Special issue article

Policy Futures in Education

2018, Vol. 16(1) 92–107
The internationalisation of ! The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
early childhood education: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1478210317745399
Case study from selected journals.sagepub.com/home/pfe

kindergartens in Bandung,
Indonesia

Vina Adriany
Department of Early Childhood Education, Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia, Indonesia

Abstract
For the past 20 years, early childhood education has undergone changes that have resulted from
an alteration in Indonesian socio-political situations. One of the changes has resulted in the
emergence of the internationalisation of early childhood education in Indonesia. This paper
unpacks the complexity of the process. Three teachers from three different kindergartens in
Bandung, Indonesia were selected to participate in this study. Drawing from postcolonial theories,
the findings of the study illuminate the extent to which international schooling perpetuates the
legacy of colonialisation, while at the same time sustaining the legacy of neo-liberal policy.
However, the findings also suggest that the schools have become a hybrid space where global
and local values are interacting and negotiating with one another.

Keywords
Internationalisation, early childhood education, postcolonial, neo-liberal

Introduction
Since the fall of the New Order’s1 regime, Indonesia has undergone changes in its political,
economic and social structures. Many have argued that the country is now moving towards
a democratic society as there now exists greater freedom of speech, more calls for

Corresponding author:
Vina Adriany, Department of Early Childhood Education, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia. Jl. Setiabudhi No. 229,
Bandung, Jawa Barat 40154, Indonesia.
Email: vina@upi.edu
Adriany 93

governmental transparency and accountability (Brenner, 2011) and a marked shift from
centralisation to decentralisation (Amirrachman, 2012; Brenner, 2011). The country has
also experienced rapid economic development and growth (Asian Development Bank,
2016). It is without any doubt that the neoliberal economic policy that emphasises the
country’s development, in terms of economic growth and gross domestic product per
capita is evident (Gellert, 2015). Unfortunately, the economic distribution is unequal, and
thus, while some groups can have access and benefit from it, others have in fact been
marginalised (Yusuf et al., 2014).
The process of change is taking place in every field, including education, which during the
New Order government was characterised by a top-down policy whereby the government set
the curriculum for all schools. In addition, schooling was also used by the government as an
apparatus through which the state ideology PANCASILA2 was promulgated. During this
time, children were taught to become good citizens with a strong emphasis on obeying the
rules. Classes were very structured and teacher-centred teaching was a part of the funda-
mental features in the classroom (Parker, 1992).
With the fall of the New Order government, the value of PANCASILA was then ques-
tioned and contested (Amirrachman, 2012). Education was no longer centralised. In the
post-New Order government, several new education laws were passed. Laws No. 20 (2003)
and government regulation No. 19 (2005) provide a space for decentralisation by allowing
each school to develop its own local curriculum, a curriculum which is based on local
diversity (DIKTI, n.d.).
The new practices of education in Indonesia are therefore characterised by deregulation,
privatisation and the state’s withdrawal from many aspects of social provision (Harvey,
2007a). These apparently illuminate the influence of the neo-liberal policy, which can be
defined as a political approach that minimises the roles of the state and optimises entrepre-
neurial freedoms within individuals (Harvey, 2007b). It is within the neo-liberal discourse
that the state’s intervention will be lessened and individuals’ roles will be optimised, except
in some targeted communities (Penn, 2002). In the field of education, neo-liberal policy is
evident when education is no longer the sole responsibility of the state.
Early childhood education (ECE) in Indonesia has also undergone these changes. One of
the indications of neo-liberal policies in ECE in Indonesia is its privatisation. Many kinder-
gartens are organised by private organisations with a link to international agencies. It is
without any doubt that an internationalisation process is occurring within ECE in
Indonesia.
There are various forms of internationalisation of ECE. The first form takes place when
ECE becomes the focus of international donors or agencies like the World Bank, United
Nations and UNICEF (White, 2011). Using a human capital discourse, these international
agencies see ECE as a vital resource for a country’s development (Adriany and Saefullah,
2015). The second form is evident from the penetration of international models and curric-
ulum of ECE to the local ECE (Newberry, 2010). Finally, the last form of internationalisa-
tion is demonstrated by the franchising of schools all over the globe (D
yrfj€ or, 2012).
Even though not all internationalisation is based on neo-liberalism, the proliferation of
neo-liberal policies will perpetuate a colonising tool. While internationalisation can be
broadly defined as the process of integrating international, global and multicultural dimen-
sions into the aims, functions and delivery of education (Knight, 2004), in this paper I am
focusing on the process of internationalisation as a means for promoting a neo-liberal
agenda through the use of international models and franchising of ECE.
94 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

The first form of internationalisation of ECE in Indonesia is evident from the

intervention of international agencies, such as the World Bank (World Bank, 2012),
Australia’s Agency for International Development (AusAID) and the International Child-
Saving Organization, PLAN (Newberry, 2012), in the practices of ECE in Indonesia. The
World Bank, through collaboration with the Indonesian government, launched the Early
Childhood Education and Development project in 2004 (Hasan et al., 2013). Their first
project was launching a pilot project in 11 districts in Indonesia (Adriany and Saefullah,
2015). They expanded it in 2006 by including more than 50 districts and targeted more than
500,000 children in villages to enrol in ECE (Human Development East Asia and Pacific
Region, The World Bank, 2012). While this programme initially aimed to reduce inequality
between children in rural and urban areas, Adriany and Saefullah (2015) argue that it was in
fact perpetuating the inequality. The projects benefited only children in areas selected as the
pilot-sites, hence it could be argued that this made the inequality between children in the
rural areas more severe. Penn (2002, 2008) also believes that the neo-liberal policy brought
in by those international agencies brings with it a negative effect on countries in the South.
She argues that, instead of including more children, the policy is in fact further margin-
alising others.
The second and third forms of internationalisation of ECE in Indonesia can be seen with
the growth of market-driven pre-school programmes and non-profit NGOs (Newberry,
2010). The emergence of the former marked the country’s shift to more neo-liberal policies
(Adriany and Saefullah, 2015; Newberry, 2010). Many are franchised from global interna-
tional programmes, such as High Scope, Tumble Tots, BCCT (Beyond Circle and Centre
Time) etc. The existence of international programmes in ECE is celebrated in Indonesia
mainly because many educators and parents believe that it provides more humanistic and
democratic approaches in viewing young children (Newberry, 2010).
It is a fact that the penetration of the global market to ECE is not only taking place in
Indonesia. It appears to be a worldwide phenomenon. In other Asian countries, such as
India (Viruru, 2005) and Korea (Yoon, 2007), the influence of global marketing in ECE is
also very pervasive. Thus, ECE institutions that are franchised or have some international
features flourish in Indonesia. D
yrfj€ orô (2012) labels this phenomenon as the
McDonaldisation of Education. The basic idea in this process lies in the fact that education
can be franchised from one country to another country. Not only can international kinder-
gartens be licensed in Indonesia, one private kindergarten was in fact successful in persuad-
ing the Indonesian government to sign a contract with the founder of the BCCT
programme, to implement the programme in all ECE institutions in Indonesia (Adriany,
2013). At the heart of programmes such as BCCT, the idea of the active, liberal and rational
child is promoted (Newberry, 2010). Here, the construction of children in the programme
seems to resonate with the new democratising Indonesia. Even though the contract between
the Indonesian government and BCCT ended in 2013, the process of how BCCT was
implemented in Indonesia illuminated the penetration of international as well as neo-
liberal forces into local practices of ECE in Indonesia.
The Indonesian government has attempted to tackle the issue related to internationalisa-
tion of education. The Ministry of Education and Culture launched the Minister Regulation
No. 31 (2014), which unfortunately only focuses on the managerial aspects in running an
international education centre, such as requiring international schools to have local students
as well as local teachers, while also making it compulsory for introductory Indonesian to be
taught to international students.
Adriany 95

As mentioned above, the influence of global markets on the practice of ECE may
also perpetuate the legacy of Western colonialisation towards countries such as
Indonesia (Adriany, 2013). The ECE philosophy brought by Western programmes is derived
from the Western discourse on childhood that assumes it to be universal and following the
same pattern of development (Viruru, 2005). It is obvious that the construction of childhood
disseminated by Western agencies or Western education models is predicated on the devel-
opmentalism discourse. Developmentalism is based on the belief that all children will under-
go a similar pattern of development (Edwards et al., 2009; Macnaughton, 2005; Walkerdine,
1998). While the idea may appear to be harmless, assuming children’s stages of development
to be universal may yet create conflict with the local construction of childhood (Burman,
1996), which is very often perceived to be inadequate and thus it is considered as ‘the other’
in the discourse of child development (Walkerdine, 1998). As Macnaughton (2005) argues,
when researchers find children do not achieve their prescribed developmental stages, they
will automatically consider their development to be delayed. This is also evident in
Indonesia. Many Indonesian children in rural areas, for example, were tested and measured
using internationally validated instruments such as Early Development Instrument from the
World Bank (Hasan et al., 2013). Children who could perform better in the test would be
regarded as ‘normal children’ while those who fail to score well would be seen as having
delayed development (Adriany and Saefullah, 2015). It is not very surprising that the major-
ity of the Indonesian children who take the test get a very low score. This process has created
the process of ‘othering’, when children in the Global South are continuously seen as ‘dif-
ferent’ from children in the Global North countries (Penn, 2002, 2011).
There are several studies that aim to explore the process of the internationalisation of
schooling (Huang, 2013b; Miyahara and Miyahara, 1994; White, 2011). Yet, with all the
complexity surrounding the neoliberal legacy within ECE in Indonesia, research that
attempts to explore how neoliberal measures of internationalisation have impacted ECE
remains very limited. Thus, this paper aims to fill the gap in the current literature by
exploring more about the internationalisation of neoliberal measures of ECE in Indonesia
from teachers’ points of view. This paper focuses on the process of internationalisation that
takes place in international schools because they demonstrate the pervasiveness of interna-
tional forces in educational practices in Indonesia.

Applying postcolonial theories to research on early

childhood education
In doing this research, I was informed by postcolonial theories. Ashcroft et al. (2002: 2)
define postcolonial as ‘all the culture affected by the imperial process from the moment of
colonialisation to the present day. This is because there is a continuity of preoccupations
throughout the historical process initiated by European imperial aggression’.
Postcolonial theories carry multiple meanings. Childs and Williams (1997) argue that the
key element in the postcolonial condition could also refer to a situation where colonial
discourse affects the minds of the colonised people. In this sense, the postcolonial approach
indicates a legacy for colonialisation. Young (2001), however, believes that postcolonial
theories go beyond colonialism. Within the postcolonial approach, there exists a space for
struggle and resistance for the colonised. Spivak (2000) defined the colonised as the subal-
tern, ‘the space of difference’. While within Gramscian theory (Green, 2002), subaltern refers
96 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

to a group of people from certain races, social statuses, genders and cultures that are
considered subordinate, Spivak (2000) believes that the subaltern does not have to be nec-
essarily oppressed. In fact, it is a group of people who can only speak using the language of
the coloniser (Landry and Maclean, 1996). Language here is not confined to a system of
spoken words or representation, rather my understanding of language is informed by my
understanding of discourse (Foucault, 1984), in which language is seen as a set of system of
thought that controls the way people think and act.
The subaltern, however, can possess agency within hybridity. Bhabha (1994) believes the
unequal power relations between the coloniser and colonised have resulted in hybridity as a
means for the subaltern to challenge this. Because hybridity opens up a new possibility for
the colonised to challenge the hegemonic discourse of the coloniser, the postcolonial theories
of hybridity ‘do away with the old dichotomy of colonizer/colonized’ (Prabhu, 2007: xiii).
Thus, within hybridity, the relationship between the colonised and coloniser is not always
binary. They are both in the process of negotiating and transacting between one another
(Gupta, 2006). Hybridity undoubtedly creates a space for the colonised and coloniser to
meet, exchange cultures and open up what Bhabha (1994) described as ‘the third grey space’.
For this reason, postcolonial theories have been widely used by scholars, particularly schol-
ars from Third World countries, because they give space for them to speak, to be heard, and
to construct their identity as non-Western scholars. As Srinivasan (2014: 10-11) argues,
‘there are constant arbitrations, negotiations, and contestations between individuals and
groups loyal to their collective identities, on claiming ownership of that illusive construct,
the national subject’.
Many researchers have attempted to use postcolonial theories to discuss ECE (Gupta,
2006; Srinivasan, 2014; Viruru, 2001, 2005). Viruru (2005) claims they have mostly been
used to understand elective and oppressive practices within ECE. Elective practices occur
when a researcher tries to identify the practices of the subaltern and make a comparison of
the extent to which these practices are similar to the practices of the coloniser (Viruru, 2005).
Research by Gupta (2006), for example, illuminates the extent to which educational philos-
ophy and practices in Indian schools share certain commonalities with those in America,
while at the same time highlighting forms of resistance. The oppressive practices involve a
process whereby a researcher challenges and questions the dominant practices of the colo-
niser, mostly Western discourses within ECE (Viruru, 2005). Research conducted by
Walkerdine (1998), Burman (2008), Huang (2013a) and Adriany and Warin (2014) has
attempted to question the extent to which the Western discourse of education, such as
child-centredness, has become a ‘regime of truth’ in ECE.
The postcolonial approach is also very pertinent due to the effect of internationalisation
on ECE (Gupta, 2006; Viruru, 2001, 2005). Internationalisation is believed to be a new form
of colonialisation and imperialism (Kennedy, 2006). Its effect has created the privatisation
and businessfication of education, and the commodification of childhood (Viruru, 2005), by
allowing transnational companies to franchise their educational systems in other countries
(Newberry, 2010). In the case of Indonesia, these companies have been able to gain support
from the government (Adriany and Saefullah, 2015; Newberry, 2010).
Postcolonial theories are also particularly useful in understanding the effect of neoliber-
alism on ECE. Neoliberal policy is evident when we see marketisation, privatisation and an
emphasis on human capital development (Harvey, 2007a, 2007b). Research conducted by
Newberry (2010) has revealed that marketisation and privatisation are very pervasive in
ECE and, consequently, the government’s roles are minimised.
Adriany 97

Methods
This study uses a qualitative case study approach because it allows me to understand the
complexity of the problems and also lets me explore the matter deeply (Swanborn, 2010;
Yin, 2008).
In conducting this research, I have tried to be consistent with the postcolonial approach
that frames my theoretical framework. The fact that I am Indonesian, conducting research
in an Indonesian context, yet my theoretical framework is nevertheless the result of my
engagement with Western theories has situated me as a postcolonial researcher. Narayan
(1997) emphasises three approaches postcolonial researchers can adopt in their studies. They
are emissaries, mirrors and authentic insiders (Narayan, 1997: 121–157). In the emissary
approach, a researcher will become less critical of her own culture because she will see
Western discourse as inherently problematic. The second approach – mirror – is one in
which a researcher is less or not critical of the Western discourse, using a Western lens in
understanding her own culture and, hence, perpetuating Western domination in her culture.
The last and final approach is that of the authentic insider, whereby a researcher will
attempt to be critical and cautious in using Western theories while at the same time
remain critical of her own culture. In my study, I attempt to use the last approach as
I believe it will allow me to go beyond the binary between the West and the East and,
hence, I will be able to see a hybrid space, ‘a third grey space’.
In selecting the participants, snowball sampling was used, which is very common in
qualitative research (Griffith et al., 2016). I contacted a teacher I know, who introduced
me to the other two female participants; all teach in different international schools. The first
teacher is Indra, a male teacher at Stone School; the second is Ina, a female teacher at
Freedom School; and the last is Mela, a female teacher at Up-Hill School. The information
from the teachers was collected using informal interviews, which were transcribed. These
were returned to the teachers so that they could see whether I had accurately recorded their
opinions. Each teacher was interviewed once or twice. Each interview lasted between one
and two hours. All the interviews took place either in the teachers’ schools or another place
they chose. In collecting the data, I adhered to ethical principles by observing the privacy
and confidentiality of the teachers and the schools. Thus, all of the names used in this paper
are pseudonyms.
The data were then analysed using a constructivist grounded approach (Charmaz, 2006)
as it allows me to listen to the data while at the same time recognising my subjectivity, which
may shape my understanding of it. The transcripts were coded, and compared to see what
themes were revealed. The data analysis yielded a theme of education as an investment.
Within this theme, three subthemes emerged. They are the construction of Indonesian upper
class, neoliberal policy and the human capital discourse.

Research setting: introducing the schools

Stone School
Stone School is a franchise school from America. According to Indra, this school is operated
under the management of a corporation and, hence, it is profit-oriented. The school special-
ises in teaching children from zero to four years old and focuses on stimulating children’s
gross motor skills. Each class lasts for 45 minutes and runs four times a month. In a month,
98 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

parents have to pay Rp.600,000 (US$45) as well as Rp.3,000,000 (US$225) for the admission
fee and Rp.300,000 (US$23) for the annual fee. These fees are relatively expensive if we
compare them with the national poverty level at Rp.200,262 (US$15) per month (World
Bank, 2012). Stone School has spread to four big cities in Indonesia: Jakarta, Bandung,
Cirebon and Surabaya. Since 2006, the school has expanded by opening up a new kinder-
garten programme. When the research was conducted, the school was in a transition period
because it was no longer going to be able to use its original name. According to Indra, the
contract with the central school in America had expired. They could not renew the contract
because of several factors, including the decline of Indonesian currency values compared
with American dollars. Despite this, the activities will remain the same. Indra believes that in
a way this provides a sense of freedom because they can now use their own programme and
not merely model it on the central school in America.

Up-Hill School
Up-Hill School was established in 2001. The school follows a rigorous programme in line
with the Singapore curriculum. It provides education from pre-school to junior college
levels. At the end of their secondary education, students sit for the International General
Certificate of Secondary Education and the International ‘A’ Level examinations offered by
Cambridge University. Up-Hill School is in five cities in Indonesia and the teachers come
from various countries. The languages of instruction used in the school are mainly English
and Chinese. The annual fee for each student ranges from US$4000 to US$5000. The school
is associated with schools in Singapore and has a strong emphasis on Chinese values, as
reflected in the hours of Chinese language taught in the school. Most of the children who
attend the school are from international and Indonesian Chinese descendants.

Freedom School
Freedom School offers English medium education from pre-school to diploma level. Its
ECE programme is for children aged three to five years old. The school’s annual fee is
around US$5000 per year. It follows the International Baccalaureate (IB) Primary Years
Programme (PYP) for children aged three to 12 years old. The aims of IB PYP education are
to develop the critical and whole child. In order for the school to be authorised as an IB
school, it must undergo certain procedures and pay certain fees. If it wants to use the IB
assessment system, additional fees are required. The teachers in the school come from var-
ious countries. Around 70% of the students are children of expatriates and around 30% are
local.

Findings and discussion

Education as an investment
The analysis of the data reveals that the theme of education as an investment is strongly
articulated by all the participants. Within this paradigm, education is perceived as a form of
investment, and any money that is spent on ECE is believed to bring a higher return in the
future (Nolan, 2013). The notion of education as an investment is also closely related with
the notion of human capital (Adriany and Saefullah, 2015; Formen, 2017; Formen and
Nuttall, 2014). It is believed that there is a relationship between ‘education and economic
Adriany 99

gains, global competition, and the future economic contribution of today’s children’
(Formen and Nuttall, 2014: 26). The theme of education as an investment also highlights
three neoliberal perspectives: prestige of dominant cultural human capital, quality of
schools, and educational achievement equalling later economic success. Under this theme,
several subthemes are developed: the construction of the upper class in Indonesian society,
the emerging neoliberal policy and the neoliberal and developmentalism discourses.

The construction of the Indonesian upper class. All of the teachers in this research agree that one
of the most apparent reasons parents enrol their children in these schools is related to the
construction of prestige. As Indra said in the following interview:

‘Erm, I think this kind of [international] school has to do with lifestyle. Yes, lifestyle. “Which
school does your child go to?” “Stone School” and people will say “wow”. Even though this
school is not the most expensive school in town. . .there are other schools, which are more
expensive. So, when parents send their children to this school, it will automatically increase
their prestige and things like that. Yes, that’s what I think, this is my personal opinion.’

Indra’s statement is also supported by Mela. Mela also explained that parents seem to
choose their children’s school because they want to be considered as privileged in the
society.

‘I think it is just due to prestige. Really, it’s all coming down to prestige. If they [the parents] are
gathering with their friends and somebody asks, “which school does your kid go to?” and you
say an international school, everybody will think “wow”. Last time I had a reunion with my
friends, and we all talked about how many kids you have, where do they go to school? And if
you mention [she mentions the name of an international school in Jakarta, Indonesia], every-
body will be like, “What? That school, you know. . .and you have three kids and all are going to
that school. You must be very very rich!”[laughs].’

It is apparent that the growth of international schools in Indonesia is directly related to the
construction of an upper class. This situation might indicate a legacy of colonialism, in
which the creation of an upper class was a feature (Gupta, 2006; Suratno, 2014). It was
during Dutch colonialisation in Indonesia that education was stratified and an elite class was
produced as a means to protect the interest of the colonial power (Suratno, 2014). The
construction of an upper class in international schools, therefore, perpetuates the legacy of
Dutch colonialisation in Indonesia. It was during Dutch colonialisation that three separate
legal groups were constructed. They were European, Foreign Oriental (Chinese-Arab), and
Indonesian. These were then reflected in the school system, in which schools were also
formed based on these legal distinctions (Locher-Scholten, 2000). The current practices of
international schools have apparently sustained these distinctions. In Stone School, the
activities and learning programme echoes its centre in America, while Freedom School
follows the British education system, and Up-Hill school celebrates Chinese values through-
out its activities and curriculum. Even though, at the moment, all of the international
schools can be accessed by people from different ethnic backgrounds, the schools sustain
the idea that society is divided into different stratifications. Not only do all international
schools continue the legacy of racial stratification, they also perpetuate economic class
division.
100 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

The construction of an upper class in international schools is predicated on the fact that
the admission fee, as well as the annual and monthly tuition fees, is very expensive for
Indonesian standards. In Up-Hill and Stone Schools, for example, the annual fees for kin-
dergarten are almost 15 times more expensive than the admission fee in a public kindergar-
ten in Indonesia and equivalent to Bandung’s income per capita, which is around US$4200
per year (Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Bandung, 2015).
Even though the notion of quality is a contested term, with such tuition fees, the schools
can obviously provide high quality facilities and learning resources, and all comply with the
Directorate of ECE’s requirement for a small ratio of pupils to teachers (Rubiyantoro,
2015). Therefore, the children and their families will have social, economic and cultural
capital (Bourdieu, 1986). Hence, the social reproduction resulting from memberships of the
international school will be produced and reproduced. In a situation where most lower class
children are entering the ‘educational race’, middle and upper class children who have access
to an international school will obviously benefit much more (Waters, 2006). Education here,
as Collins (1972) and Bourdieu (1986) argue, becomes a means of exclusion that perpetuates
social class reproduction in modern society. It is undoubtedly true that school is a tool that
produces and reproduces inequality.
This can be seen in Bandung, where the growth of shopping malls is evident, but at the
same time the slum areas have continued to spread; whereas the international schools are
mostly located in exclusive geographical areas, signifying inequality and the neoliberal
legacy within society in Indonesia, and illuminating the increasing economic and social
gap between the upper and lower classes.

Neoliberal policy. The teachers in all of the three schools, however, believe that such expensive
education is necessary in order to get good quality education. They believe that the money
spent by the parents on schooling is a form of investment. With good ECE, children will be
able to enter good primary schools and even go to good universities abroad. Indra, for
example, argues that the sizeable tuition fees collected can be spent on providing teachers
with decent salaries – something that most teachers in ECE in Indonesia struggle to achieve
– and therefore, he believes it will eventually improve teachers’ motivation to teach better.
The salary in Freedom School, for example, is around Rp.6,000,000– 20,000,000 (US$450–
1500) per month depending on educational background and years of teaching. These sala-
ries are much higher compared with those for teaching in the government kindergartens in
Indonesia, which range from Rp.1,500,000 to Rp.9,000,000 (US$112–675). To complicate
the picture, the salary of teachers in non-formal ECE is even lower than that, approximately
between Rp.0 and Rp.300,000 (US$0–22.5) (Yulindrasari, 2014).
The money from the parents is also used to develop infrastructure and provide learning
resources for the schools. Mela asserts that the international schools fill the gap left by the
Indonesian government. The government’s inability to provide accessible, good quality
education has enabled schools such as Stone, Up-Hill and Freedom to emerge.

‘Education is not cheap. It can never be cheap. There is money that needs to be spent for paying
teachers’ salaries, improving teachers’ quality, developing programmes, providing all facilities.
Not to mention, we have to pay the rent for the building. Teacher’s welfare is important; we
have to make sure we give them [a] decent salary. . .so no, education cannot be cheap. I think the
government really needs to work hard in order to ensure that they are improving the quality of
education by paying attention to these factors.’ (Interview with Indra)
Adriany 101

Indra’s statement points out the lack of government support for improving the quality of
education in Indonesia. This is again evidence of the neoliberal policy adopted by the
Indonesian government. In a situation where education is not merely the government’s
responsibility, it is unavoidable that the private sector will be taking part in developing
education. The rise of international schools, therefore, only demonstrates an attempt by the
upper-middle class to fill an empty space, untouched by the government, so that they may
have a high quality education. International schools are chosen and paid for by the parents
because they demand high quality education that is not provided by the government. As
Duncan (2007: 321) argues, neoliberal discourse ‘positioned education as a private good that
should be paid for by the individual and asserted that choice and competition was the way to
ensure efficiency and the maximum use of resources”.

Human capital discourse. Human capital discourse, in which education is seen as an invest-
ment that will bring higher economic benefits to society in the future (Penn, 2008), is very
pervasive in schools. This is often based on an assumption that any money spent on ECE
will be returned with interest in the future.
Human capital discourse emphasises economic value. Education is seen as a form of
investment and, thus, its objective is to create an individual who can assist his/her country
in furthering its economic development. In all of the schools in this study, the teachers
clearly emphasise the link between ECE and a successful future. All three teachers who
participated in this study strongly believe that the foundation that the children receive in
these schools will help them to compete in the future, to prepare them to become ‘global
citizens’.

‘Erm. . .the world is becoming more globalised; if we don’t equip our children with sufficient
preparations, they won’t be able to compete on a global level. This is why teaching English is
becoming very important. It helps them to become global citizens.’ (Interview with Indra)

One of the preparations carried out by the schools is the insertion of academic values. In
Up-Hill school, for example, kindergarten children need to learn three languages: Chinese,
Indonesian and English.

“Erm. . .I am not quite sure about the other schools. But in this school, the [academic] load is
quite overwhelming. Surprisingly, all the children in this school come to school
happily. . .Children have to learn languages. In a week they have 10 lessons on language, and
each lesson lasts for 30 minutes. Imagine! Not to mention they have to learn and speak Chinese
as well. Yet they seem to be very excited about this. . .erm, early years is a golden age. It will only
happen once. Thus, we have to make sure the children are stimulated so that they can develop
fully.’ (Interview with Ina)

The school’s emphasis on the value of learning languages seems to suggest there is a rela-
tionship between students’ academic achievement and later economic success.

‘Here, we offer so many things that public schools cannot offer. Pupils in this school, for
example, will have an opportunity to visit Cambridge University and experience a private
tour of the university. Then, we also have another programme. We want to make sure that
102 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

later on the children will be ready for entering a global world. . .that one day, they can enter
good university abroad.’ (Interview with Mela)

In Freedom School, human capital discourse is evident with the school’s emphasis on the
notion of child-centredness, in which playing is emphasised, and non-cognitive and emo-
tional skills are encouraged. Despite the fact that these values promoted by Freedom School
appear to be contradictory to the values of Up-Hill school, they are actually predicating on
the same discourse of human capitalism. As Formen (2017) argues, emotional skill is highly
needed in a democratic society that aims for economic development. Thus, international
schools such as the schools in this research embrace developmentalism and infuse it in the
schools’ philosophies and practices.

Developmentalism discourse. The notion of education as an investment can also be found in the
discourse of developmentalism in the school. Within developmentalism, the notion of child-
centredness, play based learning and developmentally appropriate curricula are promoted
(Burman, 2008; Henriques et al., 1998; Jahng, 2013; Marsh, 2003). Most of the theories and
research on developmentalism are conducted in Global North countries. For this reason,
developmentalism is often criticised as promoting Western values. In Indonesia, as previ-
ously mentioned, developmentalism is perpetuated through international agencies like the
World Bank, or international learning models such as BCCT, and disseminated by the
Ministry of Education and Culture in the guide books for ECE teachers (Departemen
Pendidikan Nasional, 2006, 2007a, 2007b) and the Indonesian Ministry of Education’s
regulation number 136, year 20014 (permendiknas 136/2014). This justifies developmental-
ism as an extension of neocolonialism.
However, my interviews with the teachers demonstrate how the concept of developmen-
talism has travelled and been understood differently in local contexts. Despite the teachers’
claim that they are promoting developmentalism, their understanding and practice of it
appear to be quite distinct. One of the basic ideas in developmentalism is all children will
undergo certain stages of development and adults should not focus on activity well beyond a
child’s developmental level. A child should not be engaged in any activities that are too
problematic for his/her developmental stage (Jahng, 2013). Yet, my interviews revealed that
the teachers, to some extent, have in fact challenged children’s developmental stages.
Up-Hill School, for example, has a very strong emphasis on academic and Asian values
(Gupta, 2006). As previously mentioned, Mela is even convinced that the insertion of strong
academic values into the school’s curriculum has become its strength and their emphasis will
be beneficial for the children and will equip them to enter primary school compared with
children from other schools. As a result, hours of activities are spent on children doing
paperwork and the activities are very much teacher-centred. In this sense, the practice in the
international schools becomes no different from the practice in local schools, where they
also focus on academic learning. To even complicate the picture, the practice in the school is
similar to the practice of kindergartens during the New Order government.
Mela, however, claims that, in spite of the fact that the school focuses on academic
values, it does not take away the joy of learning. She believes that existing theories of
child development somehow underestimate children’s ability to learn.

‘I think even though pupils in our school have to learn three languages, but they seem to be ok.
In fact, they seem to have a lot of fun. They are always excited to go to school every day.
Adriany 103

Well, I am not an expert, but I do believe children can be stimulated to do many things.’
(Interview with Mela)

What Mela and the Stone Hill School do might be interpreted as a violation of developmen-
talism principles. Yet, I understand it differently. I believe that what they are trying to do is
to translate the global knowledge into the local context (Anderson-Levitt, 2003). The Stone
School clearly understands that academic achievement is still very important to the parents.
In fact, one of the reasons why they send their children to the school is that the children can
gain high-quality education that will allow them to compete in the future. Thus, develop-
mentalism, as global knowledge, is ‘reconstructed through the global-national-local hege-
monic struggles’ (Jahng 2013: 91). It does not mean that the schools are completely
abandoning developmentalism. In fact, during my visit, I could see how it colours the
school, from the way classes are being structured, to the language used in the schools’
brochures and website. All, to some degree, reflect the ideas of developmentalism. The
classrooms are colourful and structured with various corners for children’s activities. The
schools’ brochures are filled with words such as ‘promoting learning through playing’ and
‘developmentally appropriate curriculum’. The fact that there are multiple contradictory
meanings of developmentalism in the school is what creates ‘a hybrid form of kindergarten
education’ (Jahng, 2013: 92). What happens in the school illuminates the extent to which
they become a hybrid space where contradictory discourses and practices are interwoven.

Conclusion
This paper attempts to unpack the internationalisation that is taking place within ECE
institutions in Indonesia. The findings of this study illuminate the complexity of interna-
tional schools. On the one hand, they have become an apparatus that perpetuates inequality
in society; on the other hand, they exist because there is a gap unfilled by the government.
The government’s lack of spending on education is seen as being responsible for this. From
the three teachers’ point of view, international schools provide high quality education for
middle class children that is not provided by the government. Hence, these schools can also
be perceived as a form of critique from middle class families that are demanding their right
to a good education. However, while middle class parents are able to offer good education
to their children, parents from lower class families will not be fortunate enough to have
access to this type of education. Thus, the existence of international schools should be seen
by the government as a challenge to spend more budget on education to provide high quality
education for everyone, regardless of their background.
The findings of this paper illuminate the ongoing effects of colonialisation in ECE. They
suggest that in order to have prestige and receive a high quality education that later will
determine his/her success in the society, a child must receive a Western education. Here,
Western education is seen as a form of investment that will bring higher returns to a child.
The findings of this paper also show that despite the penetration of Western values into
international schools, teachers are still able to create a hybrid space. Despite the fact that
Western education ideologies such as developmentalism are consistently perpetuated in the
schools, the teachers manage to expand the meaning and adapt it to the local values of the
schools to include academic learning. However, while it becomes a form of hybridisation,
the schools at the same time fall into the trap of human capital discourse, with its emphasis
on academic and economic values. These messy pictures demonstrate that there is no single
104 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

hegemonic discourse in the schools. Rather, they are places where the juxtaposition of
multiple meanings is produced and re-produced.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or
publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.

Orcid ID
Vina Adriany http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8457-4885

Notes
1. From 1967 until 1998, Indonesia was governed by President Soeharto, who gained his presidential
position after he successfully eliminated the communist force in Indonesia with military back-up
(Ricklefs, 2001). His term was characterised by rapid yet centralised physical development, mostly
in Jakarta and Java, with little room for democracy. In fact, his rule was considered to be
authoritarian.
2. Pancasila is the philosophical foundation of Indonesia. It consists of five principles. They are: 1)
belief in one God, 2) humanitarianism, 3) national unity, 4) representative democracy, and 5) social
justice (Hosen, 2005).

References
Adriany V (2013) Gendered Power Relations within Child-Centred Discourse: An Ethnographic Study in
a Kindergarten in Bandung, Indonesia. PhD Thesis, Lancaster: Lancaster University.
Adriany V and Warin J (2014) Preschool teachers’ approaches to gender differences within a child-
centered pedagogy: Findings from an Indonesian kindergarten. International Journal of Early Years
Education 22(3): 315–328.
Amirrachman RA (2012) Peace education in the Moluccas, Indonesia: Between global models and local
interests. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Anderson-Levitt K (2003) Local Meanings, Global Schooling: Anthropology and World Culture Theory.
New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ashcroft B, Griffiths G and Tiffin H (2002) The Empire Writes Back. New York: Routledge.
Asian Development Bank (2016) Indonesia: Economy. Available at: https://www.adb.org/countries/
indonesia/economy (accessed 17 January 2017).
Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Bandung (2015) Kota Bandung Dalam Angka/Bandung City in Figures.
Available at: https://bandungkota.bps.go.id/ (accessed 17 January 2017)
Bhabha HK (1994) The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.
Bourdieu P (1986) The forms of capital. In: J Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Theory and Research for
the Sociology of Education. Westport, CT: Greenwood, pp. 241–258
Brenner S (2011) Private moralities in the public sphere: Democratization, Islam, and gender in
Indonesia. American Anthropologist 113(3): 478–490.
Burman E (1996) Local, global, or globalized? Child development and international child rights legis-
lation. Childhood 3(1): 45–66.
Adriany 105

Burman, E (2008) Deconstructing Developmental Psychology. East Sussex: Routledge.

Charmaz, K (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis.
London, California, New Delhi, Singapore: SAGE Publications.
Childs P and Williams P (1997) An Introduction to Post-Colonial Theory. Essex: Prentice Hall.
Collins R (1972) The Credential Society: An Historical Sociology of Education and Stratification. New
York: Academic Press.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional (2006) Pedoman Pembelajaran di Taman Kanak-kanak. Jakarta:
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional (2007a) Pedoman Pembelajaran bidang Pengembangan Berbahasa di
Taman Kanak-kanak. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional (2007b) Pedoman Pembelajaran bidang Pengembangan Pembiasaan
di Taman Kanak-kanak. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
DIKTI (n.d.) Panduan pengembangan program muatan lokal [Guidance for local diversity develop-
ment]. Available at: http://www.dikti.go.id/files/atur/KTSP-SMK/12.ppt (accessed 20 March 2017).
Duncan J (2007) New Zealand free kindergartens: Free or freely forgotten? International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education 20(3): 319–333.
D
yrfj€
orô K (2012) Infected with neo-liberalism: The new landscape of early childhood settings in
Iceland. In: Cunningham P and Fretwell N (eds) Creating Communities: Local, National and
Global. London: CiCe, pp. 1–12.
Edwards S, Blaise M and Hammer M (2009) Beyond developmentalism? Early childhood teachers’
understandings of multiage grouping in early childhood education and care. Australasian Journal of
Early Childhood 34(4): 55–63.
Formen, A (2017) In human-capital we trust, on developmentalism we act: The case of Indonesian
early childhood education policy. In: Li M, Fox J and Grieshaber S (eds), Contemporary Issues and
Challenge in Early Childhood Education in the Asia-Pacific Region. Singapore: Springer Singapore,
pp. 125–142.
Formen A and Nuttall J (2014) Tension between discourses of development, religion, and human
capital in early childhood education policy text: the case of Indonesia. International Journal of Early
Childhood 46(1): 15–31.
Foucault M (1984) The order of discourse. In: Shapiro M (ed.) The Language of Politics. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Gellert PK (2015) Optimism and education: The new ideology of development in Indonesia. Journal of
Contemporary Asia 45(3): 371–393.
Green, M (2002) Gramsci cannot speak: Presentations and interpretations of Gramsci’s concept of the
subaltern. Rethinking Marxism 14(3): 1–24.
Griffith DA, Morris ES and Thakar V (2016) Spatial autocorrelation and qualitative sampling: The
case of snowball type sampling designs. Annals of the American Association of Geographers 106(4):
773–787.
Gupta A (2006) Early Childhood Education, Postcolonial Theory, and Teaching Practices in India:
Balancing Vygotsky and the Veda. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.
Harvey D (2007a) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.
Harvey, D (2007b) Neoliberalism as creative destruction. The ANNALS of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science 610(21): 22–44.
Hasan A, Hyson M and Chang MC (2013) Early Childhood Education and Development in Poor
Villages of Indonesia Strong Foundations, Later Success. Washington: The World Bank.
Henriques J, Hollway W, Urwin C, et al (1998) Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation
and Subjectivity. New York: Routledge.
Hosen N (2013) Religion and the Indonesian Constitution: A Recent Debate. Journal of Southeast
Asian Studies, 36(3): 419–440.
Huang T (2013a) Cultural analyses in a Taiwanese kindergarten: A postcolonial reflection and study.
International Journal of Educational Development 33(1): 15–24.
106 Policy Futures in Education 16(1)

Human Development East Asia and Pacific Region The World Bank (2012) Early childhood education
and development in Indonesia: Strong foundations, later success a preview. Jakarta: The World
Bank.
Jahng KE (2013) Reconceptualizing kindergarten education in South Korea: A postcolonial approach.
Asia Pacific Journal of Education 33(1): 81–96.
Kennedy A (2006) Globalisation, global English: ‘futures trading’ in early childhood education. Early
Years 26(3): 295–306.
Knight J (2004) Internationalisation remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of
Studies in International Education 8(1): 5–31.
Landry D and Maclean G (1996) The Spivak Reader: Selected Works of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak.
New York: Routledge.
Locher-Scholten E (2000) Women and the Colonial State Essays on Gender and Modernity in the
Netherlands Indies: 1900-1942. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Macnaughton G (2005) Doing Foucault in Early Childhood Studies. Oxford; New York: Routledge.
Marsh MM (2003) Examining the discourses that shape our teacher identities. Curriculum Inquiry
32(4): 453–469.
Miyahara K and Miyahara H (1994) ‘Internationalisation’ and early childhood education in Japan:
Responsive education for young children. Cambridge Journal of Education 24(2), 175–181.
Narayan U (1997) Dislocating Cultures: Identities, Tradition, and Third World Feminism. New York:
Routledge.
Newberry J (2010) The global child and non-governmental governance of the family in post-Suharto
Indonesia. Economy and Society 39(3): 403–426.
Newberry J (2012) Empowering children, disempowering women,. Ethics and Social Welfare 6(3):
247–259.
Nolan B (2013) What use is “social investment?” Journal of European Social Policy 23(5): 459–468.
Parker L (1992) The creation of Indonesian citizens in Balinese primary schools. Review of Indonesian
and Malay Affairs 26(1): 42–70.
Penn H (2002) The World Bank’s view of early childhood. Childhood 9(1) 118–132.
Penn H (2008) Working on the Impossible. Childhood 15(3): 379–395.
Penn H (2011) Travelling policies and global buzzwords: How international non-governmental orga-
nization and charities spread the word about early childhood in the global south. Childhood 18(1):
94–113.
Prabhu A (2007) Hybridity: Limits, Transformations, Prospects. Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.
Rickfles MC (2001) A History of Modern Indonesia since c 1200. Hampshire: Palgrave
Rubiyantoro Y (2015) Inilah Rasio Ideal Guru PAUD dan Anak Didik. Available at: https://paudni.
kemdikbud.go.id/berita/7099.html (accessed 17 January 2017).
Spivak GC (2000) Translation as culture. Parallax 6(1): 13–24.
Srinivasan P (2014) Early Childhood in Postcolonial Australia: New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
Suratno T (2014) The education system in Indonesia at a time of significant changes, Revue interna-
tionale d’éducation de Sèvres [En ligne]. Paper presented at the Revue internationale d’éducation de
Sèvres [En ligne], Colloque: L’éducation en Asie en 2014: Quels enjeux mondiaux? France.
Available at: http://ries.revues.org/3814 (accessed 17 January 2017)
Swanborn P (2010) Case Study Research: What, Why and How? London; California; India; Singapore:
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Ltd.
Viruru R (2001) Colonized through language: The case of early childhood education. Contemporary
Issues in Early Childhood 2(1): 31–47.
Viruru R (2005) The impact of postcolonial theory on early childhood education. Journal of Education
35(1): 7–29.
Adriany 107

Walkerdine V (1998) Developmental psychology and the child-centered pedagogy: The insertion of
piaget into early education. In: Henriques J, Hollway W, Urwin C, et al. (eds), Changing the
Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation, and Subjectivity. London: Routledge, pp. 153–202.
Waters JL (2006) Emergent geographies of international education and social exclusion. Antipode
38(5): 1046–1068.
White LA (2011) The internationalization of early childhood education and care issues: Framing
gender justice and child well-being. Governance 24(2): 285–309.
World Bank (2012) The Indonesia ECED project findings and policy recommendation. Available at:
http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/330141468044650822/pdf/NonAsciiFileName0.pdf
(accessed 18 January 2017).
Yin RK (2008) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Applied Social Research Methods).
London; New Delhi; Singapore: SAGE Publications.
Yoon J (2007) A case study of Korean girls’ constructions of girlhood in a kindergarten class. PhD
Dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, USA.
Young RJC (2001) Postcolonialism: A Historical Introduction. Malden; Oxford: Blackwell Publishing
Ltd.
Yulindrasari H (2014) Neoliberal early childhood education policy and women’s volunteerism. Paper
presented at the Negotiating practices of early childhood education, Universitas Pendidikan
Indonesia, Bandung, 18–19 November 2014.
Yusuf AA, Sumber A and Rum IA (2014) Twenty years of expenditure inequality in Indonesia, 1993–
2013. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 50(2): 243–254.

Vina Adriany is currently teaching at the Department of Early Childhood Education,

Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia. Her research interest rounds on the issues
of gender in early childhood education, the impact of neoliberalism in early childhood
education, and social justice in early childhood education. She can be contacted at
vina@upi.edu .