The Magnitude of OoSA
SUSENAS (Socio-Economy Survey) 2011 reported up to 5,17 million adolescent age 16-18 (Formal secondary school age, based on Law 20/2003 about National Education System). The figure below showed proportion of OoSA by province, the red bar represented proportion of OoSA while the green bar was school participation.
The definition of OoSA is quite different to dropout rate which often used as quality proxy indicator. The dropout rate is calculated annually and the denominator is total number of pupil enrolled to specific school level (secondary school for instance), with such formula the proportion rate below 0% such as 0,xx% for primary, 0,yy% for lower secondary and 0,zz% for upper secondary. In constrast OoSA accumulate of children who
- dropout from either secondary school, primary school
- completed primary and lower secondary but didn't continue to lower or upper secondary
- never enrolled to any schooling system
That's why the proportion of OoSA is huge (more than 50% on some provinces) and these huge proportion will raise huge social and economy problems in the near future (next 5 or ten years) if no proper intervention through skills development both formal and non-formal education. At the moment the focus more emphasize to formal education which involve large scale of resource, and the non-formal and training system are little bit forgotten.
Why these adolescent excluded from schooling system? The answer to this simple question will get complex and overwhelming answers. SUSENAS 2011 provided general reasons why adolescent excluded as depicted by below chart.
No money or not enough money to be ultimate reason for these adolescent excluded from schooling system. It indicated poverty as ultimate reason why adolescent outside schooling system. However blame poverty solely as cause of adolescent exclusion from schooling system is not obvious to give proper respond (policy implication). Recently unicef conducted out of school children study which covered early childhood up to adolescent. The qualitative research of EAUSI (Exclusion of Adolescent in Upper Secondary Initiative) study revealed that factors influence adolescent abandoned the school was complex and involved factors that can be grouped into personal/family reasons, community reasons and macro reasons. The interaction between these three groups of factor are very complex and we can't simply mention poverty solely as a cause.
If you aware the third most frequent response, working is an option for adolescent to support family income when they live under poverty line, in short word working is specific reason inside poverty. Another response is married or taking care of house hold is another specific reason inside poverty as revealed during EAUSI study. School distance is also can be specific reason inside poverty, like EAUSI fact findings where adolescent who dropout spend twice time of transportation cost compare to tuition fee, in remote area such as Papua transportation can reach 1,5 million per month.
Disability and poverty has strong relation +Daniel Mont on his study in Vietnam said poverty creates conditions that lead to disability, and having a disability can lead to poverty because of barriers to economic and social participation.
Disability has strong relation to poverty as well, as quote above from disability and poverty analysis in Vietnam case. Family with disable members less likely to enroll to education and having disable members also burden living cost. It is obvious that poor household with disable members will trap on poverty and stay away from schooling and training system.
The figure below aggregated adolescent reason abandoned school by poverty quin-tiles (Q1 Richest; Q5 Poorest) and region type (urban - rural). The findings from below figure lead to education outcomes.
The highest proportion indicated by blue color is "no money", the proportion became larger as it moved to poorest quin-tiles and it make sense, another reason (another color) follow the same trend. However the trend was the opposite for working, it became larger as it moved to richer quin-tiles, what happened? One reasonable explanation relate to education outcomes. Most likely family from richer quin-tiles consider return of investment on education, maybe they feel basic education is enough or they consider upper secondary less relevant to their needs.
Interests and Talents
During EAUSI study mostly informant said they were blind following when enroll either to upper secondary or vocational (upper secondary vocational - SMK), the process was repeating again when they selected program. It indicated the counseling system either in lower or upper secondary didn't work properly to assist pupils to select which school or program they will continue or pursue based on pupils interests and talents. I interviewed a female Adolescent a few months ago on EAUSI study and asked her aspiration, she replied want to be a teacher. When i realized she enroll to vocational i asked her why you didn't enroll to upper secondary? She said just following her friends.
Universal Secondary Education (Pendidikan Menengah Universal - PMU)
Ministry of Education and Culture (MoEC) recently issued Universal Secondary Education (Pendidikan Menengah Universal - PMU) to extend basic education "compulsory". Based on PMU guideline it is obvious that the strategy emphasize to access by providing infrastructure through public and private school. The challenge to keep adolescent stay or increase participation more huge than basic education, since 16-18 age group consider as legal worker and legal age to participate in public forum.
The proposed strategy by extending access very supply side approach. I heard from internal source of MoEC that there was strong debate whether the extension of compulsory basic education will go to lower or upper education level. So we talk about effectiveness of resource spending, like Patrinos (xxxx) mentioned that investment on basic education will contribute to economic development, while it is true when the pupils got quality of basic education.
A strategy to improve access to upper secondary can be undergone through demand side approach. At least there are two methods can be considered to encourage demand side of upper secondary.
Voucher System
Government mostly channel the fund to provider (school) either public and private. On Indonesia case, Government channel direct cost to school directly called BOS (school block grant), mostly for direct cost for basic education. Voucher system delivers the cost (either direct and indirect) to parents instead of schools. The rational behind this system to empower pupils and parents to be aware on school selection based on their needs and aspirations. While for school to encourage spirit of competition with other schools to provide the best education service, because now "the money" lied on parents not from government directly.
How the proportion between direct and indirect cost will be determined, it is up to local context and needs. Like in Papua case where indirect cost such as transport even twice times of tuition fees, most likely transport cost should be a priority.
Chartered School
School transparency and accountability can be increased to community participation, that's why Government introduced School Based Management, a concept borrow from US. The xxxxxxx (2012) said that in average parent education attainment lower than teachers or principals. It make school member more superior. In US parents as school board member involve on teachers development (recruitment, development, firing) but in Indonesia limited on school planning and financial. So it is ridiculous when parents involve on school development but they really never can improve teacher development more over in public school where teacher more loyal to superior as civil servant than as educator (.......), even it is the most challange situation where certification considered fail (........).
Chartered school is state school but managed by community or private. So it give more power to parent to more involve on education system and will give further impact on the fitfulness of demand side. Below chart show the strategy of delivering upper secondary, where demand side method need to be encouraged.
Another demand side method is home schooling, at the moment the pressure from public to goverment to provide supports for this method increase. Government should provide concise and obvious guide for this method, due to PUSLIT (R & D on MoEC) fact findings, the implementation of home schooling became miss leading. The concept of home schooling need parents to be a leader and facilitator for learning process, however on the field the practices parents hired teacher or professional educators providing learning process.
What Government of Indonesia Can Do
For adolescent inside formal education
- More contextual teaching and learning process, more pupils and parents engagement, more linking to user driven needs.
- Provide financial support through chartered school model, voucher system and home schooling.
- Competencies and careers counseling (capacity building for counselor).
- Vocational (SMK) and upper secondary (SMA) exchange flexibility.
For adolescent out of formal education (school)
- Integrated training system with user needs as well as education system (formal).
- Providing regional qualification framework.
