RI education system needs a revolution<\/p>\n
By Nirwan Idrus<\/p>\n
This is the first of two articles on Indonesian education.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Minister of Education and Culture Juwono
\nSudarsono recently outlined his eight or so basic competencies he
\nwould like to see adopted during his term of office. There is no
\nprize for guessing that \"the three Rs\" (reading, writing and
\narithmetic) are included on the minister's list. It is refreshing
\nto listen to the incumbent of a very important portfolio
\nresponsible for the country's human resources development talking
\nabout getting back to basics. The minister was speaking at an
\nIndonesian independence celebration at the Australian
\nInternational School on Aug. 19, 1998.<\/p>\n
Getting back to basics has been proven to be a potent antidote
\nto deteriorating organizational health. There is no reason why
\nthis cannot be the case with education either. Not very long ago,
\nmany companies around the world talked about keeping to their
\nnetworking, reconcentrating, refocusing, reduced diversification
\nand even reengineering. But how will these impact on Indonesian
\neducation now and in the future? What is the health of the
\nIndonesian education system?<\/p>\n
The education portfolio in a country of more than 200 million
\npeople where a big percentage are of primary and secondary school
\nage, is an extremely formidable responsibility. This portfolio
\ndesigns the templates of future Indonesians and molds their moral
\nand intellectual characteristics and capacities. It therefore
\nneeds the most appropriate and well thought-out vision, mission
\nand strategy. It needs to envision the type of Indonesians that
\nIndonesia needs in five, 10, 15, 20 and even 100 years from now.
\nTo be realistic, we also have to think about the type of
\nIndonesians we need right now and in the next two or three years.<\/p>\n
This complex situation is somewhat exacerbated by the constant
\nsocial and technological changes occurring everywhere, the
\neffects of globalization, increasingly open competition, tariff
\nand protection reduction and, of course, the monetary crisis. But
\na man's work is never done, as they say.<\/p>\n
Do we need education reform in addition to the other three
\nreforms we have heard so much about since May 21 this year?<\/p>\n
It has been argued that education reform in Indonesia started
\nsome years ago and not in 1998. The nine-year compulsory
\neducation perhaps could be seen as a major part of that reform.<\/p>\n
But the government's insistence on Bahasa Indonesia as the
\nmedium of instruction in higher education and the abolition of
\nthe term MBA and its global replacement with MM (Magister
\nManajemen) could also be seen as part of that reform as well.<\/p>\n
This is so despite the fact that at about the same time,
\nMalaysia said that its insistence on the Malaysian language as
\ntheir educational medium of instruction had disadvantaged
\nMalaysians and Malaysian businesses.<\/p>\n
In fact, many Indonesians have been saying exactly the same
\nthing as a result of their own shortcomings in negotiations with
\ninternational businesses.<\/p>\n
Indeed, recognized recent higher education reforms started in
\nthe early 1970s in the United Kingdom followed by other English
\nspeaking countries around the globe since then.<\/p>\n
For example Australia introduced its Unified Higher Education
\nsystem in 1987, and New Zealand amended its Education Act in 1990
\nwhen it introduced its seamless education model. One of the major
\nimpacts of these changes in those countries was improving
\nquality, efficiency, effectiveness and access.<\/p>\n
The other was the formation of new universities from the then
\npolytechnics, colleges of advanced education and institutes of
\ntechnology. For a while, Australians talked about the pre-1987
\nand post-1987 universities, although that distinction is slowly
\ndisappearing, especially now that the newer universities are
\nbeginning to show significantly higher creativity and
\neffectiveness in their teaching, learning and research.<\/p>\n
The introduction of the concept of quality management into
\nhigher education was a significant shift in paradigms in the
\neducation sector anywhere. It is encouraging that after a number
\nof years of incessant prodding by quality practitioners and
\ngovernments alike, the concepts of quality assurance, total
\nquality management, continuous quality improvement and similar
\nmeasures to recognize the importance of the consumers, are
\nbeginning to find acceptance in the hallowed corridors of
\nuniversities and other higher education institutions around the
\nworld.<\/p>\n
It is also pleasing to see that Indonesia has quickly picked
\nup this important paradigm shift and is pursuing educational
\npolicies to encourage and instill quality in its higher education
\ninstitutions. At least three of the Ministry of Education and
\nCulture's current major projects involve the implementation of
\nquality assurance and continuous improvement in higher education
\ninstitutions around the country.<\/p>\n
The Development in Undergraduate Education Project recognizes
\nthe shortfalls in various educational infrastructure at
\nIndonesian universities. Its main objective is therefore to
\nimprove such infrastructure in order to upgrade the standard and
\nquality of basic facilities that contribute to producing quality
\ngraduates.<\/p>\n
The Quality for Undergraduate Education (QUE) Project on the
\nother hand has the objectives of improving relevance, academic
\natmosphere, internal management and organization, including
\ninstitutional commitment, sustainability as well as efficiency
\nand productivity of S1 teaching and learning (S1 or Strata 1 is
\nthe undergraduate level in Indonesia). Grants were awarded to S1
\nstudy programs at universities around the country on the basis of
\nsuccessful pre-applications and final applications during 1997
\nand early 1998. These grants, subject to annual reviews, run for
\na maximum length of five years and are funded through World Bank
\nloans.<\/p>\n
The third, namely the Engineering Education Development
\nProject (EEDP) concentrates on engineering education. Its
\nobjectives are to improve the quality and relevance of
\nengineering education and to enhance students' access and
\nparticipation in the study of engineering.<\/p>\n
Quality and quality assurance sit on the top of a list of foci
\nwhich include curriculum development, industry linkages,
\nequipment and reequipment as well as student loans.<\/p>\n
Unlike the QUE Project, EEDP includes both technical and
\nprofessional engineering education levels, i.e. diplomas and S1,
\nat both polytechnics and universities. EEDP involves seven
\npolytechnics and six universities in various parts of Indonesia.
\nThis project is funded through loans from the Asian Development
\nBank.<\/p>\n
Dr. Nirwan Idrus, a consultant in higher education, is a
\nchartered professional engineer and has held senior positions in
\nindustry, government and higher education in Australia, Papua New
\nGuinea and New Zealand. Ideas expressed in this article are
\npersonal.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/ri-education-system-needs-a-revolution-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}