Shift in education system a must

By Nirwan Idrus

JAKARTA (JP): If we are tackling a problem of mathematical sets, our task could involve trying to determine which of the elements of education, globalization and nationalism do not belong together.

Much deliberation and thought would be needed to arrive at a correct answer. Why?

First, of course, you do not have to be a linguist to note that no two of the words form any set as such, whether from root words or any other lexicological reason.

Second, each of the words has an expansive definition that will make the forming of any set a difficult task indeed. There are probably many other reasons that make these three words incompatible in forming a contiguous set.

This article, however, is not about lexicology nor mathematical sets. But it is about the incompatibility of one of the words in the set.

It is widely accepted that we are either already in, or moving rapidly toward, globalization. In the technological sense, we are now able to communicate with people everywhere around the world, either by "snail-mail" or e-mail. More modern transportation now makes it possible to visit even the remotest places on earth. More people, even those not from wealthy countries, are able to travel because of the technological advances.

Procedural barriers, such as immigration and entry requirements to many countries, have been significantly relaxed. Not only ASEAN citizens can visit each other's countries without the need for predeparture visas, but even Australians, New Zealanders and Britons can travel to the nations in the same unhindered way.

In the economic sense, the existence of globalization cannot be more underlined by the recent and current Asian economic crisis. While this crisis has hit hard a number of Asian countries including Indonesia, the impact does not stop there.

Industries in the developed world are also battered, for example, as Asian airlines one by one cancel their orders for new planes or at least postpone their delivery dates. It is not only the big aircraft manufacturers who suffer, but also their smaller suppliers.

Exporters of other goods to Asia inevitably lost much of their business when their Asian customers tightened their belts and reprioritized their spending. University after university and college after college in the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, Canada and New Zealand suddenly found themselves having to rebudget and replan. It was a shock for them after they benefited from their governments' education policies allowing international students, mostly Asians, to study on a "full-fee" basis.

In the political sense, we have seen the Berlin Wall fall. We have seen the Soviet Union disentangled. Czechoslovakia reformed into the Czech and Slovak republics. We have seen the will of the world brought to bear on Iraq. We have seen a new South Africa. Even in Indonesia, we saw the resignation of a once powerful president.

Whether one accepts it or not, these events are not free from the impact of globalization. How can one argue that the world did not have a hand in releasing a long-time political prisoner and making him the president of a country, as in the case of Nelson Mandela? Closer to home, one could argue about the International Monetary Fund, for example, in recent Indonesian political change.

The case is therefore established that globalization is not only rapidly arriving, but has comfortably settled in.

Examples above show there is now significantly more mobility of people across political boundaries which are becoming blurred, and that developing countries when they sneeze can also cause a cold in the developed world.

Using Stephen Covey's terminology, the world (although not all of it yet) has matured from dependence and independence into "interdependence", that is globalization.

What about education and nationalism?

Given that globalization has arrived, it is inevitable that the education of the nation's citizens must take this into account.

In many of the developed countries, education reforms have been ongoing since the 1970s. Part of the reason lies in changing needs domestically. In Britain, for example, the era of industrialization in the 1860s required a certain type of education as the people moved from the farms to the factories. Frederick Taylor's Scientific Management could not but be a godsend.

But even it had to be let go and replaced by less prescriptive models as more and more of the farmers' sons and daughters were educated and exposed to a much wider outlook.

In turn, as the steam engines were replaced by "newer" types of prime movers, as automation and lately computers and numerical controls took over, different types of education -- in both content and delivery -- are needed.

It is frightening to think, and be told, that if one does not "get on the bandwagon" one will be left behind. This is because if we are left behind under the conditions alluded to above, there will not be any catchup. As a result, we have very little choice other than to adjust our systems, including our education system, to cater for this inevitability.

However, Indonesians should be encouraged by a recent article in Kompas daily of Jan. 26, 1999, written by Sukadji Ranuwihardjo, recently retired from the chairmanship of the National Accreditation Board and several times director general of higher education, that our education system has to change because it is no longer applicable.

In the same article, Sukadji also wrote about the efficacy of higher education and delivery that take into account the needs of industry elsewhere in the world. He felt that a similar approach should be considered in Indonesia.

This statement from such an important and long-time education administrator of the country is a profound signal of a fundamental shift in the Indonesian education system and practices are overdue. Given globalization as described hitherto, such a conclusion is indeed inevitable.

Indonesia is quite fortunate in this respect, as the Ministry of Education and Culture embarked on a number of initiatives along the above lines. It announced a couple of years ago its new "paradigms" which include "autonomy" and "continuous quality" improvement.

In addition, the ministry is also carrying out a number of projects which will reorientate our education system. These include the Quality in Undergraduate Education Project, the Development in Undergraduate Education Project and Engineering Education Development Project, all of which aim at improving Indonesian higher education systems and practices.

There are also projects in elementary and secondary education as well. Several of these projects also involve benchmarking exercises, which expose Indonesian teachers and academics to education systems, practices and relevance overseas.

Thus, education and globalization cannot but be intertwined and interdependent.

What about nationalism? Indeed, what about it? Given the various description of globalization, the bringing down (either physically or procedurally) of national barriers, the pervasive impact of actions and decisions made by any country in any part of the world and the admission that our education system needs an overhaul, the concept of nationalism appears to be somewhat anachronistic, doesn't it?

As in the case of education and globalization, nationalism also needs to be put in context. Nationalism in the sense of identification as one country, one people, one language and one entity, is fine. This is how we recognize an American, an Australian, a Dutch, a Russian and so on.

In some cases, even nationality becomes secondary to the emotion of nationalism in the sense of belonging to a particular nation, say by birth.

The Great White Shark, international golfer Greg Norman, lives in America but plays international competitions, rubbing shoulders with President Clinton but continuing to be known as an Australian golfer. Nicole Kidman, wife of international film star Tom Cruise, herself an international film star, has lived in America for a long time, uses an American accent in her films, but nevertheless feels Australian. The late Peter Allen, international singer, American accent and all, "still called Australia home".

No greater example of an international entrepreneur is Rupert Murdoch, the media giant who rescinded his Australian nationality and took up American citizenship for a number of reasons associated with his business. Murdoch is an American citizen, but I think it would be wrong to assume he does not feel for Australia. In fact, it would not be surprising to hear that in many circles he is still seen as an Australian.

However, nationalism that limits a person's horizons, particularly in this era of globalization, can hardly be relevant and allowed.

Unfortunately, it appears that such is the Indonesian President's attitude in relation to education when deliberating on whether to allow citizens to study overseas. While a concession has been agreed to that allows Indonesians under 18 years to study overseas, Minister of Education and Culture Juwono Sudarsono's statements in Kompas of Jan. 30, 1999, still leave doubts about the government's sincerity in pursuing globalization.

Those of us who have heard the minister are most impressed with his command of the English language, and others who have heard the President are most impressed with his command of German. Yet all of us, I am sure, have not the slightest doubt about their Indonesian nationalism.

The writer is an engineering and higher education consultant living in Jakarta.