Schools should enlighten, not indoctrinate students

Simon Marcus Gower, Executive Principal, High/Scope Indonesia School
Jakarta

Many people, it is clear, fret and worry about how Indonesia is going to survive in our "age of globalization". This is understandable as the challenges are considerable. But we must not fret too much and become overwhelmed; response is necessary. With the perceived growth in global competition many commentators warn of the tests and potential threats to Indonesia's position within the global economy and world order.

Understandably educators must be concerned about their role in helping to equip the nation with the skills needed to perform. But what are those skills and how can a schools' curriculum help to target them?

In the context of Indonesian education investment and financial support is, of course, a major worry. An education system that suffers from a lack of sufficient investment will, of course, face major obstacles along its pathway to success.

However, there may be certain alternative ways in which Indonesia's education system may rise-up to the challenges of globalization without being too demanding of financial input. Indonesian education and educators would be far better equipped for future challenges, if mental change and input, rather than just material/ financial change and input, was encouraged.

In order for schools to genuinely contribute to their graduates' abilities to progress and succeed in the competitive arena of globalization they must increasingly contribute to students' thinking skills.

This means that schools must more and more aim to equip their students with skills such as problem solving ability, creative and critical analysis of data and information, research and report writing skills and a general autonomy of thought that allows students to perform as independent learners and thinkers.

This in turn means that schools must work towards personal character traits within students that will allow them to develop and flourish as active participants in the era of globalization.

In this sense education must become more flexible and encouraging of originality and creativity of thought as opposed to merely presenting knowledge and expecting students to memorize and remember in a rote fashion.

Modern and progressive schooling, then, has to foster characteristics of creativity, organization and self-management skills, perseverance and mental strength, mental and moral discipline, inquisitiveness and curiosity to explore and discover and punctuality and consistency in attendance and meeting deadlines.

Many would propose that there is little new in such ideas and many of those "character targets" have long been part and parcel of "traditional", existing school aims.

However, the real difference between "traditional" schooling and more progressive modern alternative views may lie not so much in the aims of education as in the methods that are applied in trying to develop students towards such aims.

Prime examples of this kind of "difference" are to be found within the existing Indonesian schooling system. For example, more traditionalist educators would claim that traits such as discipline and punctuality are targeted within the existing system; but it is necessary to examine how those good character traits are targeted.

Unfortunately, most consistently discipline is not nurtured as a trait that comes from within each individual. Instead it is imposed in a dictatorial manner that demands compliance rather than shows that disciplined behavior is best for one and for all.

Within many Indonesian schools there is a consistent misappropriation of education as a means of indoctrination. Students are barely thought of as individuals and are goaded and forced down an education path that does not permit them to view the world from a broader perspective.

Instead of enlightening students and opening their minds up to the world, schools are often placing blinkers over the eyes of students that leave them naive and narrow-minded.

In such a mode of education, sadly, curiosity becomes curious and even unacceptable. Inquisitive students often find that there is little room for them to explore subjects within an Indonesian classroom or the Indonesian curriculum. This is a particularly sad condition and it is a condition that is contrary to what education should be achieving.

An example of one active and really rather thoughtful student in an Indonesian high school illustrates this point. Throughout the year this student was criticized by his teachers as being disruptive and "always asking too many questions."

At the end of the year, unfortunately, his grades were "designated" as being "borderline" and regrettably his teachers decided that he should not be allowed to pass to the next year of study. This was regrettable and unfortunate because the student had, effectively, been allowed to fail by his teachers and even, more accurately, his teachers had failed too.

This student simply had a different learning style. He consistently wanted to find out for himself and be creative in his studies. Multiple-choice questions did not suit him but that was all that he was exposed to at his high school and consequently he did not succeed in his tests.

But instead of helping this student with different teaching and learning strategies, the teachers consistently misinterpreted his behavior and character as disruptive and ultimately unsuccessful. The lack of success, though, lay both with the student but perhaps more so with his teachers.

Many students have healthy and inquisitive minds but the structure of the school system and curriculum is prone to inhibit and restrict their thoughtfulness. Their intellect is not given the opportunity to develop because of the system's need to confine and conform.

Many Indonesian schools, and indeed teachers, end up requiring memorization of facts by the students. True learning and understanding is thus sidelined. Instead of making learning experiences memorable and so stimulating to the intellect, schools in Indonesia often conform to rote memorization that limits thought.

In the age of globalization the ability to think critically and creatively with openness to different points of view is an increasing requirement. Adaptability and flexibility become key success factors and the intransigence and limitation of indoctrination becomes debilitating. If schools merely indoctrinate rather than liberate students' thinking, then they are in effect disabling rather than enabling students to succeed in the world.

Leonardo Da Vinci once noted that "just as iron rusts from disuse, even so does inaction spoil the intellect." Schools must enlighten students to encourage active thought and development of the intellect. Passive, inactive and mindlessly obedient students will suffer a "spoiled intellect".

The globalization of our world demands that students are equipped with the power to think for themselves. School classrooms should be an open forum in which students get the opportunity to exercise their intellect and so become thinkers.

The opinions expressed above are personal.