Fraudulence on Ujian Akhir Sekolah Berst
Chapter 1
Preface
According to the laws of National Education System Number 20
Tahun 2003 at Chapter 1, Article 1 has been explained that education
is interpreted as conscious effort and organized to realize atmosphere
learn and study process [so that/ to be] educative participant actively
develop it's self potency to have the power of religious spiritual, self
control, personality, intelligence, noble behaviour , and also skill that
needed by it'self, society, state and nation.
This article also explain about the meaning of formal education,
that is an education path that had been structured and gradual,
consist of basic education, middle education, high education and
collage education.
In order to evaluate the student in formal education, especially
at the basic, middle and higher education, the government had set a
national examination called Ujian Akhir Sekolah Berstandar Nasional
(UASBN). According to minister of education’s regulation number 77,
78 and 82 Tahun 2008, the purpose of UASBN are :
a. To valuated the achievement of national competencies graduation
on Bahasa Indonesia, Mathematics and lesson that related to
Science and technology.
b. To encouraged the achievement of wajib belajar pendidikan dasar.
The UASBN result will be used as a consideration to :
a. Mapping the quality of education
b. As a base to go to the next level of higher education
c. Determine the graduation of the student
d. As a base to manage the school to raise the quality of education
UASBN must been taken to all student at the last years on
elementary, junior high school, and high school. According to
minister of education’s regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun
2008, student that participate in UN will be passed if he/she has
average grade for all lesson minimal 5,50. And minimal grade 4,00
for maximum two lesson and minimal garde 4,25 for other lesson.
Chapter II
Case
On the implementation of Ujian Nasional (UN), thera are so
many fraud that occurred. Here some quotes from the newspaper
that write lot of case about fraudulence on UN that exist for the
past four years :
1. Kepolisian Resor Ngawi, Jawa Timur, menggagalkan upaya
kepala sekolah sekaligus pengajar di salah satu SMK swasta di
Kabupaten Ngawi dalam melakukan pencurian satu bendel soal
mata pelajaran Bahasa Indonesia dalam ujian nasional.
(www.kompas.com)
2. video berisi rekaman asli yang diambil dari kamera handphone
merek Nokia 7610, tentang aksi nekat guru yang membacakan
kunci jawaban soal Ujian Nasional (UN) di SMK Negeri Talang
Padang, Kecamatan Talang Padang, Kabupaten Tanggamus pada
tanggal 21 April 2009. Rekaman diambil oleh seorang guru SMK
Muhammadiyah Gisting, yang menjadi pengawas silang di SMK
Negeri Talang Padang. (www.kompas.com)
3. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan Kabupaten Garut, telah memberi
instruksi untuk menyukseskan UN dengan cara-cara curang.
Imam Taufik, guru SMAN 2 Garut mengungkapkan bahwa
kecurangan telah terjadi sejak pelaksanaan UAN dua tahun lalu.
Ia bahkan sempat diminta untuk ikut membetulkan jawaban
yang diberikan siswa. Tahun ini, tutur Imam, kepala sekolah
dikumpulkan di Pendopo Kabupaten setempat untuk --istilah
mereka: "menyukseskan UN tanpa ekses". Menurut Imam, siswa
SLTA di Garut hanya bertindak sebagai juru tulis dalam
menjawab soal-soal UN karena yang sebenarnya mengerjakan
soal UN adalah tiga pejabat di Garut. Hasilnya tingkat kelulusan
UN di Garut tertinggi di Jawa Barat. Di tingkat SMP maupun SMA
tingkat kelulusannya sampai 99 persen. Asep, guru SMK Negeri I
di Garut, yang pernah mengawasi di beberapa sekolah
mengatakan bahwa modus kecurangan itu terjadi di SMP
maupun SLTA di Garut. Guru diberi nomor siswa yang ikut ujian,
jawaban diberikan melalui sms, dan disebarkan pada semua
siswa. Selain itu jawaban dibawa ke ruangan dan ada tim sukses
yang membetulkan jawaban siswa atau menghapus jawaban
yang sudah betul agar tidak betul seratus persen. "Tahun ini
kejadiannya juga seperti itu," tutur Asep. (www.kompas.com)
4. Pengakuan tentang kecurangan dalam pelaksanaan UN juga
datang dari Medan, Cilegon, dan Jakarta. Werdianti, guru SMP
Negeri 271 Jakarta Barat, mengungkapkan ia mendapati bocoran
jawaban dari seorang siswa di sebuah sekolah yang ia awasi. .
Kemudian dirinya mengambil lembar jawaban itu dan
mencocokkan dengan soal. "Ternyata jawabannya benar.” Ketika
ia melaporkan temuan itu justru diminta sekolah bersangkutan
untuk
tidak
memperpanjang
masalah.
(www.tempointeraktif.com)
5. Petugas pengawas ujian nasional yang menjadi saksi Pengadilan
Negeri Jakarta Pusat, Kamis (15/3), membenarkan adanya
kecurangan yang direncanakan dalam pelaksanaan ujian
nasional tahun 2006. "Ada briefing pada tanggal 16 mei tentang
bagaimana mensiasati sukses ujian nasional," kata saksi Mumul
Muhdiyatulmilah di hadapan majelis hakim yang dipimpin
Andriyani Nurdin. Menurut Mumul kecurangan itu berupa
pemberian kunci jawaban kepada peserta. Dia sendiri saat itu
menolak memberikan kunci jawaban pada peserta di SMA Pandu
Bogor. Kesaksian tadi diperkuat oleh bukti baru yang
disampaikan penggugat selama persidangan. "Ada surat
pernyataan dari 7 siswa yang menerima lembaran contekan dari
pengawas pada saat ujian," kata pengacara penggugat, Gatot.
(www.tempointeraktif.com)
6. Kebocoran soal Ujian Nasional justru terjadi di SMAN 2 Tarogong,
Garut. Guru dan kepala sekolah disekolah tersebut terbukti
memberikan
jawaban
soal
ujian
bahasa Inggris dan Matematika yang dilakukan 10 menit
menjelang akhir waktu ujian. "Mereka diberikan sanksi hukuman
disiplin
sesuai
Peraturan
Pemerintah
No.30 Tahun 1980. Tahun depan, SMAN 2 Tarogong juga tidak
lagi dijadikan Sub Rayon pada Ujian Nasional berikutnya,"
katanya. Selain itu, kebocoran juga terjadi di SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi,
Jawa Timur. Modusnya, Kepala Sekolah SMA PGRI 4 mencuri
naskah ujian nasional. Saat ini, menurutnya, departemen
pendidikan nasional telah merekomendasikan agar kepala
sekolah tersebut diusut oleh polisi. "Karena sudah tindak
pidana," katanya (www.tempointeraktif.com)
7. Di Bengkulu, sebanyak 16 kepala sekolah, 9 guru fisika, dan satu
orang pejabat dinas pendidikan setempat tertangkap basah
sedang mengerjakan soal ujian Fisika Ahad lalu. Kunci jawaban
belum sempat dibocorkan. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
8. Tim pemantau Federasi Guru Independen Indonesia Jawa Barat
membuktikan kecurangan Ujian Nasional SMP di Kota Bandung.
Puluhan siswa kedapatan menyalin jawaban ujian di sebuah
warung. “Bukti foto dan video hari ini kami serahkan ke
Polwiltabes Bandung,” kata Ketua FGII Jabar Ahmad Taufan, Rabu
(29/4). (www.tempointeraktif.com)
9. Komunitas Air Mata Guru (KAMG) menemukan beragam bentuk
kecurangan pelaksanaan ujian nasional tingkat sekolah
menengah pertama sejak hari pertama ujian dilaksanakan.
Kecurangan direkam dalam video tersembunyi saat siswa
memindahkan jawaban yang diterima melalui pesan pendek.
Investigasi yang dilakukan komunitas tersebut sejak 2007
hingga 2009, bentuk kecurangan berubah. "Tahun 2007 terjadi di
ruang kelas, 2008 setelah ujian guru memperbaiki jawaban,
tahun ini terjadi sebelum ujian dilaksanakan," kata Denni Boy
Saragih dari KAMG kepada wartawan, Kamis (30/4). Untuk ujian
nasional SMP, KAMG menginvestigasi 19 sekolah di Kota Medan,
sembilan SMP negeri, dan enam SMP swasta terkategori sekolah
favorit. "Siswa datang lebih pagi lalu memindahkan kunci
jawaban ke kertas kopekan," kata Denni seraya menunjukkan
rekaman
video
saat
siswa
memindahkan
kunci
jawaban.Investigas juga mengungkapkan adanya kesengajaan
dan keterlibatan pihak sekolah untuk membocorkan jawaban
soal. "Di salah satu SMP swasta, kepala sekolah memberikan
instruksi kepada guru," ungkap Denni. Keterangan dari siswa
juga mengungkap adanya bisnis terselubung dalam pembocoran
kunci jawaban. "Harga untuk jawaban empat mata pelajaran
dijual berkisar Rp 4 juta hingga Rp 5 juta," aku Denni. Ke 16
rekaman bentuk kecurangan dan kertas kopekan yang
ditemukan dalam kelas ujian, akan diserahkan kepada Gubernur
Sumatera Utara Syamsul Arifin. "Bukti-bukti ini akan kita
serahkan kepada Gubernur," ucap Denni. Menurutnya,
kecurangan terjadi sebab tingkat kelulusan hasil try out baik SMP
dan SMA hanya 40 persen. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
10.
Berdasarkan laporan evaluasi sementara itu disebutkan,
keterangan Polres dan barang bukti menyebutkan bahwa Kepala
SMAN I Bengkulu Selatan telah mencuri sampul soal cadangan
dan menyimpannya dalam kardus khusus. Setelah dilakukan
cross check oleh Polres Bengkulu Selatan, ternyata rombongan
oknum kepala sekolah sedang melakukan pembahasan jawaban
soal-soal UN di Masjid SMAN I Bengkulu Selatan.Akibat kejadian
itu, sebanyak 25 orang sudah diamankan di Mapolres Bengkulu
Selatan berikut barang bukti berupa soal UN. Rombongan
pembocor soal tersebut terdiri dari 10 Kepala Sekolah SMA
Negeri, 4 Kepala SMA Swasta, 1 Kepala Sekolah Madrasah Aliyah
Negeri (MAN), seorang pejabat eselon III Dinas Pendidikan
Pemudan dan Olahraga (Disdikpora), serta 9 orang guru.
(www.kompas.com)
11. Kunci Jawaban Ujian di Jambi Diperjual-belikan (17 April 2007)
Modusnya, pihak sekolah mencari beberapa orang murid, agar
secara bersama-sama menyediakan uang dengan total kurang
lebih Rp 5 juta. Sebagai imbalan, mereka dijanjikan akan diberi
fotokopi kunci jawaban ujian. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
12.
Dari rapat kerja Mendiknas dengan komisi X DPR RI (14
Juni 2007) setidaknya mencatat 14 wilayah dan sekolah yang
diduga melakukan kecurangan, seperti Dinas Pendidikan Kota
Medan, Kota Bandung, Kota Palembang, Provinsi Sulawesi
Tengah, Kota Ternate, SMAN 2 Tarogong Kidul, SMKS Dhuafa
Nusantara Kota Padang, SMAN 2 Tangerang, SMA 1 Bojonegara
Serang, SMAN 1 Ronometo Sulteng, SMAN 2 Tanggul Jember,
SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi, SMA 4 Sumbawa Besar dan SMPN 2 Cinta
Damai serta SMPN 1 Air Putih Indrapura Asahan. Jumlah ini
belum lagi termasuk wilayah atau sekolah yang lolos dari
pantauan.
Diungkapkan pula modus operandi kecurangan yang beraneka
ragam seperti; secara bersama-sama melakukan kecurangan
dengan cara membantu memberikan jawaban soal UN kepada
siswa (10 menit menjelang ujian berakhir), beredarnya kunci
jawaban palsu, pengawasan ujian yang masih melibatkan guru
mata pelajaran yang di-UN-kan, kelalaian pengawas yang tidak
melarang peserta membawa dan menggunakan HP di ruang
ujian, mengambil soal cadangan kemudian membagikan
jawaban pada siswa, terjadi pencurian naskah UN seperti yang
dilakukan oleh kepala SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi, dan masih banyak lagi
modus yang tujuannya melepaskan anak dari “jerat”
ketidaklulusan. (www.kompas.com)
Lot of case that involved the school authority, like head of
principle, and the teachers, to do some fraud on UN. What things
that motivated this school authority to do such ashame action?
Why
they
do
that?
Are
they
doesn’t
know
about
the
consequencess of their action? What kind of ethical issues that
they do? We will try to find the answer from the business ethics
point of view at chapter IV in this paper.
Chapter III
Literature Review
A. Business Ethics
Ethics is the discipline that examines one’s moral standards or
the moral standards of a society.
Business Ethics is a specialized study of moral right and wrong. It
concentrates on moral standards as they apply to business
institutions, organization, and behavior.
B. Moral Standards
Moral standards are the norms about the kinds of actions
believed to be morally right and wrong as well as the values
placed on the kinds of objects believed to be morally good and
morally bad.
There are two prinsip of moral standards:
1. Consequentialist Principle:
Ethics konsep that focused on the consequences of making
decision. Decision are ethics or not ethics are based on the
consequences or the impact of that decision.
2. Nonconsequentialist Principle:
Consist of series of rules that used as guidance to make decision
ethically and based on the reason not the consequences.
C. Ethical Theories
Ethical Theories searches for principles and guidance to make
moral decisions
in a variety of situation.
1. Hobbes‘s Self Interest
It serve the individual’s best interest if they behave at the best
interest of other people
2. Mill’s Utilitarianism;
The act to deliver the greatest good for the greatest number of
person.
3. Kant’s ethic of duty.
Focus on individual rights and duties. Right or wrong of an
action is based on the consequencess of that action.
4. Aristotle’s virtue ethics.
Incorporating the Mill’s and The Kant’s theory. developing
individual rights along with the benefits of greatest number of
people.
D. Five Types of Ethical Issues
i. Bribery
Has been defined as “the offering, giving, receiving, or
soliciting of something of value for the purpose of influencing
the action of an official in the discharge of his or her public or
legal duties. The item of value may be direct payment of
money or property.
ii. Coercion
Coercion controls people by force or threat. It is defined as
“compulsion; constraint; compelling by force or arms or threat
… it may be actual, direct, or positive, as where physical force
is used to compel action against one’s will,or implied,legal or
constructive, as where one party is constrained by subjugation
to another to do what his free will would refuse.
iii.Deception
Deception is “the act of deceiving; intentional misleading by
falsehood spoken or acted… Knowingly and willingly making a
false
statement
or
representation,
expressed
or
implied,pertaining to a present or past existing past.”
iv.Theft
Theft is the taking of something that does not belong to you.
v. Unfair Discrimination
Unfair discrimination is defined as “unfair treatment or denial
of normal previlages to a person because of their race, age,
sex, nationality or religion… a failure to treat all persons
equally when no reasonable distinction can be found between
those favored and those not favored.
E. Classification of ethics
1. Descriptive Ethics : object can be judge by attitude and
behavior to chase the purpose of live based on heritage of
culture on certain community.
2. Normative Ethics : the reference are on the ideal norm and
morality that had been demanded by the community / majority
(democratic)
3. Deontologi Ethics : the urge of obligation and necessity to do
things right (drive,positive desire)
4. Teologi Ethics : a bad or good behavior are looked by the
objective and the result had been caused.
5. Relativism Ethics : ethic that measured by the goodness of
locality not global.
F. Legal Norm
Are norm that more clear, sure, strict to all the citizen, and
protected by punishment. This law should be good, right, and fair
because it codified by moral norm. The Obedient to the Legal
Norm not automatically because moral quality because it could
be the obediance are because fraid of punishment, not from
consciusness of moral. Or on the contrary morality demanded
usually against law but beliefed the goodness by the subject.
Chapter IV
Case Analysis
Fraudulance on Ujian Nasional (UN) which made by school
authority are unethical. Because that behavior are against moral
standard, that is honesty and against the law ( minister of
education’s regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun 2008)
Why do the school authority do unethical behavior?
1. They thought that education discrepancy had force them to do
this fraudulence. Government had raised the standard grade of
graduation on UN without looked the real capability of all student
in Indonesia. The teacher had been forced to produced smart
student,
meanwhile
the
facility
on
education
are
not
sufficient.Even the school facility between city and village are not
same, but they faced on the same standard grade. The different
quality of education in Indonesia had been measured by the
same instrument, that is UN. For the example, lot of school
facility on the village in Indonesia, like school building are not
proper, many of school building are collapse or like a shack/
bunkhouse, their condition are very poor. Many student had to
study at frontyard of the school. Many of school don’t have
enough teachers to teach the student. They lack of the teacher.
Are the student that had been study on these kind of school must
been measured/test with the same instrument with other student
on the big city,like Jakarta, where their school had fully equipped
with all the facility?
2. The school authority had mercy to their students. In the middle
of hard economic situation, for the poor people, school is a bet.
They sent their kids to school with a lot of economic effort. And
it’s not easy. But now their future will be stake with UN. Lot of
students are stress because of the standard grade of graduation
on UN are more high than before. For the example,last year a
student from SMK 1, Waingapu, Sumba Timur,NTT, commit
suicide, because for the 2nd time she don’t pass UN.
3. Each school are competing,they have ambition to reach the
highest score on UN. They afraid, if many of their student don’t
pass UN, the quality of their school are assume drop, and it will
make they run out of new student, if this happen, the school
can’t have enough money to run their school.
4. There
local
government
(pemkot/pemkab), i.e. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan,
because the
number
are
of
some
forced
nonpassed
from
student
the
will
effected
to
the
local
government reputation (pemkot/pemkab).This condition cause
any report about fraudulance on UN will be not responds from
the local government. On the contrary if there anyone who dare
to report about the fraudulence, he or she will become a victim,
they will not be promoted, will be transfer to other section/region
or even will be fired
5. School authority feels that all other school do the same
fraudulence on UN like they do. So they feel that they not alone.
If we look by the school authority reason’s their act are only by
Consequentialist
Principle;
Ethics
concept
that
focused
on
the
consequences of making decision. Decision are ethics or not ethics are
based on the consequences or the impact of that decision; may be
they think what they do is ethic, because all they do is for goodness to
the student, the parent, the school itself, and the local government.
But from the Non Consequentialist Principle; what they do is not ethic,
because what they do is against the rules. i.e. minister of education’s
regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun 2008.
Maybe from the ethical theories, what they do are ethical if we use
Kant’s ethic of duty theories. Because their act will be right based on
the consequences of that action. On the short run their act will bring
goodness for everyone, like the Consequentialist principle.
But if we used Mill’s Utilitarianism theories, what the school authority
are not ethical, because what they do are not deliver the greatest good
for the greatest number of person, because, what they do are not fair
to other school that don’t do fraudulence on UN, and for the longrun,
what they do to student will make the student in the real life think that
cheating are right because their teacher had teached it to them. If this
happen, it will not bring greatest good for the community in the future.
The classification of ethics bring us to Teologi Ethics and Normative
Ethics. From Teologi Ethic’s point of view, what the school authority do
are right because the objective of their act are to help the student to
pass UN, even the way is wrong (with fraudulence), but they think that
they must do this because the government are not fair to give them
;the poor school; the same instrument/test with other student on the
big city,like Jakarta, where their school had fully equipped with all the
facility.
On the contrary, based on Normative ethics, what the school authority
do are not right, because even the objective is to bring goodness for
the student in the short run, but fraudulence on UN still against ideal
norm and morality that had been demanded by the majority
(democratic) especially to the law.
What kind of ethical issues that they do?
Mostly the fraudulence on UN involve with three ethical issues:
1. Coercion
There
are
some
forced
from
the
local
(pemkot/pemkab), i.e. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan,
government
to the school
authority, to do fraudulence on UN, because the number of
nonpassed student will effected to the local government
reputation (pemkot/pemkab).
2. Deception
The school authority has delude, mislead and lied to government
and to all Indonesian People about their student’s real capability
on UN.
3. Theft
The school authority had steal some UN problem sheet to know
the problem first,and then they find the right answer and give it
the answer to the student. So the student can write the right
answer on the day of UN had been held.
4. Bribery
The student had to pay to the school authority if they want the
answer key of UN. This case happen in 2007 on Jambi.
SWOT Analysis
Strength :
-
The number of student that pass UN are very high
-
On the contrary the number of stressful student because they
didn’t pass UN are very low
Weakness :
-
The students will depend on the cheating sheet that their
teacher give to them, this will cause they will not study for UN,
because they have know that their teacher will help them with
the right answer in the cheating sheet.
-
This will debilitate mental of the students,because they will used
to cheat all the rest of their life, because they see that their
teacher
supposed
to
be
a
good
example,
but
they
do
fraudulence, so the student will think that fraudulence is a good
and usual think to do in life.
-
Because of the school authority often helped their students for
cheating, so the teacher will loose his/her competency to teach,
because they know that even they don’t teaching well, the
student will pass UN.
Oportunity :
-
If the amount of student that pass UN are high, many new
student will come to study at this school. Because they think this
school is good.
-
The teacher will have an income from their cheeting sheet, if
they sold it to the students.
Threat:
-
If their act detected to the authority, like police officer, they will
get the punishment, the form of punishment could be skorsing,
fired or even go to jail.
-
For the school that had been caught, they will get a bad
reputation, if this happen, the school could be short of new
student. Because they think this school is not good.
Chapter V
Summary
Education is a media of glorification to human being through
increase the intelligence. Because of that we must keep the purity of
education. We can’t do some filthiness, like cheating on an exam,
especially if the teacher itself that do that kind of filthiness.
Pass on Ujian Nasional (UN) must been some proud for all the
people; the student, teacher and the parents. But permitted bad ways
will not give a bless to the people who do that.
UN are still important as a tool to measure the improvement of
education in Indonesia, but may be we must considered not to use UN
as requirement
to go to the next higher grade, except if the
government have made all the facility and resources on education is
equal in every school in Indonesia.
Because of that we need business ethics on every organization
including in school, there are seven reason,why we need business
ethics in school :
1. The school that violate the ethics will lost students and other
stakeholders,because bad image will quickly spread on the
community. i.e: ethics violation will be blow up in media,
Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat, etc.
2. The school authority will be sue to something that make
adverse consequences to the community, because the school
authority had take the advantage from the community.
3. The school need community support, so it need to fulfill ethics
standard.
4. Positif image from the school that ethical will help to lightening
the punishment if one day in the future the school had a legal
problem.
5. Business ethics will protect the school from the employee and
competitor that have diverge behavior.
6. Business ethics will bring nice feeling on the teacher, the
employee, the parents and the student, because they feel that
they are had been protected from manajemen behavior that
will harm them. Employee activity will be smooth so the
productivity will increase.
7. Business ethics will
protect the pshycology from stress
disruption, strain, frustrated,conflict and depression. Because
ethics violation will make fidgetiness to the one who did it and
to the people that had careness on ethics in communal life.
Fraudulence on Ujian Nasional (UN)
Which Made By School Authority
(Business Ethics)
By :
KAUTSAR ADITYA WICAKSANA
(0951035)
MAGISTER MANAJEMEN
UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA
YOGYAKARTA
2009
Preface
According to the laws of National Education System Number 20
Tahun 2003 at Chapter 1, Article 1 has been explained that education
is interpreted as conscious effort and organized to realize atmosphere
learn and study process [so that/ to be] educative participant actively
develop it's self potency to have the power of religious spiritual, self
control, personality, intelligence, noble behaviour , and also skill that
needed by it'self, society, state and nation.
This article also explain about the meaning of formal education,
that is an education path that had been structured and gradual,
consist of basic education, middle education, high education and
collage education.
In order to evaluate the student in formal education, especially
at the basic, middle and higher education, the government had set a
national examination called Ujian Akhir Sekolah Berstandar Nasional
(UASBN). According to minister of education’s regulation number 77,
78 and 82 Tahun 2008, the purpose of UASBN are :
a. To valuated the achievement of national competencies graduation
on Bahasa Indonesia, Mathematics and lesson that related to
Science and technology.
b. To encouraged the achievement of wajib belajar pendidikan dasar.
The UASBN result will be used as a consideration to :
a. Mapping the quality of education
b. As a base to go to the next level of higher education
c. Determine the graduation of the student
d. As a base to manage the school to raise the quality of education
UASBN must been taken to all student at the last years on
elementary, junior high school, and high school. According to
minister of education’s regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun
2008, student that participate in UN will be passed if he/she has
average grade for all lesson minimal 5,50. And minimal grade 4,00
for maximum two lesson and minimal garde 4,25 for other lesson.
Chapter II
Case
On the implementation of Ujian Nasional (UN), thera are so
many fraud that occurred. Here some quotes from the newspaper
that write lot of case about fraudulence on UN that exist for the
past four years :
1. Kepolisian Resor Ngawi, Jawa Timur, menggagalkan upaya
kepala sekolah sekaligus pengajar di salah satu SMK swasta di
Kabupaten Ngawi dalam melakukan pencurian satu bendel soal
mata pelajaran Bahasa Indonesia dalam ujian nasional.
(www.kompas.com)
2. video berisi rekaman asli yang diambil dari kamera handphone
merek Nokia 7610, tentang aksi nekat guru yang membacakan
kunci jawaban soal Ujian Nasional (UN) di SMK Negeri Talang
Padang, Kecamatan Talang Padang, Kabupaten Tanggamus pada
tanggal 21 April 2009. Rekaman diambil oleh seorang guru SMK
Muhammadiyah Gisting, yang menjadi pengawas silang di SMK
Negeri Talang Padang. (www.kompas.com)
3. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan Kabupaten Garut, telah memberi
instruksi untuk menyukseskan UN dengan cara-cara curang.
Imam Taufik, guru SMAN 2 Garut mengungkapkan bahwa
kecurangan telah terjadi sejak pelaksanaan UAN dua tahun lalu.
Ia bahkan sempat diminta untuk ikut membetulkan jawaban
yang diberikan siswa. Tahun ini, tutur Imam, kepala sekolah
dikumpulkan di Pendopo Kabupaten setempat untuk --istilah
mereka: "menyukseskan UN tanpa ekses". Menurut Imam, siswa
SLTA di Garut hanya bertindak sebagai juru tulis dalam
menjawab soal-soal UN karena yang sebenarnya mengerjakan
soal UN adalah tiga pejabat di Garut. Hasilnya tingkat kelulusan
UN di Garut tertinggi di Jawa Barat. Di tingkat SMP maupun SMA
tingkat kelulusannya sampai 99 persen. Asep, guru SMK Negeri I
di Garut, yang pernah mengawasi di beberapa sekolah
mengatakan bahwa modus kecurangan itu terjadi di SMP
maupun SLTA di Garut. Guru diberi nomor siswa yang ikut ujian,
jawaban diberikan melalui sms, dan disebarkan pada semua
siswa. Selain itu jawaban dibawa ke ruangan dan ada tim sukses
yang membetulkan jawaban siswa atau menghapus jawaban
yang sudah betul agar tidak betul seratus persen. "Tahun ini
kejadiannya juga seperti itu," tutur Asep. (www.kompas.com)
4. Pengakuan tentang kecurangan dalam pelaksanaan UN juga
datang dari Medan, Cilegon, dan Jakarta. Werdianti, guru SMP
Negeri 271 Jakarta Barat, mengungkapkan ia mendapati bocoran
jawaban dari seorang siswa di sebuah sekolah yang ia awasi. .
Kemudian dirinya mengambil lembar jawaban itu dan
mencocokkan dengan soal. "Ternyata jawabannya benar.” Ketika
ia melaporkan temuan itu justru diminta sekolah bersangkutan
untuk
tidak
memperpanjang
masalah.
(www.tempointeraktif.com)
5. Petugas pengawas ujian nasional yang menjadi saksi Pengadilan
Negeri Jakarta Pusat, Kamis (15/3), membenarkan adanya
kecurangan yang direncanakan dalam pelaksanaan ujian
nasional tahun 2006. "Ada briefing pada tanggal 16 mei tentang
bagaimana mensiasati sukses ujian nasional," kata saksi Mumul
Muhdiyatulmilah di hadapan majelis hakim yang dipimpin
Andriyani Nurdin. Menurut Mumul kecurangan itu berupa
pemberian kunci jawaban kepada peserta. Dia sendiri saat itu
menolak memberikan kunci jawaban pada peserta di SMA Pandu
Bogor. Kesaksian tadi diperkuat oleh bukti baru yang
disampaikan penggugat selama persidangan. "Ada surat
pernyataan dari 7 siswa yang menerima lembaran contekan dari
pengawas pada saat ujian," kata pengacara penggugat, Gatot.
(www.tempointeraktif.com)
6. Kebocoran soal Ujian Nasional justru terjadi di SMAN 2 Tarogong,
Garut. Guru dan kepala sekolah disekolah tersebut terbukti
memberikan
jawaban
soal
ujian
bahasa Inggris dan Matematika yang dilakukan 10 menit
menjelang akhir waktu ujian. "Mereka diberikan sanksi hukuman
disiplin
sesuai
Peraturan
Pemerintah
No.30 Tahun 1980. Tahun depan, SMAN 2 Tarogong juga tidak
lagi dijadikan Sub Rayon pada Ujian Nasional berikutnya,"
katanya. Selain itu, kebocoran juga terjadi di SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi,
Jawa Timur. Modusnya, Kepala Sekolah SMA PGRI 4 mencuri
naskah ujian nasional. Saat ini, menurutnya, departemen
pendidikan nasional telah merekomendasikan agar kepala
sekolah tersebut diusut oleh polisi. "Karena sudah tindak
pidana," katanya (www.tempointeraktif.com)
7. Di Bengkulu, sebanyak 16 kepala sekolah, 9 guru fisika, dan satu
orang pejabat dinas pendidikan setempat tertangkap basah
sedang mengerjakan soal ujian Fisika Ahad lalu. Kunci jawaban
belum sempat dibocorkan. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
8. Tim pemantau Federasi Guru Independen Indonesia Jawa Barat
membuktikan kecurangan Ujian Nasional SMP di Kota Bandung.
Puluhan siswa kedapatan menyalin jawaban ujian di sebuah
warung. “Bukti foto dan video hari ini kami serahkan ke
Polwiltabes Bandung,” kata Ketua FGII Jabar Ahmad Taufan, Rabu
(29/4). (www.tempointeraktif.com)
9. Komunitas Air Mata Guru (KAMG) menemukan beragam bentuk
kecurangan pelaksanaan ujian nasional tingkat sekolah
menengah pertama sejak hari pertama ujian dilaksanakan.
Kecurangan direkam dalam video tersembunyi saat siswa
memindahkan jawaban yang diterima melalui pesan pendek.
Investigasi yang dilakukan komunitas tersebut sejak 2007
hingga 2009, bentuk kecurangan berubah. "Tahun 2007 terjadi di
ruang kelas, 2008 setelah ujian guru memperbaiki jawaban,
tahun ini terjadi sebelum ujian dilaksanakan," kata Denni Boy
Saragih dari KAMG kepada wartawan, Kamis (30/4). Untuk ujian
nasional SMP, KAMG menginvestigasi 19 sekolah di Kota Medan,
sembilan SMP negeri, dan enam SMP swasta terkategori sekolah
favorit. "Siswa datang lebih pagi lalu memindahkan kunci
jawaban ke kertas kopekan," kata Denni seraya menunjukkan
rekaman
video
saat
siswa
memindahkan
kunci
jawaban.Investigas juga mengungkapkan adanya kesengajaan
dan keterlibatan pihak sekolah untuk membocorkan jawaban
soal. "Di salah satu SMP swasta, kepala sekolah memberikan
instruksi kepada guru," ungkap Denni. Keterangan dari siswa
juga mengungkap adanya bisnis terselubung dalam pembocoran
kunci jawaban. "Harga untuk jawaban empat mata pelajaran
dijual berkisar Rp 4 juta hingga Rp 5 juta," aku Denni. Ke 16
rekaman bentuk kecurangan dan kertas kopekan yang
ditemukan dalam kelas ujian, akan diserahkan kepada Gubernur
Sumatera Utara Syamsul Arifin. "Bukti-bukti ini akan kita
serahkan kepada Gubernur," ucap Denni. Menurutnya,
kecurangan terjadi sebab tingkat kelulusan hasil try out baik SMP
dan SMA hanya 40 persen. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
10.
Berdasarkan laporan evaluasi sementara itu disebutkan,
keterangan Polres dan barang bukti menyebutkan bahwa Kepala
SMAN I Bengkulu Selatan telah mencuri sampul soal cadangan
dan menyimpannya dalam kardus khusus. Setelah dilakukan
cross check oleh Polres Bengkulu Selatan, ternyata rombongan
oknum kepala sekolah sedang melakukan pembahasan jawaban
soal-soal UN di Masjid SMAN I Bengkulu Selatan.Akibat kejadian
itu, sebanyak 25 orang sudah diamankan di Mapolres Bengkulu
Selatan berikut barang bukti berupa soal UN. Rombongan
pembocor soal tersebut terdiri dari 10 Kepala Sekolah SMA
Negeri, 4 Kepala SMA Swasta, 1 Kepala Sekolah Madrasah Aliyah
Negeri (MAN), seorang pejabat eselon III Dinas Pendidikan
Pemudan dan Olahraga (Disdikpora), serta 9 orang guru.
(www.kompas.com)
11. Kunci Jawaban Ujian di Jambi Diperjual-belikan (17 April 2007)
Modusnya, pihak sekolah mencari beberapa orang murid, agar
secara bersama-sama menyediakan uang dengan total kurang
lebih Rp 5 juta. Sebagai imbalan, mereka dijanjikan akan diberi
fotokopi kunci jawaban ujian. (www.tempointeraktif.com)
12.
Dari rapat kerja Mendiknas dengan komisi X DPR RI (14
Juni 2007) setidaknya mencatat 14 wilayah dan sekolah yang
diduga melakukan kecurangan, seperti Dinas Pendidikan Kota
Medan, Kota Bandung, Kota Palembang, Provinsi Sulawesi
Tengah, Kota Ternate, SMAN 2 Tarogong Kidul, SMKS Dhuafa
Nusantara Kota Padang, SMAN 2 Tangerang, SMA 1 Bojonegara
Serang, SMAN 1 Ronometo Sulteng, SMAN 2 Tanggul Jember,
SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi, SMA 4 Sumbawa Besar dan SMPN 2 Cinta
Damai serta SMPN 1 Air Putih Indrapura Asahan. Jumlah ini
belum lagi termasuk wilayah atau sekolah yang lolos dari
pantauan.
Diungkapkan pula modus operandi kecurangan yang beraneka
ragam seperti; secara bersama-sama melakukan kecurangan
dengan cara membantu memberikan jawaban soal UN kepada
siswa (10 menit menjelang ujian berakhir), beredarnya kunci
jawaban palsu, pengawasan ujian yang masih melibatkan guru
mata pelajaran yang di-UN-kan, kelalaian pengawas yang tidak
melarang peserta membawa dan menggunakan HP di ruang
ujian, mengambil soal cadangan kemudian membagikan
jawaban pada siswa, terjadi pencurian naskah UN seperti yang
dilakukan oleh kepala SMA PGRI 4 Ngawi, dan masih banyak lagi
modus yang tujuannya melepaskan anak dari “jerat”
ketidaklulusan. (www.kompas.com)
Lot of case that involved the school authority, like head of
principle, and the teachers, to do some fraud on UN. What things
that motivated this school authority to do such ashame action?
Why
they
do
that?
Are
they
doesn’t
know
about
the
consequencess of their action? What kind of ethical issues that
they do? We will try to find the answer from the business ethics
point of view at chapter IV in this paper.
Chapter III
Literature Review
A. Business Ethics
Ethics is the discipline that examines one’s moral standards or
the moral standards of a society.
Business Ethics is a specialized study of moral right and wrong. It
concentrates on moral standards as they apply to business
institutions, organization, and behavior.
B. Moral Standards
Moral standards are the norms about the kinds of actions
believed to be morally right and wrong as well as the values
placed on the kinds of objects believed to be morally good and
morally bad.
There are two prinsip of moral standards:
1. Consequentialist Principle:
Ethics konsep that focused on the consequences of making
decision. Decision are ethics or not ethics are based on the
consequences or the impact of that decision.
2. Nonconsequentialist Principle:
Consist of series of rules that used as guidance to make decision
ethically and based on the reason not the consequences.
C. Ethical Theories
Ethical Theories searches for principles and guidance to make
moral decisions
in a variety of situation.
1. Hobbes‘s Self Interest
It serve the individual’s best interest if they behave at the best
interest of other people
2. Mill’s Utilitarianism;
The act to deliver the greatest good for the greatest number of
person.
3. Kant’s ethic of duty.
Focus on individual rights and duties. Right or wrong of an
action is based on the consequencess of that action.
4. Aristotle’s virtue ethics.
Incorporating the Mill’s and The Kant’s theory. developing
individual rights along with the benefits of greatest number of
people.
D. Five Types of Ethical Issues
i. Bribery
Has been defined as “the offering, giving, receiving, or
soliciting of something of value for the purpose of influencing
the action of an official in the discharge of his or her public or
legal duties. The item of value may be direct payment of
money or property.
ii. Coercion
Coercion controls people by force or threat. It is defined as
“compulsion; constraint; compelling by force or arms or threat
… it may be actual, direct, or positive, as where physical force
is used to compel action against one’s will,or implied,legal or
constructive, as where one party is constrained by subjugation
to another to do what his free will would refuse.
iii.Deception
Deception is “the act of deceiving; intentional misleading by
falsehood spoken or acted… Knowingly and willingly making a
false
statement
or
representation,
expressed
or
implied,pertaining to a present or past existing past.”
iv.Theft
Theft is the taking of something that does not belong to you.
v. Unfair Discrimination
Unfair discrimination is defined as “unfair treatment or denial
of normal previlages to a person because of their race, age,
sex, nationality or religion… a failure to treat all persons
equally when no reasonable distinction can be found between
those favored and those not favored.
E. Classification of ethics
1. Descriptive Ethics : object can be judge by attitude and
behavior to chase the purpose of live based on heritage of
culture on certain community.
2. Normative Ethics : the reference are on the ideal norm and
morality that had been demanded by the community / majority
(democratic)
3. Deontologi Ethics : the urge of obligation and necessity to do
things right (drive,positive desire)
4. Teologi Ethics : a bad or good behavior are looked by the
objective and the result had been caused.
5. Relativism Ethics : ethic that measured by the goodness of
locality not global.
F. Legal Norm
Are norm that more clear, sure, strict to all the citizen, and
protected by punishment. This law should be good, right, and fair
because it codified by moral norm. The Obedient to the Legal
Norm not automatically because moral quality because it could
be the obediance are because fraid of punishment, not from
consciusness of moral. Or on the contrary morality demanded
usually against law but beliefed the goodness by the subject.
Chapter IV
Case Analysis
Fraudulance on Ujian Nasional (UN) which made by school
authority are unethical. Because that behavior are against moral
standard, that is honesty and against the law ( minister of
education’s regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun 2008)
Why do the school authority do unethical behavior?
1. They thought that education discrepancy had force them to do
this fraudulence. Government had raised the standard grade of
graduation on UN without looked the real capability of all student
in Indonesia. The teacher had been forced to produced smart
student,
meanwhile
the
facility
on
education
are
not
sufficient.Even the school facility between city and village are not
same, but they faced on the same standard grade. The different
quality of education in Indonesia had been measured by the
same instrument, that is UN. For the example, lot of school
facility on the village in Indonesia, like school building are not
proper, many of school building are collapse or like a shack/
bunkhouse, their condition are very poor. Many student had to
study at frontyard of the school. Many of school don’t have
enough teachers to teach the student. They lack of the teacher.
Are the student that had been study on these kind of school must
been measured/test with the same instrument with other student
on the big city,like Jakarta, where their school had fully equipped
with all the facility?
2. The school authority had mercy to their students. In the middle
of hard economic situation, for the poor people, school is a bet.
They sent their kids to school with a lot of economic effort. And
it’s not easy. But now their future will be stake with UN. Lot of
students are stress because of the standard grade of graduation
on UN are more high than before. For the example,last year a
student from SMK 1, Waingapu, Sumba Timur,NTT, commit
suicide, because for the 2nd time she don’t pass UN.
3. Each school are competing,they have ambition to reach the
highest score on UN. They afraid, if many of their student don’t
pass UN, the quality of their school are assume drop, and it will
make they run out of new student, if this happen, the school
can’t have enough money to run their school.
4. There
local
government
(pemkot/pemkab), i.e. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan,
because the
number
are
of
some
forced
nonpassed
from
student
the
will
effected
to
the
local
government reputation (pemkot/pemkab).This condition cause
any report about fraudulance on UN will be not responds from
the local government. On the contrary if there anyone who dare
to report about the fraudulence, he or she will become a victim,
they will not be promoted, will be transfer to other section/region
or even will be fired
5. School authority feels that all other school do the same
fraudulence on UN like they do. So they feel that they not alone.
If we look by the school authority reason’s their act are only by
Consequentialist
Principle;
Ethics
concept
that
focused
on
the
consequences of making decision. Decision are ethics or not ethics are
based on the consequences or the impact of that decision; may be
they think what they do is ethic, because all they do is for goodness to
the student, the parent, the school itself, and the local government.
But from the Non Consequentialist Principle; what they do is not ethic,
because what they do is against the rules. i.e. minister of education’s
regulation number 77,78 and 82 Tahun 2008.
Maybe from the ethical theories, what they do are ethical if we use
Kant’s ethic of duty theories. Because their act will be right based on
the consequences of that action. On the short run their act will bring
goodness for everyone, like the Consequentialist principle.
But if we used Mill’s Utilitarianism theories, what the school authority
are not ethical, because what they do are not deliver the greatest good
for the greatest number of person, because, what they do are not fair
to other school that don’t do fraudulence on UN, and for the longrun,
what they do to student will make the student in the real life think that
cheating are right because their teacher had teached it to them. If this
happen, it will not bring greatest good for the community in the future.
The classification of ethics bring us to Teologi Ethics and Normative
Ethics. From Teologi Ethic’s point of view, what the school authority do
are right because the objective of their act are to help the student to
pass UN, even the way is wrong (with fraudulence), but they think that
they must do this because the government are not fair to give them
;the poor school; the same instrument/test with other student on the
big city,like Jakarta, where their school had fully equipped with all the
facility.
On the contrary, based on Normative ethics, what the school authority
do are not right, because even the objective is to bring goodness for
the student in the short run, but fraudulence on UN still against ideal
norm and morality that had been demanded by the majority
(democratic) especially to the law.
What kind of ethical issues that they do?
Mostly the fraudulence on UN involve with three ethical issues:
1. Coercion
There
are
some
forced
from
the
local
(pemkot/pemkab), i.e. Kepala Dinas Pendidikan,
government
to the school
authority, to do fraudulence on UN, because the number of
nonpassed student will effected to the local government
reputation (pemkot/pemkab).
2. Deception
The school authority has delude, mislead and lied to government
and to all Indonesian People about their student’s real capability
on UN.
3. Theft
The school authority had steal some UN problem sheet to know
the problem first,and then they find the right answer and give it
the answer to the student. So the student can write the right
answer on the day of UN had been held.
4. Bribery
The student had to pay to the school authority if they want the
answer key of UN. This case happen in 2007 on Jambi.
SWOT Analysis
Strength :
-
The number of student that pass UN are very high
-
On the contrary the number of stressful student because they
didn’t pass UN are very low
Weakness :
-
The students will depend on the cheating sheet that their
teacher give to them, this will cause they will not study for UN,
because they have know that their teacher will help them with
the right answer in the cheating sheet.
-
This will debilitate mental of the students,because they will used
to cheat all the rest of their life, because they see that their
teacher
supposed
to
be
a
good
example,
but
they
do
fraudulence, so the student will think that fraudulence is a good
and usual think to do in life.
-
Because of the school authority often helped their students for
cheating, so the teacher will loose his/her competency to teach,
because they know that even they don’t teaching well, the
student will pass UN.
Oportunity :
-
If the amount of student that pass UN are high, many new
student will come to study at this school. Because they think this
school is good.
-
The teacher will have an income from their cheeting sheet, if
they sold it to the students.
Threat:
-
If their act detected to the authority, like police officer, they will
get the punishment, the form of punishment could be skorsing,
fired or even go to jail.
-
For the school that had been caught, they will get a bad
reputation, if this happen, the school could be short of new
student. Because they think this school is not good.
Chapter V
Summary
Education is a media of glorification to human being through
increase the intelligence. Because of that we must keep the purity of
education. We can’t do some filthiness, like cheating on an exam,
especially if the teacher itself that do that kind of filthiness.
Pass on Ujian Nasional (UN) must been some proud for all the
people; the student, teacher and the parents. But permitted bad ways
will not give a bless to the people who do that.
UN are still important as a tool to measure the improvement of
education in Indonesia, but may be we must considered not to use UN
as requirement
to go to the next higher grade, except if the
government have made all the facility and resources on education is
equal in every school in Indonesia.
Because of that we need business ethics on every organization
including in school, there are seven reason,why we need business
ethics in school :
1. The school that violate the ethics will lost students and other
stakeholders,because bad image will quickly spread on the
community. i.e: ethics violation will be blow up in media,
Lembaga Swadaya Masyarakat, etc.
2. The school authority will be sue to something that make
adverse consequences to the community, because the school
authority had take the advantage from the community.
3. The school need community support, so it need to fulfill ethics
standard.
4. Positif image from the school that ethical will help to lightening
the punishment if one day in the future the school had a legal
problem.
5. Business ethics will protect the school from the employee and
competitor that have diverge behavior.
6. Business ethics will bring nice feeling on the teacher, the
employee, the parents and the student, because they feel that
they are had been protected from manajemen behavior that
will harm them. Employee activity will be smooth so the
productivity will increase.
7. Business ethics will
protect the pshycology from stress
disruption, strain, frustrated,conflict and depression. Because
ethics violation will make fidgetiness to the one who did it and
to the people that had careness on ethics in communal life.
Fraudulence on Ujian Nasional (UN)
Which Made By School Authority
(Business Ethics)
By :
KAUTSAR ADITYA WICAKSANA
(0951035)
MAGISTER MANAJEMEN
UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA
YOGYAKARTA
2009