Report No. 4954-1 ND

General Secondary Education in Indonesia:Issues and Programs For Action

July 26, 1984

Projects DepartmentEast Asia and Pacific Rcgional Oifice

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Document of the World Bank

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipientsonIV in the performance of their official duties. Its contents may not otherwisebe disclosed without World Bank authorization.

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

CIJRRENCY EOUIVALENTS

Currency Unit = Indonesian Rupiah (Rp)

S1 = Rp 970Rp I = SO.001031Rp 1 thousand = S1.03Rp I million = SI,031Rp I billion = S1,031,noo

FISCAL YEAR

April I - March 31

AAnEEMIC YEAR

July I - June 30

PRINCIPAL ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS IJSEI)

BP3 - Parents' Association School ContributionsDPP - School Grants from School Fees (SPP) Collected

from ParentsIYIP - Teacher Training CollegeIPA - Science Stream

IPS - Arts StreamKabupaten - District

Kecamatan - Subdistrict

PPI - Entrance Exanination for In Senior Public llniversities

PP28 - Government Regulation 'No. 29, IQRI on the Distributionof Aid to Private Schools

S.AKERNAS - Labor Force Survey

SD - Primarv SchoolSD-INPRES - Primary School Building ProgranSLTA - All Senior Secondary SchoolsSLTP - All Junior Secondary SchoolsSMA - Senior General Secondary SchoolSMP - Junior General Secondary SchoolSPG - Teacher Training High SchoolSPPs - Public School Fees Contributed by ParentsSTM - Senior Technical School

FOR OFCIAL USE ONLY

INDONESIA

GENERAL SECONDARY EDUCATION IN INDONESIA: ISSUES AND PROGRAMS FOR ACTION

Table of Contents

Page No.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i - lJi

I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Operational Purpose and Organization of the Study . . 1Overview of the Education Sector . . . . . . . . . . 2Investments in General Secondary Education . . . . . 3

II. RECENT ACHIEVEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

III. CURRENT ISSUES AND PROBLEMS . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 8Education Sector Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Educational Quality: Issues and Problems . . . . . . 8Educational Equality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Sources of Educational Inequality . . . . . . . . . . 27Enrollment and Output Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . 30Financing Secondary Education . . . . . . . . . . . 34Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39The Returns on Investment in Secondary Education . 39

IV. SOME PRINCIPLES AND TECHNIQUES FOR INVESTMENTPOLICY AND ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Improving Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43Improving Equity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46Expanding Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49Financing the Development of General SecondaryEducation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

V. CONCLUSION: A PROGRAM OF ACTIONS AND ITS FINANCIALIMPLICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52Three Specific Action Programs . . . . . . . . . . . 53Quality Action Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Equity Action Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Resource Mobilization Program . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Budgetary Implications of the Action Programs . . . . 55

This report was prepared by Mr. J. van Lutsenburg Maas (educator!sociologist) and is based on the findings of a mission in November 1982comprising Mr. van L. Maas (mission leader), Mr. H.C.A. Somerset (consultant,educator), Mr. D. Clark (consultant, economist), Mr. J. Smyth (Unesco,economist), Mr. G. Criel (consultant, economist) and Ms. A. Nazareth(consultant, educator). The report was reviewed by Mr. van L. Maas, withthe Government in an early draft in April 1983, and again in April 1984during missions to identify and appraise a First General Secondary EducationProject.

This document has a restricted distribution and may be used by recipients only in the performance oftheir ofricial duties. Its contents may not otherwise be disclosed without World Bank authorization.

-2-

Page No.TABLES IN TEXT

2.1: Enrollment Growth in Primary and Secondary Schools . . . . . . . . 42.2: Public and Private Shares of Enrollment, 1975, 1980/81

and 1981/82 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . 52.3: Gini Coefficients and Participation Rates for Enrollments

in all SMP and SMA Schools .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63.1: Per Student Provision in Routine Budget and DPP Funds for

SMPs and SMAs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113.2: Availability of School Library and Science Laboratory

Facilities by Type of SMA School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163.3: The Proportion of Explained Achievement Variance Attributable

to Home and School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183.4: The Effect of School and Teacher Quality on Science

Performance in Indonesia by Comparison to Other Countries . . . 193.5: School Attendance Rates for Socio-economic Groups, 1978 ... 243.6: Gini Coefficients for Inter-provincial Distribution of.

Secondary School Enrollments, Classrooms and Teachers,1980/81 . . .. . . . . . . . . 25

3.7: Survey Test Scores for Urban and Rural Grade 9 StudentsAccording to their Access to a School Library . . . . . . . . . 25

3.8: Family Costs of Secondary Schooling, 1979/80 . . . . . . . . . . . 283.9: Distribution of SMA Enrollments, Applications and Recruitment

to PP1 Universities/Institutes across Provinces, 1982 . . . . 303.10: Secondary Enrollment Rates in Indonesia, 1978/79-1981/82 . . . . . 313.11: Secondary Education Enrollment Rates, East Asia and Pacific

Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313.12: Distribution of Secondary School Enrollments between General

and Vocational Schools 1977-1981/82 . . .. . . . . . . 32

3.13: Public Investment in Secondary Education in the DevelopmentBudget, 1979/80-1982/83 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

3.14: Financing of Education in Government Budget and as Percentageof GDP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 34

3.15: International Comparisons of Levels of Government Financingof Education Sector: Percentage of GDP . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

3.16: Education Expenditures as Percentage of GDP-Asia Region . . . . . 353.17: Social Rates of Return of Senior Secondary School Graduates,

1978 ********** .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413.18: Labor Market Results in 1978, Male Out-of-School Members of

Tracer Study Cohort, by Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.19: Educational Qualifications of the Labor Force, 1976 . . . . . . . 425.1: Breakdown of Secondary Education Action Program Costs in . . . . . 56

1984/85 and 1993/94

FIGURES IN TEXT

3.1: Number of Teachers Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153.2 Total Number of New Teachers Required . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

-3-

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDIX TABLES

Table 1 Admission Cutoff Marks for Courses at PP1 Universitiesand other Recruitment Data

Table 2 Distribution of School Quality Inputs by ProvinceTable 3 : Average Number of Good Classrooms and Corresponding

Representation Indices, 1980/81, SHP and SMATable 4 Student/Teacher Ratios and Corresponding Representation

Indices 1980/81, SNP and SYAhTable 5 : Rank Representation Indices for Provinces Divided into

Urban and Rural Positions, 1981/82Table 6 Vocational Enrollment as Percentage of Secondary School

Enrollment, East Asia Pacific RegionTable 7 Comparative Education IndicatorsTable 8 Projections of Enrollments in SD, SMP, SMA to 1994/1995Table 9 Projection of Resource Requirements for SD, SMP, SMA, to

1994/1995Table 10 : Education Budget Projections and Impact of Secondary

Education Action Program, Repelita IV and VTable 11 : Government Education Budget Growth With and Without

Action Program

APPENDIX FIGURES

Figure 1 Indonesia: The Education Structure, 1983Figure 2 Enrollment Numbers and Repetition, Dropout, Graduation Rates

in Primary Schools, 1970 and 1978/79Figure 3 Junior Secon<ry School Net Progression Rates,

1971-1981/82Figure 4 Senior Secondary School Net Progression Rates,

1971-1981/82Figure 5 School Libraries and Achievement, Grade 9Figure 6 School Libraries and Achievement, Grade 12Figure 7 In-service Teacher Training and Achievement, Grade 9Figure 8 In-service Teacher Training and Achievement, Grade 12Figure 9 Representation Indices for Urban and Rural Portions of

Provinces, for SMP Enrollment, 1981/82Figure 10 Representation Indices for Urban and Rural Portions of

Provinces, for SMA Enrollment, 1981/82

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

i. The Government has traditionally placed high priority on the devel-opment of the education sector. For the past ten years it has been carryingout a large-scale program of expansion of primary education. This programis now complete and universal access to grade one of primary school hasvirtually been achieved. Demand for secondary education is increasing rapidlyand has already exceeded the capacity of public sector schools. Privateschools have sprung up to meet demand and at the senior secondary level out-number public schools. Development of secondary education has thereforebecome a priority issue and is likely to remain one for the next twofive-year plans (1984-89; 1989-94). However, while the massive expansion ofprimary education was largely made possible by increased revenues from highoil prices, the proposed development of secondary education coincides with adrop in oil prices and constrained financial resources. Limited financialresources will have an important effect on development of the subsector andon Government's ability to deal with the main issues, namely: educationalquality; equity; capacity expansion; and financing.

ii. The quality of secondary education as reflected in students learningachievements is generally low, and effective teaching is concentrated in avery small percentage of secondary schools. The report traces the low qualityof learning to several sources: lack of quality-producing resources; lowlevel of budgetary provisions for education; teachers' employment conditions;and the school examinations system. Two important surveys carried out in thelate 1970s on Grade 9 and 12 students identified several factors which wereassociated with high learning achievements. These included the existence ofschool libraries and science laboratories. A third factor was that studentsof teachers who had taken in-service teacher training courses showed highachievements. Private schools in particular lack quality-producing resourcesas they often operate on a very low budget. Budgetary provisions foreducation are low in Indonesia in comparison with other countries in theregion. The low level of teachers salaries has led to "multi-jobbing" andin some cases teachers are teaching more than 40 or 50 periods per week.There is also a lack of trained teachers in the key subjects of science,math, and languages. School-leaving examinations are in need of reform toselect the best students to go on to higher education more efficiently, tomonitor school quality, and to feed information on student learning back toteachers and supervisors in order to assist them in improving the teachingin their schools.

iii. Equity is another of the major policy goals in the education sector.However, given the resource constraints a choice may have to be made betweenimproving quality in existing institutions or enlarging the number of insti-tutions to reach a greater portion of the population. At present there areconsiderable disparities between urban and rural areas in the distributionof classroom accommodation and availability of quality-producing resources.Furthermore, there are significant disparities between socio-economic groupsin school attendance rates. Until 1982/83 new senior secondary schoolswere located mainly in cities and larger towns and almost no boardingfacilities existed for students from rural areas who were forced to pay theadditional costs of renting accommodation if they wished to attend secondary

- ii -

school. The Government has now adopted locational criteria for new schoolswhich would favor students in deprived rural areas. The private costs ofsecondary schooling are also a problem for lower income families. A mecha-nism exists whereby parents of children in public secondary schools paycontributions or school fees. These fees could be an important source ofadditional capital which could be used to establish or subsidize moreschools in low income and rural areas. A wider distribution of quality-producing resources among schools would also contribute to improved equityin secondary schooling.

iv. There is an increasilxgly strong demand for secondary schooling, aswitnessed by the rapid increase in the number of private schools. Given theGovernment's budget constraints ways must be found to meet this demand atthe lowest budgetary cost. However, meeting social demand is not the onlyjustification for expanding capacity. Recent studies have also found thatinvestments in secondary education bring high rates of return. Governmentassistance to private schools, accompanied by matching local contributionswould permit relatively low cost expansion, especially in rural areas. Waysalso need to be found to optimize existing school capacity. For example,as primary school teacher demand recedes in the next several years, someof these institutions can be converted to high schools.

V. The report provides estimates on the cost of the proposed programof improvement and expansion of secondary education within the context of anoverall education sector budget projection. Government budget allocationsto the education sector will need to be increased, especially for recurrentcosts. However, the increases required to improve quality and equity aresustainable, partly because of greater efficiency in use of facilities, anincrease in school fees and a cyclical waning of primary and secondaryschool enrollments beginning in the mid-1980s. At the same time, ways needto be found to increase other sources of financing such as parents'contributions to schools.

vi. To address the issues in secondary education the report proposesa program of activities to be carried out over the next ten years.

Quality

(a) Expand in-service teacher training programs by establishingteacher training centers, especially in rural areas.

(b) Provide secondary schools with more science equipment,laboratories, and libraries.

(c) Develop a more effective examinations system and establisha National Examinations Center.

{d) Increase the supply of teachers and teacher incentives to reducemulti-jobbing. Carry out a study on the optimal wage scalesfor public school teachers.

- ili -

Equity

(a) Channel capital funds to underprivileged provinces.

(b) Increase access to high quality schools and universities.

(c) Extend school coverage to rural areas by adopting the minimumeconomic size school as the norm.

(d) Increase double shift use of facilities in urban areas.

Capacity Expansion

(a) Construct, with local, public support, 54,000 junior generalsecondary school (SMP) classrooms and 47,000 senior generalsecondary school (SMA) classrooms, plus related facilities such aslaboratories and libraries.

(b) Reallocate excess teacher training high school (SPG) facilities forSMA use.

(c) Prepare physical facilities inventory on provincial basis todetermine allocation of grants for new facilities at existingpublic and private SMPs and SMAs.

Financing

(a) Adjust parents' contributions to public school fees (SPP)schedule annually for inflation.

(b) Allow schools to retain part of SPP income for own use.

(c) Establish means-tested nil-fee system to permit qualified, lowincome family students to enter public SMP and SMA without payingSPP fees.

(d) Channel more capital funds to private schools in selected areas.

vii. The additional cost of this action program over the next two five-year plans - Repelita IV, 1984/5-88/9, and Repelita V, 1989/90-93/4 - is sub-stantial, but appears manageable. The average annual additional cost of theprogram during Repelitas IV and V will be 14 to 17% above the presentlyprojected secondary education budget. The action program will cause thesecondary education budget to grow somewhat faster than it otherwise would.Without any action program, the secondary budget would grow at 6.1% p.a.With the entire action program including its cost recovery elements, thebudget would grow at 7.8% p.a. However, if the cost recovery elements werenot adopted as part of the package, it would grow at a faster rate, 8.6%;i.e., the cost recovery elements reduce the program's edditional cost bynearly a third.

I. INTRODUCTION

Operational Purpose and OrRanization of the Study

1.01 The chief purpose of this study is to stimulate an exchange ofanalytical findings and Insights between World Bank staff and Indonesianofficials who are responsible for guiding policies and investments insecondary education. This exchange is an ongoing process which is expectedto lead to new investments in Indonesian secondary education to which boththe Bank and the Government can give strong support. In November 1982 aseries of seminars was held with government officials on drafts of severalof the background papers which contribute to this study./l An earlier draftof the report was discussed with government officials in April 1983.

1.02 The sequence of this report is as follows:

Chapter 2: A brief review of notable achievements in secondaryeducation in the general policy framework of theeducation sector.

Chapter 3: A discussion of the most pressing problems and issuesin general secondary education. These are grouped asfollows:

(a) educational quality;

(b) equity;

(c) output capacity;

(d) finance;

(e) administration; and

(f) returns on investment in secondary education.

Chapter 4: A discussion of the broad policy and Investmentsolutions available to deal with these problems,Including a look at some of their underlyingassumptions.

Chapter 5: Recommendations of appropriate actions, both policymeasures and projects, to develop general secondaryeducation.

/1 These papers are included in the Bibliography. Background papersprepared for this study are asterisked.

-2-

Overview of the Education Sector /1

1.03 In 1984 Indonesia has a school-age population (7-18 years) of about46 million. The Government.has made notable progress in providing basiceducation and pre-employment training to its children and young people. By1983, universal access to grade one of primary school had been virtuallyachieved. Dropout and repetition rates have dropped dramatically in the pastdecade, in spite of the much larger volume of children involved. From13.0 million children in primary schools in 1972, enrollments grew to a peakof 24.7 million in 1982/83 producing a gross enrollment rate of 100% comparedto the size of 7 to 12 year age group./2 At the junior secondary levelenrollment tripled from 1.4 million in 1971 to 4.3 million in 1982/83 and theenrollment rate has reached 41Z. At the senior secondary level enrollmentgrew from 0.6 million In 1971 to 2.2 million in 1982/83 resulting in anenrollment rate of 23Z. In higher education enrollments have grown from0.3 million In 1975 to about 0.6 million in 1982/83.

1.04 Despite these achievements there is an acute shortage of skilledmanpower which constrains effective implementation of development programs.Substantial investment in the educatlon system beyond the primary level is nowrequired, in particular to increase the supply of better educated secondaryschool graduates who are more easily trainable as professional, para-professional, technical and managerial manpower, or who are more productive atwhatever work they take up.

1.05 The formal education system consists of a six-year primary schoolcycle, junior and senior secondary cycles of three years each and post-secondary education ranging from one to six years. The system is dividedinto several types of schools at the secondary level: junior seconda -

general (SMP); home economics (SKKP); and technical (ST); senlor secondary -general (SMA); economics (SMEA); home economics (SNKK); technical (STH ;teacher training (SPG); and sports teacher training (SGO). At both secondarylevels the share of general secondary schools is large and has beenincreasing.

1.06 While enrollment in general secondary education has been steadilyexpanding, several issues have emerged concerning quality of output, equity,output capacity, financing, and administration. These Issues are dealt within detail in the following chapters.

/1 The Educational Structure 1983 is shown in Appendix Figure 1. Forfurther descriptive material readers are referred to the "IndonesiaEducation Sector Survey Report," No. 443a-IND, February 5, 1975, WorldBank.

/2 This is more than the approximately 21.3 million children in the firstsix grades of school in the United States, which has a total population1.6 times as great as Indonesia's. Calculated from Table 2 of theDigest of Educational Statistics 19R2, National Center for EducationStatistics, Washington, D. C.

- 3 -

Investments in General Secondary Education

1.07 The World Bank has made extensive Investments in Indonesia'seducation and training sectors. These investments cover areas such asuniverslty education, basic nonformal educatlon, vocational training,specialized manpower training In the agriculture and public works sectors,textbook development, polytechnic education (diploma level), pre-serviceteacher training, special education, public administration and educationaladministration training, and secondary-level technical education. Theabsence of direct Bank investment in general secondary education has becomeincreasingly conspicuous. Even though Indirect Investments are being madethrough loans for developing teacher training institutlons and for producingmore and better textbooks, the Bank dnd other major donors have beenreluctant to make major and more direct Investments In secondary schoolsthemselves. The reluctance to invest In this major subsector is probablydue to the popular judgment that general secondary schools produce anoversupply of school leavers who are unemployed, unproductive, and poten-tially a social and political liability. However, fresh data have becomeavailable recently to challenge this judgment. These data will be discussedat the end of Chapter 3.

1.08 Investments In Indonesia's general secondary schools have nowbecome a matter requiring urgent attention. With free access to primaryschool, there is every likelihood that demand for secondary schooling willgrow rapidly, given experience elsewhere. Already in 1982/83, secondaryeducation received 572 of the Depart'ient of Education's development budgetand 48Z of its routine budget./I

/1 Analisa Perkembangan dan Perbandingan ABN Rutin dan Pembangunan, Dept.P. dn K., Pelita III, Tables 9 and 10. (Primary education expenditurefalls largely under the Department of Internal Affairs).

-4-

II. RECENT ACHIEVEMENTS

2.01 The achievements of Indonesian educators and planners sinceIndependence and especially since 1973 are Impressive, not only in terms ofquantitative growth, but also in terms of an enlightened policy regime, andincreasing efficiency and equity In the use of resources. The followingachievements deserve particular recognition.

2.02 Enrollment Growth. Primary school (SD) enrollments have grownnearly tenfold since Independence in 1945. The steepest growtn occurredfirst In the early years and then again In the last half of the 1970s, whenthe Government undertook the massive SD-INPRES school building program forthe rural areas. This cycle of rapid growth in the early and then again inmore recent years with relatively slow growth in the 1960s is repeated atthe junior and senior secondary levels as well (Table 2.1). At the

Table 2.1: ENROLLMENT GROWTH IN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS(enrollments in '000)

1945 agr 1960 agr 1975 agr 1982/83

Primary 2,523 10.7% 11,587 1.4Z 14,280 8% 24,742

Junior Secondary 90 17.92 1,062 4.0% 1,900 12.3% 4,273

Senior Secondary 18 22.22 362 5.4% 795 16.1% 2,261

Sources: Education In Indonesia, 1900-1974; Rangkuman, StatistikPersekolahan, 1975 through 1982/83.

agr - annual growth rate.

secondary level, this growth has been facilitated by major expansions inprivate as well as public schools. Table 2.2 on the next page shows therecent shifts In the pattern of accommodation between public and privateschools. At the primary level nearly all the growth has been accommodatedthrough the Government's direct effort. At the junior secondary level, thegovernment majority share has stayed slightly ahead of the private sector'seffort. Rowever, at the senior secondary level private sector growth haasurpassed the public sector. Among senior general secondary schools (SMA)alone the private sector numerical lead has become more evident in the pastfew years as the bottom panel of Table 2.2 shows quite clearly.

Table 2.2: PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SHARES OF ENROLLMENT: 1975, 1980/81-1982/83

1975 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83N ('000) i N ('000) Z N ('000) Z N ('000) Z

SDPublic 12,132 85 20,165 90 21,649 91 22,548 91Private 2,148 15 2,322 10 2,214 9 2,194 9

Total 14,280 100 22,487 100 23,863 100 24,742 100

All SLTPPublic 1,000 53 1,869 55 2,124 56 2,380 56Private 900 47 1,544 45 1,686 44 1,893 44

Total 1,900 100 3,413 100 3,810 100 4,273 100

SMPPublic 707 47 1,797 54 2,060 55 2,310 55Private 811 53 1,532 46 1,676 45 1,883 45

Total 1,518 100 3,329 100 3,736 100 4,193 100

All SLTAPublic 434 55 884 50 888 49 1,076 48Private 361 45 871 50 1,035 51 1,185 52

Total 795 100 1,755 100 1,923 100 2,261 100

SMAPublic 195 56 518 50 609 47 679 45Private 150 44 523 50 678 53 825 55

Total 345 100 1,041 100 1,287 100 1,504 100

SD = Primary SchoolsSLTP = All junior secondary schoolsSHP = Junior general secondary schoolSLTA = All senior secondary schoolsSMA - Senior general secondary schools

- 6 -

2.03 Progress Toward Greater Equity. Gross enrollment rates in juniorand senior secondary education as a whole were 37.5% and 21.8% respectivelyin 19-1/82. At the same time, the distribution of secondary school enroll-ments, especially in SMAs, is very skewed in favor of urban areas. However,in recent years, the Government has adopted locational criteria for newpublic secondary schools which favor deprived rural areas. As a result,improvements in the equity indicators are beginning to appear as Table 2.3shows. In addition, the Government eliminated primary school fees in themid-1970s thereby removing one major obstacle to universal entry into gradeone for the children of the lowest income families.

Table 2.3: GINI COEFFICIENTS A1 AND PARTICIPATION RATES /2ENROLLMENTS IN ALL SMP AND SI{A SCHOOLS

SMP SMAYear Gini Participation Gini Participation

Coefficient Rate Coefficient Rate

1979/80 0.159 30% 0.230 10%1980/81 0.146 33% 0.215 12%1981/82 0.138 37% 0.199 14%

Source: G- Criel, "Distribution of Secondary School Enrollmentsin Indonesia".

2.04 Increasing Efficiency in Student Flow Rates. Indonesian schoolshave for long been hampered by high dropout and repeater rates. However,as Aopendix Figure 2 shows, there have been dramatic improvements in theserates for primary schools since 1970. For secondary schools, as AppendixFigures 3 and 4 show, student year-to-year progression has also improvedover the past several years, although this has recently begun to level off.The conclusion to be drawn is that not only are students entering school inmuch greater numbers than before, but also a greater percentage than beforeare managing to stay in school and complete the cycle. This is a majoraccomplishment.

/1 A Gini coefficient of 0.0 indicates a condition of absolutely equaldistribution, i.e., all groups have a proportional share of the scarcegood or service which is in question. "Proportional" is of course inreference to some suitable criterion, e.g. school-age population in thecase of enrollment. A Gini coefftcient of 1.0 would indicate a (ratherhypothetical) condition of absolute inequality, i.e. one person wouldmonopolize to him/herself the scarce good or service in question. Thus,the smaller the Gini coefficient the more equal the distribution. TheGini coefficients used here are based on a comparison of the distribu-tion of school-age population and enrollments, grouped by province.

/2 Participation rates as used here refer to the number enrolled as apercentage of the school-age population.

2.05 Curricular Coherence. The multiplicity of different types of seniorsecondary schools in Indonesia has sometimes been criticized (see AppendixFigure 1) Besides general academic secondary schools there are paralleltechnical schools, commercial schools, home economics schools, teachertraining schools, agricultural schools, etc. However, this arrangement hasimportant virtues in giving each school a clear curricular function andsimplifies their management./1

2.06 Teacher Supply. Any school system which expands rapidly, asIndonesia'shTais,is normally severely constrained by shortages of newlyqualified teachers. This is undoubtedly true in Indonesia's university systemand shortages will continue for some time to come. It has also been true inrecent years at the secondary and primary levels as well. However, at theselatter levels, the prospects for overall supply are improving of late. At theprimary level the years of rapid enrollment expansion are now past, and outputfrom tuacher training high schools (SPGs) has caught up with aggregate primaryteacher demand. Thus, there are signs of surplus primary teacher trainingcapacity emerging now in some parts of the country, although shortagescontinue elsewhere. At the secondary level, the latest demand and supplyprojections indicate an emerging balance between aggregate supply and demandduring this decade. However, shortages of fully qualified teachers, sometimessevere, will continue in some subject areas especially in mathematics, scienceand English./2

2.07 Cost Recovery. In the public institutions, at the secondary anduniversity levels, parents are required to pay school fees (SPPs) according toa sliding government fee scale./3 At the primary and secondary level thepublic schools' parents associations levy upon themselves a further "contri-bution" to the school (BP3). At all levels there are always the considerableprivate costs for uniforms, transport, materials, etc. In addition, at thehigher levels of education private schools and universities are taking agreater share of total enrollment. This is entirely appropriate given thefiscal constraints which the Government is facing. Thus, certain flexiblefinancial management tools are already in place for recovering considerableamounts of the cost of schooling from the users. For educational growth tocontinue it is crucial that these tools be strengthened further. (This isdiscussed in further detail in para. 4.34.)

/1 To attempt to offer a full array of prevocational or vocationalspecializations in each school would increase the minimum size requiredto operate specialized facilities efficiently, and create extraadministrative overheads.

/2 This problem will be discussed in paras. 3.10-3.13.

/3 The SPP school fees are collected from parents, then sent to theMinistry of Finance before being reallocated to the provinces forredistribution to schools as DPP funds for specific categories ofexpenditure.

III. CURRENT ISSUES AND PROBLEMS

Education Sector Goals

3.01 Since its independence in 1945, Indonesia has placed the educa-tional progress of its population very high on its list of priorities. Aswe have seen in Table 2.1, this progress initially took the form of explo-sive growth in enrollments, until about 1960. However, economic stagnationand political turmoil in the 1960s took their toll in slowing down thisgrowth, though certainly never stopping it. Under the New Order Government,and especially after the rapid rise in world oil prices, the educationsector resumed its rapid growth. This has been the goal of the five-yearplans, Repelita I, II, and III. In Repelita III the policy goals in theeducation sector took on the additional emphasis of increasing equality ofopportunity in education. And in recent years, policy makers have shownincreased concern with the quality of education being provided. Thus equityand quality have emerged side by side with educational growth as overallpolicy goals.

3.02 In this chapter we will discuss the main issues and problemsemerging today in secondary education, and identify the probable source ofthese problems. These are grouped into five broad categories: the qualityof output; equity; output capacity; financing; and administration. Insome cases the evidence for a "problem" is reasonably hard; in others, theevidence is softer and more judgmental.

Educational Ouality: Issues and Problems

3.03 "Quality" as used here refers to the level of performance ofstudents completing a cycle of schooling. Student performance is defined interms of cognitive achievement, or learning. Several issues or problems arediscernible with regard to quality in general secondary education.

3.04 One key indicator that learning levels in secondary schools areunacceptably low is the scores ot successful secondary school graduates onthe entrance examination for the ten most sought-after public universities.The exam is commonly known by its acronym, PPI./l The maximum score onthe entire PP1 exam is 200, and simple chance or random guessing alonewould, on average, give candidates a score of 40./2 Yet candidates in1981 who scored as low as 73 in chemistry or 76 in mechanical engineering

/1 PP1 = Proyek Perintis 1 = Experimental Project 1.

/2 H.C.A. Somerset, t"Secondary Education, Selection Examinations andUniversity Recruitment in Indonesia: Some Key Issues," Table 3.2. Theexam usually contains four sections worth 50 points each, or 200 pointsmaximum possible score. Each multiple choice question shows 5 answersfrom which to choose one. Therefore a random guessing score - 200 x1/5 = 40.

- 9 -

gained admission in the ten best, most selective public national universities(see Appendix Table 1). The public teacher training colleges (IYIPs) have hadto maintain much lower entry standards to find students. For example themedian students admitted to Jakarta IKIP's Diploma course for future secondaryscIhool mathematics teachers scored only slightly above the random guessinglevel on just the mathematics section of the exam - 11.9 out of 50./1

3.05 Effective teaching is concentrated in a very small percentage ofsecondary schools. A useful way to evaluate the academic productivity ofsecondary schools is to see how well their students perform on nationalentrance examinations such as the PP1. First, some background information.Only SMA and STM (senior technical school) candidates are qualified toapply for the PP1 science (IPA) exam. The science exam is the access routeto almost any university or institute faculty, whereas the nonscience or"arts" (IPS) exam gives access only to some faculties. In 1981/82 there were3,378 SMAs, of which only 806 were public, and altogether about 675 STMs.Relatively few STM graduates apply to PP1, however. Of these roughly4,000 possible source schools, only about 2,500 or 63% of the schools providedany PP1 science candidates in 1982. (Many smaller SMAs are unable to organizea science stream due to lack of facilities, equipment and staff). In all,87,550 students attempted the exam and 8,589 scored well enough to berecruited into a faculty in one of the PP1 universities./2 The top 20 govern-ment SMA schools in the country, or 0.6% of all 3,378 S?Ms?, produced 5% of thecandidates and fully 20% of the recruits, giving these schools a representa-tion index among recruits of 33.0./3 This illustrates the extreme concentra-tion of high quality teaching and learning among a few "action sector"/4secondary schools.

/1 Somerset, op. cit., Table 4.3. Of course, it may be the case that thestandards set by the university examiners are unrealistically high. Sofar there is no evidence to support or refute this. If true, it wouldconstitute another type of problem.

/2 Minimum exam scores vary between faculties and universities depending onthe places available and the numbers of high scoring applicants. Somehigh scoring students fail nonetheless to gais public universityadmission if both of the two faculty choices they are allowed happen torequire very high marks which they fail to reach.

/3 20% -t 0.6% = 33.3. In other words, these schools obtained 33 timestheir proportional share of PP1 university places.

/4 This term, which aptly captures the contrast in educational effectivenessbetween schools, originates from earlier work of Somerset.

- In -

3.06 Low quality learning can be attributed to several sources: low levelof budgetary provisions for education; over-employment of teachers; additionalresource constraints in private schools; and the malfunctioning of externalschool examinations. These will be discussed in turn.

3.07 Budgeting for School Ouality Resources. Table 3.1 shows thebudgetary provision per student in recent years./1 From 1979/80 to 1982/83the per student budget increased an average of 22% per annum in the routine(i.e. recurrent) budget. However, this growth actually ceased in the lastyear, 1982/83. Overall provision out of the government routine budget, plusthe official SPP fee collections, amounts to about $45.02 in 1982/83, or 8.7%of the country's 1982 GNP per capita of S520.

3.08 How does this compare with educational efforts in other countries?A comparison with other countries in the region shows the following publiccurrent expenditure per secondary school student: Thailand-$66 (1980);Singapore-$780 (1981); and Malaysia-$430 (1980)./2

3.09 It can be argued that nations which need to close the developmentgap also need to invest more in human resources than do wealthy countrieswhich already have relatively large stocks of well-educated manpower. Thissuggests that Indonesia has not yet approached the level of public effortneeded to acquire high quality teaching and learning in the secondaryschools. This broad conclusion would appear to remain valid even if oneadds in the considerable private expenditures for both public and privateschooling to arrive at "total" effort. (These matters will be discussedfurther in paras. 3.37, 3.38, 3.45.)

/1 Enrollments are for both private and public schools. Private schoolsreceive limited assistance as a matter of policy.

/2 Unesco Yearbook, 1983.

- 11 -

Table 3.1: PER STUDENT PROVISION IN ROUTINE BUDGETAND DPP FUND FOR SMPs AND SMAs

1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83

Budget ProvisionGeneral Secondary School /aRoutine budget (Rp mln.) 45,044 85,078 136,448 153,944Enrollments SMP + SMA /b ('000) 3,738 4,365 5,023 5,697Per student (Rp) 12,049 19,492 27,167 27,022Budget provision ($1) /c 17.98 29.09 40.55 40.33

1982/83 DPP Fund /d = Rp 17.9 billion /e - 5,697 thousandfor all Sec. Schools = Rp 3,142 6 670

= $ 4.69

/a Analisa, Tables 9 and 11./b Including enrollments in public and private schools.7Ic $1.00 = Rp 670.7X Joint Decree, Table IX.1. This includes public schools only./e Rp 17.9 billion is 87% of the total DPP Fund of Rp 20.5 billion, which

is the percentage of all secondary school students who are in eitherSMP or SMA.

3.10 School Quality Resource Requirements. In the late 1970s, theMinistry of Education and Culture conducted two major national sample sur-veys of final year students in SMPs (Grade 9) and SMAs (Grade 12). Thesesurveys sought to identify through multiple regression analyses the keyfactors in both the student's background and the school which most affectedlearning achievement levels./1 The following discussions will draw heavily

/1 National Assessment of the Quality of Indonesian Education: (a) Surveyof Achievement in Grade 9; (b) Survey of Achievement in Grade 12,Ministry of Education and Culture, Office of Research and Development,Jakarta, 1978 and 1981, respectively. As with any cross-sectional surveydata, the results of these surveys need to be treated with caution indrawing inferences about causality or in predicting results in a specificinstance on the basis of statistical averages. Nonetheless, these dataare richer than what is normally available in a developing country.

- 12 -

on these two studies. The two surveys found five school variables to becritical; these are discussed below. It is fortunate that these are subjectto interventions.

(a) School Libraries. The Grade 9 survey stated "the presence ofa library in a school, along with an adequate supply of books ...is a variable strongly associated with achievement ... Itstands out clearly, as the most significant of a cluster of"school quality" variables and is independent of home backgroundfactors. This is probably the single most significant findingof the present survey ... " Elsewhere it states "...the presenceof a school library and an adequate supply of books stand "headand shoulders" above the (other factors) in significance". TheGrade 12 study found that once an SMA school had even as few as250 library books "achievement was quite superior", but belowthat size, achievement scores fell below average. Figures 5 and6 in the Appendix show the relationship betweea school librariesand achievement in graph form. It is especially noteworthy thata quarter of the students in the SMA sample and about 35% of theSMP sample did not have access to any school library. Further-more, in many school libraries the book holdings turned out to bemultiple-copy textbooks rather than library reference books, asTable 2 of the Appendix shows.

(b) In-service Teacher Training. The Grade 9 study states: "Grade 9students taught by teachers who have been upgraded in specialin-service training courses show higher achievement ... This is apromising finding, and suggests that the courses should be extendedwherever possible." The survey showed these results werepositive in all five major subject fields: mathematics, science,social studies, Bahasa Indonesia and English. Tne Grade 12 surveycame to the same conclusion, noting also that "the (in-serviceteacher training - achievement) relationship remained a strong oneeven after the varying backgrounds of students had been allowedfor." Figures 7 and 8 in the Appendix illustrate theserelationships.

(c) Science Laboratories. Although the Grade 9 survey did not examinethe efficacy of laboratories, the Grade 12 survey found that"access to at least one science laboratory in an SMA is importantfor achievement in ... physics, chemistry, and biology. Inaddition there was a positive relationship between the number ofscience experiments undertaken and total achievement, for studentsin science streams." The survey found that about one quarter ofthe sample SMAs did not have a science laboratory.

(d) Afternoon Schooling. The Grade 9 survey found from its multi-variate analysis that: "There is a clear advantage to studentsattending morning rather than afternoon sessions...." It observes

- 13 -

that the reasons lying behind this finding are partly climatic:"the afternoon sessions tend to be hotter and more tiring, andboth students and teachers are liable to be affected." It alsonoted that afternoon sessions tend to be shorter and are moreoften taught by part-time teachers. The Grade 12 surveyinitially found the same negative effects: "Achievement levelsfor students attending in the afternoon were lower by 5 pointsin both (arts and science) streams (5/8 of a standard deviation)and this does seem to be a significant difference". But thenafter a multiple regression analysis it concluded that afternoonschooling of itself "explained little further variation in totalachievement." Thus the two surveys reveal some degree ofdifference in the significance of this factor which is notreadily explained. However, in SMA, less able students areplaced into arts rather than science streams. Since arts streamspredominate in afternoon schools, the already lower ability ofthose students may be the reason why the extra, potentiallynegative effects of the afternoon session are reduced.

Ce) The Teaching Experience, Management Training and Income of theSchool Principal. The Grade 12 survey found that the abovecluster of school principal's characteristics "far outweighedthe effects of any other school or home background factors... ininfluencing the quality of scholastic performance in the school."It is noteworthy that of those principals in the Grade 12 surveywho professed to have some form of preparation as principals, morethan half were self-taught. The surprising strength of therelationship of principal's salary to achievement is partlyaccounted for by the fact that such salaries are strongly relatedto the size of a school. Related to this is the point thatscience streams are more often found in larger, well establishedschools because small schools are less able to carry and mobilizethe resources to support a science stream. In the Grade 9 surveymuch less attention was given to measuring the principal'scharacteristics, and therefore their importance was untested.

3.11 Teacher Issues. A clear estimation of the extent of secondaryschool teacher shortage is difficult to achieve due to an unknown amount ofdouble counting of teachers in the statistics. Secondary school teachersfrequently teach at two or more schools to get extra income. Therefore thenumber of teaching "posts" counted in the statistics is always more than thenumber of actual teacher "bodies." As a result, the counting of teacher postsleads to calculations of misleadingly low teacher:student ratios: 1:17 inSMPs and 1:15 in SMAs.

3.12 Allowing for some double counting of teachers, the overall supply ofSMP and SMA teachers appears to be sufficient if one applies teacher:student

- 14 -

ratios of 1:26.7 and 1:23.3 for SMPs and SMAs, respectively./l Figures 3.1and 3.2 predict a declining overall demand for new SMP and SMA teachers after1985. However, comparing teachers by subject (irrespective of the numberinflation due to double counting of teacher "bodies") reveals that there areconsiderably fewer teachers trained in science/math and languages than thereare persons teaching those subjects.

3.13 The second teacher problem is the common practice among teachers ofteaching in two, three or even more schools simultaneously. This practice isgreatly facilitated by the existence of large numbers of private schools,which often operate in the afternoons and evenings using the facilities ofgovernment schools which operate in the morning. Often the staff of themorning shift school also operate the private afternoon school. As a resultit is not uncommon for teachers to teach more than 40 or 50 periods per weekeven though the official norm is 24. Under these conditions a teacher can notbe effective for each of his classes and each of his schools. By teaching somany periods per week he may help more students spend time in school, but theresult is a watered-down quality of teaching in each class through lack ofcareful preparation and lack of time to monitor and evaluate his students'work. In addition, the school is weakened as an institution when teachershave their loyalty divided among different schools, and are unavailable forgroup and institution-building functions such as staff meetings, andsponsoring extra-curricular activities.

3.14 Unfortunately, the present system for giving salary supplementsreinforces the practice of teaching extra classes in more than one school.Secondary school teachers are given a salary supplement on a piecework basis,i.e., a flat fee per hour of teaching./2 This piecework fee is paid out ofthe SPP fee income collected from students. A piecework basis for paymentcan even give teachers an incentive to build up the volume of pay units byfailing students in order to increase the number of repeaters and thereforenumbers of extra classes to teach. At the same time, in 1982/83 the budgetallocation for teachers' basic salaries slowed down, growing at only 1.8% fromthe previous year, even while overall teacher requirements continued to growat over 6% p.a.J3 This combination of factors sends the wrong "signal" toteachers to increase their volume rather than their quality of work if theywant to increase their income.

/l There are 37 periods per week on the class timetable and the officialnormal teacher workload is 24 periods per week, resulting in 1.5teachers per class. If the normal class size is 40 in SMPs and 35 inSXAs, the resulting teacher:student (staffing) ratios are 1:26.7 and1:23.3 respectively. The methodology for projecting the enrollmentsand teacher requirements is given in A. Nazareth, "Projections ofEnrollments and Resource Requirements for Primary and Secondary Educa-tion in Indonesia".

/2 Joint Decree of Ministers of Education and Culture and of Finance,August 24, 1982, concerning Regulations for SPP and DPP, Appendix X.

13 Analisa, Table 13.

- 15 -

Iig. 3.1: NUMBER OF TEACHERS REQUIRED

N SDU 88,6 .SMP

g *--sJA.aER

0F 508,Q8./

TEAC 380,808-HE a0,"8-- - - - - - - -_

.

s 188,888- ___---~,~,,, ................... ---''........,,

1974 1976 1978 1989 1982 1984 1980 1 988 998 1 92 1 94YEAR

Fig. 3.2: TOTAL NUMBER OF NEUTEACHERS REDUIRED

189,888-

s8..9s- -soNJU 86.88- SMP

M I ~~---- UAEE 78,888]-

F 50s, ee/

TE 4 0, 8seeAC 38,2089*HE za28822 '\ 9 =

E8.28

1974 1978 1978 198a 1982 1984 198 e988 1 998 1992 1t94

YEAR

a! i.e. for replacement and expansion.

- 16 -

3.15 The Additional Resource Poverty of Private Schools. In recent yearsprivate senior secondary schools and universities have been absorbing ever-increasing shares of these large increases in enrollments, as Table 2.2 shows.In 1982/83, 67% of the 12,361 SMPs and 76% of the 3,667 SMAs were private or"Swasta" schools. The Grade 12 quality assessment study commented: "...at thesenior secondary level there are very few well-endowed Swasta (schools), onereason being that schools are very expensive to build, staff, and equip atthis level. The Swasta in the sample were mostly small schools supported byparents with about average levels of education and income, ... with young andless experienced teachers giving lessons mostly in the afternoon only,offering relatively poor facilities and often sharing school buildings. Thiswill help to account for their relatively low achievement."/l The Swastaschools are especially deficient in science laboratories and libraries, andexperienced principals some of the key school quality inputs we noted in para.3.10 above. This relative asset poverty is shown in Table 3.2, taken from thesample of schools in the Grade 12 survey. The Swasta schools will requirecapital aid to obtain the more costly "school quallty Inputs" to be able tohandle a science stream.

Table 3.2: AVAILABILITY OF SCHOOL LIBRARY AND SCIENCE LABORAMOkYFACILITIES BY TYPE OF SMA SCHOOL

Percentage of Schools with:(No. of Any All More than 502schools science science Any More than ot library

School in the labor- labor- library 450 books books actuallytype sample) atories atories /a books in library textbooks

Public (1,559) 97 59 93 68 23Subsidi (287) 74 45 100 77 51(subsidized)Bantuan (60) 67 41 45 0 37(aided)Swasta (604) 50 35 74 38 44(fully private)

/a This implies having at least three labs: one each for physics, chemistry,and biology.

Source: Grade 12 Quality Assessment; data breakdown provided on request byWorld Bank mission; taken from S. Heyneman "Indonesian SecondarySchools: Issues of Quality and Finance," Table 5.

/1 Grade 12 Quality Assessment, page 45.

- 17 -

3.16 The private schools are all required to follow the officialcurriculum and government school inspectors carry out a relatively smallamount of supervision of them. However, private schools and universitiescan set their own entrance and final examinations. Once registered for afew years, private schools can receive limited direct government aid. Mostcommonly this takes the form of giving them government paid teachers.However, only 20% of 14,106 full-time teachers in private SMAs and 26% of42,533 full-time teachers in private SMPs are paid by the Covernment./I Inaddition, private schools have to pay another 141,000 part-time teachersout of their own income to meet their staffing needs. Many of these part-timers will also be teaching full or part-time in government schools ascivil servants. The private schools depend heavily on an indirect subsidyfrom the government school sector, by using the physical facilities ofgovernment schools for afternoon and evening shifts. While the privateSMAs own about 13,500 classrooms, they use another 8,400 classrooms whichthey do not own, or 38% of what they use. Of these, 76% are "borrowed"from government schools while another 15% are rented. On the other handthe government schools own 92X of the classrooms they use. More than halfof the private SMAs, 56%, operate during the more difficult afternoon and/orevening hours, whereas only 7% of government schools are obliged to do so.The above picture is repeated among SMPs.

3.17 Notwithstanding the above, one can still ask whether the effectsof these "school quality inputs" diminish when compared with the powerfulprior influences of the home on learning. Studies in industrial countrieshave shown that this is indeed what happens, leaving the schools toreinforce the influence of the home and family. The multiple regressionanalysis of the Indonesian Grade 9 and 12 surveys produced some interestingresults in this comparison of the two general sources of influence. First,in the science stream fully 56% of all variance in student performance wasaccounted for by either home or school variables measured in the survey; forarts students, the corresponding figure was 49%. Out of these total amounts

/1 Rangkuman Statistik Persekolahan, 1982/83, Ministry of Education andCulture.

- 18 -

of explained variance, Table 3.3 shows the proportions attributable to homeand school respectively. In international perspective the share ofexplained variance attributable to school rather than home effects, as Table3.4 shows, is in line with most other developing countries for which dataare available. Thus, when home background factors are controlled for,statistically, a very substantial amount of variance in student performanceremains, which can be directly and independently attributed to schoolfactors taken together. Thus school variables which are susceptible topolicy influence take on considerable importance by Grade 12 - more than ateither Grade 9 or Grade 6.

Table 3.3: THE PROPORTION OF EXPLAINED ACHIEVEMENT VARIANCEATTRIBUTABLE TO HOME AND SCHOOL

Stream Home School

Arts 54% 46%Science 46% 54%

Source: Grade 12 survey, with the reclassificationof the "School Type" variable from the homebackground to the school block of variables.Taken from S. Heyneman, op. cit., page 11.

- 19 -

Table 3.4: THE EFFECT OF SCHOOL AND TEACHER QUALITY ON SCIENCEPERFORMANCE IN INDONESIA BY COMPARISON TO OTHER

COUNTRIES /a

Proportion of explained variancein student performance

Country /b Home School /c (Total R2 )

OECD countries 65.2 34.8 (34.4)Indonesia

12th grade 46.3 53.7 /d (55.5)9th grade 66.5 33.5 (26.0)

Iran 47.0 53.0 (17.0)Peru 48.0 52.0 (32.0)Mexico 45.0 55.0 (26.0)India 10.0 90.0 (30.0)Botswana 31.0 69.0 (20.0)

/a Sources: For Indonesia: BP3K, National Assessment of the Quality ofIndonesian Education, 1978 and 1981. For other countries: EducationDepartment, the World Bank. Table taken from S. Heyneman, op. cit.

/b Analysis in all countries except Indonesia limited to 14 year olds or8th graders. Data in fact are available on 12th graders in all countries,but the Education Department, for lack of time and resources, has had toconcentrate upon the last year in primary school. OECD countriesincluded the following: Italy, Japan, Scotland, England, New Zealand,Finland, Netherlands, Australia, Flemish and French Belgium, Germany,Sweden and the U.S.A.

/c The proportion of explained variance is that portion of the R2 attribut-able to the home or the school. It is a useful indicator for comparisonacross studies where the level of R2 varies considerably from one to theother.

/d Indonesia 12th grade figures have been revised; School Type is includedas a school influence independent of the home.

- 20 -

3.18 Ability Streaming. SMA students are assigned to either a scienceor an arts (language or social studies) stream at the end of the initial"torientation semester" in their first year. These labels containconsiderably more significance, however, than their curricular "face value"might suggest to the observer. This is perhaps primarily due to the factthat a science stream graduate has the option of being considered for entryto almast any faculty in the university system, whereas the arts graduatehas his choice restricted to just non-science faculties. With this prospectin sight brighter students gravitate toward the science stream. Likewise,the alert school principal and his staff will try to reserve scarce sciencestream places for their most promising students. Thus the science streamhas become code for "the fast track". Indeed, the Grade 12 survey foundthat science students clearly out-performed social studies and language(arts) students even in civics, Bahasa Indonesia and English.

3.19 Occasionally there is a call to deal with the quality issue inIndonesian secondary education by "introducing ability grouping". Such achange is not warranted: for all practical purposes such grouping hasalready been implemented for some time, only it is labelled differently.The grouping takes place in the assignnent of students to their subjectstreams. What this system allows, like any pre-sorting arrangement, is theconcentration of the scarcest and best teaching resources (e.g. well quali-fied science and mathematics teachers and laboratories) on those relativelyfew students who are deemed by some method to be the best able to benefitfrom this investment.

3.20 School Examinations: A Neglected School Ouality Resource. Thequality of schooling can also be enhanced by means other than improving theratio of physical quality inputs to students, e.g. by "delivering" morelibraries, laboratories, or teachers who are better qualified. Quality canalso be enhanced, and at probably less expense, by making careful changes inthe key "signalling" system in formal education: the external examinations.What is so problematic in the present situation that it calls for a reformof school examinations?

3.21 National primary and secondary school examinations have beenabolished for well over a decade. As a result, the schools themselves cert-ify their graduating students based on their own internal assessments andfinal examinations. Not surprisingly, in view of the range of differentschool quality endowments and of student intake quality between schools, theGrade 12 survey found low and even negative correlations between teachers'assessments and its own standardized test scores. It adds, "... (this)suggests that assessment standards at the important Grade 12 level varyextremely widely throughout Indonesia." Obviously, the means must be found to"moderate" or establish parity between grades if the latter are to be of anyuse in performance-based selection to either further education or employment.

- 21 -

3.22 Indeed, various mechanisms have emerged to fill this role leftvacant by the earlier abolition of national school examinations. This isinevitable given: (a) the tremendous scarcity of places at entry stage to eachsuccessively higher cycle of education; and (b) limited economic resourceswith which to accede to social demand to open wider the doors toopportunity./l For intake into either SMIP or SMA, local groups of schoolscooperate in administering joint competitive entrance exams. At theuniversity level groups of universities have likewise been cooperating to setcommon or at least partially common entrance exams: not only PPI, but PP3 andPP4 as well./2

3.23 In all these selection exams, the multiple choice format ofquestion has been adopted virtually throughout in the interests of easier,mechanical processing of results. The range of intellectual skills whichcan be examined is seriously constrained. Therefore, critical writtenexpression skills never enter into the selection decision. The resulting"backwash effect" on the classroom scene has been to increase the use of themultiple choice items in day-to-day teaching, at the expense of writing,various application skills, and the use of experiments. Each exam is preparedby representatives from those institutions into which selection is takingplace. Therefore, it is at least a question whether the candidate is beingtested on the curriculum of the school cycle which he has just completed -rather than that of the cycle to which he is entering. SMA teachers inparticular frequently testify to the powerful "backwash effects" of theuniversity entrance exams as interference and never as a help to theircompleting their curriculum objectives with their students.

3.24 The point here is to harness the motivational power in the class-room of the "backwash effects" from a selection exam, which is inevitable,and then to deliberately put that power to work for rather than against thecurriculum of the cycle being completed, through careful examination reform.In the process the managers of the education system would acquire what theynow so sorely need - a routine, annual monitoring system to monitorperformance in schools. The monitoring information would then be fed back tothe schools where alert principals and teachers can act on it to improve theirteaching. More about that in Chapter 4, paras. 4.09-4.15.

Educational Equality

3.25 Disparities in education can exist in various forms or at variousstages in the education process, and they can exist among different kinds ofpopulation groups. Inequality occurs in a sequence: first, provision ofbasic classroom accommodation, then, provision of quality producing inputs,

/1 In this respect, Indonesia's condition is typical of any Third Worldcountry, and quite different from that of affluent, industrial societies.

/2 A detailed discussion of this arrangement is given in R.C.A. Somerset,op. cit.

- 22 -

e.g. especially materials, teachers, and guidance information; then,educational outcomes especially cognitive achievement; and finally,admission to further education or work. The different types of inequalitycan be observed among the following types of population groups: provinces;urban/rural areas; socioeconomic groups; and the sexes. Ideally, theanalysis of educational inequality would proceed through every cell in amatrix formed by the above categories. In practice, data limitationsrestrict our description of inequality. (The following discussion refers tosome of the more critical cells in the matrix.)

3.26 Enrollment Distribution across Provinces and Urban/rural Areas.The Gini coefficients for the distribution of enrollments compared toschool-age population across provinces in 1980/81 were 0.146 for SMPs and0.215 for SMhAs./l This compares quite favorably with similar distributionsdone in other developing countries. Furthermore, in recent years these Ginicoefficients have been improving (declining). However, the relatively evendistribution of enrollments across provinces serves to average out and thusto mask the far more important disparities between urban and rural areas (andeven among rural areas themselves within provinces.) Although it is truethat practically all countries exhibit urban-rural disparities ineducational opportunities, the situation in Indonesia appears to be moresharply skewed than is usual. If each province is divided into an urban anda rural portion,/2 then the Gini coefficient rises to 0.219 for SMPs and ahigh 0.390 for SMAs. A closer look in Appendix Table 5 at how over- orunder-represented each urban or rural area is in enrollments, shows that nourban area has less than 1.4 times its proportional share of nationalenrollments in SMPs or SMAs, and several have 3 or more times a proportionalshare. Furthermore, all rural areas with the slight exception of Bali andrural Yogyakarta have lower representation indices than all urban areas.In sum, there are relatively few SLMPs and almost no SMAs located in ruralareas, whether on Java or on the outer islands. Rural students wishing tohave a secondary education are faced with the extra costs and hardships ofeither migrating or commuting daily into towns or cities. The Grade 12survey discovered that more than 302 of SMA students actually live away fromhome. These difficulties imposed on students from rural areas result in ahigh rate of dropout and waste of talent.

/1 For a full treatment of this issue see G. Criel, op. cit.

/2 Jakarta is entirely urban and several provinces are classified asentirely rural.

- 23 -

3.27 Disparities in School Attendance Rates among Socio-economic Groups,Urban/Rural Areas and Sexes. Table 3.5 below shows that school attendance isconsistently skewed in favor of higher status families, whether seen in termsof urban/rural locale, household expenditures, parent's schooling or parent'soccupation. Table 3.5 also shows that the urban-rural gap increases stronglywith age, to the point where persons in the 16-18 age group are more thantwice as likely to attend school if they live in towns or cities. However,contrary to what some may expect, attendance rates are consistently higher inthe outer islands (as a whole) than they are on Java. The pattern of socialskewness gets accentuated in each successive age group, so that it becomesstrongest in the 16-18 year old, senior secondary age group. Finally, exceptat the primary school age level, female attendance is consistently lower.

3.28 The Distribution of Physical Classroom Accommodation AcrossProvinces. A comparison of numbers of students enrolled and of classrooms(in satisfactory condition) shows a rather even distribution of classroomsacross provinces./I No data analysis has been carried out to assess thedistribution of classrooms between urban and rural areas, however. Acomparison of the Gini coefficients for the distributions of classrooms,enrollments, and teachers across provinces is given in Table 3.6. It showsclearly that the inter-provincial distribution of classrooms (and teachers)in relation to students is much more equitable than that of enrollments inrelation to school age population. The reason for this better distributionof classrooms among provinces - leaving aside the urban-rural disparity -is that classrooms and teachers are allocated according to plan, at least inthe public sector, whereas enrollments at the post-primary develop accordingto social demand.

3.29 Disparities in the Inter-provincial Distribution of School fuality-producing Resources. The distribution of important instructional facilitiesand materials is bound to be difficult and uneven in a large country,especially one with many impoverished private schools. In 1977 a nationalassessment survey of the quality of SMA Grade 12 education was conducted in18 provinces. The survey's inventory of quality inputs is summarized inAppendix Table 2./2 The disparity in levels o' provision is very large. Inthree provinces over half of the sample SMA schools have no science labora-tories. Appendix Table 2 shows similar disparities in the availability oflibraries, visual aids and books across provinces. Nothwithstanding these

/1 Appendix Table 3 shows the average ratio of students to classrooms andcorresponding Representation Indices for each province. Source: C.Criel, op. cit.

/2 Taken from S. Heyneman, "Indonesian Secondary Schools: Issues of Oualityand Finance," Table 3.

- 24 -

Table 3.5: SCHOOL ATTENDANCE RATES FOR SOCIO-ECONOMIC GROUPS, 1978

Ages 7-12 Ages 13-15 Ages 16-1RSocio-economic Characteristics Male Female Male Female Male Female

All ChildrenIndonesia 84 82 59 47 34 22Region of residenceJava 83 80 57 41 30 19Outer Islands 86 84 62 57 40 26

Location of residenceUrban 92 88 81 67 60 40Rural 82 80 54 41 27 16

Household per capitaexpenditures classLower 40% 81 78 48 37 20 9Middle 30% 84 82 60 47 30 20Upper 30% 91 90 77 59 57 36

Children of Household HeadEducation of Household HeadNo schooling 72 72 41 31 20 10Not completed primary school 86 80 60 41 27 23Primary school 90 90 76 65 57 50Junior secondary school 97 95 84 93 72 70Senior secondary school 99 96 100 79 92 76Academy/University 98 100 100 100 100 99

Occupation of Household HeadProfessional 93 85 76 65 59 40Clerical 94 97 98 77 76 73Sales 100 92 93 76 76 46Services 86 77 66 64 36 45Agricultural 80 81 52 38 24 19Production worker 90 84 63 39 45 22

Other Children 85 78 53 39 31 8

Source: From data tapes of SUSENAS, 1978, Biro Pusat Statistik, in Meesook,"Indonesia: Finance and Equity in the Social Sectors" appendixTable 1.

- 25 -

Table 3.6: GINI COEFFICIENTS FOR INTER-PROVINCIAL DISTRIBUTION OFSECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS, CLASSROOMS AND TEACHERS,

1980/81

Distributedvalue (Criterion) SMP SMA

Enrollments (School-age population) 0.146 0.215

Classrooms (Student enrollments) 0.056 0.043

Full-time teachers (Student enrollments) 0.065 0.056

Source: G. Criel op. cit.

the provincial distribution of school quality materials, the province-wisedistribution of teachers is (as noted in para. 3.28) quite even. AppendixTable 4 shows the student/teacher ratios and corresponding RepresentationIndices for each province.

3.30 Urban-rural Disparities in School Quality Resources. The Grade 9survey found that whereas 28% of urban SMP students lacked access to a schoollibrary, 42% of students in rural SMP schools lacked access. Table 3.7 showsthe difference in the survey test scores associated with lack of access to aschool library - one of the critical "quality inputs" noted earlier. Rural

Table 3.7: SURVEY TEST SCORES FOR URBAN AND RURAL GRADE 9 STUDENTS,ACCORDING TO THEIR ACCESS TO A SCHOOL LIBRARY

With Withoutaccess to access tolibrary library

Urban 218 179

Rural 186 172

Source: Grade 9 Quality Assessment.

- 26 -

students without access to a library drop in score by another third of astandard deviation from their already low position. (The nation-wideaverage score was 190). The Grade 9 survey found that rural teachers hadfewer opportunities to attend in-service teacher training courses. But inaddition, for those who did, in-service course attendance was notstatistically associated with higher achievement by their students. Thesurvey report reasons, based on its other findings, that in spite of suchcourses "such teachers are forced to carry on their poor habits of teaching.There are simply not enough books and other facilities in the typical ruralschool to support their newly acquired knowledge."/l

3.31 Disparities in Use of School Quality Resources between Socio-Economic Groups. The Grade 12 survey found "that students from advantagedhome backgrounds were attending SNAs which are superior in every one of the(quality indicators) measured in this (survey)./2 In other words there areno mitigating or compensating policies or practices - such as scholarshipsor boarding arrangements - which give able students from poor familiesequal access to high ranking schools.

3.32 Disparities in Cognitive Performance across Regions. The Grade 9assessment survey found considerable inter-regional variation in mean scoreson tests of knowledge in the key subject areas. Students in Jakarta andBali scored higiwsbt and those in Kalimantan, northern Sumatra and easternIndonesia scored lowest.

3.33 Access to Educational Guidance Information. The schoolcurriculum in Indonesia is national and uniform; in principle all schoolshave equal access to the official curriculum. However, because of thepowerful "backwash" influence of university entrance examinations, there isa parallel teaching "agenda" or curriculum in the final years of SMA asstudents focus on passing that exam. Indeed, to supplement their chancesfor success, those students who can afford to take private fee charging,coaching schools. To the extent that the entrance examination to the tenmost prestigious universities is conducted only at nine urban centers onJava and one in northern Sumatra, it is likely that the penetration of this"feedback" information is weak in remote areas and provinces.

3.34 Disparities in Recruitment to National Universities and Institutesacross Provinces. As we noted above the Gini coefficient for the inter-provincial distribution of SMA enrollments compared to school age populationis a moderate 0.215. However, if one compares the distribution of recruitsto the ten public national PP1 universities and institutes to the same baseschool age population - the Gini coefficient rises sharply to 0.455./3

/1 Grade 9 Quality Assessment report, page 79.

/2 Grade 12 Quality Assessment report, page 82.

/3 H.C.A. Somerset, "Patterns of University Recruitment: Regional Variationsin the Flow of Secondary School Leavers to the PP1 Universities".

- 27 -

Sources of Educational Inequality

3.35 Disparities can arise, first, in getting access to secondaryschools, then, in performing well in school, and finally, in gainingaccess to the more sought-after institutions of higher education. Theseinequalities arise, on the one hand, from rather obvious locational factors,such as the lack of local schools, or of schools which are good enough to beworth going to. On the other hand, they can also arise from private costsand from more subtle disincentives or what might be termed institutionalfactors.

3.36 Location. Until 1982/83 new SMPs and, especially, new SMAs tendedto be located almost exclusively in the cities and larger towns. Further-more little or no boarding facilities have been provided to accommodatebright but poor rural youth.

3.37 Private Cost. The private costs of secondary schooling areanother major source of inequality. As we saw in Table 3.5, school atten-dance is heavily skewed in favor of urban families with higher householdexpenditures. Because very few SMPs or SMAs include boarding facilities fornonlocal students, students from rural areas have had to migrate and rentlodging in towns simply to complete their secondary education, absorbingprivately the added costs which are not imposed on urban populations. Also,Table 3.8 shows that the average annual family expenditures in support ofall SMP schooling in 1979 (including private as well as public schooling)was nearly five times the Government's contribution to recurrent cost perstudent. Family expenditures at SMA level were over ten times theGovernment's contribution./l Private family expenditures also appear to behigh when compared to employee income or to GNP per capita. Averageemployee income at the time of the last SAKERNAS labor force survey was inthe range Rp 84,000 to Rp 120,000 per year./2 Family expenditures for onlyone SMP student would consume half of average income; for SMA, expenditureswould more than consume average income. Private expenditures are nearly onequarter of GNP per capita at SMF, and nearly one half at SMA.

/1 The family expenditures were obtained from a national sample surveyincluding 1,832 students in 26 provinces. Waskito Tjiptosasmito andW.K. Cummings, "tStatus and Deployment of Teachers in Indonesia", 1981.These results were confirmed in a Bank staff survey of family costs among81 students in two schools. Counting only books, supplies, uniforms andfees, the average annual costs were Rp 39,144 in a public SMA andbetween Rp 77,000 and Rp 89,000 in a private state-subsidized SMP.S. Heyneman, "Indonesian Secondary Schools; Issues of Quality andFinance", Tables 6 and 7.

/2 The Labor Force Situation in Indonesia 1978, Table XX.

- 28 -

Table 3.8: FAMILY COSTS OF SECGNDARY SCHOOLING, 1979/80 PRICES

SMP SMA SPG /a

Total family cost of schooling: Rp /b 58,400 122,000 103,700i Rp 670 = $1.00 87.16 182.09 154.

As percentage of average employeeIncome (1978)/c 57% 120Z 102%

As percentage of 1979GNP p.c. ($370) 24% 49% 42%

As percentage of Gov't Routinebudget per student (1979)/d 485% 1,013% -

Portion of total family costs for /bFees (SPP and BP3) 10,800 18% 25,500 21% 20,800 20%Transportation 7,500 13% 21,500 18% 22,500 22%Pocket money 14,900 25% 31,700 26% 21,800 21%Equipment 12,200 21% 17,200 14% 13,600 13XUniform 8,000 14% 13,900 11% 11,400 11%Other 5,000 8% 10,200 8% 13,600 13%

/a SPGs are teacher training high schools at the same level as SMAs. AllSPGs in the sample were government schools while 20% of SMAs were highcost private schools.

/b Waskito Tjiptosasmito and W. K. Cummings, "Status and Deployment ofTeachers in Indonesia", 1981, Table 3.15.

/c SAKERNAS, 1978.

/d Table 3.1.

- 29 -

3.38 In short, the private cost of secondary schooling is high for theaverage family, even without considering the opportunity cost of incomeforegone. This is in sharp contrast to the relatively low expenditures onsecondary schooling through the government budget, as a percentage of GNPper capita, as noted in para. 3.08 above. Such a high private investmentcost naturally tends to prevent the poor from investing in education, inspite of the future benefits to be derived./l

3.39 "Institutional" Ba-riers. We have noted briefly that theprovince-wise distribution of PP1 university recruits is unequal in relationto the distribution of the relevant age group population, with a Ginicoefficient of 0.455. The selection process contributes to the differencesbetween provinces. Table 3.9 disaggregates the key phases of selection andshows the Gini coefficient for each step toward entry in a PP1 university:Grade 12 enrollment, application and finally recruitment (based on thewritten PP1 entrance examination scores to these ten prestigious and heavilygovernment-subsidized universities and institutes)./2 The highest Gini's arefor the distributions of applicants compared to Grade 12 SMA students - bothscience and arts students. On the other hand the Gini's for the recruits(high scorers) compared to applicants are very low. What this signifies isthat regional inequality in this most important educational outcome is notprimarily a matter of cognitive performance on the examination. Instead,the greatest differentiators are in the "institutional" factors which shapea Grade 12 student's decision whether or not to compete in the PPI entranceexamination. It is especially noticeable that students on Java and in northSumatra are the only groups who are overrepresented among the applicants.These are the provinces where all the PP1 universities and institutes arelocated. It may be that students .-rom other provinces are either notadequately informed about PP1 universities, or are simply too distant fromthe PP1 examination centers to attend either as examinees or subsequently asstudents./3

/1 See Chapter 4 below.

/2 However, the examination score cut-off points vary for certaineconomically advanced ethnic groups.

/3 Although the PP1 examination approximates most closely a nationalexamination, it is physically administered only at the PPI memberinstitutions.

- 30 -

Table 3.9: DISTRIBUTION OF SMA ENROLLMENTS, APPLICATIONS ANTRECKUITMENT TO PP1 UNIVERSITlES/INSTITIJTES ACROSS PROVINCES, 1982

Province withhighest represen-

Stage Distribution of:/a Gini coefficient tation indices

R.I.1 Grade 12 enrnllment: 0.217 Jakarta (2.23)

(vs. 18 year old Yogyakarta (2.23)population)

2 Science Applicants to PPI Java Timus (1.47)universities: 0.278 Jakarta (1.46)

Arts Applicants to PP1 Yogyakarta (1.79)universities: 0.308 Jakarta (1.52)(vs. grade 12 enrollment)

3 PP1 Science Recruits 0.146 Bali (1.74)Yogyakarta (1.51)

PP1 Arts Recruits n.nqO Yogyakarta (1.2R)(vs. PP1 Applicants) Jawa Tengah (1.16)

Combined PP1 Recruits (Science Arts) 0.455 Yogyakarta (4.8n)stages (vs 18 year old population) Jakarta (2.20)

/a The base population for computing the Gini coefficient for each distri-bution is shown in parenthesis.

Source: H.C.A. Somerset, "Patterns of University Recruitment: Regional Varia-tions in the Flow of Secondary School Leavers to the PP1 Universities."

Enrollment and Output Capacity

3.40 Enrollments in general and technical secondary schools have grownrapidly in the past decade (Table 2.1). In recent years, most of this growthhas taken place in private schools (Table 2.2). Gross enrollment rates forall types of secondary education are given in Table 3.10. As fast and assteadily as these rates are growing, they are still below the regionalaverage, as Table 3.11 shows. The competitive regional and world economyplaces a premium on the educational quality of a nation's labor force.Enrollments in secondary and higher education will need to increase evenfurther if they are to catch up to today's regional norms. It is thereforealtogether appropriate that growth rates in the 112-13% range of recent yearscontinue.

- 31 -

Table 3.10: SECONDARY ENROLLMENT RATES IN INDONESIA,1978/79-1981/82

(Z)

All schools 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83

Junior secondary 28.7 31.0 34.5 37.5 40.8

Senior secondary 15.1 17.9 19.4 21.8 23.6

All secondary 22.2 24.8 27.3 30.0 32.6

Source: Rangkuman, Statistik Persekolahan and World Bank staff populationestimates.

Table 3.11: SECONDARY EDUCATION ENROLLMENT RATESEAST ASIA AND PACIFIC REGION

China (1981) 38% Philippines (1979) 55%Korea (1982) 84% Singapore (1980) 55%Malaysia (1980) 65% Solomon Islands (1980) 18%Papua N. Guinea (1980) 12% Thailand (1980) 29%

Source: World Bank Comparative Education Indicators (1983).

3.41 Historically, a comparatively high percentage of Indonesian seniorsecondary school places have been in vocational schools of various types.Table 3.12 shows the recent trend in vocational share at the junior and seniorsecondary level respectively. At the junior level, vocational schools aresteadily giving way to general schools and will almost disappear if this trendcontinues. This trend is undoubtedly a response to relative demand forknowledge and skill levels in the labor market. This trend is even moreadvanced among private junior secondary schools where parents are presunablymore conscious of income signals and more likely to compare the benefits withthe costs of schooling. At the senior secondary level, vocational-typeschools (including teacher training) still make up about 34X of enrollment.This is a high proportion by regional standards, as seen from AppendixTable 6. Only the centrally planned (socialist) economies, plus a handful ofcountries in Latin America and Europe devote a higher share of secondaryschooling to vocational schools.

- 32 -

Table 3.12: DISTRIBUTION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS BETWEENGENERAL AND VOCATIONAL SCHOOLS, 1977-1982/83

(in 'OOOs)

Junior Secondary Senior SecondaryVoca- Voca-

Total General tional Total General tional

1977 2,340 2,029 311 1,108 492 61610n% 87% 13% 1noz 44% 56%

1978/79 2,674 2,271 403 1,290 604 686100n 85% 15% i0n% 47% 532

1979/80 2,983 2,894 89 1,574 843 7311002 97% 3% 100% 54% 46%

1980/81 3,412 3,329 83 1,755 1,n36 7191OZ 98X 2% 100% 5Q% 41%

1981/82 3,809 3,736 73 2,024 1,287 7371002 98% 2% 100% 64% 36%

1982/83 4,273 4,193 80 2,262 1,504 758100% 98% 2% 100% 66% 342

(1982/83) Public only: 100% 97% 3X 100% 63% 37%

(1982/83) Private only: 100% 99% 1% 100% 70% 30%

Source: Rangkuman, Stalistik Peresekolahan.

3.42 A further useful insight into effective demand comes again from theprivate school sector. Here, enrollments in the private technical/vocationalsenior secondary schools have stagnated in recent yecrs even while privateSMA enrollments have continued an exponential growth curve.

3.43 The rapid and responsive growth of private school enrollments isone of the most significant developments in Indonesian secondary education.It poses certain risks in terms of equity and the quality of learning asmany such schools are small, impoverished operations and located in urbancenters. However, it also embodies a low subsidy approach to financingsecondary education which is most conducive to rapid growth especially intimes of fiscal constraint.

- 33 -

3.44 The chief source for the limited enrollment and output capacity ingeneral secondary education is also an obvious one. Until 1982/83 publicinvestment in expanding secondary education was very limited in relation tothe explosive demand. Table 3.13 shows the limited investments in expandingall junior and senior secondary schooling (not just general) before 1982/83.At a notional capital unit cost of Rp 1,300,000 per student place, theseinvestments would have permitted the construction of the equivalent of only173 schools of 500 students per year on average for three years before1982/83. This provided enough accommodation for about 259,000 studentssingle shift, or 390,000 if half of the schools operated on double shift.At the same time the secondary school age population (13-18) grew in size byabout 1,560,000./1 Thus this rate of construction was keeping up with only25% of population growth. It is only because of the far more rapid growthof private school enrollments, that overall accommodation has been able tokeep ahead of population growth. Many of the private schools come intoexistence simply by adding an afternoon or evening shift to an existingschool, thereby avoiding additional capital outlay.

Table 3.13: PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN SECONDARY EDUCATION IN THEDEVELOPMENT BUDGET, 1979/80-1982/83

(Rp '000,000)

Developmentbudget 1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83

Jr. Secondary Education 30,000 52,067 71,392 205,165Sr. Secondary Education 43,200 63,664 76,818 120,000

Total 73,200 115,731 148,210 325,165

Source: Analisa, Table 10.

/1 Rp 73.2 + 115.7 + 148.3 billion - 337.2 billion, divided by Rp 1.3million 259,384 student places or 519 schools with 500 places in each,ever 3 years. 519 - 3 - 173 schools per year.

- 34 -

Financing Secondary Education

3.45 Table 3.14 summarizes recent levels of government financing.As a percentage of GDP, the trend is distinctly up since 1979/80. How-ever, when seen in comparison with education expenditure levels in othercountries, Indonesia's low budgetary effort is apparent (Tables 3.15, 3.16and Comparative Education Indicators in Table 7 of the Appendix).

Table 3.14: FINANCING OF EDUCATION IN GOVERNMENT BUDGETAND AS PERCENTAGE OF GDP

(Rp '000,000)

1979/80 1980/81 1981/82 1982/83 1983/84

I.Total Government /c /dBudget /a 5,505,200 9,120,500 12,339,200 17,700,000 20,560,400

2.Education Youth andReligion SectorBudget /a 498,565 808,081 1,147,786 1,653,330 2,034,000Z of total 9.1 8.9 9.3 9.3 9.9/d

3.Department ofEducationand Culture'Budget la 350,030 547,446 747,025 1,004,821 n.a.

Z of total 6.4 6.0 6.1 5.7

4.GDP (in currentprices)/b 32,025,000 45,446,000 54,027,000 59,956,000 73,251,000

5.Education SectorBudget as percen-tage of GDP(2) - (4) 1.6% 1.8% 2.1% 2.8% 2.8%

/a Includes Development and Routine Budgets./b Taken from Country Economic Memorandum, 1983, Annex III, Table 2.1TW Bank estimate based on first semester information./d Draft budget estimate

Source: Analisa. Tables 3 and 15a.

- 35 -

Table 3.15: INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT FINANCING OFEDUCATION SECTOR: PERCENTAGE OF GNP

Most recent1970 1975 year

% x X

Indonesia 2.8 3.0 2.i) (1978)India 2.8 2.9 3.2 ( 1 97q)Japan 3.9 5.5 5.8 (1979)Korea (Republic of) 3.6 2.2 3.4 (1979)Malaysia 4.4 6.3 5.8 (1979)Philippines 2.6 1.9 2.0 (1Q79)Singapore 3.1 3.0 2.9 (1979)Thailand 3.5 3.6 3.2 (1979)Germany (F.R.) 3.7 5.1 4.7 (1979)United States 6.6 6.6 6.4 (1979)

Source: UNESCO Statistical Yearbook, 1982, Table 4.1.

-Table 3.16: EDUCATION EXPENDITURES AS PERCENTAGE OF GNP - ASIA REGION

C. 1970-1973 late 1970s

"Typical Country" 3.04 3.45 (East AsiaPacific)

Indonesia 2.17 n.a.Burma 3.11 1.42Korea (Republic of) 3.37 3.73Malaysia 4.99 5.23Nepal .73 1.37Pakistan 2.80 1.52Papua New Guinea 5.04 6.37Philippines 4.93 3.20Singapore 2.42 2.31Sri Lanka 4.90 2.87Thailand 2.97 3.33

Sources: Zymelman, "Patterns of Educational Expenditures", World BankStaff Working Paper No. 246, 1976 and "Educational Expenditures inthe 1970s", World Bank, Education Department, 1982.

- 36 -

3.46 Private Secondary Schools. The Government has a deliberate policyto allow and indeed to expect a major role in education for "the family andthe society," in addition to the Government's contribution. In practice,not only private organizations, but also many local groups or communitieshave raised funds to establish and support what are loosely called "private"schools. The connotation of "private" can be misleading, however. Some ofthe private secondary :hools are indeed excellent, even elite, institutions.But the great majority of them could as readily be called "self-help" or"community" schools. These depend very heavily on local contributions andtake in students from the local or surrounding population. Without either adependable local revenue base or central government subsidy, most so-calledprivate secondary schools struggle as marginal institutions, constituting a"facade" sector in contrast to the small "action" sector schools in whicheffective teaching and learning are concentrated.

3.47 Under a new decree, PP 28 /1 the Governnent is prepared to givegrants to private schools for operating, but not (yet at least) for capitalcosts. The mechanism is new and apparently not in much use as yet. Eachgrant application to the Minister of Education is supposed to include theschool's plans to raise additional school funds privately while using thegovernment grant.

3.48 Fees in Public Schools. Families are also expected to contributeto the costs of education for society by paying school fees (SPP) for childrenin the state schools. However, since 1978 the SPP fees in primary schoolshave been replaced by a government subsidy. Meanwhile, the SPP fees atsecondary and university level have remained unchanged in nominal terms inspite of inflation. Thus in real terms they declined by one-third between1975/76 and 1980/81./2 The percentages of recurrent expenditure per publicschool student which are recovered by fees (in 19R0/81) are:/3

Junior secondary: 6%Senior secondary: 10%University : 13%

These percentages are rather high compared to OECD countries and do nottake account of the considerable private costs of schooling. Yet thesubsidy issue remains: given that such large majorities of post-primaryschool age youth are not in public school and given the large excess

/1 PP28 translates into "Government Regulation Number 28 of 1981, concern-ing the Distribution of Aid to Private Schools."

/2 Meesook, op. cit., p. 29.

/3 Ibid, Table 1. There are no fees at the primary level.

- 37 -

private demand for secondary schooling, should the public schools recover aneven greater share of their costs from users through higher fees so thatmore schools could be opened and operated with government subsidies? As itis, the secondary and especially higher education enrollments, and thereforethe subsidies, are heavily biased to upper and middle income families./I

3.49 To recapitulate briefly, the following factors condition Govern-ment's options for educational financing.

(a) Indonesia's secondary enrollment rates are comparatively lowand effective teaching is concentrated in a relatively fewschools, indicating a need for substantially increased investmentlevels in future;

(b) even though the Government has recently raised its financialcontribution sharply, the government contribution to the costof education is still comparatively low;

(c) the government revenue base is now being seriously eroded bythe fall in world oil and commodity prices;

(d) "private" (self-help) SMA schools are growing exponentiallyas a response to the demand for schooling in excess of thegovernment SMA sector's capacity;

(e) cost recovery in the public secondary schools has declinedlately in real terms; and

(f) low teachers salaries and "piecework" salary supplements weakenthe quality of teaching.

Under these conditions the chief financing issues are whether the Governmentcan increase the education share of a severely constrained budget, and evenif it can increase the share, whether the amount of education financing willremain constrained or even shrink due to a reduced overall budget. Giventhat a relatively constrained level of government financing of education isthe most likely result, the issues become:

(i) how can the users (families and local communities) beinduced to increase their contributions to the increasingtotal cost of education, given the prospect of rapidly risingpost-primary enrollments; and

(ii) how can the Government's financing be made more costeffective in terms of educating more students at lowerunit cost, without a fall in the qaality of educationaloutcomes.

/1 Ibid., page 22 and Appendix, Table 10.

- 38 -

3.50 One cause for some optimism in this constrained environment isthat the near-universalization of primary education means that the share ofcapital funds allocated to primary education should naturally begin todecline in the near term, freeing capital funds for secondary and highereducation. Mest of the physical capacity for primary education has now beenbuilt, and most of the additional required teachers are either trained orare already in training. Furthermore, because of a lower population growthrate than was foreseen in 1981,/1 and allowing for realistic pupil dropoutrates, primary school (SD) enrollments will not grow to 30 million by 1990as projected in the 1982 World Bank Economic Report on Indonesia./2Instead, SD total enrollments are estimated to settle into a "steady state"level of enrollments of about 23 million, or roughly even with enrollmentsin 1982/83.13

3.51 Cost Recovery through Public School Fees. The practice ofrequiring the users of public schools to pay a share of costs is firmly inplace. However, the scheduled range of fees allowed has not been adjustedupward to keep up with inflation and rising per capita incomes. In additionthe schools themselves have little incentive to raise the fees. This isbecause under the fee system, the amounts of SPP fees collected by a schooland passed on to the Government are not directly related to the amounts ofDPP funds the school receives back from the Government. If they wererelated, parents as well as school principals would have every incentive toraise their fees voluntarily to a higher levcl within the scheduled range offees, since the pupils and the school as a whole would see the directbenefit. The present system allows for higher SPP fees collected in schoolsin higher income areas to subsidize the schools located in lower incomeareas where parents are presumed to be too poor to be willing to pay ahigher fee.

3.52 Grants to Private Schools. As described above the Governmentprovides operating grants to private schools. However the PP28 regulationsdo not provide for capital grants. This has apparently not stopped theprivate sector from expanding rapidly in the aggregate. However, privateSMA growth is also very uneven. It is heavily concentrated in urban areas,in Bali, and in a few rural provinces where there is a long tradition ofchurch-related schools. In the urban areas, the growth of private schoolshas already been given a major "hidden" capital subsidy by the commonpractice of establishing such schools as afternoon or evening shifts on thepremises of a public school which operates only in the morning.

/1 Current projections based on an analysis of the 1980 census resultswere not available at the time.

/2 "Indonesia: Financial Resources and Human Development in the Eighties,"No. 3795-IND, May 5, 1982, World Bank, para. 6.15 and Table 6.1.

/3 See Appendix, Table 8.

- 39 -

Administration

3.53 Two broad administrative problems are emerging with respect to therapid growth of secondary education. The first concerns the extent and paceof administrative decentralization. Today, well over 5,000 public secondaryschools and 140,000 teachers in those schools are administered jointly bydepartment headquarters staff in Jakarta and provincial staff of only about250 supervisois in 27 provincial offices./I In addition they have to pro-vide quality supervision of over 10,600 private secondary schools with up to190,000 (including part-time) teachers. Thus, on average, each supervisorcovers about 62 public and private secondary schools. No supervisory staffbelow the province level exist for secondary schools, even though threeprovinces on Java include populations of about 30 million persons. Super-visory officials are already hindered by being too remote from the schoolsthey are supposed to know and guide. This problem will become worse as thenumber of secondary schools increases.

3.54 A second problem concerns the sharp differentiation between publicand so-called private schools. Some private schools are well endowed withresources by state school standards. They may prize their independence andare able to select the best candidates for their student intake. However,as previously mentioned, the bulk of the so-called private schools areresource-poor and would benefit significantly from even limited state aid,which they eagerly seek. Provided these schools abide by the officialcurriculum, their exclusion from public funds will tend to accentuate thedifferences between the "action" and "facade" sector schools. Would a moreliberal use of a grant-in-aid system to greater numbers of self-help schools,under PP28, provide a higher return on investment for the Government'slimited budgetary resources, than the present practice of providing heavysubsidy to a smaller number of fully public schools?

The Return on Investment in Secondary Education

3.55 Does secondary education help to increase the efficiency and pro-ductivity of the Indonesian economy? Cross-sectional surveys of the laborforce have shown that unemployment rates are high--20Z for junior secondaryschool leavers and 26% for senior secondary school leavers between ages 20and 24. But these same surveys have shown a major drop in the unemploymentrate as young people get slightly older (ages 25-29)- to 6% for juniorsecondary school leavers and 7% for senior secondary school leavers./2 Thissuggests that the high unemployment figures might be associated with youth,implying that job prospects get better as an individual acquires more exper-ience and persists in his search.

/1 Department of Education and Culture, "Draft Report of the PreinvestmentStudy on the Improvement of Secondary General Education", 1982, TableIV.3.

/2 SAKERNAS, 1978.

- 40 -

3.56 But do the job prospects associated with higher levels of edu-cation come early enough and are they sufficiently more rewarding to justifythe expansion of secondary education? The Department of Education recentlyconducted a national tracer survey to probe more carefully inr'! thisquestion, and into related questions concerning the labor market performanceof various types of primary and secondary school leavers./1 The findings:

(a) The rates of return are high to all forms of secondary educationin Indonesia. This is because the demand for secondary schoolgraduates appears to be expanding at a faster rate than the supplyof such graduates.

(b) Table 3.17 indicates that the returns are somewhat lower to vocat-ional streams, but this is for two legitimate reasons. Vocationalsubject unit costs average 50% higher than the costs of academicsubjects. Secondly, vocational schools are not able to attractthe best students; entry to them often represents a second choicefor students denied access to academic schools for reasons ofability and/or availability. Thus, lower quality entrants andhigher costs help explain the somewhat lower returns, which arenot an indictment of vocational schools. They continue to play auseful role in the spectrum of educational opportunities at thesenior secondary level.

(c) The rates of return are higher for senior secondary graduates(SLTA) than for junior secondary graduates (SLTP). This differ-ence is due to the relative scarcity of senior secondary schoolopportunities and the relatively low unit costs for seniorsecondary education.

Cd) Statistics indicating high rates of unemployment appear to be duenot to long processes of searching for jobs but to rather sporadicjob searches. This on-again-off-again behavior "bunches" togethercohorts of graduates thereby statistically driving unemploymentrates upwards.

(e) The time taken to find a better job, rather than taking the firstjob available is itself an investment. A year's "job search"delay can yield a real rate of return of more than 21%./2

/1 See D. Clark, "How Secondary School Graduates Perform in the LaborMarket: A Study of Indonesia", World Bank Staff Working Paper, No.615,1983.

/2 Ibid. p. 30.

- 41 -

(f) As is often the case,Il the high rates of unemploymentincidence are a sharply declining function of age, or time sincegraduation. Thus the high rates found in the age group 20-24are not an indication of crisis.

(g) Senior secondary school graduates (excluding specially trainedteachers) were half again as li-tvly to be working for privateemployers rather than for either the Government, governmententerprises, or the military.

Table 3.17: SOCIAL RATES OF RETURN FOR SENIOR SECONDARYSCHOOL GRADUATES, 1978

Compared to primary graduates Academic Vocational All

If average senior secondarygraduate has to wait:

0 years to get a job 32% 18% 24%1 26 14 192 22 12 16

3 19 10 14

Senior secondary education (SLTA) comparedto graduates of junior secondaryeducation (SLTP) 27%

Junior secondary graduates (SLTP) comparedto primary graduates (SD) 22%

Source: D. Clark, op.cit., p.46. The calculations are confined tourban males.

J1 G. Psacharopoulos, "Higher Education in Developing Countries: ACost-Benefit Analysis," Work Bank Staff Working Paper No. 440,1980, p. 4.

- 42 -

Table 3.18: LABOR MARKET RESULTS IN 1978, MALE, OUT-OF-SCHOOLMEMBERS OF TRACER STUDY COHORT, BY LOCATION

Jakarta Other Java Non-Java

Proportion of those wanting work had jobs:SMA 38% 58% 67%SMEA - 73 36STM 68 53 62

Mean earnings of those with work (Rp 1,000/mo):SMA 22 19 19SMEA - 17 17STM 28 20 13

Note: Blanks appear where sample is too small for accurate estimates.

Source: D. Clark, op.cit., p. 49.

3.57 The conclusion from these findings is that secondary education, andin particular general secondary education, has been worth the investment.This conclusion should come as no surprise. Table 3.19 shows the relativescarcity of educated manpower in the labor force. This scarcity will help tomaintain the recent high rates of return to secondary as well as highereducation.

Table 3.19: EDUCATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF THE LABOR FORCE, 1976(Percent)

Higher Secondary < Primaryeducation

Indonesia 0.7 9.3 90.0Malaysia /a 1.8 25.8 72.4Thailand 2.2 5.8 92.0Korea /b 10.4 60.6 29.0Philippines 12.0 18.0 7n.0

/a 1974.79 1975.

Source: Indonesia, Central Bureau of Statistics; Thailand, Labor ForceSurvey (1976); Philippines, National Manpower Plan (1978); WorldBank estimates (Korea); Malaysia, Labor Force Survey (1974).

- 43 -

4. SOME PRINCIPLES FOR INVESTMENT POLICY AND ACTION

4.01 This chapter will attempt to outline reasonably consistentapproaches for dealing with the problems which have been raised up to thispoint.

4.02 Provision of School Quality Inputs. The Grade 9 and 12 QualityAssessment Surveys, which were discussed in Chapter 3, pinpointed two keyquality-producing resources. These were: school libraries and sciencelaboratories. The survey also learned that these resources are veryunequally distributed. These resources, together with books and lab equip-ment, would therefore be priority investments in a program to raise qualityand improve equity.

4.03 Teacher Development. The two quality surveys identifiedin-service training of teachers as anot-Ler key factor affecting achievementscores. Given that an increasing proportion of science, math and Englishteachers are receiving only diploma rather than degree training, the needfor an expansion of in-service training of teachers is indicated.

Improving Quality

4.04 Extensive "multi-jobbing" by teachers is an important obstacle tohigh quality secondary schooling. Its source is in the relatively lowofficial base pay of teachers, in a tight teacher labor market, and in thepiecework method of paying salary supplements to teachers described inChapter 3. Since teachers' salaries are the dominant item in the Routineeducation budget, the Government is likely to resist raising base salarieseven though this would somewhat reduce the incentive to "multi-job". Thetight labor market is likely to continue due to continued growth ofenrollments. It is therefore difficult to avoid a pessimistic conclusion onthe policy options for addressing this problem directly in the near term.Obviously the expansion of output of new secondary teachers should continue inorder to increase the supply of teachers and thereby reduce opportunitiesfor multi-jobbing./1

4.05 Finally, salary supplementation should be based on experience andqualification rather than piecework, to remove incentives for increasing thevolume instead of the quality of teaching. Salary supplementation should beconcentrated on those teaching subjects which are in short supply.

/1 Of course, a simultaneous change in teacher remuneration would be neededto prevent a continuing movement of teachers to more lucrativeoccupations.

- 44 -

4.06 Curricula and the Allocation of Teaching Time. There is nearlyuniversal recognition that the ordinary primary or secondary school has acomparative advantage in the teaching of language, number skills, scientificskills and social studies - what is commonly called the core curriculum.The list of subjects on the school timetable almost always grows beyond thiscore of subjects, but at a certain point all available teaching time isexhausted. At that point, there is a trade-off. The addition of newsubjects must be at the expense of other subjects.

4.07 In recent times general secondary schools have been especiallyprone to an over-extension of their school timetables, under such labels as:curriculum diversification, "comprehensivization" or vocationalization.But for one school to be all things to all people requires a large-scaleoperation as well as considerable managerial talent if it is to be runeconomically. Fortunately in Indonesia, the pressure to vocationalize theSMA curriculum is greatly reduced because of the existence of variousparallel specialized technical and vocational schools. Nonetheless, thereis an allocation of four out of 37 weekly periods to "prevocational skills".It is unclear how thoroughly this part of the timetable is followed up tothe present.

4.08 The policy principle at issue here is that teaching and learningtake place within finite time, which is as scarce a resource as teachers andinstructional materials. Indeed, time is a resource with a multipliereffect on other resources: efficient use of time will maximize benefits (andvice versa) from the costliest of inputs, namely teachers. The planning ofeducational quality requires careful attention to planning the mosteffective use of time and of time bound resources for learning. Timeavailable for teaching should be allocated heavily to whatever it is thatschools - compared to other delivery systems - can teach best./l

4.09 School Curricula and the Reform of Examinations. Even though acommon, national final examination for secondary schools was abolished morethan ten years ago, universities and other postsecondary institutions stillhave a need to select their entrants in a way which is fair and efficient.Ir,evitably university entrance examinations have grown up to fill the voidleft by the absence of a common secondary school leaving examination. Threeparallel university entrance examinations now operate./2 The PPI examinationis the most difficult, and the most popular of these examinations as itgoverns access to the most sought-after universities. It has come to exerta powerful "backwash" influence on the SMAs, so much so that final year SMAstudents are frequently released some months before the end of the schoolyear so they can take tuition in private "cramming" schools just for PP1.

/1 As a broad generalization, curriculum diversification programs workbest in countries where well over half of the age cohort attend secon-dary school and therefore the need (and economies of scale) to accommo-date a greater range of subject interests are more likely to be present.

/2 See Somerset, op. cit. for description.

- 45 -

4.10 Thus the university entrance examinations have come into conflictwith the secondary school curricula. It need not be so. Secondary curri-cula and end-of-school examinations can be structured to support each other.This would occur if performance on a common secondary school leavingexamination determined one's selection in the competition for universityentrance, thus eliminating the need for a separate, additional entranceexamination.

4.11 Such a leaving examination could also achieve other equallyImportant objectives, besides its critical function of allocating publicuniversity places efficiently to the highest performers. The examinationcould become a powerful mechanism by which to monitor and improve thequality of teaching in schools as the basis on which to build an"intelligence" or management information system, down to the level of eachschool./1 This mechanism can be created, first, by analyzing the patternsof actual responses to examination questions to determine the most commonerrors, and then determining the reasons why students chose these mostcommon wrong answers. This involves breaking down the logical stepsinvolved in each question, retracing the error to faulty learning orteaching, and pointing out where a correction is needed. This approachdiffers significantly from conventional so-called "item analysis."/2

4.12 Secondly, this "guidance" information should be fed back quicklyto: the national level education staff, provincial supervisors, schoolprincipals, teachers and teacher educators, through examination reports,in-service courses and pre-service teacher training. The examinationfeedback reports should also include rankings of districts and schools bytheir mean exam scores, to show local education staff and school teacherstheir relative performance as an incentive to pull themselves up In future.Thus, two types of feedback or management information are needed: guidanceinformation on how to change classroom teaching; and incentive informationto stimulate local education officials and principals to pull theirinstitutions up to higher levels of performance.

4.13 The heavy use of examination material to generate guidance inform-ation for teachers assumes of course that the quality of the examinationquestions is technically very high indeed. Exam item writing should beapproacbed as a labor-intensive craft to be undertaken by the most skilled

/1 This approach to examination reform is described carefully and concretelyin R.C.A. Somerset, "Examination Reform, The Case of Kenya," to bepublished as a World Bank Staff Working Paper.

/2 This approach is illustrated in a further paper by Somerset based on someitems from the English language section of the 1982 PP1 examination:"The Potential Contribution of Examinations to School QualityImprovement."

- 46 -

professional educators available in the country. Items must be subjected topanels of critical reviewers before they are put to use. A large countrylike Indonesia can achieve considerable economies of scale by preparing andconducting an examination and feedback system on a national scale. The unitcost per graduate of such a system could be far less than other qualityimprovement measures.

4.14 The examination's cognitive and skill content should be drawndirectly from the curriculum's own goals. These curriculum goals shouldtake full account of the intellectual needs of the majority of students whowill not proceed to a university, but who will instead directly enter theoften harsh world of work, where they will need to survive and hopefullyprosper by their wits, without the help of a diploma.

4.15 In summary, the purpose of this type of examination reform insecondary education would be to harness the capacity of the selection exami-nation to motivate students and teachers, and to put that motivational forceto work raising the quality of teaching and learning. The curriculum andthe examination should reinforce each other by beaming identical, instead ofconflicting, "signals" into the classroom as to what should be taught andlearnt.

4.16 Private Schools and Quality Improvement. Private SMAs and SMPstend to be either among the very best or the worst schools. By contrast,public schools tend to be concentrated around the mean. High qualityprivate schools also tend to be high cost. By offering an education at fullcost to those with means to pay for it, they relieve the Government ofsubsidizing those who least need to have their education subsidized.Therefore on financial and equity as well as educational quality grounds,such institutions should be given the latitude to grow independently whilepublic school subsidies should be aimed primarily at students from low-income families.

4.17 However, the typical private school is a weak institution. Asnoted earlier at least half of them are small, having fewer than sixclasses, or two classes per grade. They are therefore often not able tomake efficient use of science laboratories and libraries. Priority shouldbe given to raise them to a minimum size and standard of resource provision,by capital grants-in-aid. Provided they can generate a minimum of operatingrevenue from fee income, they should also benefit from operating grantsunder the PP28 system.

Improving Equity

4.18 No country has ever been successful in creating a truly equaleducation system, i.e. in the sense that all groups in society receiveexactly proportionate educational opportunities, resources and results,

- 47 -

leading to a Gini coefficient for the country of O.0. However, a great dealcan be done to improve the equality of opportunities and resources inincrements. The following are some principles or "rules of thumb" to takeinto account.

4.19 The Quality-Equity Trade-Off. Developing countries are alwaysforced into making investment choices because of scarce resources. Ineducation one such choice is: should the new investment go into improvingthe quality of the existing stock of institutions, or, should the stock beenlarged to accommodate a greater portion of the population. Unfortunately,the choice bears an equity consequence. It is based on the assumption thathigher income families are the first to take up limited available schoolplaces at each successive level. Therefore, a decision to improve thequality of the existing stock of secondary schools in Indonesia will ofcourse disproportionately benefit those groups who are already over-represented in the schools, whereas each amount of expansion will benefitsuccessively lower income groups. Given the fact that there are compara-tively low enrollment rates in secondary education and given the satisfac-tory returns on investment to secondary schooling as it is, i.e., evenwithout quality improvements,/l there appear to be compelling reasons toexpand secondary education at the same time as efforts are made to improvequality, as sketched out in the previous section.

4.20 Planning for Equity and Demand for Schooling. There are at leasttwo types of causes for pockets of low enrollment in a country. Some areasor groups in a country could have relatively low enrollment rates becausethey simply lack the necessary physical facilities, while other groups orareas could be under-enrolled because they underutilize the facilities whichare available to them. Such areas can be identified by comparing enrollmentsto numbers of student places available, based on physical inventory.Planning the distribution of new resources to promote greater equity musttake account of this possibility of underutilization. Neither equity norefficiency is served by issuing resources by fiat to areas or groups whichhave insufficient demand to be able to make full use of them.

4.21 Planning School Sizes and Locations for Equity. Inequality ofsecondary education in Indonesia is in large part geographic inequality dueto a very marked urban bias in school locations. The creation of literallythousands of new secondary schools in the coming ten years will present aprime opportunity to reduce the distance-to-school factor in rural areas./2These new SMP and SMA schools can be carefully targetted for those ruralsubdistricts (kecematan) which presently lack any SMP or SMA. Every effortshould be given to maximizing rural coverage of the new school map by

XI See paras. 3.55-3.56.

/2 For more detailed discussion, see W.T.S. Gould. "Indonesia: Sume SpatialIssues in Secondary Education"

- 48 -

keeping school size down to the minimum necessary for efficient use offacilities. This minimum size would be about three parallel streams inSMA and two in SMP. The smaller the size of the schools, the more schoolscan be built in more places, and the lower will be the distance barrier formore potential students.

4.22 For this reason, specialized facilities which are seldom used inthe weekly timetable should be avoided as these will require large numbersof classes and therefore large size schools to generate satisfactory userates. There is a direct tradeoff between equity and specialization offacilities.

4.23 Reducing Quality Differences Between Districts and Schools.Improving equality in education does not stop with making access to schoolplaces more equal. Equalization, as discussed in Chapter 3, ought toinclude access to good quality schools. This requires equalization of thoseresources - especially qualified and experienced teachers and instructionalmaterials - which contribute to good schools. The reduction of qualitydifferences between schools will also require frequent monitoring of theperformance of all schools on standardized measures, especially externalexaminations, and giving the weakest schools guidance based on an analysisof the exam results, as discussed in paras. 4.09-4.15. Naturally, not alldistricts or schools will respond efficiently to this guidance information,but it is precisely the weakest districts and schools which stand to benefitthe most from this information./1

4.24 School Fees and Equity. Under present conditions of budgetaryconstraint the Government needs to raise further revenues from off-budgetsources, such as school fees. Under conditions where (so far) only a smallpercentage of the age group benefits from public schooling, and these tendto be disproportionately from high income families,/2 the raising of schoolfees would conversely reduce public subsidies to those who least need them.Means-tested scholarships should be made available for the poor. Thus, theraising of school fees need not reduce equity in education. It mightconceivably even promote equity if the operating funds saved from thereductions in public subsidies could be ploughed into capital expansion, oras increased operating subsidies to schools in low income and especially ruralareas.

4.25 Opening Recruitment Channels to High Ouality Public Schools.Given that the number of "action sector," schools producing graduatessuitable for recruitment into the better universities is so small (para.3.05), it is very important that access to such schools is as wide open as

/1 For a case in point, see R.C.A. Somerset, "Examination Reformi TheKenya Case," Chapter 8.

/2 See Table 3.5.

- 49 -

possible until the "action sector" is enlarged several times over. Underpresent arrangements, SD and SMP graduates are supposed to take a locallyset examination for entrance to whatever public SMP or SMA places may beavailable locally. In rural areas these spaces will be both few in numberand probably of low quality. The channeling of talented rural youth intosuch educational "cul-de-sacs" is not only inequitable, it is also wastefulof scarce human resources. Therefore, until such time as there are publicschools of reasonable quality in small towns, it would be socially andeconomically advantageous to allow open registration to all public schools.In order to avoid a situation where rural candidates are rushing from onelocally set exam center to another, it would be more efficient to enlargethe examination areas so that a common exam serves at least a province or agroup of provinces. Candidates could Lhen be allowed to indicate two orthree public school preferences to guide their placement, if they succeed onthe exam.

Expanding Capacity

4.26 Given the Government's budget constraints innovative ways must befound for expanding capacity at lowest budgetary cost. The following aresome approaches to capacity expansion under budget constraints-

4.27 How Much to Expand? The economic reason to invest in secondaryeducation is that it brings a rate of return higher than the opportunity costof capital./l The extent of that investment should be guided pragmatically byfrequent reading of demand and supply signals in situations where subsidiesare kept to a minimum. For example as long as demand by applicants for placesin fee-charging private schools surpasses capacity, and as long as theincidence of school leaver unemployment is a sharply declining function of age(para. 3.56 tf)) and therefore remains a phenomenon associated with transi-tion into the work force, investment in general secondary education shouldincrease.

4.28 Reasons for Public Investment in Capacity Expansion. Given therapid growth of the unplanned, private secondary school sector, publicinvestment should focus primarily on the two goals of maintaining quality andequity in secondary education. These goals have been discussed above indetail. Maintaining equity will require a public investment, carefullytargetted, in new school construction, largely in rural areas. This could bein both public and private schools.

4.29 Public Investment in "Private" Community Schools. Perhaps the mostcrucial government policy in secondary education in the coming years willrelate to its support to what are called private schools. Since the Govern-ment's revenue base will not allow the full financing of rapid secondary

/1 See paras. 3.55-3.56.

- 50 -

(Table 3.14). According to informed observers, the actual expenditures willbe lower, in part because some of these funds have been blocked and in partrural areas. By making matching capital grants to local community groups atthe kecematan level to establish new secondary schools especially in ruralareas, secondary school capacity can be expanded at lower capital andrecurrent cost to the Government. Various other forms of financial supportwill also be needed to see if the Government can stimulate local or privategroups to shoulder an even greater portion of the cost of accommodating andteaching the rapidly growing student population. This could include taxrelief to corporations or individuals who contribute to schools as proposed bythe Soemitro commission report./l

4.30 Maximizing Output from Existing Capacity. The options in thisdirection are few. As already noted, there is extensive double shifting ofboth schools and teachers. Neither can we look for much improvement in"internal efficiency:" grade repetition is already less than 2% in both SMAand SMP.12 Where there is some room for increasing output capacity is in theredeployment of facilities among different types of secondary schools. Inparticular, the demand for additional new primary school teachers has recentlypeaked with the achievement of near-universal primary school entry. Enroll-ments in primary grade one are tapering off to a "steady state" level close tothe size of the seven year old cohort./3 Accordingly, some of the public andprivate SPG schools for training primary teachers could be converted for useas S-MAs to meet the mushrooming demand at that level.

Financing the Development of General Secondary Education

4.31 The previous discussion on expanding the capacity of secondaryeducation has already necessarily touched on some specific financing policyissues. However, some broader principles of resource mobilization remain tobe discussed.

4.32 An Appropriate Level of Public Effort. It is never easy todetermine what is an appropriate level of public financing of education in agiven country. It is worth recalling from para. 3.37 and Table 3.8 thatfamilies pay five times more than the Government for the direct and indirectcosts of SMP and ten times more for SMA. These include family payments forvarious fees, transportation, boarding, equipment, and other "incidentals".Comparisons with other countries can provide a useful guide for makingjudgments on levels of effort. Government budget allocations to education indeveloping countries as a percentage of total budget are usually in the 15 to20% range, and sometimes as high as 25 to 30%. However in Indonesia theallocation to education has remained at about 12% for the past few years

/1 Laporan Komisi Pembaharuan Pendidikan Nasional, Jakarta, 1980.

/2 School Statistics for SMP and SMA, 1980/81, BP3K.

/3 Anita Nazareth, "Projections of Enrollments and Resource Requirementsfor Primary and Secondary Education in Indonesia".

- 51 -

because of delays in expenditure due to insufficient school constructioncapacity in the outer islands.

4.33 Similarly, public expenditures on education amounted to 3.45% of GNPin a "typical" East Asia and Pacific Region country in the late 1970s, but inIndonesia it is around 2% (Table 3.16). Notwithstanding the current fall ingovernment revenues, it is difficult not to reach the judgement that thepercentage of total government budget devoted to the education sector shouldbe increased significantly over the next decade, to bring Indonesia in linewith the comparator countries in its region for the first time. This increaseshould be approached in phases and should not displace private contributionsto education. Rather, government funds should be used as grants-in-aid orloans which will stimulate further private contributions. Specific proposalsfor increasing budgetary outlays to secondary education are described inChapter 5.

4.34 Cost Recovery. It is clear from the rapid growth of privatesecondary schooling that there is a strong "willingness to pay" for schooling.This willingness is also likely to be strong among many or most of thefamilies who send students to public secondary schools. There is so far noindication that public schools have a higher proportion of students fromlow-income families than do private schools, although this needs to beconfirmed. Since 90% of the direct cost of public secondary schooling is paidby the Government,/l there would appear to be some scope for greater recoveryof these direct costs from the direct beneficiaries through raising publicschool fees. The SPP school fees scale as a whole should be raised at leastto offset inflation and possibly higher, in order to generate additional fundseither to expand or improve schooling. Means-tested fee exemptions could beprovided to guarantee access to more low income students. At the present timethese are provided to only 2% of secondary and university students./2 Publicschools should be given an incentive to increase their own fee level withinthe official fee scale. This could be done by allowing the schools to keep asignificant portion of their SPP fee income, rather than simply sending it allto the central government. This could be conditional on their presenting abudget for its use, followed by an audit. The assumption is that the schoolmanagement is more knowledgeable than are distant officials about theparticular expenditure needs of the school from year to year./3 To summarizethis point: even though parents already pay a great deal for indirect costs,and, furthermore, even though Government budgetary outlays are comparativelylow and should increase, given the rising strength of demand and recentdeclines in fee levels in real terms, there is some scope for raising parentfees again in future.

/1 c.f., Meesook, op. cit. Table 1. Note that "direct cost" does not referto the indirect costs already borne by parents shown in Table 3.8.Instead, "direct costs" are those which actually appear on school budgets,of public schools in this case.

/2 Meesook, op. cit. page 18.

/3 Heyneman, "Indonesian Secondary Schools: Issues of Quality and Finance".

- 52 -

4.35 A Mixed Public-Private System. By increasing the parental contri-bution to the direct, budgeted costs of public schooling, and increasingpublic subsidies to private schools through grants-in-aid, the artificiallysharp distinction between public and so-called private schools would be brokendown deliberately./l The thrust behind such a mixed public and private schoolpolicy would be primarily to enlarge the overall number of productive schoolsby strengthening the many "private" schools with an infusion of schoolresources to the point where they move out of the "facade" and into the"action" sector. To make these schools more effective will, it is argued,cost less in total government expenditures over time than expanding the 90%subsidized public school sector.

4.36 For many so-called private schools, being private primarily meansbeing poor and under-resourced as a school, and charging students full-costfees for watered-down education. It also means being heavily enrolled bythose students who were unable to get a place in a public school, becausethere are and will continue to be too few places ir public schools to accom-modate them. Being a public school, on the other hand, means that some basicresources to run a school are usually provided: qualified teachers, a sciencelaboratory, some books and paper, perhaps a very small library, and a playingfield, etc. And yet these students have to pay only about 1OZ of these directcosts in the public schools. This stark contrast makes little sense otherthan in terms of an inadequate supply of places in schools of reasonablequality. The majority of private schools have to cater for excess demand.However, with a few notable exceptions they provide an inferior education, ata higher cost to the user. The policy response should be to close the gapboth in terms of quality and in private cost by increasing private expendi-tures in the public schools and using the "savings" to the Government's bud-get to strengthen the weak, so-called private schools, and provide scholar-ships for the needy. These schools should be labelled more preciselyas community schools. Local leaders at the kecematan level should be given arole in organizing local support for such schools.

5. CONCLUSION: A PROGRAM' OF ACTIONS AND ITS FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

5.01 The previous chapters identify the major problems in secondary edu-cation, and then offer some principles and investment approaches or options.This chapter will recommend a program of specific actions for dealing with theproblems, reflecting the principles just reviewed. It concludes with a reviewof the costs of this Action Program in relation to a projection of governmenteducation expenditures without the action program, for the next two five-yearplans: PRepelita IV (1984/85-1988/89) and Repelita V (1989/90-1993/94).

/1 The exception would be those relatively few private schools which havethe means and the will to be truly independent.

- 53 -

Three Specific Action Programs

5.02 Quality Action Program

(a) Expand the in-service, on-service science and mathematics teachertraining program to include English language, and give particularemphasis to rural areas. Build rural teachers centers tostrengthen the program (paras. 3.10, 4.03.)

(b) Provide SMPs and SMAs which have at least two parallel streamswith science laboratories and libraries and related equipment,with particular emphasis on private schools (paras. 3.10, 3.15,4.02, 4.16-4.17).

(c) Develop a system of national school leaving examinations which rankscandidates for selection to further education, monitors schoolquality, and provides schools and supervisors with feedback of"incentive" and "guidance" information. Create a National Examina-tions Center to lead this institution building process, bystrengthening the Ministry of Education Center for Examinations.

Arrange external examinations at the end of each cycle as follows:

(i) SD: set by the province (kanwil); conducted, marked analyzedind reported by the kabupaten education authorities.

(ii) SHP: set centrally by the Center in close cooperation withthe Directorate of General Secondary Education; conducted,marked, analyzed, and reported by the provinces.

Ciii) SMA: set, marked, analyzed and reported centrally by theNational Examinations Center (paras. 3.20-24, 4.09-4.15.)

(d) Reduce SMP/SMA teacher double shifting by increasing teachersupply for both private and public schools, (paras. 3.11-3.13).

(e) Conduct a study to determine optimal wage scale for public schoolteachers, using comparisons with private sector with objectiveof reducing incentive to "multi-job," and eliminating "piecework"as basis for salary supplementation (paras 3.13-3.14, 4.04-4.n5.)

5.03 Equity Action Program

(a) Allocate available capital funds for SM? and SMA expansioninitially to those provinces which are both most severely under-represented in enrollment and most underprovided with classroonfacilities relative to demand (enrollment), up to the point wherethey catch up to the next-most underrepresented provinces; followthe same "bump-up" procedure with the two nost underrepresentedprovinces jointly; and so forth until the budget allocation isfully committed. Within each of these provinces apply the

- 54 -

bump-up principle to kabupatens; and with each kabupaten chosenaccordingly, apply the same principle to kecematans, etc. The useof this allocation procedure could by 1989/90 reduce the existingGini coefficients for SMP and SMA dramatically from 0.146 and0.215 to 0.009 and 0.023 respectively./1

(b) Extend opportunities for qualified candidates to enter highquality SMPs and SMAs by enlarging the geographic areas in whichcommon examinations are conducted (para. 4.25).

(c) Enlarge the opportunities for qualified candidates to enter PP1universities by staging the PP1 examination at many locations,not just at the PPI universities themselves (para. 3.34, 3.39).

(d) Extend the coverage of the school map over more rural areas, byadopting the minimum economic size school as the norm for schoolsize. Retain double shift use of facilities in urban areas inorder to minimize new urban school construction until the ruralschool map has been filled in, thereby offsetting the extra cost.

5.04 Resource Mobilization Program

(a) Maintain level of SPP fee income in real terms by adjustingfee schedule annually for inflation (para. 3.48, 3.51).

(b) Allow schools to retain portion of SPP income to use for ownbudgeted purposes, as incentive to schools to raise theirown fees (para. 3.51, 4.34).

Cc) Establish means-tested nil-fee system for very low incomefamily students who qualify for admission to public SNP orSMA so that they are exempted from the SPP fees (para. 4.34).

(d) Channel maximum portion of capital budget for general secondaryeducation through grants-in-aid to "private", i.e., communityschools in targeted kabupaten and kecematan (paras. 4.35-4.36).The communities would be required to raise 15% of capital costswhich the Government would "match" with the remaining 85%.

(e) Reallocate excess SPG facilities to use as SMAs as demand for newprimary teachers falls rapidly early in Repelita IV, and remainslow through Repelita V (para. 4.30).

(f) Prepare physical facilities inventory province by province asbasis for providing grants for adding new facilities at existing,incomplete public and private S'lPs and SMAs (para. 4.29).

/1 Such a program is presented in detail in Criel, op. cit. It isdnteresting that this "bump-up" procedure for allocating new placestoes not involve a significant extra cost. This is because most ofrhe under-represented areas are in Java where building costs areelatively low.

- 55 -

5.05 Underlying these action programs is an assumption that secondarygeneral education will continue to grow. Tables 8 and 9 of the Appendixpresent two scenarios for enrollment growth and rcelated facility and teacherrequirements. The "trend scenario" extrapolates recent enrollment trends to1994/95, while the "target scenario" uses enrollment rate tar,ets in 1994/95of 55% in SM? and 20% in SMA. According to the more realistic "trendscenario," enrollments in public and private SMAs will expand from 1.3 mil-lion students, or 14% of 16-18 year olds, in 1981/82 to about 3.6 million or32% at the end of Repelita IV, 1988/89. Total public and private SMPenrollments will expand from 3.7 million students, or 37% of the 13-15 agegroup in 1981/82, to about 7.3 million students or 58% of the age group atthe end of Repelita IV in 1988/89. It will be necessary to accommodate thisenrollment growth in Repelita IV by constructing about 54,000 SMP classroomsplus related laboratories, libraries, staffrooms, etc., and 47,000 SMAclassrooms plus related laboratories, libraries, staffrooms, etc. On anaverage annual basis, this means constructing about 20,000 new classroomsplus about 5,000 related specialized rooms or the equivalent of about 2,000new schools per year. Continued extensive use of double shifting wouldreduce these quantities.

Budgetary Implications of the Action Program

5.06 How much would the implementation of the proposed Action Programcost the Government? The projected costs of the various quality-improving andequity-enhancing programs identified in paras. 5.02 to 5.04 are summarized inTable 5.1. The table shows these costs for 1984/85 and 1993/94, the firstand tenth years respectively of Repelita IV and V. In addition, theGovernment's annual education sector budget, by levels of education, hasbeen projected forward through 1993/94, the last year of Repelita V. Thisproje:tion is based on a straight-line extrapolation of the Government's ownenrollment forecasts for Repelita IV. The complete projection of enroll-ments, budget and Action Program costs is shown in the Appendix, Table 10.Let us first turn to the costs of the Action Program before looking at theirimpact on the projected government budget as the base.

- 56 -

Table 5.1: BREAKDOWN OF SECONDARY EDUCATION ACTION PROGRAMCOSTS IN 1984/85 AND 1993/94

(Rps. billion)

I. Recurrent Budget Expenditure 1984/85 1993/94

Increase Teacher Salaries 29 94

Reduce Double Shifting 0 14

Equipment Replenishment 35 74(Laboratory and Library)

Increase Classroom Materials 57 116

Examination Reform 3 6

Nil-Fee Scheme 6 12

Subtotal 130 316

Cost RecoveryRaise SPP schedule -3 -6Allow schools to raise SPP fees 13 -22

Subtotal -16 -28

Net Cost 114 286 /a

II. Capital Budget Expenditures

Teacher Improvements 9 2

Private School Facilities 51 43(Laboratories; Libraries)

Private School Equipment 38 36

Examination Development I 0

Subtotal 99 81

Cost Recovery:Converting Excess SPGs to SMAs 1 -4Matching funds for Community Schools 94 -102

Subtotal 95 -106

Net Cost (Savings) 3 /a - 25

/a Columns do not sum exactly due to rounding

- 57 -

5.07 The components of the secondary education Action Program which bringthe heaviest additional recurrent budget outlays are an increased level ofprovision of classroom materials, a 5% p.a. real increase in teacherssalaries, and the replacement of science 'aboratory and library equipmentevery seven years. The added recurrent costs of these and other actions areslightly offset by an effort to recover some costs by an increase in schoolSPP fees, which in turn is partly offset by a nil-fee scheme for students frompoor families. On the other hand, the capital expenditure side of the ActionProgram will actually help introduce some savings to the government budgetrather than add to the budgetary burden. This budget savings is due in partto slower enrollment expansion forecast in the outer years. But in additionthe program would (a) ircroduce local community fund-raising to partiallymatch future government school building grants, and (b) convert future excessSPGs (primary teacher training high schools) to SMAs to reduce new schoolbuilding and increase capacity utilization. The budget savings from theseactions would more than offset the additional expenditure brought on by theother proposed actions.

5.08 The added cost of this Action Program to improve secondary schoolquality and equity appears manageable, (see Appendix, Table 11 with anattached note). The Government's combined capital and recurrent budget forsecondary education is estimated at Rp 825 billion in 1983/84. It would growafter ten years to: Rp 1,490 billion without the Action Program (6.1% p.a.),or to Rp 1,751 with the entire Action Program (7.8% p.a.). By 1993/94 theadditional cost of the full action program would be Rp 261 billion, requiringtotal secondary education expenditures of Rp 1,751; the latter would be 18%more than the base budget of Rp 1,490 billion. The cost recovery features ofthe Action Program, shown in Table 5.1, explain why the Action Program addsonly modestly to the projected growth of secondary education costs. However,if these cost recovery features were to be deleted from the Action Program,its cost on the government budget would rise from Rp 261 to 397 billion,which would represent 27% instead of 18% of the base budget. By the sametoken, the ten-year annual growth rate of the budget plus the partial ActionProgram would be not 7.8%, but 8.6% p.a., which is a 50% increase over the6.1% p.a underlying growth rate in the base budget.

- 58 -

BIBLIOCRAPHY

Items where only the author and title are given are internal Bankdocuments and are not available outside the Bank. Items marked with anasterisk are to be published in the World Bank Staff Working Papers seriesand will be available to the public.

I. External Productivity

a. David Clark, "Labor Market Outcc.mes for New Senior SecondarySchool Graduates in Indoaesia." World Bank Staff Working Paper,No. 615, 1983.

b. G. Psacharopoulos, "Higher Education in Developing Countries: ACost-Benefit Analysis." World Bank Staff Working Paper No. 440,1980.

II. Ouality/Efficiency

*a. H.C.A. Somerset, "Secondary Education, Selection Examinationsand University Recruitment in Indonesia: Some 1Key Issues."

*b. _, "The Potential Contribution of Examinations to SchoolQuality Improvement."

*c. S. Heyneman, "Indonesian Secondary Schools: Issues of nualityand Finance."

d. C.S. Mangindaan, R.K. Sembiring, I. Livingstone, "NationalAssessment of the Quality of Indonesian Education: Survey ofAchievement in Grade 9." Ministry of Education and Culture,Jakarta, 1978.

e. Suprapto, R.K. Sembiring, I. Livingstone, "National Assessmentof the Quality of Indonesian Education: Survey of Achievementin Grade 12." Ministry of Education and Culture, Jakarta, 1981.

III. Finance

a. John Smyth, "Central Government Education Expenditure, 1980/81 -1990/91."

*b. Oey Astra Meesook, "Financing and Equity in the Social Sectors inIndonesia."

c. Claude Tibi, "A Summary of the Study on (Secondary School) CostsIn Indonesia." IIEP, Paris 1982, Working Document.

d. Boediono, "A Study on Costs of Education." IIEP, Paris, 1982,Working Document.

-59-

*e. Ward Heneveld, "The Development and Routine Budgets in Indonesia'sDepartment of Education and Culture: Do They Complement EachOther."

f. Douglas Lamb and Ruth Daroesman, "Financing Education; Central-Local Financial Relations Review for the Government of Indonesia,Sectoral Study No. 6."

g. M. Zymelman, "Patterns of Educational Expenditures." World BankStaff Working Paper No. 246, 1976.

h. C.M. Widodo, A Study of Educattonal Costs in Primary and SecondarySchools, Proyek Pembiayaan Pendidikan, BP3K, Department of Fduca-tion and Culture, Jakarta 1978.

I. Department of Education and Culture, miscellaneous documents onbudget and finance.

IV. FquIty

*a. W.T.S. Gould, "Indonesia: Some Spatial Issues tn SecondaryEducation."

*b. Geert Criel, "Distribution of Secondary School Enrollments InIndonesia".

*c. R.C.A. Somerset, "Patterns of University Recruitment: RegionalVartatior.- tn the Flow of Secondary School Leavers to the PPIUniversities."

d. Waskito Tjiptosasmito and W.K. Cummings, "Status and Deploymentat Teachers in Indonesia", 1981.

e. World Bank "Indonesta: Financial Resources and Human Developmentin the Eighties" No. 3795-InD, May 5, 1982.

V. General

a. Department of Education and Culture, "Draft Report of thePreinvestment Study on the Improvement of General SecondaryEduication", 1982.

b. _, Report of the Nattonal Comnission r"SoemitroCommission Report), (Laporan Komist Pembaharuan PendidikanNasional), Jakarta 1980.

c. . Education in Indonesia, 1900-1974 (in hahasaIndonesia) Jakarta, 1976.

*d. knita Nazareth, "Projections of Enrollment and ResourceRequirements for Primary and Secondary Education In Indonesia."

e. World Bank, "Indonesta: Education Sector Survey Report"No. 443a-IND, February 5, 1975.

AppendixTable I

I NDONRSI1A

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Admission Cutoff Marks for Courses at PPIUniversities and Other Recruitment Data

No. of Minimum cutoff mark No. of places & applicants % places to first-choice applicantsCourses Median Range Places (P) Applicants (A) A:P Median Range

(a) Science Courses

Civil engineering I lS 95-112 930 7,737 8.3 792 55- 992Medicine 7 104 91-108 962 7,399 7.7 822 65 - 962Other engineering 14 102 86-116 1,190 12,034 8.7 632 16 - In0.Architecture 4 100 91-104 260 3,n93 11.9 s82 2R - 712Chem. engineering 4 99 80-104 278 1,745 6.3 611 11 - 74tMech. engineering 5 9' 76-104 360 2,824 7.R 44% 20 - 612Physics 5 97 77-99 217 1,314 6.1 212 14 - 36SMathenatics 7 97 80-101 366 2,985 8.1 372 7 - 9D2Agriculture 5 96 A5-101 89S 10,331 11.5 4PX 28 - 642PharmAcy 5 94 79-101 260 3,035 11.7 46t 16- s50Chemistry 6 '4 73-102 240 1,679 7.0 31% 15- 70Dentistry 5 90 76- 93 485 3,120 6.4 412 22 - 47X

(b) Social Science and Language Courses

Phychology 2 104 104 210 5,814 27.7 84S 76- 92SPublic aduin. 6Int. relations 2 104 101-107 140 3,268 23.3 73% 56 - 412

English 5 100 80-106 210 2,990 14.2 8n2 32- -s5Economics 7 97 89-108 1,639 19,836 12.1 84% 67 - 92%French/German 5 94 89-101 l4s 1,405 9.7 402 26 - sn2Sociology/

anthropology 7 93 76-97 296 4,156 14.0 317 15- 53%Soc. Science (IPS) 5 92 83-1nO 820 11,670 14.2 48% 38 - 632Law 7 90 81-98 1,727 18,189 10.5 SI1 44 - 612Arabic 4 05 s8-8s 128 566 4.4 252 22- 43%tndonesian 6 84 71-94 250 1,826 7.3 23% 8 - 432History 5 83 72-89 198 1,325 6.7 15% 6 - 225

Source: H.C.A. SoLerset, "Secondary Education Selection Examinations and University Recruitment in Indonesia: Some 2eyI ssues". , X

- 61 -

AppendixTable 2

INDONESIA

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Distribution of School QualityInputs by Province

Proportion of SMA Schools With:

More than 50%of the library

No laboratory No library More than 450 books actuallyProvince facilities facility books available textbooks

Istimawa Aceh 0 0 100.0 0Sumatra Utara 31.8 11.4 23.1 45.0Sumatra Barat 0 0 100.0 0Jambi 0 0 100.0 0Sumatra Selatan 0 0 0 /a 100.0Lampung 56.4 0 31.5 68.5

Dki Jakarta 12.1 10.5 69.0 11.4

Jawa Barat 31.9 0 87.7 27.0

Istimewa Yogya 26.2 0 100.0 0Jawa Tengah 6.4 0 100.0 14.8Java Timur 12.1 44.2 33.0 18.0Sulawesi Utra 32.1 12.2 40.1 20.9Sulawesi Tengah 48.3 50.0 25.0 0

Sulawesi Selatan 0 81.6 18.4 0Kalimantan Tenya 18.6 81.4 0 0Kalimantan Timur 0 0 0 /b 0Bali 58.9 0 100.0 0Maluku 53.8 0 0 /b 100.0

/a No school library had access to more than 250 books.7Th No school library had access to more than 50 books.

Source: National Assessment of Indonesian Education data; breakdown createdat request of the World Bank Mission, March 1982.

- 62 -

AppendixTable 3

INDONESIA

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Average Number of Students Per "Good" Classroomand Corresponding Representation Indices

1980/81, SHP and SMA

SMP SMAProvince Average RI Average RI

Jakarta 56 1.262 61 1.046Jawa Barat 85 0.843 65 0.982Jawa Tengah 62 1.156 55 1.159Yogyakarta 60 1.199 58 1.101Jawa Timur 86 0.828 68 0.942Aceh 73 0.977 61 1.053Sumatra Utara 67 1.061 59 1.091Sumatra Barat 76 0.937 72 0.887Riau 61 1.175 64 1.008Jambi 66 1.080 47 1.374Sumatra Sela 68 1.047 67 0.952Bengkulu 74 0.958 86 0.742Lampung 74 0.969 55 1.159Kali. Barat 97 0.736 87 0.734Kali. Tengah 65 1.099 85 0.756'Cali. Selatan 94 0.758 68 0.938Kali. Timur 66 1.082 41 1.548Sulawesi Utara 67 1.063 66 0.966Sulawesi Tengah 72 0.996 56 1.138Sulawesi Selatar. 78 0.910 93 0.689Sulawesi Tengg 87 0.824 105 0.612Maluku 69 1.038 88 0.732Bali 76 0.935 67 0.957Nusa Tengg B 86 0.824 83 0.777Nusa Tengg T 62 1.149 64 1.002Irian Jaya 70 1.024 60 1.067

Total 71 1.000 64 1.000

Source: G. Criel, op. cit.

INnONFSIA

.SECnNnARY FnflCATInN

Student/Teacher Ratios and Corresponding Representation IndicesIRn/ARI, SHP and SMA

SMP SMAFull-time Part-time Vull-tlte "art-time

lleadmasters teachers teachers Total /a fleadmasters teachers teachers Total /aProvince Average Rl Average RI AveraAe RI Average RT Average RT AveraRe RT Average RT Average RT

Jakarta 3q9 0.R13 37 n.q7A 4q n.94n IR n0q54 511 n.764 41 n0.01 1S n.RIA 17 n,qnqJawa Barat 3R9 0.R15 46 0.7Q2 44 l,n59 IQ n,qns 382 .n2l in n0.. Irv 23 1.78 Is .A77Jawa Tengah 327 n.992 16 1.nI7 44 I.n4R 17 l.nlR 404 0.967 4n 1.n27 27 1.0n9 14 I.n01Yogyakarta 317 I.n24 27 1.321 37 1.24h 11 1.2R5 341 1.14S in 1.366 In I.49n 1n 1.42?Jawa Timur 323 1.nn5 48 0,7AR 35 1.342 17 1,024 354 1.0l3 47 n.A74 94 I.I9q 14 3n074Aceh 2R2 1.1sn 2% 1.231 46 1.n05 16 I.1n7 327 1.193 42 n.9qQ 7R l.n4l IS 1.nnsSumatra Utara 333 0.974 32 1.141 In5 0.445 2n n.853 421 n.922 .n 1.ll8 9s n.517 17 n.8h4Sumatra 8arat 421 0.771 3n 1.224 116 n.4n0 20 0.R67 552 0.7n7 36 1.146 0n n.578 38 n.8,nRiau 302 1.076 34 1.057 68 n.681 19 n.qI1 175 I.n42 39 1.n4l lit n.7A 17 n.8RRJambi 301 1.076 31 1.156 63 n.716 IR r.977 111 1.174 3n 1.356 4Q n.5R7 16 n0. nSumatra Sela 285 1.117 37 0.9R4 17 1.261 17 I.007 345 1.134 45 n.909 ?n 1.n14 1% n0Q71Bengkulu 206 1.580 3S I.042 37 1.241 15 1.102 256 1.52q 44 n0ql4 27 l.n02 14 I.n41Lampung 275 1.178 17 0.969 4n 1.164 16 1.068 139 1.13 3A 1.nA2 32 n.Q6 IS n. nnlKali. Barat 241 1.347 46 0.785 4n 1.192 1 O.Q72 3n4 1.289 S4 n.796 3n n,q77 I6 n.qlKali. Tengah 195 1.661 28 1.3n2 94 n0.8n IS 1.149 115 1.214 ?7 1.512 4n n.7?1 14 1.n07Kali. Selatan 281 1.151 34 I.n60 4n 1.16A 16 .I1ns 34n 1.144 44 n0q.7 3n n0.QR 16 A.451Kali. Tinur 211 1.524 45 n.812 3n 1.567 IS 1.16 247 1.582 17 I.n01 21 1.277 12 1.216Sulawesi I)tara 289 1.122 2R 1.311 68 A.A6n 117 I.n0? 14 1.141 4n 1.n28 29 n0.0l IS 1.l0iSulawesi Tengah 227 1.43n 36 I1.l 48 n.q76 17 1.nI6 294 1.111 3q 1.n4n 33 n0.4n IS n,n"sSulawesi Selatan 417 n.77Q 12 1.125 1n0 n.452 21 n.R14 486 n.8n4 46 n0.8q 4n n.776 It) A.709Sulawesi Tengg 1?1 I.nn5 n 1.2n? 194 A.3n2 21 0.8IR 577 n.677 41 n0.f2 66 n0.41A ') n.66nMaluku 251 1.287 22 1.6h5 n3 n.4q9 1 1.141 41Q n0.qn 16 1.1?2 62 n.6q8 17 n0.83Bali 126 n.997 11 1.176 26 1.776 11 1.lS6 144 n0q97 42 n0.6? '3 1.771 11 1.1nnNusa Tengg 1 179 0.857 41 n0R.1 44 ln.04 Iq n0. Q6 3s 1.n03 64 n.632 i5 I .I IA n0nIQNusa Tengg T 2n6 1.575 30 1.212 s0 n.9l6 IS .i;q 116 1.217 17 1n.08 3n n0q.4 IS 1.n21Irlan Jaya 22n 1.477 2A 1.299 S n. I.h 16 1.111 292 1.14n 92 n.7A8 IQ l.S2h 1' I1?.n

Total 325 I.nnn 36 1.nnn 47 1.nnn 17 1.nnn 3Q1 I.nnn 41 l.nnn ?4 3.nnn is 1.nnn

Ia Includes also VLce-Headmasters and Alternate Teachers. 4

-mSource: C. Criel, op. cit. m jP.

- 64 -AppendixTable S

INDONESIA

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Rank Ordered Representation Indices for ProvincesDivided Into Urban and Rural Portions. 1981/82

SMP SMAProvince Provinceportion RI portion RI

Ja Bar Rural 0.632 Jambi Rural 0.325Jambi Rural 0.633 Lampung Rural 0.357Kal Sel Rural 0.680 Sum Sel Rural 0.442Sum Sel Rural 0.681 4aluku Rural 0.445Kal Bar Rural 0.694 Kal Bar Rural 0.460Lampung Rural 0.748 Kal Tgah Pural 0.470Ja Tim Rural 0.761 Ja Bar Rural 0.470Ja Ten Rural 0.790 Xal Sel Rural 0.506Bengkulu Rural 0.805 Kal Tim Rural 0.522Maluku Rural 0.809 Ja Tim Rural 0.562Irian Ja Rural 0.814 Ja Ten Rural 0.591Aceh Rural 0.845 Bengkulu Rural 0.616Nustenba Rural 0.894 Irian Ja Rural 0.643Ral Tgah Rural 0.923 Sum Bar Rural 0.723Sul Tgah Rural 0.928 Sul Tgah Rural 0.750Rlau Rural 0.939 Sun Utar Rural 0.765Nustenti Rural 0.961 Riau Rural 0.787

Sustenti Rural 0.846Aceh Rural 0.858Sul Sel Rural 0.96'

Total 1.000 Total 1.000

Kal Tim Rural 1.028 Nustenba Pural 1.024Sul Sel Rural 1.067 Sul Uta Rural 1.092Sult'ara Rural 1.123 Sult'ara Rural 1.209Sum Bar Rural 1.144 Yogya Rural 1.327Sum Utar Pural 1.159 Kal Tim Urban 1.434Sul Uta Rural 1.278 Janbi Urban 1.541Bali Rural 1.453 Bali Rural 1.593Kal Tim Urban 1.568 Kal Sel Urban 2.00rKal Sel Urban 1.585 Jakarta Urban 2.154Yogya Rural 1.662 Sum Sel Urban 2.720Sul Sel Urban 1.694 Kal Bar Urban 2.817Jakarta Urban 1.730 Ja Ten Urban 2.818Jaubi Urban 1.750 Maluku Urban 2.877Ja Bar Urban 1.821 Ja Bar Urban 2.911La?Iung Urban 1.871 Ja Tim Urban 2.918Kal Bar Urban 1.894 Sul Sel Urban 2.934Sum Bar Urban 1.914 Lampung Urban 2.965Maluku Urban 1.949 ICal Tgah Urban 3.453Sul Uta Urban 1.995 Sum Utar urban 3.545Ja Ten Urban 2.025 SuUm Ur Urban 3.553Sum Utar Urban 2.100 Sul Ura Urban 4.137Sul Sel Urban 2.135 Riau Urban 4.139la Tim Urban 2.165 Bengkulu Uirban 4.397Kal Tgah L'rban 2.322 'Yogya Urban 5.077

Bengkulu Urban 2.542 Aceh Urban 7.431fogya Urban 2.712Riau Urban 2.718Aceh Urban 3.339

RI - Percent of national enrollmentpercent of national age group

Source: C. Criel, op. cit.

- 65 -AppendixTable 6

INDONESIA

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Vocational Enrollment as Percentage ofSecondary School Enrollment, East Asia and Pacific Region

Most1960 1970 recent

Fiji 10% 6% 6XHong Kong 6% 6 6Indonesia 20 22 21Kaampuchea 7 3Korea 14 16 16Laos 9 14 14Malaysia 5 3 3Papua New Guinea 16 19 22Philippines 15 6 -Singapore 2 8 13Taiwan 24 15 18Thailand 19 24 13Vietnam - - 14Western Samoa - 1 2

Source: World Tables, Table 4.

- 66-

INDONESTA AppendixTable 7

SECONDARY EDUCATION

Comparative Education Indicators

CEIFTRALT 1 1 -

CO 0 t PC%? £s!lIrr¶ ag[ON1 cas- PIOIrr c ¶m1 1SASE P7,. CAP2rA pnMar CV? ?0?AL flVTALjLLRA-I jVTo.7.9P .n?iPi.sL ant-a?_V COMI-A'? -^IFy 1 nrqq-rean1 L.nTM n.S. (V.') cr747 .. cr. n.%- I~ s A! jW.L.I00 151L tVlfT KOL

01979) (1919) iceCArlOS eK?pen::2T (23 (1974) (1 (l) 1?ZACEIM jC.¶CAPITAj : jrFAOifl CZ3

(13 ~~~~~~~~ I ~~~~~~ I ~~~~~~ I ~~~(4) J p ( 23SO (114) F'(32) (ii) (4

TAT? ASIA At- ?'TI P4m:-:r-I r4rT -. ob 30Ob 34 i 4 39 27 Gob 40 42 - 23 7.0 72 39 17 2.14)

:coonsA a:I '":n.Sb 320 2.1 9. 7 24 4 32 nP 41 7 31.0 3. 27 2n 2..09C03A .2 34.5£ 1. q3ab It 22.5 34 31 31 9-6 9 9 '3 19.0 94 qa la 71.40

I-JAYSZA a: :'.tb 3S?fl 3.2 Ma2 3m, is- at or 22 :2.9 Vi ASS £9 3.30'*OtaiS. 7' 2.1 Ian 1.. I. - !- - -- - £tnS.'s731 31 1.1 1 IZ 23 r-n.zwtns 79I' -.*.1b s0. 2.r" :4.0 1' 34A O- 75* ea 45 31 7.1 to -is 34 21.00

LtVAPCC so Z.& 4.'20 2.7 4.7 34 40 is 63 92 52 it 6.8 9a 15 z2 0.002&LC-M ilL. 50 43.2 Z40 a4.2W Mir. Al 31 70 - 40 60 24 - 15 16 -

=1411AM ig 474£b rib L4 20.9 59 15 23 Mb 04 - 17 9.3 29 22 4.00

!~WASIAiZ=Z.LJ jq 1L.3

190 1.iP I.I'07 31 1' 23 it" 4,7 - 33 546 la1 23 142

VIoA 77 $9594 7.10 2.Ty 9.A7

- - - 34 748 - All - - 2'AM-EFAL£2 :t.tb itt IA - -- 191 70 - 39 - 21 23 3.70'

PAuSTA 79 79.7 270 2.W7T S.I7 39 25 27 24 so0 4m. 4s 4.3 51 2fF 17 4.00

auceatsz -. .1.. - 1.7 3.7 17 11 Is :2 3jbF 49 3*b - £2 4 2tbr 1.0@7AunuZ 79 :.1 3 1i.770 3.P 12.3 31' 248 23- i5 4)7 450 37 7.0? 558 2W 24 5.7WrInnr PI '3.tb Net i.11 &- 4.5 Jt ir i- so *' go, 34 'a' 43r 'i le 15.00

c-ttcir,. 4~ .t& i.r1 10.4£ 27 Z* 21 - q717 -- b sat - lvb. 2767 :7.4'P?5.l1 79 2. - S.Y-F l&.ifl - - - let10" 2- - - &r. 2"& &.9fl'7

,%Am! 29 12. Z.71 4.3' *487 - - - - ir 28 - - 4s7 30 q.-30S7:P.=AXD 9 a.4 4*A 4.3'? iir41 - - - 96 13 14 29 - is I 146 11I04_zp__Ax£1 2-l 1:zq Lr 10.2 19 44 is it io48 55 32 7.2 91 sr 25 i9.I0

79 2.3 - - 11.fly -_-- - - goV - 1,9 -- - - 27.Ro...:.k so 192 73 . 7.5' 35 44 22 29t 24" 35 39 39.7 40 23- 31 '.10

C-fl 42 2.91~~~~l 5.920k :.?"1 Mr. - 3 71' 45 23 - Me Ii 117' 1.41 2W.44 3.' 22.2 50 2' 11 IS 97 20 0' 12.4 do AS" 17' 3.30'

X2KAPAt 15 :27.: z.:u 3.17 6.: - - -- '64 10 - Itis W.~ it4 10A32'r74 3t4 4.*t20 7.17 :at.sF - - - Wby 29£ - 474. - 241L;

2-tiA ~ 7. 1.170 a.AP :0.3 I' 75. 256 Sp v1

4 3!b - 4£ a1b? 2:6 12.647?iflA 79 f.a~~~ ! 130 ?.,)p 19.0 42 39 14 C

1if' 4 0 124Pb0 0 40

_._jT t AS7 i.4't 3.1 216.2 - - - 711£ 1:5 2o& 25 7.9 :1. 35 20 4.70yav A.£. P0 L9 '213 5.01W 12.0 94 7 7 it iv :- ~Ur 47.3 iS 3 20 7.141?t18N P.*.1. 47Z 44201 7.1 9.7 643 :0 " 53 ki 34 Zs 22.0' 4 17 20 Z."o

-or emrZhzo 4£ 94 70 49 57 75 as 9' 94 42 72 91 9 45

Sang.s (3.4 3.7- (19- (7- (2-~ (3- (15- (12- (17- (1.I- (9- (2- Cy- (0.03-10.0) 41.03 IA) AG) 246) 9) ill) 99) 77) 47.0) SO) 4£) 44) '.0)

0..rtiioo: C:!..: 3.4 2043 5z2 3 21 mg 94 19 42 in as 45 25, 10.410d1.ot '.0~~~~~Z 15.5 43 27 1' 32 42 40 I5 12 41 25 21 3.7Ia-er: ~~~~ ~~~3.0 10.1 3718s1.3 246 SG is 27 7 '0 12 1a 1.0

Ows'eilo, rllo.%ls:: - 1.1 5.1 7.5 4.0 '.0 23.0 20.5 22.5 7.5 l.4 212.5 15.5 P.$ 4.4

qaaw ~~~~~~4., 16.1 44 2419 5n 3 75 40 246 1i 40 31 21 4.9

StaoaKdarni.Ctto: 2.9 7.A 15 10o 7 30 24 25 11 II 27 23 7 J'A

tadIos: '~~ ~ ~~~~~~~.0 15.5 43 23 15 13 al 41 35 12 41 25 22 2.7

- A-775 75AVAiUILA A - 0A-'" PROlR 29' an1a IPAX 5 - q02411rT C? '1f0 -0rg Or..*s0E`TT7! Ml CS w!C1C3t S - VA4775 -. PeWs? -AP SASE TWAl T - WV AND 57*77 -ovt,"wzrM "MTZA34775 C.~TflC9aL£a CCVAdIJJ PSIMS v - P3L Pfm: 7fl2L

*ic.tcs VA--n:.-z nv.Acrn P - cap 3 - rIDVan Mrr-4cs 529517r

Calin I maf %A lott lost Atlao or 1333 oId.0Io',.

C.e.nf.l.o 7!r!I,..o...11I 3 -:al oferIos doc.ctle -.-.Iru. .a ma.ioO .IatA *.-. -f e(eteo -. oclr.,.rIo..CogoaCrt.. 0.r t- o..i. of toa pasat le,,.. r.o,t.I Oel... -,ooE I. r.prw..c14 .2i ras,oat -tla .aroate1 0.et 090. Aal. lw-booeinn E.-otc "'llcoso Ire. £ao.ru-,: -.. :n: tno roslaar r." cecil .. ttno.. o7 -. go la. r-.c.0 2 !Iforto *-w- 'on ta £.. go Satd.floitlos .. S. -32%:: :34:. to `. % c, b ercr r0 re- E.g. h.or.oI. .0.01 . .111 t--PrO~ct it sooro1 aaW* tOo 10.* is wor.,t tolonCeso £10. ?:eqtoo9-nZ. eo tIe tcci.oi or it. opt.tlowla -on. Is C%. .ao o

t£000 4o:o. no. Iofh.i. *Iie.f too. oooli -J. "PC .o oLe

(13 34.ecloto.- .1 "e."4 S. tOo tell. I1.01040 all Coegocas too trglsis. 'e'oe1..A loor-trEsl.

(2) lPrlsr fleootIo's rot.. T. d.OCorlw oC no lr, toni em' o nosac..rr docaotlo r.fo,. to .11 do5rtlo. Stoo0 -0r04..7 lo"t! tooseflloo of £71

fto.;- gaorC. tofloiOo. oqVicor13f1).

(3) Z1C.rac, inc..' CCOo. 9) or. oartot otoIeEIo, :o..:r coooo.... T. oso tamIs,riso lmo? ar. olty oesrooloom boo end It t. dosactfo 210e .. T alrot.41iioittoo of -.1torogoI, bo oon o' .Ecoe.st.

(43 Potll:1 -v-wit.r. io od 0 ott.C- (cola. a.0 2o 3 rotors to .21 costrd ami r.crwui .osoottoroo Lontd to odocatim £7 "bite oS4 aoooe-ohlica3000t4..

(5) tovoio.ot rst.(o .7U W 1': pro.. to -- oI 7or ma ... £10 Iforo-. .1i.tbo 0 iEr. %t4" -1.'iole felUn 0feorooriot. .C_"J.enb1i1.0.4 nsw.bIo.-t tI%I tro tof!.el: to . wile -.r.: of orVTfI'- 'lOl't .oo¶roo i .0 oortflorfo. 1e2t10ccnr-e of %..IC

das(1.. 5-.ooifL 1:n.oCo -oeoiaoo£.I. r.oi :flrotro frosa,mlz or. ftio10r to.. 1?- seor of osoo"co gct.ofly to oc.moo. O-r-o.odetsooma.34hlooto Re ledl9Ceca 1. oasbtoc.0 .ae tea &.f late t%. racloo.

PRINTOUT -1I INDOHESIA: COHORT SURVIVAL PROFILE

TREND PROJCTION NEIHODD 2 RADIA ADJUSIMENT TO STEADI STATE FOR SD-I EIROLLHENTS(SDI SlIP-GERERALi SM-GENERALI

DATA DATA DAtA DATA DATA DArA ITA DATA PROJ. PROJ. FROJ. PROJ. PROJ. ipOJ. fROJ. PROJ. FROJ. F-PJ. PO. PROJ. FROJ.1974 1975 1976 1977 1978/79 1979/80 1980/81 1981/02 1982/f3 1983/84 1994/85 19fi/86 198/687 1987/88 1"8/89 1989/90 1990191 1"1/92 1992193 1993194 1994/95

7 iR ODS 3931000 3970000 4010000 4050000 409000 4131000 4173000 4260000 4303000 4285000 4324000 4342000 4349000 4354000 4398000 44U6000 4455000 4470000 4476000 4556000 4628000SD-1/7 YR 0.88 0.89 1.00 1.07 1.21 1.38 1.25 1.24 1.22 1.20 1.16 1.12 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09

St-I 3446835 3552670 4002377 4331285 4929754 5682323 5221513 5284819 5249660 5142000 5015840 4863040 4740410 4745860 4793820 4835240 4855950 4872300 487840 4966040 5044520SD-24SD-1 0.89 0.92 0.94 0.91 0.92 0.89 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93SD -2 2829095 3067592 3253994 1747117 3955770 4511656 5076253 494834 0491882 4882184 47820 4664731 4522627 4408581 4413650 4458253 4496773 4513 4532 4618417SD-3/S0-2 0,89 0,92 0.96 0.93 0T9 092 092 092 0.92 0,92 0,9 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 092 0.2 0.9250-3 2501138 2512291 2822312 3120022 3464353 3608747 4153127 4674669 4460927 4521691 4491609 439495 4291553 4160817 4055895 4060558 4101592 4137031 4154751 4168740 4174336SD-4/SD-3 084 0.88 0.90 0.89 0.87 0.90 0.90 0.90 .9 0.9 0,90 0.0 090 0090 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0,9 0.90SD-4 2003492 2099223 2217059 2538736 2770132 3006281 3243646 3719695 4207202 4014835 4069522 4042448 3959546 3862397 3744735 3650305 3654502 3691433 372332 3739276 375186bSD-5/SD-4 0.84 0.86 0.88 0.88 O.7 0. 90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 090 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0..0 0.90SD-5 1627590 1692093 1811199 1944605 2242429 2404782 2703781 2922037 3347726 3786482 3613351 3662570 3638203 3563591 3476158 3370262 3285275 3289052 3322290 3350995 3365348SD-6/SD-5 0M84 0.86 0.87 ,Oi8 0.87 0.90 0.89 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90S0-6 1299716 1366288 1442683 1583446 1710381 1951933 2153550 2412434 2629833 3012953 3407834 3252016 3296313 3274383 3207232 3128542 3033236 2956747 2960147 2990061 3015896

GRADS 0.91 0.91 0.94 0,92 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 0,92 0,92 0.92 0.92 09 0M 0.92 0.92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92SD6 BRADS 1180055 1242761 1358262 1453213 1569814 1795778 1981266 2219439 2419447 2771117 3135207 2991855 3032608 3012432 2950653 2878259 2790577 2720208 2723335 2750856 2774624SD TOTAL 13707866 14280157 1555012417265291 19074819 21165724 22551870 23862480 24810230 25360144 25380216 24884300 24448652 24015630 23691490 23503159 23427328 23462597 23570595 23752433 23970383POP 7-12 20499000 2090800 21326000 21753000 22188000 22632000 235000 23812000 24446000 2490500 25280000 25534000 25681000 25777000 25910000 26069000 26227000 26370000 26485000 26658000 26905000SD/(7-12) .667090 .6829S7 ,7291627 .7936970 .8596908 .9352123 .9769058 1.002120 1.0148M9 1.018275 1.003964 .9745555 .9520132 .9316689 .9143763 .9015750 .8932523 .8f97458 .8899601 .8910058 IO .09267

. . _ . * _ __ ................................................. _ _ ..- _ --- __-.-----_.-----.-_------ _.-. _-.................._

13 IR OLD 3172113 3259804 3348141 3441552 3539369 3636763 3390000 3491000 3619000 3760000 3894000 4030000 4137000 4191000 4211000 424000 4257000 4276000 4302000 431000 4360000SP1/IJYR .1709321 .1929018 .2122067 .2462191 .2556252 .3143719 .3894720 .4154311 .4783539 .5276453 605066 .6612719 .6147151 650600 6080664 5915225 .5747051 5547218 .5374655 .5344804 .5362907SII OSD-660 0.53 0,57 0.62 0.62 0.73 0.74 0.73 0.78 0.82 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0,85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85SlP-I 542216 628822 710498 847376 904752 1143296 1320310 1450270 1731163 1983946 2356129 2664926 2543077 2577717 2560568 2508055 2446520 2371990 2312176 2314835 2338228ShP2/SMPI 0.90 0.91 0.89 0.8 I.O5 0.95 0,94 O.9S 0,95 0.9S 0,95 M9 0.95 09 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95SIP-2 434623 489638 572592 633530 743560 951007 1088282 1247035 1377757 1644605 1884749 2238323 2531680 2415M23 2448831 2432539 2382653 2324194 2253391 2196568 2199093SKP3/SMP2 0.92 0.95 0.96 0,98 1.08 0.9? 095 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95#tP-3 350972 399933 464276 547579 622491 800680 919990 1038715 1184683 1308869 1562374 1790511 2126407 2405096 2295127 2326389 2310912 2263520 2207984 2140721 20867391 GRADS 0.90 0.90 0.91 0.95 0.96 0.93 0.90 0.93 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0,92 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92SMP3 GRAD 314871 361145 422604 520127 594805 744036 828767 96006 1089909 1204159 1437384 1647271 1956294 2212688 2111516 2140278 2126039 2082438 2031345 1969464 1919800S9P TOTAL 1327811 1518393 1747366 2028485 2270803 2894983 3328582 3736020 4293602 4937419 5803252 6693760 7201163 7398735 7304525 7266984 7140085 6959704 6773551 6652123 6624060PO 13-15 8280000 8528000 8784000 9048000 9319000 9599000 9887000 10160000 10473000 10843000 11244000 11654000 12033000 12331000 12511000 12651000 12680000 12741000 12807000 12883000 12968000SAP/13-15 .1603636 .1780480 .1989260 .2241915 .2436745 .3015921 .3366625 .3677185 .4099687 .4553555 .5161199 .5743745 .5984512 .6000109 .5838482 ,5744197 .5630982 .5462447 .5288945 .5163489 .5108004

16 YR OLD 2780242 2915621 3629236 3124005 3210363 3297357 3389035 3190000 3278000 3361000 3462000 3589000 3729000 3864000 4002000 4107000 4162000 4184000 4208000 4229000 4251000SlIAI/16YR 0447583 .0478262 .0472717 .0677483 .0810260 .1102544 .1329496 .1663834 .1915509 .2107827 .226842 .2603232 .2871349 .3290867 .3593821 3341820 .3342578 .3302881 .3216694 .3122191 .3011412Sl/AI/SlP3G 0.44 0,48 0.50 0.50 61 0,61 0.64 0.5 0,65 0.65 0.65 0,65 0,65 0.65 06 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65

? SA, 124439 139443 171560 211616 260123 363548 450571 530763 627904 708441 782703 934300 1070726 1271591 1438247 1370486 1391181 1381925 1353585 620374 1260151.8 0.9 O 3 0.2 1.05 0,9 0.96 .9 6 0.96 0. 6 0,96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0.96

SM-2 103069 109764 123805 158857 194265 272577 332496 429808 509532 602788 680103 751395 896928 1027897 1220728 1380717 1317586 1335534 1326648 129442 126750SI4A31SMA2 0.93 0.96 0.98 0,94 1*07 0.93 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.9aSNA-3 91488 95748 105697 121357 149369 207273 252949 325893 412616 489151 578676 652899 721340 861051 986781 1171898 1325489 1264883 1282112 1273583 1247464 C tZ GRADS 0.89 0.89 0.92 0.91 1.03 0.90 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0,93 0,93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0,93 0.93 0.93 0.93SIA3 GRAD 81090 85340 97232 109832 154460 186786 234033 303080 383733 454911 538169 607196 670846 800777 917706 1089866 1232704 1176341 1192364 1184432 1160141SA TOTAL 318996 344955 401062 491860 603757 843398 1036016 1286464 1550052 1800380 2041483 2338594 2688993 3160S39 3645756 3925101 4034256 3982342 3962346 3893399 3795175POP 16-18 7693000 7901000 8114000 8333000 8558000 8789000 9027000 9277000 9536000 9797000 10070000 10381000 10747000 11148000 11562000 11941000 12239000 12420000 12521000 12589000 12658000S1IA/16-18 .0414657 .0436597 ,0494284 .OS90256 .0705488 .0959606 .1147686 .1386724 .1625474 .1837685 .2027292 .2252764 .2502087 .2835072 .3153222 .3287079 .3296230 .3206394 .3164560 .3092699 .2998242

DAlA MD PROJECTIONS FROIM 1980/81 ICLUDE TIIIUR TIIIOR

Source: A, Nazareth, op. cit.

PRINTOUT-3: INDOISIACOUT SURIYILV POILE8 NO 1193 IRGET CRUKE ElRU.LKNI RATES IETHOD

(SDo S1P-GERM. SMP-NERAL).......... .............. _.. _ _......

DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA DATA PROJ. PRJ. FROJ. OJ. PROJ. R PROJ O. PROJ. POJ. OJ. POJ. PROJ MPJ.1974 1975 176 1977 1978/79 1979/80 I"O/81 IS11/82 1982/83 I"3/14 1984/8 5 1M/56 1996/87 1997/8 1M8/89 IM9/ 1990/91 1991/2 M1 /93 19934 1V4/95

7 TR OLDS 3t31000 3770000 4010000 4050000 4090000 4131000 4173000 4260000 43030 425000 4324000 4342000 4349000 4354000 439000 4436 4455 4470000 4476000 45500 4620S5-1/7 YR 0,88 0,89 1.00 1.07 1,21 1,38 1.25 1.24 1.30 1.21 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1,20SD-I 3446835 3552670 4002377 4331285 4929754 5682323 5221513 5284519 5593900 5184850 5199800 5210400 5218900 5224800 5277600 5323200 534000 5364000 5371200 5467200 555360053-2/50-1 20289 0 92 0,94 0.9 3 0.92 0.89 0.93 40.9595 A3 .96l 91 .61 09 I9 0.9 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96SD-2 2 629t95 3067592 3253994 3747171 355;770 4511658 5076253 48434 5020578 533097 4"92641 4U98637 5007194 50100i4 5015908 5046496 5110272 5132160 5149440 5156352 5248512S-3/1S-2 0.89 0.92 0s96 0,93 0M*1 0.92 0.92 942 .953 *953 .953 .954 O.96 0.96 0.96 0.6 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96SIF3 2501138 2512291 2922812 3120022 346635 3608747 4153127 4474669 4567602 478411 5060430 4748457 4757061 480697 4809646 4815176 4863836 4905861 4926874 4943462 495009OSD-I/SD-3 014 9 7 0. 0.90 1939 I 939 Y939 .939 .939 0.94 0.94 0,94 0,94 0,94 0*94 0,94 0,94SD 4 2003m2 204S23 2217059 2s38n9 277O-16372 3006211 3243646 3719695 4296021 428978 4492750 4770524 4456901 4471637 4518492 4521067 4526265 4572006 4611509 4631261 85583-5/80-4 0,84 0.86 0.89 0.98 0.87 090 0.90 .923 .95 .95 I95 OM5 .96 .96 ,96 .96 .96 .96 .96 .96SD-5 162750 1682093 18l11i1 194465 2242429 2404792 2703793 2922037 3433278 4081i20 4074529 4290576 455560 4280449 4292772 4337t53 4340225 '434521 438S926 4427049 44460110D- 84 08 7 U 03 0.0 09 .9 .99 .0 .99 09 09 091 0.91 3 0,91 0,91 0.91 0,9112997"16 1360629 1443433 N158446 1710811 °191D 33 2150309 24114i4 262M33 3312050 37091299 3703747 3900133 41456214 38950 3064 47355 3949604 3954145 3994104 40296151 MAPS 0.91 0.91 0.94 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 .942 .945 .948 .95 .95 .96 0.6 0,96 0M9 0,96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96836 GRAM 118005 1242761 1353262 1453213 1569914 1795778 1I91266 2219439 2485192 2956566 3535467 355169 3744128 397999 3739400 3750165 379441 3791620 3795979 3634340 3867470SD TOTA 1370786 14290157 15550124 21726529 3907 9 21165724 2255870 23862488 254121 2679145~ 75 79271040 2M789740 27939664 2780926 27970114 281333953 21268946 28402294 266I9429 29873690POP 712 24"99000 209 0213 262 17530 I228 22632000 23050 23012000 24446 2405025 2 25 000 257770002 2606900026227000 26370000 26485000 2665802695000931(7-123 .6687090 .6299 .7962? .7936970 .8596906 9352123 t9769058 1,002120 1.044801 1.075748 3.068963 3.852 1.086322 3.0389 1.073312 1.072926 1.072710 1.072006 1.072392 1.073573 1,073172-.--- _ -_ -_.--_.._ -t.----_------ -__--.------- .---- @--@---- -- -----------------------

13 YR OLD 3172113 325S904 3348141 3441552 3539269 3636763 3390000 3491000 3361900 37610 389409 4030000 4137000 4191004 211000 4240000 4257000 427600 4302000 4331000 4360000SWI/13YR .1709321 1929018 .2122067 .2462191 .2556252 3143719 .3894720 .4154311 3957002 4302588 4554206 .4438139 4743164 *4978 14910252 5224705 5362389 .5363770 559654 .57961 .5820528SlIf/SD-66D 0,53 0,57 0.62 0U.2 0.73 0,74 0.73 o.n 0.65 o0.65 o.60 05I 0.55 0.56 0,52 0.59 0,63 0.63 0.64 0.66SII-I 542216 628822 710499 847376 904752 1143296 1320310 1450270 1432039 1617773 1773400 1798570 1962247 2086149 2067707 2215275 2282769 2293548 243173 2510456 2537750W-2 434623 48969381 570259 63330 743560 950100 108212 1247635 137°757 1360i37 1536884 1684738 13699142 1864135 I19 942 1604322 2104531 2168631 2178271 2313044 2384933SI31SIW2 0,92 0.95 0.96 0.99 1.06 0.97 0.95 0.9 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.9 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.5 0.95 0.95W-3 3972 39O33 464276 547579 622491 60060 91190 1038715 1184683 1308616 1292415 1460040 1605O1I 1634184 177029 13882749 I86106 32 206039 20627 23973921 WRA 0.90 0.90 0,91 0.5 09 0.93 0.9 .2 09 .2 09 .292 2 0,92 0.92 0.7 0.g 92 0,92 0.92 0.j92 20.092SWi IRA) 334871 3615 5212 59 5 741036 s27 95 106 12041 1189022 314323 172461 1485050 16292 32 1736817 189343 5 9333 21600SW TOTAL 1327l11 1518393 1747366 2028485 2270603 289493 3328562 3736020 394479 420707n 4602706 4933343 526188 5564468 582046 6062346 6253386 6461464 6673853 6893427 7120075POP 33-5 329000 8529000 8784000 9048000 9319000 959100 M97000 1016000 1047300 10643000 11244000 11654OOO 1203300 12331000 32511000 12651000 3268000 12741000 12107000 12983001296800SNP/13-15 1603636 70480 1989260 2241915 2436745 3015921 3366625 *3677185 3814073 .3953775 .4093479 .4233180 o4372982 45128 46S52297 .49199 4931692 .5071395.523M .5350793 .540496…--------- -- -- -- --- ……- . ….…36 TR OLD 2780242 2915623 3629236 3324005 32103W3 3297357 3389035 3190000 327800 336300 34620 35890 3729000 3864000 4002000 4107000 4362000 4184000 4208000 422_000 4251000SI'Al/16YR .0447583 .047262 .0472717 .0677483 .0810260 .3IO2544 .3329496 .s663834 .1403063 .1596091 13766806.1570049 .l7300 .1973543 .1733949 16635 .193070 .l985 .20041 .2117611 °2105473

131;4 4 7 4jj41 1.48 0,46 ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~0j46 0.47 0,4MY" 12W38i 4 1 1 8 210^^* 24111 UhU 4101 5389,4 45 1 751 611°96 57 4i1 6 66 nl7l 6+47 448 o u 8 81 O S7 0Sff2/SM3 0,9 0O." 0.93 0.92 3.05 0.9I 0.96 0.95 0.9 O.9 0o.9 05 0.9S Of? 0,95 0.95 0.5 0.95 0.95 0.95,SM-2 103069 309764 123805 158857 194265 272577 332496 429903 504225 436934 509624 501131 535316 613003 687740 659230 729076 7804 02 00935 850764SM3/$M2 0.93 0.96 0.99 0.94 1.07 0.93 0.96 0.95 0.95 0, 095 0.95 0.5 0.9 0.95 0,95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95SM-3 91488 95748 105697 323357 19369 207273 252949 325893 406333 47904 415087 484143 552055 508550 562353 453353 626269 692622 74838 713367 761879 I DRABS 0.89 0,89 C,? 0.9I 1.03 0.90 0.93 0.92 0492 0,92 0.92 0.92 0.92 092 02 0.92 0.92 09 0.92 0.92 0.92swP mu MAD 83 90 5340 97232 109832 334460 186786 234033 29992 37564 440693 383990 445431 507891 467866 535765 601065 576167 637232 688747 656114 70061

SM TOTL 311 344754 40062 09 3 57 843399 10360 12286459 3372X 14534 1536M47 1628744 1732638 1845490 1964019 206001 2384860 2270675 23434 2430643 2507639POP 16-IB 769 0100 831000 8333 8 O 8 27W 9277000 0 9536107 10381000 1o747 11562000 11941 13000 12420000 12523 12890 126580SW16-I1 0414657 0436597 .0494294k .0590256 .0705488 .0959606 .1147686 .1386719 .1439250 .1482489 .1525n2 .1568967 .1612206 .655445 .1685 .1741924 .1785162 .1826402 .1871641 .1914880 .981070… @* ....................... __..... ........ ......... . . .....….-- -.... ...... .

DATA ANDP MOJEC1IONS FROM 1990/81 INLUK TIN TIO

Source: A. Nazareth, op. cit.

PRINTOUT -21 INIESIAI REf CE REOU IIETS10 N4CH 1993 TREND PR O.EC1ON METHOD 1 IUM A TS1NT 10 STEADY STATE FOR SD-I EULMNIS

ISit SHP-CERM SM-GE3RI1974 1975 1976 1977 1978/79 1979/50 IM/SI 1991/82 192/83 199/84 1994/85 1995/9 1996/87 1917/8 I99/89 199/90 I90/91 1991/92 1992/93 1 M3/94 1994/95

__ . .. ..... ... _ ........ ............. ..... ........ .. .. ...... ........ _.. .... ... __._. .. . _... ..... ........ .. ..... . . ...... . ............. ._. ... ... _ ..... .. .__..._. ....

so._....... .. ...

?UIW~ITLOTS 1J1707 142801i IY5 15550I3 1726521 19074819 211657jl 2255%30 238624fl 248102ij 25360114 2538023^ 246843n 244466i 240156N 2369141 23503111 234273H 23462513 2357053 2375241 23970311TEAChER R0T5 428371 446255 485941 539540 596081 661429 704746 745703 775320 792505 73112 777634 764020 750489 740359 734474 732104 733206 736581 142264 749074K1U TEACIR SLOtS 17964 3966 53599 56548 65341 43317 40957 29617 17185 627 -15497 -13614 -13532 -10129 -5865 -2370 1102 3375 52 6811TE&SLOT/TEACHER ". 31 .1 .3 .1 .3 .3 I1.09 73t08 71.O1 1.04 1.02 1,005 1 3 1 I YE RIS 189128 405i36 4 41 45' 4 904i .9 11 4541899 601299 640671 6779li 3 0411 727068 734381 73361 734635 735773 736676 734474 732104 733206 736581 742261 749074NEU IEADIERS 16258 36079 46726 51407 59401 39379 37233 26924 22232 7313 -764 1018 1136 903 -2202 -2370 1102 3375 5682 6811EACKH, REtRACEIET 9736 10142 11044 12262 13547 15032 16017 16940 17621 18177 18360 19340 18366 18394 18417 18362 18303 18330 18415 18557IOTIL REV TEACHERS 25"94 46221 59770 63669 72946 54412 53250 43872 39953 25490 17596 19358 19504 19297 16215 15992 19405 21705 24097 25368STUDMET/SEAIS 1.15 1.15 1.35 315 l.l5 1.15 l .15 1.15 1.35 1.15 1,14 1.11 1.09 1.07 1.05 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.01 1 1SD SEATS 11919993 12417529 13521847 15013297 3658679 18404977 19610322 207499 21574113 2205229 22263347 2241389 2242995 22444514 22563323 2259192 22744979 23002546 2337222 23752433 23970383

497644 1104319 1491450 1573503 3818171 1205344 113968" 824121 479187 211048 154941 11S61 14515 118910 3568g 145717 257568 331466 435213 217950'A I F/ K 1 1 45 45 45 4S 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 4s 45 4s 45 4s 45 45 45 45 45SD R0345 264896 275945 300485 333629 368596 4069 4357a5 461111 479425 49051 494741 499184 496443 499767 501407 502204 505444 531116 538605 527832 532675NEW 8S 11059 24540 33143 34967 40404 26785 25326 19314 10626 4690 3443 259 324 2640 797 3240 5724 74317 9227 4143

SWWL NIS 132791 13516393 1747366 2028485 2270103 294993 3319562 3736020 429360 4971 5603252 W69763 7201163 7399735 730451 7266994 7140085 6959704 6773551 6652123 6624060SIDTATRSLOTS 26.7 267 26.7 26.7 26,7 26.7 26.7 26,7 267 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26. 26.7 26.7 26,7 26,7 24.7 26.7

IE ACHIR SLOTS 49731 56869 65444 75973 85049 108426 124666 I13926 16060 194922 217350 250703 269706 277106 273578 272172 267419 26063 253693 249143 248092NEW IENM R SOTS 7338 8576 10529 9076 23371 16240 15260 2063 24113 32426 33352 19004 7400 -3529 -1406 -4753 -6756 -6972 -4549 -1051TFACM.ILOT/IEACHE.R .5 1.5 13 335 .3 35 13 35 33 1.5 13 35 15 135 .3 .75 , 1.5 11 30 TEAD3IA 361da6 42105 4814757 561276 61499 uu33 6' 923145 10369 319181 1397 161000 19476 1117813 205264' 2101444 2371 ?P 222141 2266' 64 230426 237'271 24609iNEW TEACHERS 5287 6352 7799 6723 17317 12029 11304 15469 17961 24021 24705 14077 5483 5163 7293 5112 3814 396 6651 10613TEACH. REPLACEMENI 921 1053 3212 1407 1575 2006 2309 2591 2979 3424 4025 4643 4995 5132 5261 5443 5571 5667 5766 5932TOTAL NEV IEACIERS 6208 7406 9011 9130 1862 14037 13632 1906 20839 27445 29730 1872 10476 10332 12554 10555 9386 9633 12417 16745SIUKKID/SEATS 1.258 1.258 1.258 1.258 t. 28 1.258 1.256 3,258 1,25 1.24 1.23 1.225 3,22 3.23 1.19 III? 3.14 1.1 1.06 1.03 ISMP SEATS 1055414 320699 13389003 3632468 3805M9 2301256 2645932 296990 3434682 3991790 4738091 5464294 5902592 6114657 6138256 6211097 6263232 6327004 6!'~H43 6458372 6624060NEW SEATS 353496 16Ž014 223465 192622 496369 344673 323679 465073 546906 736302 746203 438298 232065 23599 72941 52135 63772 6333 68230 165687SEAISiROCN 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 4! 40 40 40 40 40 40 40SWI RO0OKS 26387 30175 34725 40312 45127 57531 66148 74245 85872 99545 317952 136607 147565 15296 353456 355277 15658 158175 359754 361459 165601DEV 90033 3787 4550 5587 4816 12404 8637 8097 11627 13673 16408 18655 10957 5302 590 1821 1303 1594 1579 1706 4142CAP,COST IN RF.AIL 2789670 3190074 3671135 4263753 4770852 6082226 6993197 7849206 9071393 10523871 12469I1614442129 13600~52 16161038 16223411 16415930 16553723 16722271 1689947 17069478 17507390NEW CAP COSI 400404 481062 590618 50909 1311373 910972 956008 3229187 1445478 3946045 3972234 3356423 560487 62373 392519 137792 368548 366876 180331 437932

.^%f* ........................ ................... - >@">X- >*- - i- * - - - Be^@- ~ "- - - - -- -- -*- -- -- - - -- --- - - - - - .=***@e"* ......... . ............ .* ........................- - -

SMA

5AENVL NI~NS 3JIM9 344155 40161 491160 603IS7 84339 O3 f 10 1 126435523 380 2041148 23 f94 2 3 336l9 364575 392510 045 3992347 3967346 369339 37 7SIUD/TEAC3(K SLOTS 2 2.3 a a 21.3 2 .3 23.3 23.3 23.321,3 23.3 23.3 za 7 23.3 23 3 2 23, 2 2 213 2TEACHER SLOTS 13691 145 17213 21310 25912 36197 44464 55213 66526 77270 87637 100369 135407 135645 356470 168459 373144 170936 17008 16709 16298IIE TEIaC SLOTS 1134 2406 3897 4802 126M 8267 30749 11231 10744 10348 12752 15039 20236 20825 1199 4685 -2229 -858 -2959 -426TEACHERSLOTEACHR 1,59 1i29 1.59 1.59 1.59 3.59 1,59 3.59 1.59 1. 1.i9 1.59 3.W9 1.59 1.59 1,59 1.59 1.52 3.47 3.43 1392

UEACHERS 8633 5 933 30626 11277 16297 22766 27965 340725 41840 4597 55105 63125 3 95312 409 05949 1 6 112445 18 116652 117382NEU TUEAIRI 701 1514 2451 3020 6469 5199 6760 7115 6757 6506 8020 9458 32726 33097 7540 2946 3549 3241 1167 330TEACH. REPACEIENT 235 233 271 332 407 569 699 868 1046 1215 1379 1579 1815 2133 2460 2649 2722 2911 2992 2921TO1AL NEV TEACHERS 914 1747 2722 3352 6876 5766 7459 79"3 7203 7723 9397 11036 34543 15230 10001 5595 6271 6052 4059 3251

STUDENT/SEATS 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.34 1.33 1.32 3.31 1,3 1.29 l.26 1.24 3.22 1.2 1,16 1.12 1.01 1.04 1.01 1S SEATS 236293 255522 2'97063 364341 447227 629401 779959 974594 t1832 1384907 1594906 3856027 2168543 2590605 3038130 3383709 3602034 3687354 380948 385480 379

IAUIIEA ~~~19229 41536k 67256 82967 182174 14955 395635 20865 20161i 210003 261319 31251 6 422063 447524 345570 218306 95340 122594 44902 -596725Sl3 3 3 5 3 5 35 35 3 5 ss735 iS 35 5 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35Sm M 5056751 7301 9488 10410 32771 1799 22256 27846 33807 39569 45569 53029 61958 74037 66804 96677 102935 305353 1l685 110139 106434NEW r"oMs 549 3367 1922 2368 5205 4273 5590 961 5762 6000 7441 8929 12059 12796 9874 6237 2438 3503 1203 -1705

CAP.COST IN W.IL 608692 658225 765286 938542 1352058 362330 2W0 4993 2510554 3048041 3567521 4106494 4791125 5566517 6673400 7926222 8716432 927879 949623 "14425 9930094 9776370NEU CAP COSI 49534 107060 173256 213516 469290 315261 503955 537487 51948 540963 2642 892l 41 3087233 1152822 890230 562356 219835 315803 31566 -u53724

_ ̂w -w ^b* -i ------------------ - ---------------------------... - ------- - - - - -- - -- - " ---- - --- - ----- " - -- - -- - ------ - --------................... ----wz * B_............................. --w-¢* ^----^--- *---- Z -----s--- ~ ------__….…..… … … …….. .……….

TOTAL CAPITAL COST 339361 384829 4436421 52002 5922930 770364 89" 9797 10359760 12126434 140913921657139 19223255 21386738 22834438 24049633 25132362 25832511 26220894 26703572 249972 272NIEW .W COST 449 58822 763874 u261 3790654 1296233 1359963 17674 19649 2487006 2644855 1963464 1647720 1215195 1082729 700148' 388383 482679 29599 294168

................. .E ...ER .1 ... 7 272 ...... 487 574 .^5 ........ 780 .... ..9 ........ .e^ ....... 59 27 35

PRINIOUI -4 I INDON4ESIA, RESOURCE REGUIRENENTSS MACH 2983 168ff CRUDE ERU.LIENT RATES I(E111D

(SD SIIP-GEPEKMLi SM-GENERAL21974 215 3s976 2977 (978/79 3979180 1980/811 191/92 1982183 2903/84 1984/95 1995/06 1906187 3997/S8 1988/89 I98/90 I990/91 I99I/92 1992193 1993/94 1994/95

SD (NRO.LLIENIS 13707866 14280157 15550124 17265291 19074819 21165724 22551870 23862489 25541212 26791495 27528979 27710140 27897840 21939664 27809526 27970114 28133953 28268846 28402294 29419429 286873690STUD/TEACHER SLOIS 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32 32TEACHER SLOTS 428371 446255 495941 539540 596081 661429 704746 7$ 73 799263 837234 960292 965942 8718Q 873115 969049 97406 71 941 871 9379"0NEV TEACHER SLOIS 17O8 J9694 53599 56541 65342 43327 4ov97 52461 9071 2306 5661 5566 1307 -4067 5015 51o 4211 4170 679 716IEACH.SLOT/TEACTER 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 III 1.1 1.1 1.09 1.09 1.06 1.04 1.02 1.005 I 1 I I I IEACHERS 3894296 405686 441765 490491 541998 601299 640878 677912 72503 768105 796556 516926 918276 85599 8644724 8740 86 79196 893401 887572 894357 902303NEV TEACHERS 16258 36079 48726 51407 59401 39379 37733 47691 42502 28451 20370 21350 17718 8729 9342 51210 4215 4170 4785 7946TEACH. REPLACE&ENT 9736 10142 11044 12262 13547 15032 16 17 26948 19140 19203 29914 20423 20957 21400 21619 21852 21980 2208 22189 22359iTOTM NEW TEACHERS 25994 462221 59770 63669 72948 54412 53250 64639 60642 4/654 40284 41773 38675 30129 30960 26972 26295 262155 28975 3030

STUDENT/SEATS 3.35 3.25 1.15 3.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.25 2.25 1.14 1.11 1.09 1.07 2.05 1.04 1.03 1.02 1.02 IISD SEA, S 11919893 12417529 13521847 15013297 16586799 19404977 19610322 20749990 22209750 23296952 24148227 24964090 25594349 2611t836 26485263 26894340 27334517 27714555 286121083 28619429 29873690NEW SEATS 497644 2204329 1491450 1573503 1918178 1205344 1139668 1459760 10872103 8522175 825963 430259 517487 373428 409077 420177 400038 406528 498344 254261SEATS/OOII 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45 45so ROOS :64886 275945 300485 JJ3629 368596 408999 435785 461111 493550 517710 536627 554758 568763 580263 588561 597652 40698 615879 624923 635997 641638NEW ROOIS 11059 24540 33143 34947 40404 26785 25326 321439 24160 18917 19130 14006 11500 8298 9091 9337 MO9 9034 11074 5650

'WPE'NRO~LLIEMT 1327811 2518393 1747364 2028485 2270803 284983 3328582 3736020 3994479 42807079 4602708 4933348 5262989 5564469 5820476 6062346 425338 6461464 4673853 4893427 7220075STUD/TEACNER SLOTS 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 210 20 20 20 'I0IEACH4ER SLOIS 46391 75920 97368 101424 113540 244749 166429 186801 199724 214354 230135 246667 263094 278223 291024 303217 312669 323073 333693 344671 356004NEW TZACHER SLOTS 9529 22449 24056 122226 32209 21680 20372 22923 14630 15781 16532 16427 15129 12280 12093 9552 10404 10619 10979 11332TEACH#SLOI/IEACHER 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 2.35 2.35 1,35 1.35 1,35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 I.3 1.25 2.2 3,25 2.2 1,05 ITEACHERS 492198 56237 6471? 75129 84104 107222 123281 138371 147944 258782 170472 282727 349485 206093 223864 242494 260558 290933 303357 328258 356004KYW TEACKERS 7059 8480 10412 8975 213118 16059 15090 9573 10837 1 1690 12246 12168 11207 17773 19629 18064 210375 22424 24902 27745IEACH. REPLACETTENT 1229 1406 i162 1979 2103 2681 3082 3459 3699 3970 4262 4568 4972 5152 5597 6062 4514 7023 7584 8206TOTAL MNE TEACHERS 8288 9886 12030 10853 25220 19740 28172 13032 14536 15659 26509 16736 26079 22925 24226 24326 26889 29447 32485 35952

STUDENT/StATS 1.258 1.258 1.258 1-259 1.258 1.258 1,258 1,258 1.25 2.24 1.23 1.225 1,22 1,21 l.29 2.17 1,14 I.3 1.06 2.03 ISRP SEATS 1055494 1206990 2399003 1612468 28050?0 2301258 2645932 2969809 3195583 3457322 3742039 4027223 4313024 4598734 4891157 5191492 5485424 5874058 6296087 6692647 7120075NEV SEATS 251496 282014 223465 1926212 496269 344673 323878 22774 262739 284737 285184 285802 M8573 292423 290336 303934 388632 422029 394560 427427SEATS/ROOM 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40SI?98c2 26387 30275 34472 40312 45127 57531 46148 74245 7989 096431 93551 100681 107924 114968 122279 12937 137236 146851 157402 367316 278002NEW Ro's 3797 545 5587 4916 12404 8617 8097 5644 4543 7118 72 30 7245 7143 7311 7258 7598 9716 10551 9914 10468

CAP.COST IN RP.KIL 2789670 3190074 3671135 4242753 4770852 6092226 6993197 7949206 8445926 9137701 9890208 10643949 11399322 12154454 12927327 23694484 14497981 15525136 26640559 1768867 U1810358NEW CAP COST 400404 482042 590628 509099 1311373 910972 856008 596720 692775 752507 753742 755373 755132 772873 767357 903297 2027355 31115423 3049108 1229693

SMA

SPA ENROLLMTENTS 31B96 344955 401062 492860 603757 943398 1036026 228459 1372448 1452394 1536407 1628744 3732638 1845490 1964039 2090031 2184960 2270975 2343482 2410643 2507639STUD/TEACHER SLOTS 18 19 to i9 18 to i8 lo 18 to i8 19 t8 18 i8 19 i9 to t9 to t9TEACHER MsLT 17122 19264 22281 27326 33542 4485 57556 71470 76249 8068 85356 90484 9625 102527 109112 115557 1222381 126160 130193 233925 139313NEW TEACHER SLOTS 1442 3117 044 6217 13313 10701 13914 4778 4440 4667 513 5772 6270 658 6445 58214 4779 4034 3731 538TEACH.SLOhITEACH!R 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 2.59 1.59 1.59 2.59 1.59 1.59 2.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.52 1.47 1.43 1.39TEACHERS 21146 22053 14033 27296 22096 29469 34299 44950 47955 50749 53683 54909 60539 64483 68624 72679 76340 83000 88567 93654 100225KUW TEACHERS 907 2960 3273 3930 9373 6730 8751 3005 2793 2935 3226 3630 3943 4141 4054 3663 6659 55 67 5087 6572TEACH. REFLIXACENT 279 30: 350 430 527 737 905 1124 1199 3249 3342 2423 2523 2612 1726 1817 1909 2075 2214 2341IOIML NY EW ACERS 1186 2262 3523 4339 8901 7467 9656 4129 3992 4204 4568 5053 5457 5754 5769 5480 8569 7642 7302 8913

STUDENI/SEATS 1.35 1.35 1.35 1.35 1,35 2.34 1.33 1.32 1.31 2.3 1.28 2.26 1.24 3.22 1.2 1,16 1.12 1.08 3.04 3.02 ISIIA SEATS 2136293 255522 297083 364341 447227 6219401 779959 974590 1047686 1117226 1200319 1292654 1397299 1512697 363663 1793131 1950768 2102642 2253348 2386775 2507639NEW SEATS 19229 41561 47258 82887 182174 149558 195631 73096 49540 83092 92336 104634 125408 123986 256448 157638 151894 25068 233427 120864 -I1SEATS/ROOMS 35 35 '35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 ISN A RO022S 6752 7302 9498 10410 22779 279?83 22254 27845 29934 32922 34295 36933 39923 43220 46762 51232 5523 60074 644m1 6894 73647NEV ROWIS 549 229 3922 2369 5205 4273 5589 208 199 2374 2638 9 3297 3542 4470 4504 4340 410 382 3"453CAP.COSTIN t V.IMM 608692 658225 765286 938542 1252058 1622338 200659? 2530545 2698839 2877975 3092019 3329877 3599425 3896707 4234094 4639304 5025179 5426457 5804625 6148333 6459677NEW CAP cost 49534 107060 173256 213516 469280 385261 503945 189294 179136 224045 217858 269538 297292 319388 403010 406074 392278 388168 343708 312344

TOTAL CAPITAL COST 3399362 3848299 4436421 5200295 5922910 7703564 8999797 10359750 212144744 12015676 12982227 13973927 14998739216051161217143422 18313789 19523160 20941593 22445394 23837000 2578035NEW CAP. COST 449938 588122 763874 722615 2780654 2294233 1359954 785024 670911 966552 991599 1024911 1052423 1092261 1170367 1209372 1419433 1503591 2392924 1442035

INDONESIA

Secondary Education Sector Study

Education Budget Projections and Impactof Secondary Education Action Program

Repelita IV (1984/5-88/9) and V (1989/90-93/4)

& 13164 £435 6306 16-11 SiN u-n it-to 901-4 I-t2 9293 93.94 It9e121a IV RepliltA V.. ..................... .. _...... -. - - ......-............ _._.................- . .. . .......

. ...20 ?v1alea rp 23,6 23,594 23,435 23,640 23,473 23,413 23,173 23,73S 23,756 23,777 23. 7 11124.100 117119.00

12 L.er kwet S v 2,596 2,943 3,3`5 3,7191 4,v1l 4,24 4,1e1 5,075 5,422 5,770 6,117 21471.00 27222.0023 SRI 2,552 1 *,I 3,351 3,152 4,058 4,722 4,107 5,09 5,422 5 ,74 1,6 285.00 27057.00I4 .eca1amlle 47 41 44 39 31 22 71 IJ 11 6 I 21300 55.00Is

urper Si ary 2,094 1 07 1,314 2,425 2,506 2,716 2,652 2,19*1 2,172 2,256 2,391 19. 4 007.00In SM5 13S 9035 912 1,038 1,750 2,790 2,317 1,4I3 12,50 1,417 4MY.00 7411.0

S1 9lo valweeal 233 2.3 393 325 349 42 441 417 525 552 $15 2250.00 2513.029 16S'i I1 2 224 242 12 1 122 123 225 1 .07022 a;tmor ItEa,lion 3Il 405 464 So0 571 24 036 i97 959 2552.00 42173.072 SagIra 10 15 90 270 too 150 115 2t9 215 Z15 255 515.00 2075.0023 Strata I 3l0 325 349 I7l 414 451 524 s55 592 63l 470 293S.00 29u0.0024 str1ta 11 1 A 3 5 7 9 IJ 9 71 23t79 11 34 53.00 2 .00252

77 Pfav 350.0 e. X ;SN 15.00 23.00 20.00 3e.00 22M 21.04 21.00 c.0o 21.00 211.00 217.00I Ie. r so-n ar 345.0 452 J 39 4.0 793.00 212.00 4,3.00 347.00 34.00 341.00 347.00 352.00 27315.00 1240.0029 SP 345.00 455.00 402.00 SA.M 260.00 449.00 357.00 352.00 353.00 352.00 35N.001 2622.0 1171.03S ill6 11 0.00 -3J0 O .J 7 51.00 4.00 -2.00 -5.00 S 00 -5.00 -500 -2.00 -2.00 -21.0032 Uorw SttimrJ 12.14 204.U11 10.20 9n.34 212.24 3.96 2.0 234.00 135.411 23%.00 119.00 A44. 4511.001

3; id74.37 73.00 A7M 64.0. 222.00 40.00 9n.oe 94.00 9.00 97.00 97.00 415.00 436.0is SAt4 VC(A1,o4aI So.C.) 30.00 32.00 24.00 7.00 22.00 3N 700 37.00 36.00 37.0 2.00 7. 21.0034 S ! 0 9.14 3.78 2.10 0.54 -0.04 2. 2.0 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 3.3 7 035 4aqftir Eauclwn 32.00 41.00 62.00 X 0.00 s.00 04.00 46.0 60.00 42.0 42.0 U3.00 sos.e 327.003631 1U2l- SCl4t 11AC1tIS lOh l2It ............ -- -1 - - ------- +3J Pr,,ary 413 494 495 49 494 All 47 A9 4l 9 1 3471.15 3493.5340 SeUtoarf IN O 29 324 241 26 20 23 336 359 31405 J274. 29.1 M.14441 2lt i3 25 21 32 35 so 44 40 SI 55 St 256.20 M.32421

It ........... .....

S3 Senier Stcoea#rw 2111,3 301.n9 ;|*.u 53X. l 31M? u71.e1 u1.oe 41U5 sse.11 sU4.44 51117. 2et01.73

4 3PRIVATE 2MLltiU ISl 60o00

49 Ad4ia2a.su 1relIa1im to fal. ll 111 11'So total Sr(dary 141.00 557.00 59.00 49.40 453.0 5e 2.00 40,0 490.00 439.e0 4. 49.00 27.00 2 .52 Lutr Setteairy 281.04 372.00 324.00 245.00 2.0110 3114.1 234.00 265.00 254.00 2114.0 4 265.00 1461.0 1413.0S~ I78p.r Siavluw 234.00 232.00 235.0 274.00 349.00 227.90 204.00 205.0 205.0 204.00 244.0 2024.00 12024.0053 54 11th9210995

5 s .l2ael tspe.422ve ISluEe 411e1. 0hl57 Prowl 42.70 42.20 41.20 41.20 42.20 41.20 42.20 42.70 42.20 42.2 42.20 .00 20.0 p...J6 lKoly 70.70 70.70 70.70 70.10 70.10 7,0.0 170.7 70.70 70.70 7e.7 70.10 35 33450 0 59 ulUlit 315.40 375.40 315.4 315.40 395.40 317.0 315.40 3175.40 315.0 375.40 375.4 I n.0 23770

n5 bnl. OKurn iN t I5.A Illu OOhl02 N5oars *.00 6.40 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.0 0.40 LO4 *.40 SM *IN S° 0.4003 kSodutr 57.4 "1.0 "" .0 "1.'0 17.UO 17.N0 11.0 II.6 171.0U 11.0 1.10 17.IN 17.0U4 lil*w I0.1. I01W 105W0 101."0 50.90 05.90 11.90 I5010 165.1 050.90 MW." IN." II5.01U totale Int rret 1t1U14u659. OOhl01 Pr , 5r. 41.2 410 41.0 41.10 41.10 41.20 41.10 41.24 41.10 41.21 41.20 20.0 201.00if SkceeuEu U.2 31.30 10.L0 M.i 08.30 11.30 U. .0 11.30 11.30 U.30 11.20 441.1 441.10It "0Ihr 411.30 411.30 401.30 401I. 111.30 411.30 411.30 451.30 411.30 41.30 411.30 2600.5 2400.50711 rltil terrnt Ill. 141111S ro.l 1462934.10 115331.00 104211.44 1iWA2.U 114250.14 111107J.571 199112.01 191415.40 2U41N0.10 220034.0 21193,51.M4 M N57 11233195.111n Prisrty 15705.00 912155.20 9m7172.00 91792.00 1127.0 91n3nn.u0 970911.0 917111112.4 970141." 10 ,1 12.0 0IL.0 4171fl0.40 4893736.0013 Secoedty 320403.00 31145.31 415191.04 45909.5.1 4940U. 14 W1,04.11 WH5IC4.00 023574.00 U6046.90 1011 M254.44 . 227002.01 307 .1014 Mll5wer 51932.91 594920.30 214.30 214019.10 271 1.10 301293.10 345123.W S13411.e1 02366. 4111 26.10 4615171 1227190.3 20 1051.41110 lln t41li1a tIanllrtnufltlEut Ibo. 00h017 Ptieuy 207.00 212.U0 211.17 225.32 231.1 238.51 245.50 22.62 259.94 21.411 211.24 1121.53 1200.10II SncodAiry 5031.0 1170.00 1152.U 1111.94 12 19 I251. 1292.10 1329.5 1561.12 1407.10 14U.63 5934.30 1140.21I9 Hlqr 3U10.00 n920.e0 4013.81 4150.00 4211.03 4394.89 4522.34 4513.46 4711.44 4921.u 5070.15 2u77o.25 25m.11

01 hlo Capital tit. laliSlU Apsl 07631.32 112113.00 174952.29 700165.51 160913.53 1"3107.17 9712264.9 91413X.6 1006111.11 144002.34 10562163 4437111.1 ses7m222U2 Priuwtyel 56000.e1 suoo.o0.00 50 1 . 00 504.0 900.00 1000.0. 0 1600.00 56000.00 s1.0 so10.00 20210.1 200.00 Socoodarylanl 4961.32 5953.0,11 s721191.61 01126.1 5`1291.01 01997.46 021194.44 39121.11 040114.11 670119.0 1154.41 2314 .10 32630.1064 Hilagorlab. 121120.00 1604120.00 246054.41 249439.4 711910.2 569510.0 296414.251219209.50 2920914.o 30142.64 31U422.12 127094.19. 1494092.710580 Sc.kel Il4.1 e 5coult 505135.0 58535.20 1531.10 52515.20 5031.2e 59535.20 5111.20 5131.20 615.10 585.20 50535A.1 m650.40 M 1.of tatil CpItsal fpmilto1 734907.12 101014.0 933483.49 24001.75 91550.13 115109.7 I1IM.6"9 5033202.0 5007429.97 5090163.4 11141.4 3 47241n.7 5349619.22n total SC.Capltal CEpitvr Isuil uu1 4 0m.0 59s11.20 u1519.25 nu0 u 5 1.61 5 s204 9 n0. 5 . 137090.11 1391.1 311349.0 3111116.31

O0 total CUc.lEgt4Iac.Ris.hm A4f) 2111141-.2 2434023.u6 237782.9 2103319.37 kut760.51 2902112.03 "34. 49 3006207.49 3114590.17 321b17.14 33N149.63 1310051.30 1s5 74.32

91 lecVtOilt 562914.50 51533539.00 114219.44 107n0s2.s1 1142250.U4 1111013.51 1 199112.61 5974945.0 2041750.90 1120031.3t 21593345.14 1595.5f 7 1123151751092 Cait.l 734901.s2 910144.0 953403.49 024490.11 9150.73 1155099.07 1035171.19 1503202.09 5001429.911 5090M33.4 1114101.37.3 413n.9 14971.n93 94 total i.ti.* Do. [is *pi. 5lli5 l 1451601.10 51455111.64 1533585.41 551130311.00 56833.05 1700151.11 1,14.11 10 250715.18 51314.40 15421043.00 1040974.51 19200190.5195 PrilAu 922155.20 973702.00 974192.00 913227.00 913139.00 91975.1. 917112.00 976147.20 9012.41 9,1015.00 4175120.60 4019130.404 Socmdarp 293454.90 33292.04 34100.51 391550.00 4275.01 46520.00 4920.40 113290.50 50741.20 001513.00 51112.17 206473.3

91 Hilgh 152037.0 110142.0 590321.10 21201.10 2 0.4 2034.00 291117.U0 35034.0 3301.00 3.0 91n7045.40 5114142.20961I9 total Nuol.11p.l. ao.slillooSl 915100.96 9385.53 1151404.30 900120.91 1200340.92 593808.19 509".9 1142591.41 1132312.14 12070.13 . 43301.39 SM7211.12o00 Prisay 5 0.0 s10.00 50.n s100.00 1O00 0 o40.0 4 14.00 500.40 s0.00 50. 2M0." 21600.u0105 fecoEar7 011011.04 I55174.00 3. 7 32.05 658457.55 f4442.64 9.14 7682.9 193560.91 151135.29 831591.25 ; m03.5 39004.90502 Hilter 1II23." 2U000.So' 24902.10 252W4.42 30902.26 29290.1 26005.4 293050.10 3495.14 31041.02 52105.2 1549,000.21503

505 AM510 FIC68M tio 319. PiSiSsmiled560 ouoai,i,emi,inOi,i,iii,,,flhI,o,gi

51§o KClIIS 35115 O ICEtWIII 0C4( iocr109 .--- _ ........--Il0 leitASEIEAC tIK IL5 l1I total I1537.34 120999.53 96714.20 1515412.70 104151.94 171411.13 19294.2 2000.417 22423.40 243026. 70270.6L 1099.49Ill Pnilauy 66321.00 11113.39 92004.61 9151.131 35 16321. 101440.05 554103.92 51966. 121712.30 132012.43 46751.12 605093.56112 seiooErt 2t341.42 34903.13 40495.00 4199.u4 12171.13 5F5H.4 0410 11209.15 1191.0 93813.1 202071.52 2037.94l5 IIwrr 4420.93 332.41 6114.20 m117.31 1721.90 5031.00 55913.49 13472.3 5S1I5.2 151090.95 3201.51 114501.4

I51 l0IM SIC.1160110 ES.F2M 3093 0.0 0.e0 o.00 22.n 102.t1 50905.1 117U4.24 1201.42 I5S30.93 5450.71 59290.11 02153.71lit IY lKriiilf laill tOKkr stguIll1 lIIFFoRf tt tCnUl511l-tita5 55453.12 40008.i 44253.30 47150.20 12533.44 56170.49 01067.95 05451.19 9M3.2 7W A.S 21904.74 3224.05

11 fo g Lds 1 1071.70 12348.64 13Z2L.12 54953.15 15117.03 17341.20 16042.42 19939.14 21214.34 22317.40 07417.66 99705.05 W120 fw r Lii 6410.56 0913.03 7409n.20 1917.7n 935.21 9939.41 508.64 114.12 5273.90 122M.29 Sl0.09 117541.99 121 fo SW Utrib 5504.9 53475.02 1S4.04 56353.50 1030.10 50912.54 20s31.50 21512.12 1375.3 245u6.2 73141.90 511019.54 122 for Lw tialgbri 61.26 7210.20 715.0 4 34.52 15001.40 50375.0 1l51.4 5I .31.2 12732 340.00 4405 111.0 1 2. 111123124 IKU* PAWN UftIlU 1409.53 1.10 73.02 m152 32 92.7 P15 064l. 502434.3s 502a. 11764.05 3491t9 159.0I26 P08l k wv kbgoto 26234.50 5$10..10 t 340.05 su03.44 146.37 414103.5 41044.70 51311.14 403L1 - 11 .I 148. 01.9

In1 (11111111m1611001cA 301,31. 3214.00 3531.13 3044.43 4410.01 4643.00 49a1.10 1201.50 U40.00 5911.10107.0 241311.5

132$

133 COST 31C3111v*t.a3 -14121.21 *1l116.40 -211291.03 -14494.61 -241175.14 -72344.13 -21311.43 -251111.91 -241141.12 -21462.53 -31911.41 -126444.50III #aiie Pt Fee ItbidvIm -2443.04 -214.135 -1212433 -3111,1 -3195.51 *4329.32 -4142.03 -5321.24 -5612.04 -0311.21 -14433.?5 .26449.15135 tit stMolt %ege sI? Bad133 tomt go ee level -33449.32 -14111.14 -33044.50 *3531.NA -34143.31 *31531.04 -1580.43 -29143.12 -21100.45 *11324.21 *1!443.33 -100435.56

133 si,uauitey ee Iewt m [P. 544431.34 41S171.44 434493.11. 444024.34 134040.11 581034.0 4123514.40 i444l4.90 1016415.50 151254.40 2271021.31 3330511.10140III hiblolal of*lmnSew 113043.44 331129.9IS 3479110.31 111434.1? 1114113,34 101144.41 221151.43 345144.45 MO4M.2 2MITI.45 33393.44 1213231.44

143 kImioM at I of 4nre.1,14. 31.01 51.48 32.19 SI.M 35.31 3.1.3 34.43 4.413 31.49 31.11 33.19 31.05

34 ....... .................................... -

Il 14(20 15V113i314k,m 9331.00 I31456.0 14242.00 W4U1.00 TOM5.6 13400.00 1400.00 IOW0.A 400.00 26(.00 44451.00 4600.00148144 9 II3I61t01934(*ea 50412.32 41911.01 31150.40 38394.411 48021.21 4335.211 43191.10 43245.28 43221.23 45321.10 219131.44 264430.241134 51 sm toll 24O1.9 21M2.41 14052.40 9301.21 2$529.41 114017.1 354613.20 35401.45 35601.41 33415.10 91153.14 93149.44131 513 kmees ilt 4003.4i-0 6111.00 51446.40 31342.40 4241.20 4423.40 4561.00 41156.0 1,14.43 4534. 40 341331.4 34404.40131 NIftS? hmbe,raea 100'l.30 11337.40 35253.40 1 '43. 20 3344l.40f 3184.0 I31134. 00 TIMM I4 1116. 10 171199.0 9(-235.46 590134.40

134 29'4111 SI2G I5uPmllI-tetaI 3314.00 34kk1.43 30049.03 43113.3 33011.31 34211.21 34111.41 54204.30 34001.33 W 3(.10 1111951.51 201109.??133 %1 5iuuti IM4 9114.13 745.44 4411.13 3414.11 9433.60 1111.13 2003.10 4914.9 4914.95 1001.30 35941.33 3493.2.5334 145 klineotac1bs 919.3 9302.63 5931.00 11124. 91 413.11 I0511.31 10530.11 1055.11 10411.10 30415.30 31233.53 11199.41ISP SAP hulb?v 9tI1142.1m 1413.2 4341. 00 V312.20 30243.20 111.20 7438.00 7141.10 1411.20 1433.00 3tfif. if 34110.40151 SPA L,beiriis 4043.4 9434.001 4324.40 11104.40 480. 20 110,11.40 I0U.00 1043.00 30434.40 10954.401 54411.40 541114.10W

141 lItilnl I.il.-haidial Cents 110 3420 2340 2030 320 M1 I I 3 0 1330.CO 330.00141143 C0Ot4I1l NI OF (131 S 111 MA -3341.14 -2195.53 -4143.21 -4193.21 -4193.21 -4139.21 -4113.711 -4193.21 -4134.21 -4393.28 -14113.32 -20,946.401

Ill

TO10 o 34141444 03 t ult.oo- C ome.tal-321.0.5 -13,19.5 -11019.1 -11412.13 -8311.04 -93351.30 -43441.45 -139121.33 -20150.421 -122444.14 422565.45 4-13054.4

Ml ktaeos is1, I fap.hEqip 3.44 1.11 2.37 3.40 -3.33 -0.37 -0.94 -3.93 -2.13 -3.31 0.1 -1.44

115 tOtAL 3114(2 of 1K21Ol 1149331.94 139369.43 319009.43 332539.38 131038.15 104113.13 220599.15 232031.32 244929.11 243391.40 113420.19 13234325.1314Il10111 R(01134 I0tA*t30 Ro0l 1030122.3 la 0141324.44 919343.31 1105541.35 12403U40K 3242335.44 3321021.19 I33111.2713445173.44 1440442.01, 14431S1.51 140114.20

I19 INA1(30 OF I300SAS452 ( SIEC. M I6( 1I13 332 34.24 14.11 34.3 34.11 14.119 34.1 34.44 13.54 34.30 1.1.3

III Il S C. IIC4T IG R 35 12113.36362 34241 OF ACtION 31343 3356524.12 31331M.411 3210844.41 1441401.10 344143411.31 1142231.34 1411414.40 1140114.21 115103,9.41 42229912.41 m9IN16" 4 '

554 '

I-l

74 AppendixTable 11

GOVERNMENT EDUCATION BUDGET GROWTH WITH AND WITHOUT ACTION PROGRAM(1983/84-1993/94)

(Rp billion)

Annual1983/84 /a 1993/94 growth

(Z)

I. Budget Without Program (Base)

A. Recurrent BudgetPrimary 957 981 0.3Secondary 326 751 8.7Higher 180 462 9.9

Subtotal 1,463 2.193 4.1

B. Capital BudgetPrimary 56 56 0.0Secondary 557 739 2.9Higher 122 319 9.8

Subtotal 734 1.115 4.3

C. Total Education Budget 2.198 3.308 4.2

II. Secondary Education Action Program Costs

A. Recurrent costs 0 286 (382) Ic -- Base plus Action Program 326 /b 1,037 12.3

B. Capital costs 0 -25 (-32) /c -'

- Base plus Action Program 499 /b 715 3.7

III. Summary

A. Secondary Education Base Budget 825 1,490 6.1without Action Program (I A 2 + I B 2)

B. Action Program (AP) Effects:1. Full AP (incl. cost recovery) 0 261 (18Z) /c -

Base budget + full AP 825 /b 1,751 7.8

2. Partial %P (not incl. cost recov.) 0 397 (27%) Ic -Base Budget & Partial AP 825 /b 1,887 8.6

/a Final year before Repelita IV.

/b These figures do not include action program but are included as a base forcalculating growth rates when the action program is added for subsequent years.

/c Percentages of Base Budget expenditures in 1993/94.

NB Columns do not always sum exactly due to rounding.

- 75 -

AppendixTable 11

Note to Appendix, Table 11

As Table 11 shows, the government secondary education budget will growduring Repelita IV and V by an annual rate of 6.1%, without an actionprogram. The secondary recurrent budget will grow much faster than the capitalbudget (8.7% vs. 2.9%). The growth in the recurrent budget assumes no changein the amount of expenditures per student; it is simply -- forward extrapolationdriven by enrollment growth.

When the recurrent costs of the complete secondary action program areincluded, they add another 38% to the recurrent cost of secondary education by1993/94. When the existing secondary costs are combined with the actionprogram, this higher level of secondary costs would grow at 12.3% p.a. comparedto their growth rate of 8.7% without the action program.

On the capital budget side, the secondary action program actuallyproduces net savings on the currently planned level of expenditures. This isbecause of the proposal to introduce a local contribution as a condition ofgovernmant help for building new (government) schools. By 1993/94 the savingsamount to Rp 25 billion or -3% of the projected budget without the actionprogram. Thus when recurrent and capital budgets are combined, the effect ofthe whole action program is to increase the average annual growth rate of thetotal secondary education budget from 6.1 to 7.8Z p.a. However, if the costrecovery elements of the action program are not adopted, then, as the bottom ofTable 11 shows, the growth rate would be 8.6% p.a., an increase by half againover the increase brought on by the full action program.

INDONESIAEducation Stiucture, 1964

Sho*1ng Wodd Bank Group Fnancial sultarnce to Date

t 2 3 A S 6 7 S 9 10 11 12 13 14 1S 16 1 16 19 20 2

l i - , 1 -I 1 - 1 1 I t- I I I I I t 8 79 to 11 12 13 14 1 16 17 Is 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 2t 21

19"MIyUC ILnON L0W63N CCNIAY Mt #NCtARX HIGIE IOUCAIONIIDUCADON IOUCAWl

I ~ i~ty Si (So.1-~) g S2(70,O Soton) S3 (Ph 0)

L.J

loc~~~E

(,nhwmc Ewqwvotum

* ScM Ii*ioIaW s

Fh~~5 D

D~NVkx,Degocorlm*

90onLffmhcwbctxet ) | POtocthc

AMt o bY %kVnU DM*oe scS (ACo* Mo t MO_

v*aitIbW%DdW L -ShO I

* nltwlrvolDCI A D-in

tec tt t o^*SC@¢{ 9w1L _ ._ 0tW Sd _ tO _ t 1 _ _ _ ~~~~~~~l tbtuto d lWe A&Wt"om (UWN)

k r WcotamtTroCendn tt $C|ow

1~~~AM L k .u2"

INDONESIAEnrollment Numbers and Repetition, Dropout,

Graduation Rates In Pimary Schools, 1970 and 1978/1S 79

Year Grafe I Gaode 2 Grodo 3 Grods 4 Grade 5 Grods 6

6%/ 78/ 12Sa 16%

1970 3 2.926000 2,06.0W 2.074.0 IA86 1,0

19% 14% S S7% 14

A 6% T% IOIL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~7%

1978/1979 2L 7 L 92%

197911980 6.8232

Key Dropout

Sowce. Raangkurono Sfalisflk .'3reklohom. 1979/i9B0: BP3K ( Bori-25b

INDONESIAJunilor Secondary School Net Progression Rates'

1971-1981/1982

GRADE

Yooi Grodualos

1971(51.6 (14).1

'97, (i8Om(1 _ 85

197J Ie,Lli) , 4 Z i9pa Lt~(61156) 86 76

1974 (1 88 77 86(697.712) (362.670)

1916 I~~~~LX.) 89 80o. 68(777112) (3\0.973)

1976 wt' 9 6) 7 1 SCtZo ~~~~~~~(#SMb 419) (45i.442.4 6) Got

1977 1 V 89 86 75(91306.3) (526.070)

1978 (I. 9 6 so(1.09.39.1) (616.375)

1979) It00 92 7(I I?.' 130) (629.5W4)

WN)' I WX 95 89 9(1 5 I 95 ) C 772.207)

.llWCIQ7) (9S.1 )

lItt$ (0 Calik)t{X1 Ovt- J IIt m owm4 as ti soWcld as 1d Bor* -2#691

INDONESIASenior Secondary School Net Progression Rates'

1971-1981/1982

Yooi I II III GfOdUO$,

1971 0(354.840)

1972 85(261.578)

_

WM7 100867(262,21i7)

¶00 61(287.076)

87 79 (173.315)

1975 100 88 81 71(330584)

(184\520)

t97 100 84 72

i976 (391 534) (189.740)

100 77

(452138) 91

87 (221.791)

1978 100 89 78

(524.634) 92 89 (257.676)

1979 100 9894)87(634 345) (341829)

1980 1W0 90 92 84(695.690) (381.645)

100 95 90 86(794 SS) (451620)

Sauco rIangkurnan Slotislik PorsokobahonRalos are cajulauld on Sontor Socondaryr Gcade I enrollnt as Ihe bose.

Wodd enk-25692

- 80 -AppendixFigure 5

ACHIEVEMENT MEANS FOR STUDENTS, ACCORDING TOTHEIR ACCESS TO SCHOOL LIBRARY BOOKS, GRADE 9

210-

208-

z

g. ~ ~~~~ /

.1 /

170-,

0 24 1 TO 4 <1NUMBER OF STUDENTS PER LIBRARY BOOK

AppendixFigure 6

STANDARDIZED TOTAL ACHIEVEMENT MEANS FOR STUDENTS IN ARTS ANDSCIENCE STREAMS BY NUMBER OF LIBRARY BOOKS IN SCHOOL, GRADE 12

--ARTS STREM----- SCIENCE STREAM

58-

at~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

<_~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .X p I

NONE UP TO S S1-1ISO 51-2S8 251-35 351-460 OVM 45NUMBER OF L IBRARY BOOKS

- 82 -AppendixFigure 7

SUBJECT ACHIEVEMENT SCORES FOR STUDENTS IN URBAN AND RURAL AREAS,BY ATTENDANCE OF TEACHERS AT IN-SERVICE TRAINING COURSES, GRADE 9

68*

mATTDEDCOM-SE AT LEAST OaC

Mz-iiNT A1oWED .t

48-

cow

28-

1~~SI

U R T R U R U R U R

MATH SCIENCE SOCIAL BAHASA ENGLISHSTUDIES MDONESIA

- 83 -

AppendixFigure 8

STANDARDIZED TOTAL ACHIVEMENT MEANS FOR STUDENTSIN ARTS AND SCIENCE STREAMS, BY IN-SERVICE TRAINING

OF TEACHERS, GRADE 12.

58 - ARTS STREAM

---- SCICE STREAM -

zi54 S-

~52-

z -

-z .ow

148

z

I'~~~~~~~~~~~~

tWER 2 2-3 4-5 0-7 A- A:LIN to IN is IN is IN-IS IN 1e

PROPORTION OF TEACHERS WITH IN-SERVICE TRAINING

INDONESIA 1981/82

Representation Index

Urban/Rural Provinces

35 ~~~~~~Mixed Enrollment in General Junior Secondary Schools (SMiP)

3

2.5am0 0

2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o

1.5~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o

-- ~~~~~~~~ inininmm . - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~c

I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~e -0.5 - - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

- ~~~~~~~~~~~- -~~~0 0.0 .

- -w 000 O. w0 ,

pq Ii)0 0 4o oI O

%~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 0O000q.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

INDONESIA 1981/82

Repreaentation Index

Urban/Rural Provinces

B _ Mixed 4nroll.ent in General Senior Secondary School. (SMA)

t A ̂ u 0 s v ) t) W t t B 6 e ) 4 -M > g .v l i ii)\t W \ > j\ y S W t s s 4 W 9 f i y > 4 6 \ t o ,

0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0

oe~

0JO000 0000 u J