In an interview, Siska told Tempo magazine one of the strongest factors that compelled her to learn about the teachings of the Islamic State (IS) movement was the inability of her lecturer at the Bandung-based Indonesia Education University — during a global politics class — to explain the nuances of IS’ origins. The lecturer simply stated that IS was evil and a product of the United States military.

She said her lecturer was reluctant to elaborate and she found her peers uninterested in such a heavy subject. Siska seems to be a bright, curious young woman and if her questions were addressed in an intellectual, factual manner she could have gone on to contribute immensely to her country.

Instead, she pledged allegiance to one of the most heinous organizations in the world and dreamed of an Indonesia that submitted to its rule.

Her story only further illustrates one of the most fundamental problems Indonesia has never addressed: structural reform in its education system. Indonesia spends 20 percent of its overall state budget on education, one of the highest in the region. In 2018, it increased the budget allocation by 5.8 percent to reach Rp 441.1 trillion (US$31.33 billion), and yet Indonesia’s 2016 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) global scores for mathematics, reading and science averaged at 62 out of 70 countries tested.

The World Bank also estimated recently that 55 percent of Indonesians were functionally illiterate. When we look at where the education budget goes, it focuses on the Smart Indonesia Card (KIP), operational aid for schools, rehabilitation of school facilities, scholarships and increasing teachers’ wages.

Essentially, it aims to increase access to education, improve physical infrastructure and teacher’s welfare. However, it still does not address fundamental questions. Why increase access to an education system that will not produce critical, competitive or productive individuals? Why increase the wages of teachers who are still at the same qualification level?

The consequences of not addressing these issues are already being felt and will be significantly more severe if ignored. Essentially, the most detrimental effects of not addressing these questions will be on Indonesia’s economic growth and political system. We are entering the initial stage of the much-hyped demographic bonus, likely to peak within 12 years.

By 2030, Indonesia is expected to reap from its massive productive age group, which will reach 70 percent of the total population. On paper, it seems like a prime opportunity for the country to propel its growth.

However, with more graduates being produced than jobs, exacerbated by the mismatch of skills and employer expectations, the demographic bonus will just as likely turn into a demographic burden. The production of an inadequate workforce will also in turn lead to lack of productivity in the private sector and lack of efficient policy-making in the public sector, further contributing to stagnating economic growth.

The lack of challenging stimulation in our classrooms will also have a massive impact on voting behavior and ultimately Indonesia’s political system. What the US election in 2016 and Jakarta gubernatorial election in 2017 exposed was how a lack of education equated to an immense susceptibility to accept inaccuracies as factual, as long as it resonated emotionally.

Seventy-percent of Donald Trump’s voters in 2016 did not have a college education. Although the voter base of the winning pair in Jakarta’s election were mostly middle-income people and college graduates, again with Indonesia’s best university ranking between number 800 and 1,000 in the world, what is the actual parity with college educated voters in America?

Emotional narratives became the red thread between the two campaigns, rarely focusing on specific policy prescriptions to solve problems.

What both elections have exhibited is that educational background very much shaped voter preferences, and their subsequent lack of criticism of the elected officials. On account of the lack of criticism toward leaders, politicians and officials are normalizing ineptitude and unethical practices, confident that their voter base would pardon their behavior.

Trump memorably said he could “shoot somebody on Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes”. Lack of willingness to critically assess politicians’ statements and relying on emotional connections will have a detrimental effect on Indonesia’s political landscape, where voters will continue to elect candidates willing to stoke hatred and division for the sake of votes without the capacity to actually govern.

Therefore, Indonesia will have to take a holistic approach in addressing these problems. Improving education quality is futile without ensuring Indonesia’s stunting rates are not lowered. Digital literacy campaigns are pointless without equipping internet users with tools to think critically. Battling radicalism is fruitless without improving teachers’ qualifications to prevent early seeds of violence.

The government must realize that our subpar education system is a major problem, but it’s not the only problem. We need to stop working in silos and start recognizing what these issues really are — endemic.

______________________________________________

The writer heads research and strategy at Bower Group Asia Indonesia.

Popular

Ministry orders remote working for civil servants to help ease traffic congestion

Netanyahu vows victory after Iran strikes, fears of wider conflict grow

18 people killed in South Sulawesi landslide