Our education: Schooling in ruined buildings
B. Herry-Priyono, Jakarta
As the 2004/2005 academic year draws to a close and the new school year approaches, an old cycle of urgency is returning. It is the angst of enrolling children in school, the problem of paying for their education and the questions surrounding the lamentable quality of education in Indonesia. These problems were here last year and the year before, and they are likely to haunt us again next year. Like some kind of amnesia, they return only to fade away once the school year is underway.
These months, amid the angst of parents preparing their children's schooling, the cycle of urgency takes the form of a promise by the government to rebuild school buildings that are either ruined or in a state of irreversible decay. There is nothing new in this, as it has been a grave problem for the past 10 years or so. It only has the appearance of urgency due to the law of history: the longer it is left unattended, the harder its urgent nature bites.
How large is the scale of decay? According to data at the Ministry of National Education from 2003-2004, of 816,834 state elementary school buildings (SD), 471,050 (57.67 percent) were in a state of decay. As for the condition of state junior high schools (SMP), 22,621 (16.30 percent) of a total of 138,742 were in a state of decay, while 2,589 of a total a 47,913 state high school buildings (SMA) were in ruin. As many other data about the dark side of Indonesia, these numbers are likely conservative.
History may not cry over spilled milk, but since the future is a history made by our children, history certainly cries over ruined school buildings. It is laudable that a sense of urgency over ruined school buildings has again descended upon this country's mandarins. It is a promise that deserves wide support. But political promises are often a triumph of hope over experience. And the story of political promises in Indonesia contains enough tragedy to discourage even the most resilient romantic. This is also true with the promise to rebuild ruined school buildings. No one knows for sure whether the promise is simply a game of public relations or a statement of political intent.
For courtesy's sake, let us assume that it is a statement of political intent that will be pursued to its consequences. First, the problem of ruined school buildings is only one among many in the universe of problems besetting education in Indonesia. The others include the quality of teachers, technology for learning, curriculum, school management and financing, plus intangible issues like the civic content of education as opposed to sectarian content, which has reached an alarming level.
Repairing ruined school buildings is far from addressing the problems of education in Indonesia. Nonetheless, it is a virtue to start at the lowest level of expectation. If, due to a lack of creative imagination, the government can promise only to address the most physical side of the problem -- i.e., repairing ruined school buildings -- and is yet to address the less visible sides, then it is a virtue to pursue it as an entry point.
Second, it is convenient to start with law. The story of reform in Indonesia, however, contains enough lessons to conclude that many bills may have been passed, but ruined school buildings remain unrepaired. It is a constitutional mandate that "the state shall prioritize the budget for education to a minimum of 20 percent of the state budget and of regional budgets" (Constitution, Article 31.4). Every constitution is an ideal; the loftier the better. Yet it is clear that this ideal is based on a premise that the government has the autonomous capacity to determine budget allocations. This premise is farcical, not only because a large amount of the budget is siphoned off to corruptors' pockets, but also because of budget cuts in areas deemed "social", like education and public health.
So, the statement of political intent faces a mounting problem of financing. On this issue, it is instructive to affirm a criticism posed by Indonesian Human Development Report (IHDR) 2004: "At a time of financial stringency, there is a temptation to postpone the necessary social investment: the government may instead focus excessively on repairing the state budget at the expense of human and social development, in the hope that this will create enough investor confidence to regenerate [economic] growth." This is a type of predicament that is likely to recur.
To say that this tendency is a policy error is simply stating the obvious. IHDR 2004 suggests other sources of financing. One is "by taking a certain percentage of proceeds from the exploitation of natural resources, since these resources are ultimately owned by all Indonesians".
The other is a form of levy "applied to wealthy individuals". But there is another source suggested by IHDR 2004, i.e. "a social sector levy on corporation". This is likely to spark controversy, as it runs counter to the mainstream economic idea that business should not be hampered by any costs other than those directly related to the process of capital accumulation.
IHDR 2004 argues that such a social levy "would not necessarily add to business costs" insofar as it is compensated by "moderate wage claims". In my view, the issue runs much deeper. It has something to do with the ongoing tidal wave of deregulation. Deregulation stands on a premise that is less to do with economic issues than with a new art of statecraft. In a nutshell, it is the idea that the survival of a society must no longer depend on the working of its government. This, of course, is one side of a coin whose other side is the idea that the survival of a society can no longer simply be the burden of its government. In short, deregulation is an act of stakeholding by other sectors in society in tandem with the government.
Now, consider this question. Which sector is the main beneficiary of school products in the form of workers and other professional groups? It is neither the government nor any other sector but the business sector. Indeed, by eschewing this act of stakeholding -- here the case involves the reconstruction of ruined school buildings -- the business sector may simply be a free rider in Indonesian society.
The writer is a postgraduate lecturer at the Driyarkara School of Philosophy, Jakarta.