Nurlaila, an example of abuse against teachers

Nurlaila, an example of abuse against teachers

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

One leading national newspaper reported not long ago that some
teachers and students filed a judicial review of Law No. 20/2003
on national education. They argued that basic education should be
extended from elementary school to high school. They also
insisted that the gradual phasing in of the 20 percent national
budget allocation for education as required by the law was
hampering the realization of free education for all. They
appeared to press for the "now-or-never" implementation of the
budget allocation.

In another case, Nurlaila, a teacher at SMP 56 junior high
school in Jakarta, together with parents, students and other
teachers, led a protest against a land-swap deal between the
Ministry of National Education and PT Tata Disantara. The
protesters claimed this deal, which led to the closure of the
school, was riddled with irregularities (The Jakarta Post, May
12, 2005).

I also encountered during my research, we have witnessed the
mushrooming of non-governmental organizations founded by teachers
and educators that are often critical of the government's
education policies.

Whether or not they provide well-reasoned arguments for their
criticism is another story. What is important here is Christopher
Bjork's (2003) research indicating that the role of teachers in
Indonesia as mere "transmitters" of knowledge has gradually begun
to break down. Teachers' awareness of their social role has not
only emerged, but has also begun to be put into action as
"teacher activism".

There are some points worth considering here.

First, teachers are increasingly aware that they can be a
force to be reckoned with and that education can function as an
influential agent of social change. The old paradigm that schools
are merely instructional sites and that education is and should
be separated from sociopolitical aspects has steadily vanished.

Second, the challenge derives from the fact that schools
represent arenas of contest and struggle among differentially
empowered cultural and economic groups. Teachers are under
pressure to generate and accommodate various competing
aspirations within society, meaning equal treatment in the form
of the involvement of students and parents regardless of their
background is imperative in giving weight to the credibility of
their movement.

Third, teachers should further use this opportunity to inject
this new spirit in students. Involving students in the judicial
process of the education law must have been a stimulating
experiment, indeed, but this should also be accompanied by
nurturing this spirit in a more pedagogically responsible manner
in class.

After declaring themselves "new democrats", teachers'
democratic values should be reflected when teaching and dealing
with students.

Fourth, teachers' organizations must be "immune" from any
vested interests and must be able -- together with concerned
lawmakers -- to effectively balance and apply pressure on the
government. The idea that non-governmental organizations often
end up being subjected to vested interests is still widespread in
this country.

During my fieldwork, for example, I encountered two new
teachers' organizations that had splintered off from the once-
government supported Indonesian Teachers Union (PGRI). One of
them vanished in about a year due to a dispute among its members.
The remaining organization grouped private teachers who were
disappointed with the PGRI, which was dominated by government
teachers. However, just before I finished my fieldwork, the
chairman of the organization ran for the local legislature as a
member of the then ruling political party.

Another teacher activist from the private sector successfully
became chairman of the education board in Jakarta, but the
supposedly independent body was never effective because its
members from the private and government factions became entangled
in a dispute over the members' election results.

Teacher activism therefore strongly demands idealism on the
part of teachers in avoiding short-term political gains and in
resisting political pressure. But can teachers consistently
uphold such idealism amid their below-standard pay and
professionalism and the lure of and pressure from political
power?

One may doubt it. But among the cases I observed, only SMP 56
is different, with Nurlaila left alone fighting for justice as
parents and other teachers compromised and accepted the closure
of the school. Nurlaila was fired, losing her position as a civil
servant, and is now suing Jakarta Governor Sutiyoso for her
dismissal. The land-swap deal itself is now before the Supreme
Court as both the South Jakarta District Court and a higher court
threw out a civil suit against the Ministry of National Education
and the private company involved in the deal (The Jakarta Post,
May 12, 2005).

But how many Nurlailas do we have? Certainly not many. As the
aforementioned cases show, while being critical over education
policy is undeniably needed because our education system is still
dogged with entrenched problems, it is also equally important
that teachers critically reflect on what has been achieved,
assist each other in enhancing professional development, identify
factual and common problems and back this up with solid
arguments, and launch more organized campaigns to achieve the
just and quality education system to which we all aspire.

Without this strong commitment and awareness, teacher activism
may end up being hijacked by short-term interests or bending to
political pressure. And more Nurlailas might end up being
victimized.

The writer is Master of Philosophy in Education candidate at
the School of Policy and Practice, Department of Education and
Social Work, the University of Sydney.