Examining the plan to limit the number of new students at State\nUniversities (PTN), perhaps we need to look at it from outside the box.\nWith the spirit of equalising the number of students, this quota policy\nis intended to enable Private Universities (PTS) to increase their new\nstudent intake after several years of decline, in line with the freeing\nup of PTN to accept new students through independent pathways.<\/p>\n
It becomes ironic because the number of students \u2018up for grabs\u2019 is\nonly around 10 million or equivalent to a Gross Enrolment Ratio (GER)\nfor higher education of 32.89%. Meanwhile, more than 67% of the\ncollege-age population still cannot access higher education for various\nreasons. The potential is very large and still wide open to be given\naccess to universities. Why is this 67% seemingly not given\nattention?<\/p>\n
From the perspective of higher education as part of the industrial\neconomy, this can be viewed from three approaches.<\/p>\n
First, structure. Of the over 4,000 universities in Indonesia, 99.8%\nare conventional universities based on physical infrastructure\/buildings\nand offline learning systems where the university is located. This\nreflects a conservative paradigm about higher education where students\n\u2018come to\u2019 the educational institution. This is the main reason why only\n32.89% are able to access higher education.<\/p>\n
Because to attend university, it\u2019s not just about being able to pay\ntuition fees, but there are other accompanying costs such as\ntransportation and\/or accommodation. Not to mention the opportunity\ncosts lost, such as the need to earn a living, care for parents, and\nother reasons that make access to universities still limited.<\/p>\n
Second, behaviour (conduct). For higher education providers,\nincluding the government, the operational costs of managing\nphysical-based universities are certainly not cheap. Private\nuniversities with limited capital generally pass on most or all of these\ncosts to students. Therefore, the number of students (student body)\nbecomes very important to ensure the sustainability of the\nuniversity.<\/p>\n
Before the era of Public Universities as Legal Entities (PTNBH),\nstate universities generally did not think too much about this because\nall costs were borne by the state through the State Budget (APBN) or\nRegional Budget (APBD). After the PTNBH regulations were implemented,\nthe behaviour of PTN became no different from PTS in the context of\nrecruiting new students to achieve the determined student body\ntargets.<\/p>\n
Third, performance. With a collective mindset that students \u2018come to\u2019\nthe educational institution and the sustainability of the university is\ndetermined by the student body, it is understandable if higher education\nin Indonesia today is very urban-biased (urban bias education). There\nare almost no major universities located in villages. If there are, the\nvillage will soon turn into a city as a multiplier effect of the\nuniversity\u2019s presence.<\/p>\n
Almost no one wants to build universities in remote areas. As a\nresult, higher education becomes increasingly difficult to reach and be\nreached by society, especially marginal groups. Urban bias is also shown\nby choices of activities after graduation. Most choose cities as places\nto work. Only a few want to return to their home regions. As a result,\nthe home regions that send students remain underdeveloped even though\ntheir children have been sent far away to study. The multiplier effect\nis almost invisible.<\/p>\n
The government is not unaware of this situation. That is why distance\neducation policies (PJJ) then emerged. Universitas Terbuka (UT) was\nfounded in 1984 based on this policy. For years, UT has developed\ndistance higher education with the concept of an educational institution\nthat \u2018approaches\u2019 students.<\/p>\n
To date, UT has produced nearly 3 million graduates and around\n800,000 active students recorded. However, relying on UT alone is not\nenough to reach relatively hard-to-access communities and then boost the\nhigher education GER. The PJJ concept is also relatively not much\nfavoured by higher education providers.<\/p>\n
The Covid-19 pandemic then became the icebreaker. Fundamental changes\ndue to the pandemic have given birth to a new culture based on online\nactivities, including in education. After nearly 40 years of UT\noperating alone, at least three PJJ universities were established in\n2020-2021, namely Asia Cyber University (Unsia), Indonesian Cita Insan\nUniversity (UICI), and Muhammadiyah Cyber University (SiberMU).<\/p>\n
The three develop different concepts but with the same spirit, namely\nproviding flexibility for students to study from anywhere with\nonline-based technology. Some offline-based universities have also\nopened PJJ study programmes. With this concept, the access problem\nshould be resolved because with online-based PJJ, the educational\ninstitution is essentially \u2018approaching\u2019 students wherever they are.<\/p>\n
Nevertheless, in terms of numbers, the addition of three PJJ\nuniversities has not changed the structure. Nor has it significantly\nincreased the number of students\/learners. This can be understood as\npart of the literacy stage in the transformation process.<\/p>\n
In this process, society is just beginning to understand the 5W1H of\ndistance education. Flexibility becomes the key word that makes them\nwant to know more. Acceleration efforts are needed through consistent\nand persistent socialisation so that the literacy stage can be completed\nmore quickly. For education providers, this stage is also needed to\nchange the urban-biased education paradigm into education that impacts\nthe regions where students are located.<\/p>\n
For that, conventional PTN and PTS can prepare to take opportunities\nfrom the market potential.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/the-irony-of-the-plan-for-limiting-new-students-1775656332", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }