M01624

Evaluation of Inclusive Education Program for Slow Learners

in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga

Yanuet Indah Z.T

indah_na70@yahoo.com

PPs-Magister ManajemenPendidikan Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Salatiga

BambangS.Sulasmono

sulasmonobambang@yahoo.com

PPs_MagisterManajemenPendidikan Universitas Kristen Satya Wacana, Salatiga

ABSTRACT

The objective of this study is to evaluate the Inclusive Education Program for Slow Learners in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga using Discrepancy evaluation model (Malcom Provus). It assesses the gap between the inclusive education program for slow learners in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga and its standard program. It ha s four stages (design, installation, process, and product). The interviews to the head of school, teachers, students and parents were employed to collect data, and observations in some classrooms were conducted to understand the condition of the slow learner inclusive education implementation in that school. The findings showed that there were gaps in all stages: design (the gap in teacher component, the support of society, measuring instrument for social skills area), installation (the gap in special education needs teacher/SEN teacher, learning process, and the infrastructures), process (the gap in teaching learning activity), product (the gap in students’ social skills and behavior assessment). It was suggested that

SD Pulutan 02 need to create the instrument for assessing students’ achievement in

social and environment skills, create special learning strategy for slow learners, provide the infrastructures for slow learners and create the inclusive planning and implementation program for slow learners.

Keywords : Educational Program Evaluation, Inclusive education, slow learners, discrepancy analysis

INTRODUCTION

Inclusive education is a strategy to promote effective universal education. The

main goal of inclusive education is to educate children with physical, mental, and social

disabilities or often referred to children with special needs in regular classes together with

non-disabled students but with additional support that they need. Previously, children

regular schools. However, it is important for school nowadays to make every effort to

provide inclusion of children with disabilities. (Friend, 2006; Lewis &Doorslag, 2006).

The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Needs Education

provides the obligation for schools to accommodate all children, including children who

have physical, intellectual, social, emotional, linguistic or other abnormalities. In

Indonesia, the right to learn is stipulated in Law No. 20 of 2003 on “National Education

System”, Article 5, paragraph 1 to 4. In particular, the Regulation of the Minister of

National Education of Indonesia Number 70 of 2009 Article 1 states that the inclusive

education program is an education system that provides opportunities for all learners with

disabilities, yet with full of potential intelligence and/or special talent, to participate in

learning in an educational environment together with other learners in general. The

implementation of inclusive education aims to provide the widest possible opportunity

and to realize the provision of education that respects diversity of students' abilities and

demonstrates non-discrimination.

Currently, all Inclusive schools in Indonesia from elementary to high school level

accept children with special needs in regular schools but with special treatment. These

students could follow regular classes, but on the other hand they also have to follow

special programs according to their needs and capacity. The curriculum used is the regular curriculum, but with implementation tailored to the students’ ability.

In Salatiga, experiments on inclusive education program have been implemented

since 2010 to six elementary schools and two junior high schoolswith over 115 students

joined the inclusive program. One of the inclusive schools in Salatiga is Elementary

School District of SidorejoSalatigaPulutan 02 (SD NegeriPulutan 02

KecamatanSidorejoSalatiga), which was designated as an inclusive school in Salatiga by

the Decree of the Head of the Department of Education, Youth and Sports No: 420 /

0241.a / 101 on 24 January 2012. The number of pupils in this school is quite a few--with

only 80 students total, but there is at least one child with special educational needs in each class. According to the school’s psychological test report, almost all the special need students in this school have a level of intelligence (IQ) below average. Thus, much of the

Based on the preliminary observations of researchers, there are fundamental issues

in the implementation of inclusive education in SD NegeriPulutan 02

KecamatanSidorejoSalatiga ever since it was established as an inclusive school. The first

issue is that SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatigahas never held a thorough evaluation of the

inclusive education programs they have run for two years. Evaluation of the current run is

still focused on the results of teaching and student learning activities, but not exhaustive

on the input, process and output of the program. There are various underlying reasons for

not having run a thorough evaluation of inclusive education programs, one of which is

the unavailability of time and instrument evaluation to see the development of the school. The second issue lies on the discrepancy of the school’s adaptability to maximize its resources to achieve the predetermined goal of inclusive education. The main doubt is on

the management of the inclusive program school itself--not so much on the ability of the

learners. As an already “established” school, as opposed to a new inclusive school, SDN

Pulutan 02 develops a tendency to approach their program just like the general primary

school education. This becomes both a strength and weakness of the school that needs

further investigation.

An evaluation was conducted to determine the level of quality of inclusive

education in SDNPulutan 02 in comparison to certain criteria or primary standard.

Researcher applied the evaluation model developed by Malcolm Provus called the

Discrepancy Evaluation Model. This evaluation model is applied because it stresses on

the view that there is a discrepancy in the implementation program--and it assesses the

magnitude of the gap that should be achieved in reality. The gap measured in this

inclusive education program is the gap between the program implemented in reality as

compared to the standard program which has been set as a reference.

Aspects and dimensions of the object to be evaluated are input evaluation, process

evaluation and output evaluation. The targeted object of this evaluation model has 4

stages. First, the design stage is the design of the activities or work program. The focus of

activity at this stage is to formulate the goals, processes or activities, as well as the

allocation of resources to carry out the activities and achieve the goals that have been set.

Second, the installation stage is the provision of tools and equipment needed for the

tools and equipments available for the implementation of the program. Third, namely the

process stage is the process of program implementation. Evaluation at this stage is the

relationship between the resources, tools and equipment to process activities. Fourth, the

product phase is the result of the program. Evaluation at this stage is the final result /

program objectives.

RESEARCH METHODS

This study includes an evaluative study, which analyzed the discrepancy between

the program implementation (or real conditions) with the standard program (point of

reference). This evaluation will be analyzed with the discrepancy model. This

discrepancy evaluation model is performed in 4 phases: the design phase, the installation

phase, the process phase, and the product phase.

The program to be evaluated is the inclusive education program for slow learners

in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga, with various input, process, and output components, as

well as certain variable criteria.

The source of data used in this study was obtained from the internal data of SD

NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga, the school where the study was conducted. There are two

kinds of sources: primary and secondary data. The primary source in this research is

directly obtained by interviewing principal, teachers, parents, and the students themselves

regarding the purpose of inclusive education, the planning and implementation of

learning and parental involvement in education programs in school. Meanwhile, the

secondary data includes the Decree of the MInistry of Youth and Sports No

420/0241.a/101 on January 24, 2012, Reports on Psychological Tests in the elementary school, a written report by the school’s principal regarding the Role of the Principal and the Education Curriculum of SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga, as well as the school's own

records on the number of admissions, the schoolteacher's status, and the school

achievements.

Data collection techniques used are document analysis, interviews, and

observations. As for testing the validity and reliability of all data (internal validity) of this

study was done using the credibility test (internal validity) through the extension of the

observation. Extension of the observation means that the researcher returned to the field

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The study in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga is described in three stages, namely

Input, Process, and Output, in six standard references according to the Inclusive

Education Program by Minister of Education (Kemendikbud 2013). These six include:

students, curriculum, teachers, learning activities, infrastructures, and community

empowerments. Meanwhile, the criteria that is used as a comparison or point of reference

is the standard criteria designed by Malcolm Provus (1969) as follows:

Table 1. Design Criteria/Design Standards

B. Establish Criteria for each variable

B. Establish Criteria for each variable

B. Establish end goals for each variable

Source: Malcolm (1969)

The discussion section is analyzed using the gap analysis (discrepancy models) in

four parts, namely: design stage, installation stages, process, and product.

First Stage: Design Stage

Table 2. The Gap of Design Programm

Input Design Indicator Design Gap Findings

1. Students Positive interactions

between non-disabled students and special educational need students

Interactions between non-disabled students and special need students are

3. Educators Accredited relevant

The availability of differentiated classroom teachers, subject teachers and special needs teacher/assistant per classroom

4. Learning Activities Devoted to the student, smaller class size

The approach is quite well

5. Infrastructure/Facilities Public Facilities and Specialized Facilities

Public facilities are met, specialized facilities are still lacking.

There is high support from community/parents/commi Boys/Girls Scout, Physical Education, Art, exemplary coaching, special lesson for special need students

Assessment of learning outcomes is still focused on the achievements of the student's general the teachers, subject teachers, special need educators, informal

Direct, intensive, and integrated with each student’s needs

High public enthusiasm to register their slow learning children.

Output

1. Student Variables Students master: Important Life Skills: Personal Skills (Self and Environment), Analytical Skills, and

Social Skills (Communication and Teamwork)

personal skills, analytical, and or social skills.

2. Educator Variables Increased skills, expertise and teaching methods to be more varied and intensive to support the growth and development of students.

Adaptation capability of educators is satisfactory, even though it is in need of more assistant labor and advanced training in the field of inclusive education.

3. Community/Parents/Co mmittee Contributions

Parents recognize and support the needs, talent developments of their children. Public actively support schools’ regulation

The level of satisfaction from parents and general public has never been assessed.

In the design phase, there is a little gap in the input design and process design,

which is in the educator variables. The reason is because the number of slow learners in

each class is plenty in proportion to the number of special guidance counselor or special

need teachers available, which is only one teacher for the whole school. This number is

inadequate to handle all slow learning students in the school. Meanwhile, for the output

design, for the student variables, the results from their report cards and final exams are

satisfactory. Yet, there is still no assessment tool to measure personal skills

(self/environment), analytical, and social skills. In the educator variables, adaptation by

the educator is also satisfactory, even though there is a lack of guidance and advanced

training in the field of inclusive education. Lastly, there has never been an assessment of

the satisfactory level in the community/parents/committee variables.

Second Stage: Installation Stage

Table 3.The Gap of Installation Programm

Installation Stage Installation Indicators Gap Findings

Installation Input

1. Students Administration for a new concept of admission of new students

Students recognize the concept of inclusive

education

3. Teachers Teachers have relevant

expertise; ideal teachers to students ratio

There is no school policy to specifically educate teachers or to regulate the number of teachers per student

4. Learning Activities Designated learning activities in a small class size

Learning activities have not been drafted in the syllabus, lesson plans, or teaching materials in an orderly manner

5. Infrastructure/Facilities Regulation of public and specialized facilities

Provision of public facilities is still dominant, while specialized facilities procurement policy is still lacking Boys/Girls Scout, Physical Education, Art, exemplary coaching, special lesson for special need students learning students are lacking of students: small class size,

normal integration and inclusion for special need students, which comprise of the teachers, subject teachers, special need educators, informal teacher-student relationship

unavailable

3. Public/Parents/Committe e Contributions

Direct, intensive, and integrated with each student’s needs

High and positive public response to enroll their slow learning children

Installation Output

1. Student Variables Students master : Important Life Skills: Personal Skills (Self and Environment), Analytical Skills, and Social Skills (Communication and Teamwork)

Report cards and final exams show satisfying result, but there is no assessment tool for personal skills, analytical, and or social skills.

2. Educator Variables Increased skills, expertise and teaching methods to be more varied and intensive to support the growth and development of students.

Adaptation capability of educators is satisfactory, even though it is in need of

Parents recognize and support the needs, talent developments of their children. Public actively support schools’ regulation

the student variables, curriculum, teachers, learning activities, infrastructure and

facilities, and community/parents/committees empowerment.

Third Stage: Process

This process stage is to determine whether the behavior of the studied components

change as expected or not. If it does not, it means there is a discrepancy resulting in the

need to amend activities geared toward achieving the behavioral changes.

Process Stage Process Indicators Gap Findings

1. Student Variables General Knowledge,

Counseling Guidance,

learning outcomes is still focused on the activities are still dominant.

Slow learner’s activity is not a priority

2. Educator Variables Methods and materials that focus on the potential, the growth, the needs and interests of students: small classes, normal integration and inclusion for special needs students, which comprise the teachers, subject teachers, special need educators, informal teacher-student

Direct, intensive, and integrated with each student’s needs

achievements of the student's general knowledge. Consequently, the learning activities

still employ the regular/conventional education that do not prioritize the slow learners.

Moreover, there are gaps in the educator side as well, specifically in the teacher to

student ratio that is considered disproportionate. The number of slow learning students

exceeds the proportion each class could support. Simultaneously, the learning activities

has been a positive response in the community/parent variable, in which they support the

implementation of inclusive education in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga.

Fourth Stage: Product

During the product stage, the assessment is to determine whether or not the final

goal is reached.

Table 5. The Gap of the ProgrammProduct

Product Stage Product Indicators Gap Findings

1. Student Variables  The rate of passing and graduating students is 100% skills (communication and cooperation).

 Student's needs before and after the program have not been assessed clearly, especially for slow learning children.

Slow learning students are identified but solely based on psychological tests, without any assessment on students after graduating from elementary school. As a result, the product outputs are yet to be measured.

The academic goal in terms of the 100% percentage rate of graduating students has been reached.

2. Educator Variables  Increased skills and expertise coupled with a more variant and intensive teaching method that support the growth and development of students

 Possession of capacity and education background that corresponds to areas of work and expertise of teaching

 Possession of a better awareness of the administration in the planning, implementation school, however there is still a lack of special teaching assistant in each classroom especially with the disproportionate number of students in each class

The school is able to modify their regular school program and curriculum to be an inclusive school though there are still some weak points that need to be fixed.

the vision, mission, and school curriculum have been developed into the concept of inclusive school.

National Curriculum has been integrated into teaching materials of the inclusive education

3.

Community/Parents/Commi ttee Contributions

School committees and communities are involved in school activities planning, implementation and evaluation of school.

The level of satisfaction from public and parents has not been measured.

School committee runs smoothly although their role is still limited in financial management and program planning.

Based on the above table, the gap in the product stage is divided into three

measurement variables, such as the student variables, educator variables, community

variables. For the student variables, academically, the output product is achieved even

though other non-academic assessment such as personal skills has not been measured.

For the educator variables, educator output has increased in terms of skills and ability to

carry out the vision and mission of the school, especially in teaching special need

children. However, there are still gaps in the number of special teaching assistant in every

classroom--especially with the high number of slow learners enrolled in each class.

Consequently, these students are not aided optimally. There is a need for assistance to

handle these slow learners, so that teaching activities can be carried out directly,

intensively, and in accordance to their needs. The same goes for the community

variables/parents/school committees--for public with lower income, the establishment of

this inclusive school is received warmly and greeted enthusiastically because it shelters

their children with special educational needs. Yet, there are still gaps in terms of the

public contribution and its role in accordance with the school inclusive program planning.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

The study of inclusive education programs in SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga showed gaps

On the input design and process design, there are gaps in the educator variable

since there is no provision by the school for the amount of educators, specifically

designed to address the slow learners. With only one educator per class, the amount is

inadequate to handle all the slow learning students in the school.In the design of the

output, there is also gap found in the student variables in which there is no measuring tool

to assess personal skills/environment, analytical and or social skills of the students.

Additionally, there are gaps in the educator variables, which are still lacking support for

assistance and advanced training in the field of inclusive education. There are also gaps

in the public/parents/committee variables because their level of satisfaction has not been

measured as well.

On the installationstage, there are gaps in the variables:(1) Educators. The

majority of the teachers still rely on the experience they had on regular/conventional

education program, since there is no qualified and clear teaching guides given by the

school for slow learning students. The number of qualified educators is still lacking with

only one teacher to serve all classes from grade 1 to grade 6. This educator is unable to

perform all of their main tasks as a special need educator.(2) Learning Activities. In the

planning and implementation of learning activities, teachers experience a lack of learning

devices (i.e. syllabus, Lesson Plan/ Teacher’s guidance and other special tools) that are

organized together with other stakeholders, such as educators, psychologists, or

physicians, and parents. Consequently, the learning materials presented to the special

need students are the same as the ones for normal students.(3). Infrastructure/Facilities.

No specialized infrastructure is built for the slow learning students (Resource Room).

On the processstage, there are gaps in the teaching and learning activities,

specifically in the composition of teachers, subject teachers, and classroom teachers.

General school infrastructure still dominates the school, in comparison to a development

of specialized tools for the special need students.In terms of education staff, gaps often

occur in the qualification and suitability of educator's skills with the subject they teach.

This also includes gap on the education and training provided by the school to advance

the quality of the teacher.From other stakeholders' point of view, such as general

public/parents/committee, the program received warm welcome although their level of

On the productstage, despite an increase in the students' graduation rate, which is

100% rate, the assessment for social, environment, and behavior is not known and is not

measured due to a lack of measurement instrument. On the educator's side, no advanced

training and education is available that is based on the needs of teachers. Additionally, to

increase the support from the public, the role of planning, implementation, and evaluation

of school needs to be revised.

Suggestions:

Based on the gap findings in the Inclusive Education Program of slow learners in

SD NegeriPulutan 02 Salatiga, the author conveys some suggestions as follows:

1. For Inclusive Education School Administrator

The result of the study indicate gaps in the design phase, which requires

administrator to create a tool to measure the success of students in the field of personal

skills, such as social, communication, and environment. This can be done by forming a

team that consists of principals, teachers, and parents, as well as experts in accordance

with the school's needs. This area could potentially demonstrate the specialty of inclusive

school in comparison to regular school, which is dominated by solely an academic

assessment.Infrastructure and facilities specialized for special need students (in this case, the slow learners) are needed, specifically the development of a “resource room”. This resource room has a lot of benefits in aiding these students since it demonstrates a focus

on individual assistance. Additionally, both students and special education teachers could

gain trust and concentration in the subject taught--which could potentially provide

therapy for these students.

2. For the School's Principal

The shortage of special assistance teachers could be fulfilled by using job

training’seducators who have educational background in psychology or counseling.

Additionally, they could also use experts from the public or even parents in order to

fulfill the needs for special education teachers in each classroom. School also needs

coaching in developing, planning, and implementing the inclusive education program for

slow learners.

With learning activities still the same for both regular and special need classes,

educators are expected to revise their understanding of the slow learners in order to make

learning strategies that seek to enhance the learning achievements of these students.

REFERENCES

Ainscow, M. 2001.Understanding the DevelopmentofInclusive Schools: Some Notes and Further Reading Paper Available from EENET

Arikunto, S. 2009. Dasar-dasarEvaluasiPendidikan.Jakarta :BumiAksara

Bandi.D. 2006. PembelajaranAnakTunagrahita. Bandung :PTRefikaAditama.

Carlberg, C.&Kavale. K. 1980. The efficacy of special class vs regular class placement for exceptional children: a metaanalysis. TheJournal of Special Education. 14,295-305

Cooter.K.S. & Cooter.R.B.2004.One Size doesn’t Fit All : Slow Learners in Reading

Classroom. International Reading Association (pp.680-684).

Friend, M. 2006. Including Students with Special Needs.Boston: Pearson.

Fernandes,H.J.X.1984. Evaluation of Educational Program. Jakarta: NationalEducationPlanning,Evaluation and Curriculum Development.

Lerner, J.W. 1988. Learning Disabilities: theory,diagnosis and teaching strategies. New Jersey: Houghton Miffin Company

Hallahan, DP &Kauffman,J.M. 1991 dan 1986. Exceptional Children,Introduction to Special Education.Fifth Edition Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Inc.

O’Neil,J.1994. Can inclusion work? A Conversation with James Kauffman and Mara

Sapon-Shevin. Educational Leadership.52 (4)7-11

Provus, Malcolm M. 1969. The Discrepancy Evaluation Model: An Approach to Local Program Improvement and Development. Washington DC: Pittsburg Public School.

Suyanto&Mudjito, 2012. Masa DepanPendidikanInklusif, Jakarta: KementrianPendidikandanKebudayaanDirektoratJenderalPendidikandasar.

Undang-undangNomor 20 tahun 2003 tentangSistemPendidikanNasional