As reported by de Lange (1996), RME has been adopted and adapted in some projects in different countries such as USA, Portugal, England, Germany, Spain, Brazil, Denmark, South Africa, Japan, and Malaysia. For example, in the USA, through a collaboration project between the Freudenthal Institute and the National Science Foundation, RME is adopted and redesigned in the Mathematics in Context (MIC) textbooks for grade 5-8. After the books were used by students in several school districts from different states, preliminary research showed that the student achievement in the state tests increased. In one of these examples, ninth-grade students in the Ames district (Iowa state) with three years experience using these books were recently tested with the Iowa Tests of Educational Development. In this test, 25% scored in the top 1% of the nation, 47% scored in the top 10%, and 90% scored above the national median (Romberg & de Lange, 1998).
However, these positive results were achieved after facing some obstacles. As Clarke, Clarke & Sullivan (1996) mentioned that in the beginning implementation of MIC textbooks, teachers found difficulties to teach the book materials in the classrooms. Although each pupil has his/her own book, teachers were used to make their own teaching materials. They want to use the books but in some cases they want to make their own materials by adapting the materials in the books. Therefore, the project provided a professional development program for teachers learned how to teach new materials using a new approach and how to redesign the materials based on teacher needs. This experience can be used as a good example if RME materials want to be introduced then teachers are need to be trained and supported in implementing such materials.
In the country where RME originally has been developed and implemented for about 30 years, the Netherlands, there are also positive results that can be used as indicators that RME might be promising to increase the quality of mathematics education. For instance, the results of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) showed that pupils in the Netherlands gained high achievements in mathematics education which was ranked 6th out of 38 participating countries and the gap between smart pupils and weak pupils was very small (Mullis et al., 2000). The latter achievement might be interpreted that RME philosophy of mathematics as human activity was achieved or more precisely that mathematics not only for the smart pupils but also for the weak. Thus, "mathematics for all" which is only slogan for some countries including Indonesia has been achieved in the Netherlands. Still, these positive results could be achieved not in the short-term but in the long-term endeavor.
Based on the explanations in the previous sections, RME looks promising to be introduced and implemented in Indonesia because it could increase pupil's understanding and pupil's motivation toward mathematics. For instance, RME content materials are developed using the contexts that are experientially real to the pupils. This can increase pupil's motivation toward mathematics. Also, the teacher using that materials can guide the pupils learn from real level to abstract level of mathematics concepts. With the interaction and construction, this way of learning leads pupils to understand the concept of mathematics. Yet, in order to do so, there are three warnings are should be considered.
First, RME curriculum materials are not easy to be designed and learned by teachers because the mathematics materials differ from former ones in that they emphasize application problems with a loose structure and a redefinition of basic skills. For instance, the assessment materials focus on middle-level and high-level order thinking instead of the low level only. Second, teachers need to be educated how to use RME materials in their classroom. According de Lange (1993) the role of teachers in RME changes from teaching to 'un-teaching'. Finally, the implementation of RME is not a short-term program or project, but it needs many years to be institutionalized. These changes are consistent with Fullan's (2001) suggestion that the innovation of teaching is a complex undertaking for teachers, usually involving a combination of changes in the following areas:(1) new curriculum materials or changed use of existing materials; (2) new knowledge and skills required by the teacher; and (3) new values and attitudes concerning pupil learning and the new patterns of work in the classroom. Therefore, in order to introduce RME in Indonesia it is important to take in to account the obstacles that were faced either by the MIC project or Dutch experts. Related to the Fullan's suggestion, the following questions arise: How to develop or adapt new curriculum materials to the new context? How can teachers be helped in implementing these materials in the classroom practice? What advice can be given? What support can be offered? Selter (1997) pointed out that these are all mediated through the teacher, specifically through teacher's beliefs about how to organize and facilitate pupil's learning of mathematics. In this context, teacher education (pre-service as well as in-service) plays a vital role. One key strategy in this situation is to engage teachers or student teachers in their professional development using the following strategies (Loucks-Horsley, Hewson, Love & Stiles, 1998): (1) a short course (for building knowledge by teachers or student teachers); (2) curriculum development (by adapting the innovative materials into the school practice); and (3) using technology (in order to provide teachers or student teachers with a sustainable tool which support rich information about the new approach).
However, these positive results were achieved after facing some obstacles. As Clarke, Clarke & Sullivan (1996) mentioned that in the beginning implementation of MIC textbooks, teachers found difficulties to teach the book materials in the classrooms. Although each pupil has his/her own book, teachers were used to make their own teaching materials. They want to use the books but in some cases they want to make their own materials by adapting the materials in the books. Therefore, the project provided a professional development program for teachers learned how to teach new materials using a new approach and how to redesign the materials based on teacher needs. This experience can be used as a good example if RME materials want to be introduced then teachers are need to be trained and supported in implementing such materials.
In the country where RME originally has been developed and implemented for about 30 years, the Netherlands, there are also positive results that can be used as indicators that RME might be promising to increase the quality of mathematics education. For instance, the results of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) showed that pupils in the Netherlands gained high achievements in mathematics education which was ranked 6th out of 38 participating countries and the gap between smart pupils and weak pupils was very small (Mullis et al., 2000). The latter achievement might be interpreted that RME philosophy of mathematics as human activity was achieved or more precisely that mathematics not only for the smart pupils but also for the weak. Thus, "mathematics for all" which is only slogan for some countries including Indonesia has been achieved in the Netherlands. Still, these positive results could be achieved not in the short-term but in the long-term endeavor.
Based on the explanations in the previous sections, RME looks promising to be introduced and implemented in Indonesia because it could increase pupil's understanding and pupil's motivation toward mathematics. For instance, RME content materials are developed using the contexts that are experientially real to the pupils. This can increase pupil's motivation toward mathematics. Also, the teacher using that materials can guide the pupils learn from real level to abstract level of mathematics concepts. With the interaction and construction, this way of learning leads pupils to understand the concept of mathematics. Yet, in order to do so, there are three warnings are should be considered.
First, RME curriculum materials are not easy to be designed and learned by teachers because the mathematics materials differ from former ones in that they emphasize application problems with a loose structure and a redefinition of basic skills. For instance, the assessment materials focus on middle-level and high-level order thinking instead of the low level only. Second, teachers need to be educated how to use RME materials in their classroom. According de Lange (1993) the role of teachers in RME changes from teaching to 'un-teaching'. Finally, the implementation of RME is not a short-term program or project, but it needs many years to be institutionalized. These changes are consistent with Fullan's (2001) suggestion that the innovation of teaching is a complex undertaking for teachers, usually involving a combination of changes in the following areas:(1) new curriculum materials or changed use of existing materials; (2) new knowledge and skills required by the teacher; and (3) new values and attitudes concerning pupil learning and the new patterns of work in the classroom. Therefore, in order to introduce RME in Indonesia it is important to take in to account the obstacles that were faced either by the MIC project or Dutch experts. Related to the Fullan's suggestion, the following questions arise: How to develop or adapt new curriculum materials to the new context? How can teachers be helped in implementing these materials in the classroom practice? What advice can be given? What support can be offered? Selter (1997) pointed out that these are all mediated through the teacher, specifically through teacher's beliefs about how to organize and facilitate pupil's learning of mathematics. In this context, teacher education (pre-service as well as in-service) plays a vital role. One key strategy in this situation is to engage teachers or student teachers in their professional development using the following strategies (Loucks-Horsley, Hewson, Love & Stiles, 1998): (1) a short course (for building knowledge by teachers or student teachers); (2) curriculum development (by adapting the innovative materials into the school practice); and (3) using technology (in order to provide teachers or student teachers with a sustainable tool which support rich information about the new approach).
No comments:
Post a Comment