Education, Society, and Culture

EDUCATION, SOCIETY AND CULTURE

Translated and edited by: Denny Nugraha

Department of English Education 5^th Semester

From the book of “Landasan Pendidikan” (The Foundation of Education)

Originally written in Indonesian by: Dr. Asep Kurniawan, M.Ag

The State Institute of Islamic Studies (IAIN) Syekh Nurjati Cirebon

Introduction

            An educational institution and its educational program will reflect the life and culture of its society, circumstances of socio-culture will not be separable from it. Sociological and anthropological foundation of education namely are discussing about the concepts of education in society contexts and its culture, the relation between education and society, the relation between education and its culture, also various environments of education which exist in the society. Therefore, the study of sociological and anthropological foundation are viewed important for those of educator, especially for teachers.

            This paper will emphasize the discussion of sociological and anthropological foundation of education in Indonesian context. Here the focus will be on the matters of function of education that teachers or educators should deal with. The discussions which involve the definition of social institution, the relationship between education and society, and the relationship of function between the society and its culture will be presented to broaden the teachers’ knowledge and so for those who are concerned in education.

1.    Education as Social Institution (Pranata Sosial)

Theodorson G.A defines the social institution as “an interrelated system of social roles and norms organized about the satisfaction of an important social need or function”. Social institution is a roles system and social norms that are related and organized around the fulfilment of need or important social function (Sudarja Adiwikarta, 1988). Komblum uses the term of institution to describe the social institution, he defines it as “a status and role structure which are directed to the satisfaction of basic needs of society member” (Kamanto Sunarto, 1993). Whereas Koentjaraningrat (1984), in his definition about social institution intrinsically mentions also the tools and human that implement those roles. All definition above is critically different, but fundamentally contains the same relative understanding. The essence is that social institution constitutes a typical activity system of a patterned behavior; this typical activity is done by every individual or human which each has status and role which is mutual connected or has structure; refers to the system of certain ideas, values, and norms or behavior patterns; implemented by using various tools; and this particular activity has function to fulfill the basic necessity of society member. In other words, social institution is a patterned behavior used by the society to fulfill every basic need.

Every member of society (individual) and the society itself as an individuals unity have various basic need, for instance the need of metabolism, reproduction, security, health etc. These basic necessity will be fulfilled in the shape of cultural responses of food supply, kinship, protection, education etc. These responses will have similarity in pattern within a certain society. The standardized pattern of responses is called social institution which involves economic institution, political institution, religious institution, educational institution etc.

Educational institution (pranata pendidikan) is one of social institution in the matter of socialization process and/or enculturation to deliver individual into social and cultural life, also to maintain the existence of society and its culture. Through the educational institution, the socialization and/or enculturation is held by the society, so the existence of society and its culture can last although there is a change of its member because of the birth, death, and/or migration.

As the social institution, educational institution exists within the society and is open. Therefore, educational institution takes the input from the society and gives the output to the society too. For example, the input of teachers and students in a educational institution derives from the society itself; the purpose of education is formulated according to the input of the society’s system of values, hopes, and dreams etc. Conversely, the society provides or gives the input resources for educational institution and receives the output from the educational institution. For instance, within the society there are residents, value system, knowledge system, etc., this is input resource which is provided by the society for the educational institution. But though the society itself (for example a company) accepts the fresh graduate of educational institution (school or university) as the employee or worker etc.

2.    Education and Society

a.         The Relation between Education and Economy

In the perspective of history is well known that education in the beginning is held informally in family environment and non-formally in society environment. Furthermore, education is also implemented in schools. Even as the reality, recently education is experiencing a significant development. The development deals with the amount of institution of education (number of child education institution, elementary education, middle education, and high education institution); the increase of education level for a position or profession (i.e., in the past, to be an elementary school teacher, someone must be a graduate from teacher education school (SPG) which is in the same level with high school (SMA), then it is increased to be diploma 2, and now it must be for bachelor degree graduate (S1)), the existence of increasing society’s aspiration concerning the significance of education etc. Towards those development, Olive Banks calls it as “explosion of education” (ledakan pendidikan) (Sudarja Adiwikarta, 1988).

 Besides of the occurence of development in education as described above, recently there happens the development in economy too. The development of economy is signed with the use of technology which is progressively developed in industry, the appearance of the new job field needs certain skills and managements, etc. In line with the condition above, raise a question, is there a relationship between education and the economic condition of a society?

Concerning with the problem as it is questioned above, based on the data gained from various source, Sudarja Adiwikarta (1988) concludes that there is a constant and positive relation between the level of education and economic condition, meaning that the higher level of education, the higher level of economic condition too. So many evidences show that between the two there is a mutual influencing relationship, namely that the growth of education influences the growth of economy, and conversely, the growth of economy influences the growth of education. Scrutinizing the statement above, we can conclude that there is mutual relation between the growth of education and the growth of economy. Yet, it does not know clearly that which factor that appears first and becomes the cause for another factors, whether the growth of education that causes the growth of economy or conversely, the growth of economy causes the growth of education.

By citing the explanation from Parellus (1978) and Knowles (1982), Sudarja Adiwikarta (1988) states that in sociology, the concept of relation between education and economic condition as explained above, gets supports from the adherents of consensus and conflict theory. Both the adherents of these theory have similar view that the main function of an institution or educational institution in the matter of involvement with the economic condition is to prepare the youth to fill the productive job field. Furthermore in the the matter of education for adult, the purpose that is intended to be reached is not more to prepare the skills, but to increase the skills so that students can face any problems at that moment. Therefore, they (students) achieve the education of mentals, attitudes, knowledges, and skills which are useful for them. The process happens in all society’s layer, started from the most traditional to the most modern society.

b.    The Relation between Education and Social Stratification

Fundamentally there is equality among human. But conversely, the reality also shows that wherever in a society always exists the inequality of status or position of society member. The inequality of status maybe in job position, type of job, wealth, prestige, education level etc. The differentiation of society member based on the status is called social stratification.

There are many kinds of method used by the sociology experts in determining the social stratification, those are (1) objective method, (2) subjective method, and (3) reputation method (S. Nasution, 1983). Through the objective method, social stratification is determined according to objective criteria which are concerning with the amount of income, education level, job type, etc. Through the subjective method, social stratification is decided on the view of society member itself in evaluating theirselves in the position hierarchy of the society. Whereas through the reputation method, social stratification is determined according to how the society member locate themselves in the society stratification. In this way, the member of society is given a chance to decide the social groups which exist in in their society, furthermore, they are asked to identify each group member. In determining the social stratification by using the reputation method, W. Lloyd Warner finds six class or groups, namely class or group: “upper-upper, lower-upper, upper-middle, lower-middle, upper-lower, lower-lower”.

In sociology there is a differentiation between closed social stratification and open social stratification. Based on J. Milton Yinger, a stratification is called as closed if every society member remains on the same status with their parents. Further, a stratification is called as open if every society member has a chance to stay the status which is different with their parents, maybe higher or lower (Kamanto Sunarto, 1993).

In the system of social stratification, everyone has their own status, everyone will occupy in their group or class. Yet, in the open social stratification, everyone has a chance to raise up or even maybe down their status/class/group. This is called social mobility. For example, a son of the street seller has a technique bachelor degree and gets a job with the biggest salary than his parent’s salary, will stay on the higher group than the group that is stayed by his parents in their social stratification. Social mobility will keep going, opened chance for someone to raise up the status/group in his/her social stage. Conversely, they which are born in upper status/group which are less motivation and hard work to achieve knowledge, attitude, mental, and skill which are needed for certain profession, thus they will downgrade the status/group in their social stage.

Social stratification and social mobility which happen within the society, have attracted the attention of sociologist, they question those things in relation with education. Is there any relationship between education and social mobility? So that they also question about the relationship between education and social stratification.

According to Ralph Turner, in the society with open social stratification system, education is viewed as the important facility of social mobility. Turner views the education as the holder of social mobility function (Sudarja Adiwikarta, 1988). Education is viewed as the way to reach the better position in the society. The higher level of education which is reached by someone, the bigger hope to upgrade to the higher status in his/her social stage. In line with this, S. Nasution (1983) also states that “Education is viewed as the chance to move from one group to another, from the lower to the higher one. Education is the way for social mobility”.

Many education experts which put the trust on the function of education to repair the someone’s fate so he/she can upgrade the status/group in his/her social stage. The implication is that the appearance of idea and the expansion program and proration of chance to get the education. By that idea and program, it is hoped that it can be liquefied the boundaries across status/class/ group in a social stage. It is hoped that the similar chance for learning gives the opportunity for every child to get the job which is dreamed by them. The mandatory education program or universal education gives the same competence for everyone from all status/group. Thus, the social differences will be able to be decreased, although maybe it cannot be deleted entirely. The problem is: is it able for education to omit the social stratification?

As it is professed by Sudarja Adiwikarta (1988), Emile Durkheim suggests that the more progressive a society thus there will be division of labor which demands specialization for a field of job. Specialization contains meaning selection, because specialization locates people on a certain position appropriate with talents, interests, competences, and opportunities which are available in the society. This process also means allocation and distribution of resource which exists in the society. People get reward, including material reward, appropriate with the role that they play in the society. Selection means allocation and distribution of wealth resource, because every field of specialization get different reward. Furthermore, those happenings can evoke social stratification. How can selection, allocation, and distribution process be happened? These can be happened through education. Earl Hopper supports this theory. According to Earl Hopper, selection is undertaken in several phases, and it is started in education institution. When entering the school, children experience the strict selection through selection test. Then they must choose a field of study or study program, whether they are accepted or not in such study program, the criteria are decided by education institution. Educational curriculum in various ladders/stages and fields of study or studies program are projected for a certain job field, there are high, middle, and low position, and thus the salary too. Through the education institution, every society member is selected and gets certain knowledge, attitude, value, mental, and skill. So that, when entering the job field - which is through selection too – they will occupy certain job field appropriate with their education. Even after entering the job field, someone will likely get training or advanced education. There is potential job field to get the better income or the worse one, and there is a closed or open job field to achieve the progress through better and further education is undertaken by institution or company where someone works or through the education in other institution. Hopper views the education as the selection facility in implementing the social roles which are as stated by Durkheim which can arouse social stratification.

 Scrutinizing the explanation above, the conclusion is that education has socialization function for the sake of homogenity, also it has selection function to create heterogenity that is implicated for the creation of social stratification. Social stratification will not dissapear because of education, conversely education will create or conserve the existence of social stratification.

Education cannot abolish the social stratification, even conversely it can conserve and maintain the existence of social stratification. However, the concept of relation between education and social mobility gives the hope for everyone to be able to rise the status/group in their social stage. This must be understood and concerned by all teachers, because this concept will become hint by the teachers to give stimulation and motivation for their students, so that students can study to reach the high achievement until the higher education level. Teachers should be able to give the model concerning with such cases of social mobility. In this context, it is not expected that teachers underestimate their students which are from the low group, or teachers are not sure with their students’ capability. These attitude of teachers clearly will be contra-productive, and will hinder the occurence of social mobility. Therefore, teachers should realize that education – particularly school – has social mobility function.

3.    Education and Culture

Culture is the product of human and the prerequisite for them. They create culture because with it they become cultural creature. Take a look at a newborn baby, he/she is in the condition which is full of dependence to other people, especially to his/her parents, he/she cannot control his/her emotion yet, has not known yet about the values and norms, is not able to expect his/her future yet, etc. Yet, because he/she lives in cultural environment, through the education (enculturation), finally he/she can be an adult which is able to take part in society life and its complex culture.

According to the anthropology’s point of view, something that it is possible to let the above phenomenon happened is the process of enculturation. By referring to the statement of Melville J. Herkovits, Imran Manan (1989:34) states that: “The enculturation process of someone for years from his/her life is the main mechanism which makes a stable culture, while the ongoing process on the older member of society is important in encouraging the change”. Thus during his/her childhood and youth, enculturation stabilize the culture, because enculturation develops social habits which are accepted and to be the maturation of his/her personality. In this way, enculturation means cultural transmission. Yet, when entering the adult world, enculturation often stimulates the change. This is happened because there are so many new behavior forms which are needed by the adult people, even it is not only for theirselves, but for the culture itself too.

There are three views about culture which have implication towards the concept of education. Those three views are: 1) superorganic view, 2) conceptualist view, and 3) realist view (Imran manan, 1989).

a.    Superorganic’s view

As it is stated that the culture is the creation of human, conversely based on the view of superorganic adherents, that culture is a reality which exists on the top and outside of individuals which become the support of culture, and this reality has its own law. Thus, culture constitutes superorganics’ reality. Leslie White, one of the adherents of this view, states that: “Human’s behavior is the only organism response towards the culture’s stimulus. Therefore, human’s behavior is determined by the culture. What does one search about and how he can find it are determined by the culture. This is a view of “cultural determinism” where human is viewed as instrument, through human, the culture reveals itself.

As stated by Kneller (Imran Manan, 1989), the implication of superorganic’s view about culture towards education is that education is viewed as a process which is used by a society to control and form individuals appropriate with the purposes which are determined by basic values of a culture. Education – informal, formal, and nonformal – is the process which puts the new generation under the control of a culture’s system. Superorganic’s view also emphasizes that the must of the government to do strict supervision to guarantee that teachers simply implant the ideas, attitudes, and skills which support the advancement of culture. This means that education has sentralistic character, moreover education functions only for inheriting or cultural transition.

b.    Conceptualist’s view

Contrastingly with the view of superorganic, according to conceptualist that culture has not ontological reality, culture is not a superorganic’s reality in the top or outside of individual. But, culture is a “logical construct” which is abstracted from human’s behavior. Culture is a concept which is established from the uniformities which can be observed in the order of behavior by using a logical abstraction process.

The implication of conceptualist’s view about culture towards education is that in education, the new generation must learn their cultural heritage appropriate with their concern and develop their own description about their culture objectively. Therefore, according to conceptualist’s view, education is viewed to become the tool of culture’s change which means to create opinion athmosphere which stimulates thinking and the innovative acceptance.

c.    Realist’s view

According to realist’s view, culture is an empirical concept and reality. As it is stated by  David Bidney (Imran Manan, 1989), culture is “cultural heritage” namely abstraction or generalization from the real “behavior” of society members. This means that culture is a concept (abstraction) and also a reality (behavior).

The implication of realist’s view about culture towards education: the adherents of realist view believe that human child has adjustment ability towards the surroundings reality, towards his/her physicality or socio-culture. To develop such adjustment ability they must be given various kinds of knowledge, value, attitude, and skill which are provided by their culture. They want the system of education which functions to train young generation that have ability to consider objectively the social and cultural change which is appropriate with the value of their basic culture.

The above explanation gives understanding about the existence of the ideological differences regarding the culture and its implication towards education. This is about what does education in a society only function to implant the cultural heritage or to influence the development of culture? Moreover it is also regarding with whether the students should learn the cultural heritage as it is taught by their teachers, or students should explore by their own initiative, creating their own description about cultural heritage. By these questions, it is possible to know that fundamentally there are two main functions of education in the relation with the condition and hope of the society and its culture. The functions are:

1)   Conservative function

In this way, educational institution functions to transmit/inherit or conserve the values of society’s culture and/or to maintain the ongoing existence of society.

2)    Innovative/creative/transformative function

In this way, educational institution functions to do the change and renewal of society with its cultural values.

The two functions of education as stated above, namely conservative and creative functions of education for the society and its culture can be understood and real happened in the society’s life. As it is understood that in the society there are values, knowledges, and patterned behaviors which are still relevant and viewed as good things which must be conserved. Otherwise, there are also values, knowledges, and patterned behaviors which are not viewed as relevant anymore and unworthy which need to be changed or renewed. Furthermore, to conserve and do the renewal or change, the society needs to do the above ways through education, or through what is in anthropology called enculturation.

Download Full Text Here