Dogmatic religious instruction undesirable<\/p>\n
National Education Day which falls on May 2 is marked this
\nyear by the continuing acrimonious debate on the national
\neducation bill, especially the contentious article that requires
\nthat students receive religious instruction according to their
\nfaith from teachers who are of the same religion. Mohamad Surya,
\na former chairman of the Indonesian Teachers Association (PGRI),
\nshared his opinions about national education with The Jakarta
\nPost's Soeryo Winoto.<\/p>\n
Question: What's the real meaning of National Education Day?<\/p>\n
Answer: National Education Day dates back to the struggle
\nagainst the Dutch colonial regime through education. May 2 was
\nthe birthday of Ki Hajar Dewantara, one of the noted scholars who
\nwere against the Dutch ...<\/p>\n
We must give priority to education. We have been left behind
\nby other nations in this regard.<\/p>\n
We must observe National Education Day ... by finding out our
\nown weaknesses, strengths and constraints, and planning
\nimprovements ... In this way we will be able to achieve the
\nfounding fathers' goal of making the nation better educated in
\nall fields, including political and social affairs.<\/p>\n
Q: How do you see the development of our national education
\nsystem, especially at the elementary level?<\/p>\n
A: It is true that the development of our education is still
\nunsatisfactory. Elementary education has never been given
\npriority by the government. Compulsory (elementary) education is
\nnot being properly implemented. The government's political will
\ndoes not extend to providing school-age children with adequate
\naccess to elementary education, which is the foundation for
\nfurther formal education.<\/p>\n
The result is that our children's elementary education is
\ndeficient. Now, the children of well-off families or children
\nliving in big cities have better access to elementary education
\nthan the of children of poor families living in remote areas.
\nEquality (of access to elementary education) is a must.<\/p>\n
Q: What should the purpose of education be?<\/p>\n
A: Education is needed for the development of human resources. A
\nnation can improve its life through education. However, education
\nhas yet to be spread equally ... The question is to what extent
\ndecision makers strive to make elementary education a top
\npriority. Teachers are part of the education system. Have
\nteachers been taken care of properly by the government?<\/p>\n
Q: Is our current education system on the right track or on the
\nbrink of collapse?<\/p>\n
A: Failure is something subjective. I see efforts being made to
\nimprove the system and endeavors to improve the management of
\neducation. But, that's all. It's all at the discourse stage
\nwithout any real or concrete steps being taken. The improvement
\nof the national education system must begin with the teachers,
\nthe classrooms, libraries and then management. How can we talk
\nabout good education if we have no qualified, properly paid
\nteachers, and no clean and suitable classrooms? Teachers and
\nclassrooms are at the front line of the education system.<\/p>\n
Q: How do you see the quality of our teachers?<\/p>\n
A: People may say that our teachers are inferior. Yet, we have
\nfailed to establish a proper training system for teachers. Being
\na teacher is no longer something to be proud of.<\/p>\n
Financially the job is not attractive. Thus, many teachers
\nspend most of their time trying to get enough money to feed their
\nfamilies.<\/p>\n
We need a different managerial system for teachers to make the
\nprofession culturally, economically and socially more
\ninteresting.<\/p>\n
Q: What are your views on the national education bill, the
\ndeliberation of which should have started on May 2?<\/p>\n
A: There must be a balance between the political and educational
\ncontent of the bill. There must be compromise in this regard.<\/p>\n
The definition of the purpose of education -- according to the
\nbill -- is too complicated and theoretical.<\/p>\n
The points on religious instruction are also contentious.
\nReligious instruction for students (at all levels) must not stray
\nfrom the basic needs of education.<\/p>\n
The House of Representatives should not be in a hurry to pass
\nthe bill into law. A bill is a political product. That's why it
\nmust be carefully examined before it is implemented. The
\npedagogical messages in the bill must be able to be implemented
\neasily once the bill is passed into law.<\/p>\n
Q: To what extent do elementary school students need religious
\ninstruction? What about the teaching of morals and character-
\nbuilding?<\/p>\n
A: Religious instruction, morals and character-building should be
\nunited in one package. Dogmatic (religious) instruction is not
\ndesirable. Learning religious verses by heart is not necessary.
\nThe students need to receive religious instruction that is
\nrelated to the practical things in their lives. Religion must be
\nimparted as a comprehensive system.<\/p>\n
The role of parents is a must in encouraging the awareness of
\nstudents of religion and its application in their daily lives.<\/p>\n
Q: What do elementary school students really need, religious
\neducation or religious instruction?<\/p>\n
A: Religious education has a broader horizon. In acquiring
\nreligious education, children need models at home, while
\nreligious instruction is simpler; it is currently concerned only
\nwith rituals.<\/p>\n
It all depends on the teacher. Religious instruction should be
\ndeeper and it should strongly relate to the practical things in
\nlife. Qualified teachers are needed. Therefore parents and
\nteachers must compliment each other. Parents must function as
\nteachers at home and teachers must function as parents at school.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/dogmatic-religious-instruction-undesirable-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}