Indicting history lessons in schools
Indicting history lessons in schools
By M. Habiburrohman
JAKARTA (Antara): How would a history teacher feel if his own students accused him of teaching them a lie?
Sumantri from junior high school SMP 18 in Jakarta knows from experience.
"What you said about Supersemar (the March 11 Indonesian presidential executive order) is not the same as what the newspapers say," he quoted his students as asserting critically.
Long a subject of debate, the document contained president Sukarno's order for Soeharto, then chief of the Army Strategic Reserves Command, to take necessary steps to restore order in 1966.
Sumantri is not alone. At least 50 history teachers from junior and senior high schools in Jakarta, Bogor, Tangerang and Bekasi told the same story in a "Dialog on History Teaching", organized by the Directorate of History and Traditional Values of the Ministry of Education and Culture in March.
They complained that their students asked them many questions about historical facts, particularly those, like Supersemar, which are controversial.
"According to our history books, president Soeharto is the 'Father of National Development' and an honest person," a participant in the dialog said. "Unfortunately, according to the mass media, he is involved in collusion, corruption and nepotism. So, students think that we are lying to them."
Agreeing with the participants, director of the Directorate of History and Traditional Values, Anhar Gonggong, said the dilemma was the result of an inappropriate teaching strategy, curriculum and materials for the subject.
He believed the teaching of the subject was undefined. "As a school subject, history tends to be taught as events and dates that the students have to commit to memory."
Historian Taufik Abdullah said the teaching of history from elementary school to secondary school did not vary. "It is all about dates, heroes and foes," he said.
History education, said Abdullah, chairman of the Indonesian Society of Historians (MSI), tended to be out of tune with the level of explanation desired at each educational level.
"From the junior high schools to the senior high schools, the same materials are simply repeated without any effort to expose historical events to the students from different angles. He added that the Diponegoro War, for example, was simply repeated several times without any attempt to reveal its various historical aspects.
In his opinion, the history curriculum does not allow students to have an adequate understanding of the subject. "As a history lesson is fraught with political content, it is vulnerable to lies," Anhar said.
Politically, a history lesson always sides with the interest of the ruling class; the significance of a historical event can be belittled or exaggerated according to what those in power deem to be appropriate.
As a result, Taufik said, the teaching of history in schools tended to be ideologically oriented. It is reflected, for example, in the awarding of the title "The Father of Development" to Soeharto.
Owing to the ideological orientation, the teaching of history in Indonesia only cherishes great hopes. "As a result, the significance of the dimension of time usually eludes the students," he added.
Taking the March 1, 1949, general attack as an example, Anhar said the event was evidence that the teaching of history was coopted by the interest of the ruling regime. "Soeharto's heroism in this event has been exaggerated," he said.
Book
Anhar also identified the constraint that many books history books were inadequate but "unfortunately, these books are compulsory at school".
He said most of the history textbooks had passed a credibility test because they were written without adherence to a correct textbook writing methodology.
"The trouble is that these books are already in circulation, and some are being used as a teaching material simply on the basis of a consensus between the publisher and the history teachers concerned," he said.
Taufik seconded the opinion, saying that many history textbooks were not fit to be used as teaching materials because the pointers used to elucidate an event can indicate, at least, that the textbook writers are incapable of drawing up a good line of historical description.
It was justified by a study of history textbooks for secondary schools which was conducted by a group of students at the Jakarta Teachers Training Institute (IKIP Jakarta).
"The study has shown that many textbooks on history do not meet the requirements, at least in respect to the line of discussion and the language used," said Syamsiar, a teacher at IKIP Jakarta's history department.
Not surprisingly, the Directorate of History and Traditional Values has concluded that history textbooks are a problem for both students and teachers on a national scale.
Controversial
In an attempt to compensate for the weaknesses, Anhar Gonggong suggests that controversial historical facts should be honestly exposed. "History is controversial," he said.
As an example, he said, revealing the facts related to Supersemar, the birth of Pancasila or March 1, 1949, must be coupled with putting them in their historical background.
"In this way, there will be no more cases in which a figure is given more prominence than other figures or the role of a certain figure in a certain historical is abolished," he said.
In this context, a sociological explanation of a historical event plays a significant role to ensure that historical facts will no longer be exposed and understood as merely black or white.
In addition to this sociological explanation, Taufik believes it is necessary to develop the materials of history as a subject in accordance with the maturity levels of students and educational stratification.
In this way, said Taufik, who is vice president of the International Association of Historians on Asia (IAHA), the materials for the subject must be able to kindle the students' imagination about a particular historical event.
"This may avoid a level of explanation which is either too sophisticated or too naive," he said.
Regarding the curriculum and materials of a history subject that fail to conform to the intellectual development of the students, the Directorate of History and Traditional Values views it as the impact of the gap between historians and the team drawing up a curriculum for the teaching of history.
"The Directorate General of Primary and Secondary Education and the Directorate of History and Traditional Values must be synchronized," a meeting concluded.
Taufik has suggested a thorough study of various textbooks on history now available in bookstores. "Teachers must also be able to evaluate the credibility of a textbook on history," he said.
The study must encompass the framework of discussion or chapters, the line of description of a particular historical event and the style of the language used in a history textbook.
"The style of the language used in a history textbook must reflect history as a discipline. It means that each word chosen must have a concept behind it." He added that there were frequent cases of overlapping use of terms and words in textbooks on history, such as the words "battle" and "war".
He continued that a history textbook should be provided with attractive illustrations to conform with the historical events being discussed to ensure that history will be more interesting to study.
Anhar believes improvements in the teaching of history are essential because the presence of too many confusing items will only perplex students and teachers.
He admitted efforts to improve the teaching of history would not proceed well unless the government shows its political will not to include its political interest in the curriculum or textbooks.
In the conclusion made at the preparatory meeting, the Directorate of History and Traditional Values affirmed this, saying that the teaching of history must be freed from political interests from now on.
As long as political interests remain in the curriculum and materials for the subject, the fate of Sumantri and his fellow history teachers will remain difficult. They will continue to be caught between feeling deceived by the curriculum presented to them, and having to deal with being called liars by their students.