Institutional Evaluation in Improving Student Literacy Through the Implementation of the Merdeka Curriculum
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58706/jipp.v4n1.p95-101Keywords:
Literacy Improvement, Merdeka Curriculum, Institutional Evaluation, Critical Literacy, Project-Based LearningAbstract
Literacy is essential for academic success, social engagement, and long-term career prospects. This study analyzes literacy improvements under the Independent Curriculum from 2023 to 2025 using the Education Report Card. The analysis evaluates the curriculum's impact on literacy, readiness for high school, and the role of literacy in social engagement. The study used a longitudinal approach, collecting education reports, teacher and student interviews, and annual surveys. This provided a comprehensive view of literacy development. Results showed significant improvement during the study. By 2025, all students will have achieved minimum literacy competencies, and 73.68% exceeded the standards. The findings highlight the value of collaborative projects, such as fake news analysis and gender equality campaigns, in strengthening text evaluation and critical thinking. However, challenges remain, including limited funding for technology and achievement disparities. The study emphasizes the need for coordination between curriculum policies, teacher training, and inclusive learning environments to maintain literacy gains. The findings should help policymakers and educators design effective and sustainable literacy strategies to meet future educational demands.
References
Burns, T. & Gottschalk, F. (2020). Education in the digital age. Paris: Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/1209166a-en.
Chen, V.Y., Lu, D.J., & Han, Y.S. (2024). Hybrid intelligence for marine biodiversity: Integrating citizen science with AI for enhanced intertidal conservation efforts at Cape Santiago, Taiwan. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(1), 454. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010454.
Freire, P. (2007). Pedagogy of the oppressed. In P. Kuppers & G. Robertson, The Community Performance Reader. Oxforshire: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003060635-5.
Hammond, L.D., Hyler, M.E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute. Retrieved from: https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/teacher-prof-dev.
Kemendikdasmen. (2025). Rapor Pendidikan. Jakarta: Kemendikdasmen. Retrieved from: https://raporpendidikan.dikdasmen.go.id/.
Kohnke, L. (2024). Microlearning for teacher professional development. In Optimizing Digital Competence through Microlearning: Flexible Approaches to Teacher Professional Development (pp. 1–7). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-8839-2_1.
Kooli, C. & Yusuf, N. (2025). Transforming educational assessment: Insights into the use of {ChatGPT} and large language models in grading. International Journal of Human--Computer Interaction, 41(5), 3388–3399. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2024.2338330.
Krajcik, J.S. & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.018.
Kwan, R., McNaught, C., Tsang, P., Wang, F.L., & Li, K. (2011). Enhancing learning through technology. Berlin: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22383-9.
Lailiyah, N. & Mas’ud, S. (2024). Analisis tantangan guru dalam menerapkan pembelajaran berdiferensiasi pada kurikulum merdeka di sekolah dasar. Journal on Teacher Education, 6(2), 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31004/jote.v6i2.38501.
Medlock Paul, C., Spires, H., & Kerkhoff, S. (2017). Digital Literacy for the 21st Century. In M Khosrow-Pour D.B.A. (Ed.) Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Library Science, Informaton Management, Scholarly Inquiry (pp. 2235–2242). USA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7659-4.ch002.
Mercer, N. (2019). Language and the joint creation of knowledge: The selected works of neil mercer. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429400759.
OECD. (2024). PISA 2022: Notas por pais. Perfiles Educativos, 46(183), 188-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22201/iisue.24486167e.2024.183.61714.
OECD. (2023). Extending broadband connectivity in southeast Asia. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/b8920f6d-en.
Rehani, A. & Mustofa, T.A. (2023). Implementasi project based learning dalam meningkatkan pola pikir kritis siswa di SMK Negeri 1 Surakarta. Didaktika: Jurnal Kependidikan, 12(4), 487–496. Retrieved from: https://jurnaldidaktika.org/contents/article/view/273.
Sahlberg, P. (2014). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland. New York: Teachers College Press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.co.id/books?id=py7r-7Lz-w4C.
Sharma, P. & Hannafin, M. (2004). Scaffolding critical thinking in an online course: An exploratory study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(2), 181–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/TMC3-RXPE-75MY-31YG.
Tomlinson, C.A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed ability classrooms. Alexandria: ASDC Publication.
UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2018). A global framework of reference on digital literacy skills for indicator 4.4.2. Canada: UNESCO. Retrieved from: http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/ip51-global-framework-reference-digital-literacy-skills-2018-en.pdf.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. USA: Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Riky Sheptian, Soeprijanto Soeprijanto, Riyadi Riyadi, Aip Badrujaman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
