Skip to main content

TRANSFERRING AUTHORITY TO LOCAL SCHOOL COMMUNITIES IN INDONESIA: AMBITIOUS PLANS, MIXED RESULTS

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Educational Decentralization

Abstract

Indonesia, like many developing nations in Asia, is currently riding a decentralization wave. Over the past decade, the government has pushed for decentralization in all sectors of government, from health to agriculture. In the 1980s, the Ministry of National Education (MONE)1 began exploring the possibility of decentralizing authority over the schools. In the years that followed, a multitude of programs and policies tied to that goal were enacted. Although the government sometimes had trouble following through on its promise to devolve authority to autonomous regions, its support for decentralization projects did not wane. The culmination of its efforts to reconfigure authority frameworks was the passage of two laws in 1999 that granted sweeping powers to Indonesia’s districts and municipalities, beginning in 2001 (Ferrazzi, 1998; Malo, 1995; Usman, 2001). This legislation indicated that the education system, like all sectors of government, would be managed by local authorities and educators, and the MONE’s primary responsibility would shift from direction to coordination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  • Alm, J., Aten, R., & Bahl, R. (2000). Can Indonesia decentralize? Plans, problems, and prospects. Working Paper No. 00–10, Georgia State University, International Studies Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, C. (2003). Local Responses to decentralization policy in Indonesia. Comparative Education Review, 47(2), 184–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, C. (2004). Decentralization in education: Institutional culture and teacher autonomy in Indonesia. International Review of Education, 50(3), 245–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bjork, C. (2005). Indonesian education: Teachers, schools, and central authority. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buising, T. (2000). Decentralize. Easy to say. Difficult to do. Inside Indonesia, 63(July–September). The article was retrieved from the website: http://www.insideindonesia.org.

  • Burns, T. R., & Flam, H. (1987). The shaping of social organization. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (2000). Educational decentralization and behavior needs in Indonesia, Unpublished manuscript, Jakarta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emmerson, D. K. (1978). The bureaucracy in political context: Weakness in strength. In K. D. Jackson and L. W. Pye (Eds.), Political power and communications in Indonesia (pp. 82–136). Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrazzi, G. (1998). Criteria for transferring functions to sub-national governments: Selection and application in Indonesian decentralization initiatives, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Guelph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrazzi, G. (2000). Using the “F” word: Federalism in Indonesia’s decentralization discourse. Publius, 30(2) (Spring), 63–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. F. G. (2000). Inter-governmental fiscal relations and state building: The case of Indonesia. Washington, DC: Mimeograph.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (1993a). Innovation, reform, and restructuring strategies. In G. Cawelti (Ed.), Changes and achievements of American education (pp. 116–133). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. G. (1993b). Why teachers must become change agents. Educational Leadership, 50(6), 12–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govinda, R. (1997). Decentralization of educational management: Experiences from South Asia. Paris: International Institute for International Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinness, P. (1989). ‘Social harmony’ as ideology and practice in a Javanese city. In P. Alexander (Ed.), Creating Indonesian cultures. Sydney: Oceana Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guinness, P. (1994). Local society and culture. In H. Hill (Ed.), Indonesia’s new order. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Handisumarto, D. (2000). Re-designing programs and providing capacity building support for good local governance. Jakarta: National Development Planning Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer, R. M. (1993). Cooperation and organizational identification. In J. K. Murninghan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malley, M. (1999). Regions: Centralization and resistance. In D. Emmerson (Ed.), Indonesia beyond Suharto (pp. 71–108). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malo, M. (1995). Social sector decentralization: The case of Indonesia. Ottowa, Canada: International Development Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandolang, N. H. (1996). Community participation specialist consultant’s report. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J. G. (1994). A primer on decision making. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, M. (1990). The change agent revisited. Educational Researcher, 19, 11–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Culture. (1994a). Community participation in planning and management of educational resources. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Culture. (1994b). Flexible framework for the development of coplaner at the sub-district level. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education and Culture (1994c). The role of communication, motivation and exploration of the quality of community participation improvement in the sector of education. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moyle, C., & Pongtuluran, A. (1992). Involving the community in the local school. In, J. Chapman, ed., Institutional management: school decision making and management in the Asia/Pacific Region. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Institution for Educational Research (NIER). (1996). Partnerships in education: Home, school and community links in the Asia-Pacific region. Report of a Regional Seminar, National Institution for Educational Research, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahardjo, M. D. (1985). The role of the community in modernization. Prisma, 36, 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, A. (2000). A nation in waiting: Indonesia’s search for stability (2nd ed.) Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirianni, C. (1987). Worker participation in the late twentieth century: Some critical issues. In C. Sirianni (Ed.), Worker participation and the politics of reform (pp. 3–33). Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soedirja, S. (2001). Regional autonomy: Main policies toward a democratic and prosperous Indonesia. Jakarta: Minister of Home Affairs and Regional Autonomy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, G. (1990). Fostering teacher professionalism in schools. In R. F. Elmore (Ed.), The next generation of school reform (pp. 59–96). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, R. M. (1981). Indonesia’s cultural pluralism and education. Educational Research Quarterly, 6(3), 75–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP. (1998). Managing the delivery of local content curriculum final report. Jakarta: United Nations Development Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP/UNESCO/ILO. (1994). The management and delivery of the 1994 junior secondary local content curriculum. Author: Jakarta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usman, S. (2001). Indonesia’s decentralization policy: Initial experiences and emerging problems. London: The SMERU Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Werf, G., Creemers, B., de Jong, R., & Klaver, E. (2000). Evaluation of school improvement through an educational effectiveness model: The case of Indonesia’s PEQIP project. Comparative Education Review, 44(3), 329–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vicencio, E. M. (1995). Muatan Lokal: Innovation and creativity in curriculum development. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1989). Indonesia basic education study. Jakarta: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yee, S. (1990). Careers in the classroom: When teaching is more than a job. New York and London: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bjork, C. (2006). TRANSFERRING AUTHORITY TO LOCAL SCHOOL COMMUNITIES IN INDONESIA: AMBITIOUS PLANS, MIXED RESULTS. In: BJORK, C. (eds) Educational Decentralization. Education in the Asia-Pacific Region: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-4358-1_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics