Trust crucial in punishment

Trust crucial in punishment

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): The recent Tasikmalaya riot in which five people
were killed has both political and educational implications. The
political aspect has been intensively analyzed by the public
while the educational aspect remains largely untouched.

One detail that escaped public scrutiny in this episode was an
educational mishap which preceded -- but did not prompt -- the
riot. Three teachers from the Riyadul Ulum Wadda'wah Islamic
school punished Rizal, a 14-year old non-resident student, who
was caught stealing. Rizal happened to be the son of Corporal
Nursamsi, a police officer of the local police precinct.

According to Republika, Rizal reported this incident to his
father, saying that during his punishment he was soaked in the
school's pond. After receiving this report, Corporal Nursamsi
called the headmaster and asked for an explanation which was duly
given to him. Apparently not satisfied with the information
provided by the headmaster, he summoned the three teachers,
interrogated them, and along with his staff of eight other police
officers beat them up. He later threw the three teachers into a
cell.

A fourth teacher managed to escape and report the incident to
the school administrators, who then reported the matter to the
deputy regent Oesman Roesman. The deputy regent then contacted
the Tasikmalaya Police Chief, Lt. Col. Suherman, who ordered his
men to release the three detainees. The three teachers were then
taken to the local hospital for medical treatment.

Thinking that everything was under control, Lt. Col. Suherman
said, "Everything has been settled. We don't want to make things
any worse." But things did get out of control, and a riot
erupted.

This particular incident involving the punishment of a student
who fought his unfair treatment and whose feeling was shared by
his father, looked trivial, but seen from an educational point of
view the affair was not trivial at all.

This case showed two basic violations. First, violation of
pedagogical norms in administering punishment, and second,
violation of educational authority. The first violation was
committed by the three teachers who punished Rizal, and the
second violation was made by Corporal Nursamsi who could not
distinguish his role as a father and a police officer.

Viewed within the context of pedagogical theory, punishment is
administered as a dramatic reminder to students that they have
violated a norm, and that the act should not be repeated. When
punishing a student, the trust that exists between the teacher
and the student is severed. This trust will be restored again
when the teacher stops punishing the student and resumes a normal
relationship with the student.

When I was seventeen years old, my class was punished in a
non-violent manner by one of our teachers. We were supposed to
complete some mathematics homework that our teacher would check
that day. However, the class produced a very poor result and no
one could give the teacher an explanation for our laziness.

Our teacher was very disappointed. He just sighed deeply, went
to sit on the high chair in front of the class room and did not
utter a word until the end of class. We did not know what to do
or what to say. The class were very fond of the teacher and
to apologize, but we just did not know how to do it. When the
school bell rang signaling the end of the session, he just
climbed down from the high chair and left the room without saying
a word to us. We felt very relieved the following day when he
spoke to us again.

This is an example of effective punishment in the
education system. No shouting, no burst of anger, just a silent
demonstration of a severance of trust. And when trust is abused,
it hurts. Therefore punishment is only effective if trust between
the teacher and the student exists. Effective punishment at
school should be a mental experience, not a physical one.

It should be noted that the mistake made by the three teachers
was a pedagogical mistake and not a criminal act. It was a case
of educational malpractice, which is not subject to criminal law.
Here the police made a big mistake. By summoning the three
teachers and treating them like criminals, the police
transgressed its authorized power. The police are not authorized
to intrude into the territory of an educational authority unless
a criminal act is committed.

Knowing the limit of our authority and respecting the
authority of another institution appears to be something which
still has to be learned. It is important to know the moral limit,
as well as the legal limit, of our authority. There have been a
large number of violations of authority in society recently, and
the result is chaos and incoherence. We should aim to reduce this
chaos and incoherence, and return some sense of order and
civility to our society. This can be achieved by disciplining
ourselves and respecting the authority of others.

If the three teachers make a mistake, does it mean that the
students should not have been punished for stealing?

Of course students must be punished for disobeying the rules
of the educational institution. Stealing in the educational
sector is considered a serious violation. Any act of taking
someone's property without consent is a breach of morals and
should be acted upon accordingly. If a student has not yet
learned to respect other peoples' property, this means the
education system has failed to internalize moral principles.

Since the purpose of education is guiding students towards
recognizing the difference between right and wrong by observing
and respecting existing norms, any violation of norms encouraged
by other people is a sign of a serious defect in moral growth.
Thus cheating, lying, and stealing are signs of disrespect and
failure in the development of personal commitment to certain
values. It should not go unremedied. But what is the best
solution?

Punishment alone is not the answer. We should resort to
punishment only after other measures do not work. The purpose of
punishment is to teach the student that they must improve
themselves morally. But if punishment fails to improve the
student, then there is something wrong in the educational
relationship. The best solution is to improve the relationship
between the teacher and the student, and the student's parents if
deemed necessary. On this basis, the parties could work towards
an improved relationship, a greater understanding of each other
and a solution to the problem.

It is important to remedy the situation because there are many
violations of the rules established by the education system. The
end result is that many students leave school and enter society
with unrecognized and "unremedied" character weaknesses which may
cause them problems later in life.

In this way, it was a brave act of the three teachers to
administer punishment to the students. It is regrettable that
they did this without sufficient knowledge concerning the basis
and requirements of punishment in schools.

The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.