Standardized Testing in Indonesia

Standardized Testing in Indonesia
Running head: STANDARDIZED TESTING IN INDONESIA
Standardized testing in Indonesian secondary education:

An analysis on the impact of national exit exam (2005-2007)
Iwan Syahril
Teachers College, Columbia University
C&T 4145
Professor Nancy Lesko
Fall 2007
Standardized testing in Indonesian secondary education:

An analysis on the impact of national exit exam (2005-2007)
The History of Standardized Testing in the Indonesia

Standardized testing has long been the dominant feature in the education system in the
Republic of Indonesia. Furqon (2004) explains that in the period of 1965-1971 the Ujian
Negara (State exam) was done for almost all subjects for students at the end of each of the
school level, elementary, middle school and high school. Although, a non-standardized testing
policy was endorsed for the next seven years, where schools were given the authority to design
and hold the final exam based on the guidelines from the central government, in 1980 Indonesia
went back to the centralized exam system. The Evaluasi Belajar Tahap Akhir Nasional (National
Final Learning Evaluation), commonly shortened as Ebtanas, was implemented for twenty-one
years.
Ebtanas was used for three main purposes. First, it was used to determine students path
for their further education. If they were able to obtain high scores, they were eligible to choose
favorite schools in their next education level. Failure to do so would force them to attend schools
of lower quality and most likely the private ones, which would cost more. If their family was
quite well off, then they could attend good private schools, usually by paying some considerable
amount of donation to the school development. Secondly, it also served as the tool to filter
students to the next educational level, because of the smaller number of available schools as the
students progressed to the next education level. Thirdly, it was also utilized as a mapping tool to
inform quality improvement in Indonesian education.
In Ebtanas scheme, the decision about student graduation was largely in the hands of the
schools. Thus, students who performed poorly in these Ebtanas tests were still able to graduate
provided they performed well in school. Ebtanas scores were just part of total scoring component
for student graduation, besides the provincial exams, and school grades.
The fall of the authoritarian government in 1998 breathed some new air of reform in all
sectors of development in Indonesia, including education. The initial reform effort in education
touched a number of issues, such as decentralized education system, school-based management,
competence-based curriculum, and portfolio-based assessment. There was a strong consideration
to abolish the nation-wide standardized testing. As a result, Ebtanas for the elementary school
was terminated in 2002, and for the secondary education, the number of subjects tested was
reduced. Both middle school and high school only have three subjects for the national exams,
compared to the previously five and seven subjects respectively.
The new form of nation-wide standardized exam was called Ujian Akhir Nasional
(National Final Examination), popular with the acronym UAN. The subjects tested were
Indonesian language, English, and math. It was up to the schools and provinces to decide
whether or not they required students to take final tests on other subjects.
Initially the passing grade was 3.01 out of 10.0. As everything was running as expected in
2004 the Ministry of Education decided to raise the minimum threshold for the passing to 4.01.
This decision faced strong opposition form many parents and teachers, because they feared it
would be too difficult for a great number of students to obtain the minimum of 4.01 for all three
subjects. This concern turned out to be the truth. Shocked by the unexpectedly poor results, the
Ministry of Education reacted quickly by drawing a conversion table, to many peoples surprise,
to equalize the achievements of students. Heavily criticized as introducing a great element of
gross injustice in scoring, this system had students who answered more than half of the test
questions correctly see their final scores lowered in order to subsidize the ones who did very
poorly on the tests, who later their scores improved.
Under the new cabinet in 2005, the new Ministry of Education was still determined to
conduct the similar form of tests, which was given a new name, Ujian Nasional (National
Examination), shortened as UN. Despite heavy criticisms for the previous UAN, UN still uses
the same format, testing three subjects, math, Indonesian language and English to students at the
end of their senior year in middle school and high school. Moreover, UN raises the new
minimum threshold, from 4.01 to 4.51, which spread more terror to many of teachers, school
principals, and parents, who still have vivid images of what happened in the previous year. To
make it even more intimidating, UN is used as one of the decisive criteria to graduate high
school. In short, failure to achieve the minimum threshold in UN will automatically result in
failure to graduate high school, regardless the students overall performance during their school
years. As a result, the stakes of the tests have been raised very highly, growing deep concerns of
many schools, teachers, and students.
This paper will explore various impacts of the current national exit examination (UN).
More specifically, it will focus on the impacts it has on some aspects of secondary education,
such as the students life, teachers life, and school administrators life.
Research Questions
The decision of the current government administration to raise the stake of the national
exit examination has raised harsh criticisms from many fronts. Not only that it is considered as a
re-centralization policy, but the requirement of passing the national exam to graduate has caused
a lot of problems for many students, teachers, and school administrators. In 2005, 30% or
400,000 out 1.9 million senior and vocational school students failed the national exam
(Sampoerna Foundation, 2006). Some high schools even had 0% passing rate. Unlike the failing
students in 2005, the ones in 2006 were not given the chance for a remedial test. Despite the
number decreased significantly to less than 10%, these students were only allowed to take the
equivalency test, called ujian persamaan paket C. If they pass, they can get a high school
diploma, which unfortunately holds a lower status than the regular one. Students are usually not
able to use this diploma for further education. To make it worse, for students graduating from
vocational schools, their prospective employers might reconsider hiring them when they use the
diploma from the equivalency test. This situation has made the national exit exam as the main
focus for many elements in the secondary education in Indonesia at the present time.
This research aims to answer the following questions.
1. What are the main reasons behind the implementation of the current Indonesian national exit
examination?
2. What impacts does it have on students life, teachers life, classroom life, and school life?
3. Whose interests does the exam serve?
Data collection
Due to the limitation of the research about the topic, as well as the time constraint, the
data will be collected from various online resources. There are three major online sources. They
are:
1. The official website of the Indonesian Ministry of Education, http://www.depdiknas.go.id.
2. The websites of two major newspapers in Indonesia. I will use their search engine, by typing,
ujian nasional, and national exam, and analyze the data from the first ten result pages.
a. Kompas: http://www.kompas.com
b. The Jakarta Post: http://www.jakartapost.com

3. Google scholar. I will type ujian nasional, national exam, and dampak ujian nasional,
and analyze the data from the first ten result pages.
Literature Review
Oakes and Lipton (2007) suggest that the current standardized tests use the same
assumptions and procedures as the IQ test design. Tests are designed, administered and scored in
the same fashion. Test-takers are assumed to take tests under the same condition. It is argued that
the standardized achievement tests measure how well students master certain knowledge and
skills taught in schools.
Furthermore, Oakes and Lipton (2007) explain that standardized tests are claimed to be
objective, valid, and reliable. It is objective because it is not open to bias and interpretation, and
the performances can be simplified by statistical figures. Also, all test-takers are perceived to
have an equal and fair opportunity to demonstrate their ability. It is valid because the information
collected and analyzed is perceived to be trustworthy. Finally, it is reliable because the results are
trusted to be consistent.
However, there are critiques towards standardized testing, which have been commonly
ignored by policymakers. Oakes and Lipton (2007) argue that there are three major flaws of
standardized testing. First, it still uses the assumptions of learning theories from the nineteenthcentury behavioral psychology, and does not reflect the rapidly emerging views from the
cognitive and educational psychology. For instance, it is assumed that learning happens when
teacher breaks down the knowledge into small bits of information, which is transmitted by the
teacher to the learners. Second, it inherits the flaws of the logic and technology of IQ tests. For
instance, the presumption of bell curve, where tests are designed to produce a wide range of
scores, with most of the test-takers score in the average range, and only few can reach the high
scores. Third, it is culturally bias. Different cultures have different areas of strengths that are
emphasized. Some value memorization, some value personal and social responsibility. Also,
poverty and oppressive social conditions may influence the test-takers in the standardized tests.
When a standardized test is used as the tool to determine students academic future, it can
be considered as high-stakes testing. Janesick (2001) explains that the term high-stakes testing
refers to the test for which the consequences of a students score are extremely serious (p.112).
Janesick argues that the high-stakes testing would harm low-income and minority students
because funding would be taken away from the poor-scoring schools. Moreover, listing schools
as failing schools based on the high-stakes testing results would give an impact to the students,
who might consider themselves as failing students as well.
Froese-Germain (1999) also mentions that standardized tests have been used
inappropriately. SAT, for instance, was originally developed to assess students potential in their
first year of college in the US. However, we have seen how SAT has been used for other
purposes such as athletic eligibility, student loan eligibility, and awarding scholarships.
Moreover, it has also been used as the criteria to decide student graduation. DarlingHammond (1994) suggests that the multiple-choice tests of de-contextualized bits of information
cannot capture the minimum skills needed for employment and future education in order to
graduate. Furthermore, she emphasizes, ...the use of tests as a sole determinant of graduation
imposes heavy personal and societal costs, without obvious social benefits. (p.14)
Findings
The rationale of the policymakers
The Ministerial Decree no 34/2007 stipulates that the main goal of the national exit
examination is to evaluate the graduates competence achievement nationwide for certain
subjects in the groups of science and technology. The results of the exams will be used as one of
the considerations to map education and education program, filter (students) for further
education, decide student graduation, and supervise and assist education units for quality
improvement (Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan, 2007).
According to the central Ministry of Education, the decision to implement the national
exit examination in its current format has been supported by six studies (Ujian Nasional,
2005). From these studies, it was concluded that the national exit exam is needed as a tool for the
central government for measurable educational quality improvement, by improving the teachers
and students performance. Also, the results indicate the societal approval for the exam
implementation. However, the studies, which were done by either the institutions within the
Ministry of Education or the institutions sponsored by the Ministry of Education, did not address
the major issues around the nation-wide exams, such as the direct correlation between the exams
and education quality. It also failed to explain the cheating practices that had happened during
similar exams in the previous years.
Interestingly, there is a strong assumption from the top policymakers that students and
teachers have not worked hard enough, and the pressure of having to perform well in the national
exams will motivate them to improve their performance. For instance the Vice President, Jusuf
Kalla, believes that the national exams will motivate all elements in education to improve the
quality of Indonesian education (Standardisasi Mutu, 2005), and also improve the international
competitiveness of Indonesian students (Lawmakers, activists, 2006). He also believes in the
importance of standards and uniformity of education system. The Minister of Education,
Bambang Sudibyo, accused the students who failed the national exams as being lazy
(Depdiknas Pembunuh, 2006). The Coordinating Minister for the Peoples Welfare, Aburizal
Bakrie, showed a similar tone when he put the blame for the failure of a significant number of
students on the teachers and the students. He also implied that failure in graduation is a sign of
competitiveness. (Lawmakers, activists, 2006). Thus, from the data, it is quite clear that the
hidden rationale for the top policymakers in using the national exam is to motivate the students
and teachers to work harder, because they have been blamed for their laziness which resulted in
the low standing of Indonesia in the international ranking.
The impacts on students
The data shows that the major impact of the national exit examination is serious
psychological problems suffered by many middle school and high school students. There are a
lot of indicators for this argument. Students were reported to be worried about their physical and
mental fitness during the test-taking days, which will likely affect their performance during the
tests (Kecemasan, 2006). Even the top ranking students also shared the same psychological
stress, and to overcome this feeling, they went to tutoring institutions after school especially in
their final year (Orangtua pun, 2005). They still need to have extra tutoring lessons as the precautionary action in order to sharpen the test-taking skills and strategies needed to quickly and
accurately answer test questions in the multiple-choice paper-and-pencil tests.
In 2006, some top ranking students failed the national exit exam (UN, 2006). Despite
scoring 8.2 in her English test and 7.4 in her Indonesian language test, Melati Murti Pratiwi, a
student of SMU 6 Jakarta failed the national exam because she only scored 3.33 on her math test.
The minimum threshold was 4.26. Melati had initially been awarded scholarship to study in
Germany and accepted in an Australian university. Another SMU 6 Jakarta student was Kartika
Standardized Testing in Indonesia 10

Paramita Setyorini, who had been accepted to one of the best public universities in Indonesia,
Universitas Gadjah Mada. She had to face the bitter reality when she only scored 3.8 for her
math test. Like Melati, Kartika scored very well on the other two tests. There are quite a few
similar cases happened with students who normally had very good, if not outstanding, academic
track record, but have to accept the fact that their score in one of the exams is not good enough to
make them pass. Interestingly the exam that has caused a lot of problems seems to be math.
It seems that students have become even more stressed since 2006 when the government
decided to eliminate the option for remedial test. Since then students have only one chance to do
all the tests. Even the sick students did the tests in the hospital (Final exams, 2007). It is not
surprising that some reaction of this stress can be quite destructive. Some students tried to burn
their school (UN patut diduga, 2006) as a protest to their school for their failure in the national
exams. The frustration and anger of failure in the national exit exam have even led to some
suicidal attempts. In fact, a student in Karanganyar, Bali, was found dead after hanging himself
in his room, the day the national exam results were announced (Tidak lulus UN, 2007). He just
failed the national exam.
In general, there is a strong sense that students fear to fail the national exams that they
force themselves to study for the tests as hard as possible. They spend an excessive amount of
time to do the test drills. Even when they have extra lessons for exam preparation in school, they
will still take some extra lessons in tutoring institutions, just to ensure that they are definitely
ready for the tests (UN digelar April, 2006).
The impact on teachers
The huge pressure and the high-stakeness of the national exit examination as one of the
decisive requirement for student graduation have made teachers less motivated to be creative and

innovative in designing their lessons. They feel that it is useless to design lessons that are
powerful and engaging, but it is not what is tested in the national exam (Desakan, 2007;
Standardisasi Mutu, 2005). The pressure of having to make students pass the exams has led
teachers to teaching to the test (UN jadikan,, 2006). What is perceived as more important to
teach is the skills to answer the multiple-choice pencil-and-paper tests (UN tidak selaras,
2005). In some cases teachers in the senior year have to spend extra hours after school to teach
students to answer test questions (UN digelar April, 2006).
With the fact that many teachers are under qualified, the central governments pressure to
force the high-quality performance in the national exams also looks unrealistic. For instance,
46.6 % of senior high school teachers are not bachelor degree holders (Sampoerna Foundation,
2006). Moreover the government is only able to cover 6.5 % out of USD 6 billion needed to
finance school infrastructure, such as teacher salaries, books, professional development, etc.
Thus, the huge gap between the capability needed to implement the policy and the reality in the
field has added a huge psychological problem to the under-paid, under-resourced, and underqualified teachers.
This situation has probably made many teachers, usually coordinated by their school
administrators, choose to take the short cut in solving the improbable task. A number of teachers
and school administrators have been reported to facilitate cheating practices during the national
exit examination. There are some common patterns used by this collaboration (Ada indikasi,
2006). First, before the exam took place, the test questions were leaked to the students. In some
cases the students were asked to come early to copy answers. Second, during the exam, the
answers were given to students, either through distributing small papers, text-messaging to
students hand phones, writing on the board, or even reading the answers out loud to the whole

class. Third, after the exam, the exam supervisors revise students answers, before the test packs
were sealed and sent to the party who was in charge of assessing the tests.
There have been a lot of reactions from teachers themselves about these unfair practices.
The ones that had the courage to stand together and get the attention of the media is a group of
teachers from North Sumatra, who named themselves as Komunitas Air Mata Guru (Teachers
Tears Community), shortened as KMAG. They reported the cheating practices involving school
principals and the local officials of the Ministry of Education, which apparently had happened
since 2005 (Air Mata Guru, 2007; Jika para guru, 2007). Ironically, they have to face bitter
realities by unfair treatment by their administrators who were involved in the cheating practices.
Some of them have seen their teaching hours were significantly reduced, which makes their
salary decreased considerably, and some others even had to face dismissal. This is similar to
some other cases in other provinces in Indonesia where teachers reporting the cheating practices
were treated like criminals, by being threatened, dismissed, or jailed (Teachers claim, 2006).
Impact on school administrators
It is obvious that the decision of making the national exit exam as the graduation
requirement has made school administrators reallocate their school resources to support the test
preparation. For instance, it is reported that the funding originally intended for book subsidies for
the whole primary and middle school students in Indonesia was reallocated to book subsidies for
middle school and high school students in only 12 provinces, which have had very low national
exam scores (BOS buku, 2006).
The student performance in the national exit exams is closely related to school prestige.
To ensure that students have the capacity to pass the exams, there are a number of strategies used
by the school administrators. First, they invite the tutoring institutions to come to schools and

teach the students (Air Mata Guru, 2007). Second, the practice tests are held as many as
possible for the students (Kecemasan, 2006). Third, the student admission process has been
used as a tool to filter students who are more likely to pass the national tests (Jidi, 2007).
Due to serious lack of capacity - yet the exam results determine school ranking, extra
funding, and local government administration performance - many school administrators have
been reported to orchestrate cheating practices in a number of places. For instance, in the case of
KMAG, the school principals and local officials of Ministry of Education have been reported to
hold a meeting a month before the exams took place (Air Mata Guru, 2007). The mission was
to do whatever is needed in order to ensure students from all schools in the region pass the
exams. Answer keys were made prior to the tests. During the tests, the answers were leaked to
the students in a number of ways, sending them through short messaging system on students cell
phones, distributing them on a piece of paper, or reading them out loud in the middle of the
exams.
Analysis
The main concern of the government, which has been repeatedly said by the Vice
President, Jusuf Kalla, is to have a standardized quality education system, which they believe can
be achieved through the national exam. The assumption of standardized tests, where everyone
gets the equal and fair opportunity to demonstrate what has been previously learned, might serve
the governments goal. Moreover, it is claimed that standardized tests are designed, administered,
and scored in the same fashion. This seems to resonate well with what Vice President mentioned
regarding the importance of applying the same norm and procedure in all regencies in Indonesia
in order to develop Indonesian people together (Portal Nasional Republik Indonesia, 2007).

It should not be so surprising that the kind of learning that happens in the classroom are
similar to the assumptions of the behavioral psychologys ones mentioned by Oakes and Lipton
(2007), where learning happens through transmitting bits of information. Teachers have been
discouraged to teach in engaging and meaningful ways. Lessons are geared towards memorizing
the information needed to answer the multiple-choice paper-and pencil exams. Students do
excessive amount of drilling for test practices. In many cases, this kind of learning does not stop
in schools. Students, even the brightest ones, feel compelled to attend tutoring institutions, where
they continue to receive the test-driven drills.
For this matter, the tutoring institutions gain the most benefit, because they will get a lot
of customers, who desperately need the security to get rid of the fear of failing the exam. It is no
surprise that the influence of tutoring institutions has become more dominant in the landscape of
Indonesian education system. They have become government partners in helping students to
succeed in their academic life.
The attitude shown by the Coordinating Minister of Peoples Welfare, Aburizal Bakrie,
where having failed students is as a sign of the properly working system, is similar to the
assumption of the bell curve in standardize system. In bell curve logic, the majority of the
participants will get average score, while only some of them get either high or low scores.
However, at the two extremes of the curve, few will have to either do extremely well, or do
extremely poorly. The later one usually refers to failure. This has been the criticism to
standardized testing, where some participants are pre-determined to fail.
The national exit examination fits the description of the high-stakes testing suggested by
Janesick (2001), where the consequences of the test scores are extremely serious. I would argue
that these consequences are burdened not only to students, but also to teachers and school

administrators. For students, even if they have performed extremely well in school and have
gained prestigious recognitions of their potentials and talents, failure to reach the minimum
threshold of any of the national exit exams will automatically shut their door to step further. This
has caused a major stress to the life of practically every student in the secondary education in
Indonesia, even the brightest ones. The common way of dealing with this stressful situation is by
attending tutoring institutions to have practice drills as often as possible.
The teachers and school administrators have no choice but to comply and deal with the
current format of national examination. The have been reportedly very stressed with the pressure
of making their students reach at least the required minimum threshold for all of the exams. In
fact, the pressure can be a lot bigger because the exam scores are used as the symbol for prestige
for the administrators. They are used as the criteria to determine good quality schools, either by
the ministry of education, or by the general public. They are very competitive about the ranking
of their schools, and will often do whatever it takes to achieve maximum results. Thus, the
consequences of students exam scores also determine the life of the teachers and administrators.
When almost half of the Indonesian teaching force are under-qualified, and the
government is only able to cover 6.5 % of the funding needed to build the education system, the
pressure has seemed to force teachers and administrators to take short-cuts to ensure that their
goals are achieved. The serious incapacity to achieve the target results has frustrated many
teachers and administrators that they have decided to use unethical practices to solve their
problem. There are a number of manipulative acts during the exams that have been reported in
different locations every year. To make it even worse, the teachers who reported the cheating
practices were the ones who received the intimidation, and some of them were even dismissed
from their schools. So far, the government seems to be very slow to respond to the reports of

unfair practices during the national exam. Even the top policymakers, who should have the huge
interest in keeping the trustworthiness of the exam, do seem to consider these reports seriously.
This has sent the message that these practices to some extent can be tolerated.
Conclusion
The national exit examination has caused some seriously damaging impacts to the
secondary education in Indonesia. Students, even the brightest ones, feel fearful that they will
jeopardize their future plans by scoring one point less than the required minimum threshold in
any given exams. Teachers are forced to sacrifice their creative, innovative, meaningful, and
engaging lessons to allow time for students to practice the test drills. School administrators have
to reallocate resources to meet the test-driven demands, even by partnering with external tutoring
institutions to help the students obtain the skills needed to pass the test.
In addition, the huge gap between the needed capacity and the actual capability of
schools to meet the demands of the national exit examination has resulted in serious
psychological distress. There have been a high frequency of reports from the data that students
are very worried and stressed. Some of them expressed their frustration through destructive acts,
such as burning school buildings and committing suicides. A number of teachers and school
administrators have to give up their professional ethics, by facilitating cheating during the
exams, which in some cases involved the officials of the local Ministry of Education.
With the current format, the national exam will do a lot more damage to the secondary
education life in Indonesia. The only parties that benefit from it are the governments top
policymakers who have a sense of accomplishment with the improved test scores, and the
tutoring institutions who will get the financial benefit from the stress suffered by students,
teachers, and administrators.

Despite the heavy criticisms from many authoritative scholars, the government seems to
continue their stubborn attitude in regards to national exit examination. The top policymakers,
such as the Vice President, the Minister of Education and the Coordinating Minister for Peoples
Welfare have repeatedly insisted on the importance of the national exit examination as the tool to
motivate Indonesian students and teachers to work hard. They seem to believe that the improved
test scores directly correlate with the better quality of education, thus will improve Indonesian
ranking in international assessment.
In the mean time, teachers, students, parents, administrators will have to continue to be
stressed out by the national exit examination. Perhaps, after the coming Indonesian general
election in 2009, with some new top policymakers, there will be some hope to change the
direction of the education policy in Indonesia, particularly the national exit examination. For
now unless an organized and persistent massive movement is done to change the direction of the
current educational policy throughout the country, we will keep hearing the similar stories at
least for the next three years.
I would like to end by repeating a quote from what Darling-Hammond (1994), the use
of tests as a sole determinant of graduation imposes heavy personal and societal costs, without
obvious social benefits. I think this is very true in Indonesian context, especially with the
current national examination, which has resulted in extremely damaging costs, not only for the
students, the teachers, and the school administrators, but also for the society in general, because
Indonesia is losing the chance to provide the quality education for its future generation. It is
indeed a huge cost for Indonesia.

References
Ada indikasi kebocoran soal UN: Masih banyak dijumpai kecurangan [There are indications of
the leakage of the national exam questions: Many cheating practices are still found].
(2006, May 18). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0605/18/Jabar/2199.htm
Air Mata Guru bongkar kecurangan UN Medan: Kecurangan UN SMA dan SMP direncanakan
sangat sistematis [The Teachers Tears (group) reveals cheating practices in the national
exam in Medan: The cheating in the national exams for middle schools and high schools
have been planned systematically]. (2007, April 27). Kompas. Retrieved December 5,
2007, from http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0704/27/humaniora/3486199.htm
Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan [National Board for Education Standards]. (2007,
Novermber 30). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia nomor 34
tahun 2007 tentang ujian nasional SMP/MTs/SMPLB, SMA/MA/SMALB, dan SMK
tahun pelajaran 2007/2008 [The National Education Ministerial Decree of the Republic
of Indonesia number 34 year 2007 about national exam SMP/MTs/SMPLB,
SMA/MA/SMALB, and SMK academic year 2007/2008]. Retrieved December 6, 2007,
from http://www.bsnp-indonesia.org/document.php?id=29
BOS buku digunakan UN [The school operational assistance for books is used for the national
exam (purposes)]. (2006, June 5). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0606/05/humaniora/2702049.htm
Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Performance-based assessment and educational equity. Harvard
Educational Review 64(1), pp. 5-30.

Depdiknas pembunuh [The Ministry of Education (is) the killer]. (2006, June 21). Kompas.
Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.co.id/metro/news/0606/21/082032.htm
Desakan penolakan UN menguat [The pressure to reject the national exam is getting stronger].
(2007, October 7). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/ver1/Dikbud/0710/07/213344.htm
Final exams testing time for students, govt. (2007, April 18). The Jakarta Post. Retrieved
November 29, 2007, from
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailweekly.asp?
fileid=20070418.@02
Froese-Germain, B. (1999). Standardized testing: Undermining equity in education. Ottawa,
Canada: Canadian Teachers Federation.
Furqon. (2004, December 23). Masih perlukah ujian nasional? [Is the national exam still
needed?]. Pikiran Rakyat. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from http://www.pikiranrakyat.com/cetak/1204/23/0804.htm
Janesick, V. J. (2001). The assessment debate: A reference handbook. Santa Barbara, CA: ABCCLIO.
Jidi. (2007, April 27). Bila nilai UN tinggi, puaskah kita? [If the UN scores are high, are we
satisfied?]. Kompas. Retrieved November 29, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0704/27/jatim/65722.htm
Jika para guru menolak kecurangan ujian nasional [When teachers reject cheating practices in the
national exam]. (2007, April 28). Kompas. Retrieved November 29, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0704/28/utama/3489353.htm

Kecemasan sambut UN 2006 [Anxiety welcomes the national exam 2006]. (2006, April, 7).
Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak
/0604/07/humaniora/2564214.htm
Lawmakers, activists criticize national examination system. (2006, June 26). The Jakarta Post.
Retrieved November 28, 2007, from http://www.thejakartapost.com/yesterdaydetail.asp?
fileid=20060626.H01
Oakes, J., & Lipton, M. (2007). Teaching to change the world (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Orangtua pun pontang-panting urus UN [Parents are also being driven crazy by the national
exam]. (2005, February 16). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas,com/kompas-cetak/0502/16/utama/1562884.htm
Portal Nasional Republik Indonesia [The National Portal of the Republic of Indonesia]. (2007).
Vice president: For education we must be strict. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from
http://www.indonesia.go.id/en/index.php/content/view/844/701/
Sampoerna Foundation. (2006). Increasing the impact and the effectiveness of foundation and
donor funding. Retrieved December 6, 2007, from
http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/che.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/Ed_06_Frankel/$FILE/Frankel_Sa
mpoerna+Foundation_Risk+Sharing+Structure.pdf
Standardisasi mutu lewat ujian nasional [Quality standardization by national exam]. (2005,
February 5). Kompas. Retrieved November 29, 2005, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0502/05/opini/1541677.htm
Teachers claim intimidation for disclosing exam fraud. (2006, September 15). The Jakarta Post.
Retrieved December 5, 2007, from http://www.asia-pacific-

action.org/southeastasia/indonesia/netnews/2006/ind34v10.htm#Teachers%20claim%20i
ntimidation%20for%20disclosing%20exam%20fraud
Tidak lulus UN, siswa gantung diri [Failed the national exam, a student hung himself]. (2007,
June 25). Kompas. Retreieved December 5, 2007, from http://www.kompas.com/kompascetak/0706/25/daerah/3628508.htm
Ujian nasional jalan terus [The national exam goes on]. (2005, January 31). Kompas. Retrieved
December 6, 2007, from http://www.kompas.com/kompascetak/0501/31/humaniora/1530091.htm
UN digelar April, jam les siswa bertambah [The national exam will take place in April, students
tutoring hours increase]. (2006, December 4). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007,
from http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0612/04/jateng/45087.htm
UN jadikan siswa fotokopi guru [The national exam makes students imitate teachers]. (2006,
May 22). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from http://www.kompas.com/kompascetak/0605/22/humaniora/2674343.htm
UN patut diduga langgar HAM [The national exam should be suspected as a violation to human
rights]. (2006, June 23). Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0606/humaniora/2758086.htm
UN tidak menghargai proses [The national exam does not value the process]. (2006, June 22).
Kompas. Retrieved December 5, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/ver1/dikbud/0606/22/160850.htm
UN tidak selaras pembelajaran: Model ujian yang monoton picu murid menghafal [The national
exam is not compatible with learning: The monotonous exam format triggers students to

memorize]. (2005, October 24). Kompas. Retrieved November 29, 2007, from
http://www.kompas.com/kompas-cetak/0510/24/humaniora/2149417.htm

Standardized Testing in Indonesia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Standardized Testing in Indonesia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Standardized Testing in Indonesia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Standardized Testing in Indonesia

Running head: STANDARDIZED TESTING IN INDONESIA