Transformation in education

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): It has been said that education is a culture- bound phenomenon. This expression is usually interpreted to mean that the practice of education varies from one culture to another. The way the Javanese educate their children, for instance, differs from the way the Chinese educate theirs.

Two conclusions can be drawn from this expression.

One, to be an effective practitioner of education in a society one has to study not only the methods and techniques of education practiced in that society, but also the cultural bases of those educational practices.

Two, whenever a society is undergoing cultural transformation, then it is imperative for that society to reexamine and revise its education practices. It would be absolutely necessary for that society to carry out educational reform. If reform is not carried out thoroughly, then the educational system would be unable to function satisfactorily within the new environment.

Indonesia has had waves of cultural transformation since the advent of World War II. The Indonesian government and the education community in Indonesia have carried out a series of adjustments and innovations to make the educational system respond satisfactorily to the new challenges in society.

Yet in spite of all the efforts a number of problems remain unsolved. The final result is that our educational system does not run as effectively and efficiently today as it did in the 1950s, for instance. We can thus say that besides progress and development, there has also been drawbacks and decline in our educational system. Why?

This is a major question, to which no one has a satisfactory answer, I am afraid. In my view, part of the reason for this situation is that we have been operating too much "on the surface" in our efforts to bring about improvements in our educational system.

We have not given enough thought to the changes that have taken place in "the deeper levels" of our cultural life. In redressing our educational problems we have paid too much attention to the administrative aspects of our system, and not enough attention to the cultural sources of the problems that our schools face.

Let us take as an example the problem of unruly students, and the brawling between them. In our repeated efforts to mend this problem, we have been concerned primarily with the question of restoring order as soon as possible. Most of us still think this problem is confined primarily to schools and students in Jakarta, or at the most to two or three other big cities.

We have always been quick to point out that student brawls never occur in rural areas, and never at religious schools. On the basis of such observations we conclude that the remedy should consist of three steps: one, administer punitive but corrective measures to the students involved; two, return to our own cultural lifestyle, and resist with all means and might the global pull of the "modern lifestyle"; and three, give our students more religious instruction. This is a clear example of our reductive thinking.

In facing this problem we seldom ask what the ultimate causes are. We know that there must be some causes, but we consider it too complex to discover what they are. And in our vocabulary today, whenever we use the word "complex" to describe a problem it means that it is too difficult to analyze and solve.

We also never ask whether there is any relation between student brawls and the loosening of morals which is happening in our society. We never ask whether the violence and crimes committed by young people are in any way related to student brawls. We just do not go deep enough into our thinking about these problems. We feel content to think and act on a "surface level".

Why do we behave like this?

I think because, basically, we are accustomed to perceiving education and schools as a phenomenon that stands on its own, unrelated to any other social institution within society, and also unrelated to society itself.

We don't even seriously accept the fact that school education is influenced, both positively and negatively, by the education students receive in their homes. This is, in my view, the first reason why we think about Indonesia's educational problems in a reductive way.

The second cause is that in administering school education we routinely narrow our activities down to one main activity: implanting knowledge in our students.

We limit our educational tasks at school to develop the cognitive potential of our students. Most of us never pay the slightest attention to the development of the cognitive power, the power to mobilize will, of our students. Even religious education is in most cases reduced to implanting knowledge about religion, not inculcating a religious way of life. Religious education (pendidikan agama) is reduced to instruction about religion (pengajaran agama).

Because of this tradition to think about education in a reductive way we do not possess the intellectual capacity to analyze our educational problems within their cultural context. We do not have the capacity to see and understand our educational problems as part of our cultural problems. And in my opinion, this is the very result of our traditional way of educating our teachers, educational administrators and educationists.

What do we have to do to correct this situation?

We have to change the way we perceive education, and we have to learn to apply it. We have to learn, for instance, to perceive education in its broadest sense of the word, as indicated by the way we use the word pendidikan (education) in our culture.

We have to learn to perceive our schools as part of a network of social institutions, and not merely as an administrative entity which can be separated from the rest of society at will. And finally, we have to think very seriously about a new method of educating teachers.

I admit that this is a very huge agenda. Yet unless we seriously begin to tackle this big problem, we will be forever trapped in this situation of unfinished educational reform.

The writer is an observer of social and political affairs.