This may derive from the fact that, as Coleman notes (2009:19), throughout the Ministry
documentation there are references to English, and this might lead to the idea that the centre of
the project is English. It is certainly clear from interviews which I conducted with all stakeholders
that English and a generally bilingual approach is seen as the main aim of the project. A good
illustration of how firmly certain misconceptions about the project have taken hold is a newspaper
article written for the Jakarta Post (24/2/2007) by Richel Dursin entitled ‘English policy does more
harm than good’ which assumes that the Ministry policy is aiming strictly at English only classes
and will undermine Indonesian language and culture.
This misconception could be potentially harmful to the project as a whole. On the one hand it
could distort the work of the SBI schools, so that they will concentrate only on English and not on
other parts of the project, and on the other hand it could lead to fears among the public that the
SBI initiative will cause harm to Bahasa Indonesian or to other local languages, and to local culture.
It is therefore important for the Ministry to make the aims of the project clearer to the public, to
parents, teachers and others, and also to make it clear what the project does not aim to do.
Recommendation 2 – AIMS OF THE PROGRAMME: Currently there are serious misconceptions
about the SBI programme among members of the public, school staff and other stakeholders, and
this is an obstacle to the success of the programme. It is therefore recommended that the Ministry
should attempt to clarify the aims and purposes of the SBI programme to the public more fully.
Criteria
Coleman (2009:18-19) lists the criteria which a school is supposed to meet in order to become part
of the SBI project. According to Professor Slamet and other stakeholders, however, the main
problem with the implementation of the SBI scheme so far has been the fact that schools have
been accepted onto it without fully meeting the criteria to get more schools into the scheme. In
other words there has perhaps been an emphasis on quantity to date.
Those at the Ministry responsible for the Junior Secondary level of the SBI project reported that at
the moment there are 269 government Junior Secondary schools involved in the SBI project. When
asked if they thought this number would increase they reported that it is felt that it would be
better not to increase numbers significantly in the near future, even though many schools want to
join, but instead to consolidate the current number.
This proposal to focus on quality at this stage instead of increasing the quantity of schools seems to
be a useful one, and should be supported.
Recommendation 3 – NUMBERS AND QUALITY OF SBI SCHOOLS: The Ministry could review the
criteria used for admitting schools onto the SBI programme. In addition the Ministry could aim at
this stage to raise the quality of SBI schools, rather than increasing the quantity of schools.