13 Kritik Kurikulum Merdeka (TPDS#117)

Summary

The speaker outlines 13 critical reasons why the Merdeka Curriculum is not yet suitable as Indonesia's national curriculum. These critiques include a lack of academic analysis, limited coherence in its structure, insufficient assessment systems, and its potential to distort the values of Pancasila. Additional concerns are raised regarding its unproven effectiveness, administrative burdens, unequal implementation across schools, and the overwhelming use of applications for teachers. The speaker calls for a more inclusive and balanced approach to national education policy that reflects the collective interests of the Indonesian people rather than specific groups or political interests.

Takeaways

• 😀 The Merdeka Curriculum lacks a critical academic review process, limiting intellectual discourse and public control over its effectiveness.
• 😀 The curriculum lacks coherence, especially in its evaluation system, as it does not provide a unified national assessment to objectively measure student outcomes across Indonesia.
• 😀 The Pancasila values, which are central to the curriculum, are not directly reflected in the student profile, risking misinterpretation of these national values by students.
• 😀 Despite claims of simplification, the content of the Merdeka Curriculum remains dense, failing to significantly reduce the burden of learning material.
• 😀 The Merdeka Curriculum's effectiveness has not been proven, especially when compared to the emergency curriculum during the pandemic, which better addressed the needs of students.
• 😀 The large number of schools implementing the Merdeka Curriculum is not a valid reason to consider it a success, as the quality and context of implementation vary significantly.
• 😀 The automatic promotion policy in the Merdeka Curriculum undermines students' motivation and discipline, potentially reducing the development of a strong work ethic and character.
• 😀 The curriculum imposes heavy administrative burdens on teachers, which detracts from their focus on student engagement and learning.
• 😀 The Merdeka Curriculum is seen as a top-down approach, limiting the autonomy of teachers to design learning outcomes based on local contexts.
• 😀 Disparities in training and implementation between schools lead to unequal opportunities for success, as some schools receive better support than others, exacerbating educational inequality.

Q & A

Why is the 'Merdeka Curriculum' not yet suitable to be adopted as a national curriculum in Indonesia?

The 'Merdeka Curriculum' has several critical shortcomings, including the lack of a comprehensive academic review, a weak assessment system, and inconsistencies in the implementation of Pancasila values in education. Additionally, it has not demonstrated effectiveness in improving student learning outcomes on an international scale.

What is the issue with the academic review of the Merdeka Curriculum?

The academic review of the Merdeka Curriculum is lacking in critical analysis and intellectual dialogue. In a democratic system, academic reviews should be widely accessible to scholars for discussion, but such discussions have not occurred adequately, which hinders the evaluation of the curriculum's framework.

What are the three main components that need to be considered in a national curriculum?

A national curriculum must include three key components: educational goals to be achieved, the methodological and pedagogical approaches to be used, and a system for evaluating and assessing the success of the curriculum.

What is the problem with the assessment system in the Merdeka Curriculum?

The assessment system in the Merdeka Curriculum is limited to school and class levels, which makes it inadequate for evaluating the educational outcomes of all students in Indonesia. There is a need for an independent and objective assessment system that can benchmark the educational achievements of all students nationally.

How does the Merdeka Curriculum affect the understanding of Pancasila values?

The curriculum distorts the understanding of Pancasila values because its dimensions are not directly derived from the Pancasila principles. This misalignment risks misleading students and diminishing their grasp of Indonesia's foundational values.

What is the issue with simplifying the learning materials in the Merdeka Curriculum?

The Merdeka Curriculum aims to simplify learning materials, but it has not succeeded in reducing content significantly. The materials still remain dense and do not effectively address the overload problem seen in the previous curriculum.

Why was the emergency curriculum during the pandemic considered more effective than the Merdeka Curriculum?

The emergency curriculum during the pandemic, which simplified the 2013 curriculum and allowed teachers more flexibility, was more effective in preventing learning loss. In contrast, the Merdeka Curriculum has not demonstrated its effectiveness in improving learning outcomes, especially in international assessments.

Why is the number of schools implementing the Merdeka Curriculum not a sufficient indicator of its success?

The fact that over 300,000 schools have adopted the Merdeka Curriculum does not guarantee its quality or effectiveness. The sheer number of implementations does not reflect the true success of the curriculum, and many schools have faced pressure and lack of adequate support in its adoption.

What is the problem with promoting automatic student progression in the Merdeka Curriculum?

The automatic promotion system under the Merdeka Curriculum undermines students' discipline and motivation to learn. It discourages the development of a strong work ethic and perseverance, as students are assured of advancing to the next grade regardless of their academic performance.

How does administrative burden impact the implementation of the Merdeka Curriculum?

Rather than simplifying administrative tasks for teachers, the Merdeka Curriculum has added to the administrative load, distracting educators from focusing on teaching and student support. Teachers are overwhelmed by excessive reporting and application-related tasks, which hinders their ability to innovate and teach effectively.