The
Development of the Indonesian Distance Education
Satellite System (SISDIKSAT)
| In
1978, in the eastern part of Indonesia, a group
of rectors (presidents) of 10 government universities
and teacher training institutes organized the
Eastern Islands Universities Association, a
cooperative working group whose aim was to promote
the further development of its institutions
through the sharing of ideas and resources.
|
|
These
rectors recognized that their institutions would
not be able to advance rapidly enough through a
policy of self-reliance.
Educational
resources were scarce in the Eastern islands, and
there was uneven development among institutions
there. With only limited resources, the association
started some modest programs such as periodic meetings
of the rectors and the sharing of materials. With
additional support from Jakarta they conducted a
faculty exchange program, whereby a teacher from
one institution would travel to another campus to
teach one or more courses that were not available
on that campus because of a lack of faculty.
 |
Other
programs were started that involved sending
students to Hasanuddin University or to the
Agricultural Institute at Bogor on the island
of Java for graduate study. |
Hasanuddin
University |
Although
these programs demonstrated that there was an established
need for regular communications between sites, the
universities had to rely primarily on mail and personal
meetings to maintain those programs.
When the government decided to focus on “eastward-bound
development” and allot additional resources
to the Eastern islands, the government of Indonesia
and UAID agreed to launch a five-year project to
develop the agricultural expertise of the universities
of eastern Indonesia. This project brought together
Washington State University (WSU), the USAID contractor,
and the Eastern Islands Universities Association
for the goal of strengthening the agricultural sector
of the association through a variety of programs,
including degree training programs in the U.S. for
faculty and many workshops bringing together university
personnel such as librarians and home economics
teachers for the purposes of study, sharing and
networking.
Discussion with AID’s Bureau for Science and
Technology about the Rural Satellite Program took
place at the same time as consideration of an Indonesian
open university. The Director General of Higher
Education saw this as an opportunity for the Ministry
of Education and Culture to explore the use of interactive
telecommunications for distance education, both
for the direct instruction of students and also
for staff development and administrative activities.
In determining where to establish such system, both
he and USAID officials naturally looked to the eastern
islands where there was an established association
trying to share resources and a USAID project that
was already in operation.
The first consideration was to specify the general
type of communication system appropriate for the
telecommunications needs of the prospective groups.
In this case, the Association and the Directorate
General of Higher Education were primarily interested
in a two-way system that would unite the campuses.
Because programming conceivably might originate
at any of the sites, the Association stressed that
all sites should be similar in their transmission
and reception capabilities. The obvious communications
option was a fully interactive conferencing system
to link all of the campuses in the system, with
each campus able to serve as an initiator of programming.
After assessing the interest and commitment of each
of the institutions, the Directorate and the Association
recommended that the satellite system consist of
11 sites linking nine of the 10 Association member
institutions with the Directorate General in Jakarta
and the Agricultural Institute at Bogor. The University
of Halu Oleo (UNHALU) in Kendari was not included
in the plan because it was a very new university
fully occupied with its own development. After three
years, however, INHALU got funds that enabled it
to join the network in 1986. The 11 sites to be
connected were, from east to west:
1. Cenderawasih University (UNCEN) in Jayapura
2. Cenderawasih University Agriculture Campus (UNCEN-M)
in Manokwari
3. Pattimura University (UNPATTI) in Ambon
4. Sam Ratulangi University (UNSRAT) and the Institute
of Education (IKIP) in Manado
5. Tadulako University (UNTAD) in Palu
6. Hasanuddin University (UNHAS) in Makassar
7. Institute of Education (IKIP) in Makassar
8. Mulawarman University (UNMUL) in Samarinda
9. Lambung Mankgurat University (UNLAM) in Banjarmasin
10. Directorate General of Higher Education (DIKTI)
in Jakarta
11. Agricultural Institute (IPB) in Bogor
Later in the project, the twelfth site was added
with the installation of a small, solar-powered
station in the rural area of Wawatobi, Southeast
Sulawesi, to provide the universities with the means
to use telecommunications for rural development
experiments.
After analyzing the needs and feasibility of the
proposed telecommunication system with Perumtel
(government-owned telecommunication company) and
with higher education officials, it was decided
that the best configuration of this system would
be a two-channel, dedicated, audiographics system.
The first channel would be an audioconferencing
system connecting all sites in an open network:
all would be tuned into the satellite channel at
all times, and thus anything said at one location
would be heard simultaneously at all other locations.
The second channel would be used to provide a variety
of services: graphics in support of the audio via
facsimile and telewriting machines, private conferencing
telephone facilities, and emergency backup to any
failure of the audio channel. Both channels would
be leased on a full-time basis.
Based on the system selected, the equipment were
purchased for each site (see Figure 2). For the
typical classroom arrangement, see Figure 3.
Figure
1. Site Equipment
Equipment |
Number |
Function |
| Telephone
Terminal |
1 |
Setting
of transmit and receive levels for both channels;
control of dialing functions and selection of
equipment on Channel B |
| Audioconferencing:
Channel A |
| Convener |
1 |
Setting
of audio receive volume; voice switching |
| Microphones |
12 |
Push-to-talk
transmission of voice signal to all sites |
| Loudspeakers |
2 |
Reception
of voice signal from all sites |
| Graphic
Support: Channel B |
| Conferencing
phone |
1 |
Private
calls on point-to-point or multipoint basis |
| Facsimile |
1 |
Transfer
of paper copy between sites |
| Telewriter |
1 |
Microprocessor,
modem, and light pen for transmission of handwriting
or drawings |
| Monitors |
3 |
19-inch
monitor for telewriting directly on the screen
with light pen; two 26-inch monitors for display
of telewriting, video, or live television broadcasts |
| Signal
coupler |
1 |
Transfer
of graphics signal from microprocessor to the
26-inch video display monitor |
| TV
Tuner |
1 |
Reception
of off-air broadcast |
| Tape
recorder |
1 |
Taping
audio or graphics signals and replaying pre-recorded
graphics tapes |
| Emergency
Power Supply |
|
Backup
power system consisting of rechargeable batteries,
charger, voltage stabilizer, and inverter to
supply electricity for the audioconferencing
system for up to 12 hours without recharging |
As
a bi-national effort, SISDIKSAT was given the status
of a national project. This meant that it had a
temporary status with its funding coming totally
from the national development budget rather than
from the routine budget that finances permanent
entities like the Directorate. In keeping with the
government’s policy of decentralization, it
was decided to place the headquarters of SISDIKSAT
in Makassar, South Sulawesi.
Reviews of Project Results
After the initial technical problems were overcome,
the performance of the SISDIKSAT network became
quite good. In the 1985-1986 academic year, only
10 (2.3 percent) of the 441 scheduled class sessions
and none of the 28 faculty seminar programs were
cancelled due to technical problems. The technical
system actually performed better than the human
system in that a much larger percentage of classes
were cancelled because of teacher absences than
technical failures. Even then, SISDIKSA’s
class completion rate was slightly better than those
recorded for on-campus classes.
Student attendance fluctuated from week to week
because of the general lack of emphasis on attendance
in the university system and the irregular attendance
of some local classes that used the SISDIKSAT courses
as a supplementary activity. The average weekly
attendance for a single course ran from 470 for
a mandatory freshmen course to only 20 for a more
specialized course. The average weekly attendance
for all courses during the first three regular semesters
ran from 1,200 to 2,500 students.
What did the students think of the course program?
Two major surveys of student attitudes toward the
SISDIKSAT course program were made between August
1985 and June 1986. Responses were received from
2,286 students who had participated in courses during
those two semesters. The students from both semesters
generally held similar views. They felt that the
SISDIKSAT teachers were as good as or better than
their on-campus resources and that the classes were
well organized with sufficient time for interaction.
Eighty to 90 percent of those students thought that
the print materials had clear objectives and complemented
the presentations over the satellite. Over 80% of
the students from both semesters felt that the materials
mere as good as or even better than their local
materials.
Over 81 percent of the students surveyed thought
that SISDIKSAT teachers were as good as or better
than their local instructors. However, from August
semester to the February semester there was a drop
from 46% to 12% in the number of students who believed
that SISDIKSAT teachers were better than their local
instructors. In almost cases, the SISDIKSAT teachers
had higher academic qualifications than local teaching
staff so students were not using that as an indicator
of better. It does not appear either that their
evaluation were based on the dedication of the teachers
nor by the degree of student interaction allowed
by the teacher. Interviews with some classes indicated
that many students preferred instructors who covered
the course content at a leisurely pace that all
students could follow. Perhaps the presentation
styles and pace of the instructors affected the
students’ opinion.
The vast majority of students were also positive
about the time for interaction on SISDIKSAT classes,
and over 86% of them felt that the master teachers
encouraged students to participate. Fifty-six percent
of students reported that they had used microphones
at least once during their course. Eight-five percent
of those who had used the microphone used it to
ask a question on the content of the lesson, and
15% had used it solely to ask about the organization
of the course or to comment on the lecture.
Nevertheless, 59% of the students said that, given
the option, they would prefer taking a face-to-face
class over a satellite class. Only 19% said that
they would prefer a SISDIKSAT class, and 22% were
neutral. This probably reflects a natural human
preference for a face-to-face instruction rather
than a rejection of audioconferencing. Seventy percent
of the respondents said that they learned as much
as or more from SISDIKSAT classes than regular classes,
while 30% felt they learned less.
Given the highly positive attitudes from participants
in other SISDIKSAT programs, it appears that audioconferencing
may be more popular with older learners with specific
learning needs and good motivation. Professionals,
field workers, and graduate students are probably
a more suitable and appreciative audience for this
type of system. They have a better idea of what
they want to learn, strong motivation to learn it,
and an appreciation of the expertise and opportunity
that an audioconferencing can provide.
What were the reactions of the local tutors?
A survey was made of 43 tutors participating in
the February semester, and interviews were held
with most of them. Sixty-five percent said that
they were present for all of the SISDIKSAT class
sessions. All of the tutors reported having had
at least one meeting with their students outside
of the SISDIKSAT time, and the majority (63%) had
held at least seven such meetings.
Seventy-four percent of the tutors believed that
the syllabus of the SISDIKSAT course met the needs
of their own institutions, and 83% of them thought
that the course matched the needs of the Association.
It was, however, almost impossible to make each
course exactly fit the needs of each participating
campus because each campus had slightly different
needs and different types of students. The tutors
felt that the materials were as good as (63%) or
even better (37%) than that available locally, and
all of them stated they would continue to use the
materials for non-SISDIKSAT classes. Over 60% of
the tutors believed that their students learned
more from the SISDIKSAT course or at least the same
(35%) as they would have in a regular course. Only
5% felt that their students learned less.
Furthermore, 86% felt that they had increased their
ability to design and teach similar courses. Over
81% thought that this experience had increased their
understanding of the course content, and 51% believed
that it had increased their actual teaching skills.
All of the tutors felt that they would now be able
to teach the same course in a better way. When asked
to choose one or more of four alternative uses of
their particular SISDIKSAT course in their own institution,
86% of the tutors favored using the SISDIKSAT course
as a required supplement for the regular campus
course.
What were the reactions of the master teachers?
Another survey was undertaken of 20 faculty members
who had served on SISDIKSAT course teams during
1985-1986 academic year. These teachers generally
had higher academic qualifications and/or more teaching
experience than most of the local tutors. Seventy
percent of the master teachers held a master’s
or doctorate degree compared with the 21% of the
tutors who had master’s degree. Almost two
thirds of the master teacher had more than 13 years
of teaching experience; two thirds of the tutors
had less than 13 years.
Three quarters of the SISDIKSAT teachers said that
teaching over SISDIKSAT was more demanding than
teaching regular classes. Compared with face-to-face
classes, they said that they spent more time on
materials preparation (55%) using a more detailed
format (42%) and that they produced a greater amount
of material (37%) for the satellite course. Although
95% of them stated that they utilized as much reading
material or more for their SISDIKSAT class as for
their regular classes, only 79% felt that the content
was more complete than in their regular classes.
All of the instructors said that they had made modifications
in their normal teaching styles to suit SISDIKSAT.
A study to compare SISDIKSAT and regular classes
was also conducted. The data show that SISDIKSAT
classes averaged over 10 questions a class, and
the regular classes averaged less than two. In addition,
SISDIKSAT classes were much more likely to have
time for interaction. Over 97% of the SISDIKSAT
classes had time for student participation, but
only 55% of the regular classes. While students
in regular classes averaged one minute per class
for questions on the content of the lessons, SISDIKSAT
students averaged over eight minutes. These data
show that SISDIKSAT students had more control over
their classes.
Regarding their personal feelings toward SISDIKSAT
and its programs, all instructors agreed that the
offered courses were needed by the Association.
Ninety-five percent said that they were quite comfortable
teaching over the system with 85% stating that the
equipment was easy to use, and 84% expressing satisfaction
with the experience of teaching over SISDIKSAT.
Conclusion
Despite the great obstacles it faced as a complex
and pioneering projects, SISDIKSAT was able to overcome
most of the difficulties it encountered and successfully
demonstrate and develop the use of interactive telecommunications
as an effective tool for distance education.
In
the technical area, the loopback design was shown
to be a cost-efficient and effective basis for an
audioconferencing network, and the gating system
proved to be an innovative and workable response
to the problem of telephone line noise. During its
two-year demonstration phase, SISDIKSAT delivered
a variety of programs to all of its member sites,
including 60 academic courses and over 30 seminars.
Over 10,000 people in the Eastern islands benefited
from these interactive programs and the other services
offered by SISDIKSAT. Textbooks and study guides
were developed, and hundreds of master teachers
and local tutors were introduced to new materials
development and interactive reaching methods. Convinced
of the value of SISDIKSAT, three additional institutions
joined the network in 1986, thus increasing the
total number of sites to 15.
Beyond its quantifiable accomplishments, SISDIKSAT
also produced some additional benefits which are
more difficult to assess. Hundreds of faculty members
were given the opportunity to work with senior experts
in their fields, provided with high quality materials,
and given a role model to emulate. A concerted effort
was made to increase the quality and standardization
of courses within higher education institutions
and increase the degree of student-teacher interaction
in classes. Perumtel staff became familiar with
the use of different types of equipment over the
lines, the technical aspects of creating audioconferencing
networks and given a functioning example of how
the Palapa system could be used to meet their own
administrative and training needs.
Most importantly, SISDIKSAT demonstrated that an
audioconferencing network could be built in the
Third World and used in a variety of ways for educational
development. Both undergraduates and professionals
in a wide range of fields received instruction and
enthusiastically participated in discussion with
distant experts. Academic courses, in-service training
programs, meetings, and information exchange were
carried out effectively. People in remote areas
were given access to learning opportunities that
otherwise would not have been available. Audioconferencing
systems can provide developing countries with a
powerful tool to extend educational opportunities
to remote areas, to support and train professionals
in the field, to share scarce human resources, and
to enhance administrative efficiency. All countries
posses a basic telecommunications infrastructure.
SISIDIKSAT demonstrates that this existing technology
and infrastructure can be used to help solve the
problems of today and to prepare for a better tomorrow.
SISDIKSAT has shown that an auidoconferencsing system
can be very successful under less than ideal conditions
and that a developing country can use its own telecommunication
facilities to help overcome of its problems. It
is also true that “ideal” conditions
will never be approximated until developing nations
are given the experience of dealing with such technologies.
SISDIKSAT has provided the Indonesian Government
with that experience and has enhanced the chance
that educational applications of interactive telecommunications
system will be developed and successfully implemented
in Indonesia and in other countries. The Rural Satellite
Program has identified many problems that will be
encountered whenever anyone seeks to use telecommunications
services for distance education purposes, and its
experience should help others to avoid or reduce
many of those problems. The more important result
of the Rural Satellite Program, however, has been
to reveal the opportunities and achievements that
can be realized when the power of telecommunications
is used for educational goals. It is not a question
of transferring high technology to the Third World
but of using the high technology already there in
innovative ways to promote human and national development.
