Can our schools really develop `character'?

Can our schools really develop `character'?

Simon Marcus Gower, Director of Research and Development,
Harapan Bangsa School, Kotamodern, Tangerang

Within the last 10 years or so, Indonesia has experienced the
growth of a phenomenon in its education system. A crop of schools
has been established that offer education of an apparently higher
standard than that which may be encountered at a national school.
Accordingly these schools have been afforded the title of
"national plus schools."

As privately run schools with generally better facilities and
staff these schools are more expensive and are orientated towards
more international standards and methods of education. Many offer
parallel programs that mean students may go on to either graduate
from the Indonesian national system or gain a certificate from
another (foreign) curriculum such as Singapore or Australia.

These schools represent a significant beneficial addition to
the Indonesian schooling system. However, although they may be
different in many respects there are still many similarities
between "plus" schools and the more familiar national schools.

This is understandable as, after all, both segments of the
schooling population are working towards the same objective of
providing an education.

One striking similarity between these two types of schools is
the manner in which their representatives set out an agenda for
providing their students with "character building" education. In
varying degrees schools of both types proclaim policies that
target "character building". But it is worth pausing for a moment
or two to consider just what this means.

Whilst some schools may have a strong and positive perception
as to what is meant, there is a danger that the concept is being
somewhat hijacked and wrongly attributed by students, teachers
and parents. There is a danger that "character building" is being
misconstrued as another means of applying an over-zealous pursuit
of discipline and control.

This kind of dictatorial mentality applied to character
building is misplaced. If character building is merely about
discipline and control, then it is left as nothing more than a
demand for conformity, demand for near mindless following rather
than character based leadership.

A definition of the word "character" is "distinctive mark";
further definitions include "type of style", "individual
idiosyncrasy", "reputation" and "good reputation". Each one of
these definitions exhibits leanings towards the individual and
individuality.

Character in this sense recognizes and appreciates the
individual. The uniqueness and goodness of the person is being
acknowledged.

This is really rather contrary to any notions of controlling
and/ or requiring conformity of the students. Yet many schools in
Indonesia would misconstrue character building as being about
control and conformity. Consider the following examples, they
represent this kind of misappropriation of "character building."

In a promotional brochure for one school reference was made to
the school's "commitment to building the character of your
child." This commitment was to be achieved by "making sure that
the child behaves properly, does not disturb the class and does
as the teacher tells him."

There is not much doubt that what this school considers to be
character, in fact, falls into the realms of conformity and
control.

At another Jakarta school a banner had been prepared that
claimed that "children's character will be developed through
obedience and respect for elders." Again, the message is clear --
character is derived from control and those that obey. These are
nothing short of out-dated notions being applied to the slogan of
"character building".

They are erroneous but worse still they undermine the concept
of character building as a potentially key element of education
provision. Character building is essentially about giving each
student the opportunity to develop their own, individual
character. By giving them experiences and environments in which
they may explore their own selves and gain an understanding of
themselves it becomes possible for the character to build. This
is a quite natural developmental thing; as a child grows it
gathers experiences and encounters that help form the character.

In a real sense, then, character emerges as a consequence of
good experiences and encounters with people and the world around
us. It is probably fair to observe that character is not so much
developed by schools as it is developed in schools.

Schools have to provide the opportunities and examples for
students that allow their characters to emerge and develop
naturally. The notion that a school can and will instructively
and even intrusively build a child's character is bordering on
the dangerous.

Dictatorial slogans, that may be observed at some schools,
such as "Obedience is the key to character" are less about
character development and far more about character control and
the implanting of characteristics, whether good or bad.

Certainly the concept of character building can and should
include appreciation of good character traits but these should
not be forced or imposed. Again, an example illustrates the
point. At a school claiming to target character building the
students were asked to offer any observations that they may have
about their teachers.

The number one observation from these high school students at
a national school was that "the teachers are nearly always late
for class." It may seem but a small thing but surely one good
character trait that "character building schools" should be
concerned about is good time-keeping. However, by their teachers'
example these students were in fact being exposed to bad
character traits.

Similarly an impatient teacher exemplifies poor character. At
one Tangerang school a teacher gained a reputation as being
short-tempered and easily angered if a student could not answer
one of his questions. The teacher's poor character again
detrimentally affecting the students through poor example.

At the heart of education and the development of good
character has to be the development of understanding.
Understanding both the academic challenges of school but also the
social challenges of living and working with other people.

Just over 100 years ago Kartini wrote a letter to one of her
Dutch correspondents in which she discussed knowledge and
understanding. In the letter she proposed that "understanding
makes you judge more mercifully, makes you forgive and makes you
good."

In the context of Indonesia's developing education sector, it
would be wise for more people to take these sentiments to heart.
It is simply insufficient for people to use dictatorial slogans
or marketing hype to promote growth and development.

Particularly when it comes to thoughts on character building,
it is vital that education helps promote understanding -- which
in turn and over time will help people of good character to
develop.