teachers developed the curriculum based on the vision, mission, and purpose of the school.
The ninth topic focused on the education calendar on SBC. It investigated whether the teachers developed the education calendar based on the content
standard. The result showed 66,7 of the respondents answered yes and 22,2 of the respondents answered no. The 11,1 of the respondents did not give the
answer for this statement. It showed that most of the teachers developed the education calendar based on the content standard.
The tenth topic concerned with whether SBC document developed by the teachers got the agreement to be used by the education institution in their area.
For this question, The 44,4 of the respondents answered yes and 55,6 of the respondents answered no. This result showed that most of the teachers used the
curriculums that were developed by them without getting agreement from the educational institution in their area.
b Teachers’ Answers on the Syllabus Development.
The next table, table 4.2, showed the result of the respondents’ answers on the syllabus development. In this table, the researcher summarized the questions
from the questionnaire into 11 questions. Question number 11 on the table represented question number 17 on the questionnaire. Question number 12
represented the eighteenth and nineteenth question. The thirteenth question on the table represented question number 20. The next question represented question
number 21. Question number 15 represented question number 22. Question number 16 represented question number 23 and question number 17 represented
question number 24. The eighteenth question on the table represented question number 25 on the table. The next question represented question number 26.
Question number 20 represented question number 27. The last question on the table represented the last question on the questionnaire.
Table 4.2: The Result of the Respondents’ Answers on the Syllabus Development
Percentage No
Topic of Questions Yes No Not
Answer
11. Dou you develop English syllabus yourself? 11,11
88,89 12. Do you develop English syllabus for more
than one year? 44,44 55,56 0
13. Do you follow the principles of syllabus developing made by Education National
Standard Institution? 77,78 22,22 0
14. Do you follow the steps of syllabus development?
77,78 22,22 0 15. Does the syllabus you develop consist of all
syllabus components? 66,67 33,33 0
16. Do you use the performance standard and basic competence of English for elementary
school to develop the instructional material? 88,79 11,11 0
17. Does the indicators in your syllabus can be measured and observed?
100 0 0 18. Do you use the methods recommended on
SBC in having the teaching learning activities?
74,60 23,81 1,59 19. Do you use the evaluation instrument
recommended on SBC to evaluate the students’ study result?
72,22 23,61 4,17 20. Do you use learning sources recommended on
SBC to support teaching learning activities? 64,44 33,33 2,22
21. Do you always evaluate the syllabus you made per year?
77,78 22,22 0
Table 4.2 shows the answers of the respondents on the syllabus development. Question number eleven investigated whether English teachers
develop English syllabus themselves. The 88,9 of the respondents answered no and 11,1 of the respondents answered yes. It indicated that the most of the
teachers did not develop English syllabus themselves. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
On the twelfth question, the researcher asked whether the teachers designed the syllabus for more than one year. The result were as follow: 55,56
of the respondents answered yes and 44,44 of the respondents answered no. This result indicated that most of the teacher designed the syllabus for more than
one year. Question number thirteen concerned with whether the teacher developed
the syllabus by following the principles of syllabus developing. The answers of this question showed 77,78 of the respondents followed the principles. The rest
of it 22,22 of the respondents answered no. It meant that most of the teacher developed the syllabus based on the principles of syllabus development.
The respondents’ answers for question number fourteen showed 22,22 of the respondents answered yes and 77,78 of the respondents answered no. This
result indicated that most of the teachers followed the steps of syllabus development stated by Education National Standard Institution.
The fifteenth questions investigated whether the syllabus developed by the teachers consisted of all syllabus components. For this question, 66,67 of the
respondents answered yes and or 33,33 of the respondents answered no. It showed that most of the teachers developed the syllabus that consisted of all
syllabus components. On question number sixteen the researcher asked whether the teacher use
the performance standard and basic competence of English for elementary school to develop the instructional material. For this question, 88,89 of the respondents
answered yes and the rest of it answered no. The result indicated that most of the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
teacher used the performance standard and basic competence of English for elementary school to develop the instructional material.
The seventeenth questions investigated about the indicators. It asked whether the indicators in teachers’ syllabus could be measured and observed. The
answers for this question showed 100 of the respondents answered yes. It meant that all respondents developed the syllabus consisted of indicators that could be
measured and observed. The writer, on question number eighteen investigated some methods used
in developing teaching learning activities. It investigated whether the respondents applied the methods recommended on SBC in conducting teaching learning
activities. The result showed 74,60 of the respondents used these methods. There were 23,81 of the respondents answered no. The rest of it, 1,59 of the
respondents did not answer this question. So, the majority of the teacher applied the methods recommended on SBC.
The nineteenth questions asked about the evaluation techniques. It concerned with whether the teacher used the evaluation techniques recommended
on SBC. The result showed 72,22 of the respondents answered yes. The 23,61 of the respondents answered no. The rest of it or 4,17 of the respondents did not
answer the question. It indicated that most of the teachers applied the evaluation techniques recommended on SBC.
The next question investigated the learning sources used by the teachers to support teaching learning activities. The result showed 64,44 of the respondents
answered yes. The 33,33 of the respondents answered no. The 2,22 of the PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
respondents did not give the answer. It indicated that most of the teachers used the learning sources recommended on SBC to support teaching learning activities.
The last question concerned with whether the teacher evaluated the syllabus they made per year. The answers showed 77,78 of the respondents
answered yes. The 22,22 of the respondents answered no. This result indicated that most of the teachers evaluated the syllabus they made per year.
2. The Discussion
Public elementary school English teachers in Kotagede sub district did not use the example of curriculum given by the government. They developed the
curriculum themselves both in a group or individual. Based on the data presentation and analysis on the curriculum development and syllabus
development above, it could be seen that in general the implementation of School Based Curriculum development for English teaching in elementary school already
followed the government regulation. Indonesian Regulation UU 202003 about national education system and Government Regulation PP 192005 about
education national standard stated that SBC development should be based on the content standard and graduation standard, SBC development guideline made by
Education National Standard Institution, and the consideration from the school committee. The rule of curriculum development stated by Education National
Standard Institution consisted of several important rules such as SBC components, SBC development principles, syllabus development principles and syllabus
development steps. Although the teachers developed the curriculum themselves, the used the government rules as the basic guideline in developing curriculum.
Most of them developed the curriculum in a group consisted of several English teachers and some of them developed the curriculum themselves which both of
them were based on the rule stated by the government. Although in general the implementation of SBC development was good,
there were some rules of SBC development not followed by the teachers. First, based on the literature review, the development of SBC should be under
supervision of education institution. The data analysis indicated that most of the teacher were not supervised by education institution in developing the syllabus as
showed on the result analysis for question number three. Moreover, as showed by the answer for question number ten, SBC document used by the teachers as the
result of SBC development did not get the agreement to be used by the education institution in school area. As stated on the literature review, SBC document
should be used after it was approved by the principal under the educational institution agreement. However, the result showed that most of the teachers did
not follow this rule. From the data presentation and analysis about the syllabus development,
the result indicated that generally the implementation of syllabus development had been appropriate with the syllabus development guideline made by Education
National Standard Institution. The guideline organized about the syllabus development principles, syllabus designer, time allocation, the syllabus
development steps, and the syllabus components. Most of the teachers answered that they followed the syllabus development principles, those were scientific,
relevant, systematic, consistent, sufficient, actual, contextual, flexible, and PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
comprehensive. As they stated that they did not develop syllabus alone, it might happen because they were not able to develop it themselves. So, in the researcher
opinion, they worked with other English teacher in developing the syllabus. It indicated that they followed the rule about syllabus designer which said that if the
teacher could not develop syllabus themselves, they should work together with other teacher. About the syllabus components, most of the teachers stated that
their syllabus consisted of all those components. Next, generally they also followed the syllabus development steps as discussed in chapter two.
The data analysis result on the method used by the teachers showed that most of the teacher had already used some method recommended on SBC. There
were TPR, group working, songs, games, and short stories. They also used the audio and video lingual media to create joyful learning. While for the learning
skill, most of the teachers concerned with the skills development listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
The syllabus development steps stated by Education National Standard Institution about evaluation techniques and learning sources recommended some
evaluation techniques and some learning sources. The evaluations were in the form of test and non test, written and unwritten, performance observation,
behavior measurement, assignment, project, portfolio and self evaluation. The data analysis result showed that in general the teachers had applied those
evaluation techniques. But, for self evaluation, most of the teacher did not use this technique. Most of the teacher also applied some learning sources such as object,
printed and electronic media, informant, and physical environment to support the learning activities
The syllabus development guideline by Education National Standard Institution stated that syllabus should be evaluated and developed continually.
Most of the teacher had evaluated the syllabus per year. But for the development, generally they stated that they develop syllabus for more than one year. It was
contrary with the rule since that the development should be done continually.
B. Teachers’ Perceptions on the Use of SBC in Teaching English for Elementary School Students
The writer presents the data analysis of the teachers’ perception on the use of SBC in teaching English for elementary school into two parts, data presentation
and analysis, and the discussion on the result of analyzed data. There were two instruments, interview and questionnaire, used in finding the data. The data result
from those two instruments would be presented on the data presentation.
1. Data Presentation and Analysis
To answer the second question, the researcher employed two instruments. They were interview and questionnaire. The researcher chose four teachers who
have been teaching English for at least 5 years as the interviewees based on the assumption that they have experienced some different curriculums. For the
questionnaires, the respondents were the same as the respondents who answered the first questionnaires about the process of SBC development. The questions
given on the interview and questionnaire investigated the teachers’ perception toward the use of SBC.
a Interview Result
For the interview, the researcher employed four main questions. First, the researcher investigated the respondents’ opinion toward the definition of
perception. Question number two investigated the respondents’ perception toward SBC itself. Third, the respondents were asked about the reason why they used
SBC. The fourth questions asked whether SBC, if it was compared to the previous curriculums, can meet the respondents’ expectation toward the good curriculum
like they mentioned on the open-ended question. The following were the summary of the interview result and the analysis of it.
The first interviewee, who has been teaching English for 5 years, said that perception was something related to the way people thought about something
according to their own opinion. Then, her perception toward SBC stated that SBC was the curriculum which gives much freedom for the implementation according
to the need of the students, teachers, and the region that was expected to achieve the maximum result. She remarked that SBC was the good curriculum since this
curriculum was not centralized like the previous curriculum. It considered the students as an individual that is unique and different who also needed different
treatment. Although she considered SBC to be good, she said that she used this curriculum because it was a must. She needed more preparation to conduct this
curriculum. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
