Research: it's a matter of critical thinking and a process

After 1.5 years study in a Western academic setting at the University of Melbourne, my understanding about the importance of research has increased significantly. research is an important part of advancement of a country. I can see how much university here provide funding for research, in many fields both basic research or applied research. This is what lack in Indonesia, as it is reported in an article from Kompas newspaper.

However research itself is not a simple matter. The issues are not only availability of funding, but most importantly is also the existence of 'research culture'. It is useless that if funding is available but the 'research culture' itself is not exist. The basic issue underpinning research culture is the willingness to asking questions of everything, being critical of a claim even though ones who make those claims are very prominent people in their field.

The key to do that is developing critical thinking. 'Critical thinking, critical thinking'!!!! That words are probably the most often I ehard at the beginning of my study. Even when I still in Jakarta, my EAP teacher, Angela always emphasis on this aspect. I read the same thing in the books for English as Second Language learners about academic environment in Australia that I borrowed from IALF. At the beginning of Introductory Academic Program (IAP), the teacher, Paul Gruba always emphasis this words. I became so familiar with this words, even though in my dream. Even School of Graduate Studies, the School that responsible for graduate students at the University of Melbourne conducts special course of critical thinking. Not only one, there are three courses, the first is a free seminar about Introduction to critical thinking, the second one is the Workshop to develop critical thinking, and the last one is a shortcourse for Critical Thinking in which attendees have to register and pay $30 to attend the sessions. Amazingly, these courses always full-booked.

What I want to show from those examples is that critical thinking is considered as an important part of successful studies at the university,e specially at graduate level so that the university provides high supports for developing critical thinking among students. We cannot just believe in what others have said about something, nomatter convincing the way those people says about something. The most important is 'to be critically analysed' how those people come up into those arguments or conclusion, adn how they provide evidences to support their arguments.

This is often creates difficulties for many students. I often heard that students say, 'I know this and that why shoudl I provide references for this and that.' I was among those people who said this actually. But later I realised that it is not a matter we know it and we know that, but from where this thing come from, and how this conclusion achieved. people can claims X because they have interest on it, because they like it, or just any kinds of bias of human beings. That is why we need to know where is the knowledge comes from so that we can track teh sources and subsequently we can decide whether we believe in those things or not.

In the context of Indonesia, of course critical thinking in particular is a difficult matter. Many of us (may be most) grow up during our childhoold time with the doctrine that we have to follow the elderly, the respected people, in this case is parents or grandparents, teacher, etc. Those people are in the position of tell us what we have to do, what should we do what we shouldn't.
Very rarely that people let children grow up without saying, 'you have to this, you have to that.' Then the attitude to follow the respected ones continue until we grow up to the high school level. teachers are like a god who shoudl be followed, without little chances for students to criticise or to create positions against them. Students who do that would probably being stigmatised as 'naughty students', rather than as a 'creative students'. Then we grow up as an adult, still critical thinking is not accepted yet in our surrounding environment. We remember about Opspek for new university stduents. The seniors treated themselves as the Big brother who always right, can asks anythings they like to the juniors,a nd should be followed. Then when this junior move to the second year at university, they will do the same to their juniors. So the 'circle of obedience' is continued. As an adult we then have to follow what the authorities said, to consider that what the authorities said are a 'truth' rather than being critical that what they said are political words. We rarely challenged when prominent people around us says something, because we often think that they are in the position of authority to say those things. So than we often see how someone distinguish their attitudes towards prominent ones and towards lay people around them. It happens because 'gumunan' is still attached into characteristic of many of us. meanwhile Javanese proverb always remind us, "Aja Gumunan, Aja Kagetan' which is basically ask us to questioning every informations we receive.

How this cultural and social environment affect the 'research culture' in Indonesia? The impacts are massive. It creates inequeality because someone who are thought to be rpominet will be respected while someone who is considered just as a lay people 'ornag biasa' will be treated differently. So, don't be surprise that if we dress up nicely as if we are very improtant persons, others may become more respect us. This is thing that can eb n obstacle for developing democracy in Indonesia, because people judgement basically on tehir appearance rather than the contents. I don't meant it is not happened in other countries, but what I want to say is that in Indoensia, this thing is much more often happened.

The impacts for this lack of critical thinking towards research culture is tendention to follow what the authorities said rather than offering alternative that would may against the position of the authority. I am wondering if any students at typical Indoensian university would dare to have contra argument with their professors. I got one friend when I was undergraduate who spoke up and express his ideas even though he challenged the lecturer argument. But as consequences this people is being 'persona non grata' by other students. That is the sad thing about education in Indonesia. You can't be critical if you want to get friends. I hope it would be changed.

Why I concern about this lack of critical thingking in our culture is because this cultural things eventually affect the development of research in Indoensia, and subsequently affect the advancement of Indonesia. We would not move forward as fast as CHina or India if we do not develop a 'research culture'. We may will have better funding for research in teh future, but as long as the attitude towards critical thingking is not changed, research will be justification of certain policy (example from the policy fields) rather than an effort to develop a body of knowledge that will enhance better policy in the future.

I want actually write about research as a process based on my experience but may be next time.

EarlyChildhoodEducation: an alternative for conflict resolution

Today I attended a seminar about designing Early childhood education program at university. Most attendees were senior lecturer from the faculty of education (can be seen from their grey hair and appearance). I thought only three were student, one a classmate from class program Evaluation and Design, another one is Sanae, an exchange student from Osaka who is currently researching early education In Australia. The speaker is a professor from Queen's university of Belfast, Ireland.

His research is about developing evidence-based approach as an alternative for researching early childhood education program. He argued that there is problem in the current approach of early education program. He describes the current approach as focusing on investment rather than outcomes. The logic for the program is Investments (eg. increasing school readiness) --> lead in to Activities (eg. training) --> outputs (eg. how many children attend). Within this approach, the outcomes (eg. the changes of children behaviour, parents satisfaction, etc) are rarely mentioned. So he proposed an idea of turning the logic around.

He develops an approach that is outcome-focused rather than investment-focused. he start with Outcomes (what we want to achieve) --> look at the outputs --> what activities we need (find out the most effective way to achieve it) --> and finally see what investment we need (I). To implement this approach in the ECED program, there are several requirements such as consultation (direct views from parents/children- what they concern about), epidemiology (look at association between gender, life-style, etc withe ducational outcomes), best practices in other countries and applicability of these practices in a certain context and also Rigorous evaluation.

He use a case study of the Media Initiative for Children in Northern Ireland conducted by Peace Initiatives institue. We can see about this program in this website: www. pii-mifc.org.
He developed survey to udnerstand what children know about certain objects. This is qualitative data by nature, so that what he look at is a pattern such as: what they aware of differences, what implication to their attitude (eg. ethnic differences). In this survey he asked simple questions such as eg. do you like police, do you like Orange Marches (actually I don't really know what is it- I guess something realted with Ireland), etc. These types of simple questions is important to see the children preferences about tehse objects.

Based on the results of the survey, the researcher then developed key outcomes (what to be achieved from a childhood education program). There are four outcomes:
1. recognition of instances of exclusion
2. Understanding of other feelings of being excluded (emphaty)
3. Children's willingness to be inclusive
4. Children's awareness and positive attitudes (to be inclusive).

Then he developed key elements of the Media Initiative Program. This is based on perception of media as auseful tool to support the program. The key elements include:
1. short animations for television
2. Full curricullum and resource pack for playgroups
3. Events and activities
4. Training for playgroups and nursery leaders
Ongoing support for playgroup and nurseries.

To udnerstand the outcome 1 for example, the researcher show photographs to children which shown some schildren play together and one alone. The researcher then ask the children to describe the photo using their own words. The question is as simple as 'can you tell us about this photograph?' Outcome 3 about willingness to inclusiveness is developed based on questions such as 'Do you wnat to play with Joey (a chinese girl)?'
The answer from these questions than be analysed and Paul Connolly then developed a result from this.

Finally he highlights issues and challenges of adoption of this new approach. The changes requires substantial changes in approach and design of current children's services, costs and commitments needed, ethical issues (however he defend it that there is even greater ethical issue if a government spend large amount of money for program which less beneficial for children), children's right and participation, and methodological issue.

My comment is: his presnetation was interesting. IT also gives me some ideas about the importance of early childhood program to promote peace in conflict areas. Such important thing to do in Indonesia where people come from diverse of background, religions, tribes and islands. I should read a book about ' Called from Conflict to Peace: The Power of Early Childhood Initiative'.
I definitely agree with this approach of early childhood eductaion program to focus on outcomes rather than investment itself. But I still wondering about the rigour of the ersults from the survey. Firstly, how to measure that these outcomes are resulted from the program rather than other variables such as the differences of [arents in teaching their children, differences in family environment, etc. besides that, I also concerns about the questions for childrena s little as 3 years old. Questions such as 'do you wnat to play with x' can be answer differently at different moments, depends on how close the children relationship with X. I can say this because I found it many times with my own children. In the mroning Arundati will mention, Stella, Anastasia, Milian, Tarun, etc as her friends. But then in the afternoon she will say 'X is not my friend' may be because they fight for toys or something in the day care. Mutiara also does the same. She will saya, 'X is not my friend. She is being naughty to me.' But the next day, she will say X is her friend and she take flower from our front garden for her friend.

The illustration from my own experience with my own children is just to make it clear that it is a challenges to make sure that the result is strong enough to make inference such as in the Conolly case. Besides that I also concern about who asked the questions to children in the survey. From my own observation I can see that some childrens can relate comfortably with their own parents whilst they will be so uncomfortable with people they do not know. Some children just too shy even to people they know well, etc. So, to whom the children speak, will also likely to influence the way they answer the questions.

But apart from that methodological things about conducting survey for young children, I definitely delight about the importance of developing appropriate program for enhancing inclusiveness, openness to differences, during the childhood, so that these children will grow up as a person with open mindness, ability to accept differences, avoiding racism, awareness of others, etc. Those characters that are lack in the current Indonesian situation. Most Indonesian children are currently grow up in a society that emphasising on exclusiveness of certain group, either based on religion (Muslim, christian), tribe (Javanese, Sundanese, dayak, Madurese), religious affiliation (NU, Muhammadiyah, Chatolic, Protestant), or even just regionalism (Yogyanese, Banyumasenese, Bandungese, etc). This exclusiveness is reflected in many different kind of interaction within society, from the lay people level to even intelectual level.

I can see it easily in Indonesia, at university life, at work place, at public places and even here in melbourne, a home away from home people still grouping into certain group based on their preference. If you don't join one, you would not belong to anybody, so noone would care about you no matter how you try to be involved into all group. Sadly, it si still happen. I can see it in mailist, exclusiveness is still dominating conversation: if this people write down something, certain people will response to it, but if other write down something these peopel do not make the same response. Well, its very natural that as human being we tend to prefer someone we like more than others. However, when it is too much, we can't truly develop an inclusive society which respect people as they are rather than based on which groups they belongs too.

Current discussion about Manikebu and Lekra in mailist journalism also remind me about the idea of inclusiveness. I respect peopel like GUnawan Muhammad who try to develop inclusiveness of Indonesia, try to develop a society which is more open-mind, which want to move further forward rather than society that always stagnant into its history. I respect his idea that nomatter which group a person belong to, everyone deserve respect from others, deserve freedom. I respect what he said that polemic may happen and there is may be position of 'kawan' and 'lawan' in a debate. But 'lawan' does not necessarily means 'musuh'.
But I know only few people in Indonesia like him. Hopefully more and more will grow up there, so that we will develop the society as an inclusive society based on respect of differences, rather than society that try to achieve social harmony by winning certain group and losing others, and then hide the conflict underneath, as if everything in the surface is calm and peaceful.

A big hope to spread the seed for inclusiveness start from the current children, through an intriduction of inclusiveness in early childhood education. Just a dream if I can contribute something to it after I finish my study.

Melbournelife: Aus Election campaign

I am always wondering why campaign in Australia is not gegap gempita like in Indonesia. Tidak ada jalanan macet karena rombongan kampanye partai x lewat dengan sekian ratus atau ribu orang naik truk, metromini, mobil pribadi, dan motor. Tidak ada spanduk warna warni dan lautan massa berkaos, kuning, biru, merah, putih atau hijau yang bersorak-sorak. Tidak ada panggung tinggi dnegan sound system ratusan watt dengan politisi yang berteriak kencang-kenmacng dnegan slogan-slogan, 'hidup partai x...hidup partai y.; tidak ada kelengangan di lapangan atau jalanan usai kampanye yang meninggalkan tumpukan sampah di mana-mana.
Kayaknya nggak seru juga sih ya...Kadang perasaan ini muncul. Masa sih kampanye pemilu adem ayem aja. Perasaan khas Indonesia, mungkin lahir sebagai perwujudan dari perasaan bahwa pemilu adalah sebuah pesta, meski dnegan embel-embel pesta demokrasi. Namanya juga pesta, apalagis ering juga disebut dnegan kata-kata perhelatan akbar, implikasinya ya memang keriuhan yang meluap-luap.

Inilah yang beda. Disini, masa kampanye selalu ramai, tetapi keramaian paling nyata di media, TV, media cetak dan radio. Politisi berkampanye mencoba merangkul massa, mendatangi mereka di kafe-lafe di trotoar, di pasar-pasar di dareah pemilihan mereka, atau kadang-kadang ada yang mengetuk pintu dan mengantarkan karangan bunga hadiah perkawinan untuk masyarakat di daerah pemilihan mereka. Itu semua sering diliput massa apalagi kalau calonnya terkenal. Kalau Howard kampanye ke Bennelong, pasti ada liputan TV, kalau Rudd kampanye ke rumah sakit juga pasti ada TV. Intinya semua aktivitas kampanye calong perdana menteri pasti diliput media. Tetapi itu bukanlah yang utama dari pesta pemilu Australia.

Orang menunggu-nunggu ketika ada debat calon perdana menteri. Orang ribut di media tentang apakah akan pakai worm atau tidak dalam debat itu. Calong Labor dan liberal berdebat soal kebijakan industrial mereka, bagaimana kebijakan mereka terhadap berpihak pada working family, kalangan bisnis dsbnya. Ada kampanye negatif tentang misalnya Liberal menjelek-jelekkan buruh dnegan menyatakan sebagian besar calon menteri buruh adalah dari Trade Union, yang anti bisnis. Tentang ini saya punya pemikirans endiri, nanti akan saya tulis belakangan. Namun apa yang maus aya katakan adalah bahwa kampanye di Australia mementingkan isi. Kampanye adalah isu soal kebijakan apa yang kamu tawarkan pada saya. Kalau kamu berpihak pada saya, saya akan pilih kamu, kira-kira begitulah kata individu rakyat Australia. Jadi orang memang memilih berdasarkan kepentingannya. Misalnya kalau nenek-nenek dan kakek-kakaek di panti jompo juga adalah sasaran kampanye. Tapi kampanye untuk mereka tentu juga berfokus pada kebijakan yang akan mempengaruhi mereka. Mungkin mereka akan pilih liberal atu labor tergantung pada apakah partai-partai ini akan membuat kebijakan yang meningkatkan kesejahteraan kaum pensiunan misalnya, atau membuat kebijakan untuk meningkatkan jatah welfare untuk orang usia lanjut, akses terhadap fasilitas kesehatan dstnya.

Berbeda dengan Indonesia. Masyarakat adalah hanya alat untuk partai-partai yang ingin berkuasa. Kalau janji kampanye dilanggar, toh mereka tdak bsia menuntut, mungkin begitu asumsinya. Sementara disini kalau janji kampanye dilanggar, kosnekuensinya akan berat, empat tahun berikutnya mereka akan kehilangan kursinya. Siapa sudi memilih politisi suka ingkar janji.

Senangnya bermimpi bahwa suatu ketika masyarakat Indoensia akan menjadi masyarakat yang powerful. Sekarang proses mengarah kesana, semoga proses yang masih dalam tahap awal ini, amsih bayi istilahnya tidak diin terupsi oleh orang-orang yang lebihs ennag rejim otoriterian. ASemoga proses menguatkan masyarakat terus berjalan lancar, dan suatu ketika, masyarakat Indonesia pun menjadi msyarakat yang kuat, yang tidak akan cuma menjadi alat politisi mencapai tujuannya.

Melbournelife: Brainiac mania

I got a new TV program that I like to watch during weekends, Brainiac from Channel 9 (may be not really sure). This program about science myth and facts that is presented in a fun way. A very smart approach to educate young children to love science. The topics are varied, some are simple things around us, some a bit 'heavy contents' about explosion, etc. The most impressive thing is all of these topics are covered in a very fun way. Lovely.

One topic from last week for example about the smell from garlic. Three experiment participants eat garlic breads, pizza, and other foods containing garlic ingredients. One of them then eat parsley, another one brush her teeth with soda, and another one eat a lot of mints. In the next morning as soon as they weak up, they present in front of the researcher, and one by one the researcher will test them whether their mouth have nice or bad smell. The first one (who eat parsley) was asked to take a deep breath, open his mouth and blow his mouth to the researcher. The researcher reaction was fine, means his mouth smell not so bad. The second one (who clean his teeth very thoroughly using soda) did the same, and the researcher who smell his mouth move backed and close his nose. His expression revealed everything for the TV audiences. I can imagine that it smell yakky....huahaha....The third one (who eat lots of mint) did the same and the similar things happened. yakki......huahahaha...we were laughing. It is difficult to express in a written way, but visual expression in this program really bring a science into the house in a very fun way. Arundati seems to love it too. Sometimes she doesn'yt understand and ask, but sometimes she understand and just laughing with me.

That was just one topic, there are many like: Nurse, I am so bored today, can you tell me what I can do with my body? And the nurse say something like move one of your hand for some seconds and then you compare it with another hand. It's like magic the length of both hands are not the same. It is about science about muscle, etc, but because it is presented in an interactive and interesting ways, noone would feel bored to learn science.

I say, if I can go back to high school I will definitely love science. I hope my daughters can have opportunity to learn science in such a fun ways. I hope when we come back, there are changes in Indonesian curricullum so that children can learn science, history, environment, geography, anything in a fun way. Learn from environment around them rather than stag in the class room and being forced to memorised everything. May be watch video like this would also increase the students interests to learn science.

Students as little as elementary school in Melbourne for example often go for fieldc trip to Victoria Market and learnt how to do bargain, to know about the price, about the market situation etc. There are many aspects they can learn there from histroy of Australia, multiculturalism, and even economy and trade. No wonder when they are grow up, many of them have clear understanding about many social,e conomic and geographical aspects about their surrounding environment. May be it has also connection to a very high awareness of Australian people towards their environment, their society, or even to other areas around the world. NOt sure though, just my guess. For a subject that is often considered as a difficult subject like science, the program like Brainiac I believe would enhance children interests to learn science.

Moreover, this program is developed seriously, involving science professors from university, and using examples that are familiar with our daily life. In Indonesian context,we don't need definitely follow this type of program as it is. What I want to say is that we need to think about creating a program for children that can motivate them to learn something in a fun ways, which just appropriate for their age. Don't push them to remember the formula, don't impose them to remember the year when RA Kartini born, etc. Show all these things through the surrounding environment. Theree are many things that could be used as an instrument to enhance students interest to learning.

What TPI did in the past may be can be adopted in the current situation, not totally of course. But we can actually take the basic ideas to create better generation through fun programs in television. Not like a program that are imposed to watch by children at certain time like what happened about TPI program in the past of course.
What I also heard about local content in Indonesian curriculum may be can also modified into better kind of program for children.
So many ideas, so many things want to do, but it is always not an easy way to do this.

To develop better program for enhancing children learning process require not only one or two television program. It requires changes in many aspects such as curriculum, teachers training, etc. Many aspects need to be prepared if we wasnt a sustainable education program in Indonesia. Need to think about education system for teachers too. Because they who will teach the children, who will implement any changes for better generation. May be if I can work for UNESCO after I finish my study, I can do something, not all aspects I have concerned about, but may be I can do something, share my ideas, share my concerns and contribute something for the children through my work. It is not far away to go, but I need to determine my way, where I really wnat to go. Hoepfully whereever I go I can go to the best place where I can do something for the disadvantaged groups in the society, especially children.