The orientation and purpose of education have been clouded by modern, secular theories and applications that tend toward materialism. Education, fundamentally about the transfer of knowledge and virtue, has become a platform for the transfer of false knowledge and false virtues that erode identity.
In fact, in the past, the scholars from the teachers reciting the Koran on the terrace of the house, until the lesson teacher at school emphasizes the importance of education, knowledge and manners (morals). However, nowadays, it is easy to find people whose knowledge is fake, whose education is fake, whose certificates and diplomas are fake, the result of modern-secular education.
The influence of secularization, particularly in education, has unwittingly alienated the values, meaning, and purpose of education itself. The paradigm shift brought about by secularization in the contemporary era has completely shifted the purpose of education.
In general, there are 2 (two) theoretical views regarding the aims of education, each of which has a variety of opinions.
View First, Socially reoriented, namely the view that considers education as the primary means of creating good citizens, whether for democratic, oligarchic, or monarchical systems of government.
However, the theoretical view second, more individual-oriented, more focused on the needs, capacity and interests of students.[1]
Regarding the theoretical view of individually oriented education, this view is divided into 2 (two) schools.
The goal of education is to prepare students to achieve optimal happiness through achieving success in social and economic life, far surpassing that of their parents. This means that education is a pathway to socio-economic mobility within a given society. This is the opinion of adherents. first stream.
In the view of adherents second stream, It places greater emphasis on improving the intellectual well-being, wealth, and spiritual balance of students. Although students share similarities with other students, they certainly possess unique qualities in different aspects.[2] Each of these opinions has its own perspective in interpreting the goals of education.
Meanwhile, in the world of educational philosophy, the prioritization of individual education gradually shifted to the goal of fulfilling societal interests. This was due to the influence of Western institutional thinking.
In modern times, figures in educational philosophy who are socialist and communist, openly emphasize the social dimension rather than the liberal dimension which prioritizes the individual over society.[3]
Socialist leaders consider the state or society as something more important than the individual, because they see education as an investment. (business), as social engineering that will reshape the socio-economic order that sucks up state profits.
The paradigm shift in education has given rise to psychosocial pathologies, particularly among students and their parents. This is known as "diploma disease." (diploma disease) that is, the efforts made in achieving an educational degree are not for the sake of education itself, but rather for economic and social value.[4]
As is known, in poor communities, natural resources are not equipped with a good economic system, so that this kind of educational attitude also contributes to the creation of a chaotic socio-economic-political situation.
As a result, a stagnant educational situation has emerged among the poor, compounded by the poor handling of this issue by the relevant parties. This is what Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas said was the source of the problem. 'intellectual confusion' And 'loss of identity' culture is caused by the influence of the ongoing secularization program and the influence of the concept of the Western state which tends to be secular.[5]
And Allah knows best
[1] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, Philosophy and Practice of Islamic Education, Syed M. Naquib al-Attas, (Bandung: Mizan, 2003), 163.
[2] B. Othanel Smith, William O Stanley, and J. Harlan Shores, Fundamentals of Curriculum Development. Revised edition (New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Atlanta: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1957), 548-551.
[3] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, Philosophy and Practice of Islamic Education, Syed M. Naquib al-Attas, (Bandung: Mizan, 2003), 165..
[4] Ronald Dore, The Diploma Desease: Education, Qualification, and Development (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1976);See also Jandhyala BG Tilak, Education and Development in Asia, (New Delhi: Sage Publication, 1994), 92, 141. A depiction of such conditions occurred in Pakistan in the 1970s. For further information, see IH Qurasyi, Education in Pakistan; an Inquiry into Objectives and Achievement (Karachi: Ma'aref Ltd., 1975), 55-56. Quoted from
[5] Wan Mohd Nor Wan Daud, Philosophy and Practice of Islamic Education, Syed M. Naquib al-Attas, (Bandung: Mizan, 2003), 166. The problem of 'intellectual confusion' was also a topic of serious discussion between al-Attas and Nor Wan Daud.
1 comment