In search of a quality education at public schools

Mateus Yumarnamto, Surabaya

In the discussion on the future of the national examination which was held by Forum Wartawan Peduli Pendidikan (Journalists' Forum for Education) and Balitbang Departemen Pendidikan Nasional (the R & D Unit of the National Education Department) on Tuesday, Feb. 8, 2005 in Jakarta, Ki Supriyoko said there was an urgent need for an independent institution to be responsible for the national examination.

Referring to a similar body in the Philippines, he asserted that the institution should be responsible for measuring and evaluate the competence of junior and senior high school graduates and at the same time assess the national standard of education. His acknowledged that the national examination was still needed, but it should be held more professionally by an independent institution that included professional teachers and educators.

This statement is linked to the condition of our education system, which has lagged behind many Asian countries. We are badly in need of higher quality education. Imagine, the passing grade for the national exams last year was only 4,05 (this year it will be 4,25) and many students failed the exams.

It means a student could pass the examination with a pass grade of less than 50 percent and many still had trouble passing it. In this case, there may be two possibilities, either the standard for the exams was too high, or the schools simply failed to achieve the minimum national standard. In this case, the later is more probable.

However, we are not alone in lamenting over the bad condition of education. Even in the U.S., the National Governors Association has lamented the paltry skills of many high school graduates. Many high schools graduates lack the basic skills required by colleges and employers. So, despite criticism from educators and teachers, the governors are calling for more rigorous standards and harder exams than states have already imposed, often with considerable difficulty (The New York Times, Feb. 23, 2005). Not only the governors are insisting on higher standards, many others have demanded an overhaul of the education system as a whole.

What about ours? Our education system does need improvement. However, it cannot only hinge on the national examination. Like in U.S. where exit tests have been criticized -- many struggling students will be more likely to drop out and teachers will simply teach for the test at hand, hampering the development of broader skills, our national examination might have the same effect. Therefore, improving the quality of education by focusing on the national examination is like putting the cart before the horse.

The premise of developing the national education system has been wrong from the very beginning. It is based on the principle of uniformity and assumes that all students are the same: they have the same talents and abilities and the same opportunities and access to education.

In reality, students have diverse talents, interests and level of intelligence. We have a normal curve in which most students fall into the average domain and the rest occupy both poles. In terms of opportunity and access to higher education, the poor, who are increasing in number, have less opportunity to gain access to higher education.

Therefore, promoting high schools instead of vocational schools both at the senior and junior high levels is against the reality. Equipping high school students with vocational-skills and at the same time with academic skills -- as suggested by Curriculum 2004, will not be effective.

Moreover, not all students want to continue their education. Of all high school graduates, less than 30 percent go to higher education institutions. The others will jump into the job market, which does not welcome them as they lack competence in the world of information technology.

Promoting vocational schools that offer various vocational skills is more urgent and more relevant to our situation than lulling low academic achievers into dreaming of higher education. We should just allow them to develop their talents. Those who have academic potential should be helped to go to universities and especially to teacher training colleges while the others can develop their talents and pursue their interests in vocational schools, that should be opened in all districts based on global standards and local knowledge.

In this way, we can kill two birds with one stone; develop skilled workers for the job market and improve the quality of teachers for the future. This is one step toward developing a quality national education system.

Encouraging reform in education through promoting vocational schools will be useless if our society still overrates academic degrees. We have to educate the society, especially parents. Many of them put too much hope and unrealistic burdens on their children.

Instead of enrolling their children who have not done well academically in vocational schools, parents tend to force them on to higher education. Unfortunately, many higher education institutions grab this chance by offering them special seats at a premium price.

Who will take the responsibility for educating society? The answer is all of us, including the government, the mass media and educational institutions. We cannot institutionalize priyayi's view that overrates degrees and titles. Instead, we have to respect professionalism regardless of the educational background of the person.

The writer is a lecturer at the teacher training school at Widya Mandala Catholic University in Surabaya. He can be reached at mateus@mail.wima ac.id