Lecturers such as Fahmi Mubarok usually excel not because of supportive academic environment but intrinsic motivation to strive for global achievements. They generally have a “calling” to contribute to their respective areas. They do not really care about the dynamics of government policies. They are laser-focused on their goals and to achieve these they often have to use money from the own pocket because they don’t want to become entangled in the complicated bureaucracy of seeking funding from their own universities. Individual achievements are good and should be appreciated in order to encourage other lecturers to also follow suit, but of course, what we are hoping for is wide-ranging improvements in the national educational system, so it can create a conducive academic atmosphere and allow individuals and groups to grow and excel in their respective fields and enable our universities to have more lecturers with outstanding achievements at a national, regional, and international level.
Unfortunately, national educational management in the last three years has not been up to expectation, and as a result the quality of national education has been impacted, especially in terms of public participation and the effectiveness and efficiency of budget use. It appears that public participation in the decision-making process has been lacking, which leads to prolonged controversy. The application of limited education budget has also not been on target. The lack of public participation was noticeable in the formulation of Kurikulum Merdeka (Freedom Curriculum) which will begin to be implemented in the 2022/2023 academic year ,and the drafting of a National Education System bill. After face-to-face learning began, Minister Nadiem implemented the new curriculum, despite the fact that there are still schools that have yet to implement the 2013 national curriculum.
Minister Nadiem also conducted organizational shakeups and changed top officials in the Ministry too frequently, rendering it less effective and less efficient. When he took office, Nadiem abolished the Community Education Directorate General in charge of informal education. He also dissolved the National Education Standards Agency (BSNP), Education Quality Assurance Agency (LPMP) and the Center for Development and Empowerment of Teachers and Educators (P4TK), supplanting them with Balai Besar Guru Penggerak (pioneer teachers management organization). The dissolution of an institution or agency and then renaming it clearly incurs additional administrative costs that actually do not have anything to do with improving the quality of education.
Weak management in Kemdikbudristek is also reflected in the frequent shakeups of its top echelon positions, which were then assumed by acting officials. So far, there are two strategic directorate generals that have been left unfilled or only staffed by acting officials, namely the Directorate General of Teachers and Education Personnel (Dirjen GTK) and the Directorate General of Higher Education (Dirjen Dikti). Before this, the Directorate General of Early Childhood Education, Primary and Secondary Education (Dirjen PAUD-Disdasmen) and the Directorate General of Vocational Education (Dirjen Diksi) were also left vacant, but then the GTK director general was transferred to Dirjen PAUD-Disdasmen and the Diksi Director General was replaced by a new person, while Dirjen GTK was headed by an acting official.
It defies common sense that key positions responsible for the future of millions of human beings are being run by acting officials. We know that in Indonesia’s bureaucracy, acting officials wield limited power to make strategic policies, because they are only meant to assume a position temporarily (only for three months and extendable up to six months, according to the National Civil Service Agency/BKN). However, it seems that Nadiem did this on purpose so he can hire a “special team” from outside the Ministry. Speaking before the UN Transforming Education Summit in September, he referred to this special team as the “shadow organization,” comprising 400 product managers, data scientists and software engineers tasked with accelerating the programs at Kemdikbudristek. The team is led by someone at the level of a director general.
For those who are familiar with bureaucracy, his statement invites a number of controversies, especially with regard to the use of state budget (APBN) and regional budgets (APBD). The use of state funds is strictly regulated, with budget ceilings and standardized honoraria/salaries for Echelon 1 officials (director generals, inspector generals, heads of agency, expert staff, etc.). If the honorarium exceeds the ceiling, it can be investigated by the Audit Board of Indonesia (BPK). The involvement of the 400-strong “shadow directorate” is very large for a ministry. Moreover, if some of them are paid up to Rp150 million a month, of course this is beyond the normal use of APBN/APBD funds. This then raises the question: where is the mechanism to ensure accountability? And to what extent will it able to improve educational services and yield concrete results that benefit the community, and not just to suit the “taste” of the Minister?
The existence of the highly-paid shadow team is certainly ironic compared to the millions of contract teachers and hundreds of thousands of contract lecturers who have yet to be paid a living wage commensurate with their competence and dedication. If the funds allocated to pay for the shadow team were allocated to improve the welfare of contract teachers and lecturers, it would certainly have a positive impact on improving the quality of national education. If they are more prosperous, of course they will carry out their duties more optimally. By contrast, if they only earn a meager wage and struggle to make ends meet, then it feels unethical to demand good performance from them. Management issues like this have drawn a backlash from educational activists. Many academics in universities are silent, but educational activists continue to criticize the inefficient and ineffective management.