European Journal of Education Studies ISSN: 2501 - 1111 ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111 Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.858443 INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Fatah Nasikh Aryawani, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia Abstract: Republic of Indonesia’s “ct Number Year has mandated among other the obligation for overseas employees and workers to be proficient in Indonesian language, otherwise they need to be trained in Indonesian language classes; (2) the establishment of a language national agency which must be directly responsible to the minister; and (3) the increasing of Indonesian as the state language function to be an international language. Furthermore, the Government Regulation Number 57 Year 2014 emphasises the policy of Indonesian language internationalisation and it is stated that the policy is undertaken through Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA) or Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS) teaching program. Within the ILFS field itself, there are three major teaching providers which are: (1) universities, (2) agreement of cooperation schools, and (3) nonformal course and training institutions. This article is a policy analysis report which intends to expose the interpolicy dynamics existing in two education policies implementation; the internationalisation of Indonesian state language policy and the nonformal education policy. The research which is done qualitatively finds that there is an interpolicy synergy or a two-ways-support between the two policies in their implementation process. This is possible due to a good will for intersectoral cooperation and coordination among policy actors; two main governmental leading sectors of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC), which are (1) the Directorate of Nonformal Courses and Trainings Nurturance (CTN) and (2) the Agency of Language Development and Nurturance (Language Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved. © 2015 – 2017 Open Access Publishing Group 229 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Agency), and some nongovernmental ILFS stakeholders, such as the ILFS professional association “PP”IP“ , and the nonformal course and training providers (CTP) themselves. The combination of these organisations has become a unique education policy network in Indonesia. Keywords: education policy, nonformal education, language internasionalisation, language policy, ILFS teaching 1. Introduction The internationalisation policy of Indonesian language is mandated by the Republic of Indonesia’s “ct RI“ Number Year UU / on Flag, Language, State Symbol, and National Anthem. After the RIA No.24 (2009), Indonesian government then issued the Government Regulation Number 57 Year 2014 (PP 57/2014) on Development, Nurturance, and Conservation of Language and Literature, and Increasing Indonesian Language Function in order to operationalise the policies. The policy of internationalising state language including the teaching of BIPA (Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing) or the Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS) are derived from Article 33, Article 44, and Article 45 of the RIA No.24 (2009). Article of the act states that both public and private sectors’ employees who are not able to speak or perform Indonesian language should be assigned to attend the Indonesian language learning programs. Moreover, Article 44 mandates the government to increase the function of Indonesian to be an international language, while Article 45 orders the establishment of a Language National Agency which should be directly responsible to the Minister. For downloading the full article, please access the following link: https://oapub.org/edu/index.php/ejes/article/view/996 European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 230 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Figure 1: Structure of Internationalising State Language Policy through ILFS Teaching Program The Article 45 is implemented by upgrading the status of the National Language Centre, Pusat Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa or Pusat Bahasa (echelon 2) to be a National Language Agency, Badan Pengembangan dan Pembinaan Bahasa or Badan Bahasa, which is an echelon 1 unit under a direct subordination of the Indonesian Minister of Education and Culture (IMEC). The National Language Agency (NLA) soon started to become the main implementer of the state language internationalisation and ILFS teaching policy (Paauw 2009). To deal with policy implementation, the NLA as an echelon 1 unit of the ministry formed a new centre which is its echelon 2 unit. This new unit is established to more technically formulate and implement the policy and all of the NL“’s programs and activities regarding internationalising Indonesian language and ILFS teaching since late 2014 (Subyantoro 2015) (Suyitno 2017). In ministerial level policymaking, a middle term policy direction and strategies are designed as an approach in cope with actual issues and challenges. The current policy document is planned to be actuated within the time frame of 2015-2019. These European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 231 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA direction and strategies determine the effort alternatives for achieving the national development targets as well as the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture IMEC ’s strategic planning. Indonesian national policy direction and strategy as written in the Middle Range National Development Plan (MRNDP) of 2015-2019 are the main technical policy reference in formulating policies on education and culture. There are two parts of national policy direction and strategy which are poured into the IMEC’s Strategic Plan 2015-2019. One part is the policy direction and national strategy which are mandated by MRNDP 2015-2019, and another part is policy direction and strategy of the IMEC itself. The Republic of Indonesia’s “ct RI“ No. on the Long Range National Development Plan (LRNDP) 2005-2025 has been the general policy reference for determining the long range education development themes. Educational development themes and focuses at every stage are discussed and validated in order to be further formulated into the Long Range National Education Development Plan (LRNEDP) 2005-2025. In the middle range planning, it is still possible to make necessary changes or improvements to adapt with current situation and needs, firstly through the Middle Range National Development Plan (MRNDP) of every period of governance, and secondly through the Ministerial Strategic Plan. Education development themes of every planning stage as stated in the LRNEDP 2005-2025 has also been synchronised with the development themes which have been established in the LRNDP 2005-2025. In the first period of LRNEDP, education development is focused on increasing schools’ capacity as educational providers in widening services and modernising the management of learning process. In the second period, the government encourages the strengthening of educational services so that education can be accessed by all layers of society. In the third period, which is nowadays, the education development is planned to prepare Indonesian human resource in order to have regional scope of competitiveness. The MRNDP 2015-2019 emphasises that the Indonesian unifying ideology is the Five Principles, Pancasila, of 1 June 1945 and the Three Magnificences, Trisakti, which are formed among others in personality in culture through national character building and communal cooperation, gotong royong, based on the reality of nation diversity. Culture development has been referring to the LRNDP 2005-2025. Even though the special act dealing with development of culture is still in its legislation process, various policy documents mention its eight pillars of culture, which are: (1) rights for having and performing culture, (2) nation personality and character, (3) multiculturalism, (4) European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 232 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA history and heritage of culture, (5) culture industry, (6) culture diplomacy, (7) social institution and human of culture, and (8) structure and infrastructure of culture. The MRNDP 2015-2019 has established nine priority agendas, well known as the Nine Wishes, Nawacita, which is based on the Trisakti (Situmorang 2017). Trisakti ideology covers Indonesian sovereignty in politics, unreliance in economy, and personality in culture. Meanwhile, the Nawacita, includes (1) to reestablish state in order to protect the whole nation and give security to all citizens; (2) to make government which always exists by building a clean, effective, democratic, and trusted governance; (3) to develop Indonesia from the borders by reinforcing remote near border regions and villages within the frame of Indonesia as a unifying republic; (4) to strengthen the state in undertaking system reform and law enforcement which is free from corruption, with dignity, and trusted to improve quality of Indonesian people’s life to increase peoples’ productivity and competitiveness in global market so that the Indonesian nation can move forward and rise along with other Asian nations; (7) to create independence in economy by motioning strategic sector of domestic economy; (8) to revolutionise nation character; and (9) to strengthen national diversity and Indonesian social restoration. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 233 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Figure 2: Ministerial strategic planning for policymaking on ILFS teaching program in the context of national development as well as education and culture integration The Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS) teaching policy content and structure can also be rooted and analysed from the document of the Education and Culture Ministerial Strategic Plan 2015-2019. The LRNEDP 2005-2025 states that its 2025 vision is to produce Indonesia People who are Intelligent and Competitive or, the Insan Kamil in Islamic terminology. ”esides that, policy analysis used in the research has to be philosophically seen an analysis of education and culture policy. That is the implication of two fields integration, the education and culture within the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC). According to the MEC Strategic Plan 20152019 document, the integration is the part of systemic interaction of educational process with various different cultural entities including the cultures worldwide. Furthermore, referring to (1) the Nine Wishes, Nawacita, (2) the 2025 Vision above, and (3) education-culture integrated development, the 2019 vision of MEC has been formulated, which is The creation of a generation and an education and culture ecosystem which have a strong and positive character on the basis of communal cooperative work . One of the policy interpretations of the vision has been documented as growth of the culture promotion and diplomacy . In order to reach the MEC’s Vision, five missions have been established as follow: (1) to create strong actors of education and culture (Mission 1); (2) to give wide, total, and fair access of education and culture services and development (Mission 2); (3) to achieve the quality learning (Mission 3); to develop language and to sustain culture (Mission 4); and to reach strong governance, improved bureaucracy effectivity, and public participation (Mission 5). These are where the policy of internationalising Indonesian language through ILFS teaching comes from. Furthermore, besides major language policies above, it is also important to examine other relevant policies which sinergically exist. Chapter 7 of RIA No.20 (2003) on National Education System for example, also regulates language used in education delivery. The Chapter 33 Verse (3) of the chapter states that the language of education delivery is Indonesian language (Bahasa Indonesia). Before the legislation of Indonesian language policy through RIA No.24 (2009), the mentioned the RIA No.20 (2003) was considered as the only regulation at the hierarchical level below the Constitution of UUD 1945 (Basic Constitution) which regulates the Indonesian language. The basic constitution itself states about the function and position of Indonesian as a state language, not more. As already explained, the RIA No.24 (2009) does not only gives an emphasise in developing state language internally, European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 234 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA for instance Indonesian as a delivery language in education and offices, but also a mandate for spreading the language worldwide. However, the RIA No.20 (2003) as the national education act has contextually provided a preliminary support for the state language internationalisation and ILFS teaching policy. The act’s Verse 3 of Article 12 which is located in Chapter 5 clearly mentions that learners at Indonesian education providers (schools) do not only consist of Indonesian citizens but learners or students with other citizenships as well. In line with the act, Article 14 of the Ministerial Decree Number 126 (2016) about State Universities’ New Undergraduate Student Recruitment, mandates an obligation for every student candidate who are foreign citizens to pass the UKBI test as the Indonesian language proficiency examination. This proficiency test has been declared as one of academic qualifications which is required for a foreign student who wants to participate in the undergraduate selection program. “rticle of the MEC’s Ministerial Decree No. on Cooperation in Providing and Managing Education Services by Foreign and Indonesian Educational Institutions has regulated that ILFS teaching and the subject of Indonesian Studies at every school under foreign-Indonesian cooperation are compulsory. This ministerial decree is basically the technical derivation of the Government Regulation No.66 (2010) on The Change of GR No.17 (2010) on Providing and Managing Education, while the GR No.17 (2010) itself is derived from a more general policy in the hierarchy, which is the RIA No.20 (2003). Apart from those previously discussed, there are other regulations related to internationalising the state language, for examples: (1) Presidential Regulation No.16 (2010) on The Using of Indonesian Language in Formal Speeches of President and Vice President and Other State Officials, (2) Ministry of Domestic Affairs No.40 (2007) on Guidance for Local Government Heads in Conserving and Developing State Language and Local Languages, Ministry of Commerce’s Ministerial Decree No. ) on Obligation of Inserting Labels in Indonesian Language on Trading Goods. In the era of local autonomy, national level policies are not the only regulatory aspect of a policy dynamics. The state language internationalisation policy is also subject of several local level policies, for instance is the Provincial Spread Letter No. 560 (016667) on Foreign Workers Use and Control issued by Ganjar Pranowo, the Governor of Jawa Tengah Province on 23 October 2015. This letter is an exemplary action of commitment to the RIA No.24 (2009) regarding the internationalisation of Indonesian language. In the letter, it is stated that one of the requirements for extending the Permit Letter for Using International Workers is able to communicate in Indonesian which is proven by certificate of competency issued by relevant institutions . European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 235 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA This research has also found that policies in nonformal education sector provide additional support to policy implementation of ILFS teaching and state language internationalisation. Analysis result of the policy document shows that MEC’s Ministerial Decree No.131 (2014) on Nonformal Course and Training Institution Graduates’ Competency Standards has indirectly reinforced the language policy. Although this nonformal education policy has not established the graduates’ standard for ILFS learners, the document has emphasised the need for globalising nonformal course and training programs. The ministerial policy direction regarding nonformal education competency standard is responding to globalisation era by preparing the Indonesian nonformal education providers to be the producers of skilled potential workers not only for Indonesia but also other countries . According to Article 26 (Verse 4) of the RIA No.20 (2003) on National Education System, course and training institutions are nonformal education providers. On Article 26 it is explained that nonformal education provides the public related to gaining needed knowledge, vocational skills, life-skills, and particular attitudes in developing professions, jobs, entrepreneurship, and/or assisting learners to continue their formal education to higher levels. Below the act, there is a government regulation which is the GR No.17 (2010) on Providing and Managing Education. This regulation on Article 103 (Verse 1) says that nonformal education providers are established for public aimed at developing professional individuals and improving learners’ vocational competency. The article furthermore mentions that nonformal education sector with its course and training institutions provide various competency programs, which are: (1) life-skill education, (2) youth education, (3) women empowerment education, (4) literacy education, (5) jobskills education, (6) equality education, and (7) other forms of nonformal education needed by communities. The MEC’s Directorate of Nonformal Course and Training as a decision and policy maker at the national level plays a role in nurturing and developing nonformal course and training programs, both at organisational management and program actuation. “ccording to the MEC’s Strategic Plan -2019, one of the priorities in development and nurturance task conducted by the Directorate of NTC is strengthening the nonformal education services which are managed by course and training institutions by producing high-quality-outputs and increasing public trust to nonformal education sector (CSTD 2010); (Mosadeghrad 2014). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 236 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Figure 3: Interpolicy support: Nonformal education policy as a synergic policy to policy on increasing state language function to be an international language and ILFS teaching program 2. Literature Review Within advanced society, non-formal norms are no longer capable for governing the entire existing aspects of human life. Stipulation and designation of legal norms in the forms of regulation, hence, are urgently required. Law, both directly and indirectly, contributes on the patterns of human’s life, and simultaneously, illustrates the degree of human’s culture and civilization. These are in line with (Nawawi and Martini 1994) viewpoint arguing that if the law supremacy could govern a civilized, discipline, amicable, and just society, it indicates that their culture is progressive. (Dwidjowijoto 2006) argues that the 1945 Basic Constitution, Act or Government Regulation in Lieu of Law, Government Regulation, Presidential Regulation, Regional Government Regulation as they are regulated in the Republic of Indonesia’s “ct No. Year 2004 concerning Formulation of Legislation, is the first product of public policy, which acts as a formally and legally codified legislation. Every single stipulated legislation within central or national government until village and ward level of government, as argued by (Dwidjowijoto 2006), who defines them as public policy since, principally, all created by parts of government which takes a role as a public apparatus whose their professional income is paid by using taxpayers’ money and hence they are legally and formally responsible for the public. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 237 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA According to its degree, (Dwidjowijoto 2006) classified public policy into three classification, namely: (1) the macro policy (The Constitution, Act or Government Regulation in Lieu of Law, Government Regulation, Presidential Regulation, and Regional or Local Government Regulation), (2) the meso policy, and (3) the micro policy. According to policy objectives, (Dwidjowijoto 2006) classifies policies as the preferred pairs for regulatory authorities, namely: (1) distributive policies versus absorptive policies, (2) regulative policies versus deregulative policies, (3) dynamism policies versus stabilization policies, and (4) state strengthening policies or market reinforcement policies. Throughout history, language policy is inseparable from the world of education. It can be seen from a number of notes on the development of the role of Indonesian Language during the Japanese occupation in Indonesia, which at that time it was used as a daily communication language, office communication and education delivery, literacy, science and translation works for foreign books (Gunawan 1995). Substance or content of a policy is essential for some reasons. (Dye 2002) explains that policy analysis is an effort to understand what the government is doing, why a policy is designated, and what changes the policy makes. According to (Dye 2002), thus, there are three points that need to be reviewed in analysing a policy, which are: (1) description of policy, (2) policy background (causes), and (3) its consequence. The reason for the importance of studying the substance and content of a policy can also be related to Anderson's opinion in (Setyodarmodjo 2005) which explains that there are two types of policies: (1) substantive policy and (2) procedural policy. Substantive policies relate to what the government does, whereas procedural policies deal with the manner, mechanisms and parties involved in a particular administrative procedure. Meanwhile, (Widodo 2013) regards that policy content is important from the standpoint of policy analysis (styles of policy analysis). Pal in (Widodo 2013) divides the style of policy analysis into three types: (1) descriptive analysis, (2) process analysis, and (3) evaluation analysis, which descriptive analysis style consisting of two: (1) content analysis and (2) historical analysis. (Widodo 2013) explains that the content analysis style is an empirical depiction of the content of a particular public policy in order to obtain a detailed description by paying attention to the objective and purpose of policy formulation, the definition of the underlying problem, and the policy-making orientation, often requires an inquiry before the policy is formulated to develop a detailed picture of the policy objective and its rationality. The researcher or policy analyst, in this case, advised by (Widodo 2013) European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 238 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA to describe the public policy that leads to a rule, and initiate an analysis of a rule which is grouped in a policy. (Dye 2002), nevertheless, reveals the fact that most of the focus of policy research deals on how policies are made rather than what is the content of a policy along with its causes and consequences. In the current Indonesian context, policy research or analysis with regard to content and policy background appears to have manifold opportunities after the issuance of Act No.10 (2004) concerning the Formulation of Legislation. Through the mechanism of the National Legislation Program (Prolegnas), the readiness of a proposed law or act has been demanded complete and comprehensive as early as the preparation of the Academic Paper and draft of its design on the basis of research and in-depth assessment conducted (Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional (BPHN) 2008). (Gunawan 1995) opines that to achieve effective and efficient objectives, then Indonesia since the very first beginning of the Five-Yearly-Development-Plan (Repelita) era tried to resolve the problem of education, particularly the issue of educational development through educational innovation activities. Although it is infrequent, policy innovation, stated by (Setyodarmodjo 2005) is prevalent in developed countries under the reasons of welfare and education of the people who are already high, thus arising creative participation which can create policy innovation by perpetually supported the attitude and ability of the legislative members and government executives in performing their functions. (Hasbullah 2015) states that the meaning of educational innovation is a state-ofthe-art and qualitative change, different from the previous and deliberately attempted to improve the ability in order to achieve certain goals in education. Furthermore, it is argued that among the 10 educational issues that need to be solved through the policy of educational innovation are: (1) the deficiency of national cultural elements, and (2) the deficiency of solidity, identity, and national pride (Hasbullah 2015). The definition of policy implementation suggested by Pressman and Wildavsky in (Purwanto and Sulistyastuti 2015) is influenced by the paradigm of politicaladministration dichotomy. In accordance with the two policy experts, the implementation should be interpreted through the following keywords: (1) to carry out the policy, (2) to fulfil the assurance set forth in the policy documents, (3) to produce output as stated in the policy objective, and (4) to accomplish the mission which must be realized in the policy objective. In line with the aforementioned opinion, (Van Meter and Van Horn 1975) argue that the implementation of the policy encompasses actions done by public or private individuals (or groups) which are directed at the achievement of objectives set forth in the prior policy decisions. Within its development, policy European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 239 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA implementation is interpreted in a more convoluted sense as a transactional mechanism for the various resources and stakeholders involved in a policy. Warwick in (Brynard 2005) explains below. Implementation means transaction. To carry out a program, implementers must continually deal with tasks, environments, clients, and each other. The formalities of organization and the mechanics of administration are important as background, but the key to success is continual coping with contexts, personalities, alliances, and events. And crucial to such adaptation is the willingness to acknowledge and correct mistakes, to shift directions, and to learn from doing. Nothing is more vital to implementation than self-correction; nothing more lethal than blind perseveration. Concerning what is important to be reviewed for implementation analysis, (Nugroho 2009) begins with clarity on the meaning of implementation as the means for a policy to achieve its objectives through two choices of steps: (1) creating program execution as direct implementation, or (2) establishing derivative policies of the public policy. (Purwanto and Sulistyastuti 2015) suggest two approaches to studying policy implementation, namely (1) understanding implementation as part of or one of the phases of the policy process or cycle; and (2) policy implementation is seen as a field of study separately consisting of elements of ontology (field of study), epistemology (how to understand the object studied) and axiology (recommendation of necessary measure). Regarding the overall implementation review, (Purwanto and Sulistyastuti 2015) emphasize the following aspects: (1) policy implementation process, (2) performance assessment of policy implementation, (3) organization in policy implementation, and (4) vanguard bureaucrats (street level bureaucrats). Meanwhile, (Imron 1996) specifies several factors which influence the implementation of educational policy, such as: (1) complexity of the policy made, (2) clarity of the policy formulation and solution of issues offered by the policy, (3) supporting resources, (4) expertise of policy implementers, (5) target audience support for implemented policies, and (6) bureaucracy effectiveness and efficiency factors. In policy implementation, Dunsire in (Hasbullah 2015) mentions a phenomenon called an implementation gap, which is a situation where in the implementation process of education policy, there is a frequent possibility of differences between what policy makers expected, or differences between policy formulation and reality in the field. (Hasbullah 2015) explains that the magnitude of the gap depends largely on the capacity of the organization in implementing the policy, such as the ability of an organization to implement policy decisions in such a way which hence there is a European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 240 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA guarantee that the goals or targets which have been set in the formal document of an education policy can be achieved. The importance of organisational capacity in the success of a policy implementation is also put forward by (Armstrong 2009) which states that an organisation must function effectively and ensure high performance in order to: (1) achieve goals, (2) show results, and (3) satisfy the policy stakeholders. (Goggin et al. 1990) suggest that the capacity and capability of an organisation as a unitary entity, involves and is determined by: (1) the structure, (2) the mechanism of work or coordination between sections pertaining to the implementation of the policy; (3) human resources; (4) organizations resources support to implement policies, particularly financial resources. In addition, (Crosby 1996) formulates more elements that construct the organizational capacity, such as the ability to: (1) bridge various interests; (2) mobilise and maintain support; (3) adapt to new tasks and possess a framework to run the learning process; (4) recognise changes occurring in the environment; (5) undertake lobbying and advocacy; (6) supervise and control policies implementation; (7) possess good coordination on means and procedures; and (8) possess mechanisms for identifying and measuring the impact of the policy. (Salusu 2006) argues that the capability of an organization is a concept used to refer to internal environmental conditions consisting of two strategic factors, namely strengths and weaknesses that interact with each other. Concerning on the dimension of implementation, two achievement indicators determined by implementing agencies are: (1) implementation process aspect, and (2) implementation result aspect (Indiahono 2009). Process aspect indicates that during the implementation of the program, all policy guidelines have been carried out consistently by the implementing agencies in the field. While result aspect indicates whether the implemented policy has achieved the desired outcomes. (Nugroho 2009) explains in detail five important aspects to be observed regarding analysis of policy implementation: (1) clarity of the policy meaning in the context of strategic management (vision, mission, strategy, policy decisions, policy programs or activities, policy products, objectives, and performance to be achieved), (2) policy implementation model (implementation approach), (3) implementation as a form of management practice (organising, directing and supervising) and governance (adjustment of implementation procedure for the resources used), (4) policy paradigm used (continental or anglo saxon), and (5) process of socialising the policy (measures, period and timing of socialisation, and its phasing). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 241 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Following the suggestions, implementation can be incorporated as a management practice involving elements, such as: organisation, leadership, driving, and control. (Widodo 2013) outlines a more operational process of public policy implementation into two stages: (1) the policy interpretation stage, which is general policy translation into more operational policies to managerial and technical policies; and (2) organising, namely the determination of (a) implementing agencies policies, both individual and units, (b) budgeting, (c) procurement of facilities and infrastructure, (d) stipulation of instructions or standard operating procedures, (e) determining management structure of the implementing agencies and coordinators, (f) preparation of activity schedule, and (g) application or execution stage. In addition, (Widodo 2013) suggests control of policy implementation (monitoring and supervision) as a form of activities aim at controlling the implementation of activities to avoid irregularities from predetermined scenarios. (Parsons 2005) reveals that public policy is currently taking place in a national system as well as in a global system at the same time, thus the characteristics of the global system and its impact on how to analyse the policies and issues are important. Mc Grew & Lewis in (Parsons 2005) state that global politics encompasses five main features: (1) complexity and diversity (global agenda and increasingly complex and international issues with the strengthening of regionalisation and transnational cooperation); (2) intense interaction patterns (the interaction level and scope of state interaction will be wider); (3) vulnerability of nation states (national policy agendas are increasingly influenced by developments in other countries resulting in a decline in the ability of a state to control its agenda); (4) rapid and widespread change (rapid and widespread change unexpectedly involves various issues and other problems or parallel with butterfly effect in meteorological terms); and (5) the fragility of order and governance (policy agenda can be global with local implementation model with national decision-making and implementation). The idea of globalisation in this case is the emergence of cutting-edge types of relationships, such as: transnational corporations with national and world economies, cross-country relations, and transnational organisations). In this regard, it is stated that globalisation is an asymmetrical interdependence between countries, institutions and actors who are favourable to parties with economic and technological advantages over poor and underdeveloped countries (Stiglitz 2003). In fact, (Stiglitz 2003) mentioned that initially globalization aims at opening opportunities for developing countries to improve their prosperity through global trade. The ideas to advance Indonesia’s civilization as a great nation within the context of globalization, according to (Sonhadji 2015) is no more utopian at the moment European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 242 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Indonesian paramountly utilized its existing potential and build the nation-state in a more multicultural perspective. In addition, (Sonhadji 2015) also states that all opportunities which are sourced from globalisation itself can be owned and utilized for the national interest when Indonesian human beings have a strong identity and mastered science and technology. Thus, it can be concluded that in order to overcome the threat posed by globalisation, there are three things which must be done: (1) policy making using perspective of multiculturalism of the Indonesian Five Principles Pancasila, (2) mastery of science and technology for all Indonesian people, and (3) having strong self-identity as Indonesia. (Tarwotjo 2002) is concerned about the inability of national education strategy in preventing disintegration within Indonesia. These concerns aroused since the national identity and cultural-based education principles begin to crumble. Hence, Tarwotjo suggests that Indonesian culture needs to be channelled educatively by upholding the spirit of national integration. Regarding the national identity, (Mahsun 2015) emphasizes that Indonesian language takes a role as an important element to affix Indonesian identity, and it serves as a threat factor as well as a strength aspect to Indonesian national unity and integration. Therefore, according (Mahsun 2015) Indonesian language should be developed and shown as identity and national pride both inside and outside Indonesia. 3. Material and Methods This study is a policy research or a social research which support a policy, and its application follows a commonly used research procedure (Danim 2005) The approach applied is qualitative as it uses multiple techniques in data gathering and many sources of data (Creswell and Poth 2017). Qualitative is a research method which is relevant to a research for social policies. By conducting a critical qualitative research (interpretive), the researcher will get an accurate picture related to attitudes, views, and behaviour of the people who are targeted or affected by the policy (Alwi, Lapoliwa, and Darmowidjojo 2003). The research uses a case study design, focusing on one single phenomena which is studied deeply (Sukmadinata 2007). Based on its object, the research is classified as education policy research. Pal in (Brooks 2009) categories policy analysis or policy research into two types, which are: (1) applied policy analysis, and (2) academic policy analysis. Meanwhile, policy research has four major components: (1) philosophy of social policy, (2) policy alternatives, (3) policy obstacles, and (4) policy results (Muhadjir 2004). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 243 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA During the data gathering, the researcher always: (1) conducted a good relationship and tried to get closer with everyone in the field who are related to research activities; (2) put an effort to disappear suspicions to the coming of the researcher at the research field; (3) found out people’s social network, affiliation, and likes-and-dislikes to particular things, and showed an attitude of impartiality; (4) learnt tasks and functions which the organisation is responsible for, including hierarchical structures, division of power and duties among staffs; and (5) talked and behaved very carefully, calm and relaxed but still polite and friendly. The determination of data gathering location is based on government’s offices, universities, ILFS schools as well as private homes where informants can be interviewed. The places are located in some different cities and provinces in the country. During the field activities, researcher interviewed the informants, collected relevant documents and conducted observations. Analysis activities along the data gathering concentrating on finding categories and further research questions which determined next data collection. Besides, there is also analysis after the formal field study completed. Apart from the data gained from documentation technique, researcher also collected data from the technique of observation, and interviews. Interviews undertaken were particularly deep structure interviews, unstructured interviews, and semi structured interviews as suggested by (Ulfatin 2013). The validity of research data was tested by checking or examining using the four criteria of data validity as stated by Lincoln & Guba, Patton, Sugiyono, & Moleong in (Ulfatin 2013), which are: (1) credibility, (2) transferability, (3) dependability, and confirmability. Triangulation techniques used in the research are: (1) triangulation among the data sources, and (2) triangulation among techniques or methods applied for the data gathering. The use of the two triangulation techniques was meant in order the findings of the research to have a high degree of trust therefore they fulfil the conditions to be analysed further. 4. Results and Discussion 4.1 Roles of ILFS CTP a) The Outward Roles The Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS) teaching policy is a part of education policy which has been intrinsically integrated with culture policy within the Ministry of Education and Culture’s institutional entity as well as its integrated policy ecosystem. Furthermore, referring to the Nine Wishes Nawacita, the 2025 vision, and the integration of education and culture development, the 2019 vision of Ministry of European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 244 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Education and Culture MEC has been stipulated which is The Development of Citizens along with Education and Culture Ecosystem Possessing Great Character ”ased on Communal Cooperation . The words embraced in the above vision are plausibly construed in several meanings, one of which as written in the strategic planning document implies the development of culture promotion and diplomacy (Mark 2010); (Gijs and De Vrijs 2008); (Ang, Isar, and Mar 2015); (Zamorano 2016) . Related to that, the establishment of ILFS Course and Training Providers is projected to serve a number of purposes, one of which is to provide an intensively short-term training course in ILFS tailored to the needs of foreign employees or workers. Such learners are usually characterized by constraints of time they face and their specific learning needs, particularly oriented towards communicative skills and speaking fluency. Secondly, the ILFS CTP also plays an essential role in promoting Indonesia by means of teaching its language and introducing its cultures. Moreover, it stands a good chance to introduce and synergize diverse NGOs in Indonesia which allows other ample opportunities for further cooperation between home-grown and foreign organizations to tremendously grow. This is so, for the ILFS CTP often takes the students on field trips, as a part of the program, to visit tourist destinations, social events and industrial sites, for instance, specifically suited to the learners’ needs and backgrounds. For instance, if the student is a diplomatic staff, the field trip often includes paying a visit to a regional office or a branch of some political parties. On the other hand, for those who have interested themselves in environmental volunteering, the field study will be tailored to consider such a need by visiting some environmental NGOs, or an animal rescue centre. Interestingly, after having such visits, they will maintain their communications frequently or even build a partnership. Thirdly, the CTP mainly can be home to the foreign learners, establishing contacts and networks. This is so, for the learners come from different countries and diverse institutions who not infrequently secure an array of networks possibly developing into business relationships. Such a situation occurs often in the ILFS CTP wherein learners having various professions and organizational backgrounds inevitably come into contact. The two last important matters of CTP existence are basically CTP’s capability in jointing global networks with Indonesian parties and stakeholders. These critical outward roles of CTP cannot be denied and therefore should be taken seriously in relation to building the state’s capacity in soft diplomacy. b) The Inward Roles European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 245 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA In addition to the aforementioned roles, the ILFS CTP potentially plays a salient role in relation to the development of ILFS itself, particularly in curriculum development. Such a notion is inextricably linked with the availability of myriad data providing researchers with ample opportunities to carry out a study with respect to linguistic phenomenon and second language learning issues (particularly for Indonesian as a foreign language). This statement can be further elucidated as follows: 1) with regard to linguistics research, such institutions can serve as the basis for conducting a study on the domain of semantics, structure and phonetics of Indonesian, 2) pertaining to language learning, the institutions allow easy access for the researchers to examine the interplay between the learners’ dominant languages and Indonesian they learn in teaching-learning situation, the findings of which may significantly contribute to the area of research, 3) concerning pedagogical practices, classroom action research activities are widely facilitated, the findings of which can reveal the ideal model for ILFS teaching and learning in relation to methods, learning media, learning materials, classroom management, and solutions to a multitude of teaching problems or challenges, 4) and not only is the ILFS CTP beneficial to the materials development and the like, it is also advantageous to an attempt to develop or try out items designed for Indonesian Language Proficiency Test. Furthermore, the ILFS CTP actually can serve as a strategic partner for professional association, universities, and government to contrive a better model of curriculum for ILFS teaching. This is so, for the principal challenge that CTP have hitherto face is mainly related to the availability of skilful and ready-to-use instructors. It is arguably sound as university graduates in Language and Literature program are not necessarily competent to teach at the ILFS CTP. Such a discrepancy is mainly due to their skill which does not always correspond closely with the needs of practical teaching situations. Accordingly, the CTP shall conduct its own training to make their needs and the instructors’ competence proportionally align. In this regard, that the ILFS CTP can be a strategic partner is worth considering, for they can be of great help in the pursuit of curriculum development as well as teaching and learning quality improvement. Furthermore, such an endeavour can be particularly directed to evaluate ILFS course entailed in the syllabus of Indonesian Department as well. Such a step is expected to serve as a substantial contribution that the ILFS CTP can make with respect to the roles they have, one of which is to develop and standardise ILFS enterprises in Indonesia. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 246 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Elaboration on inward functions of ILFS CTP shows that it generally has potential in: (1) serving as a laboratory and research field, especially for linguistic and language education; (2) assisting research and development in education, such as in ILFS curriculum development, teaching material development, as well as the Indonesian language testing; and (3) partnering and networking with other ILFS stakeholders, such as government and universities. Figure 4: Inward and outward roles of Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers’ Course and Training Providers 4.2 ILFS CTP Management and Positive Effect of Policy In addition to ILFS institutions affiliated with universities (Azizah, Hs, and Lestari 2012), and cooperation agreement based schools, ILFS institutions also manifest in the form of Course and Training Providers (CTP), the nurture and development of which are in the scope of Directorate General of ECCE (Early Childhood and Community Education) and Ministry of Education and Culture. Considering the field observations, most of the ILFS institutions in the form of CTP are located in Yogyakarta and Bali. Some of well-known ILFS CTPs are as follows: (1) Wisma Bahasa, (2) Puri Bahasa, (3) Alam Bahasa, and (4) Cinta Bahasa (Sari, Sutama, and Utama 2016). Furthermore, an attempt to foster management capacity of the ILFS CTPs, as a consequence of national policy pertinent to ILFS teaching within the framework addressed to internationalise Indonesian, is also closely related to the provision of ILFS textbooks. Such a notion deals with teaching materials for ILFS that serve as an integral part of the training program (Aninditya, 2015). It implies that the materials are inseparable from the learning contexts tailored to the training. Moreover, the European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 247 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA development of the teaching materials can be construed as a systemic approach that refers to the training objectives. The system employed in such a setting encompasses several stages, namely, designing, implementing, evaluating and synthesizing learning elements embodied in the previous stages. Furthermore, the components of this system comprise messages, individuals, materials, techniques and learning environment. Thus, the material development is an integral part of the development of the training programs, and the learning system (Pamungkas 2014). Moreover, with regard to the organization of training materials, it comprises three primary aspects spelled out as follows: (1) to ensure that the materials are of good use to the trainees; (2) to ensure that each training material presented is meaningfully interrelated; and (3) to ensure that the given materials are appropriately sequenced and graded (Pamungkas 2014). Furthermore, in order to fulfil the needs of programs intended for ILFS instructors willing to teach overseas, Centre for Strategy Development and Language Diplomacy (CSDLD) has prepared a supporting program aimed to develop teaching materials for ILFS. The teaching materials, which are based on six levels of Indonesian proficiency, were completed by a team of developers from a number of universities managing ILFS program such as UPI, UNJ, UGM and UM. This package has been widely disseminated, the provision of which is not only intended for the teachers sent abroad but also for those having concern for ILFS practices. It also can be downloaded from the Language National “gency’s website. Tracing back the history of ILFS program development by the Language Agency (Badan Bahasa) or formerly by the Language Centre (Pusat Bahasa), this is the first time that ILFS materials are available in sufficient quantities and editions. In the era of Language Centre, an ILFS textbook "Lentera Indonesia" was once produced which hence marked the beginning of the development of ILFS teaching materials in Indonesia. Adjusting the teaching needs, the textbook, at that time, was composed by several Balai Bahasa (House of Language) and Kantor Bahasa (Language Office) in Indonesia. Indeed, to sustain the overseas teaching programs, the CDLSD has perpetually attempted to develop the teaching materials since the beginning of 2015. A number of instructors teaching overseas are always equipped with the teaching materials yielded by the CDLSD both in the form of print textbooks and E-books. Such a situation implies that the abundant array of ILFS teaching materials available has furnished ILFS institutions with practical assistance, including the ILFS CTP. Although each CTP actually has designed a distinctive curriculum that best suits European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 248 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA their needs, the provision of the teaching materials by the CDLSD has enriched their references and provided them with standardised and ready-to-use materials. Such a practice certainly facilitates the development of more specific modules for new ILFS instructors or CTPs. Moreover, the textbooks published by the CDLSD are in accordance with ILFS Output Competency Standard stipulated by the Language National Agency (2014) and Indonesian Language Proficiency Standard issued by a ministerial decree (2016). Figure 5: The production of ILFS teaching books supports teaching at CTPs 4.3 Past and Current Obstacles Faced by ILFS CTPs As expounded in the foregoing presentations, it seems that it only points out the top sides of such a training provided by the ILFS CTPs. However, it is unavoidable that numerous factors hindering or even threatening the existence and sustainability of such CTPs are apparently prevalent. Those barriers obviously are caused by both internal and external factors. However, as the internal factors are not directly linked to policy concerning ILFS programs pursued by some institutions, the present paper thus will not touch such a matter further. There are a number of factors contributing to the practice of providing ISLF courses, particularly dealing with specific learners, that is to say foreign learners. Accordingly, safety issues often play a decisive role. For instance, the bomb attacks and explosions that have rocked some regions undoubtedly had a significant effect on the number of students taking the course. It is not to mention some restrictions by certain countries imposed to their citizens which can become one of considerable constraints. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 249 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Other political and social issues can often become a key factor that renders such course providers totally bankrupt, for they hinge their lives on their consumers, that is the foreign learners. Such a situation certainly is different from one faced by providers at universities that can still keep their torches alive even though the program in which they work for stops operating. In addition to the security factor, the lack of attention and understanding demonstrated by the government towards the existence of such ILFS CTPs also becomes another factor that hinders the growth. Prior to the birth of RIA No.24 (2009), the Language Centre of Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC) had documented some problems arising in relation to ILFS CTPs. The explanation below shall further elucidate this matter. Like formal education, non-formal education is also under the supervision of Department of National Education, particularly entailed in education other than at school or nonformal education. Moreover, like formal education receiving an accreditation with a number of assessment instruments, the CTP verily should have been given such an accreditation to ensure that they have attained the required standard; unfortunately, up until the end of 2007, none of such assessment instruments had been designed for CTPs. In the domain of non-formal education, the position of ILFS CTP was not categorised as a part of the government-recognized nonformal education. Apparently, in the area of nonformal education, training courses and training for work are categorized in a different definition. The training course is a part of out-of-school education whose programs are tailored to meet the needs of job seekers. On the other hand, the training for work is tailored to occupy certain job vacancies (Boardman et al. 2003) (Berg, Wrzesniewski, and Dutton 2010). The role of courses institutions has been actually recognised with respect to their contributions to national education system, particularly the formal education system. Therefore, Department of National Education (currently Ministry of Education and Culture) formerly had attempted to standardise and issue an accreditation for certain types of training courses. Concerning types of courses comprised in nonformal education, the Association of Indonesian Course Providers previously classified them into only 10 major groups encompassing 160 skills. Referring to the functions, the types can be categorised into three areas: (1) test-oriented courses; (2) courses for gaining practical skills in typewriting, beauty class, foreign languages, accounting, tailoring, babysitting and many more; (3) courses for professional development or character and leadership development as taken by secretaries of offices, public accountants and the like. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 250 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Furthermore, when it deals with language courses, they generally comprised foreign languages as English, German, French, Dutch, Japan, Chinese, and so forth. Generally, the target audience for such courses is mainly those who have attained basic education, but they do not proceed with formal education. The audience even can be aimed at university graduates who want to improve their competence on certain foreign languages. On the other hand, it is hard to conceptualise Indonesian courses as clearly as those of foreign languages courses. Such a course is generally designed to prepare test takers to deal with Indonesian subject. Indonesian courses intended for foreign learners seem to be out of range. This is so, for the customers are the foreigners. However, Republic of Indonesia’s “ct is verily formulated for the sake of the children of Indonesia not the foreigners. Due to the lack of accreditation, the ILFS CTPs, particularly in the pre-era of RIA No.24 (2009), were not able to build a formal partnership with formal education institutions like universities abroad. For such a type of courses, the students usually took the course informally as it had not been legally accredited yet. As a result, such a course cannot be regarded as academically or formally recognised training while the customers, on the other hand, not infrequently show a high level of improvement and satisfaction in relation to the learning programs provided by the courses institutions. Accordingly, at that time, the learners, from various universities abroad, taking Southeast Asian studies or particularly Indonesian studies would only cooperate with universities providing ILFS programs, whereas in fact some universities encountered various problems with respect to the program. In brief, it can be said that in the past there were a number of obstacles faced by ILFS CTPs in Indonesia. As previously outlined, the first obstacle dealt with the lack of attention given by the government, particularly Department of National Education, with respect to the quality improvement of ILFS CTPs in Indonesia. The government did not seem to anticipate the specific learners, the foreigners, accommodated by those ILFS CTP. As a result, the accreditation for non-formal education as ILFS CTP had not sufficiently received attention for years. The absence of the accreditation surely reduced the chance for building a partnership or networking between the ILFS CTP and universities abroad. In fact, the existence of regulation and deregulation can optimize all potentials residing in the ILFS CTP. Such a situation can be referred as the second obstacle that the ILFS CTP faced prior to the enactment of language policy aimed to internationalize Indonesian language. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 251 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Thirdly, the obstacle faced by the ILFS CTP in the past dealt with the fact that the government did not have data available in relation to these courses institutions. Therefore, when the foreign learners needed the data, the representative institutions abroad could not provide the information. At that time, the government did not thoroughly realize that ILFS CTP enterprises could serve not only as course and training providers but also strategic frontiers in the pursuit of introducing Indonesia globally. On the other hand, a license issued by the Education Office for the providers often hampered the contract of partnerships between the providers and foreign companies and organizations or even the government it required Certificate of Corporate and Business Registration, a certificate owned by those under the supervision of Ministry of Labour. Besides that, the ministry also tends to generalise about the notion of the ILFS CTPs as though the courses were provided only for those seeking jobs in Indonesia, whereas many of them are actually foreign learners. Furthermore, with respect to the policy issued by Indonesian immigration, the ILFS CTP enterprises were hampered by the social-cultural visas valid for only six months. On the other hand, those under the supervision of universities could be issued an approval for the visas valid for one year. Compared to those at universities, such a restriction significantly decreased the chance of the ILFS CTPs to attract students. In brief, such notions indicate that the government’s policy on such a matter seems to render the situations less conducive to the existence of ILFS CTP in Indonesia. Figure 6: Relationship between CTPs’ problems and ILFS policy 4.4 IFLS Sandardisation Efforts European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 252 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Prior to the enactment of RAI No.24 (2009) and GR No.57 (2014), aspects pertaining to policy and regulation always created a major setback for the development of ILFS CTPs. In addition, the Nonformal Competency Certification Office (NCCO) concerning ILFS did not appear to exist so that ILFS institutions as a part of education other than at school or nonformal education could not be regarded as officially ready to tremendously perform their roles and functions. Responding to such a matter, an attempt to develop Output Competency Standard (OCS) for ILFS CTPs has been carried out by APPBIPA (Affiliation of ILFS Teachers and Professionals), the association of ILFS in Indonesia. APPBIPA is widely known to have initiated a number of programs with the Directorate of Course and Training Nurturance CTN of the MEC’s Directorate General of Early Childhood and Community Education (ECCE), and Centre for Development of Language Strategy and Diplomacy (CDLSD). APPBIPA plays a role as a facilitator as well as a contributor in the attempt to standardise the ILFS teaching profession, the elements of which encompass standards of ILFS leaners competence, standards of ILFS teachers and those of its curriculum and learning materials (Suyitno 2017). APPBIPA also plays a role in the pursuit of standardization reflected the policy of Language Agency of Ministry of Education and Culture effectively bridging the gap when cross-sector coordination is inevitably crucial. a) The Development of ILFS Output Competency Standard (OCS) The absence of a standardized curriculum for ILSF which can be employed as a nationally recognized reference has induced the Language Agency to make curriculum development. Escorting the end of 2014, located at Inna Garuda Yogyakarta Hotel, it was recorded that the Language Agency had initiated a formal attempt to conduct ILFS curriculum development. Inviting many experts on ILFS teaching, the Language Agency eventually succeeded in establishing the Indonesian language proficiency standards designed for ILFS, adopting CEFR (Common European Framework of Reference for Languages), an international standard referred to measure overall language proficiency and widely employed. The CEFR was proportionally adapted and adjusted to the characteristics of Indonesian language and the needs of foreign learners. The outcome of such an attempt was afterwards referred as a framework for the Indonesian Language Proficiency Standards (ILPS) and ILFS materials development. However, unlike ILFS materials which consistently refer to six proficiency levels (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1 and C2), the ILPS proceeds with seven language proficiency levels. (Proficient, Advanced High, Advanced, Upper Intermediate, Intermediate, Elementary European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 253 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA and Beginner). These seven proficiency levels stipulated by the ILPS have been officially issued by the government in accordance with MEC’s decree No. regarding Indonesian Language Proficiency Standards. During the process of developing the Output Competency Standard (OCS) concerning ILFS CTP attempted by the Directorate of CTN of the MEC’s Directorate General of ECCE, the OCS developed both in Yogyakarta (2014) and the ILPS (2016) was employed as the main reference. Involving the CDLSD of the MEC’s Language “gency, and “PP”IP“, the Directorate of CTN has accomplished the stage of developing the OCS for ILFS CTPs in Indonesia. The draft, along with the OCS of other course and training providers, is now being further processed to be approved by the minister as a part of MEC’s decree. The mentioned decree will make amendments to the MEC’s decree No. regarding Output Competency Standard of Course and Training Providers. b) The Establishment of ILFS Nonformal Competency Certification Office (NCCO) and Professions Certification Office (PCO) RIA No.20 (2003) concerning National Education System Verse 61 gives a mandate that certificates of competence provided by institutions and training providers for learners and citizens are in recognition of their competence to perform certain work, as evidenced by their pass mark on the competency test administered by accredited educational units or certification offices. It closely corresponds with GR No.19 (2005) and MEC’s decree No. that substantiates such a notion concerning the certificates of competence which can only be issued by accredited educational units or independent certification offices, all of which should be established by governmentrecognized professional organizations, as a proof of the bearers’ competence indicating that they have passed the competency test. The chief objective of the NCCO’s establishment is to facilitate the administration of the competency test provided for learners at CTPs and non-formal educational units. Indeed, the access to such a test is also provided for any self-study individuals who attain the required competence standards. The NCCO manifests in an independent and legal institution established by organizations or profession offices legally recognized by the government. The NCCO is independently administered and responsible to the government (Directorate General of ECCE and MCE) as well as the PCO and general populace (the test takers). APPBIPA, in intensive coordination with the Directorate of CTN, is now preparing the establishment of ILFS NCCO which has been approved to stand in Yogyakarta. This is so, for the NCCO stipulated by MEC’s Directorate General of ECCE should be located in Jakarta nearby areas. However, as suggested by APPBIPA that European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 254 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA most of ILFS NCCO located in Yogyakarta, the Directorate of CTN eventually acceded the proposed idea. Currently, the process of ILFS NCCO has come to a stage of seeking legal recognition. APPBIPA itself has elected temporary members of the NCCO apparatus including the would-be chief. Accordingly, the pursuit of ILFS NCCO’s establishment is officially waiting for the approval of the MEC’s Directorate General. In addition to the establishment of such NCCO, APPBIPA is also working on the establishment of ILFS Professional Certification Office (PCO) having a main role to test and certify the teachers. The PCO which is under the supervision of National Body for Certification of Professions (NBCP) is planned to have its base in Jakarta or nearby areas. APPBIPA averred that such a plan will be executed after the establishment of ILFS NCCO is fully formed. Compared to the establishment of NCCO, such considerable uncertainty in relation to the establishment of PCO likely appears to be due to more demanding administrative requirements imposed to it. Moreover, it is worth considering that the Directorate of CTN actually has a policy synchronizing agenda with NBCP regarding the PCO. The Directorate of CTN declares that the process of establishing both NCCO and PCO can be synergistically interrelated so that each of them will be mutually supportive. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 255 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Figure 7: Education policy dynamics in Indonesia: mutual contribution between policy on nonformal education and policy on internationalisation of state language 5. Recommendations Upon this present study, several theoretical and practical recommendations directed for some related parties are as elaborated below: In Indonesian context, strategic planning for operationalising education policies is under the authority of two different ministries, which are (1) the Ministry of Education and Culture (MEC), and (2) the Ministry of Research, Technology, and Higher Education (MRTHE). In this study, Indonesian language for foreign speakers (ILFS) teaching policy is limited to the ILFS teaching policy which is formulated and implemented under the authority of the MEC. Therefore, the distinctive component of derivative policy formulation then arises. Education policy, in this case, does not appear as an educational policy solely. The ILFS teaching policy since its establishment has been a form of integration between education policy with government policy in the field of culture. The conceptualised education policy is inseparable from culture policy. Both policies are formed and evolved within a common policy system, in the same one ministerial office which designs policies in education and culture by integration. Concerning the fact, therefore, it is highly recommended for researchers in education policy discipline for not dubious in examining policy products which are naturally constructed within particular context such as policy integration presented in this study. Theoretically, whenever discussing the issue of formulation and formation of a public policy or educational policy, only the major policy which is usually taken into account. A main or core policy is typically initiated by a general policy followed by its operational policies which are derived from the general policy. Herein and so on until the core policy can be actuated into programs and activities, or commonly known as policy implementation. However, this research indicates that different attention from policy experts is required in the future. The experts need to pay an extended attention to the dynamics arising from interaction between the main policy and various affecting policies. A supporting policy, for instance, deliberately or not, has become a conducive European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 256 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA environment for the main policy to continue its existence. Moreover, the policy will, in turn, might also be a supporter of other policies including the ones which support it. In the case of this research, the well-known Indonesian language policy is able to create the ILFS education policy. The teaching policy also appears to be mutually supportive and synergic in providing a conducive environment to the policy in other departmental policy domain which is the nonformal education particularly related to the policy of course and training system. Nonformal education policymakers therefore should keep a close eye on any possible brand new policies which come from outside the nonformal education sphere itself. As part of the entire educational and cultural system, the nonformal education policy must first synergize with other education policy’s substances. Thereafter, a benevolent cross sectoral coordination should also be undertaken in order the designed and implemented policies can achieve their goals without causing contradictions and dysfunctions. The implementation process or policy implementation is also suggested to involve a broader educational policy network in order to ease main policy actors and government's assignments. Another thing is that empowering a policy network will enable problem solving quickly and appropriately. That will boil down to two important results: (1) successful policy implementation, and (2) satisfaction of policy stakeholders. 6. Conclusion In regard to this findings discovered in this present study, five foremost conclusion are generated as follows: 1. Internationalisation policy of the Indonesian language through the Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS) teaching is an education policy which its implementation is designed in an integrated manner with the culture policy to achieve the strategic goals of the development of national education and culture. 2. Principal policy formulation and implementation of Indonesian language internationalization in the form of derivative policies along with its programs and activities to be carrying for the nonformal education policies designation, and conversely, the policy of institutional strengthening and training courses also contribute to support the implementation of Indonesian language internationalization policy through ILFS teaching. 3. The existence of ILFS Course and Training Providers (CTP) takes outward role in terms of: (a) providing language training facilities and curriculum suitable for European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 257 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA diverse needs of foreign workers, (b) promoting Indonesian language and culture through learning activities both within and outside the classroom, (c) serving as a connection between local and international organizations to enable cooperation and networking in the future, and (d) becoming an alternative party for individuals and business institutions seeking to seek opportunities and partners in Indonesia, while the inwards roles of ILFS CTPs are (a) becoming an Indonesian linguistics laboratory, (b) serving as the centre of educational and classroom action research for the teaching of ILFS, and (c) taking a part in the development of Indonesian language testing and the curriculum and instructional materials of ILFS. 4. Throughout its development history, ILFS CTPs encountered various institutional and management problems in view of: (a) unfamiliar upon its formalization and nomenclature of course and training both within the Ministry of Education and Culture, and the Ministry of Labour (Manpower), and (b) insufficient CTP institutional standardisation by the Directorate of Course and Training Nurturance NTC ’s accreditation and performance assessments. Fortunately, the aforementioned obstacles were gradually resolved in line with the creation of policies synergising with one another. 5. The ongoing structuring efforts on strengthening the capacity of the ILFS course and training management system are conducted both sectorally and crosssectorally by the Centre for Development of Language Strategy and Diplomacy (CDLSD), the Directorate of NTC, and supported by APPBIPA (ILFS professional association) as policy networks and stakeholders, by: (a) preparing the ILFS Output Competency Standards (OCS), and (b) establishing ILFS Nonformal Competency Certification Office (NCCO), and Professional Certification Office (PCO), and supplemented with (a) the provision of ILFS cutting-edge textbooks, and (b) the readiness of UKBI (Indonesian Language Proficiency Test) . These findings suggest a synergistic interaction between policies and its processes which mutually supportive one another, between the policy of internationalisation of Indonesian language through the teaching of ILFS on one hand with the nonformal education policy on the CTP management on the other hand. Acknowledgements We especially wish to thank informants of the research who represent the Directorate of Courses and Trainings Guidance of the Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture, European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 258 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA the Affiliation of Teachers and Activists of Indonesian Language for Foreign Speakers (ILFS), and some ILFS schools in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. We would like to extend sincere appreciation to anyone who has contributed to enrich the data especially about the problems faced by ILFS and current progress due to recently issued national policy. Thanks also to the Director of Graduate Program of Universitas Negeri Malang and Program Coordinator of Educational Management who has facilitated the research. Our further appreciation is given to the Department of Nonformal Education of Universitas Negeri Padang which has permitted one of the lecturers to be an active collaborator in research as well as in writing of the journal article. Nonformal education policy in Indonesia is indeed an area in which not many researchers have extensively entered thus collaboration between educational management and nonformal education department should be greatly appreciated. About the Authors Fatah Nasikh Aryawan has a master degree in educational policy and currently been working on a dissertation toward his doctoral degree at Universitas Negeri Malang (Indonesia). He works as a government teacher, and was trained globally. His first international training was studying for a semester at graduate school of Northern Kentucky University USA while at the same time undertaking an internship. The second overseas study experience was in Victoria Australia where he earned an Advanced Diploma in Management from Holmesglen Institute (Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Department of Educational Management, Postgraduate Program, Universitas Negeri Malang, email: fatah.nasikh@gmail.com). Ahmad Sonhadji is a professor in industrial management of Universitas Negeri Malang (Indonesia). He has been teaching and supervising thesis on postgraduate level both in the area of educational management and vocational education. He has a master degree and a Ph.D. in Educational Administration and Policy from Ohio State University USA. He has written many books, research reports, and published journal articles mainly on educational policies, management, and vocational education and training (Ahmad Sonhadji, Department of Vocational Education, Postgraduate Program, Universitas Negeri Malang, email: asonhadjikh@yahoo.com). Kusmintardjo is an associate professor in educational administration of Universitas Negeri Malang (Indonesia). His expertise is management of higher education. He has been working as a professional lecturer and researcher in the faculty of education and postgraduate program. He also had a long career as a university administrator doing several senior roles as assistant dean, dean, and assistant rector. He is now doing thesis European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 259 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA supervisory for mostly master and doctoral students (Kusmintardjo, Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Education, Universitas Negeri Malang, email: kustar_um@yahoo.co.id). Nurul Ulfatin is a professor in educational management of Universitas Negeri Malang (Indonesia). She teaches and supervises students both in undergraduate and postgraduate study programs. She has done almost 40 research activities which used mainly qualitative method. She has been teaching research methodology for more than 15 years, and part-timely working for the education ministries as consultant and reviewer for some different projects (Nurul Ulfatin, Department of Educational Administration, Faculty of Education, Universitas Negeri Malang, email: nurul.ulfatin.fip@um.ac.id). Alim Harun Pamungkas has a bachelor and master degree from Universitas Negeri Malang (Indonesia) majoring in nonformal education. He has been an assistant researcher for years before he got a full time job as a university lecturer at Universitas Negeri Padang. His main research interests are mainly in literacy, community empowerment and nonformal education policy. He has authored several books on the topic of nonformal education (Alim Harun Pamungkas, Department of Nonformal Education, Faculty of Education, Universitas Negeri Padang, email: pamungkasd527@gmail.com). References 1. Alwi, Hasan, Hans Lapoliwa, and Soenjono Darmowidjojo. 2003. Tata Bahasa Baku Bahasa Indonesia. 3rd ed. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka. 2. Ang, Ien, Yudhishthir Raj Isar, and Phillip Mar. . Cultural Diplomacy ”eyond the National Interest? International Journal of Cultural Policy 21(4): 365– 81. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10286632.2015.1042474. 3. Armstrong, Michael. 2009. Armstrong’s Handbook of Performance Management: An Evidence-Based Guide to Delivering High Performance. 4th ed. London & Philadelphia: Kogan Page Publishers. 4. “zizah, Rifca Farih, Widodo Hs, and Ida Lestari. . Pembelajaran ”ahasa Indonesia Bagi Penutur Asing (BIPA) Program CLS (Critical Language Scholarship Di Fakultas Sastra Universitas Negeri Malang Tahun . jurnal- 1–13. http://jurnal- European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 260 online.um.ac.id: Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA online.um.ac.id/data/artikel/artikelC8CE6EFA60B873A1B6DB1DC20F6CFE40.pd f. 5. Badan Pembinaan Hukum Nasional (BPHN). 2008. Tiga Dekade Prolegnas Dan Peran BPHN. Jakarta: Pusat Dokumentasi dan Informasi Hukum Nasional BPHN Depkum & HAM RI. 6. ”erg, Justin M, “my Wrzesniewski, and Jane E Dutton. . Perceiving and Responding to Challenges in Job Crafting at Different Ranks: When Proactivity Requires “daptivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior 31: 158–86. 7. ”oardman, J E D et al. . Work and eEmployment for People with Psychiatric Disabilities. British Journal of Psychiatry 182: 467–68. 8. ”rooks, Stephen. Toronto Methuen, . Public Policy “nalysis “n Introduction Leslie “. Pal , Pp. Xiii, . Canadian Journal of Political Science 21: 144. 9. Brynard, Petrus A. 2005. Policy Implementation: Lessons for Service Delivery. Zambia. 10. Creswell, John W, and Cheryl N Poth. 2017. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. 4th ed. California: SAGE Publications, Inc. 11. Crosby, Philip B. 1996. The Absolutes of Leadership. San Diego: Pfeiffer & Company. 12. CSTD. 2010. Competencies for Training and Development Professionals. Canada. 13. Danim, Sudarwan. 2005. Pengantar Studi Penelitian Kebijakan. 3rd ed. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. 14. Dwidjowijoto, R N. 2006. Kebijakan Publik Untuk Negara-Negara Berkembang: Model Perumusan, Implementasi, Dan Evaluasi. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama. 15. Dye, Thomas R. 2002. Understanding Public Policy. 10th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Pearson Education, Inc. 16. Gijs, and De Vrijs. 2008. New Paradigms, New Models- Culture in the EU External Relations. Ljubljana: ZRC SAZU, ZRC Publishing. 17. Goggin, Malcolm L, “nn O’M ”owman, James P Lester, and Laurence J O’Toole Jr. 1990. Implementation Theory and Practice: Toward a Third Generation. Glenview: Scott, Forestman/ Little Brown Higher Education. 18. Gunawan, Ary H. 1995. Kebijakan-Kebijakan Pendidikan. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta. 19. Hasbullah, H. M. 2015. Kebijakan Pendidikan: Dalam Perspektif Teori, Aplikasi, Dan Kondisi Objektif Pendidikan Di Indonesia. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers. 20. Imron, Ali. 1996. Belajar Dan Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Pustaka Jaya. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 261 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA 21. Indiahono, Dwiyanto. 2009. Kebijakan Publik Berbasis Dynamic Policy Analisys. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Gava Media. 22. Mahsun. 2015. Indonesia Dalam Perspektif Politik Kebahasaan. Jakarta: PT RajaGrafindo Persada. 23. Mark, S. L. 2010. Rethinking Cultural Diplomacy The Cultural Diplomacy of New Zealand, the Canadian Federation and Quebec. Political Science 62(1): 62– 83. 24. Van Meter, D S, and C E Van Horn. . The Policy Implementation Process “ Conceptual Framework. Administration & Society 6(4): 445–88. 25. Mosadeghrad, “li Mohammad. Quality. . Factors Influencing Healthcare Service International Journal of Health Policy and Management 3(2): 77–89. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4122083/. 26. Muhadjir, Noeng. 2004. Metodologi Penelitian Kebijakan Dan Evaluation Research: Integrasi Penelitian Kebijakan Dan Perencanaan. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo persada. 27. Nawawi, Hadari, and Mimi Martini. 1994. Penelitian Terapan. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press. 28. Nugroho, Riant. 2009. Public Policy: Teori Kebijakan-Analisis Kebijakan-Proses Kebijakan, Perumusan, Implementasi, Evaluasi, Revisi, Risk Management Dalam Kebijakan Publik, Kebijakan Sebagai The Fifth Estate, Metode Penelitian Kebijakan. Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo. 29. Paauw, Scott. . One Land, One Nation, One Language “n “nalysis of Indonesia’s National Language Policy. University of Rochester Working Papers in the Language Sciences 5(1): 2–16. 30. Pamungkas, “lim Harun. (Tinjauan Teori . Pengelolaan Pelatihan Dalam Organisasi Pembelajaran Orang Dewasa . http://www.sumbarprov.go.id/images/1450027790-2. alim harun.pdf. 31. Parsons, Wayne. 2005. Public Policy: Pengantar Teori Dan Praktik Analisis Kebijakan. ed. Tri Wibowo Budi Santoso. Jakarta: Prenada Media. 32. Purwanto, Erwan Agus, and D.R. Sulistyastuti. 2015. Implementasi Kebijakan Publik Konsep Dan Aplikasinya Di Indonesia. 2nd ed. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Gava Media. 33. “ninditya S.N. . Pengembangan Program Profesionalisme Dosen Pengajar Bahasa Indonesia Untuk Penutur Asing ”IP“ Di “SE“N. Al Bidayah 1: 89–101. http://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/25203/. 34. Salusu, J. 2006. Pengambilan Keputusan Stratejik Untuk Organisasi Publik Dan Organisasi Nonprofit. 9th ed. Jakarta: Grasindo. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 262 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA 35. Sari, Ni Pt Apita Widya, I Md Sutama, and I Dw Gd Budi Utama. 2016. Pembelajaran ”ahasa Indonesia ”agi Penutur “sing ”IP“ Di Sekolah Cinta ”ahasa, Ubud, ”ali. e-Journal Prodi Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, Undiksha 5(3). https://ejournal.undiksha.ac.id/index.php/JJPBS/article/download/8635/5628. 36. Setyodarmodjo, Soenarko. 2005. Public Policy: Pengertian Pokok Untuk Memahami Dan Analisa Kebijaksanaan Pemerintah. 4th ed. Surabaya: Airlangga University Press. 37. Situmorang, Johnny W. . The Indonesia Development Strategy ”ased on Medium Long-Term Development Plan (RPJMN) 2015-2019 and Implications for Cooperatives and MSMES Development. INFOKOP 26(1). http://csmes.smecda.com/index.php/infokop/article/view?path=. 38. Sonhadji, Ahmad. 2015. Membangun Peradaban Bangsa Dalam Perspektif Multikultural. Malang: UM Press. 39. Stiglitz, Joseph E. 2003. Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. 40. Subyantoro. . Orientasi Pembelajaran ”ahasa Dan Sastra Masa Kini Pembelajanan ”ahasa Indonesia. Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Bahasa Indonesia 2015: 17–30. 41. Sukmadinata, Nana Syaodih. 2007. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosda Karya. 42. Suyitno, Imam. . Reconstruction of ”asic Knowledge on Learning ”ipa. IJRDO-Journal of Educational Research (2): 217–30. 43. Tarwotjo. 2002. Antropologi Pendidikan Indonesia Sebagai Ilmu Sosial Terapan. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Balai Pustaka. 44. Ulfatin, Nurul. 2013. Metode Penelitian Kualitatif Di Bidang Pendidikan: Teori Dan Aplikasinya. Malang: Bayumedia Publishing. 45. Widodo, Joko. 2013. Analisis Kebijakan Publik: Konsep dan Aplikasi Analisis Proses Kebijakan Publik. 9th ed. Malang: Bayumedia Publishing. 46. Zamorano, M M. . Reframing Cultural Diplomacy The Instrumentalization of Culture Under the Soft Power Theory. Culture Unbound 8(2): 165–86. European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 263 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Creative Commons licensing terms European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 264 Fatah Nasikh Aryawan, Ahmad Sonhadji, Kusmintardjo, Nurul Ulfatin, Alim Harun Pamungkas INTERPOLICY DYNAMICS BETWEEN NONFORMAL EDUCATION POLICY AND LANGUAGE POLICY OF INTERNATIONALISATION THROUGH ILFS TEACHING IN INDONESIA Author(s) will retain the copyright of their published articles agreeing that a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0) terms will be applied to their work. Under the terms of this license, no permission is required from the author(s) or publisher for members of the community to copy, distribute, transmit or adapt the article content, providing a proper, prominent and unambiguous attribution to the authors in a manner that makes clear that the materials are being reused under permission of a Creative Commons License. Views, opinions and conclusions expressed in this research article are views, opinions and conclusions of the author(s). Open Access Publishing Group and European Journal of Education Studies shall not be responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability caused in relation to/arising out of conflicts of interest, copyright violations and inappropriate or inaccurate use of any kind content related or integrated into the research work. All the published works are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 3 │ Issue 9 │ 2017 265