Teaching guidelines

This sub-theme covered the guidelines that the teachers selected in teaching the final year students. The interviews showed that the teachers‘ opinions were split among three types of views on their teaching guidelines. Three teachers linked teaching to the syllabus; two other teachers suggested that they used both the syllabus and the guidelines for the examination. The rest indicated that they referred their teaching to the guidelines of the examination. Syllabus in this section refers to the curriculum aspects and skills to be considered in the teaching and designing of lesson plans by the teachers. Syllabus of English subject for example includes four skills: listening, reading, speaking and writing. Meanwhile, the guidelines of the examination emphasized what would be tested in the national examination so the classroom practices would focus less on speaking skills, as speaking was not tested. The following three sub-sections explore the different perceptions of these three groups.

Based on syllabus

Three teachers in this study believed that they referred their teaching practices to the syllabus.

―I myself tend to teach based on the syllabus. Though probably the vision and mission or anything in the questions presented have different levels than

those that are in the textbook or shown in the teaching material‖ (Mahmud, individual interview, p.6).

The phrase ‗questions presented‘ that Mahmud referred in this statement related to the national examination. He indicated the possibility that the contents he gave to the students could be different from the questions which appeared in the examination. Endang similarly preferred to teach the students based on the syllabus. He said, ―we still refer to the fixed syllabus, the lesson plan that I designed‖. Endang suggested that the examination did not lead him to alter his teaching materials. Husna also stated that she taught based on ―the content of the textbook‖ in her classroom which was based on the syllabus for Year 3 of junior secondary school. She indicated that the textbook contained the guidelines that the teacher had to follow in teaching the students. The teachers‘ responses above suggested that the materials for the national examination would be different with the materials taken from the syllabus and the textbook. There was a tendency that the national examination items were not only taken from the syllabus for Year 3.

Mahmud later stated that it was his decision to make the syllabus his guideline in teaching the final year students.

But if we give to the students directly or instantly as the material for the national examination, the student might not be able to have the knowledge; they only gain something practically about how to do the national examination (Mahmud, individual interview, p.6).

Mahmud‘s statement above indicated that the focus of teaching to the test was only effective for helping the students gain high scores in this standardized examination. The students would not have knowledge that would be of practical use to them or as life- skills if he preferred teaching to the examination.

Endang and Husna reported that school principals became involved in influencing their classroom practices. Endang‘s school principal ordered him ―to finish the material and the lesson plan for the ninth graders first,‖ before he held exam-preparation activities. Endang suggested that his school principal instructed the implementation of exam-preparation activities after students finished the national-based school examination; this other low-stakes examination tested all subjects, thus determining students‘ graduation. Its implementation was carried out primarily before the examination was administered, based on the decision made by the Education Board within the local area of the school.

Husna echoed Endang‘s statement that her decision to less focus on preparing for the examination in the classroom was because ―the school principal prohibited us [the teaching staff] to discuss the past examination papers within the school hours‖. Husna‘s statement implied that although she preferred teaching the students based on the guidelines for the examination, she was under the principal‘s order to teach the students based on the syllabus.

Using both syllabus and examination guidelines

Two teachers believed that they worked across the syllabus and the guidelines for the examination in their classrooms. Indri, for example said:

―Since the class for the English subject is twice a week, so the first meeting in a week I teach based on the syllabus, the other meeting I use it to discuss the questions [of the previous national examination]‖ (Indri, individual interview, p.5).

Indri‘s statement above showed that she moved between syllabus and past examination papers in the classroom. Susan also had a similar experience as Indri since she used both the contents of the syllabus and the examination in teaching the final year students in the second semester.

―In the second semester, I teach the material by following the syllabus, but its delivery was compressed at the beginning of the semester. After the material finished, I start the practical session for discussing the exam-like questions‖ (Susan, individual interview, p.4).

Besides noticing the importance of teaching the students according to the syllabus, Susan was also aware that the syllabus was insufficient to help the students have better preparation for the examination. She then decided to shorten the time allocated to delivering the syllabus at the beginning of the second semester. After she considered that the syllabus had been delivered, she then preferred to teach to the test.

Based on guidelines of the examination

Three teachers responded on how the examination led them to modify their teaching syllabus. The teachers were supposed to follow the syllabus designed in regards to the school-based curriculum or 2013 curriculum. However, as the content of the syllabus described in the textbooks also covered parts that were not tested in the examination, they preferred to neglect the content of the syllabus and linked their

teaching to the directions given in the guidelines of the examination. Putri stated what she did in the second semester of the final grade:

―In facing the national examination, the first thing we look is the guidance; which material that will appear in the national examination; which SKL6 that needed to be delivered‖ (Putri, individual interview, p.4).

In order to help the students be well prepared, Putri preferred to use the guidelines of the national examination as the guidance on teaching the final year students. Nopi echoed Putri‘s statement that she also used the guidelines of the examination as her guidance on teaching the students in the second semester. Nopi neglected the content of the syllabus when teaching her students in the second semester because the content of the syllabus, as she believed it, ―had been given in the eighth grade‖. As the syllabus for English covered wider topics taught in seventh, eighth and ninth grades, Nopi preferred using guidelines of the examination since it focussed on what would be tested in the examination. She chose using the guidelines of the examination as ―the children can get used to‖ with the content that would be tested in the examination. By doing so, Nopi believed that the students would be better prepared as the teaching focussed on what would be tested in the examination.

The school where Fera worked chose the main goal of teaching the final year students in accord with its slogan, ―getting success in the national examination‖. So in the second semester she only focussed on teaching the students to prepare them for the examination. Fera stated that the curriculum staff at her school actively looked for the guidelines of the examination from the first semester so they could decide ―which material would be delivered in the classroom‖. Statements from Putri, Nopi and Fera showed that their teaching content mainly focussed on the guidelines of the examination rather than on the syllabus. They indicated that if they taught the students based on the syllabus in the second semester, the students would not be well prepared for the examination. They preferred neglecting the syllabus and linking the materials to the guidelines of the examination as it was specifically intended to put more emphasis on the examination. Within the school hours and/or the exam-preparation class, three teachers said that the materials for teaching in the second semester were influenced by

6 _{SKL is a series of criteria designed by the Indonesian Ministry of Education that the students need to}

the examination. The materials used included past examination papers and exam-like questions.