History Teacher Discourse in Teaching

The New Order Era in Indonesia

Abstract

The history of the New Order era is one of the most controversial topics in Indonesian history education. The viral tagline “Enak Zamanku to” (Better in My Era), circulated with images of President Soeharto, has challenged history teachers to respond to students’ critical questions while navigating competing textbook narratives about the period. This study examines how history teachers discursively position themselves when teaching the New Order era. Using a socio-cognitive critical discourse analysis of interviews and classroom observations involving 20 history teachers in five Indonesian cities, the study identifies two overlapping pedagogical-discursive tendencies rather than fixed teacher types. The first is an official-narrative-oriented tendency, in which teachers rely on textbooks, classroom stability, and state-sanctioned accounts to manage controversy. The second is a multiperspectival-evidence-oriented tendency, in which teachers introduce alternative sources and competing interpretations while remaining cautious about evidentiary claims and classroom polarisation. The analysis situates these tendencies within New Order state-religion governance, post-1965 politics of memory, and developmentalist projects of schooling. The study concludes that teaching controversial history requires more than the inclusion of multiple narratives; it also requires pedagogical support for source-based reasoning, ethical discussion of violence and victimhood, and reflective awareness of how state narratives continue to shape classroom discourse.