Misperception hinders changes in education

Misperception hinders changes in education

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): Every educational system has gone through a
transformation process at one time or another. Transformation is
a rejuvenation process. To wisely guide a system through such a
process is a very hard task. Most systems are either reluctant or
afraid to adopt changes, until one day circumstances force them
to change their entire foundations, structures and operations.
Then transformation becomes an unavoidable necessity.

Several factors make transformation a difficult, sometimes
even an impossible task. The flow of this process basically
depends on our understanding of any new realities facing society,
and on our vision concerning the nature of interdependence
between schools and society. If these two things are clearly
perceived, then the hurdles constraining a transformation process
will be minimum.

But if our perceptions are muddled we will have great
difficulty in steering our system through this rejuvenation
process. One additional factor that makes educational
transformation more difficult to achieve is society's perception
of education. How do we perceive education?

It is a universal phenomenon, I think, that education is
always associated with school. This is true whether you are in
China, Iran or the United States. It is as if we universally
believe that the only place where education takes place is at
school.

We know, of course, that this is not true. We know that when a
child comes to school for the first time, he or she brings with
him or her a certain amount of education from home, from the
family. We also know that after leaving school each person
continues to seek and receive education.

In the workplace every person seeks and gets further
education, non-formal or informal, from the boss and from
colleagues. Within the society at large, each person receives
education which helps him or her become mature or wise.

Maturity and wisdom is the product of formal, non-formal and
informal education. All these practical experiences
notwithstanding, most of us continue to think that education is
practically synonymous with schooling. This view has a very
strong influence on two things: one, on our perception concerning
the relationship between family education, school education and
out of school education; and two, on the way we perceive
education as a field of study.

Let us examine these two questions more closely. Because of
this traditional misperception, we tend to look at school
education as a separate activity, having no links either with
education at home or with education obtained within the society.

We habitually give only minimum attention to the kind of
education that children attain from their family. And we almost
never pay any attention to the rich opportunities for non-formal
and informal education that can be found within the society.

At school, we never teach our students how to learn from non-
formal and informal settings. It is a sad reality that school
education is detached from family education and out of school
education. It has been convincingly demonstrated that optimum
achievement for each child can be reached only when there is
close cooperation and correct mutual understanding between school
and home.

It has also been amply demonstrated that success in life
depends on our capacity to learn from non-formal and informal
opportunities, in addition to our achievements in formal
education.

In the absence of such cooperation and links, it is impossible
for most children to achieve optimum realization of their
potentials, and equally impossible for most adults to continually
develop their potentials.

In this kind of situation, a child may still be a star
student, but not a high achiever. In this kind of situation it is
possible for an adult to become a big success, but not a person
who makes things happen.

The consequence of this sad situation is that most children
are underachievers, and that most adults do not grow beyond the
limits of their formal education.

What price has been paid by this nation for allowing education
to proceed on such a narrow and isolated conceptual base?

The price is a well educated workforce and excellence in the
various branches of our national undertaking. What we have
instead is a poor workforce and mediocrity in many fields.

Another consequence of this traditional misperception is the
reduction of our national capability to deal effectively with
macro educational problems. Because of this traditional
misperception, education as a field of study is primarily
conceived as the study of teaching and learning within a school
setting.

The study of education has been confined to inquiries about
micro educational problems. Macro problems in education, such as
the relationship between school as a social institution and
politics and economics as social forces, have never been touched
or scrutinized.

Because of this tradition, our thoughts on education become
narrow and shallow, and whenever our society is engulfed in
fundamental political and economic changes we become confused,
and our schools react slowly and belatedly. The result is that
schools become, for a while, estranged from the mainstream
dynamics of society.

Good schools will quickly recover from this alienation, but
less fortunate schools will continue for a time to exist as
anomalous institutions within a modernizing society.

A group of educators asked me recently to joint them in
discussing the problem of enabling education in Indonesia to deal
with the changes that will be brought about by free trade
agreements.

What can we do now in order to prepare the young generation
for when free trade is really implemented in 2020 and competition
is expected to become more ruthless?

This is, in my opinion, a question that must be addressed
seriously. In view of questions like this, I think it is high
time we redefine our perceptions of education.

If we want to have a rigorous and resilient system of
education, capable of responding to challenges brought about by
global changes, we must broaden our perception of education. We
must give our education a broader and deeper base.

The writer is an observer of social and political affairs.