To
regain greatness, fix education
Yan Mulyana ; An
Indonesianist living in Melbourne, Australia and a fellow of the Japan
Society for the Promotion of Science at the Institute of Industrial Science,
the University of Tokyo, Japan
|
JAKARTA
POST, 26 Maret 2014
When I
first arrived in Sydney an Australian colleague asked me: “Will Indonesia invade Australia?”
I was
unsure how much that friend knew about Indonesia or whether he liked nasi
goreng, which was popularized on a TV advertisement.
Perhaps
Australians are familiar with the word goreng as they often see it on the
noodle shelf when shopping. Many young Aussies are now able to pronounce many
Indonesian phrases, and even former prime minister Julia Gillard said
Indonesian was one of the main languages that Australians were encouraged to
learn, equally important to the more widely spoken Mandarin.
At least
in Queensland’s suburb of Tanah Merah where some streets are named in
Indonesian or Malay, the familiarity of the language could develop curiosity,
interactions and even cultural penetration.
Among
the early signs of the penetration of Indonesian culture to the outside world
is the growing popularity of its television dramas in Malaysia. More
Malaysians seem to be familiar with Indonesian bahasa gaul (slang) than there
are Indonesians who can imitate Malaysian slang.
We might
be more astonished by how the composers Claude Debussy and Erik Satie were
amazed by the magical sound of gamelan, or how director Gareth Evans and
actor Iko Uwais recently gained worldwide fame with The Raid, promoting
traditional silat martial art to the world.
Nasi
goreng, sinetron, gamelan and silat are well-known words, but what about
Indonesians themselves? Or are we too skeptical?
First,
we have to criticize the way we perceive history. Each sequence of events in
history is always connected not only by time and space but also by the
subject of history itself. Thus, history should be valued as who we were, who
we are and who we will be.
It is a
huge mistake to claim that Indonesia started in 1945. The ”who-we-were” of
the Indonesians began thousands of years ago. When Stephen Oppenheimer, famed
writer of Eden in the East, came up with the idea of “out of Sundaland”,
supposed to replace the old “out of Taiwan” model, he was not joking.
The
geological, genetic and socio-cultural evidence strongly suggests that this
archipelago was once a huge land mass called Sundaland, inhabited by a highly
cultured and civilized people who established the cradle of human
civilization, before spreading to all parts of the world due to the
inundation of the land and starting new civilizations including the Indus
Valley, the Mesopotamian and ancient Egypt.
While
this theory is still embryonic, what we know now is that Indonesia represents
the major area of Sundaland and we are supposed to inherit much of its
wealth. We have inherited the greatness of Borobudur and Prambanan Temple and
traditional cultures but the rise and decline of civilizations produces one
central value passed from one generation to another, namely “the expansive
character”.
We find
this value embedded in the people of all the four big islands of Indonesia.
It was the people of South Kalimantan who made their thousand-mile voyage and
settled in Madagascar; the Makassar people from South Sulawesi travelled to
the top end of Australia and interacted with the Aborigines; the Javanese
Majapahit and the Sumatran Sriwijaya once conquered Southeast Asia.
All
humans acquire knowledge but only people capable of influencing others, such
as a society with an expansive character, will eventually construct a
civilization. This is really the “who-we-are” of this nation, passed to us
from our ancestors. It may have been dormant but we cannot afford to say we
have lost it.
If we
have to judge the process of becoming modern since independence or perhaps
since 1928, when youth activists from various areas declared the “Youth
Pledge”, surely we should have found a good model for our government system.
But reality speaks otherwise.
Where
the expansive character in a society is not dormant, people will have strong
character with courage and confidence; and the key to it is good education.
Sadly, Indonesia’s quality of education has a very low international
competitiveness. The most fundamental issue in reforming the education policy
is the education of character.
When
Indonesian students are tested in the English language, the first and main
hassle is always the writing, then the speaking, although most perform better
in the reading.
How much
have we been educated to systematically write even in Indonesian? While
writing and public speaking skills are the most fundamental requirement for
successful communication, in a society where the capability is in deficit,
people tend to have a weak character and consequently have little impact on
others.
Whoever
leads Indonesia after the coming election must work hard on the policy and
implementation of character education at the primary and secondary level. The
new education system will have to emphasize encouraging these students to
express ideas through a critical and systematic way of thinking and writing,
group discussion, public speaking and constructive debating, leading to high
quality students entering university, which will eventually improve the
quality of tertiary education.
There
has to be a massive and communal effort to bring back the expansive character
and to anticipate the country’s “who-we-will-be” question in the new
generation.
It has
to start from scratch but if confidence meets courage, it’s a bang. The famed
Russell Crowe was once a little suburban boy of Sydney who dreamed big, as he
conveyed when winning the Oscar for his role in Gladiator: “And for anybody who’s on the down side of
advantage and relying purely on courage, it’s possible.” ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar