People's School, Don't Stop at the Walls and Roofs

President Prabowo Subianto is targeting the construction of 200 boarding schools by 2025. His goal is noble: to break the chain of poverty and open access to education for children from underprivileged families. "If the father is a scavenger, the child should not become a scavenger," said the President (Kompas, 3/21/2025).

This initiative should be welcomed as it provides a new avenue for education to serve as a lever for social mobility. However, its success heavily depends on careful and comprehensive implementation, not merely on numbers and projects.

The history of educational development in Indonesia shows that good intentions alone are not enough. Many educational programs have failed to be sustainable because they were hastily designed and executed bureaucratically, without involving stakeholders at the grassroots level.

Without local community involvement, programs lose relevance and experience social resistance. This kind of top-down approach often fails to address the real needs of communities.

Building 200 schools in a short period is indeed impressive politically and symbolically. However, if it is not accompanied by the strengthening of human resources, the development of a contextual curriculum, and guarantees for operational sustainability, these schools will merely become empty buildings or administrative formalities. Schools must be designed as centers of social life, not merely places for academic learning.

We have seen similar situations occur before. Schools were built in remote areas, but no teachers were able to stay for more than a few months. Books were sent without teacher training, rendering them ineffective. A national curriculum was implemented without considering the local cultural context, ultimately alienating students from the subject matter.

If community schools repeat this pattern, they will merely become a repetition of past failures wrapped in a new narrative.

The narrative of "boarding" implies that children will be separated from their families for the sake of access to education. Although the intention is good, this separation must be reviewed from psychological and sociological perspectives. Elementary school-aged children greatly need emotional attachment to their families.

If the dormitory system is implemented extensively without a transitional approach and guidance, it could lead to new social issues, such as alienation, mental pressure, and even trauma.

If families and local communities are not actively involved, then community schools will lose their soul. Education is not just about the curriculum, but about the daily life of children in their community.

Children learn not only from books, but also from the values that live in the family and social environment. Therefore, a contextual and participatory school model is important to design from the start.

The main problem of education in remote areas is not just about physical facilities, but also the crisis of educators. The ratio of teachers in the 3T areas is still far from ideal. Even when teachers are available, many of them do not receive pedagogical training that is appropriate to local challenges.

On the other hand, incentives and protection for teachers working in remote areas are still minimal, making them reluctant to stay in the long term.

Building schools without ensuring the presence of teachers will only add to the list of suboptimal educational facilities. The government needs to design a long-term strategy, including realistic placement and incentive schemes, ongoing training, and a psychosocial support system for teachers in remote areas. Without it, the physical construction of schools is only cosmetic.

In addition to teachers, the school ecosystem also involves the principal, administrative staff, supervisors, and of course, parents. Public schools should not be run as a single structure. They must be built as a collaborative ecosystem that involves all parties. There needs to be a space for dialogue between parties so that schools can adapt to the needs and dynamics of their communities.

The Ministry of Social Affairs said that more than 200 points are ready for use, and 45 buildings are ready for use in the early stages (Kompas, 3/21/2025). However, experience shows that infrastructure readiness does not automatically guarantee system readiness.

Evaluation of similar programs in the past should serve as an important lesson. The failure of many alternative schools is not due to lack of enthusiasm, but because of weak support systems.

The People's School program must combine academic education with life skills and character building. The curriculum cannot simply copy the national syllabus. It must be restructured to suit local challenges and potentials, such as agriculture, maritime, or village-based entrepreneurship. Relevant education will be more down-to-earth and meaningful to students.

Adaptive and contextual curriculum is the key to the success of community schools. Children in rural areas have strong resilience, creativity, and life values. Schools should be a place to nurture and develop this potential, not kill it with administrative burdens and irrelevant exams. Liberating education must be the spirit of every community school program.

If implemented properly, public schools can be a symbol of the presence of a state that builds from the periphery. This program can be a milestone in restoring public trust in the national education system. However, this can only be achieved if its implementation prioritizes social justice, local involvement, and long-term sustainability.

In the spirit of Ki Hadjar Dewantara, school is a place to guide a child's life to develop according to their nature. Schools must liberate, not standardize. Educating does not replace life.

If we really want to break the chain of poverty, people's schools must be built on the foundation of a humanitarian vision and policies that side with the weakest.

Yosefina Itu, OSU Lecturer at STPM Santa Ursula Ende, NTTS3 Student in Social Development and Welfare, FISIPOL UGM