Can 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.