The term transformation has long been advocated, but in the context\nof education, particularly in Indonesia, educational transformation has\nonly begun to emerge in the last two decades. Even recently, terms\nwithin the new educational paradigm still seem foreign to some\neducators, such as student-centred learning, deep learning, and the\ndigitalisation of education. All of these are often used as indicators\nof an advanced education system.<\/p>\n
In Indonesia, policies that demand learning autonomy at the smallest\nlevels have become a breath of fresh air in implementing transformative\neducation. A flexible curriculum allows teachers to better adapt to the\nhighly diverse needs of students, from economic, social backgrounds, or\neven ethnic groups.<\/p>\n
However, behind this fresh breeze, is the educational transformation\nproclaimed today truly touching critical consciousness, or is it merely\nrevolving in the administrative realm?<\/p>\n
From the above question, let us look back at how ideal transformation\nshould be. In Paulo Freire\u2019s perspective, for instance, education is\nconsidered a process that liberates a person to develop and cultivate\ntheir critical awareness as a social critique of their surroundings.<\/p>\n
Similar to him, Mezirow takes a sharper view, considering that\ntransformation in education should enable a person to make changes to\ntheir frame of reference through critical thinking about situations that\nhave long been considered correct.<\/p>\n
In other words, this educational transformation is far more than just\nchanges in teaching methods, media, or teaching tools from traditional\nto digital; this transformation must reach changes in the\nepistemological realm and awareness of the existence of that change\nitself.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, it is interesting for us to discuss together the\nreality today, both on the national and global stage: is the\ntransformative education we proclaim truly correct and complete?\nCertainly, many have heard of 21st-century skills, a system of education\nthat uses a participatory approach. However, practices that are still\ncommonly found today show that the assessment system using quantitative\nnumbers and standardised systems is still very difficult to abandon.\nOther assessment criteria are considered difficult to describe.<\/p>\n
In addition, an example of transformation considered normal today is\nthe shift from direct face-to-face to online learning through\ntechnological devices alone. In fact, such modern education often\nbecomes a paradox: it appears technological and sophisticated on the\noutside but remains conservative in content.<\/p>\n
For example, everyone today routinely uploads screenshots of meetings\non platforms that are boasted about, but in reality, behind the scenes,\nmany are actually sleeping or not following the meetings\nattentively.<\/p>\n
What about classrooms in Indonesia? Today, the Indonesian government\nshows strong commitment to realising one of the indicators of\ndigital-based learning, starting from Nadiem Makarim with various cases\nbefalling him, which is none other than to realise the digitalisation of\neducation. Once again, educational digitalisation that (perhaps) is not\nyet accompanied by noble values within it, thus forcing it to appear in\na cage. Today, the learning approach proclaimed by Abdul Mu\u2019ti is also\ninseparable from that.<\/p>\n
Classrooms adorned with large screens are beginning to be\ndistributed. Narratives of coding and imitative thinking do not escape\nthe lips of Vice President Gibran Rakabuming in every meeting. However,\none important question remains: what about the critical reflection\nprocess of students, which should be the core of educational\ntransformation today? To this day, learning evaluations that are still\nnumerically based become a spectacle of how unsynchronised the existing\nsystem is. Not to mention if we talk about the classic problem of\neducational equity in this vast Indonesia.<\/p>\n
If referring to the explanation above, it is not wrong if many people\nsay that education in Indonesia is epistemologically critical. The\neducation system today should prioritise how to manage existing\nknowledge, not transfer existing knowledge to students.<\/p>\n
Because if that happens, our education system is still in a\npositivistic paradigm that emphasises objectivity, standard measurements\nas standards and indicators of success. There will be no room for\ndiscussion and debate within it. On the contrary, transformative\neducation should be more dynamic and reciprocal, where dialogue and\nexperience become the main capital of learning.<\/p>\n
Do not let classrooms be adorned with technological devices, but only\nused to convey information alone. This counters the situation, creating\nambivalent conditions that hinder educational transformation.<\/p>\n
Such a condition is what is called pseudo-transformation, which\nappears only on the cover adorned with technology, but when entering\ninside, it is poor in discussion and reflection. Like a book, the cover\nis tempting and designed sophisticatedly, but inside it is only one-way\nwriting taught by the teacher by asking students to rewrite it.<\/p>\n
After that, assessment is done based on who writes the most\ncompletely and then labelled as an outstanding student. In other words,\nthis pseudo-transformation is always characterised by innovations that\nare not innovative. Visually appealing but far from vital substance.<\/p>\n
In the end, we must agree that transformed education is not just\nabout technical matters, but more than that, it is a philosophical issue\nthat requires reflective dialogue so that critical awareness arises from\na student through classroom spaces. Technological devices are supporting\nintermediaries that must be used.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/pseudo-transformation-on-transformative-education-in-indonesia-1776657050", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }