To listen
Expressing opinions is quite hard. Sometimes it takes a brave heart to express the opinions, primarily if the opinions differ with those majority voices or those in the higher position. In those conditions, people often take for granted what their authority said, prefer to hide their opinions. The worst case is, when issued the public policy, the authority prefer to do it without consideration to see people’ reaction and opinions. Some will issue a public policy with relevant data and consultation to develop long-term planning and strategies to implement public policy. If the budget is sufficient, then the authority could pay a sum of money to consultants to gather data for public policy planning. Although, to be honest, any consultant when receiving an assignment from a company/government, actually also first learn from ‘internal people’ or from them: ‘who affected from the decision’, to gather any data and information as a base of the public policy decision. Hence, the recommendations presented by the consultant can be a combination of insider opinion as well as modifications as necessary.
For example, in Indonesia, every time the presidential cabinet changed — the Minister of education changed -, the curriculum for the student will also be changed. Furthermore, it takes like four years (or even in a shorter period, in any exceptional cases) to change the education curriculum significantly. In this condition, all the ‘clever thinker people above’ will generate ‘the best way’, even without asking people who affected from the decision making or without evaluation of the implemented public policy. I know that public policy somehow becomes ‘a trial and test and error and improving’, however, how if the decision making is trialled before by putting the budget to hear from people who affected from the decision.
Despite that the ‘people who affected’ is in children age, young enough not to be heard; however, there is adage says that ‘don’t consider yourself smarter than your child just because you are older than them’ or ‘you are more powerful than them’? Probably it is true.
The rule to listen #1
However, not all the public policies could be appropriate to be held into public to gather their opinions. It is essential to differ levels of participation according to the purposes, time frames, resources, and levels of concern in decisions [1]. This called the spectrum of public participation, which defines the role to be filled by the people outside the decision-maker.
In conversation about education in New Zealand [2], it could be confirmed that public participation was designed in the level of involving, collaborating, and empowering, as well as informing the public that there will be a change in the near future (which expected to improve the quality of education in New Zealand).
Persuading people, or student to engage in this public engagement literally easy: just manage to transfer the purpose and information regarding the project, and make them interest enough to involve and share their thoughts. However, if there is no ‘end result’ or nothing changed after they share their voices, then it might lead them to not interest anymore to the engagement. The values of the public participation should be seen not only in the legitimate process in public hearing but the evidence that the voices are valuable enough to create better decision and impact for those people who already share their opinions.
So do not bother to engage more opinions if nothing serious to take it into account. Should be clear enough to inform where the voices will be ended up: how the decision will be made by using those voices. Though, it will be expressed throughout the process (hopefully). I see the website conversation.education [2] and learn that student voices here are essential and taking into account. The clarity about the decision to be made by doing the public engagement involving the student (no matter their background) will lead to the public participation’ effectiveness [1].
There is a promise that people who affected from the decision will have a right to speak up. There is a promise that their voices will positively impact the decision making. There is a promise that the impact could be seen in medium short-listed, which could be traced back as a long-term vision for improving. There is a promise that this process not a short-listed or just to increase the government popularity, yet it will sustain and have real action after shot. That is the first rule of listening.
The rule to listen #2
If the values of public engagement define the expectations and aspirations of the public participation process [1], then to show the real actions of public engagement, it will need the code of ethics. Another promise: that despite the budget for public engagement comes from the authority, it does not mean that they have a right to arrange everything. However, it will be more beneficial if the communication method is also designed by people who want to participate. No pressure. They have voice and opinion, and they could decide how to participate fully [1]. Which is also to be considered that to make them fully participate will involve the way they could participate. For example, a student with a disability needs a method to engage. Alternatively, even if it is more comfortable to talk face to face, then face to face public engagement should be held.
It is ambitious work, but should be done for enduring long term vision [2]. That is written in conversation.education website [2]. However, it is a dream for ordinary people like me to see that our voice will be taken into account; hence all the public policies will meet with the people’ needs, no matter who they are or where they come from.
[1] IAP2 (International Association for Public Participation). 2018 Core Values Awards Showcase. Retrieved from https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.iap2.org/resource/resmgr/core_values/2018cva/WEB_A4_2018_Core_Values_Awar.pdf
[2] Korero Matauranga. Let’s talk about education. Retrieved from https://conversation.education.govt.nz/
