












|
 |
 |
|
See also: Requiem For Foreign Aid ,
HEDS Up in Indonesia
by Frank Stephenson
An FSU-led mission to reform Indonesian universities
speaks volumes for the cause for U.S. aid to struggling nations.
In so many ways, to be born in Indonesia these days is to be born luckier than any
generation in the island nation’s long and colorful history.
Never before have young people in this vast, steaming marinescape of 17,000 islands
faced life with as many options and personal freedom as they do today. To be sure, the
government of the 52-year-old nation--freed from Dutch control at the end of World War
II--is still in the grips of an authoritarian and at times brutal regime. But since the
collapse of the USSR seven years ago, a largely socialist order operating as a family
business since 1967 by President Suharto has been gravitating toward a marginally freer,
less-centralized society. Today, this improbably diverse nation of nearly 200 million
inhabitants--the fourth largest nation on earth--is pulsing to an ever-steadier beat of
world commerce with the fastest-growing middle class in the Far East.
In a land of stunning contrasts--young business execs in Jakarta, the capital city,
survive on E-mail and the Internet while their counterparts 3,000 miles away kill supper
with handmade spears--recent socio-economic changes have been equally mind-boggling.
Consider that in 1992, fully 70 percent of the working class drew a paycheck from the
government, typically in dead-end career service jobs artificially created just to keep
people employed. Today, 65 percent of all salaried workers in Indonesia are employed by
private businesses--a dramatic shift that not surprisingly is causing a variety of headaches
for a government still not quite sure what to make of it all.
But the pains weren’t entirely unexpected by a Suharto government whose 30-year
stability can as much as anything be credited to the absence of an allegiance to any
hidebound ideology. With the Soviet collapse as a brisk wake-up call, the government
assessed Indonesia’s economic future and saw glaring deficiencies that cried out for
remedies, and from any quarter.
Among the most egregious inequities brought to light was the comparative worth of a
degree from the average Indonesian university in the dawning of a global economy.
Assessments showed clearly that Indonesian graduates were woefully ill-prepared to compete
against bright young foreigners for dazzling new job opportunities--particularly in science
and technology--that were popping open all across the archipelago.
Not lost on the government, too, was a growing resentment among the residents of
outlying regions-- principally the islands of Sumatra and Kalimantan (formerly Borneo)
and the island-cluster province of Riau--over what clearly had become an inequitable
distribution of tax benefits. For years, the various far-flung provinces had complained
that they were getting the short end of a highly centralized system that concentrated tax
monies--and thus public services such as education--in Java, the seat of government.
Oil-rich Riau province figured to have a major beef, kicking in the U.S. equivalent of
$20 for every $1 it got back in government services.
A history of such unbalanced return-on-investment had effectively stagnated educational
opportunities in the outlying islands while Javanese education thrived. As a consequence,
every year thousands of the best students from the perimeters of the country converge on
Java universities, inflicting a brain- and manpower drain on the parts of the nation that
can least afford it.
Thus, with both political and economic considerations at stake, the Suharto government
suddenly became eager to step up efforts aimed at educational reform.
FSU Gets the Call
Indonesia’s traditional sources of foreign assistance--dating back to 1957--principally
have been the U.S., Britain, the Netherlands and various world lending institutions.
Such aid has gone for a host of internal improvement projects, ranging from agricultural
reform to pollution control. Most of the support for educational reform has come from
international lending organizations, such as the World Bank.
America has been a major player, however. In the past 40 years, nearly 12,000 Indonesians
have earned advanced degrees at American universities, largely on the strength of U.S.
foreign aid. To help fund its newest resolve to revamp its higher education system, in 1991
the Indonsian government sought help from a consortium of foreign relief agencies,
principally from Japan and the U.S., that would in effect be a continuation of work begun
years earlier by the U.S.
For a five-year project, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the
Japanese International Cooperation Agency responded with commitments of $20 million each,
which was added to $14 million in support from the Indonesian government. (Midway through
the project, the Japanese added $15 million, almost doubling the U.S. commitment.)
Florida State University’s Center for International Studies (CIS), a part of the
university’s Learning Systems Institute, sought and won an $8 million portion of the USAID
project in 1992. FSU’s "we deliver" reputation at USAID had once again paid off, says
current CIS Director Dr. Jack Bock (Ph.D. Stanford). Since 1984, the FSU center had been
the leader of a 10-year, $58 million USAID project involving 15 nations, the largest and
most ambitious educational development effort in the agency’s history. Indonesia had been
one of the 15 countries in the massive project that concluded in 1994.
"That project easily showed what we were capable of," said Bock, who first began work
in Indonesia in 1970 as an employee of the Ford Foundation. "We were familiar with the
language, culture and government in Indonesia and felt confident about working there again."
But before the FSU team could crank up for the latest Indonesian project called HEDS
(for Higher Education Development Support), political squabbles in Washington almost
scuttled it. Strident attacks on foreign aid by powerful conservative elements in Congress
held up funding for the project for six months. The delay triggered hang-ups in preparation,
which cost the FSU-led team a full year before getting fully deployed in the field. A
terribly complicated job originally designed to take five years now had to be done in three.
Where to Start
Going in, the FSU/HEDS team members had done their homework and had a reasonably good
idea of what they’d find--a fundamentally dysfunctional system of higher education.
Indonesia’s top-down style of management not only drove government bureaucracies in Java
but permeated the scattered university system as well. A severe shortage of high-quality
middle-level managers throughout public life (the good ones take off for high-paying jobs
in industry) had stymied productivity and efficiency at every level of government.
Many of the nation’s universities were universities in name only, victims of a bloated
career-service system that had produced an entrenched cadre of administrators, staff and
teachers--all paid paltry salaries, albeit for life--who, not surprisingly, had little
incentive to perform well or to improve. A get-serious attempt to overhaul the system
begun in 1990 by Indonesia’s Ministry of Education typified governmental short-sightedness:
Dozens of new institutions were built, others--mostly old polytechnic centers--were
refurbished, and simply by decree all were made four-year universities with little thought
to curricular or logistical details. (Today, the country advertises the existence of 48
state and more than 1,500 private universities--yet few offer Ph.D.s.)
A series of in-country baseline studies conducted by HEDS’ American and Indonesian
advisors soon painted the full, bleak picture. The 120-plus member team faced a management
crisis of the first order, where the end products were students holding bachelors degrees
barely worth the paper they were printed on. Although the study focused on nine universities
on the island of Sumatra, 11 others from Kalimantan to Riau were assessed. The targeted 20
included both public and private universities. All showed varying degrees of institutional
paralysis, where largely universally accepted concepts of internal management, accountability,
curriculum development, classroom instruction, and faculty training were scantily developed
if not missing entirely.
Canvassing the campuses on Sumatra and elsewhere, the HEDS team found what Bock and
others described as "shells or semi-shells"-- clusters of handsome buildings, full of nice
furnishings, well-equipped laboratories and little else. Classrooms, administrative offices
and labs sat empty during some of what outsiders would typically think to be the most
productive hours of every day.
Particularly disturbing was the state of the university’s libraries. Every campus had
a library building, but few contained many books, and often these were hopelessly outdated.
Dr. Paul C. Parker, chief academic officer for Florida’s community college system, was hired
by FSU to be "chief of party," or the in-field chief administrator for HEDS, was appalled by
what he saw at one university in Sumatra.
"The government had just spent $10 million building a fine library there," he recalls.
"But it held only about 5,000 books, and the newest one was five years old. The
administration then spent $75,000 on a security system for this collection. The money
would have been much better spent on more books."
Science labs he saw provided further proof of a system completely out of sync. The
labs were often barren of supplies, such as common laboratory chemicals, but nonetheless
arrayed with sophisticated instruments, most of which were donated by British and German
companies.
"But for the most part no one knew how to use the equipment," said Parker. "And if you
did use it and it broke down, that was a major problem. There were no technicians for
making repairs, no repair schedule of any kind, no lab management at all."
On the human side, HEDS researchers found an abysmal lack of qualified staff and
instructors everywhere they looked. Teachers ill-suited to the task, much less capable of
doing anything resembling first-class research and scholarship, were the norm as were
indifferent or incompetent staff members. The lack of qualified manpower, coupled with a
bureaucratic mindset that crippled even the simplest administrative services--such as
showing up at a prescribed hour to open an office or lab--proved to be a ubiquitous obstacle
that would dog the HEDS project from the outset.
"From the start we knew that there was only so much we could do-- given the time and
resources we had--to improve a system that needed to be radically changed from the inside
out," said Parker. "But in the end, we delivered everything called for in the contract."
Faculty Woes
It had fallen to the American segment of the HEDS project to concentrate on improving
curricula and instruction in math, science and business management, while the Japanese
partners were to focus on technology and engineering. The USAID team’s mission also included
doing what it could to improve staff and teacher training and the internal management of the
universities--something the government readily acknowledged needed attention--and to help set
up job placement and counseling centers on campus.
The latter--a virtual staple of any Western university worthy of the name--remained a
genuine novelty on Indonesian campuses, where oddly enough the connection between academic
training and careers had for the most part never been completely made by either the
administration or faculty. But the Indonesian government had been listening to complaints
by the country’s rapidly growing influx of foreign capitalists who insisted that Indonesian
graduates lacked the basic skills they needed to be productive in the private sector.
Better attention needed to be paid to matching what students learned in class and what
prospective, non-government employers were looking for.
It was precisely what students learned--and tragically didn’t--in class that bothered
HEDS advisors more than anything they encountered, said Parker. Career skills aside, the
universities’ entire approach to higher education impressed HEDS technical advisors with
an apparent lack of concern for instilling basic, pedagogical principles and concepts in
faculty and staff.
No better example was the discovery early on that most math and science teachers in
Sumatra and the outlying islands had only undergraduate degrees. Fewer than 25 percent
had training beyond a bachelors degree, and almost all of the faculty--regardless of
training--relied on antiquated class materials and teaching methods.
"We found the teachers to be terribly ill-prepared, using poor notes they’d taken as
undergraduates often in the same class," said Parker. "Rote memorization was the preferred
teaching method, with little learning-by-doing. And no textbooks, or very few of them."
The latter problem touched on a profound observation made by HEDS’ advisors: In
contrast to Western cultures, Indonesia is largely a bookless society.
"As it turns out, Indonesia by and large is not a reading culture," said Parker.
"We found that neither students nor their teachers habitually read, which helps explain
why the university libraries are in such bad shape."
Only in recent years have literacy rates in Indonesia reached high levels, which
Parker believes may be a consequence of older generations not having access to reading
materials or being neglected in elementary schools. Even today, neither elementary or
secondary education across the nation puts strong emphasis on reading, he said.
"At the university level, teachers simply don’t assign readings. Everything is
imparted orally. So with no reading assignments, there’s no justification for improving
the libraries, which means that few books that are there tend to stay outdated."
Teachers’ attitudes, too, were problematic. The baseline study showed that many
faculty displayed a lack of interest in self-improvement--whether through extended training
or self-study--and a general disinterest in the welfare of their students. The
career-service, job-for-life mentality was blamed for much of this, said Parker.
"Too many teachers had the attitude that they did not have to do anything, even
show up for work, as they would be paid their terribly low wages anyway," Parker
eventually wrote in the project’s final report.
Poor salaries, as it became increasingly obvious, were a major contributor to
faculty malaise. On average, Indonesia’s university faculty earn less than $100 (U.S.)
per month, but then that’s in a country that in 1994 had a per capita income of $884.
As a consequence, teachers often found it necessary to "moonlight" to make ends meet,
said Parker. Some took the practice to extremes, working so much elsewhere that they
wound up spending as little as two hours a week in a classroom, one study showed.
In sum, the HEDS team found no shortage of reasons why the universities under study
were suffering. An insidious combination of problems had generated a defeatist attitude
among university personnel at all levels, a sense of futility toward trying to improve
in the face of pervasive, long-standing political and economic travails.
Within the first few weeks of the project, the situation had become clear to a
sympathetic HEDS staff. If they did nothing else, they already had identified a crippling
morale crisis. In doing so, to hundreds of well-meaning Indonesian educators they had
become the only source of hope for change.
Job Corps, Indonesian-Style
By 1994, Indonesia’s economy was on a roll. While still largely agrarian--with huge
agricultural, forest and fishery industries--the nation’s economy was becoming increasingly
diversified. That year, the country was doing $44 billion in business with U.S. firms
alone--$12 billion of which was in oil.
Jakarta had become recognized as an international city, a bustling center of global
enterprise. A building glut was well under way, thanks to rampant speculation on the wants
and needs of a ballooning consumer society. Young people in steadily increasing numbers
were shunning guaranteed jobs in government offices for higher-paying, though riskier,
careers in business.
Characteristically, the last segment of public life to catch on to what the transition
meant--or should mean--was the university system. A government initiative called "Link and
Match" launched in 1991 sought to sell to the universities on the idea that Indonesian higher
education should be tailored toward meeting the manpower needs of an expanding economy
(naturally offering few details on how to do it). A HEDS study in 1993 showed that
rank-and-file teachers and students had only fuzzy notions of the concept. Most students
placed little importance on acquiring skills or knowledge that would make them more
competitive in the new job market. Further, they found such things as career planning
and job placement services faintly puzzling. What was the need when the future meant a
government pension?
"We found ourselves in the position of selling what is essentially an American concept
to a very skeptical audience," Parker recalled. The challenge became one of opening a door
to a culture largely naive to a socio-economic revolution already well under way throughout
the Indonesian heartland.
With this sobering realization, HEDS advisors tackled the problem first by holding
dozens of staff training sessions in Sumatra, trying to build a corps of qualified people
to get the job placement centers up and running. Then, agreements with local businesses
were reached, forging lines of communication between Sumatran campuses and local
industries--something entirely unheard of.
"A major oil company, CALTEX, in Riau, was literally in sight of a university, and
yet there had never been any attempt made by the university or the company to communicate,"
says Bock. "CALTEX was going to Jakarta to interview graduates for petroleum jobs right
there in Riau."
Considering what they were up against, HEDS staffers figured if they could get two or
three job placement centers working reasonably well, the effort could be called a successful
demonstration project. For one thing, much of the centers’ staffs were going to be hastily
trained people--mostly Indonesians--who were volunteering for the jobs. For another, the
effort would be starting from scratch, with no precedents to draw from and few resources,
either on campus or off. In many cases, establishing links to local businesses would mean
setting up chambers of commerce where none ever existed--a daunting task in itself.
When the HEDS project wrapped up last year, 13 of the 20 targeted universities had job
placement centers up and running, most offering a full range of services, including career
counseling, training in English and computer skills, resumé writing and interviewing
techniques. For a "demonstration project" initially expected to attract 1,000 students,
the centers were being mobbed. All told, by the time the HEDS team left in June, more
than 20,000 students had signed up for the centers’ help. More than 500 graduates found
private-sector jobs using center guidance, and another 500 found paying internships, an
entirely novel concept before HEDS.
By 1994, the centers’ phenomenal growth had caught the government’s attention which
released funds to six of the most promising to pay for office equipment and travel. Since
then, centers at the universities of North Sumatra, Riau, and Lampung have become virtually
self-sustaining, selling their services for modest fees. The University of Riau, in fact,
applied for and won a $400,000 grant from the World Bank to further develop its job placement
center.
"These three universities have become the pathfinders, the leaders of the job-placement,
career-planning movement throughout Indonesian higher education," says Parker. "They’ve
become models that can be easily exported to other countries wanting to start such centers."
Class Act
The stunning success of the job placement centers, despite all odds, figured to bode
well for HEDS initiatives in beefing up the quality of classroom instruction. Unfortunately,
positive results proved to be considerably more elusive on this front. Restrictions on how
the USAID grant money could be used precluded buying books or classroom materials or for
staff computers, copying machines or any other equipment. Funding could be used only for
hiring people.
"This handicapped us initially," said Parker. "We were tasked with reforming curriculum
and instruction, yet we had no money for supplies or equipment. That’s like telling someone
to run a race with no legs."
Eventually, the project’s Japanese partners supplied the HEDS offices with computers and
other equipment, and by the middle of the project some U.S. funds were freed for the purchase
of books and other materials. Redesigned curricula and teaching aids soon were ready for a
series of pilot courses, where they made an almost immediate impact, Parker said. HEDS
advisors saw a sudden jump in improvement both in teaching and in student comprehension
in math and science.
Still, a lack of adequate resources from the outset stymied efforts to introduce the
reforms on a wider front. Even so, Parker said that hundreds of university teachers and
students were given their first taste of high-quality education. By the time the project
ended, they would be clamoring for more.
Too Soon Gone
Like a surgical strike--in the parlance of the modern U.S. military--the HEDS project
was designed to make a strong impact with no thought to a long-term commitment. For a
five-year project shrunk by political realities to three, HEDS succeeded remarkably, argue
Bock and Parker.
For the first time, a major segment of Indonesian higher education glimpsed possibilities
it never knew existed. Beleaguered administrators were introduced to flexible ways to
counter an autocratic system, ushering in the hopes of more autonomy and control over
budgeting, personnel, and a host of other management problems. They learned what a little
professional training and guidance could do for staff, how it could stimulate productivity,
efficiency and morale.
On a higher plane, they and their faculty were exposed to fundamental tenets of education
that prompted them to think critically about nearly everything they did, said Parker. It was
a revelation to many.
"As one of our advisors put it, when we started, the (teachers) didn’t know that they
didn’t know (about how to improve quality), and therefore they didn’t care," he said. "Now
they know just a little of what they don’t know and that’s made them hungry to know more."
Unlike other overseas projects he’s worked on, which tend to wind down in the final
weeks, he said that HEDS closed with a bang. "As we were walking out of the offices, the
phones were ringing off the hook. In a real sense, it was a tragedy we had to leave when
we did."
Admitting that the project "only made a dent" in solving intractable problems besetting
Indonesian higher education--many of which, such as paltry teacher salaries, can be corrected
only through wholesale political and economic change--Parker and Bock feel confident that
HEDS made its mark.
A plus that came out of being forced to put a period on things was that the staff worked
harder to give the Indonesians a sense of pride and ownership in what had been accomplished,
vitally important for keeping the job placement centers, curriculum changes and management
reform initiatives going. Whatever remains of the HEDS effort down the road will depend
almost entirely on the degree to which the Indonesian partners make the new USAID tools their
own and put them to work, said Parker.
"This is the thing you work for, and I think we’ve done that. We’ve developed in these
institutions a sense of ownership, a sense of direction, a sense of what needs to be done."
Aborting a Mission
As hopes rise for a brighter economic future for a generation of Indonesians, rising too
are the educational demands of this naturally bounteous, culturally diverse nation.
Neither half of this equation is lost on the Japanese, as evidenced by their hefty
($1.2 billion) all-inclusive foreign aid package to Indonesia last year (roughly 25 times
the U.S. investment). While the Americans of the HEDS project are long gone from the field,
the Japanese are still there for the most part, seeing no sense in leaving just as things
are looking up. After all, the Indonesia of today is a modest trading partner compared to
what the Indonesia of tomorrow figures to be, if trends hold. The Japanese tend to take the
long view in providing foreign aid when there’s a yen to be made somewhere down the line,
says Bock.
For their part, the U.S. leaders of the HEDS project are frustrated that strong political
forces virulently opposed to U.S. foreign assistance compromised their work and forced it to
end, in their minds, prematurely. "So much more needs to be done to make these universities
reach their potentials of service to individuals and society," laments Parker in the final
report.
After early struggles to overcome language and cultural barriers, in the final months
most HEDS staff members began to see the proverbial light come on in roomfuls of eager
faces. Among teachers, the staff saw a marked shift in attitude toward the need for further
training. Volunteers at the busy new job placement and career-planning centers were clearly
on a mission, caught up in the excitement of an aroused student body and administration.
To suddenly turn their back on such promise was tough for all involved, Parker said,
but inevitable. He, Bock and their colleagues at FSU say they are resigned to the fact that
often the best things that happen under the rubric of U.S. foreign aid are the very things
that go unreported. Worthy USAID programs such as HEDS wind up paying for highly publicized
sins elsewhere in the now seriously threatened federal agency. The upshot is that HEDS may
very well prove to be the last major USAID-funded project that FSU (or any other university,
for that matter) ever undertakes.
In the conclusion to his final report, Parker summed up staffers’ feelings this way:
"If those who would try to remove America from its responsibility and international
obligation to help developing countries could know about projects such as HEDS and what it
has meant to improving the level of higher education in a country vital to the long run
self-interest of America, American aid programs would not only continue but would expand."
|
|
|