traced back to 60 years ago. From the late 1940s to the mid-1960s, South Asian countries such as Bangladesh, India and other developing countries were already implementing initiatives that advanced the role of the community. The role of community in the development program evolved from minimal consultation, participation, and empowerment. Table 2 summarizes the evolution of community role in development program which has been implemented mainly by the multilateral institution such as The World Bank.
  21. 21. 21LITERATURE REVIEW Table 2 - Summary of Type of Community Involvement Program Type of Community Involvement Program Framework By Key method of implementation Policy Actors Involved Area Community’s Consultation Role Community development program since 1960s in South Asian  Managed by central government  Group is only being consulted to determine the program (minimal role)  Central government  Local government  Several citizen representing by group  Using mix of grants and subsidized credit to help poor communities  Poverty Community Participation The World Bank  Inclusive participation  Stronger accountability mechanism  Government  Citizen  Civil societies  Improvement of governance process  Infrastructure development  Education  Sanitation Community Based Development (CBD) The World Bank in 1990s  Include Beneficiaries in design and management  Donors  Government or Institutions Authority  Program Recipients  Education  sanitation Community Driven Development (CDD) The World Bank in 1990s  Community have direct controls for key project decisions  Community manage the funds  Idea of program comes from community  Donors  Government or Institutions Authority  Program Recipients  School construction  Water supply and sewer rehabilitation
  22. 22. 22LITERATURE REVIEW Community Participation Approach in Education Program in Indonesia Community participation in education sector has been implemented in Indonesia particularly since decentralization era around 2000s. School Based Management program and School Committee are the examples of community participation approach that have influenced the learning process. A study conducted by Pradhan et. al (2014) showed that role of school committee through involving independent election7 on the leader of the committee has significant impact in increasing student’s score. Furthermore, as explored by this study, the school committee was able to encourage the improvement on school management including facilities, as well as motivate the parents to be more supportive to the children’s performance in school. 5.2 Limitation of Literature Though past literatures have discussed about the impact of community participation approach in improving education quality, no specific research has been done to assess how this approach has synergized the education stakeholders and whether this community participation approach is socially viable in terms of cost and benefit analysis. Furthermore, the weakness and options to tackle the challenges of community participation approach in education programs have hardly been examined in many literatures. 5.3 Analytical Framework on This Research This report addresses the limitations of literature by highlighting the evaluation of Pengajar Muda (PM) community participation program, with other evidences to highlight the involvement among stakeholders as a way to improve education in rural area. The research process is divided into five (5) steps. It starts with the evaluation of PM community participation program through PM Self-Evaluation report, combined with interview, survey, and observation that was executed during the field trip. Then we conduct a viability studies using additional secondary data from Indonesian Statistical Bureau to examine the cost and benefit analysis of PM program. Through the evaluation and viability studies, we synthesize all findings into Strength, Weakness, Opportunities, Threat (SWOT) Matrix. 7 School Committee was elected by all committee members, not appointed by Principal, Teachers, or Education Council (Pradhan, 2014).
  23. 23. 23METHODOLOGY Figure 3 - Framework on PAE Report Using the SWOT matrix, we determine the policy options and assessment. Finally, the last stage of this research will highlight policy recommendation according to the assessment and provide implementation priorities. 6 METHODOLOGY 6.1 Focus of Research Focus of research on the district level helps to identify the implementation of the community participation program. It helps to understand the perspective of local stakeholders as well as to determine the capacity and challenges that may occur. This research thus focuses on the five pioneer areas that have been receiving PM Program for almost five years. They are Bengkalis (Riau), Tulang Bawang Barat (Lampung), Paser (East Kalimantan), Majene (West Sulawesi), and Halmahera Selatan (North Maluku). These five districts are the pioneer of PM existence and would be the pilot project of how IM establish the strategy to leave the districts and sustain the impact on education improvement. These five districts have different characteristics in terms of social, economic, and geographic. To formulate the strategy for final recommendation in this paper, all of the factors that may affect its implementation at the districts level would be considered. The summary of these five pioneer districts are tabulated in the Table 3 below.
  24. 24. 24METHODOLOGY Table 3 - Summary of Five Pioneer Districts of IM Program Indicators Bengkalis Tulang Bawang Barat Paser Majene Halmahera Selatan Stakeholders outreach Students: 4,294 Teachers: 273 School: 20 Village: 18 Sub-district: 6 Students: 2,688 Teachers: 150 School: 14 Village: 9 Sub-district: 4 Students: 1,795 Teachers: 132 School: 13 Village: 12 Sub-district: 4 Students: 1,132 Teachers: 94 School:10 Village: 10 Sub-district: 4 Students: 1,704 Teachers: 82 School: 12 Village: 11 Sub-district: 6 Economic Condition GDRP without oil and gas (in Million): IDR 3,963,460 GDRP without oil and gas (in Million): IDR 1,277,650 GDRP without oil and gas (in Million): IDR 6,827,140 GDRP without oil and gas (in Million): IDR 703,890 GDRP without oil and gas (in Million): IDR 635,080 Most economic activity: 1. Oil exploration 2. Fishery 3. Agriculture Most economic activity: 1. Agriculture 2. Plantation Most economic activity: 1. Mining & Exploration 2. Agriculture & Plantation Most economic activity: 1. Agriculture 2. Mining and exploration Most economic activity: 1. Services 2. Agriculture Education Indicators Net enrollment Primary School 93.16% 95.07% 96.4% 90.15% 95.32% Secondary School 77.6% 71.58% 73.74% 61.15% 60.38% Geographica l condition Low-land area. low land area coastal rivers Hill and coastal area Coastal area
  25. 25. 25METHODOLOGY 6.2 Primary and Secondary Research The existing data obtained from IM self-evaluation report and the supporting studies are used for qualitative method in this research. Supporting quantitative data will be applied for the cost-benefit analysis to assess the viability of the program. This report combines both primary and secondary research to obtain the findings. Two field trips were conducted during this research. First trip was held on 16-18 May 2014 in IM Office in Jakarta and IM training Camp in Bogor, the second trip was on 19-23 December 2014 during the District Education Progress Forum (FKPD) in Purwakarta, Indonesia. For the primary research, we have conducted interview, survey, and observation. For the secondary research, we analyze the self-evaluation report and conduct cost-benefit analysis. In addition, we refer to the existing literature review and studies, the researches by government institutions, think-tanks, multilateral donor and agency, as well as official government documents to gain comprehensive understanding on education policy in Indonesia and community participation best practices. Interview, Survey and Observation We have conducted interviews with PM, IM officers, and participants of FKPD (Appendix 1). The purpose of the interview is to gain understanding about PM Program, as well as the perception about PM Program deliverables. This interview is to complement the information from PM Self-Evaluation report. Interview was conducted twice during first trip in May 2014 in Jakarta and Bogor, and the second field trip held on 13 to 23 of December 2014, in Jatiluhur, Purwakarta, Indonesia. The second field trip held during the District Education Progress Forum (FKPD)8 . During this forum, we also managed to do the observation, involved in discussion, and conducted survey regarding their evaluation of PM Program, and their readiness in long-term education improvement program without PM existence in their districts. The objective of observation in this research is to supplement non-verbal data which can help the accumulation of data interpretation (Hult, 1996). 8 Aim of FKPD Forum for IM was to recap the progress in each district of their deployment area, and formulate the strategy to sustain the positive education progress in the respective district in the post deployment of PM.
  26. 26. 26FINDINGS Analysis of progress report (self-evaluation form) To grasp the evaluation of PM program, this research analyzes the self-evaluation report prepared by the PM and compiled by the IM officers. Analysis was done by compiling the self-evaluation report and process into the qualitative research software Nvivo, to find the key progresses and challenges among the stakeholders during the PM community participation program. The self-evaluation report from PM applied the outcome mapping method (appendix 2) Cost and Benefit Analysis To evaluate the PM community participation program, this section covered independent study using cost-benefit analysis framework. The data for cost component are generated from IM Financial Report (Audited by Price Waterhouse Coopers), and for the benefit refers to the data from Indonesian Statistical Bureau. This is to assess the viability of PM community participation program and further to recommend its social viability at the district level. 7 FINDINGS We analyze the data collected (mentioned in previous section) to determine the impact of the IM program in addressing the synergy issue among stakeholders. The findings show that positive synergy has been forged during the PM program implementation. In light of the positive synergy, some positive behavioral changes were observed among the stakeholders. This section highlights the impact of PM program in addressing lack of synergy among education stakeholders as well as explanatory factors that influence the impact. The order of the findings section would be sequenced as follow: the evaluation of PM Program (Strength, Weakness, Limitation, and Opportunity); the viability studies, and the synthesis in SWOT Matrix. 7.1 The Level of Collaboration among Stakeholders Synergy is important to ensure that any policy formulated could be understood by respective stakeholders before collaboratively implemented on the ground. Hence, the indicator used to measure the synergy is the level of collaboration among stakeholders. In general, the result
  27. 27. 27FINDINGS shows a mixed finding on the level of collaboration among stakeholders as depicted in Figure 4. Among all the stakeholders involved in the collaboration with PM, only local education council has shown full participation in the collaboration. The local education council has the highest level of good collaboration followed by the society during the implementation of PM program. According to the self-evaluation report, 82% to 90% of the respondents perceived good collaboration for these two stakeholders while only 33% of the respondents perceived good collaboration with the Local Government (Mayor). Astonishingly, 57% of respondents stated that the Local Government has shown no interest in the collaboration with IM. These results highlight that there is a need for PM to address the collaboration issue with the Local Government. Figure 4: The Level of Collaboration among Stakeholders Note: Society = Parents, Teacher, School Principal and Local Community; Local Government=Mayor The level of collaboration is further explained by the activities involved in the PM program implementation. Figure 5 shows that the form of collaboration varies between stakeholders, depending on the objective of the collaboration as well as level of trust. The bar chart shows that Local Government, tend to collaborate with the Pengajar Muda in the socialization, sponsorship and education discussion activities. The society shows that they are willing to collaborate with Pengajar Muda in operational, promotion, sponsorship, discussion and socialization while the Local Education Council shows preference in all activities initiated by the Pengajar Muda. In sum, the Local Education Council is the most involved stakeholder in PM activities followed by the society and the 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Local Government Society Local Education Council Stakeholder Local Government Society Local Education Council No Collaboration 57% 18% 0% Poor Collaboration 10% 0% 10% Good Collaboration 33% 82% 90%
  28. 28. 28FINDINGS Local Government. However, it is common to see that all stakeholders prefer to collaborate in non-burdensome activities such as education discussion and socialization event. Therefore, this finding could guide IM in beefing up the training for future Pengajar Muda in the aspect of effective negotiation and communication with the local government. Figure 5: The Form of Collaboration between Stakeholders 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Local Government Society Local Education Council Stakeholder Local Government Society Local Education Council Education Discussion 42% 15% 11% Proposal Disposition 0% 0% 24% Material and Sponsorship 42% 15% 0% Promotion and Information 0% 31% 13% Sosialization 17% 4% 13% Facilititation 0% 0% 24% Operational 0% 35% 11% Administration 0% 0% 5%
  29. 29. 29FINDINGS Figure 6: The Challenges in Collaboration among Stakeholders In the process of forging the collaboration, it is observed that there are many challenges posed by the respective stakeholders before collaboration taking form, as depicted in Figure 6. According to the self-evaluation report, majority of the respondents cited hectic schedule of stakeholders as the common challenges in forging the collaboration. Bureaucracy, local election, demographic factors as well as unprofessionalism are also cited as the common challenges posed by the local education council. Hectic schedule, the lack of knowledge of PM program and objectives, bad perception and upcoming local election are observed as the challenges for collaborating with Local Government, while education commercialization9 perception, bureaucracy and demographic are the challenges spilled by the society. In sum, IM should take into consideration these challenges to devise their approach before forming the collaboration with these stakeholders. 9 Education commercialization refers to commercialization of PM service. Some local government perceived that PM Program is the same as other paid service and business. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Local Governmnent Society Local Education Council Stakeholder Local Governmnent Society Local Education Council Hectic Schedule 73% 50% 0% Unprofessional 0% 0% 47% Local Election 9% 0% 18% Demographic 0% 14% 18% Bureucracy 0% 21% 18% Bad Perception 9% 0% 0% No Knowledge of IM 9% 0% 0% Commercialization Issue 0% 14% 0%
  30. 30. 30FINDINGS 7.2 The Behavioral Change among Stakeholders As the level of collaboration shows positive results in addressing synergy issue among the stakeholders, the positive behavior changes are also observed. Table 4 summarizes the behavioral changes of stakeholders and its causes. The table shows that students have shown significant changes in active and independent learning in the classroom while the teachers have shown commitment to full school attendance and involvement in the student’s development program. In line with these two observations, the school principals have shown high commitment in facilitating student’s development program as well as teacher’s capacity building. Aside from school level stakeholders, the local community has demonstrated higher level of participation in education and learning activities during the IM program implementation period. For more detailed in findings, please refer to the appendix 4. Table 4: The Behavioral Change of Stakeholders and Its Causes Stakeholders Most Behavioral Change Causes Least Behavioral Change Causes Student  Actively participate in learning activities in the classroom, including asking, discussion, work together, and finish the job  Intrinsic motivation of students  Role of teacher and Pengajar Muda as a form of extrinsic motivation to students  Mastering the material presented in accordance with the standards of completeness  Student’s learning ability and socioeconomic background play a role Teacher  Engage in activities that encourage increased student achievement and potential, such as additional lessons, OSK, and UASBN  Full class attendance  Intrinsic motivation of teacher  Role of school principal and Pengajar Muda as a form of extrinsic motivation to teachers  Involving parents to participate actively in monitoring the progress of students  Teacher is too complacent.  Social norm.  Geographical factors School Principal  Facilitating the improvement of students' achievements and development potential  Facilitate capacity building of teachers in school  Full school attendance  Supervision from Local Education Council  Role of Pengajar Muda and Teacher  Intrinsic motivation and personal value  Developing an active school committee and accountable support for school development  Enabling school communication forum with parents  Authority or ‘blessing’ from the parents in terms of their child’s education thus is least likely to involve parents in education matters.  Geographical factors are often cited as the causes in the survey form. Besides that, social gap between parents  Attitude Society (Parents, Local Education Council and  Local communities to actively participate in educational activities in the community  Young local graduates initiate local education movement  Parents provide a good appreciation of the positive development of achievement,  Lack of active participation promoted by the teachers and the
  31. 31. 31FINDINGS Local Community) potential and behavior of their children school principals  People are starting to initiate learning activities required to support the Young Teachers  Parents actively participate in educational activities in schools  People are actively improving the advancement of education in the region with the initiation and the resources at their disposal  Parents communicate intensively with the school about the child's learning process  Parents actively supervise the provision of education in schools Ultimately, these positive behavioral changes could be explained by the roles played by respective stakeholders and how mutual roles of these stakeholders are pertinent during the PM program implementation. Table 4 above shows that each stakeholder need some level of collaboration (synergy) in order to demonstrate some influence towards the student, teacher, school principal and society. Students According to the self-evaluation report, 30% of the respondents perceived that student’s self-motivation is the largest influence towards various positive behavioral changes particularly towards active and independent learning in the classroom. Interestingly, Teacher and Pengajar Muda were perceived as the largest influence to the positive behavioral changes of the students as compared to School Principal, Parents, Local Education Council and the Community. This finding demonstrates the important role of teachers towards positive outcome of the students. Meanwhile, students have been observed to show least progress in mastering the learning material presented based on the standards of competency. This result could be influenced by many factors such as teaching ability, students’ learning ability, as well as socioeconomic status. Teachers According to the self-evaluation report, 41% of the respondents perceived that teacher’s self-motivation led to positive behavioral changes particularly towards full attendance in school and involvement in student’s development program. Teacher’s self- motivation could be explained from the role and support from the school principal
  32. 32. 32FINDINGS especially in higher involvement in teacher’s capacity building as well as peer learning projected by the Pengajar Muda. These findings demonstrate the important role of School Principal and Pengajar Muda towards positive outcome of the teachers. However, the self-evaluation report shows that teachers demonstrate least progress in involving parents to participate actively in monitoring the progress of students. This result is expected as teachers are too complacent due to social norm issues where teachers have been regarded as higher authority by the parents. On top of that, geographical factors such as in farming or fishery area are often cited as one of the causes to involve parents. Hence, it is normal in these districts that monitoring of child’s education is least likely to involve parents. School Principals According to the self-evaluation report, the most positive behavioral changes have been observed in facilitating student development program and teacher’s capacity building. School Principals were observed to improve their attendance in school which influenced the teacher’s attendance rate as mentioned above. However, the school principals were observed to show least progress in the aspect of developing active and accountable school committee to support school development and enabling communication with parents. This finding could be explained from the fact that school principals and teachers seemed to have an authority or ‘blessing’ from the parents in terms of their child’s education. Therefore, parents are least likely to involve in child’s education matters. Besides that, social gap between parents whom are likely farmers or fishermen and the well-educated school principals may also explain the failure in enhancing active participation among parents. In sum, currently there is no platform for two-way communication between parents which results in no check and balance mechanism for school principals. Therefore, the active and accountable school committee is hard to materialize in these districts. Society (Parents, Local Education Council and Local Community) According to the self-evaluation report, local community has shown the most positive behavioral changes while parents’ behavior is least likely to change. Local community has been observed to initiate learning activities to support Pengajar Muda for example by setting up local
  33. 33. 33FINDINGS education movement such as Majene Mengajar, Paser Mengajar and etc. These local movements have been led by the local young community and local education council who were inspired by this program. Meanwhile, parents are least likely to involve in supervision, development and communication of their children’s education due to the lack of active participation promoted by the teachers and the school principals, social norm and geographical matters as discussed above. In sum, all stakeholders need to collaborate to produce positive behavioral change of respective stakeholders. This finding shows that only mutual roles or combined positive behavior of each stakeholder could reinforce the synergy and positive changes in education program. As for IM, the five years program is sufficient and effective to influence positive behaviour change in most, if not all, of the outcome mapping. On top of that, it is sufficient and effective to raise positive collaboration levels among stakeholders. However, the least changed indicator and its causes should be emphasized and monitored. 7.3 Weakness of the Program Despite the positive impact observed in the level of collaboration and behavioral changes among the stakeholders, PM program demonstrates some weaknesses in the implementation. Figure 7 summarized the findings from the self-evaluation report. Figure 7: Weaknesses of IM Program Local Context and Culture • No smooth transition • Ignore real context and culture of district Policy Communication • No formal progress report • No knowledge transfer • No intense communication between IM top management and stakeholders Component and Material of PM Training • Lack of training on the function and structure of education policy makers and stakeholders
  34. 34. 34FINDINGS According to the self-evaluation report and survey form, majority of the respondents raised concern over three (3) weaknesses of IM program implementation in these districts as follow: 1) Failure to implement program that suits local context and culture Local stakeholders are clueless on how IM will carry its transition mechanism when they ended their five (5) years program in these districts. This concern is highlighted as local stakeholders especially the local education council and local community are incapable in sustaining the initiated education program especially in human resources, financial, infrastructure and geographical matters. As a matter of fact, they are not ready to move on their own. On top of that, there are some concerns regarding Pengajar Muda activities that emphasize more on the Western culture but not the local culture or tradition. For instance, activities which involve games, art and musical. Local stakeholders are worried that younger generation may not uphold their own culture and identity. 2) Weak policy communication between IM and Local Stakeholders According to the self-evaluation report, the respondents raised concern from local education council that after five (5) years program, IM has yet to produce formal periodical report on the progress of the PM Program to the local education council. The periodical progress report is important to the local stakeholders so that they could see the intended result, improve area that least progressed and devise new mechanism in education approach. This report is also beneficial for education budget planning of the districts. In light of this matter, the local stakeholders expected more and intense communication with IM top management to happen. As for now, intense communication is only initiated by the Pengajar Muda which explains why some collaboration between stakeholders is difficult to form especially with the local government whom authority and bureaucracy are highly regarded. Furthermore, local stakeholders especially school level stakeholders (teacher and School Principal) as well as local community movement has raised concern regarding the need of knowledge-sharing platform among all districts under PM program. This platform, either in the form of social media or seminar, is beneficial for networking and sharing knowledge of the best practices in local education movement.
  35. 35. 35FINDINGS 3) Failure to integrate the role of stakeholders and national policy into component and material of training According to the self-evaluation report, the Pengajar Muda has raised concern on their inability to understand the role and function of some local education stakeholders which hinder their ability to form collaboration with the respective stakeholders. The Pengajar Muda raised some issues regarding the unknown protocol and bureaucracy especially when dealing with government agencies. In addition, some of the Pengajar Muda have raised concern over lack of knowledge on current national and local education policies for example on latest curriculum reform (K13), RPP (Lesson Plan), BOS as well as teacher’s management and development system in the districts. Lacking knowledge in these matters is proven to be a big problem for Pengajar Muda to exercise the role of change agent in the districts. In sum, this finding could guide IM in its approach to implement its activities at districts level. Firstly, it is crucial for all stakeholders to have adequate time to reinforce current activities after one cycle of program implementation in order to maintain the level of their performance. Given the adequate time, IM could integrate new activities into next program cycle. New activities may include support and transition mechanism i.e attendance in refresher training workshops; policy communication i.e inclusion in radio programs and social media and interactions with other local stakeholders as well as revamp Pengajar Muda training according to current policies, need and context. Secondly, continued analysis of what works and what doesn’t work as well as intense policy communication and feedback system are necessary to increase the likelihood of success for more communities. Hence, activities and communication devices need to be tailored to districts’ particular situation. Lastly, the presence and effectiveness of local change agents which in this case the Pengajar Muda is one of the key elements of stakeholders’ changes. This indicates that it is necessary to equip Pengajar Muda with sufficient knowledge and skills that is context and time relevant. In the wake of PM program discontinuation, it is pertinent to identify potential local leaders in each
  36. 36. 36FINDINGS stakeholder and to nurture and support them in their efforts to influence positive change in community participation program. 7.4 Limitation of Local Government The data from self-evaluation report and survey has also captured some limitation faced by the local education governance to support and adopt the program. According to our survey, each district has voiced out their concern about continuing the PM community participation program. Figure 8 summarizes the limitation faced by each district under this study. Detail of this finding could be referred in appendix 4. In general, each district has voiced their concern over the lack of capacity especially in Teacher Management and Development as well as lack of resources particularly in human capital, financial and infrastructure. Figure 8: Limitation of the Local Education Governance This qualitative finding is in line with the findings from the World Bank’s Local Governance and Education Performance: a Survey of the Quality of Local Education Governance in 50 Indonesian Districts. Figure 9 reveals that Management Control System (including teacher’s management and development indicator), scored the lowest. Hence, the validity of our survey on the capacity in teacher’s management and development is further strengthened by the World Bank survey on Local Education Governance.
  37. 37. 37FINDINGS Figure 9: Limitation of Local Education Governance Source: The World Bank 2012 In regards to our findings on the lack of resources, the World Bank survey also helps to explain the finding. The World Bank survey found that despite relatively good planning and budgeting processes, most sampled districts demonstrate large differences between budgeted and actual spending which frequently a sign that the original planning process is weak and does not provide an effective mechanism to allocate resources to priority areas. However, this is likely to be driven in part by factors outside of local government control. In particular, the constitutional obligation to devote 20 percent of the total government budget to education makes the overall education budget sensitive to revisions in the overall budget. For example, large energy subsidies and the fluctuating price of oil has meant that budget revisions in recent years have been large and have had a significant impact in planning and budgeting processes in the education sector as a whole (World Bank 2013). Hence, the report helped us to hypothesize that the claim of lack of resources by these districts under study could be explained by either budget sensitivity or the weak and ineffective mechanism to allocate resources, where both cause the lack of local government capacity. 7.5 The Opportunity to Sustain the Community Participation Program Despite weaknesses of the program and the incapacity of local education governance as discussed in the previous section, there is room for IM program to be sustained. According to the survey data, IM program has three (3) points that could be leveraged for further expansion at the local government level namely; 1) Restructured Local Education Council
  38. 38. 38FINDINGS ready to embrace new ideas and change; 2) Local community group is on the rise and 3) Higher trust from the local community towards Pengajar Muda. The evidence and explanation of the findings could be referred in the Appendix 4. Figure 10: The Opportunity to Sustain IM Program According to the self-evaluation report, the respondents highlighted that these districts have very open local education council whom show higher level of collaboration with the Pengajar Muda in respective activities. The openness has been due to current changes in the top management and restructuring of local education council. With this restructuring, IM could leverage the openness to influence further change at district level. On top of that, the period of five years of program implementation has shown the growing trust from local community whom regard IM as par as the donor agencies. With growing trust and influence of IM, the young local graduates have initiated their own education movement in these districts as exemplified in Paser Mengajar, Majene Mengajar, Bengkalis Mengajar and many more. In sum, these opportunities demonstrate the likeability of PM program through its community participation approach to sustain and even evolve into community driven approach. Restructuring of Local Education Council Open new window for Change Local Community Group Rising Concern Growing Trust from Community
  39. 39. 39FINDINGS 7.6 Viability Studies Furthermore, to assess the impact of IM in generating synergy among the education stakeholders, we have conducted an independent cost and benefit analysis (CBA) of PM Program. The following stakeholders hold the standing in the CBA: the Indonesia Mengajar (IM), the Pengajar Muda (PM), students and other stakeholders (local teachers, principals, parents and school committee, education department). The inflation rate is 9.09% and the social discount rate is 7.5%. In CBA, we primarily look at the three actors involved: Indonesia Mengajar, Pengajar Muda and students. There are four components of cost items: IM's program expense, PM’s cost of forgone earning, student's direct cost of education expense, and student’s opportunity cost of foregone earning. There are two components of benefit items: PM’s increased job prospects and students’ increased job prospects. The method for estimation for all these cost and benefit items is provided in the Table 5. The assumption and calculation about the cost and benefit items will be provided in the Appendix 5 as an independent CBA report. This section will only present the result of CBA as well as its implication for IM. Table 5: The Summary of Method for CBA Items Items of CBA Method for Estimation IM’s Pengajar Muda Program Expense Sum of all expenses PM’s Cost of Forgone Earning Difference between Salary paid by IM and paid at market rate PM’s Benefit of Increased Job Prospect 10% higher than market rate during life- long working years Student’s Direct Cost of Increased Schooling Increased years of schooling times the education-expense in different education levels Student’s Opportunity Cost of Foregone Earning Increased years of schooling times the education-expense in different education levels Student’s Benefit of Increased Job Prospect Increased number of people in different education attainment times the according salary
  40. 40. 40FINDINGS 1) Positive Net Benefit: Socially Viable Overall, the total cost is 404 billion and the total benefit is 6,398 billion. The net benefit is 5,994 billion with a high Internal Rate of Return (IRR) which is 24%. This means the 5-year Pengajar Muda Program, which involved 22,808 students and 1,724 teachers, is socially viable and beneficial with a high value of net benefit and IRR. Table 6: Summary of Cost and Benefit Analysis (in billions) Cost and Benefit Items Net Present Value (NPV) IM's Program Expense 61 Student's Direct Cost of Education Expense 125 Student's Opportunity Cost of Foregone Earning 218 Total Cost 404 PM's Increased Job Prospect 1 Student's Increased Job Prospect 6396 Total Benefit 6398 Net Benefit 5994 2) Relative Low Cost: Affordable for Local Government The monetary cost for operating PM program is relatively low. First, we look at the aggregate level. Among the three cost components: IM’s PM program expense, student’s cost of education expense and student’s cost of foregone earning, the only monetary cost is IM’s PM program expense, which only accounts for 15.04% of the total cost as depicted in the Figure 11.
  41. 41. 41FINDINGS Figure 11: Breakdown of Cost (in Percentage) Second, we look at unit level. IM’s PM program expense per year per district is 0.72 billion, which is less 1% of the total governmental education expense of the poorest district. The monetary cost for operating PM program is relatively low and affordable for most of the districts. 3) High Rate of Return for Student Majority of the benefit goes to students instead of the PM and the net benefit for students is exceptionally high. First, we look at aggregate level. The student’s increased job prospect accounts for 99.98% of the overall benefit. Presumably due to the number of the students is almost 15 times the number of the PMs. 15.04% 30.98%53.98% IM's Program Expense Student's Cost of Education Expense Student's Cost of Foregone Earning
  42. 42. 42FINDINGS Figure 12: Breakdown of Benefit (in Percentage) Second, we look at unit level. The net benefit per student is 265 million and the net benefit per PM is 0.84 million. One rupiah invested in IM’s PM program will get IDR 4,362 return for student and IDR 14 return for PM. Though investment in IM is both beneficial for students and PM, the rate of return for student is higher than PM as depicted in Figure 13. 0.00% 50.00% 100.00% PM's Increased Job Prospect Student's Increased Job Prospect 0.02% 99.98% 1 Indonesia Rp Return of 4362 Rp per Student Return of 14 Rp Per PM Figure 13: Rate of Return of IM’s PM Program for student and PM
  43. 43. 43FINDINGS In conclusion, the result of the CBA shows first, IM’s PM Program is socially viable and beneficial with high net benefit of return and high internal rate of return. Second, the monetary cost of operating PM program is relatively low and affordable to most of the district government. Last, PM program is beneficial for both PMs and students with higher rate of return for students. 7.7 Summary of Findings: SWOT Matrix In sum, the quantitative and qualitative findings of the study discussed in previous section are summarized in the SWOT Matrix as depicted in Figure 14. The SWOT Matrix is used to guide us to the next section; for formulating policy options, policy assessment and the policy recommendation. Figure 14: The SWOT Matrix of PM Program S GOOD COLLABORATION POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL CHANGE LOW COST HIGH RETURN W LOCAL CONTEXT POLICY COMMUNICATION TRAINING MATERIAL O NEW GOVERNMENT READY TO CHANGE GROWING TRUST RISING LOCAL COMMUNITY GROUP T LACK OF LOCAL CAPACITY LACK OF RESOURCES GEOGRAPHICAL PM community participation program evaluation
  44. 44. 44POLICY OPTIONS 8 POLICY OPTIONS Based on the SWOT Matrix tabulated in the previous section, we recognized the strengths, the weaknesses, the opportunity and the limitation in the program implementation as well as the sustainability at district level. As a preliminary conclusion, the PM community participation program is proven to address the policy problem highlighted in the study, with its strengths and potential of adoptability at district level through the opportunities outlined above. Taken into account the weaknesses and the limitations in the implementation, we formulate four (4) policy options that will address the weaknesses and limitations mentioned below. 8.1 IM to Improve Program Implementation Weakness to be addressed  Failure to Suit Local Context  Weak Policy Communication  Failure to Integrate Role and National Policy in Training Limitation Lack of Local Capacity Lack of Resources Geographical In this policy option, IM is advised to improve three (3) implementation mechanisms that deemed crucial in the operation of their community participation program; particularly in 1) Support and Transition Mechanism; 2) Policy Communication and 3) Training. 1) Support and Transition Mechanism In the context of this study, IM has decided to end their five year program in the five (5) districts under study which raised concern among the local stakeholders, especially local education council and local community’s ability to sustain the program. In addition, these stakeholders in the survey had responded that IM program did not cater the local context and characteristics. Hence, to enable smooth transition from IM led to local community driven program, IM need to tailor the level and type of capacity building support to district characteristics. The report by the World Bank has shown that the level and type of support that local governments need to strengthen education governance varies considerably. For example, in the case of five districts under study where
  45. 45. 45POLICY OPTIONS teacher’s management particularly recruitment and training are abysmal, IM has to strategize the capacity building support mechanism for smoother transition and sustainable implementation. To be successful, future capacity building programs need to take into account of the specific constraints that districts face and provide appropriate levels of training or funding. 2) Ramp up Policy Communication In this study, the survey often cited that policy communication between stakeholders has often been established by the Pengajar Muda rather than the management official of the IM. This practice is the main concern among local education government officials whom cited that as of five years of program implementation, there was no formal progress report or feedback of the program implementation or education problems issued to them. On top of that, there were concerns regarding the difficulty to publicize and disseminate information to the local population when there is no local media and communication is hampered by limited infrastructure and geographical obstacles. To be successful and well trusted, future communication mechanisms need to take into account of the specific constraints that districts face and provide platform for feedback and knowledge- sharing among stakeholders. 3) Improve Pengajar Muda Training According to the study of self-evaluation report, there is a need to integrate national policy and role of local education policy in Pengajar Muda training. Besides leadership and pedagogical training for Pengajar Muda, it is important to fortify the future Pengajar Muda with knowledge of local education policy and role of various local education actors. As politics and administration change in Indonesia, the jurisdiction of agencies/ministries/local Government and national education policies may change. Inculcating the knowledge on Indonesia’s education system is important to help Pengajar Muda to better fit in the local education system and community, building trust and respect from various stakeholders and becoming the change agent for the nation.
  46. 46. 46POLICY OPTIONS 8.2 Towards Community Driven Approach Weakness to be addressed  Failure to Suit Local Context  Weak Policy Communication  Failure to Integrate Role and National Policy in Training Limitation  Lack of Local Capacity  Lack of Resources  Geographical In this policy option, IM is advised to evolve their approach of community participation program based on the capacity and readiness of the local education stakeholders in the respective districts. As for now, IM approach in these five (5) districts under study are more likely as community consultation model where NGOs consulted communities, but operated as direct service providers using their own staff and Pengajar Muda. As IM intended to end their program after five (5) years in operation at these districts, it is crucial for IM to initiate the community participation model where local communities and local education council are encouraged to participate in choosing development priorities and project design, co- financing or providing any kind of support for the operation. The road map for program evolvement is as follow: Figure 15: Roadmap towards Community Driven Approach Source: Asian Development Bank, 2006
  47. 47. 47POLICY OPTIONS From the roadmap in Figure 15, PM program has reached positive level of community participation during the collaboration stage among local stakeholders. As there are growing trust and rising local community movement in place, the support from IM only to be phased out slowly when the entire community reach the highest community participation where they are in full capacity to initiate and implement their own program with the funds from other donors or Government. At this stage of community empowerment, it is hope to see that integrated local education development which is a co-production of communities, local governments, government sectors and private organizations bloom and spread to other districts. At this stage, respective roles need to be properly defined and stakeholders need to be fully empowered to execute their roles, in particular with finances. Case Box 1: Example of Best Practice for Community Driven Approach in Education Program Cambodia: Education Quality Improvement Program (1999–2004). EQIP aims to develop a model for a participatory approach to improving school quality and pursuing performance-based management of resources. The project has two main components. The first finances grants to provincial committees, quality improvement grants to school clusters, and monitoring and evaluation activities. The second component supports the National Committee on Effective Schooling, policy studies, and provincial and district education offices. It entails a deep transformation of political and administrative structures that aims to empower communities with powers, resources, and authority to use them flexibly and sustainably. (Asian Development Bank, 2006)
  48. 48. 48POLICY OPTIONS 8.3 Empower Local Education Governance Weakness Failure to Suit Local Context Weak Policy Communication Failure to Integrate Role and National Policy in Training Limitation to be addressed  Lack of Local Capacity  Lack of Resources  Geographical In this policy option, the need to empower local education governance is vital to improve education performance. Decentralization has put local governments, particularly district administrations, at the heart of basic education service delivery. District responsibilities include the overall management of the education system, the licensing of schools and the planning and supervision of the teaching force. Districts also provide the bulk of public financing for primary and junior secondary schools. Since district local governments play a central role in delivering basic services, their capacity to manage their education systems effectively is a key determinant of performance. In particular, studies have shown that education outcomes are better in districts that have more effective planning and budgeting systems and have lower levels of perceived corruption (The World Bank, 2013). These findings suggest that efforts to improve education outcomes will need to address weaknesses in local governance to be successful. The Figure 16 explains the step to empower local governance to better deliver education outcome.
  49. 49. 49POLICY OPTIONS Figure 16: The link between intermediate outcomes and district education performance Source: The World Bank, 2013 1) Managing Limited Resources In general, decisions that districts make on education financing, the mix of education inputs to use and their distribution appear to be strongly associated with education outcomes (The World Bank, 2013). With the exception of the measure of the teacher distribution efficiency, better intermediate outcome indicators are associated with better district education performance. For example, districts that prioritize education services and devote a greater share of their budget to education tend to have better education outcomes. 2) Managing Quality of Governance The overall quality of local governance is associated with better intermediate education outcomes. Districts with better assessed governance are also districts that prioritize education more in their budgets, have a greater proportion of teachers with bachelor’s degrees and have a more equitable distribution of teachers. With better quality of governance, limitation in the capacity of teacher’s management and development would be addressed. The World Bank
  50. 50. 50POLICY OPTIONS survey shows that the distribution of teachers also appears to be better in districts with better governance quality (The World Bank, 2013). This means that in better governed districts, a larger proportion of schools have the right number of teachers which in turn is likely to improve overall levels of education quality. 3) Managing Transparency and Accountability Transparency and accountability come out as having a particularly strong and statistically significant association with the intermediate measures of district education performance. Districts with better levels of transparency and accountability tend to prioritize education more and have a higher proportion of qualified teachers compared to other districts. These results suggest that education performance is higher in districts where greater effort is made to produce and disseminate information about the use of public resources. The results also suggest that performance is better in districts that encourage greater participation of key stakeholders in the education decision making process. 4) Managing Control System Management control systems are also important in explaining differences in district education performance. Management control system explains the way districts manage and use their education resources. This component attempts to assess whether the systems are in place to incorporate decisions made by local and school level planning processes into annual education work plans. When these systems are absent, annual work plans developed by the local administration are unlikely to reflect the real needs of local communities and weaken the effectiveness of district planning. The dimension involved in this system are 1) incentives for key professional staff (e.g. teachers, school principals and supervisors) and 2) record and disseminate local examples of education innovation and good practice. Higher management control system is proven to have better education outcome of the districts (The World Bank, 2013).
  51. 51. 51POLICY OPTIONS Case Box 2: Example of Best Practice for Empowered Local Governance The Philippines manage to empower the local governance through Local Government Code. In contrast to Indonesia, where central governments are still formulating decentralization reforms and regulations, the Philippines local governments are already well established. One of the cases was the KALAHI-CIDSS project which worked within the decentralization law and engaged with formal institutions such as the Barangay Development Council and the Municipal Development Council to make the process for planning and allocating local development resources more participatory. Furthermore, to strengthen coordination with local governments and enhance sustainability, the Philippines project works with municipal committees chaired by the mayor and composed of the heads of all local departments. Local representatives of national agencies, NGOs, and donor institutions also participate. These multiagency committees meet every two weeks to discuss progress and determine needed contributions to KALAHI projects, including staff, salaries, and other recurrent costs (The World Bank, 2005). 8.4 The Grassroots’ Model Approach Weakness Failure to Suit Local Context Weak Policy Communication Failure to Integrate Role and National Policy in Training Limitation to be addressed  Lack of Local Capacity  Lack of Resources  Geographical In this policy option, it is important for the central government and local education governance to diversify the model of teacher management and development to cater various issues and district’s concern regarding capacity, resources and geographical obstacle. As in the case of Indonesia, managing teachers in remote areas presents additional difficulties. Concerns vary from teacher absenteeism to lack of monitoring in rural areas due to issues such as having private work to supplement income, physical remoteness of the school, cost of travel to collect pay check, medical problem. Hence, it is important to explore some
  52. 52. 52POLICY OPTIONS possibilities in teacher’s deployment system, targeted recruitment plus incentive and peer system. A) Diversify Teacher Deployment Systems based on Geographical Issue In this policy option, the teacher deployment system has been proposed into three (3) category based on the need and respective problem. Specifically, we are focusing on the rural area which could be categorized into two (2) systems: 1) Accessible and Developed Rural and 2) Isolated and Underdeveloped Rural. Therefore, the current teacher deployment system has to be reviewed to cater the need and problem of the rural area. The explanation of the respective teacher deployment systems are as follow: 1) Urban Centralized deployment which has been a long-standing model in Indonesia could be implemented only for urban posting. Central planning has the advantage of distance from local pressures and can be more easily made fair and transparent. However, highly centralized systems are dependent on the quality of information they receive from schools and tend to suffer from congested decision making and inattention to the individual needs of education staff (Mulkeen, 2005). 2) Accessible and Developed Rural Centralized deployment which has been a long- standing model in Indonesia could be implemented for accessible and developed rural posting. However, improved systems of ‘checks and balances’ are needed to ensure equity, justice and efficiency in teacher deployment in these kind of districts. This check and balance system is needed to prevent greater possibility of undue influence being exerted by powerful individuals on deployment decisions, especially in countries with a weak administrative capacity at district and local levels (Mulkeen, 2005). 3) Isolated and Underdeveloped Rural Area As for the case of poor and isolated rural area, it is recommended to adopt the market system. In the market system, potential teachers apply for posts in specific schools. This system removes the burden of deploying teachers from the central authorities. In effect, teachers deploy themselves by searching for jobs. It gives each school more autonomy in selecting their teachers. Schools are more likely to select teachers who will accept the position and often recruit
  53. 53. 53POLICY OPTIONS local people. For these five (5) districts under study, this model is viable as there are pools of young graduates who are currently driving the local community group. However, this model is also susceptible to low qualified teacher. B) Targeted recruitment (Putra Daerah and Incentive) An alternative strategy may be to seek to recruit teachers from within each region or Putra Daerah in the hope that personal history and family connections will entice them to return to teach in their home area after they attain their teacher certification. The presumption is that those individuals will have family roots in these rural areas and be more willing to return and remain in these rural settings (Mulkeen, 2005). One of the attractions of this approach is that if teachers become established within their own community, they may gain extra benefits from the proximity of relatives, which may help to ensure long term stability. However, educated Putra Daerah may view their education as a means of social mobility and may have no desire to remain in the community once qualified. Hence, the targeted recruitment strategy is to be supplement with higher incentive such as financial bonus as well as non-monetary incentive. On top of that, it may also be possible to focus teacher recruitment on teachers from lower socio-economic background as study shows that teachers from poorer backgrounds were more likely to value the relative security of the teaching profession and take up their postings (Mulkeen, 2005). C) Peer System Lesson could be learned from PM program where Pengajar Muda was deployed in groups and involvement in teacher education outreach program in rural area seems to work as the peer support system. Mulkeen (2005) has written that those posted with another teacher, were found to draw strength from the readymade friendship, especially in hostile communities, even if they had not known each other before hand. In sum, the best practice of Grassroots Model Approach particularly in teacher’s deployment and targeted recruitment are explained in the Appendix 4.
  54. 54. 54POLICY ASSESSMENT 9 POLICY ASSESSMENT The complex policy problem as shown by the previous section cannot be addressed by stand-alone policy option. It requires further assessment to evaluate and determine the implementation of the respective policy options. 9.1 Assessment Criteria The evaluation criteria are synthesized from the OECD policy evaluation guidelines, the International community-developed standards for effective evaluation, and the UNESCAP. Table 7: Policy Assessment Criteria Utility  Meeting the needs of users/stakeholders  Effectiveness of the proposed policy  Efficiency of the proposed policy Feasibility  How realistic is the policy option  Political viability  Institutional capacity constraints  Economic cost effectiveness  Community acceptance Equity  Who take advantages and disadvantages from the policy (IM and community)  Reduction of disparities (among communities) 9.2 Assessment of Policy Options Policy options in this section will be measured by the following scale: Low High

×