1 / 20

Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science

DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP. Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science. INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION. Sumar Hendayana Harun Imansyah. Issues & Challenges of INSET MGMP or Teacher Subject Forum.

yana
Télécharger la présentation

Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP Development of School based In-service Teacher Training in Mathematics and Science INDONESIA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION Sumar Hendayana Harun Imansyah

  2. Issues & Challenges of INSETMGMP or Teacher Subject Forum Government Regulation No.38 in 1994: in-service teacher training at district level, did not work? • Project-based activities, no guarantee for sustainabilty • Venue at central city/district, transportation problems for teachers at rural or remote areas • Less support of school principals to the forum, gave teaching assigment on forum day, Wednesday for math teachers & Saturday for science • No attractive activities, not promising

  3. UPI Pre-service Enhancement of Quality in Math & Science Ed. Schools/subjectLesson Study (in-service) District office of Educ DISTRICT – UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP Feedback on contemporary teachers’ needs Producing good prospective teachers Feed back on school reality Consultancy Consultancy Developing teachers’ professionalism Intervention to students Sharing experiences Opportunities for expansion APPROACH (Saito, 2004)

  4. 2006 - NOW Schools Target in Sumedang district School centers with 8-15 schools partner 556 teachers of junior secondary mathematics and science 94 school principals & 8 supervisors 80 faculty members

  5. Activities Inception meeting Baseline survey School principal traning (twice a year) Facilitator training (4 times a year) School based Lesson Study (twice a month) Subject based Lesson Study (twice a month) Evaluation workshop (twice a year) Dissemination Forum (twice a year) Endline survey

  6. District – University Partnership Supported by MONE & JICA • Introducing cooperation programs to stake holders • Singing MoU by rector of UPI & head district of Sumedang

  7. Baseline survey • 29% teachers were under qualified • 25% teachers were mismatch • 42% teachers has ever participated in MGMP Teacher centered in science class

  8. Principal training to build ownership • Twice a year at schools • 1st meeting: introduced cooperation programs & and discussing an agreement to support the teachers • 2nd meeting: discussed principles of lesson study • Latter: principals observed lesson & post-class discussion

  9. Facilitator training • 32 facilitators: selected teachers from 8 working groups, leaders in wg • Four times a year at schools • 1st meeting: introduced cooperation programs & discussed principles of lesson study • Latter: facilitators observed lesson & engaged in post-class discussion

  10. Lesson study • One semester: • 2 Plan meetings • 3 Do-See meetings • Venues at different schools

  11. Plan Lesson plan is developed collaboratively based upon learning problems to promote student active learning through hands-on & mind-on activity, daily life, and local materials

  12. Open lesson (Do) Observers: teachers, facilitators, principals, supervisors, lecturers A teacher teach a lesson while others observe the lesson. Observation is focused on student activities. Observers do not make any intervention • Are students learning & how are they learning? • Is any student not learning & why? • How did teacher help students learning? Does it work?

  13. Exploring math through experiment

  14. Class discussion presenting finding dialogue among students

  15. Post-class discussion (See) • The teacher and observers discuss to share and exchange views regarding student activities. • Observers learn each other to apply it at their class • Discuss follow-up

  16. Impact on daily teaching practices? Contextual learning in science on daily teaching practice utilizing available learning resources

  17. Role sharing DGQITEP (policy) DGHE (financial) UPI (lecturers) JICA (experts) SISTTEMS School-University linkage District (Policy & Financial) Schools (Teachers & Financial)

  18. ConclusionSchool based in-service teacher training • Lecturers visit school 2x per month in 8 working groups of 20-40 teachers from 8-15 schools • Distance & transportation problems for teachers were reduced significantly • Lecturers & teachers worked collaboratively in research lesson promoting student active learning through lesson study • Principals, supervisors, education district officers actively involved to build ownership • Promoting role sharing to guarantee sustainability Innovatve contribution • Disparities in learning quality between urban and rural/remote areas were reduced

  19. benefit for both sides Conclusion Lecturers help teachers and learn from reality • All teachers have opprotunity to participate in the CTPD through collaborative research lesson utilized optimally available learning resources • Distance & transportation problems for teachers were reduced significantly • video records as learning resource • Improve student teaching practice Implication of developed Model PRE-SERVCE IN-SERVICE Lecturers obtain feedback for improvement of pre-service

  20. Arigato Gozaimasu Thank You TerimaKasih

More Related