International Journal of Indonesian Studies Volume 1, Issue 3 | Page 174

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INDONESIAN STUDIES
SPRING 2016
presidency.72 The apparent attitude toward English during Suharto’s presidency culminated
in the statement issued by the Government Regulation No 55 Year 1998 about
Basic/Elementary Education about the Change of Government Regulation No 28 Year 1990
about Basic/Elementary Education. It stated in Chapter 14 a,73 as follows:
(1). Bahasa pengantar dalam pendidikan dasar adalah Bahasa Indonesia (Language of
Instruction in the basic education is Bahasa Indonesia).
(2). Bahasa Daerah dapat digunakan sebagai bahasa pengantar dalam tahap awal
pendidikan dan sejauh diperlukan dalam penyampaian pengetahuan dan/atau
keterampilan tertentu (Local Dialects could be used as medium of instruction in the
introductory level when it is necessary to deliver particular sciences and/or skills.).
(3). Bahasa Inggris dapat digunakan sebagai bahasa pengantar sejauh diperlukan
dalam penyampaian pengetahuan dan/atau keterampilan tertentu (English language
could be used as medium of instruction when it is necessary to deliver particular
sciences and/or skills).
The Suharto regime’s support for English language was different at the senior high school
level and the higher education level. It issued regulations which mentioned “Foreign
Languages” instead of “English language”.74 At the practical level, however, English language
was becoming an obligatory subject. The former edicts show the clear support Suharto had
toward English language teaching. During the formation of the New Order, Bahasa Indonesia
was challenged by the advocacy of teaching English throughout Indonesia, to adapt to the
liberal free market principles to which the Suharto regime adhered. The teaching of English
as a foreign language, however, posed insurmountable obstacles due to high illiteracy rates,
lack of English teachers and suitable teaching materials. The boom in capitalism during the
Suharto era, however, supported infrastructural support to the schools and universities. The
‘hard-factors’, however, were not accompanied by beneficial ‘soft-factors’ such as
curriculum development. Curriculum in Indonesia displayed a strong tendency to copy
directly from the U.S. When the communicative approach was introduced in the U.S, the
curriculum in Indonesia advocated it as well. The development of the English curriculum in
Indonesia was never in an independent position. Its position was strongly influenced by
what happened outside Indonesia. In other words, the legacy of teaching English in
Indonesia was always not in Indonesian hands. The curriculum makers anyhow supported
such a perspective inasmuch to support their own legacy of the teaching of English and the
72

Ibid.
Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 55 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan atas
Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 28 Tahun 1990 Tentang Pendidikan Dasar.
74
Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 56 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan
Pemerintah Nomor 29 Tahun 1990 Tentang Pendidikan Menengah; Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia
Nomor 57 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 30 Tahun 1990 Tentang
Pendidikan Tinggi; and Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 60 Tahun 1999 tentang Pendidikan
Tinggi.
73

174 | P a g e