'Super schools' making inroads into RI society

'Super schools' making inroads into RI society

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): I am using the term "super school" here as a translation of the Indonesian term 'sekolah unggul', a name chosen by the Ministry of Education and Culture to denote schools which carry out a "quality education" program. I was told that this terminology was especially chosen to avoid the use of the term sekolah elite (elite school) which in the opinion of the education bureaucracy contains a negative connotation, i.e. being exclusive and arrogant.

I have been involved during the last three or four months in a number of discussions about the problems of developing "super schools" in Indonesia, and from this involvement I have learned a number of things. I have learned, among other things, that there are four questions or problems about "super schools" that are hitherto still unresolved.

These four questions are: first, the question regarding the essential characteristics of "super schools"; second, the question concerning the basic difference in curriculum between "super schools" and ordinary schools; third, the question concerning whether or not "super schools" should necessarily be expensive; and fourth, questions about the exclusive character of "super schools": is it an inherent feature? I have also learned, in addition, that in spite of all the criticism that has been leveled against existing super schools in Indonesia today, the number of groups within our society which wish to have their own "super schools" has been increasing.

It is not only the super-rich groups which have been active developing their own "super schools". Groups which are not so rich are also considering setting up schools of their own. I have learned, for instance, that the PSKD group (The Association of Christian Schools in Jakarta) is planning to develop such a school right in he middle of the city, in the Menteng area. The Muhammadiyah group is also considering setting up one "super school" in each province. If this is not possible yet, they will start with five "super schools" in this country.

What is it that has makes the "super school" idea so attractive? My guess is that more and more parents in our society are longing for a kind of education for their children which they think cannot be provided by Indonesian schools today. Those who are well-to-do, who work and live in a net of national and international environments, want their children to become fluent in Indonesian and English at the end of their high school education. They also want their children to acquire functional literacy in science and technology; have knowledge about Indonesian history, at least modern Indonesian history and also be sufficiently skilled in computer technology.

Parents like this do not believe that our schools today can provide such an education. Parents who are not so rich, but still want a good education for their children are looking for schools which can provide good cheap education. These parents also do not believe that our schools today are capable of providing such a service. Education at our schools today is cheap all right, but it is not good. Not as good as they want it to be.

"Good education" to these parents means education which teaches their children to speak and write in Indonesian without making syntactical mistakes, to understand ideas and feelings communicated in both written and spoken English, to have a basic understanding of science and technology, to appreciate beauty conveyed through various media of art and enable them to pursue a prosperous and respectable life.

Surely it must be possible to have such education without having to pay outrageous tuition fees. These parents do not need schools with luxurious facilities. What they need is schools which are modest but dignified, managed by good teachers and with a decent library.

Is this rush towards "super schools" a good or a bad sign? Opinions differ concerning the meaning of this phenomenon. On the one hand there are those who regard this as a good sign. They think that the existence of "super schools" in our society will one day bring about a crop of well-educated people in our work force, which will boost our economic development. In addition, young people graduating from such schools will certainly constitute a social force capable of strengthening democracy in our society.

On the other hand, there are those who think that "super schools" will exacerbate social and economic discrepancies that already exist in our society. These "super schools" will be accessible only for children from the privileged classes. Developing "super schools" thus only means giving more privileges to those already privileged.

Which opinion is closer to the mark.

I do not think a general answer to this question is possible. In the end the answer depends upon the way a "super school" is managed. A "super school" designed and managed in the true spirit of "quality education" will, I think, bring benefits that will far outweigh the negative side effects. On the other hand, a "super school" designed and managed in a way that emphasizes exclusiveness and elitism will quite probably encourage part of its students to develop an elitist attitude in their adult life later on.

In light of this problematic situation, I think it is imperative that the four basic questions mentioned above be resolved as wisely as possible, and as soon as possible. For this purpose clear guidelines must be provided concerning how each of those four questions should be approached and handled. It should be mentioned in this regard that every "super school" school worthy of the name will inevitably develop its own philosophy, its own personality. There can be no uniformity, and especially no forced conformity, among schools that really offer "quality education".

Attempts must thus be made to clarify matters which today are still controversial. It is therefore imperative to come to a healthy agreement concerning those basic guidelines, all contradictory views must be openly stated, scrutinized, and evaluated. And discussions about matters of this kind must be treated as intellectual and professional discourses, and not become a pedantic monologue by know-all bureaucrats disciplining a bunch of rowdy educational adventurers.

In all frankness, we must admit, I think, that this "super school" idea is still new to most of us. We must also realize that there is more than one model for a good and viable "super school" in Indonesia. Experiences in other countries about "quality education" show the possibility of this healthy diversity.

Finally, we must always bear in mind that in the end really good education requires creativity on the part of the educators. And this is hard to generate in an environment which constantly requires absolute conformity and does not allow critical scrutiny and independent judgment.

The writer is an observer of social and political affairs.