Main Article Content

Abstract

This paper intent to elaborate Local Content Curriculum (LCC) development based on responsive evaluation. The main purpose of LCC is to bridge both school experience and student live experience. Additionally, by introducing local culture from early years to student, its used as an effective tools to conserve diversity of cultural heritage which has exist in Indonesian people. Unfortunately, some research indicated that application of LCC in school tend to emphasize for transfer of knowledge an-sich, and scope of local culture are narrowed. Local value as a lens of community to solve their problem less appreciated in developing LCC. Its cause LCC loss of relevance to prepare student to be an active participant in their community. In this sense, school leaders, teacher, and decision maker in education needs to collaborate with stakeholders to identify the local culture that can be use as foundation in character education by using responsive evaluation.

 

ABSTRAK

 

Kajian ini dimaksudkan untuk mengelaborasi pengembangan kurikulum muatan lokal dengan menggunakan evaluasi responsif sebagai pijakannya. Elan-vital kurikulum muatan lokal di sekolah dimaksudkan untuk meningkatkan relevansi pembelajaran dengan konteks sosial-budaya peserta didik dan diharapkan berperan dalam melestarikan khazanah keragaman budaya yang merupakan soko-guru kebudayaan nasional. Dalam aplikasinya, nilai dan budaya lokal yang menjadi isi pembelajaran di sekolah muatan lokal lebih menekankan transfer dan penguasaan pengetahuan yang mapan (established knowledge). Sehingga reinterpretasi dan revitalisasi kearifan lokal yang diharapkan menjadi basis pendidikan karakter tidak berjalan sebagaimana diharapkan. Karenanya, evaluasi terhadap kearifan lokal dengan mempertimbangkan relevansinya dan melibatkan stakeholders, sebagaimana ditawarkan model evaluasi responsif, diyakini mampu memberi kontribusi dalam mempersiapkan peserta didik dalam menjawab berbagai tantangan. Pembahasan ini dilakukan melalui tinjauan literatur yang relevan sehingga diharapkan mampu memberi kontribusi konseptual dalam pengembangan kurikulum muatan lokal pada masa mendatang.

Article Details

How to Cite
Musanna, A. (2010). Revitalisasi Kurikulum Muatan Lokal Untuk Pendidikan Karakter Melalui Evaluasi Responsif. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 16(9), 245-255. https://doi.org/10.24832/jpnk.v16i9.516

References

  1. Abma, Tineke A. 2005. “Responsive Evaluation: Its Meaning and Special Contribution to Health Promotion” dalam Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 28, pp. 279-289.
  2. Abma, Tineke A. 2006. “The Practice and Politics of Responsive Evaluation” dalam American Journal of Evaluation, Volume 27, Nomor 1, pp. 31-43.
  3. Arikunto, Suharsimi., Said, Asnah., 2002. Pengembangan Program Muatan Lokal. Jakarta: Unversitas Terbuka.
  4. Bajovic, Mira., Rizzo, Kelly., Engeman, Joe, 2009. “Character Education Reconceptualized for Practical Implementation” dalam Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, Issue 92, 14 Maret 2009.
  5. Benninga, Jacquess S. 2006. “Character and Academic: What Good School Do” dalam Phi Delta Kappa, Edisi Februari, hal. 448-453.
  6. Berkowitz, Marven. 2002. “The Science of Character Education” dalam Damond, William., Ed. Bringing New Era in Character Education. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press.
  7. Castagno, Angelina E., Brayboy, Bryan McKinley Jones, 2008. “Culturally Responsive Schooling for Indigenous Youth: A Review of the Literature” dalam Review Research in Education, Volume 78, Nomor. 4, hal. 941–993.
  8. Creasy. 2008. “What is Character Educaton?” dalam Educational Policy, Volume 3 Nomor 12, hal. 172-180.
  9. Curran, Vernon. 2003. “Application of Responsive Evaluation Approach in Medical Education” dalam Medical Education, Volume 37, hal. 256-266.
  10. Dakir, S., 2004. Perencanaan dan Pengembangan Kurikulum. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
  11. Damond, William., Ed. 2002. Bringing New Era in Character Education, Standford Hoover Institution Press.
  12. Davis, Rita, Ed., 1998. Proceeding of The Stake Syimposium on Educational Evaluation. Illionis: University Illionis.
  13. Departemen Agama. 2008. Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 Tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional. Jakarta: Balitbang Depag.
  14. Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2006. Model Mata Pelajaran Muatan Lokal SD/MI/SDLB-SMP/MTs/SMPLB–MA/MA/SMALB/SMK.Jakarta: Balitbang Depdiknas.
  15. Dewantara, Ki Hadjar., 1962. Karja Ki Hadjar Dewantara: Bagian Pertama, Pendidikan. Yogjakarta: Majelis Luhur Taman Siswa
  16. Deyhle, Donna., Swisher, Karen., Steven, Tracy. 2008. “Indigenous Resistance and Renewal: From Colonizing Practices to Self-Determination.” dalam Connelly, F. Michael., Fang He, Ming., Philion, JoAnn. [Ed.] The SAGE Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction. California: SAGE Publication.
  17. Dimerman, Sara. Ed., 2009. Character Is Key: How to Unlock the Best in Our Children and in Our Self. Ontario: John Wiley & Sons Canada.
  18. Drost, D.J., 2007. Dari Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi (KBK) sampai Manajemen Berbasis Sekolah (MBS): Esai-esai Pendidikan. Jakarta: Penerbit Kompas.
  19. Glanzer, Perry L., Milson, Andrew J., 2006. “Legislating the Good: A Survey and Evaluation of
  20. Character Education Laws in the United States” dalam Educational Policy, Volume 20 Nomor 3,
  21. hal. 525-550.
  22. Guba, Egon G., Lincoln, Yvonna S., 1981. Effective Evaluation: Improving the Usefulness of Evaluation Results Through Responsive and Naturalistic Approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publisher.
  23. Guba, Egon G., Lincoln, Yvonna S., 1990. Fourth Generation Evaluation. California: SAGE Publishing.
  24. Hidayati, Inur., 2009. Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 dan Perubahannya. Jakarta: Indonesia Tera.
  25. Hooley, Neil., 2000. “Reconciling Indegenous and Western Knowing.” Makalah disampaikan pada the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Sydney, 4-7 Desember. Pp. 1-14.
  26. Hunter, James Davison. 2000. The Death of Character: Moral Education in an Age Without Good or Evil. New York: Basic Books.
  27. Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L., 2005. “Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations” dalam Educational Technology & Society, 8 (1), 17-27.
  28. Kupperman, Joel., 1991. Character. New York: Oxford University Press.
  29. Lemu, B. Aisah., 1997. Islamic Tahdhib and Akhlak: Theori and Practice. Kuala Lumpur: Iqra’ Foundation.
  30. Lickona, Thomas., 1991. Educaton for Character: How Our School Can Teach Respect and Responsibilty. New York: Bantam Books.
  31. Linn, Robert L., 2000. “Assessmentts and Accountability” dalam Educational Researcher, Volume 29, Nomor 2, pp. 4-16.
  32. Luthan, Rusli., 2009. Keniscayaan Pluralitas Budaya Daerah: Analisis Dampak Sistem Nilai Budaya terhadap Eksistensi Bangsa. Bandung: Angkasa.
  33. Mapajanti, Amien, A., 2005. Kemandirian Lokal: Konsepsi Pembangunan, Organisasi dan Pendidikan dari Perspektif Sains Baru. Jakarta: Gramedia.
  34. Mathison, Sandra, Ed., 2004. Encyclopaedia of Evaluation. Colorado: SAGE.
  35. Nakaya, Ayami, 2004. “Muatan Lokal for Current Problems in the Local Community: A Study of the Subject of Local Life and Environmental Education in Jakarta – PLKJ” dalam Pacific Asian
  36. Education, Volume 16, Nomor 2, pp. 38-48.
  37. Nuccy, Lary P., 2003. Education in Moral Domain. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
  38. Ornstein, Allan C., Levine, Daniel U., 1985. An Introduction to The Foundations of Education. Third Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  39. Pai, Yong. 1990. Cultural Foundation of Education. New York: McMillan.
  40. Patton, Michael Quin. 2002. “Two Decades of Developments in Qualitative Inquiry: A Personal,
  41. Experiental Perspective” dalam Qualitative Social Work, Volume 1, Nomor 3, pp. 261-282/
  42. Pawan, Paridah., Thomalla, Theresse Groff. 2007. “A Responsive Evaluation Study of ESL/Spanish Language Service for Newcomers” dalam Journal of Ethnographic and Qualitative Research, Volume 1, hal. 50-65.
  43. Peterson, Christoper., Seligman, Martin E. P., 2004. Character Strenghts and Virtues: A Handbook and Classification. New York: Oxford University Press.
  44. Pradipto, Y. Dedi., 2007. Belajar Sejati Versus Kurikulum Nasional: Kontestasi Kekuasaan dalam Pendidikan Dasar. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
  45. Rosa, Clara., Nyre, Glenn F. 1977. The Practice of Evaluation. New Jersey: ERIC Clering House on Test, Measurement and Evaluation.
  46. Schoen, La Tefy., Teddlie, Charles. 2008. “A new model of school culture: a response to a call for conceptual clarity” dalam School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Volume 19, No. 2, Juni 2008, hal. 129–153.
  47. Semali, Ladislaus M., Kincheloe, Joe L. 1999. What is Indigenous Knowledge?: Voices from the Academy. New York: Falmer Press.
  48. Shepard, Lorrie E.,2000. “The Role Assesment in a Learning Culture” dalam Educational Researcher, Volume 29, Nomor 7, pp. 4-14.
  49. Stake, Robert E. 2004. Standard-Based and Responsive Evaluation. London: SAGE Publishing.
  50. Stake, Robert E.,1972. Responsive Evaluation. New York: US Department of Health, Education & Welfare.
  51. Stake, Robert E., 1975. Program Evaluation: Particularly Responsive Evaluation. Illionis: Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation (CIRCE) University of Illionis
  52. Stein, Rita., Richin, Roberta., Banyon, Richard. 2000. Connecting Character to Conduct: Helping Student to do the Right Thing. Alexandria, USA: Association for Supervision and Development Curriculum.
  53. Sternberg, Robert J., Grigorenko, Andrey. 2004. Culture and competence: Contexts of life success. Washington: American Psychological Association
  54. Strinati, Dominic. 2007. Popular Culture: Pengantar Menuju Teori Budaya Populer. Terjemahan Abdul Mukhid. Cet. III. Yogyakarta: Jejak.
  55. Stuffelbeam, Daniel. L. Madaus & Kellaghan 2002. “Foundational Models for 21st Century Program Evaluation” dalam Stufflebeam, Madaus, Daniel L., Kellaghan, Thomas. Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation. Second Edition. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
  56. Stufflebeam, Daniel L., Shinkfield, Anthoni J., 2007. Evaluation Theory, Models and Applications. San Francisco: Willey&Sons.
  57. Sukmadinata, Nana Syaodih. 2008. Pengembangan Kurikulum: Teori dan Praktik. Cet. Ke-10. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
  58. Suwito. 1995. “Konsep Pendidikan Akhlak Menurut Ibn Miskawaih”, Disertasi. Jakarta: IAIN Syarif Hidayatullah.
  59. Taba, Hilda.,1962. Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace&World Inc.
  60. Tilaar, H.A.R. 2000. Pendidikan, Kebudayaan dan Masyarakat Madani. Cet. I. Bandung: Remaja
  61. Rosdakarya.
  62. Tilaar, H.A.R. 2007. Mengindonesia, Etnisitas dan Identitas Bangsa Indonesia: Tinjauan dari Perspektif Ilmu Pendidikan. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
  63. Unesco, 2005. “Curriculum Themes: Indegenous Knowledge and Sustainability” dalam www.unesco.org. [on line] di akses tanggal 24 Februari 2008.
  64. Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 (Amandemen).
  65. Wasliman, Iim., 2007. Modul Problematika Pendidikan Dasar. Bvandung: Sekolah Pascasarjana
  66. Pendidikan Dasar Universitas Pendiidkan Indonesia.
  67. Widianto, Bambang., Pirous. Iwan Meulia. Ed. 2009. Perspeektif Budaya. Cetakan I. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
  68. Wilhelm, Gretchen Marie. 2005. “A Comparative-Qualitative Research Analysis of Character Education in the Christian School and Home Education Milieu” Thesis. Chedarvile University
  69. Zamroni, 2000. Paradigma Pendidikan Masa Depan. Malang: Bigraf Publishing.