Perception of teacher autonomy in curriculum development at the vocational school - USD Repository

PERCEPTION OF TEACHER AUTONOMY IN
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AT
THE VOCATIONAL SCHOOL
A THESIS

Presented as a Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
to Obtain the Magister Humaniora (M.Hum) Degree
in English Language Studies

By

Siti Nurhayati
Student Number: 056332026

THE GRADUATE PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES
SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
YOGYAKARTA
2010
2010

i

ii

iii

iv

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all I would like to convey the very first eternal gratitude to Allah, the
Almighty for his endless kindness. I always come to Him whenever I find difficulties. I
ask For His guidance. I believe this is His blessing so that I can finish this thesis and is
able to obtain the degree. May He always be with us.
This thesis is dedicated to my beloved family, friends and colleagues and to my
husband, Wahyu Edy Guntara, and my son, ‗Yusuf‘, who always supported me when I
was powerless. I really thank them for being my spirit and my companion.
I would like to express my utmost gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Novita Dewi,
M.S., M.A. (Hons) who always kindly supported me with her advice, guidance,

suggestions, helps, encouragement, and motivation during this thesis writing. I will
always remember her bright ideas, her patient during my consultation, as well as her
lovely and beautiful voice. I really learn a lot from her.
My debt of gratitude is also due to F.X. Mukarto, Ph.D. who has always questioned
me on the completion of my thesis writing. I am very grateful since he kindly helped me
to learn everything confusing me such as learning how to build the blue print, browsing
sources for the thesis writing, and sharing the IT knowledge he had.
I would like to deeply thank to Dr. J. Bismoko for his valuable advice, valuable
knowledge, and valuable perspective. I was amazed with his deep understanding and
dedication to open not only for his students‘ eyes but also the teacher‘s eyes for their
on-going development. His words were precious to remember such as his ideas of
glocalization.
I feel having a good fortunate to be the student of the great lecturers in this
Graduate program. I learnt a lot experiences, I was trained to be more mature in my
profession as Dr. BB. Dwijatmoko, M.A, Dr. Fr. B. Alip, M.Pd., M.A. and Prof. Dr.
Soepomo had encouraged me to develop to be autonomous person from the tasks they
had given to us.
A word of many thousand thanks also goes to my two research participants: Ibu
Florentina Sri Wartini, S.Pd and Ibu Priwanti, M.Hum. I really thanked for their real-

vi

lived teacher-stories and willingness to show their document and classroom action. I
believe their support would be useful for teachers to consider.
I also have a debt of gratitude to the Principal of SMK N I Kalasan, LPMP
Yogyakarta, Dinas Pendidikan Kabupaten Sleman by giving me the chance to taste this
wonderful experience in the Graduate study of Sanata Dharma University
Finally I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my father Bapak Haji
Joko Suharto, my mother Ibu Hajjah Siti Mursini and my mother in-law Ibu Kasih, who
always supported me with their love and prayers. I love them all.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE ....................................................................................................................
APPROVAL PAGE ..........................................................................................................
DEFENSE APPROVAL PAGE ......................................................................................
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY ................................................................................
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................

TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................
LIST OF FIGURES ..........................................................................................................
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................
LIST OF APPENDICES ..................................................................................................
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................
ABSTRAK .........................................................................................................................

i
ii
iii
iv
v
vii
ix
x
xi
xii
xiii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION …………………………………… .............................

A. Background of the Study …………………………………… .....................................
B. Problem Identification ……………………………………… .....................................
C. Problem Limitation …………………………………………......................................
D. Research Question ………………………………………….. .....................................
E. Research Goal ………………………………………………......................................
F. Research Benefit ……………………………………………. ....................................
1. Theoretical Benefits ……………….......................................................................
2. Practical Benefits .....................................................................................................

1
1
3
5
6
7
7
8
8

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................

A. A review on related study ………………………………………… ..............................
B. Theoretical Review ……………………………………………. ..................................
1. The Roles of Curriculum and Teachers In Education ………………... ..................
2. The Government Formal Document and Educational Goal in Indonesia ...............
3. Perception …………………………………………………………. .......................
4. Curriculum Development ……………………………………………… ................
5. The Notion of Teacher Autonomy in Curriculum Development ………. ...............
6. English Teachers in Vocational School …………………………. ..........................
C. Theoretical Framework ……………………………………………. .............................
D. Constructs ……………………………………………. ................................................

9
9
10
10
16
20
23
33
39

41
46

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................
A. Research Method ……………………………………………………. ..........................
B. The Nature of Data..........................................................................................................
C. Data Setting and Sources …………………………………………….. .........................
D. Data Gathering Instrument and Presentation ………………………… .........................
E Constructing Interview Questions …………………………………... ............................
F. Research Procedure and Data Processing …………………………… ..........................
G. Methodology in Brief ………………………………………………. ...........................

49
49
50
51
52
55
55
59

viii

CHAPTER IV DATA PROCESSING AND FINDINGS .............................................. 61
A. Data Processing …………… ………………………………………… ........................ 61
1. Narration and observation ………………………………………. ……. .............. 61
2. Interview questions ……………………………………………………. ............... 63
3. Conducting Interview ……………………………………………….. ............. 66
4. Processing Data ……………………………………………………… ................. 67
5. Thematizing the relationships between teacher‘s perception and teacher‘s
practice ................................................................................................................................ 71
B. Findings …………………………………………………………… ............................. 71
1. Rose‘s perception and practice on teacher autonomy in curriculum development .. 71
1.1. Rose‘s perception and practice on the school goal ........................................... 73
1.2. Rose‘s perception and practice on syllabus establishment .............................. 77
1.3. Rose‘s perception and practice on lesson plan establishment ......................... 85
1.4. Rose‘s perception and practice on the selection of the learning opportunities
93
1.5. Rose‘s perception and practice on the organization of the learning
opportunities ............................................................................................................ 102

2. Intan‘s perception and practice on curriculum development ………………............ 111
2.1. Intan‘s perception and practice on the school goal ………….......................... 113
2.2. Intan perception and practice on the syllabus establishment ........................... 116
2.3. Intan perception and practice on the lesson plan establishment ..................... 121
2.4. Intan‘s perception and practice on the selection of the learning opportunities 127
C. Summary of the Perception and Practice on Teacher Autonomy in Developing
Curriculum ……………………………………………… ............................................. 139
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................
A. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................
B. Implications ...................................................................................................................
C. Recommendations ..........................................................................................................

145
145
147
148

BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................. 151
APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................
Appendix 1: Observation Data ...........................................................................................

Appendix 2: Interview Questions .......................................................................................
Appendix3: interview Data/ transcript of Interview ............................................................
Appendix 4: Category of Observation and Interview Data On teacher perception ............
Appendix 5: Category of Observation and Interview Data On teacher autonomy .............

ix

154
154
161
173
235
246

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1 On-going-development of curriculum ……………….......................................
Figure 2.2 Autonomous teacher ………………………………….. ...................................
Figure 2.3 Teacher autonomy in curriculum development ……….....................................

x

23
35
44

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Standard Competency and Basic Competency for Vocational School ( SK and
KD) ..................................................................................................................... 18
Table 2.2 Passing Standard/SKL ……………………………………….. .......................... 19
Table 3.1 Blue print on the perception of teacher autonomy in curriculum development . 56
Table 3.2 Blue print on the practice of teacher autonomy in curriculum development ..... 57
Table 4.1.2 Narration of the syllabus in SMK N A Sleman ………………. ...................... 154
Table 4.1.2 Narration of Rose‘s teachers‘ work book ………………….. .......................... 155
Table 4.2.1 Narration of Intan‘s syllabus in SMK ………………. ................................... 156
Table 4.2.2 Narration of Intan‘s teachers‘ work book ………………….. .......................... 157
Table 4.1.1 Rose‘s perception on the school goal ………………… ................................. 235
Table 4.1.2 Rose‘s perception on the syllabus ………………………….. ......................... 236
Table 4.1.3 Rose‘s perception on the lesson plan ……………………………................... 237
Table 4.1.4 Rose‘s perception on the selection of the learning opportunities.. ................... 238
Table 4.1.5 Rose‘s perception on the organization of the learning opportunities .............. 238
Table 4.1.6 Rose‘s perception on syllabus evaluation ........................................................ 238
Table 4.1.7 Rose‘s perception on lesson plan evaluation ................................................... 239
Table 4.1.8 Rose‘s perception on the evaluation of the selection of learning
opportunities ....................................................................................................................... 240
Table 4.1.9 Rose‘s perception on the evaluation of the organization of learning
opportunities .................................................................................................... 240
Table 4.2.1 Intan‘s perception on the school goal ………………… ................................. 241
Table 4.2.2 Intan‘s perception on the syllabus ………………………….. ......................... 241
Table 4.2.3 Intan‘s perception on the lesson plan ……………………………. ................. 242
Table 4.2.4 Intan‘s perception on the selection of the learning opportunities..................... 242
Table 4.2.5 Intan‘s perception on the organization of the learning opportunities .............. 243
Table 4.2.6 Intan‘s perception on syllabus evaluation ....................................................... 244
Table 4.2.7 Intan‘s perception on lesson plan evaluation ................................................... 244
Table 4.2.8 Intan‘s perception on the evaluation of the selection of learning
opportunities ....................................................................................................................... 2434
Table 4.2.9 Intans perception on the evaluation of the organization oflearning
opportunities .................................................................................................... 246
Table 5.1.1 The influence of the school goal to Rose‘s practices…… .............................. 246
Table 5.1.2 Rose‘s practice on the syllabus establishment …………………….. .............. 247
Table 5.1.3 Rose‘s practice on the lesson establishment………………………................. 247
Table 5.1.4 Rose‘s practice on the selection of the learning opportunities.. ....................... 247
Table 5.1.5 Rose‘s practice on the organization of the learning opportunities .................. 248
Table 5.1.6 Rose‘s practice on syllabus evaluation ............................................................ 248
Table 5.1.7 Rose‘s practice on lesson plan evaluation ....................................................... 249
Table 5.1.8 Rose‘s practice on the evaluation of the selection of learning opportunities .. 249
Table 5.1.9 Rose‘s practice on the evaluation of the organization oflearning
Opportunities ................................................................................................... 248
Table 5.2.1 Intan‘s practice on practice perception on the syllabus ………… .................. 250
Table 5.2.3 Intan‘s practiceon the lesson plan ……………………………....................... 250
Table 5.2.4 Intan‘s practice on the selection of the learning opportunities.. ...................... 251
Table 5.2.5 Intan‘s practice on the organization of the learning opportunities ................. 251
Table 5.2.6 Intan‘s practice on syllabus evaluation ........................................................... 252

xi

Table 5.2.7 Intan‘s practice on lesson plan evaluation ...................................................... 252
Table 5.2.8 Intan‘s practice on the evaluation of the selection of learning opportunities . 252
Table 5.2.9 Intans practice on the evaluation of the organization of learning
opportunities .................................................................................................... 253

xii

LIST OF APPENDICES

Page
Appendix 1:
Appendix 2:
Appendix 3:
Appendix 4:
Appendix 5:
246

Observation Data ........................................................................................
Interview Questions ....................................................................................
Interview Data/ Transcript of Interview ......................................................
Category of Observation and Interview Data on Teacher Perception .........
Category of Observation and Interview Data on Teacher Autonomy…….

xiii

154
161
173
235

ABSTRAK

Siti Nurhayati.2010. Perception of Teacher Autonomy in Curriculum Development at
the Vocational School. Yogyakarta: English Language Studies, Graduate Program,
Sanata Dharma University.
Teacher‘s perception on autonomy in curriculum development has been the
bases for any practice the teachers take. This development is needed to answer the
varieties of study program at the Vocational School. The development of English
curriculum which contains three elements namely what-to-teach, how-to-teach, and its
evaluation should be done for the achievement of the educational goals. This research
is to answer ‗what is the perception and practice on teacher autonomy in curriculum
development at Vocational High School?‘
Before I studied the teacher‘s document and made some interviews, I had
already formed some pre-understanding about the perception to lead to their willingness
and ability in developing curriculum. By having those willingness and ability in
developing the curriculum, it is hoped that teachers can establish their own syllabus and
lesson plan to achieve the school‘s goal. Those syllabus and lesson plan guide the
teachers in selecting and organizing the learning opportunities. The perception and
decision in evaluation are to ensure whether what have been perceived and practiced
have already been on the right path in the achievement of each study program‘s goal.
During the interview the pre understanding was the guide to clarify those perception and
practice so that it helped the teachers being more autonomous. Autonomous teachers
will in turn boost the learners‘ autonomy in learning English. It is also hoped that the
description will be able to draw the stake holder empathy and understanding.
This progressive qualitative research has involved two English teachers from
different school groups namely Arts and Crafts and Tourism. To get the findings, the
researcher studied the document, conducted interviews and classroom observation.
Through the participants‘ narrative expressed before and after the classroom
observation, they will reveal the relationship between their perception and actions.
Revealing the relationships, hopefully they can help themselves to develop their degree
of autonomy more professionally.
The findings show that teachers perceive that their autonomy in the syllabus
establishment need to be encouraged while in the lesson plan establishment the
perception and actions are better. In the teaching learning, the participants show their
ability in the application of the principles of the selection of the learning opportunities.
This also happens in the organization of the learning opportunities by performing the
continuity, sequence, horizontal and vertical integration. Having some reasons, the
willingness and ability are examples of autonomy shown by the participants
Due to the difference of willingness, ability, school policy, and school
conditions the findings show that development of teacher autonomy in curriculum is
varied. This variation is hoped to enrich the teachers‘ understanding in the development
of the curriculum.

xiv

ABSTRAK

Siti Nurhayati.2010. Perception of Teacher Autonomy in Curriculum Development at
the Vocational School. Yogyakarta: English Language Studies, Graduate Program,
Sanata Dharma University.

Persepsi mengenai otonomi guru dalam pengembangan kurikulum menjadi dasar
bagi setiap guru dalam memutuskan setiap tindakan yang dilakukan didalam
mengembangkan kurikulum di SMK untuk menjawab berbagai program kejuruan yang
ada di SMK. Pengembangan kurikulum Bahasa Inggris yang meliputi tiga elemen yaitu
what-to teach, how-to-teach, dan evaluasi harus ditujukan demi tercapainya tujuan
pendidikan tiap program pendidikan. Penelitian ini mencoba untuk menjawab
pertanyaan ―apakah persepsi dan tindakan yang diambil oleh guru didalam
mengembangkan kurikulum bahasa Inggris di SMK?‘
Sebelum studi dokumen, penulis sudah mempunyai pemahaman awal yang
berkaitan dengan persepsi guru guru mengenai kemampuan dan kemauan mereka
dalam mengembangan kurikulum. Dengan kemauan dan kemampuannya, diharapkan
guru dapat menentukan silabusnya dan RPP sendiri sesuai dengan tujuan pendidikan.
Silabus dan RPP itu akan membimbing guru dalam menentukan penyeleksian dan
pengorganisasian kesempatan belajar. Sedang evaluasi dilakukan untuk meyakinkan
apakah pembuatan RPP dan silabus, serta penyeleksian dan pengorganisasian
kesempatan belajar sudah menuju kepada ketercapaian tujuan pendidikan pada masing
masing program keahlian yang ada. Selama. Selama wawancara pemahaman awal
tersebut dapat membantu persepsi dan tindakan guru untuk lebih bertanggung jawab
atas otonomi yang diberikan kepada guru. Guru yang autonomous diharapkan akan
membantu mendorong otonomi siswa didalam belajar bahasa Inggris. Diharapkan
pembahasan mengenai studi ini akan meningkatkan empati dan pemahaman dari semua
stake holder pendidikan.
Penelitian ini menggunakan metode progresif kualitatif dengan partisipan
berjumlah dua orang guru bahasa Inggris. Keduanya berasal dari kelompok sekolah
yang berbeda yaitu kelompok seni dan kerajinan serta kelompok Pariwisata.Untuk
sampai kepada hasil penelitian pengambilan data dilakukan melalui studi dokumen,
beberapa wawancara, dan observasi kelas. Melaui naratif yang disampaikan sebelum
dan sesudah observasi kelas, partisipan memperlihatkan hubungan antara persepsi
mereka miliki dan tindakan yang diambil. Melalui proses ini diharapkan guru akan
membantu dirinya sendiri untuk membantu perkembangan otonomi secara lebih
professional.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan otonomi guru didalam pembuatan silabus masih
perlu dikembangkan sedang dalam pembuatan RPP kemamuan dan kemampuan mereka
sudah lebih baik.. Dalam hal cara mengajar, guru sudah memperlihatkan kemampuan
dan kemauannya untuk menggunakan prinsip prinsip penyeleksian pembelajaran. Guru
juga sudah berusaha mengorganisasikan secara beragam kesempatan belajar kepada
siswa dengan melalui prinsip kontinuitas, keberurutan, dan pengintegrasian pengalaman
belajar baik secara vertikal maupun horizontal yang sesuai dengan situasi dan kondisi
anak didiknya. . Penelitian juga menunjukkan bahwa kemauan dan kemampuan untuk

xv

mengevaluasi ditunjukkan secara beragam dengan berbagai alasan yang muaranya
adalah untuk perbaikan.
Hasil penelitian juga menunjukkan bahwa pengembangan kurikulum bahasa
Inggris adalah sangat beragam. Hal ini diakibatkan oleh keberagaman kemauan,
kemampuan guru, kebijaksanaan sekolah, dan situasi serta kondisi yang ada.
Keberagaman ini diharapkan dapat memperkaya pemahaman guru mengenai
pengembangan kurikulum bahasa inggris di SMK.

xvi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study
Teachers are the ones who know their class better as to detect the characteristics
of their learners, including their strengths, weaknesses, interests, preferred learning
style, as well as the school condition to help them conduct teaching learning better.
There is no single prescribed teaching learning method and strategy that may match all
learners at the same level, for sometimes, one single method does not work in one
classroom. Thus, teachers should employ various ways to bring learners closer to their
success. As such, diversities make teacher autonomy is greatly needed. Teachers from
novice to experienced level perceive autonomy differently. However as autonomy can
be fostered, it is no wonder that the degree of autonomy fluctuate from the least to the
maximum or the reverse. One example stated by Goodlad (in Suyanto, 2005) showed
that when teachers entered the classroom and closed the door, the quality of teaching
learning is mainly determined by the teachers. Those teachers are the ones who have the
autonomy; they are the ones who can do everything in the classroom. They can perform
themselves as interesting and effective professional persons who can attract students‘
needs of achievement. Teachers can make students think divergently by proposing
questions that need creative and imaginative thinking. On the other hand, the same
teachers can also lead them boring, hence unable to become exemplars. Those kinds of
teachers make the class less interesting as to become less successful. Both the first and
second types of teachers mentioned above indeed use their autonomy, but they show

1

2

different results. Therefore, it is very important to employ teacher autonomy in
the right way.
Teacher autonomy is thus a potential topic for research in education. Instead of
employing their autonomy, teachers should also be sensitive with the curriculum
development. This research is intended to reveal the degree of teacher autonomy in
curriculum development. Given the rapid changes in technology, market demand, newer
invention and higher standard in the world of teaching learning, with which curriculum
itself is also changed from time to time, curriculum development will also be different
from one subject to others to fit those changes. In the past, Glasgow in Fitzharris (1999)
detected that the curriculum was only based on teachers‘ past experience in school,
input from textbook manufacturers, standard and information from peers. It happened
that teachers were accustomed to using a ready-made curriculum which did not require
the teachers to think, design and create their own syllabus and materials. This is a kind
of top-down decision which had been applied for years and forced teachers to be the
user and applicator of the curriculum including the syllabus and the textbook provided.
Teachers have to follow ready made syllabuses which sometimes are not suitable for a
certain situation. If it happens then the teaching learning cannot catch up with the
changes and will result in lack of some requirements needed by the students to cope
with those changes. Fitzharris (1999), then, stated that the position of teacher should be
moved from the position of conveyer to become the designer of the curriculum itself.
The designing itself should follow the current changes. It means it is very important for
teacher to be always ready with changes, in order that teacher can accumulate the
changes by developing the curriculum by means of adopting, adapting, or even creating
the new curriculum.

3

The process of reaching autonomy and curriculum development is therefore
interrelated. Teacher autonomy enables him to become autonomous in creating
curriculum development because an autonomous teacher has had the requirements to do
so. The teacher has capacity, freedom, and /or responsibility to make choices
concerning their own teaching (Aoki, 2000). This is to say, that teachers have the
knowledge of the subject matter, paradigms, methodologies, and approaches so that they
can make their own choices based on professional assessment and various class and
institutional factors. Besides having the knowledge and able to make their own choices,
teachers are to make reflection upon what they have done (Chylinski, 2005). Therefore
it can be said that to be able to involve in curriculum development one should posses his
or her autonomy first.
The curriculum of education in Indonesia is also changing from time to time. It
moves from top down strategy to bottom up strategy. The first strategy puts the
teacher‘s role to implement in exactly the same way in which expert designers intended
it to be implemented (Okda, 2005). By using this, the government can centrally control
the national wide changes. However, Markee (in Okda, 2005) also argued that this
strategy will discourage individual initiative and it turns teacher into passive recipient of
change. The latter strategy puts teacher‘s role as a planner, implementer, and/or
evaluator of his own curriculum by adapting an existing curriculum, adopting it
unchanged, or creating new curriculum. Indonesia nowadays applies KTSP which
provides spaces for teachers to employ their autonomy in curriculum development.
However as they are accustomed to follow the top down strategy, it is probable that
some or perhaps many of them are worried about it. Teachers at school may find it
difficult to set their own curriculum because it is the government‘s design. In KTSP, the

4

teachers should make their own curriculum which is designed for a school level.
Actually it is hoped that by having this KTSP, it will meet the need of learners and local
communities.
As it is an on-going process, this research is hoped to empower the autonomous
teachers to increase their autonomy in curriculum development and those who are less
become more autonomous.

B. Problem Identification
The room for autonomy has indeed been given by the application of KTSP
which is meant to be the curriculum in unit level of education. This KTSP demands
every unit level of education has its own curriculum. This policy makes the curriculum
for English subject may probably be different among the departments in vocational
school. However there is only one standard that is Content Standard or Standar Isi that
regulates more than one hundred departments of vocational school. The reason why the
government proposes only one Content Standard to follow is to provide rooms for
teachers to employ their autonomy.
Educational Law Number XIX, 2006 contains the Content Standard that covers
the Competency Standards and Basic Competencies. The two standards become the
guides for teachers to carry their teaching learning program. The Standard of
Competency states three levels of communication namely Novice, Elementary and
Intermediate. The Basic Competencies generated from the Competency Standard
contains twenty two competencies.
By employing the autonomy, teachers are free to translate all competencies
suiting them to the main goal of each department. The main goals of vocational school
are two. The first is to prepare its graduate to be a middle skilled worker who possessed

5

skills as a result of their study and training. The second is to give opportunity to pursue
higher academic degree. These goals then shape each department in managing all
aspects to be special in its specification. These goals should also direct the English
subject in handling all materials in teaching learning program. For that, curriculum
development is certainly needed. Besides, the department put English as an adaptive
subject. As an adaptive subject, English has been mentioned to provide learners to have
basic skills of English in order to support their expertise as well as to bring them to be
able to use their ability and skills to communicate by oral or by written text.
To reach those goals and to meet the position of an adaptive subject, teachers
should design the curriculum to bring the learners to get closer to their expertise. For
this, there should be many differences of English teaching learning among lots of
departments. Supposing that English should be different, have the teachers always been
ready to meet the diverse goals of every department? As the institution which prepares
student teacher is only providing the general pedagogy and knowledge of English but
when they become teachers, they should not only teach general English but touch the
knowledge of the students‘ specification also. Do they have easy access to learn, to get
book, and to develop their knowledge on the new specification of the learners? Do they
also have the willingness and capacity to suit their curriculum with the student‘s need
and specification? One English teacher does not only teach in one department, it is
possible that he must teach two up to four different departments at one school, so how
he differs the teaching learning program including in making the preparation and doing
the evaluation? Also how does he overcome his difficulties? Moreover, has all the
element of the curriculum that the teachers design and put into practice satisfied each
other? There are still many problems that might become the obstacles as well as good

6

things in applying KTSP such as the difficulties of teacher to eliminate the habit of topdown management in education to move to bottom-up one.
Another serious problem that is the use of English National Examination as one
among the three passing scores to be able to graduate from the Vocational School, the
other two being Indonesian and Mathematics. National Examination is held nationally
but the worst thing is that it gives the same exam questions for every department
without considering that each department may provide different emphasis in its English
teaching learning. As it is very important in determining whether learners can graduate
or not, it is possible that English teacher will likely teach his learners for the sake of
graduation hence neglecting the need of English for learners‘ expertise.

C. Problem Limitation
The contradictory and problems in teacher autonomy and curriculum
development shows that it is a process to get closer to better education in Indonesia.
Both autonomy and curriculum development are indeed an ongoing process, therefore
there will never be an end for teacher to keep continue increasing autonomous including
in realizing curriculum development to support the betterment of the learners. This ongoing process will result different problems from time to time and from person to
another, therefore this study will be limited by location of the conducted study and by
the participants‘ views. The location is SMK A Sleman and SMK A Kotamadya
Yogyakarta. The participants are two teachers; one is from SMK A Sleman and the
other one is from SMK A Kotamadya Yogyakarta.
The study is conducted in Yogyakarta and it focuses on how vocational high
school English teachers translate autonomy in curriculum development into practice.
Their perception will be seen from perception and action in performing their autonomy

7

in curriculum development through the study documents, classroom observation,
interview, and teacher reflection to support the findings of data. Through those data
gathering, it is hoped that the participants of the study will perform and able to articulate
their autonomy in curriculum development in the three curricular elements namely
what-to-teach, how-to-teach, and evaluation upon the first and second curricular
elements so that it will help them sharpening their autonomy. As by revealing their
perception and reflecting their action, they will be able to think over what should be
improved, revised, and maintained. This will in turn improve the education in Indonesia.
The participants are professional since they are already S1 degree. One of
them, even, has already got her master degree. They should have had sufficient subject
matter knowledge and competence in teaching skills and technique. Therefore, they can
handle the problem concerning what-to-teach, how-to-teach and evaluation. By having
those professional participants, this study would like to see how those teachers have
employed their autonomy in curriculum development so as to contribute to the success
of learner.

D. Research question
Derived from the problem identification, this study will seek to answer the
following research question:
What is the perception of teacher autonomy in curriculum development?

E. Research goals
The research goals are as follows:
1. To describe and interpret the teachers‘ perception on autonomy in
curriculum development

8

2. To describe and interperet the practice employed by the teacher in applying
autonomy in curriculum development
F. Research benefits
As the research question in this thesis is ‗What is the perception of teacher
autonomy in curriculum development?‘ I therefore formed some pre-understanding
about teacher autonomy in curriculum development in making all the three elements of
curriculum namely ―what-to-teach‖, ―how-to-teach‖, and ―evaluation‖ to be developed
will support each other. By knowing their perception on autonomy in curriculum
development, the teachers would reveal their experiences and understanding they got in
relation to the elements of curriculum to be developed. By exploring the actions, it
could be displayed to find out the response or the action of the three elements of
curriculum are really interlinking or supporting each other. Thus the narratives of the
perception and the actions I have described and interpreted could be the bases for
improvements for me as the teacher researcher, participants of the research, audiences,
and the stake holders.
When the goals of the research are achieved, it will bring contribution to the
theoretical and practical aspects in teacher autonomy in curriculum development. Thus
the research benefit will be addressed in two areas of contributions, namely theoretical
and practical benefits.

1. Theoretical benefit
Theoretically the study may provide a model of a progressive qualitative
research to promote teacher autonomy in curriculum development. It may also bring

9

contribution to EFL teaching theories by revealing their perception and action so that it
will reveal the pattern of the participants in this research.

2. Practical benefit
Practically the study provides opportunities for teachers-participants to have
better understanding of their own autonomy in curriculum development. By having
better understanding then the participant will be able to give more meaningful
treatment, better perception, and better action in applying their autonomy especially in
curriculum development. It may also influence the school as the teaching learning
institution to have better emphatic understanding in teacher autonomy in curriculum
development so it will help the school when designing the curriculum development. In
the field of ESL/EFL professionals including teachers, teacher educators, policy makers,
language experts, curriculum designers, and language teachers, the study may
encourage them to have better emphatic understanding so that this research can help
them to be able to perceive and do better action on applying their autonomy in
curriculum development, and also better treatment to some problems which occur. It
will also help other teachers of vocational school to build their emphatic understanding
and learn the pattern of their colleagues. Another practical benefit may go to the
students of vocational schools; they will get the best effort from their teachers since the
teachers have been already autonomous. These autonomous teachers will then promote
the students‘ autonomous learning. This means that the students will get the best effort
from their teachers. In the long run, when the students are given the best effort, the
students will also perform their best effort.

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Review on Related Studies
There are a number of studies done related to the first problem of the research, i.e.
perception. Sulistiani (2009) reported her study on the perception of English teachers at
public Junior High Schools in Malang on the implementation of School-Based
Curriculum/KTSP. She found out that some teachers had already good understanding
whereas there were still teachers that had to improve their understanding on the SchoolBased Curriculum/KTSP. Different from Sulistiyani‘s finding, Kristyowati (2009: 7)
had revealed teacher perception on the usage of CALL in School Based
Curriculum/SBC by exploring their understanding, views, and action upon the field of
study. She found out that teachers may have shared as well as individual perception of
the components of CALL to bring about better result on the design, procedure, and the
approach in SBC. Similar to Kristyowati‘s finding, Nurtriatmo (2009: 14) also revealed
the teacher perception of English for Tourism in Junior High School. To have the
complete picture of the perception, he explored three things. The first was the teachers‘
perception seen from their view based on their past experiences, the second was from
their action to make meaning including its process, and the last was from their hope and
expectation. He found out that teachers may have different as well as shared perception
upon English for Tourism.
Besides the studies on the perception, there was also study on curriculum
development. It was done by El-Okda (2005). He studied the top-down model of

10

11

curriculum development applied in Arab country. He revealed that this model
was not effective. Furthermore he proposed both top-down and bottom up model in
curriculum development for gaining better result in education.
Unlike the studies which were done merely on the perception or curriculum
development, this present study will look at both on the perception and curriculum
development. The perception will be revealed from three aspects. The first was how the
teacher recognizes some entities, characteristics, or simply the definition of curriculum
development. The second was from how the teachers give function to the elements of
curriculum development that they had recognized. The last was from their decision to
do some action based on their knowledge of their definition, entities, characteristics, and
the function they put on each element of curriculum development. Teacher autonomy in
curriculum development, however, would be revealed from the ability and willingness
to have actions on the three elements of curriculum development namely what-to-teach,
how-to-teach, and its evaluation. Therefore I needed to put some related theoretical
reviews to support a better framework of the study.

B. Theoretical Review
1. The Roles of Curriculum and Teachers in Education
Tyler (1949: 1) bases his theory of curriculum on four fundamental questions. The
first is what educational purposes a school should seek to attain, the second is what
educational experiences can be provided to attain those educational purposes, the third
is how those experiences are effectively organized, and lastly how the school can
determine whether those purposes are being attained. The first fundamental question
refers to what Bobbit in1918 (in Smith, 2000) called as the objectives of the curriculum.

12

He explained that they are the abilities, attitude, habits, appreciations and forms of
knowledge that men need so there will be numerous, definite and particularized. In
education, the goal comprises of national, institutional, and subject matter goal. The first
two goals are not set by the subject matter teacher whereas the last goal is the privilege
for the teacher who is assigned to handle the subject matter. The second fundamental
question refers the content of the curriculum. It refers to the material to be covered
including the evaluation to ensure that the intended or desired goal stated in the fourth
fundamental questions has been attained. The third fundamental one copes with the
teacher and students activities in attaining the desired goal. This kind of fundamental
question is called as process (Garcia in Wilson, 1975). It is an attempt to describe the
work observed in classrooms that it is adequately communicated to teachers and others.
Finally, within limits, a recipe can be varied according to taste.

So can a

curriculum (Stenhouse, 1975: 4-5 in Smith, 2000).
Those four fundamental questions include both limited and broad notion of
curriculum. In limited notion, curriculum only refers to a series of topics to be covered
while in broader notion, it means as a plan (Saylor et all, 1981 in Ansyar, 1989: 12-13).
In this study; curriculum is considered both in broad and limited notion. Thus,
curriculum is defined as a series of plan written in the syllabus and lesson plan, a series
of learning experiences selected and organized by the teacher, and evaluation done over
the plan and the learning experiences.In other words, curriculum includes the goal to be
reached. The plans, learning experiences, and the evaluations are directed to the
attaintment of the goal.

Curriculum including its goal, contents and process takes very crucial position in
education and so does teacher. Because teachers are those who help students or pupils

13

learn in a school whereas the objective is typically a course of study, lesson plan, or a
practical skill, including learning and thinking skills. The different ways to teach are
often referred to as the teacher's pedagogy. When deciding what teaching method to use,
a teacher will need to consider students' background knowledge, environment, and their
learning goals as well as standardized curricula as determined by the relevant authority.
It is what is considered as curriculum in broad notion. In this notion, Grundy (1987)
calls it curiculum as a praxis in which it is not only a set of plans to be implemented but
rather is constitutes through an active process in which planning, acting and evaluating
are all reciprocally related and integrated into the process.

ELT in Indonesia changes from time to time, starting from the old style
Grammar Translation method in 1945, new style of Audio Lingual Based Curriculum in
1958, Revised Audio Lingual Based Curriculum in 1975, Structure Based Curriculum in
1984, Communicative Based Curriculum in 1994, Competency Based Curriculum in
2004, and the newest is the School-Based Curriculum (KTSP). There are reasons for the
changes to occur, for example this is to satisfy the political demand and the response on
some assumption on theories of teaching. As they are relied on some theories of
teaching therefore there are some prescribed methods even the curriculum has provided
what to teach and how to teach in the form syllabus. However unlike the previous
curriculums, KTSP is believed to give wider freedom /opportunity for teachers to design
and apply their design in teaching learning. It is also believed that KTSP is the
development of the curriculum 2004. In KTSP it is said that the basic outline and
curriculum structure of vocational school is determined by the central government
whereas the development of the curriculum is the responsibility of the school group,
unit level, and school committee under the coordination and supervision of Educational

14

Office at Regency and Province level as seen in Government Decree Number XIX,
2005 article 17 section 2.

The differences of the recent curriculum with the later ones explicitly influence
the roles of the teacher. For the prescribed method and syllabus, teachers are the doers
of those prescriptions, there is no obligation for teachers to consider the students‘ needs
as their needs has been determined by the government. Whereas in KTSP, schools have
the obligation to direct their goal and management so that they have to keep the
harmony of every subject goal with the school goal or more specifically the department
goal to cater the students‘ needs.
Indeed teachers take very crucial roles in education. According to Richards and
Lockhart (1996: 99-100) there are eight teacher roles at school. They are as need
analyst to determine students‘ individual needs. They are as curriculum developer to
develop their own course reffereing to her plan and syllabus. They also are as material
developer to develop his or her own class material whether that can use own or other
sources material to choose. Besides they also counselors to identify the difficulties in
learning and to offer advice. In addition they may be mentors who assist less
experienced teachers to gain more experienced. Not only as mentors but also as a team
member to work as a team and to take part in cooperative activities. Even they are as
researchers who conduct research related to language learning and teaching. And above
those all, teachers should be as proffesional persons are willing to make on going
development by taking part in workshop, conference, reading proffesional journal and
join proffesional organization.

15

Besides teachers‘ roles at school, the teachers themselves may have their
personal view of teaching. Based on this, Richards and Lockhart (1996: 105-106) state
that teachers may select roles of themselves. Based on their personal view, teachers can
consider themselves as planners who see succesful teaching learning depends on
planning and structuring the learning activities. Furthermore, they may think themselves
as managers who organize and manage the classromm environment and students‘
behaviour. In addition, they can be also as quality controllers who maintain the quality
of language used in the classroom. They can also think as organizers who organize the
students to work on their tasks. Other than quality controllers, teachers may see
themselves as