Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Indonesia Vocational High School Science Teachers’ Priorities Regarding 21st Century Learning Skills in Their Science Classrooms

Esty Haryani 1 * ,
William W. Cobern 1,
Brandy A-S. Pleasants 1
1 Western Michigan University* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 2, Issue 2, May 2019, pp. 105-133
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 738 DOWNLOADS: 377 Publication date: 15 May 2019
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study was to examine vocational high school science teachers’ instructional  prioritizing the 21st Century Skills mandated in the Indonesian National Curriculum 2013 revision. The Indonesian  government implemented this curriculum in 2017 to support students’ career readiness, which was inadequately addressed in previous curriculum documents. Survey data was obtained from the population of vocational high  school science teachers in the city of Pontianak, West Kalimantan province, Indonesia. The study contrasted the  prioritizing of 21st Century Skills objectives with previous curriculum objectives, in order to determine if teachers give priority to current curriculum requirements or are still focusing on previous requirements. The study furthermore examined whether teacher st Century Learning Skills over previous curriculum objectives. Novice teachers demographic data are associated with their teaching priorities. Results  indicate teachers do prioritize the 21 report higher priority on communication skills and male teachers give higher priority to problem solving. Future research includes determining how these priorities translate into classroom practice.   
KEYWORDS
21st Century Learning Skills, Science content, Scientific process, Teaching priority, Quantitative study.
CITATION (APA)
Haryani, E., W. Cobern, W., & Pleasants, B. A.-S. (2019). Indonesia Vocational High School Science Teachers’ Priorities Regarding 21st Century Learning Skills in Their Science Classrooms. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(2), 105-133. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.224
REFERENCES
  1. Ahmad, D. (2014). Understanding the 2013 curriculum of English teaching through the teachers’ and policy makers’
  2. perspectives. International Journal of Enhanced Research in Educational Development, 2, 4. 6-15.
  3. Aikenhead, G. S. (1985). Collective decision making in the social context of science. Science Education, 96, 4. 453-
  4. 457.
  5. Babbie, E. R. (1990). Survey research methods. 2nd Ed. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
  6. Badley, G. (1986). The teacher as change agent. British Journal of In Service Education, 12, 3. 151-158. doi:
  7. 10.1080/0305763860120305
  8. Banner, I, Ryder, J. & Donnelly, J. (2009, September). The role of teachers’ priorities for science education in the
  9. enactment of science curriculum reform. Paper presented at the European Science Education Research
  10. Association conference, Istanbul.
  11. Czerniak, C. M. & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Relation between teacher beliefs and science education reform. Journal of
  12. Science Teacher Education, 7(4), 247-266.
  13. Dam, M. Janssen, F. J. J. M. & van Driel, J. H. (2018) Attention to intentions- How to stimulate strong intentions to
  14. change. Research in Science Education, 48, 369-387. doi: 10.1007/s11165-016-9572-4.
  15. Dahar, R. W. (1996). Teori-teori belajar. Jakarta: Erlangga.
  16. Darsih, E. (2014). Indonesia EFL teachers’ perception on the implementation of 2013 English curriculum. English Review: Journal of English Education, 2(2), 192-199.
  17. David, J.G. (2018). A study of K-12 teachers’ perceptions of teacher self-efficacy in relation to instruction of 21st
  18. century skills. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (AAT 10820891)
  19. Davies, L. M., Newton, L. D., & Newton, D. P. (2017). Creativity as a twenty-first-century competence: An
  20. exploratory study of provision and reality. Education. 3-13. doi: 10. 1080/03004279.2017.1385641.
  21. DiBenedetto, C. A. (2015). Teachers’ perceptions of their proficiency and responsibility to teach the knowledge,
  22. skills, and dispositions required of high school students to be career ready in the 21st century. Retrieved from: ProQuest Digital Dissertation. (3729140)
  23. di Gropello, E., Kruse, A. & Tandon, P. (2011). Skill for the labor market in Indonesia: Trends in demand, gaps,
  24. and supply. Direction in development. World Bank © World Bank.
  25. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/2282 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.
  26. Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys. The Tailored
  27. Design Method 4th edition. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Son.
  28. Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publication Inc.
  29. Friis, R. H. & Sellers, T. A. (2009). Epidemiology for public health practice. Sudbury, MA:
  30. Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
  31. Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change 4th ed. New York: Teacher College Press.
  32. Haney, J.J., Czerniak, C. M., & Lumpe, A. T. (1996). Teacher beliefs and intentions regarding the implementation
  33. of science education reform strands. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(9), 971-993.
  34. Happ, D. W. (2013). Results of a survey of 21st century skills of communication,
  35. Collaboration, critical thinking, and creativity. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital Dissertations. (AAT
  36. 3575592)
  37. Hertzog, M.A. (2008). Consideration in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing & Health,
  38. 31, 180–191.
  39. Hill, R. (1998). What sample size is “enough” in internet survey research? Interpersonal Computing and Technology Journal for the 21st Century, 6(3-4). Retrieved July 12, 2008, from http://www.emoderators.com/ipctj/1998/n3-4/hill.html
  40. Indonesia’s Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation number 21 of 2016: The core standard for elementary and
  41. secondary education (Permendikbud no. 21 tahun 2016 tentang standard isi pendidikan dasar dan menengah). Retrieved from: https://luk.staff.ugm.ac.id/atur/bsnp/Permendikbud21-2016SIDikdasmen.pdf
  42. Indonesia’s Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation number 22 of 2016: The process standards for elementary
  43. and secondary education (Permendikbud no. 22 tahun 2016 tentang standard proses pendidikan dasar dan
  44. menengah). Retrieved from: http://bsnp-indonesia.org/wpcontent/uploads/2009/06/Permendikbud_Tahun2016_Nomor022_Lampiran.pdf
  45. Isaac, S., & Michael, W. B. (1995). Handbook in research and evaluation. San Diego, CA: Educational and
  46. Industrial Testing Services.
  47. Kirk, D. & MacDonald, D. (2001). Teacher voice and ownership of curriculum change. Journal of Curriculum
  48. Studies, 33(5), 551-567. doi: 10. 1080/00220270010016874.
  49. Larson, L. C. & Miller, T. N. (2011). 21st century skills: Prepare students for the future. Kappa Delta Pi Record,
  50. 47(3), 121-123. doi: 10. 1080/00228958.2011. 10516575.
  51. Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E. & Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability
  52. and validity of rating scale. Methodology journal, 4, 73-79. doi: 10.1027. 1614-2241.4.2.73
  53. Machali, I. (2014). Kebijakan perubahan kurikulum 2013 dalam menyongsong Indonesia emas tahun 2045. Jurnal
  54. Pendidikan Islam, 3, 1. 71-94.
  55. Mansour, N. (2009). Science teachers’ beliefs and practices: Issues, implications and research agenda. International
  56. Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 4(1). 25-48.
  57. National Research Council. (2011). Assessing 21st century skills: Summary of a workshop. Washington DC: The
  58. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13215
  59. Newton, L. D. (2012). Creativity for a new curriculum. New York: Routledge.
  60. Odger, S., Symons, A., & Mitchell, I. (2000). Differentiating the curriculum through the use of problem solving.
  61. Research in Science Education, 30(3), 289-300.
  62. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of
  63. Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
  64. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009). A. framework for 21st century learning. Tucson:
  65. AZ: P21. Available at: http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework
  66. Rotherham, A. J., & Willingham, D. (2009). 21st Century skills: the challenges ahead. Educational Leadership,
  67. 67(1), 16-21.
  68. Satten, G. A. and Grummer-Strawn, L. (2014). Cross-Sectional Study. Wiley StatsRef: Statistics Reference Online.
  69. Retrieved from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118445112.stat05138/abstract?userIsAuthenticated=false& deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=
  70. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2011). Toward professional development for teachers grounded in a theory of decision making.
  71. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43,457–469 doi: 10.1007/s11858-011-0307-8
  72. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2015, February). How we think: A theory of human decision-making, with focus on teaching.
  73. Paper presented at the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education pp 229-24, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-12688-3_16
  74. Skourdoumbis, A. (2016). Articulating of teaching practice: A case study of teachers and “general capabilities”. Asia
  75. Pacific Education Rev. 17, 545-554. doi: 10.1007/s 12564-016-94607.
  76. Spillane, J. P. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers’ efforts to reconstruct their practice: the mediating
  77. role of teachers’ zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143-175.
  78. Tok, N. K., Tok, S. & Dolapçıoğlu, S. D. (2014). The perception levels of novice teachers’ problem solving skills.
  79. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 412-420.
  80. Trilling, B. & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  81. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Curriculum and Development
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.