RI education system needs a revolution

By Nirwan Idrus

This is the first of two articles on Indonesian education.

JAKARTA (JP): Minister of Education and Culture Juwono Sudarsono recently outlined his eight or so basic competencies he would like to see adopted during his term of office. There is no prize for guessing that "the three Rs" (reading, writing and arithmetic) are included on the minister's list. It is refreshing to listen to the incumbent of a very important portfolio responsible for the country's human resources development talking about getting back to basics. The minister was speaking at an Indonesian independence celebration at the Australian International School on Aug. 19, 1998.

Getting back to basics has been proven to be a potent antidote to deteriorating organizational health. There is no reason why this cannot be the case with education either. Not very long ago, many companies around the world talked about keeping to their networking, reconcentrating, refocusing, reduced diversification and even reengineering. But how will these impact on Indonesian education now and in the future? What is the health of the Indonesian education system?

The education portfolio in a country of more than 200 million people where a big percentage are of primary and secondary school age, is an extremely formidable responsibility. This portfolio designs the templates of future Indonesians and molds their moral and intellectual characteristics and capacities. It therefore needs the most appropriate and well thought-out vision, mission and strategy. It needs to envision the type of Indonesians that Indonesia needs in five, 10, 15, 20 and even 100 years from now. To be realistic, we also have to think about the type of Indonesians we need right now and in the next two or three years.

This complex situation is somewhat exacerbated by the constant social and technological changes occurring everywhere, the effects of globalization, increasingly open competition, tariff and protection reduction and, of course, the monetary crisis. But a man's work is never done, as they say.

Do we need education reform in addition to the other three reforms we have heard so much about since May 21 this year?

It has been argued that education reform in Indonesia started some years ago and not in 1998. The nine-year compulsory education perhaps could be seen as a major part of that reform.

But the government's insistence on Bahasa Indonesia as the medium of instruction in higher education and the abolition of the term MBA and its global replacement with MM (Magister Manajemen) could also be seen as part of that reform as well.

This is so despite the fact that at about the same time, Malaysia said that its insistence on the Malaysian language as their educational medium of instruction had disadvantaged Malaysians and Malaysian businesses.

In fact, many Indonesians have been saying exactly the same thing as a result of their own shortcomings in negotiations with international businesses.

Indeed, recognized recent higher education reforms started in the early 1970s in the United Kingdom followed by other English speaking countries around the globe since then.

For example Australia introduced its Unified Higher Education system in 1987, and New Zealand amended its Education Act in 1990 when it introduced its seamless education model. One of the major impacts of these changes in those countries was improving quality, efficiency, effectiveness and access.

The other was the formation of new universities from the then polytechnics, colleges of advanced education and institutes of technology. For a while, Australians talked about the pre-1987 and post-1987 universities, although that distinction is slowly disappearing, especially now that the newer universities are beginning to show significantly higher creativity and effectiveness in their teaching, learning and research.

The introduction of the concept of quality management into higher education was a significant shift in paradigms in the education sector anywhere. It is encouraging that after a number of years of incessant prodding by quality practitioners and governments alike, the concepts of quality assurance, total quality management, continuous quality improvement and similar measures to recognize the importance of the consumers, are beginning to find acceptance in the hallowed corridors of universities and other higher education institutions around the world.

It is also pleasing to see that Indonesia has quickly picked up this important paradigm shift and is pursuing educational policies to encourage and instill quality in its higher education institutions. At least three of the Ministry of Education and Culture's current major projects involve the implementation of quality assurance and continuous improvement in higher education institutions around the country.

The Development in Undergraduate Education Project recognizes the shortfalls in various educational infrastructure at Indonesian universities. Its main objective is therefore to improve such infrastructure in order to upgrade the standard and quality of basic facilities that contribute to producing quality graduates.

The Quality for Undergraduate Education (QUE) Project on the other hand has the objectives of improving relevance, academic atmosphere, internal management and organization, including institutional commitment, sustainability as well as efficiency and productivity of S1 teaching and learning (S1 or Strata 1 is the undergraduate level in Indonesia). Grants were awarded to S1 study programs at universities around the country on the basis of successful pre-applications and final applications during 1997 and early 1998. These grants, subject to annual reviews, run for a maximum length of five years and are funded through World Bank loans.

The third, namely the Engineering Education Development Project (EEDP) concentrates on engineering education. Its objectives are to improve the quality and relevance of engineering education and to enhance students' access and participation in the study of engineering.

Quality and quality assurance sit on the top of a list of foci which include curriculum development, industry linkages, equipment and reequipment as well as student loans.

Unlike the QUE Project, EEDP includes both technical and professional engineering education levels, i.e. diplomas and S1, at both polytechnics and universities. EEDP involves seven polytechnics and six universities in various parts of Indonesia. This project is funded through loans from the Asian Development Bank.

Dr. Nirwan Idrus, a consultant in higher education, is a chartered professional engineer and has held senior positions in industry, government and higher education in Australia, Papua New Guinea and New Zealand. Ideas expressed in this article are personal.