Life Balance









Education is one of the important factors of the development process of every country. In Indonesia, according to the Law number 20, 2004 education is a consciously planned effort  to develop all potentials of the students through learning process. The aim of education is to develop the students’ potential so that they have the strength of spirit, religion, self control, personality, intelligence,  good spirit and skills needed as a member of the society. To achieve the honored education aim, a curriculum which is a set of plans and rules of the aim, content and material and learning method have been made.  Curriculum is an instrument to achieve the goal of education. Curriculum covers program focus, instruction media, material organization, learning strategy, class management, and the role of the teacher  (Arieh Lewy in Lccptc. 2008)

Celce -Murcia (2000) defines that a curriculum is a document of an official nature, published by a leading  or  central educational authority  in order to serve as a framework or a set of guidelines for the teaching of a subject area – in our case of language – in a broad and varied context.

BSNP (2006:1751) defines : “ Curriculum is a set of plan and arrangement of objective, content, and lesson material, and also manner that is used as the guidance of learning activities to achieve the aim of  education “. curriculum is called School- based curriculum which is in Bahasa Indonesia called Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). It replaced the curriculum 2004 which was based on competence ( KBK ). It is the main basis for every education institution in Indonesia to arrange their own syllabus for teaching and learning. It consists of socialization, Competence Standard and Basic Competence, syllabus, and also

lesson plan.


KTSP as a new curriculum is a new paradigm in education world in Indonesia. It gives place for democratization to determine the education curriculum which is appropriate to the community context where the schools take place, financial context, human resources and other things  of the Schools, so that the potential of each school can be optimalized, and there is competition among schools. With KTSP, each school can make their own syllabus, curriculum and  indicators. Although  determining  their  own syllabus, the competence standard and the content has to be accordant with Education National Standard Board (BSNP) ( KTSP is based on Law number 20, 2003 about National Education System and The Rules of Government of Republic of Indonesia number 19,2005 about The National Education Standard. It is applied in Primary School, Junior High

School, Senior High School and also the Vocational School, arranged by unit of education  based on the Content Standard ( Standard Isi ) and Passing Standard Competence ( SKL ) also according to the guidance arranged by The Education National Standard Board ( BSNP). It is based on The Rule of Minister of National Education number 24,2006. Its arrangement involves teachers, employees and also The School Committee, with the hope that KTSP will reflect the aspiration of people, environment situation and condition, and the people’s needs.

Based on the competency model  developed by Celce Murcia as cited in Depdiknas  (2003), that communicative competence is discourse competence or a person’s ability to understand and create discourse. Discourse is simply  interpreted as text both spoken and written. To achieve the discourse competence, it needs mastering the proponent competencies. Those proponent competencies are :

1)  Linguistics Competence, it is the  understanding and ability to apply aspect of grammar, vocabulary, pronounciation, and spelling correctly

2)  Actional Competence, it is the ability to use language to express communicative function ( language act : spoken and written )

3)  Socio-Cultural Competence, it is the ability to state and receive message correctly according to sosio cultural context

4)  Strategic Competence, it is the ability and skill to be applied in various communication strategies how to handle the communication problems.

5) Discourse Competence

Indonesia is now in the process of changing its school curriculum into a competence-based curriculum (CBC) aimed at equipping school graduates with sufficient knowledge and life skills so that they can survive, academically and socially, in modern societies. With regard to language education, the government’s decree, No 19, 2005, (Depdiknas, 2005) states that language education should develop language competence with special emphasis on reading and writing according to the literacy level set up for every level of education. In other words, language education in Indonesia is aimed at developing competence that enables school graduates to communicate orally and, especially, in writing. This is certainly not a simple task given that the ultimate goal is not only speaking the language, but writing as well. A CBC needs to be designed in order to help language educators see very clearly what competence they try to develop. A CBC for Language education also needs to clearly define what competence to be achieved if the aim of language education is communication.

The proposed model has been motivated by their “belief in the potential of a direct, explicit approach to the teaching of communicative skills, which would require detailed description of what communicative competence entails in order to use the sub-components as a content base in syllabus design” (1995:6). It is also developed from an L2 perspective but a great deal of it is assumed to have validity for describing L1 use as well. Their model proposes five types of competence: linguistic competence, actional competence, sociocultural competence, strategic competence, and at the heart of the model is discourse competence. In Celce-Murcia et al.’s words:

Thus our construct places the discourse component in a position where the lexico-grammatical building blocks, the actional organizing skills of communicative intent, and the socio-cultural context come together and shape discourse, which, in turn, also shapes each of the other components. (Celce-Murcia et al. 1995:9)

The quotation suggests that looking at language education as an effort to develop language skills (listening, speaking, reading, and writing) involves so much more than providing exercises in the four skills involving different themes. Celce-Murcia et al.’s (1995) article provides lists of what each sub-competence covers that can be referred to as well-defined targets when one tries to develop a curriculum. These well-defined targets need to be seen and understood by language teachers so that they know exactly what they try to develop, and based on this understanding, they can think about what learning experiences needed by the learners, teaching materials, and  methods  needed by the teachers. Celce-Murcia et al.’s lists can be regarded as a translation or elaboration of a “not-so-easy-to-understand” construct called discourse.


One very relevant theory used by Celce-Murcia et al. is that of M.A.K. Halliday who sees language as a means of communication, or as social semiotic (1978). Under Discourse Competence list, for example, they group the items into five sub-headings: Cohesion, Deixis, Coherence, Generic Structure (formal schemata), and Conversational Structure (inherent to the turn–taking system in conversation but may extend to a variety of oral genres). In Hallidayan systemic functional linguistics, these sub headings and their respective items do not belong to the same level of abstraction. The four other lists, together with the discourse list, need to be comprehended as a holistic discourse construct that involves different levels of abstraction according to Halliday’s tri-stratal model of language. One way of understanding how these competences systematically relate to each other is by reviewing Halliday’s model of language and other supporting theories.

In conclution, to achieve the discourse competence, it needs mastering the proponent competencies that are Linguistics Competence, Actional Competence, Socio-Cultural Competence, Strategic Competence and discourse competence.


Celce-Murcia, Marianne, Zoltan Dornyei and Sarah Thurrell. 1995. Communicative Competence: A

Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Specifications. In Issues in Applied Linguistics.

Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 5-35.

Celce-Murcia, Marianne and Elite Olshtain. 2000. Discourse and Context in Language Teaching: A

Guide for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. Essex: Longman Group Limited.


Tinggalkan Balasan

Isikan data di bawah atau klik salah satu ikon untuk log in:


You are commenting using your account. Logout /  Ubah )

Foto Google+

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Logout /  Ubah )

Gambar Twitter

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Logout /  Ubah )

Foto Facebook

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Logout /  Ubah )


Connecting to %s

Masukkan alamat surat elektronik Anda untuk mengikuti blog ini dan menerima pemberitahuan tentang tulisan baru melalui surat elektronik.

Bergabunglah dengan 56 pengikut lainnya

Juni 2012
« Mei   Jul »

follow My twitter

Kesalahan: Twitter tidak merespons. Tunggulah beberapa menit dan perbarui halaman.

%d blogger menyukai ini: