'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.