Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn

Unlocking Children’s Potential to LearnA Report

Research by:Belynda McNaughtonDr Gita Nasution

Research Contributors:Monica Agnes SylviaMurni LeoPopo Ronald Alexander Simanjuntak

In collaboration with:

Table of Contents

Message From Filantropi Indonesia 1Executive Summary 2Glossary of Terms 3Acknowledgements 4Summary of Key Findings 4Key Research Questions 5Methodology 5

Annex 1: Background Indonesia’s education system 19Annex 2: Highly effective practices to increase access and learning outcomes in education

21

References 22Source/Definition 24

CHAPTER 1: BACKGROUND 6State of Education in Indonesia 6Status of Early Childhood Development in Indonesia 6Early Childhood Education 7Parenting Programs 8Child Health and Nutrition 9

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 10Global Literature 10Research on Stunting and Learning Outcomes 11Pre-Primary Education 14Indonesian Literature on ECED and Child Cognitive Development

16

CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS 18Analysis/Discussion/Recommendations 18

Message from Filantropi Indonesia

as this period holds a significance of the child learning outcomes in the subsequent years. This stage is also fundamental for the development of child’s brain and cognitive prowess in pursuing higher education levels – thus largely determining their success in school and life in general.

Through this study, Filantropi Indonesia examines aspects in learning outcomes as well as challenges to achieve them. This publication identifies the need for funding allocation for pre-school programs, encouragement for policy advocacy as well as other innovative approaches such as through the role of parenting, participation in pre-school activities, and attention to maternal and child health and nutrition. This ‘Unlocking Children Potential to Learn’ study is the initial research of the Filantropi Indonesia, in collaboration with the Tanoto Foundation, aimed to explore the potential learning outcomes in Indonesia particularly through the integration of new initiatives in the ECED. We hope that this publication will be our steppingstone and bedrock in comprehending the significance of ECED, which further could generate greater public awareness and discussion to enhance learning outcomes in Indonesia.

Finally, we hope to encourage collaboration and partnerships between communities, educators, development partners, and the government through policies, practices, and research to increase the overall impact of Indonesian children’s learning outcome in the future.

Rizal AlgamarChairman of Perhimpunan Filantropi Indonesia

Education plays a pivotal role in building Indonesia’s human resources. Thus, in the past few decades, both public and private sectors have sought program transformations and increased funding allocation in the country’s education landscape. This can be seen from the government’s effort to improve the quantity and quality of pedagogical training for educators, enrich and span the curriculum based on the needs of the students, expand budget allocation, as well as challenge and promote policy changes and new direction. However, learning outcome does not reflect these accumulative comprehensive efforts as Indonesia’s students PISA scores have not meaningfully improved since 2011. Thus, some questions linger, what are key obstacles in achieving high learning outcomes in Indonesia? What other efforts need to be considered and made to reap maximum learning outcomes?

With the focus on sustainable impact and strategic collaboration, Filantropi Indonesia’s Education Cluster realizes the importance of carrying out structured, tangible, and measurable Early Childhood Education and Development (ECED) interventions. Our ability to architect child development – focused programs is vital

1 | Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn (UCP) Study

Executive Summary

"Early childhood investment yields strong returns for all levels of education."

only slightly improved. This is reflected through the fact that most students in Indonesia who are below basic proficiency in reading (70%), Math (72%) and science (60%). 1 The 2018 Indonesia’s PISA scores also have not shown any significant improvement since 2011.

Further examinations across literature reveal that early childhood intervention plays a significant role in determining children’s quality of learning. It is found that early childhood investment yields strong returns for all levels of education. The early childhood interventions include nurturing care, quality pre-primary education, early stimulation, parenting programs, child and maternal health and nutrition and family packages play important roles in supporting children’s quality of learning up to later years, reducing the achievement gaps of poverty and supporting the most vulnerable children to keep up with their peers. It suggests the early childhood interventions to be holistic by considering the diverse factors, including nutritional support to children and mothers as well as parental support and stimulation. Another highlighted finding is the role of the family in providing nurturing care and the readiness of children, family and school (Britto, 2010) as well as community as key contributing factors to children’s growth and development in the later years, including their learning ability.

Despite significant reforms and investment in the education system in Indonesia, learning outcomes remain far below target. At the forefront, this paper lays out relevant rationales contributing to the slow-paced progress of learning including the widening learning gap across Indonesia, poor teacher quality, and inadequacy for early childhood development intervention – to name a few. Research has been conducted through a review of the literatures across the global and regional level as well as in Indonesia context and interview for TF findings. This report seeks to explore what are the early childhood factors contributing to poor learning outcomes in primary school and provide a range of cost-effective approaches to early childhood development that have successfully improved learning. This report highlights some key findings regarding the connection between early childhood interventions and students learning outcomes in primary school. The conclusions from this report will complement learnings from the field to allow primary finding be the basis for further research. Beyond its scientific capacity, the recommendation is hoped to be useful for policy making which is key to architect sustainable education in Indonesia.

While results have been largely positive on the reform and investment in education over the past two decades, it is recognized that the students' learning quality has

1 Defined as below level 2 band in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)


In terms of policy making, the study finds that the local government requires support in translating and implementing the policies at the national level regarding the early childhood intervention that are appropriate to their local contexts. The limitation of data availability also appears to be a challenge at the sub-national level, including the limitation on the data of student’s academic progress in early primary years.

Lastly, reiterating the study by World Bank (2019) 2, some policy advocacy works are advised to:

● Issue the policy statement of making two years of pre-primary education compulsory by 2030.

● Increase public funding to early childhood education and development with some alternative and innovative funding approaches.

● Use the budget allocation for PAUD to increase the supply of quality early childhood education.

● Stimulate the registration of PAUD services through campaign and socialization.

● Improve the data collection and collaboration among teachers, students, and other related stakeholders.

● Develop strategic partnership among Development Partners to support coordination, advocacy to the government and ensure consistent messaging is adopted across different implementing partners and different geographic areas.

2 World Bank. 2019. The Promise of Education in Indonesia: Consultation Edition: Overview (English). Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/968281574095251918/Overview.

Glossary of TermsBPS Badan Pusat Statistik (Central Bureau of Statistics)

DAPODIK Data Pokok Pendidikan (Basic Education Data)

ECED Early Childhood Education and Development

GoI Government of Indonesia

INAP Indonesian National Assessment Program

Kemendikbud Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan (Ministry of Education and Culture)

MOEC Ministry of Education and Culture

MORA Ministry of Religious Affairs

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PAUD Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini (Early childhood education programs)

PAUD DAK Dana Alokasi Khusus (Special Allocation Fund)

PINTAR Pengembangan Inovasi untuk Kualitas Pembelajaran (Tanoto Foundation’s Flagship program for Basic Education)

PISA Programme for International Student Assessment

PKH Program Keluarga Harapan (A program that provides conditional social assistance to families who are considered as poor)

Pusmenjar Pusat Asesmen dan Pembelajaran (Center for Assessment and Learning)

Riskesdas Basic Health Research (Riset Kesehatan Dasar)

RPJMN Indonesia's National Medium Term Development Plan (Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional)

SDG Sustainable Development Goals

SIGAP Siapkan Generasi Anak Berprestasi (Tanoto Foundation’s Flagship program for Early Childhood Education and Development)

Susenas National Socio-economic Survey (Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional)

TF Tanoto Foundation

UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund


Acknowledgements

Summary of Key Findings

The authors would like to thank Filantropi Indonesia for the support and the staff of Tanoto Foundation for their guidance on the research topic, participation in key informant interviews and time taken to provide comments and feedback on earlier drafts.

While noting different contexts can change the effectiveness of certain interventions, this research report, based on global and Indonesian literature, highlights the following key findings in relation to the links between early childhood interventions and learning outcomes in primary school:

1. The most commonly cited effective early childhood interventions likely to impact on child development (including cognitive development) are nurturing care (esp. 0-3 years). Nurturing Care is characterised by a stable environment that promotes children’s health and nutrition, protects children from threats, and gives them opportunities for early learning, through affectionate interactions and relationships. Other research from developing countries shows a strong link between early stimulation, attending a quality preschool and provision of conditional cash transfers linked to ECED indicators on academic performance. Meanwhile, Annex 2 provides a more detailed list of practices that have a positive effect on learning and access and comparative cost. It shows that after providing access to a quality preschool, investing in practices related to teaching methods improve learning, cost effectively.

2. If children attend pre-primary/kindergarten for longer, including informal play-based groups prior to formal pre-primary, learning outcomes are further enhanced.

3. The more risk factors that are addressed in an early childhood intervention the greater the impact of on learning outcomes.

• Nutrition interventions are more effective in improving learning outcomes when combined with interventions that address socio-environmental

factors such as parental education and the home environment.

• Interventions that provide packages of support to the whole family unit not just the child are more effective. For example, a visit to a Posyandu may include an immunisation for the child plus skills for care givers on positive discipline.

4. Early childhood interventions for disadvantaged populations have the potential to reduce disparity (e.g. among the rich and poor and urban and rural area). Currently access to early childhood services and the quality of these services in Indonesia are much lower in rural and remote areas.

5. High-quality care in families, child day care services, and preschools during the earliest years needs to be followed by high quality schooling and services into adolescence in order to capitalise on inter-dependence between investments made in the successive stages of the life cycle.

6. Interventions that build on existing delivery platforms increase community buy-in, enhance feasibility of scaling-up and sustainability.

7. Providing access to quality early childhood services in Indonesia is severely underfunded and with many services provided by government and partners uncoordinated.

8. Despite some progress, there are still many data gaps on ECED, particularly at the sub-national level. This inhibits the ability of policy makers and practitioners to make informed decisions on the most effective ways to invest in ECED in order to impact on learning outcomes


Key Research Questions

Methodology

This research is driven by the research questions below:

1) What Early Childhood Development research exists globally that shows key factors that contribute to poor learning outcomes in primary school? This may include research that highlights and compares the impact of child health and nutrition, socio-economic background of families, level of parental engagement in child development and access to pre-primary education.

The methodology used for this study will use a mixed method approach. The research reviews secondary data sources that consists of qualitative and quantitative information. The research methods included:

• Literature review of relevant research, from various reports published by international and national organisations such as the World Bank, UNICEF, TF, OECD.

• Review of data on child development indicators and learning outcomes in Indonesia taken from Indonesian statistics such as Riskesdas, BPS, and the Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) and Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA).

2) What cost effective early childhood development interventions have been used successfully in developing countries and in an Indonesian context to improve cognitive ability and learning outcomes in school and later life? How effective are they?

3) What kind of advocacy (including approach and policy advice) could be made to influence Government of Indonesia policy and programming in relation to child development and improving learning outcomes?

• Semi-structured interviews with TF staff involved in early childhood development and basic education investments

• Review of baselines and internal monitoring data for TF’s Early Childhood Development and Basic Education investments


Background

Chapter 1foundations are in place to ensure children can reach their full potential. There is strong evidence to suggest that early childhood experiences have a profound impact on brain development – affecting learning, health, behaviour and lifetime opportunities in later years. For Indonesia to benefit from its expected ‘demographic dividend’ in 2030, radical action will be needed, commencing immediately, to ensure children reach their full potential including their ability to learn.

COVID-19 is likely to threaten any gains in relation to both access and quality that have been achieved in recent years. The Government of Indonesia has moved quickly to support learning during the pandemic, instituting online learning and educational TV for early childhood through senior secondary (MoEC Circular Letter No. 4/2020). However, recent World Bank modelling has simulated the effects that COVID-19 will have on learning and school outcomes. The authors estimate that Indonesian children have already lost 11 points on the PISA reading scale and USD 249 in future annual earnings due to the four-month closure period from March to July 2020 (Yarrow, N., Masood, E., Afkar, R, 2020). Due to ongoing closures these losses are expected to increase.

Status of Early Childhood Development in Indonesia

There are strong indicators to suggest that Early Childhood Education and Development (ECED) is becoming an increasing policy priority for Indonesia. The establishment of Directorate General for Early Childhood Education back in 2000 has been followed by a Grand Design and several ministerial regulations shaping Indonesia’s early childhood sector. Services are cross-sectoral and provided in different formats by different ministries in Indonesia (See Table 1). Indonesia’s Education Law No. 20/2003 spec¬ifies that early childhood education (Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, or PAUD) should cover the peri¬od from birth to six years through different types of services such as playgroups and kindergartens. Despite an increased focus on integrated services, they are still quite limited in scope and reach. Presidential Regulation No. 60/2013 on Holistic Integrated Early Childhood Development (HI-ECD) aims to provide a strong foundation for improved implementation and coordination.

3 Defined as below level 2 band in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)

State of Education in Indonesia

Despite large scale education reforms over the past two decades including increased funding, the quality of learning appears to have improved only slightly. Learning inequality is high between regions, between schools and within schools. While Indonesia has achieved high levels of school enrolment over the last two decades, learning remains ‘flat’ and inequality in learning outcomes is increasing. The majority of Indonesian students are performing below basic proficiency 3: 70% of students in reading, 72% in maths and 60% in science achieved below basic proficiency. Less than one per cent of Indonesian students achieved ‘high’ proficiency (level 5 or above) in at least one subject. Indonesia’s scores are lower than all countries in the region except the Philippines. The 2018 PISA scores have not shown any significant improvement since Indonesia first undertook PISA in 2001. For more detailed background on the status of Indonesia’s education system and learning outcomes see Annex 1.

Evidence from various studies (World Bank, 2017) in Indonesia shows poor teacher quality is the single main factor behind poor student learning outcomes at school. Rote-learning and content-focused teaching approaches dominate across Indonesia, and many teachers themselves are not equipped with the critical thinking skills measured in PISA. Other issues that hamper learning at primary school include poor teacher attendance, inadequate teacher training and support, as well as shortcomings in the curriculum and assessment systems.

However, by the age of 6 years, 85% of a child’s brain development is nearly in place (UNICEF, 2019). Therefore, it is critical that by the time a child enters grade one, the

6 | Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn (UCP) Study Background

Table 1: Summary of ECED Services provide by the Government of Indonesia

Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC)

Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA)

Ministry of Home Affairs with Ministry of Health staff

National Family Planning Board

Formal Kindergartens (taman kanak-kanak, TK)

Islamic kindergartens (raudhotul atfal, RA)

Nonformal Playgroups (kelompok bermain, KB)ECED posts (Pos PAUD)Child care centers (taman penitipan anak, TPA)Other early childhood units (satuan PAUD sejenis, SPS)

Islamic kindergartens (taman pendidikan quran, TPQ)

Integrated health service units (Posyandu)

Toddler family groups (bina keluarga balita, BKB)

Source: World Bank 2012.

Early Childhood Education

Although early childhood education is not yet compulsory in Indonesia, the subsector is growing and the intent is to make one year of pre-primary education compulsory by 2030 (World Bank, 2020). Early childhood enrolment has increased over the period of 2015-2018 but remains low at less than 38.1% (SUSENAS, 2018), way below

the national target of 77% as stated in RPJMN 2015-2019 (See Figure 1). The newly appointed Minister of Education, Mr. Nadiem Makarim, has recently integrated the ECED Directorate under the Directorate General for Early Childhood, Elementary and Middle Education (Direktorat Jenderal PAUD, Pendidikan Dasar dan Pendidikan Menengah) to accommodate the smooth learning transition from PAUD to elementary and high school.

Disparities in education in Indonesia start at an early age, reflected in the gap of access to early childhood education (including Taman Kanak-Kanak, PAUD). Such inequality is not only among families from the poorest to the richest quintile, but also among urban and rural areas. Over 30 million Indonesians live below the poverty line (US $2 per day) and half of all households are clustered around the poverty line. Of the poor, 65 percent currently live in rural areas. For these families, national economic improvements have brought only modest gains in health and education, putting children's

development at risk and threatening national progress. Educational attainment profiles (World Bank, 2012) reveal that while almost all children from all segments of society start primary school, children from poorer households and children from rural areas have more difficulties progressing from lower levels of education to higher levels. Only 55 percent of rural children make it to junior secondary school, and less than a quarter enrol in senior secondary. In contrast, 80 percent of urban children make it to junior secondary school and almost two-thirds enrol in senior secondary. According to the Indonesian

National

Boys

Girls

Urban

Rural

201515%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

2016 2017 2018

Source: SUSENAS

Figure 1. Gross Enrolment Ratio for Early Childhood Education (aged 3-6 years) (2015-2018)


Lancet Study, children who have attended PAUD, are better prepared for school, less likely to fall behind and therefore more likely to stay longer in schools.

In the 2019/2020 academic year there were 205,472 early childhood education centers in Indonesia (UNICEF, 2020). The number includes formal and informal institutions across the country and there are significant disparities across geographic regions. For example, East Java has the highest number of centers (38,673), while there were only less than 1,000 numbers in Papua (939) and North Kalimantan (629). Despite the limited number of PAUD services in the country, SUSENAS (2019) recorded that all Indonesian children below from age 0-6 years old had accessed early childhood education in many forms, from formal to non-formal and informal. However, national level data shows 61.98% accessed formal kindergarten (Taman Kanak-Kanak, under MoEC) and only 20.72% have accessed the non-formal and informal pre-school services.

In addition to access issues, another major challenge is the low quality of PAUD early childhood education in Indonesia (UNICEF, 2020). The low quality of centres is also further affected by the low quality of PAUD teachers4. Only 32% of PAUD teachers have a bachelor degree in education and around 68% are high school graduates (UNICEF, 2020). While the government encourages each village to have at least one PAUD centre, the quality of such centres is often questionable. Despite the introduction of an early childhood education curriculum, interviews5 suggested this was not yet

universally applied and there is a large gap in learning between pre-primary and elementary school with no support for this transition, impacting on child and school readiness.

While Minimum standards of quality for ECED have been laid out by the government these are not well enforced with available data showing nearly 80% of them not accredited (UNICEF, 2020). Many ECED providers are unaware of the purpose of these standards (Won, E. & Adriany, V., 2020). According to PAUD 2019–20 data (UNICEF, 2020), only a small percentage of the non-formal ECED services are accredited. Many of these services operate in private homes or garages, and some operate in parallel with the health centres (Posyandu).

While UNICEF (2020) recommends 10 per cent of total education spending should be for ECED by 2020, the current allocation is only 1.33 per cent of the entire education sector budget (MOEC 2019). Currently registered PAUD receives partial subsidy from the government of Rp600,000 for each student per year who is enrolled in the center. These funds are transferred to the centre to buy learning materials and equipment, additional support for teacher’s transportation and meetings, parental education support, additional food for children and other educational activities. However even with this support for PAUD, it remains unaffordable for many families and resources are still lacking. Some PAUD are located far from the community, particularly in rural areas, making it difficult for parents to send their young children. In addition, with the known low quality of PAUD in rural areas, parents often choose to keep them at home.

4 Interview with TF’s staffs, 20205 Ibid

Parenting Programs

Indonesia increasingly recognizes the impor¬tance of parent education related not only to ECED but also to other levels of education as well. The result has been a plethora of programs developed and implemented by a wide range of government ministries (Education and Culture, Health, Social Affairs, Religious Affairs, and the National Board of Family Planning), international nongovern¬mental organizations and other local

partners. Unfortunately, these programs lack consistent messaging and coordination, with many parents missing out on relevant parenting information at the right stage of a child’s development (World Bank, 2020). A World Bank Study of Indonesian Parenting programs (Tomlinson, H. & Andina, S., 2015) in 2015 provided a range of recommendations to improve targeting of messages and system enhancement for the short and long term.


Child Health and Nutrition

The Global Nutrition Report 2018 (Tomlinson & Andina, 2015) shows some progress has been made in reducing stunting among under 5 year olds in Indonesia. Child stunting among children below five years old was as high as 42% in 2000. There has been a gradual reduction in

this rate up until 2013 (to 37.2%). This has accelerated more recently with data in 20196 showing a further reduction of stunting to 27.67%. Indonesia now aims to reduce stunting to 14% in 2024 and it is on track.

Bali

Kepula

uan R

iau

Bangk

a Belit

ung

DKI Jak

artaJa

mbi

DI Yog

yaka

rta

Sulawes

i Utar

aRiau

Banten

Papua

Barat

Jawa B

arat

Kaliman

tan Utar

a

Lampun

g

Jawa T

imur

Bengk

ulu

Sumate

ra Bara

t

Jawa T

enga

h

Kaliman

tan Ti

mur

Sumate

ra Sela

tan

Maluku

UtaraPap

ua

Sumate

ra Utar

a

Maluku

Sulawes

i Sela

tan

Sulawes

i Teng

ah

Sulawes

i Teng

gara

Kaliman

tan Bara

t

Kaliman

tan Sela

tan

Kaliman

tan Te

ngah

Aceh

Goronta

lo

Nusa T

engg

ara Bara

t

Nusa T

engg

ara Ti

mur

Indon

esia

Sulawes

i Bara

t0.00

5.00

10.00 14.4

2 16.8

4 19.9

3

19.9

6

21.0

3

21.0

4

21.18 23.9

5

24.11

24.5

8

26.2

1

26.2

5

26.2

8

26.8

6

26.8

6

27.4

7

27.6

8

27.6

8

28.0

9

28.9

8

29.0

7

29.3

6

30.11

30.3

8

30.5

9

31.2

6

31.4

4

31.4

6

31.7

5

32.3

0

34.18

34.8

9 37.8

5

40.3

8

43.8

2

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

40.00

45.00

Source: SSGBI 2019

Figure 2: Stunting Prevalence at the Provincial Level (2019)

Despite the improvement with stunting prevalence at the national level during the past year, disparities in geographic regions remain (See Figure 2). Up to four years before the targeted timeline, none of the provinces in Indonesia have met the target of below 14% stunting prevalence. Meanwhile, the highest percentage of stunting is in NTT province (43.82%).

While reports show that stunting rate in the national and provincial level is decreasing, this is not uniform at the kabupaten and even village level. SMERU (2019)

6 Survey Status Gizi Balita Indonesia (2019)

developed a Small Area Estimation (SAE) method to map nutrition status in village level in Rokan Hulu district in Riau, and found that stunting prevalence had changed due to the dynamics at the local level (See Figure 3). Some factors that reduced stunting were: parental education, reduced poverty in the area, clean sanitation, committed health workers and village leaders. On the other hand, factors that increased stunting were a lack of transportation, community hygiene practices, extreme geographical conditions and food security issues.


Figure 3: Nutritional Mapping to Identify Stunting Prevalence (Rokan Hulu District)

Kecamatan Tambusai Utara

Kecamatan Tambusai

Kecamatan Kepenuhan

Kecamatan Bonai Darussalam

Kecamatan Kunto Darussalam

Kecamatan Kepenuhan Hulu

Kecamatan Rambah Hilir

Kecamatan Bangun Purba

Kabupaten Padang Lawas

Kabupaten Padang Lawas Utara

Kabupaten Rokan Hilir

Kabupaten Bengkalis

Kabupaten Siak

Kabupaten Kampar

Kota Pekanbaru

Kabupaten Pasaman

Kabupaten Lima Puluh Kota

Kabupaten Mandaling Natal

Kecamatan Rambah

Kecamatan Rambah Samo

Kecamatan Ujung Batu

Kecamatan Rokan IV Koto

Kecamatan Pendalian IV Koto

Kecamatan Kabun

Kecamatan Tandun

Kecamatan Pagarantapah Darussalam

Stunting (HAZ) 48.96%-52.77% 52.77%-55.83% 55.83%-57.70% 57.70%-59.70% 59.70%-63.25%

N

S

EW

Source: SMERU (2019)

This mapping, once completed for other provinces will provide an excellent guide for how ECED resource can be directed in the future, potentially targeting highly stunted areas and ideally aligning with investments in basic education.

Food security and nutrition are closely interlinked. Food insecurity can lead to different manifestations of malnutrition. One vital element that explains this connection is the food that people eat; specifically, the quality of their diet. Food insecurity can affect diet quality in different ways, potentially leading to undernutrition as well as overweight and obesity. Ensuring access to a healthy diet is a prerequisite for achieving the SDG target of eradicating all forms of malnutrition. A recent situation analysis by SMERU (Sirojuddin et al. 2020) shows that Indonesia has made important progress in further improving food security and nutrition. Nevertheless, some challenges remain. First, the increases in the production of most food commodities, especially rice, have not caught up with the increase in consumption. The persistent dependency on rice imports could threaten food security during the COVID-19-induced crisis. Second, although insufficient food consumption is declining, in 2018, around 21 million people in Indonesia still had calorie intake below the minimum dietary requirement. Poverty and high food prices in relation to income remain major challenges

in the effort to increase access to food. Third, the food consumption pattern of most Indonesians is still less than ideal, with carbohydrates continuing to dominate the food intake; insufficient consumption of sources of protein, fruits and vegetables; and the increasing trend in processed food consumption in both urban and rural areas. Fourth, even though the prevalence of stunting (low height for age), underweight and wasting (low weight for height) among children under 5 declined since 2013, the level of undernutrition is still high by international standards. In addition, the prevalence of overweight and obesity has steadily increased among children 6 to 12 years old, adolescents and adults. Evidence also suggests that micronutrient deficiencies prevail although representative data has not been collected for years. Indonesia is thus facing a triple burden of malnutrition in which undernutrition co-exists with over-nutrition and micronutrient deficiencies. The current crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and social distancing measures could erode the progress that has been achieved. The report makes several recommendations for the government which includes promoting a balanced diet through behavioural change communications, improving access to health services, water and sanitation, nutrition-sensitive food systems and affordability of food and ensuring social protection systems are targeting those most in need.

0 5 10 20


Literature Review

Chapter 2

The most recent Lancet Series on Early Childhood Development (2016) has emphasised “nurturing care”, especially of children below three years of age, and multi-sectoral interventions (using health as an entry point) are needed to maximise a child’s development potential. Nurturing Care is characterised by a stable environment that promotes children’s health and nutrition, protects children from threats, and gives them opportunities for early learning, through affectionate interactions and relationships. Benefits of such care are life-long, and include improved health, wellbeing, and ability to learn and earn. Sectoral interventions combined with elements of nurturing care and protection, can boost the effect on child outcomes. This approach encourages interventions directed at the family as a unit rather than the child alone. High-quality care in families, child day care services, and preschools during the earliest years needs to be followed by high quality schooling and services into adolescence in order to capitalise on inter-dependence between investments made in the successive stages of the life cycle. The results of the review suggest that “successful, smart and sustainable” interventions to improve developmental outcomes need to: (i) promote nurturing care and protection; (ii) be implemented as packages that target multiple risks; (iii) be applied at developmentally appropriate times during the life course; (iv) be of high quality; and (v) build on existing delivery platforms to enhance feasibility of scaling-up and sustainability. Interventions shown to have significant benefits for childhood development are summarised in Figure 4 and Figure 5 highlights three packages of integrated support recommended from the research.

Global Literature

The early years of life offer a special window for societies to make investments in their children to set a path towards success in primary school, their own well-being and to help ensure later economic returns to these investments (Heckman, 2007). Children cannot thrive with stunted bodies and brains, and early gaps in learning and skills trap them in lower developmental trajectories from which it becomes increasingly difficult to escape (World Bank, 2020). This perpetuates a cycle of underachievement and high dropout rates that continue to harm vulnerable young people (UNICEF, 2019). The following literature review of global and Indonesian research highlights findings related to early childhood indicators and specific interventions and their effect on learning outcomes. Many childhood experiences including environmental, biological and psycho-social affect developmental potential. This review focuses primarily on areas of particular relevance to the Indonesian context including, nutrition, early childhood education and parenting programs.

While many definitions of ECED exist, the Global Monitoring Report 2007 focused on a holistic approach that included “children’s survival, growth, development and learning – including health, nutrition and hygiene and cognitive, social physical and emotional development – from birth to entry into primary school in formal, informal and non-formal settings” (UNESCO, 2007). Under the broader SDG umbrella, investing in early childhood development has become not only an aim in itself, but a requisite for achieving many other SDGs (eg. SDGs 1-5, 10, 16, and 17).

11 | Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn (UCP) Study Literature Review

Figure 4: Evidence-based interventions that affect aspects of nurturing care (The Lancet, 2016)

Adolescence and adulthood

10 12 14 16 >18Years

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 BirthWeeks

24 48 72Hours

1 2 3 4Weeks

6 12 18 24Months

3 4 5 6 8 >10Years

• Family planning• Periconceptional

nutrition

Parenting programmes*• Periconceptional nutrition• Positive parenting and

responsivity• Maltreatment prevention

Maternal mental health and wellbeing• Assessment and treatment

for anxiety, psychosis, and depression

Social protection• Conditional cash

transfers

Water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH)• Ensuring access to clean water• Creating sanitation infrastructure• Promoting hygiene behaviours

• Routine care for labour and childbirth

• Management of birth complications

• Immediate newborn care

• Routine antenatal care and antenatal nutrition

• Maternal infection prevention, diagnosis, and treatment

• Assessment and management of fetal health and growth

• Management of pregnancy complications

• Neonatal disease prevention and treatment

• Healthy home care and nutritional support

• Promotion of optimal infant and young child feeding

• High quality early childhood care and education programmes

• Infectious disease prevention• Detection and management of

childhood illness• High quality childhood care and

educatioin programmes

Pregnancy Labour and birth

Labour onset-first 3 days

Neonatal

First week-first month

Infancy

1-23 months

Early childhood

24-60 months

School age

5-10 yearsFirst

trimesterSecond trimester

Third trimester

Interventions throughout the life course

Source: SMERU (2019)

Figure 5: Recommended Packages of Support

Lancet Series (2017) Recommended Packages of ECED Support as below:

1. Family support and strengthening package: Three elements of family strengthening increase the likelihood that families are able to provide nurturing care for their children: access to quality services (eg. antenatal care, immunisation, nutrition); skills building (eg. nurturing care and reduction of harsh discipline); and support (eg, social protection, safety networks, and family support policies).

2. Caring for the caregiver package: This two-generation package emphasises care and protection of parents’ physical and mental health and wellbeing, while enhancing caregivers’ capacity to provide nurturing care to their child.

3. Early learning and protection package: This set of interventions integrates the support of young children with parental support and the facilitation of teachers’ and caregivers’ ability to create a nurturing environment in day care and early childhood centres. The emphasis is on quality and family support through parental empowerment, guidance on nutrition and care, and child protection.


Research on Stunting and Learning Outcomes

Stunted growth (or linear growth7) during early life has been associated with lower than average cognitive scores and school achievement and with health conditions in later life. A recent Lancet publication (Prado & Kubes, 2019) showed in nutritional supplementation interventions, improvements in linear growth were associated with small improvements in child development, whereas nurturing and stimulation interventions had significant effects on child development but no effects on linear growth. This showed that the determinants of linear growth and brain development are only partly shared. For this reason, for individuals to thrive and reach their full potential, interventions should specifically target determinants of brain development and not simply linear growth (e.g. provide nutrients alone). Evidence on later outcomes

from early childhood interventions remains limited. A systematic review (Tanner, Candland & Odden, 2015) of 55 studies from developing countries has shown that early stimulation, preschool, and cash transfers appear to be most effective in improving educational outcomes. It showed early childhood interventions could affect schooling through a number of possible pathways: cognitive development could result in increased scholastic achievement, while healthier children are better able to attend classes. The study also showed schooling does tend to improve for those who are in quality preschool and supplemental feeding programs for longer.

The World Bank has recently considered the impact on child development of combining cash transfers with parenting programs with some promising results (Arriagada, et.al. 2018). Figure 6 shows the impact of cash transfers on language and cognitive development across several developing countries.

Figure 6: Impact of Cash Transfers during early years on cognitive and language skills

Cognitive

Language

Paxson et al. 2010

Lopez Boo et al. 2010

Lopez Boo et al. 2010

Marcours et al. 2010

Barhamet et al. 2010

Paxson et al. 2011

ECUADOR HONDURAS MEXICONICARAGUA

.00

.05

.10

.15

.20

.25

.18

.13

.11

.15

.15.15

.18

.18

.23

Source: Arriagada, Ana-Maria et al. 2018. Note: Size effects measured in standard deviations

7 Linear growth faltering and stunting are considered a manifestation of chronic undernutrition caused by a number of complex factors, including chronic nutrient deficiency and exposure to poor environmental conditions.


Figure 7 shows the results of combining cash transfer programs (Conditional and Unconditional Cash Transfer) with parenting interventions in 4 different countries.

Figure 7: Impact of adding parenting interventions to cash transfer programs

COLOMBIA MEXICO NIGER PERU

Safety net platform* CCT CCT UCT CCT

Delivery modality home visits group meetings home visits and group meetings

home visits and group meetings

Parenting curriculum Adapted from “Reach Up”

Educación Inicial Adapted from “Essential Family Practices Package”

Adapted from “Reach Up”

Impact on parental practices and behavior

Improved parental practices (lplay activities and play material) in the short term

Not measured Improved nutrition and stimulation practices and reduced harsh discipline

Improved parental practices: increased play activities and play material, and reduced harsh discipline

Impact on child wasting and stunting

None Not reported None Not reported

Impacts on cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes

Improved cognotopn and language skills but impacts were not sustained in the medium term. No impact on socio-emotional skills

Positive impact on cognition and language only when the program included enhanced promotion of the parenting intervention

Improved socio-emotiona skills but no impact on other child development domains

Positive impact on child development, espceally cognition and language

Source: Arriagada, Ana-Maria et al. 2018, based on impact evaluation reports from Colombia (Attanasio et al. 2014 and Andrew et al. 2018), Mexico (Fernald et al. 2017), Niger (Barry et al. 2017 and Premand et al. 2016), Peru (Araujo et al. 2016).*CCT= Conditional Cash Transfer, UCT= Unconditional Cash TransferNote: Reported impacts are based on the comparison of cash transfer plus parenting intervention versus cash transfer alone.

Pre-Primary Education

A recent UNICEF (2019) report specifically highlights the importance of pre-primary education as an integral component of early childhood development. Annex 2 shows how pre-primary education compares in terms of cost and effectiveness in relation to other interventions that improves learning outcomes. Out of 20 practices, those related to improving teaching methods are noted 7 times, with 4 practices related to teaching occurring in the top 10.

Quality early childhood education generates a positive sequence of learning – while lack of access to pre-primary education widens achievement gaps and restricts opportunities. A solid body of evidence shows that the foundations for learning are largely built in the early years of life, before a child ever enters a primary school. Quality pre-primary education sets a strong foundation for learning that includes:

• stronger social skills, larger vocabularies, better number sense and curiosity to learn more8;

• children are more likely to stay in school and attain minimum reading and mathematics competencies in primary education and beyond; and

• helps children to develop the resilience to cope with traumatic and stressful situations, such as conflicts and other emergencies9.

Universal pre-primary education also makes education systems more efficient, less repeaters and less remedial strategies required to ‘catch up’. Regardless of household or national incomes, attending an early childhood education program is one of the strongest predictors for supporting a child’s readiness for school (UNICEF, 2019). A quality pre-primary education narrows early achievement gaps for children from

8 In the Philippines, children who attended pre-primary programmes continued to demonstrate higher performance in literacy, mathematics and social and emotional development at the end of Grade 1. 9 Ibid


disadvantaged households and places them on a more equal footing with their well-off peers. A study across 55 low income countries shows increasing national pre-primary enrolment levels from 25 per cent to 75 per cent is associated with a 27 per cent increase in the proportion of children meeting minimum mathematics competencies in primary school and a 25 per cent increase in the proportion of children meeting minimum reading competencies (UNICEF, 2019). Parents or care-givers can also return to the workforce and contribute to a country’s economy. Pre-primary education builds skills that will be needed in the job market, including collaboration, self-control, critical thinking and motivation – the skills that turn knowledge into know-how and people into productive citizens (UNICEF, 2019).

As early childhood services continue to expand in the community, particular attention has been placed on transitions from home to formal pre-primary and then pre-primary to elementary level. Although not new terminology, it is from this notion that the question of ‘readiness’ has continued to bring much discussion and debate. With increased pressure on schools to increase enrolment, retention and completion rates, the role that early childhood services play in preparing children for school and its impact on their future has received considerable attention (Arnold et.al. 2008). Britto (2010) emphasises that the readiness of the child, family and school are equally important. ‘Ready children’ should be inclusive of the disadvantaged, and in addition to academic skills such as literacy and numeracy includes the ability to follow directions, working well with other children and engaging in learning activities (Mclanahan, 2005). These abilities are derived from the broader domains of physical well-being and motor development; social and emotional development; approaches to learning; language development; cognition and general knowledge, spiritual and moral development; appreciation for diversity and national pride. Many argue there is a disproportionate emphasis place on the readiness of child rather than the readiness of the school system to support a child’s transition (Woodhead & Moss, 2007). Key elements of a ready school include:

• an understanding among early year teachers that children learn through play and natural experiences and ensuring they have the resources to do so;

• a curriculum in kindergarten and the early grades that builds on prior learning. Evidence show that skills are most effectively learned and practiced when embedded in meaningful experiences. Even for children who enter school with¬out having mastered specific skills, curriculum should include child-guided as well as teacher-supported activities and should emphasize hands-on, integrated learning. Where kindergarten and schools are not co-located, some kindergartens provide children with portfolios that can be passed to Year 1 teachers, ensuring teachers have the information on where a child is at across all domains; and

• The school must take into account individual differ¬ences in language, culture, and prior experience make mean¬ingful connections with each child’s home, culture, and community. This includes providing opportunities for parents to engage with schools e.g. welcome days, parent-teacher interviews. ‘Ready schools’ are also thought to provide the bridge between home and school and include working with parents to overcome challenges such as the use of the child’s mother tongue when different to the language of instruction (Woodhead & Moss, 2007). Children along with their parents should visit the primary school before they start formally to increase their familiarity and reduce any anxiety about starting school in a new environment.

Family and community support that contributes to readiness involves a nurturing home environment, good nutrition, access to high-quality preschool, time set aside daily for parents to help their child learn with the supports (from school) that help their child learn.

Britto (2010) stresses that all 3 dimensions are interrelated, and one cannot be achieved without the other and also acknowledges the influence culture has on readiness.

A study from the Australian Center for Education Research (ACER) (2019) funded by the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs reviewed 109 studies conducted over a 20-year period, from 1998 to 201710, in a spread of geographic regions including Indonesia to understand the effectiveness of ECED programs and impact on children’s learning outcomes, which could include cognitive, socio-emotional, language and motor

10 A summary map of the evidence, created using 3ie software, presents the studies by type of intervention, DFAT region, year of publication and the age group of children participating in the intervention. https://egmopenaccess.3ieimpact.org/evidence-maps/improving-young-childrens-learning-economically-developing-countries-scoping-review


development. Results from the review showed that it is better to do something rather than nothing when it comes to ECED; all types of interventions (including income supplementation, parent focussed, child focussed), if of a certain quality, can have a positive impact on early childhood development. Results also indicated that programs that can leverage existing resources within communities to support children’s learning have great value. For example, programs that enhance parenting practices can strengthen foundations for early learning, without the costs associated with more expensive centre-based programs. The review also found that, at the most basic level, direct income supplementation interventions can help to address barriers to early learning in the home environment, while at the other end, integrated programs demonstrate that the most effective support for early learning requires a whole-of-community approach.

Other key messages highlighted in the ACER research included:

• Effects of interventions differ depending on children’s starting age, duration (length of enrolment) and dosage (number of hours per week);

• Training of staff is a key factor for success;

• Community buy-in also contributes to effectiveness;

• Child-focused ECEC interventions differ in terms of setting, staffing, design, and scale, depending on the context in which they are implemented; and

• Participation in child-focused ECEC interventions may offer a protective effect on learning in later years, even where the quality of primary schooling is low.

Indonesian Literature on ECED and Child Cognitive Development

This review highlights only a few longitudinal studies related to early childhood development and later learning in Indonesia. Unfortunately, there are very few Indonesian studies in this field.

The World Bank (Nakajima, Jung & Pradhan, 2016) has studied the contribution of early childhood education to learning outcomes both in early age (0-6 years old) and early elementary school (6-9 years old) from 2009

to 2016. The intervention operated in 50 districts and focused on 3,000 villages identified on the basis of their poverty rates and size. The study showed that in rural areas, students who have been to PAUD showed early achievements in terms of social competence, language and cognitive development, as well as less social behaviour problems. In addition, the school readiness among students was better among children with longer duration or continuous early education. The study found that children who had been to play-based education such as preschool (3-4 years old) followed by kindergarten (5-6 years old) scored slightly higher than those who have accessed less. The evaluation also found that higher-quality preschools were linked with better child development outcomes in areas such as social competence, language and cognitive development, communications skills and general knowledge.

Another study of the same program (Jung & Hasan, 2014) compared the achievement gap of richer and poorer children in project villages with those of richer and poorer children living in non-project villages over 2 years. There was clear evidence that in project villages, the achievement gap between richer and poorer children decreased in relation to general knowledge, social competence and communication. By contrast, in non-project villages, this gap either increased or stayed constant. The same study recommends including a condition for the cash transfer in the Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH) related to ECED attendance. At the time of the study, conditions for PKH related to baby check-ups and attending primary school but not ECED attendance.

A Lancet longitudinal study (Prado, et al. 2017) from pregnancy to school age in Indonesia found that maternal biomedical interventions (e.g. micronutrients, folic acid) increase procedural memory similar to that of half to one year of schooling. However, there was a stronger association of socio-environmental factors (parental education, socioeconomic status, home environment, and maternal depression) on improved cognition (See Figure 8). This suggests that child health programs focused only on biomedical determinants might not sufficiently enhance child cognition.


Figure 8: Estimates of the association of each biomedical and socio-environmental determinant with each domain score in sample

Socio-environmental risk factors

Low socioeconomic status (below median)

Low maternal education (<6 years)

Low paternal education (<6 years)

Mother depressed at follow-up

Home inventory score at follow-up (below median)

Biomedical risk factors

Maternal supplement (MMN vs IFA)

Maternal MUAC during pregnancy (<23,5 cm)

Maternal haemoglobin during pregnancy (<110 g/L)

Maternal height (<155 cm)

Preterm birth

Small for gestational age

Post-natal growth (below median)

Child haemoglobin at follow-up (<115 g/L)

General intelectual

ability

* *

*

*

*

*

*

**

*

* ** *

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Declarative memory

Executive function

Academic Achievement

Fine motor dexterity

SocioemotionalProcedural memory

Coe

ffici

ent s

ize

0

01

06

02

07

03

08

04

09

05

10

Maternal MMN had long-term benefits for child cognitive development at 9–12 years of age, thereby supporting its role in early childhood development, and policy change toward MMN. The stronger association of socio-environmental determinants with improved cognition suggests present reproductive, maternal, neonatal, and child health programmes focused on biomedical determinants might not sufficiently enhance child cognition, and that programmes addressing socio-environmental determinants are essential to achieve thriving populations

Source: Lancet 2017

TF Baseline Study Monitoring Study (Tanoto Foundation, 2018) showed those students who attended pre-school (PAUD) were able to read at a faster rate of around 12 more words per minute and they also averaged higher reading comprehension.

A recent Indonesian study (Siagian & Adriany, 2020) has highlighted the challenges facing the Government’s implementation of the Holistic Integrated (HI)-ECED program. The concept of integrated services is not well understood among stakeholders including teachers, services being offered by districts are not integrated and lastly cross-sectoral collaboration and coordination are lacking at the local level. Districts with good governance arrangements e.g. Bantul and Magelang were having more success and support for local districts to develop a local responsive framework was recommended to better implement the HI-ECED program.

Tanoto Foundation’s current approach to ECD and Basic Education

Since 2018, TF has started investing in ECED interventions across 3 pillars focusing on stunting reduction, parenting programs and PAUD teacher capacity building. The interventions are channelled through various institutions and sectors, from family to early childhood education centres, from the government policy on stunting to quality of care (formal and informal). In terms of support for basic education, TF supports the improved quality of education through improving teacher’s capacity, as well as school principals in managing schools. The early childhood education (SIGAP) was started in 2019, while the primary and middle education (PINTAR) commenced in 2018.


Key Findings

Chapter 3

nutritional mapping work supported by Tanoto Foundation, is a good start in terms of showing the diversity and disparities across regions and should be continued.

The World Bank (2019) has recently put forward options for GoI consideration in relation to improving ECED. These include the following:

• GoI to issue a policy statement making two years of pre-primary education compulsory by 2030;

• Increase public funding to ECED and seek alternative, innovative approaches to funding;

• Use DAK PAUD to increase the supply of quality early childhood education;

• Use a socialisation campaign to stimulate registration of PAUD services and higher enrolment;

• Improve collaboration among PAUD stakeholders and improve data collection on PAUD services, teachers and learners.

The strategic partnership among Development Partners could support coordination, GoI advocacy and ensure consistent messaging is adopted across different implementing partners and perhaps targets different geographic regions.

A summary of key findings from the literature are in Box 1 at the start of this paper.

Analysis/Discussion/Recommendations

• Investing in the early years yields strong returns for all levels of education. The highest returns on investment occur in the period between birth and 5 years of age, especially for disadvantaged children. Evidence suggests that an additional dollar (USD) invested in quality early childhood development programmes yields a return up to $17 USD.

• While stunting is likely to impact child development, and providing nutritional support to mothers and children can enhance child development, other socio-environmental factors can also impact on brain development. Therefore, it is important for early childhood interventions to be holistic by considering other key determinants such as parental support and stimulation.

• The role of the family, including parents and care-givers in providing “nurturing care” has been highlighted as a key contributor to later child development including their ability to learn. Increasing packages of support such as parenting support/interventions combined with child health interventions build on existing platforms and are relatively low cost.

• Attending quality pre-primary programmes is one of the most significant contributors to improved learning outcomes. Quality pre-primary programmes can reduce the achievement gaps caused by poverty and help the most vulnerable children keep up with their peers.

• Local governments require support to translate and implement the national level HI-ECED policies in ways that are appropriate to their local contexts.

• Data at the sub-national level on key factors contributing to improved learning remains poor. This includes a limited data on a student’s academic progress in early primary years. The ECDI and

18 | Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn (UCP) Study Findings

Annex 1: Background Indonesia’s education system

Education Status of Indonesian Students

Indonesia’s education system is the fourth largest in the world. The formal system collective¬ly employs 3.3 million teachers educating 53.1 mil¬lion children in grades 1 through 12 under both the Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) and the Ministry of Religious Affairs (MoRA). An additional 231,446 early childhood education services support the early learning of 7.4 million children (MOEC, 2019). Despite large scale education reforms over the past two decades including increased funding, the quality of learning appears to have approved only slightly. Seeking to capitalise on the demographic bonus from its young population in the next few years, President Joko Widodo has made the development of human capital a key focus of his second term. The new RPJMN 2019-2024, has emphasised the realisation of school for school aged-children, reducing stunting and improving the quality of education. This initiative is in line with SDG Goal 4 on equal access to education, particularly Goal 4.2 on equal access to early childhood education.

Learning outcomes

While Indonesia has achieved high levels of school enrolment over the last two decades, learning remains ‘flat’ and inequality in learning outcomes is increasing. The majority of Indonesian students are performing below basic proficiency, defined as below level 2 band in the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA)11: 70% of students in reading, 72% in maths and 60% in science achieved below basic proficiency. Less than one per cent of Indonesian students achieved ‘high’ proficiency (level 5 or above) in at least one subject. Indonesia’s scores are lower than all countries in the region except the Philippines.

The 2018 PISA scores have not shown any significant improvement since Indonesia first undertook PISA in 2001 (See Figure 1). Some slightly better performance took place in 2009 for reading and 2015 for science, but the latest results showed stagnation, and in many areas declines in performance. Some analysts attribute this decline to a wider cohort, particularly from eastern Indonesia now participating in the assessment12.

11 Conducted every three years, PISA is a sample-based test that examines what 15 year-old students know in reading, mathematics and science. PISA measures the competencies that will enable students to participate effectively and productively in life as continuing students, workers and citizens – with an emphasis on critical thinking and application of knowledge to real-life situations. Indonesia has participated in PISA since 2000. 12 OECD PISA Presentation to donors, 2019.


Figure 1. Indonesia’s PISA Score 2018

v v

350 350 350

400 400 400

371

2000 2003 20062003 2006 20092006 2009 20122009 2012 2015PISA

Indonesia OECD average Trend - Indonesia

PISA PISA2012 2015 20182015 20182018

382393º

402º

396º

397º

360º

391

371 375

386383

363º 382

403 396

379371

450 450 450

500 500 500

550 550 550score points score points score points

Reading Mathematics Science

Source: OECD 2019

While Indonesia’s scores were low across the board, some groups and areas performed better than others. The average test scores in reading for Jakarta and Yogyakarta were about 40 points higher than the national average (410 and 411 respectively compared to national average of 371), and urban areas generally outperformed rural areas by around the same margin. Socio-economically advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged ones by 52 points for reading. Disadvantaged schools also had access to fewer resources. Girls scored higher than boys in all subjects, consistent with other assessment data available for the country, but the differences were not statistically significant.

Figure 2: Overall Students’ Reading Abilities

Similar to PISA, other student assessments done by different institutions have shown similar results. The Indonesian National Assessment Program (INAP) undertaken in 2016 showed that more than 70% students showed low performance in Math and Science, and a below average result for Reading/literacy (46.83%). Interestingly, despite many of the students’ parents having a tertiary education (known to affect a child’s performance) this has not had a positive impact on their results (Pusmenjar Kemendikbud, 2020).


Annex 2: Highly effective practices to increase access and learning outcomes in education

Source: UNICEF 2019, A World Ready to Learn: Prioritising Early Childhood Education

Highly effective practices to increase access and learning outcomes in education

Impact CostCombined impacts of increased access

and learning (assuming a baseline value of 50% enrollment and 50% learning

Preschool (learning effect by Grade 5) 25% Education Access

Economic

Infrastructure

Teaching methods

Teaching methods

Community

Health

Teaching methods

Teaching methods

Infrastructure/Tech

Health

Economic

Health/Sanitation

Teaching methods

Teaching methods

Education Access

Teaching methods

Health

Economic

Management

Student performance incentives 21%

New school in village 15%

Mother-tounge/bilingual instruction 13%

Better teaching methods 12%

Community-based monitoring 11%

School feeding 10%

Remedial education for those behind 7%

Cut waste – double learning time 6%

Computer-assissted learning and materials 6%

Malaria treatment (in high malaria areas) 6%

Cash transfers 4%

Washrooms and water 4%

Group by ability 4%

Provide info to teachers on student progress 4%

User fee reduction 4%

Providing instructional materials 3%

micronutrient intervention 2%

Teacher performance incentives 2%

Train school management 2%

• Interventions cost 0% to 3% of strandard (basic) costs•• Interventions cost 4% to 9% of standard costs••• Interventions cost 10% or more of standard cost


References

Arnold, C., et al (2008). “Transition to School: Reflections on Readiness”. Journal of Developmental Processes, 3 (26). Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236003946_Transition_to_School_Reflections_on_Readiness/link/00b49515873f29f9f1000000/download.

Arriagada, A., et al (___). “Promoting Early Childhood Development Through Combining Cash Transfer and Parenting Programs”. Available at: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/489331538646764960/pdf/Promoting-Early-Childhood-Development-through-Combining-Cash-Transfer-and-Parenting-Programs.pdf

Heckman, J. (2007). “The economics, technology, and neuroscience of human capability formation”. National Academy of Sciences, 104 (33) 13250-13255; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0701362104.

Jung, H. & Hasan, A. (2014). The Impact of Early Childhood Education on Early Achievement Gaps: Evidence from the Indonesia Early Childhood Education and Development (ECED) Project. (February 1, 2014). World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6794, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2404644

Mclanahan, S. 2005. “School readiness: Closing racial and ethnic gaps – Preface”. The Future of Children. 15. 3-3. 10.1353/foc.2005.0011, https://futureofchildren.princeton.edu/sites/futureofchildren/files/media/school_readiness_15_01_fulljournal.pdf

MoEC (2019) DAPODIK.

Myers, R., & Landers, C. (1989). Preparing children for schools and schools for children. Ponencia presentada ante el CGECCD. Toronto: CGECCD.

Nakajima, H., Jung, B., Pradhan, K. (2016). “Investing in School Readiness: An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness of Early Childhood Education Pathways in Rural Indonesia”. The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 7832. The World Bank Education Global Practice Group.

OECD PISA Presentation to donors, 2019.

Prado, E., et al. (2017) "Maternal multiple micronutrient supplementation and other biomedical and socio-environmental influences on children's cognition at age 9–12 years in Indonesia: follow-up of the SUMMIT randomised trial." The Lancet Global Health 5.2: e217-e228.

Prado, E.L & Kubes, J.N (2019). “Do effects of early life interventions on linear growth corresponds to effects on neuro-behavioural development? A systematic review and meta-analysis”. Available at: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langlo/article/PIIS2214-109X(19)30361-4/fulltext

Pusmenjar Kemdikbud, 2020

Siagian, N. & Adriany, V. (2020). The Holistic Integrated Approach of Early Childhood Education and Development in Indonesia: Between Issues and Possibilities. 10.2991/assehr.k.200808.037.

Sirojuddin A, et al. (2020). Strategic Review of Food Security and Nutrition in Indonesia: 2019–2020 Update. Jakarta: SMERU Research Institute. Available at: https://www.smeru.or.id/sites/default/files/publication/rr_fsn_indonesia_finalreport_eng.pdf

Survey Status Gizi Balita Indonesia. (2019)

SUSENAS. (2018).

Tanner, J., Candland., T & Odden, W. (2015). “Later Impacts of Early Childhood Interventions: A Systematic Review”, IEG Working Paper 2015/3. Washington, D.C: World Bank. Available at: https://ieg.worldbankgroup.org/sites/default/files/Data/reports/chapters/ecd-later-outcomes_overview-introduction.pdf.


Tanoto Foundation Monitoring Baseline, 2018.

The Lancet (2016). “Advancing Early Childhood Development: from Science to Scale. Lancet Series Paper ECD 2, https://www.thelancet.com/series/ECD2016.

Tomlinson, H.B & Andina, S. (2015) Parenting Education in Indonesia: Review and Recommendations to Strengthen Programs and Systems. Washington, D.C: World Bank Group. Available at: https://globalnutritionreport.org/resources/nutrition-profiles/asia/south-eastern-asia/indonesia/

UNESCO (2007) Global Monitoring Report. Available at: https://bangkok.unesco.org/content/global-monitoring-report-2007.

UNICEF (2019) A World Ready to Learn: Prioritizing quality early childhood education, Global Report. New York: UNICEF. Available at https://www.unicef.org/media/57926/file/A-world-ready-to-learn-advocacy-brief-2019.pdf.

UNICEF. (2020) The State of Children in Indonesia. Jakarta: UNICEF Indonesia. Available at: https://www.unicef.org/indonesia/sites/unicef.org.indonesia/files/2020-06/The-State-of-Children-in-Indonesia-2020.pdf

Won, E. & Adriany, V. (2020). “Purpose of Indonesian Early Childhood Education Accreditation: Is It for Rating Grade of Institutions or Improving Their Quality?”. 10.2991/assehr.k.200808.022.

Woodhead, M., & Moss, P. (2007). Early childhood and primary education: Transitions in the lives of young children (No. 2). ___: Open University.

World Bank (2012) Early Childhood Education and Development in Indonesia: Strong Foundations, Later Success - A Preview. Jakarta: World Bank Group. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/12122

World Bank. (2017) “Improving Education Quality in Indonesia’s Poor Rural and Remote Areas”. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/results/2017/12/22/improving-education-quality-in-indonesia-poor-rural-and-remote-areas.

World Bank (2019) The Promise of Education in Indonesia: Consultation Edition: Overview. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/968281574095251918/Overview.

World Bank (2020) The Promise of Education in Indonesia. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/indonesia/publication/the-promise-of-education-in-indonesia.

Yarrow, N., Masood, E., Afkar, R. (2020) Estimates of COVID-19 Impacts on Learning and Earning in Indonesia: How to Turn the Tide. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/34378


PAUD Gross Participation Percentage or ECE Gross Enrolment Rate 2019 (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020) 3-6 year olds: Angka Partisipasi Kasar (APK) PAUD Menurut Kabupaten/Kota 2019/2020 http://dashboard.setnas-stunting.id/apk-paud/

Percentage of Stunting per Kabupaten (2018): http://dashboard.setnas-stunting.id/

Percentage of Stunting per Provinsi (2018): https://www.bps.go.id/indicator/30/1325/1/persentase-balita-pendek-dan-sangat-pendek.html Stunting is defined here as the percentage of children (over 2 year) under the height/age or length/age compared to WHO-MGRS (Multi Growth Reference Study) 2006 Percentage of Poor Population per Kabupaten/Kota 2019 (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020) Persentase Penduduk Miskin Menurut Kabupaten/Kota 2015-2020

Early Childhood Development Index (ECDI) (2018) Numeracy and Literacy and Learning Ability for Children 36 to 59 months Shows the percentage of children mastering set literacy and numeracy tasks in PAUD https://www.bps.go.id/publication/2020/10/22/7318afd993e5483a36649b4d/analisis-perkembangan-anak-usia-dini-indonesia-2018-integrasi-susenas-dan-riskesdas-2018.html

Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) EGRA data here shows percentage of students in category 1 i.e. Fluent Reading with Comprehension: obtained 80% of correct answers for reading comprehension questions, with a note that all of the texts were completely read.

Source/Definition


The information and opinions in this report were prepared by the research partners in collaboration with Perhimpunan Filantropi Indonesia (“Filantropi Indonesia”) and Tanoto Foundation. The materials in this report may be freely copied and distributed for noncommercial use only, as long as the copyright notice and publication is cited properly. Filantropi Indonesia and Tanoto Foundation have no liability for using part or full material of this report by third party.

All information in this report is provided for information purposes only and does not constitute a legal contract between Filantropi Indonesia and/or Tanoto Foundation and any person or entity unless otherwise specified. Some figures, documents and data contained on the site may be the copyrighted property of others. However, the copyrights acknowledgement to those is hereby given through proper citation. Any references used on this publication are provided as a courtesy. They should not be construed as an endorsement by Filantropi Indonesia and Tanoto Foundation of the content or views of the cited materials.

Filantropi Indonesia and Tanoto Foundation do not control, monitor or guarantee the cited information contained in this report and does not endorse any views expressed offered therein. In no event shall Filantropi Indonesia and Tanoto Foundation be responsible or liable, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any such information available on or through any such resource.

Copyright © 2021 Yayasan Bhakti Tanoto (“Tanoto Foundation”)

All rights reserved.


@filantropiindonesiaFilantropi Indonesia@FilantropiINAFilantropi TVFilantropi Indonesiawww.filantropi.or.id

Date post:	10-Apr-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	2 times
Download:	0 times

Unlocking Children’s Potential to Learn

Documents