Teachers' and Education Personnel's Perceptions of the Prototype Curriculum's Readiness for Implementation in the Academic Year 2022/2023

Authors

  • Didi Franzhardi SMA Negeri 1 Belitang, Indonesia
  • Muhammad Kristiawan Universitas Bengkulu, Indonesia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1077-4013
  • Rambat Nur Sasongko Universitas Bengkulu, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30868/ei.v11i02.2544

Abstract

The goal of this study was to find out what instructors and educators thought about the implementation of the 2022 Prototype curriculum in learning. The descriptive technique is used in this study. This study employs a population study with 19 teachers and education staff members from SMA Negeri 1 Belitang, East OKU, South Sumatra, selected using a purposive sample approach. In this study, questionnaires and interviews were utilized to collect data. The acquired data was then evaluated using descriptive statistics. According to the findings of this study, all participating teachers and education staff agree on the implementation of the Prototype curriculum 2022 in schools and recognize the benefits contained in the Prototype curriculum for 2022 which is contain character building of students.

References

Agodini, R., & Harris, B. (2010). An experimental evaluation of four elementary school math curricula. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3(3), 199–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345741003770693

Alimuddin. (2014). Penilaian dalam kurikulum 2013 [Assessment in the 2013 curriculum]. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Karakter, 01(1), 23–33.

Asmariani, A. (2016). Prinsip-Prinsip Pengembangan Kurikulum Dalam Perspektif Islam [Principles of Curriculum Development in Islamic Perspective]. Al-Afkar : Jurnal Keislaman & Peradaban, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.28944/afkar.v2i2.95

Atuhurra, J., & Kaffenberger, M. (2022). International Journal of Educational Development Measuring education system coherence : Alignment of curriculum standards , examinations , and teacher instruction in Tanzania and Uganda. International Journal of Educational Development, 92(May), 102598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2022.102598

Bahri, S. (2017). Pengembangan Kurikulum Dasar Dan Tujuannya [Basic Curriculum Development And Its Goals]. Jurnal Ilmiah Islam Futura, 11(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.22373/jiif.v11i1.61

Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (n.d.). Curriculum reform, CohenReformBytheBook 1996.pdf. In Educational Reasearcher.

Bhatt, R., & Koedel, C. (2012). Large-Scale Evaluations of Curricular Effectiveness: The Case of Elementary Mathematics in Indiana. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(4), 391–412. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712440040

Cai, J., & Kosaka, M. (2019). Learner-engaged curriculum co-development in Older Adult Education: Lessons learned from the universities for older adults in China. International Journal of Educational Research, 98(3663), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.08.011

Danielson, C. (n.d.). Enhancing Professional Practice: A Framework for Teaching.

DeVito, J. A. (2017). The Interpersonal Communication Book 14th edition (14th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.

Eryilmaz, N., & Sandoval-Hernández, A. (2021). The relationship between cultural capital and the students’ perception of feedback across 75 countries: Evidence from PISA 2018. International Journal of Educational Research, 109(June). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101803

Fu, G., & Clarke, A. (2019). Individual and collective agencies in China’s curriculum reform: A case of physics teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21467

Goodwin, A., Chittle, L., Dixon, J. C., Andrews, D. M., Goodwin, A., Chittle, L., Dixon, J. C., Andrews, D. M., Goodwin, A., Chittle, L., Dixon, J. C., & Andrews, D. M. (2017). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Taking stock and effecting change : curriculum evaluation through a review of course syllabi a review of course syllabi. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 2938(December), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1412397

Hall, D. M., Custovi, I., Sriram, R., & Chen, Q. (2022). Advanced Engineering Informatics Teaching generative construction scheduling : Proposed curriculum design and analysis of student learning for the Tri-Constraint Method ˇ. 51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2021.101455

Jackson, K., & Makarin, A. (2018). Can online off-the-shelf lessons improve student outcomes? Evidence from a field experiment. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(3), 226–254. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20170211

Kaufman, J., Doan, S., Prado Tuma, A., Woo, A., Henry, D., & Lawrence, R. (2020). How Instructional Materials Are Used and Supported in U.S. K–12 Classrooms: Findings from the 2019 American Instructional Resources Survey. How Instructional Materials Are Used and Supported in U.S. K–12 Classrooms: Findings from the 2019 American Instructional Resources Survey. https://doi.org/10.7249/rra134-1

Kim, D., Koedel, C., Ni, S., & Podgursky, M. (2017). Labor market frictions and production efficiency in public schools. Economics of Education Review, 60, 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.07.009

Kustijono, R., & Wiwin HM, E. (2014). Pandangan Guru Terhadap Pelaksanaan Kurikulum 2013 Dalam Pembelajaran Fisika Smk Di Kota Surabaya [Teacher's View of the Implementation of the 2013 Curriculum in Vocational Physics Learning in the City of Surabaya]. Jurnal Penelitian Fisika Dan Aplikasinya (JPFA), 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.26740/jpfa.v4n1.p1-14

Lloyd, G. M. (2008). Curriculum use while learning to teach: One student teacher’s appropriation of mathematics curriculum materials. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(1), 63–94.

Lowell, B. R., Cherbow, K., & McNeill, K. L. (2021). Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS. Science Education, 105(1), 5–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21604

Marita Sari, D. (2019). Pendidikan Islam Dalam Sistem Pendidikan Nasional [Islamic Education in the National Education System]. At Turots: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 1(2), 144–169. https://doi.org/10.51468/jpi.v1i2.13

Martín-Alonso, D., Sierra, E., & Blanco, N. (2021). Relationships and tensions between the curricular program and the lived curriculum. A narrative research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103433

Misfeldt, M., Tamborg, A. L., Dreyøe, J., & Allsopp, B. B. (2019). Tools, rules and teachers: The relationship between curriculum standards and resource systems when teaching mathematics. International Journal of Educational Research, 94(November 2018), 122–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.12.001

Pitt, E., & Carless, D. (2021). Signature feedback practices in the creative arts: integrating feedback within the curriculum. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 0(0), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.1980769

Polikoff, M. S., & Silver, D. (2021). Identifying and Distinguishing Among Teachers’ Supplementary Curriculum Use Patterns Using the Lasso. Frontiers in Education, 6(August), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.722554

Qolbi, S. K., & Hamami, T. (2021). Implementasi Asas-Asas Pengembangan Kurikulum terhadap Pengembangan Kurikulum Pendidikan Agama Islam [Implementation of Curriculum Development Principles on Islamic Religious Education Curriculum Development]. Edukatif: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 3(4), 1120–1132.

Rapanta, C. (2021). Can teachers implement a student-centered dialogical argumentation method across the curriculum? Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103404

Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211

Robert, B., Marzano, J. M., & Tree, S. (2009). Designing & Teaching Learning Goals & Objectives Chapter 1 : Research And Theory.

Roblin, N. P., Schunn, C., & McKenney, S. (2018). What are critical features of science curriculum materials that impact student and teacher outcomes? Science Education, 102(2), 260–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21328

Sukmawati, H. (2021). Komponen-komponen kurikulum dalam sistem pembelajaran [Curriculum components in the learning system]. Ash-Shahabah : Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Studi Islam, 7(1), 62–70.

Suluh, M., & Jumadi, J. (2019). Persepsi Guru dan Peserta Didik terhadap Proses Pembelajaran Fisika Berdasarkan Kurikulum 2013 [Teachers' and Students' Perceptions of the Physics Learning Process Based on the Curriculum 2013]. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengkajian Ilmu Pendidikan: E-Saintika, 2(2), 62. https://doi.org/10.36312/e-saintika.v2i2.10

Supangat. (2021). Mengenal Kurikulum Prototipe Bagi Guru dan Siswa [Getting to Know the Prototype Curriculum for Teachers and Students]. 4–6.

Syarifah. (2019). Active Learning Teach Like Finland (Review Curiculum 2013). Jurnal Qiro’ah, 9(1), 85–99.

Trouche, L., Gitirana, V., Miyakawa, T., Pepin, B., & Wang, C. (2019). Studying mathematics teachers interactions with curriculum materials through different lenses: Towards a deeper understanding of the processes at stake. International Journal of Educational Research, 93(March 2018), 53–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2018.09.002

Woezik, T. Van, Koksma, J., Reuzel, R., Jaarsma, D., Van, G. J., & Wilt, D. (2019). Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education How to encourage a lifelong learner ? The complex relation between learning strategies and assessment in a medical curriculum. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1667954

Zhao, D., Ma, X., & Qiao, S. (2016). Studies in Educational Evaluation What aspects should be evaluated when evaluating graduate curriculum : Analysis based on student interview. Studies in Educational Evaluation. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.11.003

Downloads

Published

25-10-2022

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 02 (2022): Edukasi Islami: Jurnal Pendidikan Islam

Section

Articles

Citation Check

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).