Secondary School Science Teacher Response to Minimum Competency Assessment: Challenges and Opportunities
AuthorsSri Yamtinah , Budi Utami , Mohammad Masykuri , Bakti Mulyani , Maria Ulfa , Ari Syahidul Shidiq
Issue:Vol. 8 No. 1 (2022): January
Keywords:Minimum Competency Assessment, teacher’s perception, Survey, science teacher
Articles "Regular Issue"
How to Cite
Teachers have an essential role in preparing students for Minimum Competency Assessment (MCA) or Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). It takes preparation, readiness, and a good teacher's perception of the AKM so that the implementation of this program goes well. This study aims to analyze teachers' perceptions in secondary schools related to the opportunities and challenges of implementing AKM. A total of 66 secondary school science teachers participated as respondents in this study. Respondents in this study were randomly selected based on their willingness to fill out a given survey. The data collection instruments were six open-ended questions. This instrument is distributed online using Google Forms. The data obtained were then analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The results of this study reveal that the majority of science teachers have the perception that AKM policy is appropriate and suitable for implementation. However, the availability of supporting facilities and ICT literacy of students and teachers is considered a challenge that must be met. On the other hand, AKM and National Assessment (NA) are considered opportunities to improve the quality of education both nationally and locally in schools. This research is expected to reference the perception of science teachers about the challenges and opportunities for implementing AKM policies in junior high schools
Adams, P.E. and Krockover, G.H. (1997), Beginning science teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 34: 633-653. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199708)34:6<633::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-O.
Anas, M., Muchson, M., Sugiono, S., & Rr. Forijati. (2021). Pengembangan kemampuan guru ekonomi di Kediri melalui kegiatan pelatihan asesmen kompetensi minimum (AKM). Rengganis Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 1(1), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.29303/rengganis.v1i1.28
Assessment and Learning Center of research and development agency and bookmaking ministry of education and culture. (2020a). AKM dan Implikasinya pada Pembelajaran.
Assessment and Learning Center of research and development agency and bookmaking ministry of education and culture. (2020b). Tanya jawab AKM (Issue 14).
Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How To Assess HOTS In Your Classroom. ASCD publications.
Cahyanovianty, A., & Wahidin, W. (2021). Analisis Kemampan Numerasi Peserta Didik Kelas VIII dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). Jurnal Cendekia : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2), 1439-1448. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v5i2.651.
Choi, K., Lee, H., Shin, N., Kim, S.-W., & Krajcik, J. (2011). Re-conceptualization of scientific literacy in South Korea for the 21st century. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(6), 670–697. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20424
Ciptaningrum, D. (2017). The Development of the Survey of Technology Use, Teaching, and Technology-Related Learning Experiences among Pre-Service English Language Teachers in Indonesia. Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 11-26. https://doi.org/10.18196/ftl.2220.
Dalal, M., Archambault, L., & Shelton, C. (2017). Professional Development for International Teachers: Examining TPACK and Technology Integration Decision Making. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 49(3–4), 117–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2017.1314780
Education Assessment Center of Research and Development Agency. (2016). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, Result From TIMSS 2015. In Pusat Penilaian Pendidikan Badan Penelitian dan Pengembangan.
Fauziah, A., Sobari, E. F. D., & Robandi, B. (2021). Analisis Pemahaman Guru Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) Mengenai Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). Edukatif: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 3(4), 1550–1558. https://doi.org/10.31004/edukatif.v3i4.608
Haney, J. J., Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Egan, V. (2002). From Beliefs to Actions: The Beliefs and Actions of Teachers Implementing Change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 171–187. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016565016116
Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (2007). Primary teachers’ understanding of concepts of science: impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 19(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069970190107
Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types: Curriculum-based technology integration refrained. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536
Hasanah, M., & Sholihah, R. Y. (2017). Correlation Between Reading Literacy Ability and Achievement in Learning Indonesian Languange in Grade X. Journal of Intensive Studies on Languange, Literature, Art, and Culture, 1(2). 83–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/um006v1i22017p083
Heong, Y. M., Othman, W. B., Yunos, J. Bin, Kiong, T. T., Hassan, R. Bin, Mohaffyza, M., & Mohamad, B. (2011). The Level of Marzano Higher Order Thinking Skills among Technical Education Students. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 1(2), 121–125. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJSSH.2011.V1.20
Holbrook, J. (2010). Education through science education for all. Science Education International, 21(2), 80–91.
Holland, D. D., & Piper, R. T. (2016). Testing a Technology Integration Education Model for Millennial Preservice Teachers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 54(2), 196–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115615129
Huang, B., Hwang, G. J., Hew, K. F., & Warning, P. (2019). Effects of gamification on students’ online interactive patterns and peer-feedback. Distance Education, 40(3), 350–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2019.1632168
Kartimi, Gloria, R. Y., & Anugrah, I. R. (2021). Chemistry online distance learning during the covid-19 outbreak: Do tpack and teachers’ attitude matter? Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(2), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i2.28468
Kartimi, Shidiq, A. S., & Nasrudin, D. (2021). The elementary teacher readiness toward stem-based contextual learning in 21st century era. Elementary Education Online, 20(1), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2021.01.019
King, F. J., Goodson, L., & Rohani, F. (1998). Higher Order Thinking Skills. Publication of the Educational Services Program, Now Known as the Center for Advancement of Learning and Assessment. Obtido de: Www.Cala.Fsu.Edu, 1–176.
Klassen, S. (2006). Contextual assessment in science education: Background, issues, and policy. Science Education, 90(5), 820–851. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20150
Koh, J H L, Chai, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2010). Examining the technological pedagogical content knowledge of Singapore pre-service teachers with a large-scale survey. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00372.x
Koh, Joyce Hwee Ling, & Chai, C. S. (2016). Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education, 102, 244–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.003
Mrani, C. A., El Hajjami, A., & El Khattabi, K. (2020). Effects of the Integration of PhET Simulations in the Teaching and Learning of the Physical Sciences of Common Core (Morocco). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(7), 3014–3025. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080730
Nawzad, L., Rahim, D., & Wakil, K. (2018). The Effectiveness of Technology for Improving the Teaching of Natural Sciences. Indonesian Journal of Curriculum and Educational Technology Studies, 6(1), 15–21. https://doi.org/10.15294/ijcets.v3i1.8675
NRC. (1996). National Science Education Standards (NSES). National Academic Press.
O’Sullivan, M. (2006). Lesson observation and quality in primary education as contextual teaching and learning processes. International Journal of Educational Development, 26(3), 246–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2005.07.016
OECD. (2014). 2012 PISA Results. 98.
OECD. (2015). Education in Indonesia: Rising to the Challenge. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264230750-en
OECD. (2016a). Assesing Scientific, Reading and Mathematical Literacy A Frame Work for PISA 2015. OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2016b). PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework PISA 2015 Assessment and Analytical Framework. In OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework, PISA. In OECD Publishing.
Peters, E., Shoots-Reinhard, B., Tompkins, M. K., Schley, D., Meilleur, L., Sinayev, A., Tusler, M., Wagner, L., & Crocker, J. (2017). Improving numeracy through values affirmation enhances decision and STEM outcomes. PLoS ONE, 12(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180674
Prior, D. D., Mazanov, J., Meacheam, D., Heaslip, G., & Hanson, J. (2016). Attitude, digital literacy and self efficacy: Flow-on effects for online learning behavior. Internet and Higher Education, 29, 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.01.001
Puspitasari, Y. D., & Nugroho, P. A. (2020). Peningkatan Higher Order Thinking Skill dan Kemampuan Kognitif pada Mahasiswa melalui Pendekatan Science, Environment, Technology and Society Berbantuan Modul Pembelajaran. Jurnal IPA & Pembelajaran IPA, 4(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.24815/jipi.v4i1.14608
Rennie, L. J., & Williams, G. F. (2002). Science Centers and Scientific Literacy: Promoting a Relationship with Science. Science Education, 86(5), 706–726. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10030
Rohim, S. R. I. D. G. D. C. (2021). Konsep Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum Meningkatkan Kemampuan Literasi Numerasi Sekolah Dasar untuk Siswa. Jurnal Varidika, 33(1), 54–62. https://doi.org/10.23917/varidika.v33i1.14993
Rokhim, D. A., Rahayu, B. N., Alfiah, L. N., Peni, R., Wahyudi, B., Wahyudi, A., Widarti, H. R., & Malang, U. N. (2021). Analisis Kesiapan Peserta Didik Dan Guru Pada Asesmen Nasional ( Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum , Survey Karakter , Dan Survey Lingkungan Belajar ). Jurnal Administrasi Dan Manajemen Pendidikan, 4, 61–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/um027v4i12021p61
Shidiq, A. S., & Yamtinah, S. (2019). Pre-service chemistry teachers’ attitudes and attributes toward the twenty-first century skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 042014. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042014
Shidiq, A. S., Masykuri, M., & Susanti, E. (2015). Analisis Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) Menggunakan Instrumen Two-Tier Multiple Choice Pada Materi Kelarutan Dan Hasil Kali Kelarutan Untuk Siswa Kelas Xi Sma N 1 Surakarta. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains, November, 2015–2159.
Shidiq, A. S., Permanasari, A., & Hernani. (2020a). Chemistry Teacher’s Perception toward STEM Learning. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 40–43. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392305.3396901
Shidiq, A. S., Permanasari, A., & Hernani. (2020b). Pre-Service and In-Service Chemistry Teachers’ Views on Teaching Spectrometry in Senior High School. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology Special Issue on AASEC2019, AASEC(2019), 80.
Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2005). The importance of involving high-school chemistry teachers in the process of defining the operational meaning of ‘chemical literacy.’ International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 323–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000266191
Shwartz, Y., Ben-zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2006). Chemical Literacy: What Does This Mean to Scientists and School Teachers ? Journal of Chemical Education, 83(10), 1557–1561. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p1557
Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2006). The use of scientific literacy taxonomy for assessing the development of chemical literacy among high-school students. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(4), 203–225. https://doi.org/10.1039/B6RP90011A
Tayag, J. R. (2020). Pedagogical Support for Blended Learning Classrooms : Interfacing Teacher and Student Perspectives. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(6), 2536–2541. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080637
Tju, M., & Murniarti, E. (2021). Analisis Pelatihan Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum. Jurnal Dinamika Pendidikan, 14(2), 110-116. https://doi.org/10.51212/jdp.v14i2.7
Ucar, S. (2012). How Do Pre-Service Science Teachers ’ Views on Science , Scientists , and Science Teaching Change Over Time in a Science Teacher Training Program ? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9311-6
Valiandes, S. (2015). Evaluating the impact of differentiated instruction on literacy and reading in mixed ability classrooms: Quality and equity dimensions of education effectiveness. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 45, 17–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2015.02.005
Wei, B., & Thomas, G. P. (2005). Rationale and Approaches for Embedding Scientific Literacy into the New Junior Secondary School Chemistry Curriculum in the People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Science Education, 27(12), 1477–1493. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500154129
Yaffe, Y., & Burg, D. (2018). What more can we learn from PISA tests? A comparative analysis of the long-term dynamics of Israeli international educational achievements. International Education Journal, 17(4), 129–146
Copyright (c) 2022 Sri Yamtinah, Budi Utami, Mohammad Masykuri, Bakti Mulyani, Maria Ulfa, Ari Syahidul Shidiq
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors who publish with Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, web sites, blogs, and other platforms by providing an appropriate reference. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- 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 Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA.
- 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).