Paper Title (use style: paper title) Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 1 Number 1 March 2016. Page 18-21 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-4878 18 ASSESSMENT SYSTEM IN CURRICULUM 2013 OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL IN SUMENEP DISTRICT MADURA ISLAND Dian Eka Indriani1) 1)STKIP PGRI Bangkalan Email: dianindriani79@gmail.com Abstract. New curriculum has been implemented by Indonesia government in an effort to improve quality of education in 2013. Curriculum 2013 is implemented only in grade I, IV, VII and Class X against 6,325 target schools. In 2014/2015 academic year Curriculum 2013 is applied to the class I, II, IV, IV, VII, VIII, IX and X in all schools in Indonesia. This study conducted in Sumenep district Madura Island as supported study to monitoring and evaluation of Curriculum in 2013 on assessment system in East Java province. The research method used is descriptive qualitative by using observation, interviews and questionnaires techniques. The results showed optimism and expectations from respondents consist of teachers, headmasters and students in curriculum 2013’s assessment system. The findings are expected to support decision-making by stakeholders and improve the implementation of Curriculum 2013. Keywords: Curriculum 2013, Elementary School, Assessment System, Sumenep I. INTRODUCTION Education system in Indonesia has taken several changes as a result of education quality improvement (Indriani, 2015). Curriculum 2013 is a New Curriculum that is focused on student-centered teaching and learning. Curricula 2013 has been implemented on grade I, IV, VII and class X upon 6.325 school (Kemendikbud, 2013) in 20013/2014 academic year. In 2014/2015 academic year all schools in Indonesia run Curriculum 2013 for class I, II, IV, V, VII, VIII, IX and X within appropriate student text books and teacher handbooks. Instructors training and Teacher Training are being held, headmaster and School supervisor training, in and on the job training class teaching and learning process (Kemendikbud, 2014). Big issue in Curriculum 2013 is that Curriculum 2103 focus not only in cognitive domain but also spiritual, social and skill domains. One of The crucial thing in Curricula 2103 is the assessment system is new and still not familiar in teaching and learning conducted by teacher. This research is focused on Assessment system in Elementary School, as a part of Monitoring and evaluation program that is based on the Law conducted by Government and run by institution namely Education and Culture Ministry, Province and District Education Department (Kemendikbud, 2014). Monitoring and Evaluation Program purpose is to ensure implementation process of Curricula 2013 goes according to plan. In particular, this research aims are (a) To describe the implementation of assessment system using Curriculum 2013 in Elementary School in Sumenep, Madura Island, Indonesia and (b) To find out obstacles in assessment system using Curriculum 2103 that need immediate action. II. Metodology This research is a descriptive qualitative research using observation, interviews and questionnaire technics to collect data (Fraenkel, 2008) in implementation process of Curriculum 2013 namely Training of Curriculum 2013 and the process of teaching and learning. A. Respondent Selection Method The selection of respondents was conducted in phases, starting from the determination of the district / city, targeted school until teachers as sample. Using purposive sampling technique, by choosing location affordability with the time available considerations. B. Place and Execution In General, after district/city was set, then random sampling for the determination of respondent schools and teachers, principals/Trustees and students was conducted. Sumenep is one of the districts selected to be presented in details as it is located in different island from where Surabaya as Capital of East Java mailto:dianindriani79@gmail.com Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 1 Number 1 March 2016. Page 18-21 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-4878 19 is. Execution venue data retrieval by observation technique implemented in the school SDN Pandian 1 and SDN Pandian 2 Sumenep, and filling questionnaire were conducted in the town hall, in two days, 21-22 November 2014. C. Sample quantity The number of respondents in Monev of Assessment System for elementary education units are presented in table 2.1, table 2.2 and table 2.3 Table 2.1 The number of respondents in Monev on Assessment System in training Curriculum 2013 for elementary education units in Sumenep (questionnaire). Respondent Number Targeted Teacher 39 Principal/Supervisor 14 Total 43 Table 2.2 The number of respondents in Monev on Assessment System in Teaching and Learning using Curriculum 2013 for elementary education units in Sumenep. Respondent Number Targeted Teacher 17 Principal/Supervisor 16 Students 36 Total 69 Table 2.3 The number of respondents in Monev on Assessment System in Curriculum 2013 for elementary education units in Sumenep (observation). Respondent Number Targeted Teacher 4 III. RESULT AND DISCUSSION The analysis of the data collected in the study supporting Monev starts from a general nature aspect, followed by exposure to a specific nature. In supporting research Monev assessment system, quite a lot of questions that dig recognition of teachers whether they understand curriculum of 2013 especially the assessment system as this study focused. The proportion of teachers and school principals with regard to the purpose of understanding the assessment system in the training of Curriculum 2013, can be seen in the following figure. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Teacher Principals Not Less Understand Figure 3.1 Proportion Of Teacher And Principal Understanding Assessment System In Training Of Curricula 2013 Materials. As figured showed that proportion of teacher and principal who less understand is bigger than the proportion of teacher and headmaster who understand (more than 50 per cent). It could be pointed out that both recognition from teacher and principal tell that they still do not understand clearly about the assessment system in the training of Curricula 2013 materials held by the Government namely Kemendikbud. It is very reasonable as the training itself just conducted once or twice at each district at that particular time. As regards to the comprehension of assessment system in learning process, according to Figure 3.2 shows that the proportion of the principal is more than teacher. Similarly, the proportion of teachers who claims do not understand is larger than the principals. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Teacher Principals Not Less Understand Figure 3.2 Diagram Proportion Of Teacher And Principal Understanding Assessment System In Teaching and Learning Using Curricula 2013. It is a positive thing because principals are supposed to understand better than teachers, though still on the level of recognition. As a leader in school, they should be able to control the direction of development policy including curriculum. In the Table 3.1 and table 3.2 has shown the assessment system used by the teacher from the questionnaire. It is important to be reviewed since curricula 2013 integrate spiritual, social, skill and cognitive from taxonomy of attitude, Taxonomy Skill Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 1 Number 1 March 2016. Page 18-21 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-4878 18 from Dyers and New Taxonomy Knowledge from Bloom (Anderson and Krathwoll, 2012). Table 3.1 Assessments system should be used by teacher (questionnaire) Type of Assessment number of person answered (%) Authentic assessment 98 Midterm/Final Exam 3 Daily test 95 Porto folio 2.2 Concession Statement from teachers must be proven with confession from students by filling questionnaires randomly that can be seen in table 3.2. Table 3.2 Assessment system conducted by teacher (Student’s questionnaire) Assessment Type Number of students (%) Observation by teacher 60 Self-assessment 51 Daily test 99 Portofolio (product/project task) 87 The Interesting point is that teacher chose midterm and final exam is not necessary conducted, since they point to conduct authentic assessment and daily test. In particular, Porto folio is one of the authentic assessments (Muslimin, 2014), took 87 per cent share on assessment system conducted by teacher from student recognition. Should there be reinforcement to make teacher understand Authentic assessment is, considering that almost 100 per cent teacher chose authentic assessment is necessary but Porto folio is not chosen by teacher’s questionnaire (only 2.2 in proportion). Observation was conducted randomly on two Elementary Schools in Sumenep in randomly. The result of direct observations in elementary school chosen randomly showed there were assessment instruments in teaching and learning material namely in syllabus and lesson plan such as teacher’s journal, cognitive and observation instruments. The problem was not every instrument could be applied at once in the time of observation. According to the respondent that there were insufficient time to conduct all assessment system in Curricula 2013, it showed that it is in line with the recognition of respondents in the questionnaires that they do not understand the assessment system in Curriculum 2013. The data was taken from data survey in one of district that is Sumenep as the farthest city in Madura apart from Java Island. The purpose is to get more specific information. One thing that could not be ignored that student is the one who would feel the main impact of any policy changes in education, in this case the changes in the curriculum. Particularly, it is very important to find out the effect of changes in curriculum to the student. Subsequently, It is fair enough if we discuss about assessment system, then we should know the assessment of the curriculum from the students themselves, especially in the learning process in the classroom using curriculum in 2013 as showed at diagram 3.3. 30% 27% 9% 22% 12% figure 3.3 Proportion Student recognition of implementation learning process using Curriculum 2013 Scientific Approach encourage to be Honest Technology Usage More Fun Recognition of student questionnaire data about the learning process in the classroom according to Figure 3.3 showed the need for increased use of ICT by teachers (Joseph D.A., 2016). Scientific Approach in 2013 curriculum has also been implemented in the learning process, which encourages students to do right (Anderson, 2001). IV. CONCLUSION Based on the description in the previous chapter, conclusions and recommendations could be obtained as follows (a) The Assessment system in Curriculum 2013 is the most dominant aspects complained by the teachers concerned with its complexity, and (b) The process of learning with the Curriculum 2013 respondents had good responses from the students, though there still minimal use of ICT in the classroom on some areas. It showed that there is optimism from respondent in Curriculum 2013. Based on the analysis of data and experience in this study, it could be submitted the following recommendations (a) Due to the high optimism of respondents to develop and implement the Curriculum 2013, the necessary training for teachers should be done intensively, (b) Assessment system requires special training intensively, and (c) Should conduct continuous research on implementation curriculum 2013 Furthermore, both as part of Monitoring and Evaluation from Government or independently. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning Volume 1 Number 1 March 2016. Page 18-21 p-ISSN: 2477-5924 e-ISSN: 2477-4878 21 REFERENCES [1] Edisi ke-14. New Jersey: Pearson Education Inc; 2012. [2] Anderson, Lorin W., Krathwohl, David R. 2001. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing. London: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. [3] Fraenkel. 2008. How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGrow-Hill Company. [4] Ibrahim, Muslimin. 2015. Asesmen Berkelanjutan. Konsep Dasar, Tahapan Pengembangan dan Contoh. Surabaya: UNESA Press. [5] Indriani, D.E. (2014). Pengembangan Perangkat Pembelajaran Model Cooperative Scripts dalam Pembelajaran IPA untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman Konsep IPA dan Keterampilan Berkomunikasi Siswa di Sekolah Dasar. JPPS vol.2, 495-502. [6] Kemendikbud, 2013. Implementasi Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan RI. [7] Kemendikbud, 2014. Implementasi Kurikulum 2013. Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan RI. [8] Nur, M. 2011. Keterampilan-keterampilan Proses Sains. Surabaya: UNESA-University Press [9] Yusuf, D.A.E (2016). The Implementation of ICT Based Education in Elementary teacher Education(PGSD) in Indonesia. Humaniora Journal, 7, 8-14.