Today, redrafting again in English

Today, I found a new structure: Combining the implication of Indonesian context and the implication.
Here is my first uncomplete draft.

6.3 The Implications of the Research for Indonesian Context

6.3.1 Resources
Indonesian Context:
It is undeniable that educational resources in most areas in Indonesia are very limited. As an Indonesian citizen who was experiencing schooling for about 17 years and involving in educational sector, and over the last three years, conducting my study in Queensland Australia, I have seen the extremely different pictures between the facilities for education in Indonesia and Australia. For example, in Queensland, books are available and accessible any where, including at schools, in every suburb library, even at home. Computers are also available in many classes with fast Internet connection. In contrast, in Indonesia, it is often difficult to find various books at school. It might be a fortune if students can borrow a textbook to bring home. The computers and Internet access are limited. This is certainly an exception for some rich schools. Therefore, I argue that, in general, Australian schools/classes would be regarded by Indonesian teachers as rich-technology learning environment. It could be appropriate to put the metaphor from many Indonesian students at The University of Queensland that living in Australia is just of a part of their dreams and Indonesia is a their real life.
Despite this unsatisfied environment, Indonesian Education Government has shown their efforts in providing the resources. The information provided through JARDIKNAS tells us that the Government has supported many infrastructures in ICT. As the results, most educational department in national and local level are connected to the Internet. Most districts (“Daerah Propinsi and Kapupaten”) have ICT centre and ICT consultant and many schools are already connected to the Internet. Even though this is still a small percentage in Indonesia, this has resulted in an increase number of teachers accessing the Internet.
I realised that even though Indonesian Government paid a lot of attention in providing the resources, Indonesian schools might be impossible to have a similar facilities (the number and the quality) with schooling in Australia. In this digital divide phenomenon, important questions to raise are: Is there still anything to learn from Australia in terms of the resources? What can we learn from the case of Australia for Indonesian context in this matter?

Links to the research finding and previous studies
In order to answer these questions, let’s turn back into my research finding and some relevant research in other developed countries.
First, this research finding suggests that the resource is not the key of a rich-technology mathematical learning. The way of teacher's thinking about the Internet would determine the way they use the Internet. The Internet could either enrich the learning or restrict the learning. The resources are not the key in achieving the successful teaching. The computers and Internet are only tools. How to use the tools for learning is determined by the teachers. Many other teachers in Australia might say that they cannot do the successful teaching and learning in the situation of Ann. They could no possibly use the Internet with only two computers connected to the Internet in a very crowded class. But Ann, because of her beliefs about the way the teaching should work, her practical knowledge about how to manage the classroom and to facilitate the student learning, she does not see her environment as disadvantages. In contrast, many Indonesian teachers might think that Jack’s classroom environment is ideal and hoping the similar classroom. Indonesian teachers might complain that they could not do any innovation since the limited resources. They might think that having computers with Internet connection in the classroom would make differences in their teaching. However, through this research, I could see a teacher in Australia who has very well resources more than average Australian standards, Internet was a part of his daily life, but this favourable situation was not enough to persuade Jack to use the Internet in mathematical rich way. So what?
The implications:
The implication of this research for Indonesian Government is that: no matter how much money will be spent to buy computers and fund the Internet connections, that is its own is not enough. Just giving teachers computers, it is not enough to make any different in teaching and learning. But it also needs a lot of investment in teachers to allow them to learn how to turn the computers into a pedagogical tool into learning, and here is the important teacher professional development.
Another thing is Indonesian education Government should learn from the previous cases where the Government in many developed countries (e.g. Canada, USA) have invested lots of money for technology and the criticism are raised such as the limited use of technology (including computers and Internet) by teachers for rich teaching. (see for example the references …………). Another problems has emerged, the high cost for the maintenance of the technology in particular when the subsidy from the Government was decreased [ref].
In the situation of Indonesia where they do not have enough money to provide technology sufficiently to every school, a part of this solution is not to take more and more money, but to think about how we can help teachers, make good use of the resources that they have.

6.3.2 Indonesian Teacher Professional Development
Indonesian Context:
Despite the development of digital divide nationally and internationally, teacher professional development in Indonesia is essential. This is becoming more important since the increase of the external pressures for teachers to using the technology into their teaching. The influential voices in Indonesia have claimed the low quality of Indonesian teachers. It has been replicated many times in the media that among 2.7 millions teachers in Indonesia, more than 70% are claimed do not meet the qualification standard. This led many discussions from educators and teachers through several mailing lists and in the media about influential factors of this low quality, including teacher educational background, teacher recruitment systems, teacher institutions, limited teacher training (quantitatively and qualitatively), teacher low salary, limited learning resources. From teachers’ point of view that I noted from a discussion in a national conference of mathematics teachers in Bandung August 2007, factors that have influence the quality of their teaching were lack of resources/facilities, the national exam that hinder them from doing innovations, the nature of curriculum (overloaded and limited time), low students motivation, and lack of parents’ supports.
The important of teacher professional development is becoming a relevant implication since in the last two years, Indonesian Government has released some debatable policies that create many problems impacting on teacher’s life and career. The Indonesian Government seemed put a pressure for the teachers to be able to achieve the level “professional” with uncertainty measurement of what professional means [ref]. Teachers are very keen to achieve the standard of “professional” since this achievement will become a passport to get a double salary [ref]
In 2006, the education Government defined that to be account as a professional, teachers must meet 4 requirements: (1) having Diploma 4 or Bachelor degree, (2) attending 30 hours certifications programs, (3) passing from a written test of teacher competency, and (4) having a certificate as a professional teacher [ref]. Because of the strong criticism from many societies, including teachers and educators as well as the limited funding to support this program, the Government changed this policy into the uses of teacher’s portfolio to justify the quality of the teacher. In other words, portfolio has become the professional standard for teachers. Teachers are expected to show their professionalism through the portfolio contained, such as: the certificate of the attendance in seminars, workshops, and conferences and so on; the academic background; teaching background in terms of the time of teaching; the participation in informal education programs, samples of lesson plan, and so on (ref).
Because of limited funding, only 200,000 of the total 2.7 million teachers could be assigned to submit their portfolios in 2007. This decision has created a number of problems such as social problems (jealousy, feeling that the selection of teachers to submit portfolio was not fair); lack of time to submit portfolio (sometimes as little as a week); lack of teachers’ understanding about the requirements or organizations of the portfolio; debatable issues raised in the media about who should be able to assess the portfolio; a very short time frames for the assessors to assess many portfolios; the cases of teachers’ dishonesty collecting ‘artificial documents [ref]. The results of this portfolio assessment are that many teachers failed to pass this portfolio assessment [ref]. These teachers are required to attend the certification program and this certification program was not clearly explained [ref]. These sequences of complex problems seemed giving us adequate evidence to argue that the Indonesian Government do not have a clear concept about teacher professional development, and also have no well preparation in implementing their policies.
Reated to ICT professional development, Indonesian Education Government has shown their attempts to support teachers by not only providing the infrastructure but also running many ICT professional development. Through JARDIKNAS websites, they inform us the content of ICT PD for teachers, including the introductions to hardware & software, Ms word, Excell, power point, email, browsing, and blooging. They have provided some online community for all the participants and helped then to subscribe. {Add, the content of discussion I noted so far}.

Links to the research finding and previous studies
- Connect to the previous research. Similar pattern!
- Connect to Ann’s case study [types of PD she attended, she could directly see the potential of the Internet at the first time and having ongoing PD that related to the content and using the Internet for ongoing PD]
- Connect to Jack’s case study [having basic skills but not enough to turn the Internet into rich mathematical learning]
The implications:
So What?
- The type of ICT PD, not only basic skills but the integration into subject matter. Not focusing in the technology but how the available technology used effectively into pedagogical practices.
- Support from the Government is required, seeing this aspect as a priority in running the ICT PD.
- For researchers: contextualise the existing research, adopting, considering the three zones presented in 6.1.
- For teachers, needing reflection into their ongoing learning. Make use the available technology for ongoing PD in certain ways, as will presented in the following sections.

6.3.3 Internet for communication and collaboration
Indonesian Context:
Links to the research finding and previous studies
The implications:

6.3.4 Online resources
Indonesian Context:
Links to the research finding and previous studies
The implications: