200 likes | 362 Views
DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP. Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science. INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION. Sumar Hendayana Harun Imansyah. Issues & Challenges of INSET MGMP or Teacher Subject Forum.
E N D
DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION Sumar Hendayana Harun Imansyah
Issues & Challenges of INSETMGMP or Teacher Subject Forum Government Regulation No.38 in 1994: in-service teacher training at district level, did not work? • Project-based activities, no guarantee for sustainabilty • Venue at central city/district, transportation problems for teachers at rural or remote areas • Less support of school principals to the forum, gave teaching assigment on forum day, Wednesday for math teachers & Saturday for science • No attractive activities, not promising
UPI Pre-service Enhancement of Quality in Math & Science Ed. Schools/subjectLesson Study (in-service) District office of Educ DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP Feedback on contemporary teachers’ needs Producing good prospective teachers Feed back on school reality Consultancy Consultancy Developing teachers’ professionalism Intervention to students Sharing experiences Opportunities for expansion APPROACH (Saito, 2004)
2006 - NOW Schools Target in Sumedang district School centers with 8-15 schools partner 556 teachers of junior secondary mathematics and science 94 school principals & 8 supervisors 80 faculty members
Activities Inception meeting Baseline survey School principal traning (twice a year) Facilitator training (4 times a year) School based Lesson Study (twice a month) Subject based Lesson Study (twice a month) Evaluation workshop (twice a year) Dissemination Forum (twice a year) Endline survey
District – University Partnership Supported by MONE & JICA • Introducing cooperation programs to stake holders • Singing MoU by rector of UPI & head district of Sumedang
Baseline survey • 29% teachers were under qualified • 25% teachers were mismatch • 42% teachers has ever participated in MGMP Teacher centered in science class
Principal training to build ownership • Twice a year at schools • 1st meeting: introduced cooperation programs & and discussing an agreement to support the teachers • 2nd meeting: discussed principles of lesson study • Latter: principals observed lesson & post-class discussion
Facilitator training • 32 facilitators: selected teachers from 8 working groups, leaders in wg • Four times a year at schools • 1st meeting: introduced cooperation programs & discussed principles of lesson study • Latter: facilitators observed lesson & engaged in post-class discussion
Lesson study • One semester: • 2 Plan meetings • 3 Do-See meetings • Venues at different schools
Plan Lesson plan is developed collaboratively based upon learning problems to promote student active learning through hands-on & mind-on activity, daily life, and local materials
Open lesson (Do) Observers: teachers, facilitators, principals, supervisors, lecturers A teacher teach a lesson while others observe the lesson. Observation is focused on student activities. Observers do not make any intervention • Are students learning & how are they learning? • Is any student not learning & why? • How did teacher help students learning? Does it work?
Class discussion presenting finding dialogue among students
Post-class discussion (See) • The teacher and observers discuss to share and exchange views regarding student activities. • Observers learn each other to apply it at their class • Discuss follow-up
Impact on daily teaching practices? Contextual learning in science on daily teaching practice utilizing available learning resources
Role sharing DGQITEP (policy) DGHE (financial) UPI (lecturers) JICA (experts) SISTTEMS School-University linkage District (Policy & Financial) Schools (Teachers & Financial)
ConclusionSchool based in-service teacher training • Lecturers visit school 2x per month in 8 working groups of 20-40 teachers from 8-15 schools • Distance & transportation problems for teachers were reduced significantly • Lecturers & teachers worked collaboratively in research lesson promoting student active learning through lesson study • Principals, supervisors, education district officers actively involved to build ownership • Promoting role sharing to guarantee sustainability Innovatve contribution • Disparities in learning quality between urban and rural/remote areas were reduced
benefit for both sides Conclusion Lecturers help teachers and learn from reality • All teachers have opprotunity to participate in the CTPD through collaborative research lesson utilized optimally available learning resources • Distance & transportation problems for teachers were reduced significantly • video records as learning resource • Improve student teaching practice Implication of developed Model PRE-SERVCE IN-SERVICE Lecturers obtain feedback for improvement of pre-service
Arigato Gozaimasu Thank You TerimaKasih