Education For Sale
Setra Yappi

In this consumerism era, happiness is equivalent to maximum consumption and most consumers would think that quality is valued on the price tag. This consumer culture often attracts opportunistic minds to explore how to manipulate consumer behavior. In Indonesia, entrepreneurship is flourishing and successful educational entrepreneurs have led many to think of education as one item on one’s shopping list. This privatization of education provision and the way players in the education industry formulate strategies has now made education a commodity. The market in Indonesia who can afford this service cannot miss the opportunity to shape their young minds with the so-called prestigious education along with its price tag.

1. Education in Peril

The typical educational experience in Indonesia, from personal experience and exchanges of opinions, is as follows. Twelve years of formal education sometimes means spending time sitting before a small desk following “procedures”: studying by mostly memorizing, staying silent to be unnoticed, following instructions. Going to school is about paying fees for pride of going to the best private school in town where one is fed with 10 to 17 essential subjects at the same time each week. School is where fresh minds are molded to produce patterned brains with good memory and “skills” to think inside the box.

When speaking of privatized educational institutions in Indonesia, we often picture students coming from the upper-middle class who strive for high-quality education. The understanding of quality for the parents of this societal level may be identical to being obsessed with bringing their children to the best school without sufficient knowledge about the real value of the institution; it is often based on some hearsay knowledge. Certainly, academic success is measured by the abilities to obtain satisfactory grades and show good behavior. Since in a consumer culture quality, price, and satisfaction are strongly correlated, it has become a habit to perceive high tuition fees as the cost to fabricate high-quality product which is no other than a child with pleasing academic achievement. It is no longer a question if enterprenurial personalities are inspired by this phenomenon. Then, the phrase for-profit education emerges, which will be discussed in section 2.

Teachers are often the voluntarily-silent victims with their roles as education providers. The privatization of their teaching field forces them to dwell in their comfort zone when hired by private school. Most teaching positions, in both private or public schools, involve low compensation. Yet, “low pay is likely a main reason that teachers perform poorly, have low morale, and tend to be poorly qualified.” In the public sector, it is said that 2“Teachers earnings are lower than those of other workers and civil servants with similar education levels and do not adequately compensate secondary school teachers and teachers working in remote areas.“ The outcome of a similar trend in the private sector forces teachers to be more active outside of school. This has given an opportunity for students to manipulate this condition by “networking” with their teachers to get private lessons and “inside information” on upcoming examinations. This issue is now beyond the common issues of low-quality education in Indonesia; it is an issue of morale, ignorance, and the future generations. At this point, parents are comforted by the fact that their children are safe and sound in school with fully-paid tuition. As a result, students are only machines that are expected to function when the correct buttons are pushed. This consumer behavior also gives room for schools to reap profits, as discussed below.

2. For-profit Education

4Now popular in the United States and going global, for-profit education is such an attractive option in an impoverished and populated society where public educational institutions are left behind. Private schools in Indonesia are not regulated by the government and they do not have to declare their non-profit or for-profit status. In addition, most private schools which are not provided by governmental subsidy regularly. These schools thus strongly depend on school fees and contribution. It is then easily implied that this method of education provision has been adopted by many private schools, as education is now seen defined by demand.

Students are seen as customers; it makes it easy for them to manage 30-40 students per classroom. Higher efficiency often involves passionate, yet underpaid teachers and minimization of operating expenses by “saving” funds from purchasing “unnecessary” facilities such as science or English laboratories, up-to-date computer systems, etc. Although private schools certainly maintain quality by being more selective in accepting new students through entry examinations, the management often uses their reputation to accept unqualified students by asking for higher “building fees” and still accept them. This regrettably also applies in some governmental education institutions up to tertiary level. Private schools often have stakeholders that control the development. Just like in a corporation, profits will be distributed to them. This has made a school no less than a business with profit-motivated strategies. Admission process is frequently an attractive way to mound “capital.” The trend in organizing the process is to break down the admission period into several intervals with the respective fees. The sooner one applies, the lower the admission fee (plus building fees) is; the fees are certainly non-refundable. Moreover, it is often observed in the public media, especially local newspapers, where schools “persuade” students to apply with rewards (free electronics especially laptops upon entry) or even raffle (chances to win goodies).

The issue of tuition fees in private educational institutions in Indonesia is numerous and complex. Cost of education in Indonesia is rated by demand, which implies that the higher the demand, schools can raise their “prices.” This is particularly true for private schools that have complete freedom in doing so without having to justify any raises in tuition to students or parents. Complaints from the public in general regarding expensive fees are never ending, especially those from poor communities. 3With 52.4% of the domestic population living with under US$2 a day (equivalent to US$60 or Rp 600.000 per month), poverty cannot afford to keep up with demand-driven education provision. The figure Rp 600.000 (and below) can be assumed to be the monthly earning one household that often have several members to support. Due to lack of data sources in the average costs of primary and secondary schooling, only higher education tuition fees will be looked at in this paper. 1Tuition in public universities is so far the lowest in the country, ranging from Rp 1.200.000 to Rp 2.350.000 per semester (6 months) in 2004-2005; living costs from Rp 5.615.000 to Rp 18.450.000. If these were household expenses, they clearly would not agree with the income. If statistics of drop-outs from primary and secondary schools were to be included in this paper, it would explain how parents would prefer their children to work rather than being educated. Poor students cannot afford to deal with “pungutan liar” (unjustifiable collection), non-deferrable tuition payment, or school supplies required to be purchased at school at higher prices. Ironically, for-profit education providers clearly will not let their stakeholders down by allowing these low tuition rates, as long as socioeconomic disparity in Indonesia persists and there is a market serving their interests. It should now show that the Indonesian community in large cannot afford for-profit education. Education that is not contextualized loses its potential in cultivating young nation builders; it no longer serves the public good.

3. Solution

Despite this disheartening situation, the culture of “all complaints, no action” on this issue has been held too long and thus must be let go of. Only collective verbal grievance from students and parents will be successful to bring the changes. Parents are responsible and possess the rights, at least as customers of commercialized education, to demand school accountability. 5Below is one short proposed solution:

The above is a description of a more open communication for day-to-day school activities and development where students, parents, and the community can voice out their concerns to ensure that ideas are exchanged between them to make the appropriate decisions. Student activism which is often murdered by the supremacy of rules and teaching staff should rise – for example, through the student council – to stay informed in the process of policymaking and organizing inter- and intra-school activities. This is crucial because educational goals in the first place are to be achieved by students. Furthermore, parent involvement in child education is not yet encouraged; parents’ association is almost non-existent. In this case, parents have to step up to join the mechanism. The headmaster would act as a manager, administering interaction between all parties; whereas, the community can hold the school accountable for conducting the open communication scheme.

Nonetheless, the government has the ultimate authority to regulate and set standards on the provision of education in any level. In the case of private educational sector, the government can hold private schools accountable to commit to prioritizing students in terms of spending. This can be done by obligating education providers to submit annual financial reports for audit. The government can also encourage schools to declare their status (not-for-profit or for-profit) to raise the awareness of students and parents and help them define their expectations to each school.

4. Through Christian Spectacles

The arguments that have been put forward might seem merely humanitarian, but possessing a Christian faith presses for the search for the deeper meaning of justice and compassion and adds it to the concept of education in a Christian perspective. Education is unquestionably crucial for children who are in dire need for guidance. Their identities are shaped by their environment, and thus whether or not one has a real role of parenting the society as a whole is responsible for providing education for vulnerable children. God has put our children in this world and commanded us to direct them to keep the way of the Lord in this world like he did to Abraham in Genesis 18:19. The word “to direct” in this context can only be appropriately translated into “to educate.” Matthew 28:19-20 cannot be any clearer in advocating God’s command to disciple the nations where education is a big part of the process. With this, ignorance and profit-driven motivation do not fit into the picture that God is trying to reveal to us. It cannot be stressed enough that with poverty looming our country, Indonesia, it is our divine obligation to take responsibility of taking care of the destitute and the powerless. In Lamentations, God poured His thoughts and tears through the author of the book watching how children who are neglected and people with power taking advantage of others and the poor. 3Of our 260 million Indonesian fellows, 52.4% live with under US$2 a day, 7.5% with under US$1 a day; 9.8% are unemployed (the Economist). These numbers speak for themselves.

As part of a small percentage of Indonesians who have the privilege of experiencing education (despite its imperfectness), we are not in the place to wait for the change, but be the change. God does not teach us to leave any room in our mind for the leave-it-to-the-government attitude; there is only room for us to think for the children of our nation. We must inform ourselves about education at home to be able to provide our children with proper education. If proper education has not yet existed in our surroundings, it is our duty (as Jesus commanded in Matthew 28) to bother finding ways to identify and resolve the problems that have been discussed and many others.

There is an indefinite number of solutions an intellectual like us can think of. One’s first thought could be, “Will building new ideal schools solve the problems?” The answer is No. It will only fire up competition with existing schools. Of course a school naturally has some expectations in terms of the number of students to accommodate. It is easy to say “let’s open a high-quality school with low fees or maybe for free.” This will definitely draw the poor. But it is then inevitable that a new school, especially one that aims to recruit students from upper-class society, needs to provide what the public is looking for. If other schools have some particularly attractive facilities, this new school needs to seek the resources allowing them to develop and have similar facilities with the same or better quality; the need for financial capital is thus unavoidable. This is the great danger that demand-driven education market exposes to schools in Indonesia, as it tends to slowly force them to follow the current fashion and market behavior.

“Indefinite number of solutions” would be interpreted best as our creativity that can bring changes to education at home. When building new schools does not work, impacting education in Indonesia can be done not only through teaching professions, but also policymaking, developing existing schools that thrive for improvements, teacher training, etc. It is us who can advocate the real values of education in the existing infrastructure; it is transformation from the inside out.

5. Conclusion

Child development must not have been left to the private sector, if educational goals are allowed to be used merely as marketing strategies. It is regrettable to observe and experience (for some) that wealth can interfere with the growth of bright young minds, particularly in a developing country that desperately needs creative and skilled human resources. The solutions proposed above may seem incompetent amid the problematic complexity of Indonesian education. Yet, transformation of attitude is of utmost importance: standing up for changes from the inside out. As well, the mindset of paying for quality must be contested; our young generation must be pulled out of quicksand engineered by profit-driven ideas.

Works Cited

[1] Country Profiles: Indonesia. 2006. University at Buffalo, The State University of New York. http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/org/IntHigherEdFinance/CountryProfiles/ Asia/Indonesia_country_profile.pdf>

[2] Investing In Indonesia’s Education: Allocation, Equity, And Efficiency Of Public Expenditures. January 2007. The World Bank, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit, East Asia and Pacific Region. February 2008. <http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTINDONESIA/Resources/Publication/280016-1152870963030/InvestEducationIndo.pdf>

[3] Human Development Report 2007/2008. November 2007. The United Nations Development Programme. March 2008. <http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/hdr_20072008_en_complete.pdf>

[4] Kinser, Kevin, and Daniel C. Levy. “For-Profit Higher Education: U.S. Tendencies, International Echoes.” International Handbook of Higher Education. Dordrecht: Springer, 2006. 107-119.

[5] Modeling Change in Senior Secondary Schools: The Indonesian Experience. 1999. School Development: Global Horizons. February 2008. <http://school-development.com/change.html>

Back to top