Education for All: The Evaluation of Inclusive Education Program in Elementary School in Jakarta, Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/hhj9cc63Keywords:
evaluation, inclusive education, elementary schoolAbstract
This study aims to identified the implementation of inclusive education programs in elementary schools in Jakarta, Indonesia. The effectiveness of inclusive education programs can be known through an internal and external aspects of evaluation. So that it can be known obstacles, benefits and impacts of the program as well as a variety of important information that is useful for the implementation of future programs. This research uses an exploratory sequential mixed-method approach through two phases, qualitative and quantitative. This research collaborated with two elementary schools in Jakarta, 52 elementary school students, 160 parents of elementary school students, and 5 elementary school teachers. General students have a positive attitude towards students with special needs. Based on teacher input shows that a lot of teachers meet administrative requirements is graduated from Bachelor Degree in education. Several of school already has a special assistant teacher even though not yet present in one week, but teachers have developed individual curriculum with the needs and abilities of students.
Downloads
References
[1] Y. W. Kim, “Inclusive education in South Korea,” Int. J. Incl. Educ., vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 979–990, 2014.
[2] Z. M. Jelas and M. Mohd Ali, “Inclusive education in Malaysia: Policy and practice,” Int. J. Incl. Educ., vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 991–1003, 2014.
[3] A. Saputra, “Kebijakan pemerintah terhadap pendidikan inklusif,” Golden Age J. Ilm. Tumbuh Kembang Anak Usia Dini, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 1–14, 2016.
[4] J. Allan, “Inclusive education and the arts,” Cambridge J. Educ., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 511–523, 2014.
[5] O. Erten and R. S. Savage, “Moving forward in inclusive education research,” Int. J. Incl. Educ., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 221–233, 2012.
[6] S. Moberg, E. Muta, K. Korenaga, M. Kuorelahti, and H. Savolainen, “Struggling for inclusive education in Japan and Finland: teachers’ attitudes towards inclusive education,” Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ., vol. 00, no. 00, pp. 1–15, 2019.
[7] J. Andrews and J. Lupart, Inclusive Classroom: Educating Exceptional Children. Toronto: Nelson Canada, 1993.
[8] U. Sharma, A. C. Armstrong, L. Merumeru, J. Simi, and H. Yared, “Addressing barriers to implementing inclusive education in the Pacific,” Int. J. Incl. Educ., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 65–78, 2019.
[9] B. Norwich, Addressing tensions and dilemmas in inclusive education. London: Routledge, 2013.
[10] L. Terzi, “Reframing inclusive education: educational equality as capability equality,” Cambridge J. Educ., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 479–493, 2014.
[11] S. Vorapanya and D. Dunlap, “Inclusive education in Thailand: Practices and challenges,” Int. J. Incl. Educ., vol. 18, no. 10, pp. 1014–1028, 2014.
[12] A. P. Munthe, “PENTINGYA EVALUASI PROGRAM DI INSTITUSI PENDIDIKAN: Sebuah
Pengantar, Pengertian, Tujuan dan Manfaat,” Sch. J. Pendidik. dan Kebud., vol. 5, no. 2, p. 1, 2015.
[13] V. Grammatikopoulos, “Integrating program theory and systems-based procedures in program evaluation: a dynamic approach to evaluate educational programs,” Educ. Res. Eval., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 53–64, 2012.
[14] K. Sokal-Gutierrez, S. L. Ivey, R. M. Garcia, and A. Azzam, “Evaluation of the Program in Medical Education for the Urban Underserved (PRIME-US) at the UC Berkeley–UCSF Joint Medical Program (JMP): The First 4 Years,” Teach. Learn. Med., vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 189–196, 2015.
[15] W. Yonglin and W. Zhanjun, “The Value Orientation of Higher Vocational Education Evaluation: A Textual Analysis of an Evaluation Program,” Chinese Educ. Soc., vol. 49, no. 1–2, pp. 60–71, 2016.
[16] R. Kumar, S. A. Karabenick, J. H. Warnke, S. Hany, and N. Seay, “Culturally Inclusive and Responsive Curricular Learning Environments (CIRCLEs): An exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach,” Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 57, pp. 87–105, 2019.
[17] J. W. Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative Mixed Methods Approaches. London: SAGE Publication, 2017.
[18] A. D. Al-Khathami, “Evaluation of Saudi family medicine training program: The application of CIPP
evaluation format,” Med. Teach., vol. 34, no. SUPPL. 1, pp. 81–89, 2012.
[19] Z. Kafi, K. Motallebzadeh, H. Khodabakhshzadeh, and M. Zeraatpisheh, “Developing, glocalizing & validating a quality indices rubric in English language teaching: A case of CIPP model,” Cogent Educ., vol. 6, no. 1, 2019.
[20] T. Handayani and A. S. Rahadian, “Peraturan perundangan dan implementasi pendidikan inklusif,”
Masy. Indones., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 27–48, 2013.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
