Is Muhammadiyah still an educational reformer?

Is Muhammadiyah still an educational reformer?

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): Can Muhammadiyah regain its role as reformer in
Islamic education?

This is a question several of my friends have been asking me
for about two years. As I see it, they have been asking this
question because they feel that Muhammadiyah is no longer
recognized by the public as a reformer in Indonesian Islamic
education. And from the way they have been communicating their
anxiety to me, I sense that they want very much to see
Muhammadiyah regain its old role as an organization which can
thrust itself forward as a reformer in the field of education or
at least as a reformer in the field of Islamic education in
Indonesia.

I have never been able to answer this question in a clear and
unambiguous way. My personal experiences with Muhammadiyah would
induce me to answer this question in the negative. But realizing
that my knowledge of Muhammadiyah is very limited, I prefer to
give a qualified answer. Usually I give as my answer a list of
prerequisites that should be satisfied by Muhammadiyah in order
to be recognized as a reborn reformer of Islamic education in
Indonesia.

In the old days Muhammadiyah was considered an educational
reformer because it succeeded in bringing about tangible changes
in the practice of Islamic education in Indonesia. Muhammadiyah
created schools which differed entirely from the traditional
pondok (the traditional "school") in terms of physical design,
curriculum and methods of instruction. Muhammadiyah also
succeeded in giving its pupils an understanding concerning the
socio-political situation of the country at that time. This is an
orientation which the traditional pondok could not provide their
pupils.

It was in this socio-cultural sense that Muhammadiyah was
considered a reformer in Indonesian Islamic education. It was
also in this sense that Taman Siswa, another educational
organization, was accepted as a reformer in national education in
Indonesia. The success of Muhammadiyah at that time was a
consequence of its ability to detect the weaknesses of the
traditional Islamic educational institutions and on its ability
to create an alternative system which worked in real life. I
think any movement towards educational reform will receive public
recognition only if it can bring about real changes in day-to-day
operations.

The situation in Islamic education in Indonesia has changed
considerably since those days when Mohammadiyah was considered
the champion of modern Islamic education in Indonesia. If
Muhammadiyah wants to become a reformer in present-day Islamic
education, it must first identify the weaknesses of the present
situation and then develop educational designs that can correct
these weaknesses. It is only after it can demonstrate
convincingly that these new designs bring about real improvements
in the conditions of present day Islamic education in Indonesia
that Muhammadiyah will again be recognized by the public as
present day reformer.

What are the weaknesses of Islamic education in Indonesia
today?

The situation is so heterogeneous that it is really hard to
give a general answer. Measured against the criteria of modern
education today there are many Islamic educational institutions
that can be considered good, but there are also many Islamic
schools that are really weak. If we concentrate on those Islamic
schools that fall within the "weak" category. then I think that
in general their weaknesses consist of the following:

First, their offerings in science is relatively poor compared
to schools without a religious background. They have no good
laboratories, their teachers are less well qualified and their
syllabuses are also somewhat poor. Second, religious education in
these schools is usually reduced to religious instruction. The
emphasis is usually on providing knowledge (the cognitive
aspect), not on guiding students to develop the will to lead a
religious life (the conative aspect). Third, instruction in
history is in these schools usually one-sided. Students get more
instruction in Islamic history, but not enough instruction in
national history. Fourth, teachers of religion in these schools
tend to isolate themselves. They do not interact sufficiently
with teachers of general subjects.

The result is that there is no functional linkage between
religious instruction and general instruction in these schools.
There is, for instance, no linkage between physics and religion.
This is sad, in my opinion, since establishing a functional and
harmonious relationship between these two fields is theoretically
quite probable. I am quite influenced by one maxim which says
"the words of God (the Koran) cannot possibly contradict the work
of God (the universe)."

These are, in my view, the major weaknesses of the less
qualified Islamic schools in Indonesia today. Can Muhammadiyah
design programs to correct these weaknesses? And can it conduct
experiments to try out such designs, and provide guidance on how
their designs can be implemented in real life?

It is only if these questions are answered in the positive
will Muhammadiyah reemerge as reformer within Islamic education
in Indonesia today. In my view, Muhammadiyah's Institutes for
Teachers Training and the Study of Education constitute the
specialized bodies within Muhammadiyah that must find answers to
these questions. Before they can fulfill this function, however,
a lot of introspection is required. One absolute requirement is,
in my opinion, that these institutions do their utmost to develop
a solid academic culture within their folds. The four questions I
mentioned above are technical-educational questions, requiring
technical-educational answers. Political responses to these
questions will never solve the problem.

As an outsider, I can only hope that the lessons from the past
five years will not go unnoticed, and that under their newly
elected leadership Muhammadiyah will be able to recapture its old
role as an effective educational reformer.

Dr. Mochtar Buchori is an observer of social affairs.