Cultural transformation and educational reform

Cultural transformation and educational reform

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): It has been said that education is a culture-
bound phenomenon. This expression is usually interpreted to mean
that the practice of education varies from one culture to
another. The way the Javanese educate their children, for
instance, differs from the way the Chinese educate theirs.

Two inferences can be drawn from this expression. The first is
that to be an effective practitioner of education in a society,
one has to study not only the methods and techniques of education
practiced in that society, but also the cultural bases of those
educational practices. The second is that whenever a society is
undergoing a cultural change or transformation, there is the
imperative for that society to re-examine and revise its
practices of education. There is the imperative for that society
to carry out educational reform. If this reform is not thoroughly
instituted, then the educational system will not be able to
function satisfactorily within the new environment.

Indonesia has been undergoing cultural transformation, waves
of cultural transformation in fact, since the advent of World War
II. The Indonesian government and the education community in
Indonesia have carried out a series of adjustments and
innovations to help the educational system respond satisfactorily
to the new challenges in society. Yet, in spite of all the
efforts that have been made there are still a number of problems
that remain unsolved. The final result is that our educational
system does not run as effectively and as efficiently today as it
did in the 1950's, for instance. Thus, we can say that besides
progress and development, we also see drawbacks and declines in
our educational system.

What is the reason for all this?

This is a very big question, to which no one can provide a
complete and satisfactory answer. In my view, part of the reason
for this situation is that we have been operating too much "on
the surface level" in our efforts to bring about improvements in
our educational system. We have not given enough thought to the
changes that have taken place at "the deepest levels" of our
cultural life. In redressing our educational problems, we have
given too much attention to the administrative aspects of our
system, but not enough attention to the cultural sources of the
problems that our schools have been facing.

Let us take as an example the problem of unruly behavior among
students, including the problem of brawling among them. In our
repeated efforts to mend this problem, we have been concerned
primarily with the question of restoring order as soon as
possible. And most of us still think that this problem is
confined primarily to schools and students in Jakarta, or at the
most to two or three other big cities. We have always been quick
to point out that this phenomenon of student brawls never occurs
in rural areas, and also is never found among schools with
religious backgrounds. On the basis of such observations we
conclude that the remedy should consist of three steps: (1)
administer punitive but corrective measures to those students
involved in brawling; (2) return to our own cultural life style,
and resist this global pull of "modern life style" with all might
and means, and (3) give our students more religious instruction.
This is a clear example of our reductive thinking.

In facing this problem we seldom ask what the ultimate causes
of this situation are. We know that there must be some causes,
but we think that to find out what they are is a very complex
problem in itself. And in the Indonesian language of today
whenever we use the word meaning "complex" to describe a problem,
it really means that we are unable to analyze and resolve it. We
also never ask whether there is any relation between this problem
of student brawling and the loosening of moral norms that is
happening in our society. We never ask whether cases of violence
and crimes committed by young people are in any way related to
cases of student brawling. We just do not go deep enough in our
thinking about these problems. We feel content to think and act
at the "surface level."

Why do we behave like this?

I think because basically we are accustomed to perceiving and
thinking of education and schools as a phenomenon that stands on
its own, unrelated to any other social institution within the
society, and also unrelated to the society itself. We do not even
seriously accept the fact that the education we provide in our
schools is influenced in a positive and negative way by the
education our students receive at their respective homes. This
is, in my view, the first cause of our habit of thinking about
our educational problems in a reductive manner.

The second cause is that in administering school education we
routinely narrow down our activity to one main activity:
implanting knowledge into our students. We limit our educational
task at school to develop the cognitive potential of our
students. Most of us never pay the slightest attention to the
development in our students of the power of conation; that being
the ability to mobilize will or to act with purpose. Even
education in religion is in most cases reduced to implanting
knowledge about religion, not inculcating a religious way of
life. Religious education (pendidikan agama) is reduced to
instruction about religion (pengajaran agama).

Because of this tradition of thinking about education in a
reductive way we do not possess the intellectual capacity to
analyze our educational problems within their cultural contexts.
We do not have the capacity to see and understand educational
problems as part of cultural problems. And in my opinion this is
all the result of our traditional way of educating our teachers
and educational system administrators.

What do we have to do to correct this situation?

I think we just have to change our way of looking at and
thinking about education. We have to develop a new way of
perceiving and thinking about the instilling of knowledge, and we
have to learn and apply it. We have to learn, for instance, to
perceive education in the broadest sense of the word, as
indicated by the way we use the word 'pendidikan' (education) in
our culture. We have to learn to perceive our schools as a part
of a network of social institutions, and not merely as an
administrative entity which can be separated from the rest of the
society at will. And finally, we have to think very seriously
about a new design for our institutions for teachers' education.

I admit, that this is a very huge agenda. But unless we begin
seriously to tackle this big problem now, we will be forever
trapped in this situation of unfinished educational reform.

The writer is former deputy chairman of the Indonesian
Institute of Sciences and now rector of the Muhammadiyah
University.