Not long ago, the Ministry of Education and Culture’s YouTube channel released a new video: a presentation by Minister Nadiem Makarim on “Kampus Merdeka” (Freedom to Learn). For me, the Ministry of Education and Culture is the most important of all ministries. Not only because of its large budget, but because it is the ministry that shapes our future. I believe a nation can only be as great as what it teaches its children. These children are our future. So when Jokowi announced Nadiem as Minister, I was quite excited.

Here is the video:

Kampus Merdeka appears to have drawn fierce reception from many quarters. Many in the public view it as too pro-business, offering cheap labor, and not pro-student. Lecturers complain that Nadiem’s program seems too practice-heavy, when academia should be about critical thinking, logic, fidelity to one’s discipline, untainted by capitalism.

My take will be somewhat more positive.

What Is Kampus Merdeka?

Kampus Merdeka itself is a program focused more on higher education than on primary and secondary education. Personally, when it comes to educational interventions, the earlier the better. The push should start from elementary school, or even kindergarten. Once students are older, they are much harder to change. But Nadiem, at the start of his speech, offered a rationale that I found very compelling: Speed. He said higher education is the level that can most quickly produce human capital. Mind blown!

According to the video, there are 4 new policies under Kampus Merdeka. First, opening new study programs is made easier. Universities will have more freedom to create new programs. I think this has potential downsides, but while many old requirements are being relaxed, one new requirement strikes me as crucial: the obligation to prove that the new program will involve credible external parties, such as companies, state-owned enterprises, NGOs, or world-class universities.

Second, the mandatory 5-year re-accreditation cycle is eliminated. University accreditation will be automatically extended unless a university wants to upgrade, in which case it applies for re-accreditation. To prevent quality decline, the ministry will monitor indicators and public complaints as signs of deteriorating quality, and will audit the university accordingly. One more important point: recognition of international accreditation.

Third, Nadiem pledged to encourage universities to become PTNBH (Legal Entity State Universities). This applies mainly to public universities, not private ones. Public universities can generally be classified into three types: satker, BLU, and PTNBH. Satker is the most constrained (this is where I work 😢). Everything requires going through the parent ministry. Not flexible. BLU is like satker but with more financial flexibility. PTNBH? Essentially a private entity funded by the government. PTNBH universities have great freedom to make their own decisions. Currently only 11 universities in Indonesia have PTNBH status.

Fourth – and this is the one that generated the most discussion – the right to spend 3 semesters learning outside campus. The ministry will require universities to offer off-campus programs worth 3 semesters, counted as credit hours. These 3 semesters can be used for internships, and/or research assistance, and/or entrepreneurship, or even taking courses from other programs. Yes, “and/or” – so you could do 2 semesters of internship and 1 of independent work, or 1 semester of research, 1 of entrepreneurship, and 1 of internship, etc. Since it is a student’s right, it is optional. If a student wants the standard 8 semesters entirely on campus, that is fine. But universities must prepare the off-campus program.

Pros and Cons: Is It Better Than the Status Quo?

One thing that immediately strikes me as both a lecturer and university administrator is the strong decentralization spirit of Kampus Merdeka, especially in the first three points. Easing the creation of new programs means less ministerial control over what can be taught and a bit more freedom for universities to design curricula. PTNBH clearly gives universities more room to maneuver with less central control than BLU, let alone satker (😢). PTNBH universities don’t need to deal with PNBP tariffs if they find revenue through consulting or research grants, can make university-to-university partnerships, can recruit faculty without going through the center, and so on. Accreditation is also simplified.

Come to think of it, Nadiem’s primary education policy – such as abolishing the national exam – also reduces the ministry’s role in education delivery.

Beyond reducing central control over universities, Kampus Merdeka opens greater opportunities for the non-academic world to participate in higher education. The requirement to collaborate with industry, international universities, or NGOs effectively serves as an invitation from the ministry for these institutions to help make universities more relevant to the real world. Automatic recognition of foreign accreditation standards clearly helps universities ready to compete internationally, freeing them from the burden of satisfying the ministry’s standards – which are obviously lower than the international standards these advanced universities are targeting.

Not only is the ministry’s role reduced, but its remaining workload is also lightened. Eliminating mandatory 5-year re-accreditation clearly reduces BAN-PT’s workload. Nadiem’s argument is very economic: opportunity cost. There is resource misallocation here: universities that neither want nor need re-accreditation (because they are doing business as usual) must allocate resources for it, while universities eager to upgrade from B to A accreditation must queue for a process that often takes a long time.

Oh, digressing a bit – there are at least two points where Nadiem implicitly acknowledges the limitations of his institution. In the video, Nadiem acknowledges a missing link between what universities teach and what the real world needs. This is literally the first time I have heard a senior education ministry official say this. Nadiem also acknowledges the need for third-party involvement (business, professional associations, international accreditation bodies, etc.) because the world is changing too fast, too globally, for the ministry to keep up on its own. With this reasoning, it makes sense why Nadiem gives universities more options to rely on non-ministerial entities for their development.

For the fourth point, there is decentralization as well. Universities now have more freedom to develop off-campus educational programs longer than a single internship semester. This opens more opportunities for universities to create more flexible and extended partnerships with third parties. Students have the freedom (decentralization!) to opt into these off-campus programs. If you are a conventional student, you can still study full-time on campus as usual. But point 4 gives students who feel they need learning experiences from non-campus settings – like companies or NGOs – the opportunity to pursue them.

Decentralization is the name of the game. Political decentralization has produced new stars like Nadiem’s own boss, Bu Risma, Pak Ganjar, Pak RK, Pak Anies, and so on. It will be interesting to see whether university decentralization produces new excellent campuses everywhere.

There are some critiques that I think are quite valid. PTNBH and internships are often called too pro-business and encouraging the capitalization of education. Internships are frequently exploited by companies to cut production costs. And now the duration could be extended to a year or more. Moreover, “This kind of education orientation (practice-focused) actually kills the essence of free critical thinking as a human being. Education is no longer a tool for human liberation or humanization,” as stated by Dian Septi Trisnanti, Secretary General of FBLP (Cross-Factory Workers Federation), quoted from Tirto. Others also ask why Nadiem doesn’t simply improve teacher and lecturer competency instead of making these changes.

Admittedly, the last time I visited a PTNBH campus in the Depok area, the parking lot was already packed with cars. I certainly do not particularly like the commercialization of education, especially higher education. Unfortunately, money is a problem for everyone, including the government. PTNBH universities are encouraged to generate their own revenue and have their subsidies reduced, precisely so that funds can be reallocated to smaller universities. However, in his speech, Nadiem promised that subsidies for universities upgrading to PTNBH status would not be cut – so any new revenue would increase the university’s total budget.

As an economist, I like to see free market interactions as power relations between buyers and sellers. The higher education market is no exception. Commercialization of education looks bad because, although demand for higher education keeps rising, supply is stagnant. Something is preventing Indonesia’s top universities from growing in quality and quantity. One of Nadiem’s tasks is to increase the supply of higher education – not just in quality and quantity, but also in the range of focus: vocational vs. academic. If competition for top universities increases, tuition costs could potentially be reduced.

And remember, becoming a PTNBH is not mandatory. So not every university will suddenly turn capitalist. You will still have affordable socialist-priced universities as options.

As for improving lecturer quality, I think that is no easy task. I am skeptical the ministry can achieve it quickly, no matter how much money it has. Perhaps Nadiem is skeptical too. That is why he seeks to involve third parties like industry, professional associations, and international universities. Their involvement, under Kampus Merdeka, can include co-designing new study programs – with curricula shaped by real-world practitioners – or establishing internship programs where students learn from practitioners for 3 semesters. Is this really bad for students?

Lastly, I want to address the argument that education should be a tool for human liberation. A friend of mine argues that education ought to pursue pure knowledge, free from the clutches of capitalism.

A very scholarly argument. I admit my brain is not quite sharp enough to fully appreciate it. Perhaps as academics, we must indeed uphold the roots of our discipline. But unfortunately, the real world is not that beautiful. Our students need to earn a living, find happiness for themselves and their families, and help build Indonesia’s economy. Unlike developed countries whose research spending reaches 1-2% of GDP, Indonesia is not there yet. For the majority of our students, being a purist of knowledge is a luxury they cannot afford. Personally, I believe upholding one’s discipline is mandatory. But education should focus on the learner, not the knowledge itself. What they need, not what we want to bestow upon them.

From the critics I have read and heard, none have proposed what alternative policies the ministry should adopt. As a consequence, I can only compare Kampus Merdeka against the status quo. Compared to the status quo, I still think Kampus Merdeka is probably better. At the very least, Kampus Merdeka does not eliminate the status quo – it makes it a choice. From Nadiem’s presentation, Kampus Merdeka gives universities more freedom to adapt to their needs and the skill demands of the labor market. Moreover, the internship program is also optional. Students who oppose capitalism or are confident their skills cannot be bought cheaply can still graduate without taking the internship track.

Ultimately, We Need More Than Just a Speech

Of course, no one is perfect. Kampus Merdeka will not be a panacea for Indonesian higher education. Its implementation remains to be seen. There is no draft regulation yet that details the 4 main points of Kampus Merdeka. The ministry still needs to issue a list of approved third parties for program or internship partnerships, and which international accreditations are recognized. What are the criteria for “declining campus performance” that would trigger a ministry audit? Evaluating all universities in Indonesia is certainly a heavy task, but perhaps still easier than mandatory accreditation every 5 years? We will see.

I also somewhat regret the absence of polytechnics and other diploma providers from Nadiem’s speech. After all, diploma programs are inherently closer to industry than more academically oriented degree programs. Should polytechnics go through the same accreditation as universities? Should polytechnic lecturers be evaluated with the same metrics as university professors? I also regret the absence of RPL (Recognition of Prior Learning) from Kampus Merdeka. This is an old policy, but its implementation remains unclear. Perhaps polytechnics and RPL will be the focus of another speech. Hopefully I can watch that one too.

So far, no new regulations have been issued by the ministry. We cannot judge Nadiem’s rules if the rules are not out yet. For now, we can only assess the Minister’s speeches. Fortunately, I think his speeches are quite good and enjoyable. I rarely enjoy listening to government officials’ speeches. The best part of Nadiem’s YouTube speech above is probably the UGM community service program (KKN) in Papua. It would be great if more universities could do KKN like that. The video quality is amazing. Check it at minute 32:57.