How education can create a spirit of pluralism

How education can create a spirit of pluralism

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

After a pause of superficial tranquility, the shocking string
of attacks that rocked the country recently is evidence enough
our society has not been able to fully escape from a culture of
violence and division. Suspicion, hatred, and prejudice, it
seems, still run deep in many communities, exploding with the
spark created by a provocateur.

Who is to blame? Not only the attackers and the police but
also educators must share culpability for these social disasters.
As an agency of social change, education in this country has
demonstrably failed to produce human beings able to voluntarily
accept diversity as an element of strength and unity.

What to do? In the short-term, law enforcers must act swiftly
to restore peace and arrest those responsible for the violence.
In education, however, things move at a snail's pace, yet
teachings can have a great impact in the long run. The present
saddening situation in the nation is an example; it reflects the
result of long-time pedagogical wrongs committed in education.

For example, while we have never officially declared that one
major group is superior to others, yet it had been "declared" in
virtually every sphere of life. Consequently, our society is now
suffering from the malaise of prejudice, with some minority
sections of the long-spoiled majority appearing uneasy and unable
to wholeheartedly embrace the emerging paradigm of pluralism.

It is timely for changes in the way we look at our society,
and one way to achieve this is through civic education in schools.
The subject of civic education originates from Pancasila Moral
Education, the core of propaganda during the New Order regime. It
then evolved to Pancasila and Civic Education that also received
criticism because of its spirit of indoctrination. With the
introduction of the new competence-based curriculum, the subject
has now been changed to Civic Education.

The names have changed but how deeply have the syllabus
changes taken place? The text books seem fine, with many offering
of interactive tasks coupled with thought-provoking issues. The
spirit of pluralism, indeed, is embedded in all chapters such as
Human Rights Implementation and Its Implication; Freedom of
Expression; Values, Norms, and Laws; and People's Participation
in Regional Autonomy, which develops the issues of local
cultures.

An interactive method of teaching, where teachers facilitate
students through a learning experience, is currently regarded as
the most effective kind of teaching. A 2002/2003 study conducted
by the Center for Civic Education in six provinces in the country
shows that students trying out the method participated
enthusiastically in the experience (Suzanne Soule, 2004).

The study showed that if this methodology and new content was
embraced and systematically applied, the prospects for our
students in the long-run would be promising. However, given the
state of the country's poorly paid, poorly trained teachers, it
is doubtful the exercises in text books will be followed up by
any concrete teaching changes in the classroom. Teachers'
economically impoverished conditions mean they often have little
time or desire for professional improvement.

Teachers in public and private schools are also regarded as
agents of the state who are obliged to carry out other official
duties. All this means the official syllabus often ends up being
taught in a shallow manner.

What to do then? A form of supplementary teacher training to
engender pluralism would be helpful, and the experiences of other
countries are worth considering. In Israel, despite its complex
society with religious, ethnic, national and migrant divisions,
and the undeniable tensions caused by the Palestinian situation,
the role of voluntary organizations in providing extra teacher
training to engender pluralism proved to be instrumental. And in
India where caste has been the main stumbling block in efforts to
promote pluralism, the role of NGOs has been virtually parallel
to that of the state.

In Indonesia, there are also similar organizations, often with
the support of multilateral agencies. But considering the vast
archipelago with its ethnically and religiously complex society,
they are just a drop of water in the ocean, meaning much must be
done to support them and to encourage other responsible citizens
to participate.

Of course, relying solely on the civic education subject to
promote mutual understanding is inadequate. Promoting plurality
requires serious efforts from teachers in all fields of study.
And while we might not have high expectations of present
teachers, we can find some hope in the students now studying at
teacher training faculties.

Having teachers from racial and cultural majorities teach
majority and minority students has deeply contributed to the
absolute rule of the majority and the "forced obedience" on the
part of the minority. Hence, balancing the number of teachers
from both minority and majority groups is vital to help promote a
genuine spirit of pluralism.

Local and religious leaders must get behind this idea. They,
along with educators, should play a part in emphasizing the
importance of preserving one's identity and fighting for one's
right to play a substantial and meaningful role in the life of
the nation.

In short, while emphasizing the teaching of pluralism will not
stop the bombs or the violence straight away, it will slowly
create peaceful coexistence within our incredibly diverse
society.

The writer is an observer of education and social issues at
the Public Sphere Institute. He can be contacted at
a.amirrachman@edfac.usyd.edu.au.