Email this article Supporting and Inhibiting Dimensions of Civilizing Process In Local Wisdom-Based Character Education
Abstract
This research aimed to find out cause, form and supporting and inhibiting dimensions of character education civilizing process based on local wisdom in SMA Batik 2 Surakarta, Indonesia. The problem is focused on the character-building process informal education. To approach this problem the theoretical reference is used the civilizing process of theory by Norbert Elias. Data is collected through used were observation, in-depth interview and documentation and analyzed qualitatively. This study concludes that there was an unprepared condition of psychogenesis and sociogenesis in the local wisdom-based character education civilizing process. The novelty of this research is the analysis of character education based on local wisdom with the perspective of the theory of civilization Norbert Elias. The presence of local content policy in school curriculum structure, adequate school infrastructure, and supporting school and foundation management served to be the main supporting dimension. Internal inhibiting dimension included the school stakeholders’ poor awareness of understanding and implementing local wisdom value in daily life and poor synergy in cultural local content learning in organizing and developing teaching material. External inhibiting dimension included no government regulation governing the integration of local wisdom content into every subject, less optimum role and cooperation of social environment, and parents’ low commitment to supporting the process of civilizing character education based on local wisdom.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alwasilah, A. C. (2009). Etnopedagogi Landasan Praktek Pendidikan dan Pendidikan Guru. Bandung: Kiblat.
Becerra, S. Munoz, F and Riquelme, E. (2015). School Violence and School Coexistence Management: Unresolved Challenges. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 190 p 156-163.
Berkowitz, M. W, & Fekula, M. J. (1999). Educating for character. About Campus, 4(5), 17-22.
Berkowitz, M. W., and Hoppe, M. (2009). Character education and gifted children.High Ability Studies, 20 (2), 131-142.
Chau-kiu, C and Lee, T. Improving Social Competence Through Character Education. Evaluation and Program Planning. Elseiver 33 (2010) 255–263.
Dewantara, K H. (1962). Karya Ki Hajar Dewantara. Bagian Pertama: Pendidikan. Yogjakarta: Penerbitan Taman Siswa.
Eccles, J and Gootman, J. A. (Eds.). (2002). Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
Elias, N. (1978) .The Civilizing Process: The History of Manners, Vol I, trans. Edmund Jephott Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Flanagan, C., Cumsille, P., Gill, S. and Gallay, L. S. (2007). School and community climates and civic commitments: Patterns for ethnic minority and majority students. Journal of Educational Psychology 99 p 421–431.
Fudyartanta, K. (1995). Acuan Wawasan Pendidikan Budi Pekerti : Yogyakarta: Majelis Luhur Persatuan Taman Siswa.
Goodlad, J. (1992). The moral dimensions of schooling and teacher education. Journal of Moral Education, 21 (2), p87–98.
Goodman, J. F. and Lesnick, H. (2001). The moral stake in education: Contested premises and practices. New York: Longman.
Katilmis, A., Eksi, H., and Öztürk, C. (2011). Efficiency of social studies integrated character education program. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 11 (2), 854-859.
Krieken, R V. (1990). Norbert Elias in Anthony Elliot and Larry Ray. Key Contemporary School Theorists. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lickona, T. Schaps, E. Lewis, C. (2002). Eleven Principles of Effective Character Education. Washington DC. Character Education Partnership.
Martin, M. and Greenwood .C.W. (2000).You Can Cope with Your Children’s Circumstances Which are About School, Translated by: Fatma Zengin Dagıdır. 1st Edition, İstanbul: Sistem Publishing.
McClellen, B. W. (1999). Moral education in America: Schools and the shape of character from colonial times to the present. New York: Teachers College Press.
Mertoglu, M. (2014). The Role of School Management in the Prevention of School Violence. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 182 p 695 – 702.
Miles, M. B and Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of NewMethods. Michigan University: Sage Publications.
Pornpimo, C. Wallapha, A and Prayuth, C. (2014). Strategy Challenges the Local Wisdom Applications Sustainability in School.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 112 p 626 – 634.
Skaggs, G and Bodenhorn, N. (2006). Relationships between implementing character education, student behavior, and student achievement.Journal of Advanced Academics, 18 (1), 82-114.
Sukmadinata, N. S. (2007). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Bandung: Cooperation between UPI and PT. Rosdakarya.
Thalib, S. B. (2010). Psikologi Pendidikan Berbasis Analisis Empiris Aplikatif. Jakarta: Kencana.
Tilaar, H.A.R. (2009).Paraigma Baru Pendidikan Nasional. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Ulger, Yigittir and Ercan. Secondary School Teachers Beliefs On Character Education Competency. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 131 (2014) 442 – 449.
Wagiran. (2010). Pengembangan Model Pendidikan Kearifan Lokal di Wilayah Provinsi DIY dalam Mendukung Perwujudan Visi Pembangunan DIY menuju Tahun 2025 (Tahun Kedua). Research. Yogyakarta: Biro Administrasi Pembangunan.
Yayasan Semai Jiwa Amini (SEJIWA). (2008). Bullying: Mengatasi Kekerasan di Sekolah dan Lingkungan Sekitar Anak. Jakarta: Grasindo.
Yin, R. (2014).Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (5th Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24114/jupiis.v12i2.17696
Article Metrics
Abstract view : 277 timesPDF - 195 times
DOI (PDF): https://doi.org/10.24114/jupiis.v12i2.17696.g14289
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2020 JUPIIS: JURNAL PENDIDIKAN ILMU-ILMU SOSIAL
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
JUPIIS: Jurnal Pendidikan Ilmu-ilmu Sosial
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License