VIRGIAWAN ADI K

USA/Indonesia Teachers Consortium

Response Paper

Adopting the Model of Morally and Ethically Responsible Teacher

Pacino (2008) states that teachers have a responsibility to create teaching and learning

environments that foster a democratic exchange of ideas based on mutual respect (p.74).

Actually Pacino’s statement really aligns with the social expectation of Indonesian people

towards teachers. Indonesian teachers are socially demanded to be role models for morally and

ethically accepted behaviors. Even Indonesian society uses the abbreviation for “GURU”

(teacher) which stands for “diGUgu lan ditiRU (people who are obeyed and imitated)”. Those

two statements imply that the morality, ethics, and religiosity of children should fall in the hand

of the education system. That’s why, in this paper, I would like to analyze and compare the

model of morally, ethically, and even religiously responsible in American education with that of

Indonesian education.

Parker Palmer (1998) argues that teacher and learners should be engaged in the search for

truth (p. 115). This implies that moral, ethical and spiritual aspects are searched for together by

teachers and learners. Moreover, the teachers invite students to get involved during the class.

This equal position of teachers and students creates the impression from the students that the

teachers are not trying to impose something on their thoughts but rather collaboratively

partcipating during learning process with them. Moral, ethical, and spiritual aspects of learning

become meaningful and personal to students because they are results of students’ self search with

the help of teachers. On the other hand, Zulfikar (2009) argues that the nature of instruction in

Indonesia is very teacher-centered (p.14), and obviously shows that the Indonesian education
system puts the teachers and the students in unequal positions in the learning process. In practice,

morals and ethics are embedded into civic subject and religion into religious subjects. By using

rote learning model, teachers seem to impose their standards of morality and ethics on the

students. Consequently, morals and ethics become external aspects instead of personal for each

student.

In contrast, Coles (1997) argues that being a moral person is a result of interaction in the

community not merely about memorizing rules (p.5). As a consequence, Pacino (2008) states

that many schools require students to perform community service as a means of developing

commitment to social action and moral responsibility to the community (p.85). Interaction

between students and community are viewed as the source for gaining understanding about

moral, ethic, and religious intelligence. Morals, ethics, and religion are considered as dynamic

aspects of society so that the way to learn them is to directly engage them within society.

However, in many Indonesian schools, the source of understanding only comes from the text

book which teachers use during the class. The creation of single textbook for moral, ethic, and

religious aspects neglects the dynamic nature of morals and ethics and multi-interpretation nature

of religious values.

Noddings (1984) stated that teachers need to be caring and compassionate and model

respect for cultural difference (p.185). In addition, Sergiovani (1992) argues that virtuous

schools are a community of learners, teachers, society, and students, which fosters respect and

works cooperatively, and this community provides a basis for determining its morality (p. 106).

In Indonesia, Community and parent are rarely involved to facilitate learning process. Bjork

(2005) argues that Indonesian schools have operated with a sense of independence from their

surrounding communities (p. 34). The basis of morality, ethics, and religion follows the
dominant religion in the school. For example if the dominant religion is Islam, then Islam

becomes the determining factor for the basis of ethics, morality, and religious values.

Indonesian schools have not traditionally been run as democratic institutions that invite or

respond to the input of everyday citizens (UNDP/UNES/ILO.1994). This undemocratic

atmosphere must be changed. We can learn from USA models by integrating positive aspects of

American education into Indonesian education. Parents, community, teachers, and students must

work collaboratively in order to integrate more meaningful ethics, moral, and religious aspects of

education.

References:

Bjork, Christopher. 2005. Indonesian Education: Teachers, Schools, and Central Bureaucracy.

New York: Routledge.

Coles, Robert. 1997. The Moral Intelligence of Children. New York: Random House.

Noddings, Nel. 1984. Caring: A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley,

CA: University of California Press.

Pacino, Maria A. 2008. Reflections on equity, diversity, and schooling. New York: Hamilton

books.

Palmer, Parker J. 1995. The Courage to teach. Exploring the Inner Landscape of a teacher’s life.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Sergiovanni, Thomas J. 1992. Moral Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Spring, Joel. 2006. American Education. New York: McGraw Hill Companies

Zulfikar, Teuku. 2009. The Making of Indonesian Education: An overview on Empowering

Indonesian Teachers. Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities.