Thinking skills can be taught at school

By Hendra Gunawan

BANDUNG (JP): In his article "Education: Learning from a crisis" (The Jakarta Post, Feb. 7, 1998), David Harries suggests that in dealing with the crisis and preparing for its aftermath, we must not only think about medicine for the present, but also insurance for the future.

In practice this means that we must take care of the young, who will be the managers and leaders of the next generation.

Harries also reminds us of the importance of education in sustaining national development and increasing prosperity.

Unlike those concerned about the impact of present turmoil on education, Harries believes that education is one of the causes of the crisis and has potential to contribute toward further crises in the future.

He asserts that our education system has failed to encourage critical thinking, analysis and creativity. Moreover, it has failed to produce graduates with the knowledge and skills required to survive and thrive in our competitive world.

I recall a television interview between Dr. Sjahrir and his guest, Dr. Edward De Bono, broadcast by Indosiar on Nov. 22, 1997, during which Bono stated that we are no longer in the information era but have entered the thinking era.

In today's world, we are inundated with information. But if we do not absorb the information and reflect upon it, we will gain nothing. Instead, we will become confused.

Bono went on to argue that thinking is not useful just to solve problems, but also for making things better.

Our greatest asset is our brain. But if we don't train our thinking skills, then possessing a brain is akin to owning a powerful car when you can't drive.

How then can our capacity to think be developed? Insight and thought develop from birth. Parents nurture this capability in their infant, which is then honed when the child enters school.

Therein lies the problem. Our schools adhere to a traditional curriculum and teaching methods which revolve around subject material, not learning ability and creative or critical thinking. This develops the left hemisphere of the brain, which absorbs analysis and procedures, to the neglect of the right hemisphere of the brain, where nodes of creativity, synthesis and design reside. Our students learn "what" and "how", but not "why" and "what if". For example mathematics, a subject through which thinking skills can be easily taught to students, has been reduced to procedural and soulless calculations.

In tests and examinations, teachers appear more concerned with answers rather than how the answers were obtained. Accordingly, multiple choice questions are more popular than essay based examinations. Through multiple choice exams, all wrong answers are treated as equally wrong and the analysis used to derive an answer is disregarded.

Daily classes leave little room for students to express their own ideas or think creatively. Essentially the government's national curriculum has crippled both students and teachers.

Like Harries, I believe that teachers' salaries should be increased if their performance in front of students is to be improved. But this is not the only thing that the government needs to do.

The current national curriculum must be trimmed. A good curriculum is lean, flexible and consists only of essential material, allowing scope for students to study subjects of their own choice.

Nationally, our education system must be reviewed and improved because now, even as we await an end to the current crisis, seeds of future woe are being sown in our classrooms.

The writer is a lecturer at the Department of Mathematics of the Bandung Institute of Technology.