Education to empower children coming from poor families

Mochtar Buchori Jakarta

Wealthy parents are inclined to think that their children need the kind of education that ordinary schools cannot offer, i.e. good education with international standards. Many of these parents have got together and created special schools for this purpose.

Children from poor families have been facing similar problems. They need a school with educational programs that will help them rise out of their poverty. They need education that will make them understand why their families and their community have become entangled in a vicious cycle of poverty that has lasted for generations. They need education that can show them the various paths to a life without poverty.

Why do these poor children need this kind of education?

There are several answers to this, but the most important is that education tailored for average children -- students from families that are neither rich nor poor -- will not provide the children from poor families with the set of knowledge, skills, and attitudes they need to exit from their inherited poverty.

Two basic notions are related to this premise. One is that poverty does not, generally speaking, come suddenly. Poverty everywhere has its genesis. Secondly, poverty can be conquered. There are ways to overcome poverty.

Based on these two notions, educational programs for poor children should ideally be characterized by three features, i.e. to foster the will to conquer poverty, to develop knowledge about the history of their poverty, and to instill understanding, concerning ways to exit from poverty without harming society. The first is called the conative aspect; the second the cognitive aspect; and the third the ethical aspect.

Can you get this kind of education in mainstream schools?

I do not think so. Mainstream schools are not designed to guide students to develop a strong personal and collective will or resolution. They are also not designed to help students understand the origin and evolution of poverty. And its interest in ethics, especially social ethics, is at best marginal. Mainstream schools are primarily concerned with implanting knowledge.

Schools with special programs for poor children, as outlined above, are intended to rescue lives, i.e. to rescue poor children from the descent into more misery. If school education fails to guide these poor children to emerge from their poverty, they will, in all probability, forever be locked in a life marked by aggravated deprivation. And from this condition they can easily degenerate into lives that constitute sources of many social ills. Unaided, these poor children will be lost in a life that is harmful to society and detrimental to every effort to build a clean and decent society.

Such is the life prospect of children coming from poor families if we fail to rescue them. And how many poor children are there in our country at this moment? I do not have the figures. But I am sure it is big enough. The percentage of children from moderately and extremely poor families is certainly greater than that of children from rich families. Yet, public attention to and public thinking about special education for poor children is much lower and much less intensive than that given to the problem of developing special education for children of wealthy families.

What should the curriculum for this kind of education look like? I do not know yet. But curriculum is not the only worry in this regard. Before tackling the problem of curriculum building, there are more fundamental problems to solve.

The most fundamental is the question of how to raise hope and the will to improve life among these poor children. Viewed from this angle, curriculum is not the decisive factor. Another factor that is equally important -- if not more important -- is the problem of building an institutional character that reflects the mission to which the institution is committed; and how to generate an educational atmosphere needed to support students in their quest for a better life.

The conative aspect of education that purports to help students improve their life should be clearly felt as an education toward a disciplined life. Students should be trained to exercise their judgment before taking actions, and to focus their choices on actions that in the long run will lead them to improving their life. They should also feel that they are continuously trained to persevere, to endure hardships. Consistent implementation of this strategy will make the school perceived by students and the public alike as an educational institution that puts heavy emphasis on training for a disciplined life.

The cognitive education aspect purports to create understanding among students of how their families and their community have become engulfed in poverty, and should create among them the feeling of curiosity. Not only curiosity about poverty and ways to conquer it, but also curiosity about significant collective actions taken in the past by their families and their community, and the consequences of these actions on their lives. Nurtured consistently, this curiosity will eventually create among students the ability to learn on their own. This is often called "learning capability", and it constitutes the distinguishing mark of person, family, community, or nation that eventually becomes successful in their search for a better life. If a school consistently employs this strategy it will be perceived by the public as an educational institution with a high degree of intellectuality.

And finally, the ethical aspect that purports to guide students into ability to separate ethical conduct in their search for better life from violent protest against the establishment and the mainstream culture should create among students the feeling of self-esteem and decency. This will make the public perceive such a school as an institution that teaches decency, tolerance and broad-mindedness.

A school that employs this kind of educational strategy will be able to demonstrate a character marked by discipline, intellectuality and decency. Such a school may be poor materially, but overwhelmingly rich culturally and spiritually.

Is it still necessary for us to develop such an educational program after we joined the campaign for the Millennium Development Goals? Absolutely! It will be our national signature to our pledge to end poverty in this part of the world well before 2025.

The writer earned his doctorate in education from Harvard University in the United States.