Dark Tunnel of National Education
For the past three years, the praxis of national education seems to have been stuck inside a dark tunnel with no end, because there have been no clear signs or direction.
Perhaps the direction is very clear for the sign makers, but it has not always been understood by the wider audience, including educators themselves. Big signs, such as Merdeka Belajar and Merdeka Kampus (MBMK), can look grey, vague or unclear.
Teachers and lecturers were confused when they read the signs, because these were not enough to guide them to the realm of independence as they had imagined. They became even more entangled in administrative matters. Teachers became preoccupied with administrative tasks, such as uploading learning activities, job titles, e-performance, and employee performance targets (SKP) each month.
A teacher in Lampung said there were many quasi-orphans, or children who don't live with their parents, in his area. To manage such students, the teachers must build close relationships with them as teachers and friends, as well as parents. However, with the teachers’ current busy schedules, they were beginning to transition into becoming administrative staff, never mind being friends and parents to these students. For him, the concept of "independence" in the MBMK was very grey and opaque.
Euphoria of pioneer teachers
This dark tunnel of education can be seen in the policy that clearly prioritizes the Pioneer Teacher Program (PGP) and the Pioneer School Program (PSP). Even to become a school principal (KS), one has to first be a pioneer teacher (GP), so there is euphoria among the latter group, or “GP euphoria”.
Before the MBMK program, a teacher had to have a certificate from the professional education and training program organized by the School Principal Development and Empowerment Institute (LP2KS) in Surakarta to be appointed as a school principal. The program participants were teachers who had worked as vice principals, so they already had management experience.
However, with the existence of the PGP, these experience-based schemes are being ignored. The LP2KS has now been disbanded and replaced with the Pioneer Teacher Center (BBGP). The requirement that one must first be a pioneer teacher to become a school principal has caused confusion in the field, because many regional leaders doubt the capacity of a pioneer teacher to become a school principal. In addition to the fact that the majority of GPs are young, they also do not have sufficient management and leadership skills through training as prospective pioneer teachers (CGPs).
Among the pioneer teachers themselves are those who feel they do not have enough provisions to become a school principal, or KS. On the other hand, senior teachers who have attended the LP2KS training cannot be appointed as school principals because they are not considered GPs, and there is a maximum age limit to take part in the PGP.
Also read:
> Boosting Indonesia’s Innovation
> Sustainability of ‘Independent Campus’
A high school teacher in Central Java said the PGP actually harmed students because teachers who participated in the program often had activities outside of school and skipped learning activities. According to him, the PGP had no impact on schools, only on PGP teachers, because being a GP meant getting a "ticket" to become a candidate for school principal, and this was seen as harmful to the merit system. This GP euphoria can lead to a decline in education quality over the long term, because there is no guarantee of quality if a GP is directly appointed as a school principal.
Becoming a school principal requires not only intelligence, creativity, and innovation, like becoming the CEO of a company, but also requires experience in teaching and maturity in managing the psychology of teachers, educational staff, and students, as well as the ability to build a relationship with the local education office so it continues to provide the resources and support needed to develop the school.
Based on the track record of so-called good schools, all are led by those who have had ample teaching experience and developed management skills as a vice principal or in roles that dealt with the curriculum, student affairs, or school finances. During the New Order era, those who were elected as a school principal were teachers who had excelled (exemplary teachers).
Seeing that the PGP euphoria will have a negative impact on the sphere of education, it is not feasible to continue the PGP because it clearly contradicts Article 4, Paragraph 1 of Law No. 20/2003 on the National Education System (Sisdiknas), which stipulates that "education is organized to be democratic, just and nondiscriminatory”.
It is also contrary to Article 14, points b, d, and e of Law No. 14/2005 on Teachers and Lecturers, which stipulate that "In carrying out their professional duties, teachers are entitled to: (b) promotions and awards in accordance with work assignments and achievements; (d) an opportunity to improve competence; (e) gain access to and use of learning facilities and infrastructure to support the carriage of their professional duties".
Currently, the teachers’ rights regulated in Article 14 of the Teachers and Lecturers Law can only be enjoyed by GPs because teacher training institutions have been changed into BBGPs. The logical consequence is that this training institution is only intended for GPs. It is very difficult to understand why the Minister of Education and Research and Technology, who is supposed to uphold the National Education System Law and the nondiscriminatory Teacher and Lecturer Law, has made policies that are obviously discriminatory and yet, no one has submitted a petition for judicial review to the Supreme Court (MA).
The training facilities of the education ministry are intended for all teachers, not just GPs.
The existence of this GP euphoria also shows the contradictions in the way policymakers think. If it is believed that GP teachers are young, intelligent, passionate, committed, creative, and innovative, then they should not have the privilege to participate in various training activities.
On the other hand, training activities should be prioritized for teachers who are not GPs, so they can increase their competence and become GPs. Granting privileges to GPs by ignoring the rights of the majority of teachers actually widens the quality gap between teachers, and certainly impacts the quality gap between schools with and without GPs. The training facilities of the education ministry are intended for all teachers, not just GPs.
IKM and PPDB
This dark tunnel is also found in the Implementation of the Independent Curriculum (IKM) and in new student admissions (PPDB), which is based on zoning. Neither provide clear directions regarding the fate of the nation. The Independent Curriculum (KM) policy appeared at the same time as the Covid-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, teachers were not focused on changing the curriculum, but on face-to-face learning.
Post-pandemic, what the education minister should not do is to create a new curriculum, but should instead improve the 2013 Curriculum so that it can still be implemented as it was envisioned. If the 2013 Curriculum is weak in terms of literacy and numeracy, the revised 2013 Curriculum should emphasize these two areas.
Improving the curriculum by revising it has different implications in the field. Improving the curriculum means that textbooks based on the 2013 Curriculum can still be used. All it requires is inserting revised materials.
Also read:
> ‘Independent Campus’ Jolts National Education
However, if it is replaced with a new curriculum, automatically, all books labeled "2013 Curriculum" can no longer be used. So, the level of wastage is higher. The burden on schools and teachers also increases with a new curriculum, because it will require new understanding. For example, there are three values in the 2013 Curriculum: knowledge, skills, and behavior. However, the current KM has only one score on student report cards, so it cannot be discerned which refers to the value of knowledge and which is the value of skill or attitude.
In fact, the nonacademic achievement column does not even appear in the KM e-report card. Teachers become confused when a student gets good scores on a knowledge test, but has bad behavior: What score should they give on the student’s report card?
A teacher's burden increases if the IKM does not start with training for teachers. Teachers must learn on their own, so it is natural that their understanding of curricular materials is still shallow, while the implementation of the 2013 Curriculum, which begins with training for teachers and supervisors, is stuttering.
This endless dark tunnel also appears in admitting new students based on zoning. Indeed, this is not a new policy. However, when Nadiem Makarim was newly appointed as the education minister and gathered together a number of figures to seek their input, this author provided feedback that student admissions based on zoning was not appropriate for the conditions in Indonesia, which had a large geographical area and lacked the even distribution of state schools, which were still concentrated in cities.
What is appropriate is a combination of a student selection scheme based on academic achievements and an affirmative policy that are based on the place of domicile as well as a family’s economic conditions. What has been implemented at one state senior high school (SMAN) in Bandung is that children who live in the vicinity of the school must be accepted to that SMAN, regardless of their academic achievements.
Also read:Learning from PISA
This is different from zoning, which is based on the distance between home and school. The PPDB that has been implemented in Yogyakarta since 2005, apart from an academic selection process, also involves a quota that 10 percent of all new students must come from underprivileged groups. Both these systems are far more fair, because they proportionally accommodate the interests of all parties.
A PPDB based on zoning will only benefit residents who live in urban areas, but harm people in suburban, rural, and coastal areas that are located far from good public schools. This policy will actually cause villagers to stop sending their children to school because they have to attend a private school in a city, while they don't have the funds.
The zoning system is only suitable for urban areas that are densely populated and the quality or distribution of schools is even. It is not suitable for Indonesia, which is very vast and the distribution of public schools is uneven.
Pseudo-autonomy
At the university level, especially state universities (PTN) and state universities with legal entity status (PTNBH), the spirit of MBMK is also not tangible because PTN/PTNBHs are proven to not have autonomy. Their autonomy is pseudo, because institutional policies cannot be separated from the main performance indicators (IKU) as set by the education ministry, which include funding.
One of the main bases for providing subsidies to PTN/PTNBH is the campus programs’ suitability with the IKU. This actually contradicts the push for the privatization of PTNs to become PTNBHs on the ground that the latter are more autonomous, because in practice, PTNBHs are not autonomous. The nonautonomous character of PTNBHs is not only reflected in ministerial votes, which account for up to 35 percent in chancellorship elections, but also in direct government intervention into these institutions, as seen in the case of the University of Indonesia (UI) in the issuance of Government Regulation (PP) No. 75/2021 on UI Statute to replace PP No. 68/2013.
The UI Statute contained in PP No. 68/2013 was developed by the university, while the institution’s statue in PP No. 75/2021 was developed by the education ministry. The UI Council of Professors is still maintaining its loud voice demanding that PP No. 75/2021 be repealed. So where is UI's autonomy as a PTNBH?
How can we emerge from this dark tunnel?
It is interesting to observe the process of electing the chancellor of 11 Maret University of Surakarta (UNS), which was won by a candidate who was not backed by the education minister. This is new in the history of PTN/PTNBHs, in that the minister's voice no longer carries weight. Perhaps this is an expression of the institutions’ resistance to the MBMK policy, which still seems unclear.
How can we emerge from this dark tunnel? First, there needs to be humility on the part of policymakers to admit that policies such as the PGP and the PSP clearly violate the National Education System Law and the Teachers and Lecturers Law, so they must be discontinued. They only serve to further widen the disparity in educational quality between schools and between regions.
Second, the education minister does not need to impose the IMK if teachers have not been trained. Third, if the intention is to truly liberate campus life, PTN/PTNBHs should be given real autonomy, not pseudo autonomy: Trust in the ability of PTN/PTNBH administrators, who have been able to produce the country’s national leaders.
Darmaningtyas
Darmaningtyas
Advisor to the Tamansiswa Family Association (PKBTS)
This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswo.
