The promise of freedom in the field of education, namely the intellectual life of the nation, has not been fulfilled. Especially if you look at our current higher education situation.
First, our gross enrollment ratio (APK) of higher education is still very low, at 31.75 percent in 2017. That is, from the number of Indonesian population aged 19-24 years, only 31.75 percent who managed to touch the bench of higher education.
Second, the quality of higher education in Indonesia is still apprehensive. Data of National Accreditation Board of Higher Education (BAN-PT) shows, from 4500s universities in Indonesia, only 1,131 colleges are accredited. A total of 50 colleges have A accreditation, 345 accredited college B, 736 colleges accredited C. Ironically, as many as 3,340 colleges have not been accredited.
Meanwhile, from 26,672 study programs, only 2,512 study programs have A accreditation, B accreditation of 9,922, and accreditation C as much as 7,280. There are about 5,000 non-accredited courses.
This is just a domestic standard, yet we compare it with international higher education standards.
Politics of Education
Then, the question arises: how to educate the life of the nation?
First, make sure every Indonesian human can access education, including higher education. In this case, no citizen shall be entitled to enjoy higher education due to both cost and space factors (high capacity for higher education).
Second, how national education, including higher education, creates an independent Indonesian man. Not only independent from the colonial mentality, but also independent in thinking.
Merdeka from the colonial mentality means to free the human mindset of Indonesia from mental inferior or always feel inferior in the presence of other nations. Sukarno and other independence fighters called mentally inlander.
While independence in thinking means to free the human mind of Indonesia from various restraints, both stukrutal and cultural, which intercept the birth of creativity, imagination, and power.
Well, how to realize the things above, that's what I mean as national education politics. Politics of higher education is reflected in various government policies in the implementation of higher education.
The threat of Liberalization of Education
Since the New Order, Indonesian higher education politics has served business. Many higher education stands just to reap profits, ranging from levies on students to the sale and purchase of diplomas.
No wonder, private universities grow like mushrooms in the rainy season. Ironically, many private universities do not meet academic service standards (number of courses, faculty, students, and supporting facilities).
This presents the problem of many problems. Firstly, the number of private universities in Indonesia is not proportional to its capacity.
Of the approximately 4600 colleges in Indonesia, as many as 4200 or 91 percent of them are private universities. Ironically, although the number of private universities reached 91 percent, but the capacity of students is only 63 percent. If averaged, the capacity of PTN is 4858 students, while private universities only 721 students.
The number of universities in Indonesia reaches 4600s, but the number of students (capacity) is only about 5.8 million students. Compare that with China whose campus is only about 2800s, but the number of students is about 37 million students.
Secondly, because the orientation is merely making a profit, many private universities operate under academic service standards. In fact, many campuses abal-abal that just open a business service sale and purchase diplomas. Do not be surprised, there are 3340 colleges that are not accredited.
Then again, after the fall of the New Order, along with the enormous liberalizing winds, the higher education world was also exposed. Born various regulations that unfurled red carpet for liberalization of higher education, starting PP no. 61 of 1999 on the Determination of State Universities as Legal Entities, followed by Law no. 20 of 2003 on National Education System, and the culmination of Law no. 12 of 2012 on Higher Education.
The regulations urged Higher Education to become "legal entities" managed as corporations. With the jargon of "autonomy", universities are forced to be independent, including in the affairs of educational finance.
As a consequence, universities are encouraged to seek their own financing through endowment management, imposition of tuition fees on students, creating business entities, and cooperation with the private sector.
In essence, the State gradually eliminated its responsibilities in administering education, including in the matter of financing.
We are then introduced to the Single Tuition (UKT) system, which regulates the tuition fee per student adjusted to the economic ability of the parent or the bearer