Meanings of educational professionalism<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): When a young journalist asked my opinion about
\nthe criteria for a \"professional minister of education\", I could
\nnot immediately reply. I was wavering between giving a simple
\nanswer that could have been misleading, and a good answer
\ncontaining thought structures that I felt difficult to convey on
\nthe phone. I decided to give a concise, but accurate answer.<\/p>\n
I said the appointment of Cabinet ministers was a political
\ndecision. Therefore, when our political decisionmakers said the
\nnext Cabinet would be a \"Cabinet of professionals\", we will have
\nto comprehend this statement in a political sense.<\/p>\n
\"Professionalism\" means different things to different people.
\nPractitioners of professions set the standards of professionalism
\nin their field on the basis of a set of academic or occupational
\ncriteria, whereas politicians may choose to understand the term
\nin quite a different sense. The term \"professional education\",
\nfor instance, may denote one set of meanings to educators, but to
\npoliticians, the word may have quite a different meaning.<\/p>\n
To educators, the concept of \"educational professionalism\" may
\ncover a wide variety of educational expertise, ranging from
\nexpertise in diagnosing and remedying learning disabilities to
\nexpertise in analyzing the philosophical foundations of various
\neducational practices and traditions. But I am quite certain that
\nthese are not the kinds of educational professionalism our
\npolitical decisionmakers had in mind. To them \"professional
\neducators\" are people who -- and this is just my guess -- can be
\nentrusted with the job of transforming our educational system
\nfrom its present horrid condition to a system capable of
\nproviding the young generation with intellectual astuteness and
\nethos that can meet the challenges of life they will encounter in
\nthe future.<\/p>\n
What are the essential characteristics of such professional
\neducators?<\/p>\n
It should be evident from my view above that this genre of
\neducators must have vision about the contour and character of our
\nschools in the future. Certain politicians may prefer to employ
\nthe word \"professional educators\" to denote persons whose
\nexpertise consists merely of a command of basic educational
\njargons, knowledge of basic educational statistics and ability to
\nexpress the view of a group in a lucid political rhetoric. Such
\npoliticians are toying with ideas that can endanger the future of
\nthe country and the nation. Politicians with sincere concern
\nregarding the future of the nation must refute and reject this
\nparticular view. Failure to stop political maneuvers to impose
\nthis insufficiently reasoned view is a betrayal to the young
\ngeneration.<\/p>\n
The problem to be solved now is determining the criteria that
\nshould be met to identify the persons who are politically
\nacceptable for the job of \"professional minister of education\".<\/p>\n
My subjective view as a person who oscillates back and forth
\nbetween education and politics is that such a person must first
\nof all have a clear idea regarding the measures that must be
\ntaken to move our system into a transformation process. Such a
\nprofessional must also have a vision concerning the type of
\nleadership that should be exercised to transform our schools from
\nbeing at the bottom end of a central bureaucracy to local social
\ninstitutions that represent the aspirations of the local
\ncommunity with regard to the future of the young generation.<\/p>\n
It is necessary at this juncture to analyze one sticky issue
\nthat has plagued our educational system for decades. This is the
\nissue of developing a curriculum that has a sound philosophical
\nbase, a clear design and a cohesive structure. Any professional
\neducator worthy of the name will understand that if one wants to
\nsucceed in preparing students for life-long learning and a
\nproductive life in society, it cannot be done through a
\ncurriculum comprising subject matters that are not interconnected
\nin any coherent way. Good curriculum consists primarily of
\nsubject matters, each of which has an integrative power.<\/p>\n
Viewed in a very fundamental way, such a curriculum is an
\neducational program that prepares the young generation for three
\nstages of life; the ability to make a living, ability to lead a
\nmeaningful life and the ability to ennoble life. Our life as a
\nnation at present contains too many vulgar thoughts and inhuman
\nacts that make many of us feel degraded.<\/p>\n
What do our students have to learn to achieve this goal?
\nAgain, fundamentally stated, they need to have sufficient
\nknowledge about three things; knowledge about their physical
\nenvironment, knowledge about their social and cultural
\nenvironments and knowledge about themselves. This last item has
\nbeen neglected in our schools. We have forgotten that no matter
\nhow smart and how knowledgeable a person may be, if he or she
\ndoes not have a proper understanding of his or her own self, he
\nor she is bound to become a misfit in his or her environment.<\/p>\n
Knowledge about physical, social and cultural environments is
\na very broad intellectual domain that is continuously expanding.
\nIt is impossible for any educational system to make students
\nmaster all the fundamentals within this broad field of knowledge.
\nKnowledge about oneself is also a never-ending process. We as
\nhuman beings are continuously changing, and the understanding of
\noneself has to be continuously reexamined and reformulated.<\/p>\n
It has been a common understanding among professional
\neducators that the basic task of schools is to stimulate and
\nguide students to acquire a learning capability, which in essence
\ncomprises scholastic skills that later in life will function as
\nintellectual instruments for mastering whatever one needs or
\ncares to know.<\/p>\n
A professional minister of education must know that this kind
\nof transformation will never materialize if the central
\nbureaucracy operates alone. Such transformation will take place
\nonly if it involves the entire system, and if each subsystem has
\nthe feeling that it is consulted in formulating the goal of the
\ntransformation process. Within the context of regional autonomy
\nin the future, this means that the professional minister and his
\nor her staff must provide a transforming leadership to
\neducational authorities in the various provinces and districts
\nthroughout the country. Making speeches, issuing decrees and
\ngiving instructions from the center will not suffice.<\/p>\n
Do we have educators who are sufficiently enlightened about
\nthe political aspects of the ministerial job?<\/p>\n
I am sure we have. If only our political decisionmakers are
\nwilling to look honestly on our educational horizon, I am sure
\nthat a number, though not too many, of personalities will be
\nidentified. At this stage of our development it is up to our
\npolitical decisionmakers to know whether it is still possible to
\nrevive, rejuvenate and reinvigorate our educational system.<\/p>\n
The writer is a social and educational observer based in
\nJakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/meanings-of-educational-professionalism-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}