In search of a proper education system

Unlike a cocoon that metamorphoses into a lovely butterfly, Indonesia's education has gone from nil to good to poor.

Prior to independence, access to education was the privilege of a selected few. After independence, more schools were built and more Indonesians had access to education. Then, the quality of education was good, with schools maintaining the Dutch legacy of discipline, high-quality teachers and curriculum.

Today, education is available for all, at least in principle. However, the quality of our education has not improved; many even say it is declining and is a far cry from the standards set up in the years around independence.

What measurement do we use to rate the achievements of our national education? How do you actually measure the quality of your students or school graduates?

The answers will vary. People often say success can be measured by the number of graduates. Others may say the graduates should match the needs of the industry.

However, few people would say the achievements are evident in an improvement in the morality and integrity of students.

Indonesia which, according to sociologist Ignas Kleden, adopts a gado-gado (mixed) model of education, tends to use the first criteria, namely the number of graduates, as a standard to measure our educational achievements.

This trend was underlined by then education and cultural affairs minister Wardiman Djojonegoro, who proposed in 1994 to implement the "link and match" approach in the education system.

Wardiman expected that through the new concept students who received education at schools and universities would meet the demands of the work force.

At a coordinating meeting on education, Wardiman once said: "In particular, with respect to linking education with the world of work, it is most urgent that our schools and universities are geared to our development effort. Here our major concern is that the skills and knowledge accumulation that takes place at all school levels is closely attuned to the needs of society, and specifically to the needs of the productive sector of the economy."

Many observers criticized this concept as it placed students as an object to fulfill the needs of the industry.

This was, of course, totally different from the concept introduced by Indonesia's first education minister Ki Hadjar Dewantara.

Ki Hadjar, who in 1922 set up the Taman Siswa school, emphasized that education must be aimed at individuals as members of the community endowed with dignity and morality.

Former education minister Daoed Joesoef in an article in the bimonthly Basis magazine wrote there are two approaches to education. The first suggests that students must be prepared to be workers. The number of workers will alter, depending on the economic performance. The second approach meanwhile sees education as a social need to develop the society. Education is seen as a tool to encourage individuals to be part of their culture and to develop it as well.

In view of the various interpretations of the purpose of national education, there are mounting calls for the nation to redefine the concept on a practical level.

Sociologist Ignas Kleden says state leaders have to redefine the philosophy and goal of education.

"Matters related to the purpose of education are very important. We have experienced a terrible education system and that was due to a lack of orientation," Ignas said.

He added that education was successful if it produced autonomous and accountable individuals with an awareness of their rights to determine their own lives.

On a more optimistic note, educator Arief Rachman said future education must adopt morality and discipline as the criteria to evaluate the performance of students.

He emphasized that a series of recent changes in the strategy of educational development were not a cause for concern as they only dealt with technicalities.

A more disturbing phenomenon, he said, was the decreasing morality and discipline of students.