Local education no guarantee of nationalism

President B.J. Habibies's recent proposal that young Indonesians should be barred from studying abroad has invited pros and cons. Mochtar Buchori, an observer of social and cultural affairs, discusses the relevance of such a proposal.

JAKARTA (JP): Is it true that sending children abroad to study at an early age will make them less nationalistic or even anationalistic?

That is what the government fears. But is this fear realistic? Or is it merely a policy to discourage parents from sending their children abroad at an early age? What is meant by early age? Is the practice of sending children abroad for secondary education, for instance, educationally faulty, and thus to be disapproved?

Let us examine the issue by using a hypothetical example. If you have a very bright son or daughter who passes his or her final high school exam at the age of 16, and you have the means to send him or her abroad for a college education, by this new regulation you cannot do that. You have to wait for another two years. If you persist, and send him or her abroad anyway, he or she will become an Indonesian without a sufficient sense of nationalism. He or she will become an estranged Indonesian. That is the argument according to this regulation. Does it make sense?

There is no simple answer to this question, I am afraid. But there are at least three remarks that can be made about this regulation.

First, what is the percentage of Indonesian parents who can afford to send their children abroad to study before the age of 18? Very small, I think. Does it make sense to issue a government regulation for such a tiny minority? I think not.

Secondly, what is the precise meaning of the stipulation before the age of 18? It can be anywhere between birth and 17 years and 11 months. At what age before 18 do most parents want to send their children to study abroad?

I think 13. The age period between 13 and 18 is usually considered a critical time to prepare for the rigorous academic life at the university level.

Parents who have high academic ambitions for their children usually have prep schools in mind when they decide to send their children abroad at an early age.

What this government regulation amounts to is that no Indonesian boy or girl will ever have the opportunity to benefit from the rich educational programs offered by schools with very rich histories and very good reputations. I think this will eventually create a lamentable situation.

Thirdly, is it true that starting to study abroad before the age of 18 will reduce one's sense of nationalism? Conversely, is it true that a secondary education at home will make children acquire a solid basis for nationalism?

I think this is a very delicate question that requires careful analysis to answer. As I understand it, nationalism has two aspects -- a moral and an intellectual one.

From the moral aspect, having a sense of nationalism means that one has a moral commitment to do something for the preservation of the existence of one's nation and for the continuous improvement of its quality of life. Expressed in popular terms, having a sense of nationalism means that one loves one's nation.

On the intellectual side, having a sense of nationalism means that one has an adequate understanding of the problems faced by one's nation and the potentials that exist within that nation. One cannot have a sound sense of nationalism if one is intellectually blind or if one has a distorted perception concerning the condition of the nation.

It is only when one is sufficiently mature in these two aspects that one will be able to develop a healthy nationalism; i.e. a nationalism that is free from chauvinism or any other kind of cultural defect. One such culturally defective nationalism is the one that is described by Erich Fromm as a form of incest, idolatry and insanity. This kind of nationalism changes patriotism from a sense of responsibility into a cult.

What does this mean in terms of education? Any system of education which purports to cultivate a healthy sense of nationalism among its students will have to ensure that three types of growth will indeed take place in the students. These three types of growth are growth in their knowledge about the condition of the country (cognitive growth), growth in their love and affection toward the country (affective growth) and growth in their commitment toward the nation (volitional growth).

If these three educational tasks are performed satisfactorily, then we can say that there is indeed an educational process taking place that leads toward the cultivation of a healthy nationalism.

But if students show only one or two of these three required growths, then there is no sufficient basis for claiming that the school system is providing an education that cultivates nationalism.

How is the condition of Indonesia's schools in this respect? It is impossible to give an accurate generalization, however, I suspect that the situation varies widely from one school to another.

One thing that is sure, however, is that in almost all of our schools insufficient attention has been given to the development of the moral aspect of nationalism. For this reason, there is, in my opinion, insufficient ground for claiming that formal education at domestic secondary schools guarantees the growth of a healthy nationalism among students.

I think that for the purpose of cultivating nationalism, pursuing a secondary education at home is indeed better than studying abroad. But the argument I would use is not because our schools are better equipped for this purpose, but because within our society, there are cultural forces outside the school which shape this sense of nationalism among our youth.

Social experiences at the local level and emotive perceptions of important events at the national level are just such forces.

If the purpose of the present government regulation is to discourage parents from sending their children abroad for secondary education, then the right measure is not to restrict parents' freedom in their search for quality education for their children, but to improve the quality of education at home.