JurnalPost.com -- A student once shared their experience through an opinion piece, recounting how their lecturer stipulated that remedial exams could only be taken by students who had purchased a book authored by that lecturer.
This requirement raises questions. Why should the opportunity to improve academic grades depend on the ownership of a specific book? Is purchasing a book from a particular party truly a measure of a student's dedication to learning?
Books should be a means of acquiring knowledge. However, when ownership is made a prerequisite for participating in academic activities, the function of a book shifts from a learning resource to an economic burden.
Practices of this nature are often referred to as "campus book monopolies," particularly when students have no choice but to purchase books through a single source.
The issue does not lie with lecturers writing or selling books. Writing is a part of academic activity that deserves appreciation. The problem arises when an educator's authority is used to compel students to purchase specific books, especially when such purchases are linked to grades or the opportunity to take remedial exams.
From the perspective of Pancasila, such practices are questionable as they concern justice, respect for human dignity, and a healthy relationship between educators and students.
This article does not intend to accuse specific lecturers or universities, but rather to critique the practice of forced book purchases within higher education environments.
When Course Books Are Available Through Only One Door
In academic activities, lecturers have the authority to determine teaching materials and recommend reading sources relevant to the course content.
This authority is essential to ensure the educational process is directed and that students acquire knowledge relevant to their field of study.
However, problems arise when recommendations turn into an obligation to purchase books from a specific source, without providing reasonable alternatives to students.
This condition is what is often referred to in daily discourse as a campus book monopoly.
The term "monopoly" in this context is used popularly to describe the limited choices students have in obtaining teaching materials.
Its use does not necessarily mean that a monopoly practice has occurred as regulated under Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. The application of that law requires a separate legal assessment, including regarding the parties involved and the nature of the economic activity.
Nevertheless, this issue can still be examined through the lens of educational ethics.
Students should have the opportunity to obtain teaching materials through various legitimate means, whether by purchasing, borrowing from the library, or using other appropriate academic sources.
If the only way to participate in academic activities is to purchase a book from a specific party, issues regarding equal learning opportunities arise.
Moreover, students' economic conditions are not always the same. For some students, the price of a book may not be a major issue. However, for others, additional expenses can affect their daily needs.
How Do Regulations View This Practice?
The issue of mandatory book purchases needs to be viewed carefully from a legal standpoint.
Law Number 14 of 2005 concerning Teachers and Lecturers regulates the professional obligations of a lecturer.
Article 60, among other things, emphasizes the lecturer's obligation to carry out the learning process, conduct assessments and evaluations of learning outcomes, and act objectively and non-discriminatorily, including based on the socio-economic background of the students.
The law also requires lecturers to uphold laws and regulations, legal codes, codes of ethics, as well as religious and ethical values.
Meanwhile, Article 78 regulates the consequences for lecturers who do not carry out their professional obligations, with sanction mechanisms depending on their employment status and applicable provisions.
These provisions do not automatically make every sale of books by a lecturer a violation of the law. However, the principles of objectivity, non-discrimination, and professional ethics are important foundations for assessing whether an academic policy has been implemented fairly.
At the school education level, the issue of book sales has previously received attention from the Ombudsman of the Republic of Indonesia.
In its discussion regarding school levies, the Ombudsman emphasized that the obligation to purchase books imposed by schools or teachers is contrary to the provisions that form the basis of its discussion.
Certainly, school education regulations cannot be directly equated with higher education. Both have different provisions and governance.
However, there is a principle relevant to reflect upon, namely that access to education should not be complicated by the obligation to purchase teaching materials from specific parties.
Considering the Issue through the Values of Pancasila
Pancasila is not just a state foundation studied through textbooks. Its values should also be present in educational practice, including in the relationship between lecturers and students.
At the very least, there are three precepts of Pancasila that are relevant to assessing this issue.
Second Precept: Just and Civilized Humanity
The second precept teaches the importance of respecting human dignity and treating everyone fairly.
In a campus environment, students are not merely recipients of learning materials, let alone consumers who must buy specific products to obtain their academic rights.
Students are individuals who have the right to receive assessments based on their abilities, efforts, and learning achievements.
When the opportunity to take remedial exams is linked to the purchase of a book, an imbalance arises in the relationship between the lecturer and the student.
Lecturers have the authority to provide assessments, while students are in a position that requires those assessments.
A relationship that should be based on the educational process risks turning into an unbalanced transactional relationship.
In fact, the ability to buy a book does not always reflect a person's academic ability.
Fourth Precept: Democracy Guided by the Inner Wisdom in the Unanimity Arising Out of Deliberation Amongst Representatives
The value of deliberation teaches the importance of listening to opinions, considering common interests, and making decisions wisely.
In academic life, this spirit can be realized through openness between lecturers, students, and the campus regarding the use of teaching materials.
Lecturers certainly have the authority to determine references they consider appropriate. However, that authority should be accompanied by consideration regarding the availability and affordability of reading materials.
If students have difficulty obtaining a specific book, there should be room to discuss alternatives that still meet the learning objectives.
Unilateral decisions that link book purchases to academic sanctions can actually narrow the space for communication.
In fact, campuses should be places where the habit of dialogue grows, not just places for accepting decisions without the opportunity to voice objections.
Fifth Precept: Social Justice for All the People of Indonesia
The fifth precept is one of the most relevant foundations for looking at the issue of mandatory book purchases.
Social justice demands that there be decent opportunities for everyone, including the opportunity to obtain education without unnecessary economic barriers.
Students come from diverse family backgrounds. Some have adequate financial support, but others must manage their expenses strictly to meet the needs of their studies and daily life.
If the opportunity to take remedial exams depends on purchasing a book, students with economic limitations potentially face losses that are not directly related to their academic abilities.
In such conditions, education, which should be a means to improve life, can actually add to the burden for those who are struggling to complete their studies.
This is where the issue of social justice becomes real.
Campuses should open up the widest possible learning opportunities, not create additional barriers that cause students with different economic capabilities to receive unequal treatment.
Impact on Students' Freedom of Thought
Beyond economic and justice issues, the use of a single book as the only reference also has the potential to affect the quality of learning.
Higher education ideally encourages students to read, compare views, test arguments, and develop critical thinking skills.
If the entire learning process is too dependent on one source, students may lose the opportunity to become acquainted with broader academic perspectives.
In fact, differences in views across various references are often the gateway to understanding an issue more deeply.
Books authored by lecturers can certainly be primary references if they are relevant and have good academic quality.
However, the use of such books should not close the possibility for students to study other sources.
The more diverse the references available, the greater the opportunity for students to develop a critical and independent understanding.
Appreciating Lecturers' Work Without Forcing Students
It must be emphasized that lecturers have the right to write, publish, and receive recognition for their intellectual work.
Books written based on research, teaching experience, and mastery of knowledge are important contributions to the world of education.
Therefore, the issue being discussed is not the activity of writing or selling books by lecturers, but the presence of an element of coercion in the purchase.
The obligation to study certain material does not always have to mean the obligation to buy books from a specific seller.
There are several steps that can be considered to create a fairer learning practice.
First, higher education institutions need to ensure that academic assessments, including the opportunity to take remedial exams, are based on objective learning provisions and are not linked to the obligation to purchase books from specific parties.
Second, reading materials used in lectures should be available through the library or other legitimate access facilities, so that students have alternatives to acquire knowledge.
Third, if lecturers offer their books to students, information on prices and purchasing mechanisms should be conveyed transparently. Purchases should be voluntary, without pressure related to academic assessment.
These steps are not intended to reduce appreciation for the work of lecturers. On the contrary, such an approach can maintain student trust while strengthening the integrity of the academic environment.
Closing
Books are one of the windows to knowledge. Through books, students can become acquainted with various ideas, broaden their horizons, and develop critical thinking skills.
However, that window of knowledge should not be locked from the inside, and then the key sold to those who want to learn.
Campuses that uphold the values of Pancasila should be able to create an educational environment that respects human dignity, opens space for dialogue, and provides fair learning opportunities.
Lecturers still have the right to receive recognition for their intellectual work, but that right needs to be exercised with attention to professional responsibilities and the students' conditions.
Ultimately, the quality of education cannot be measured only by the number of books required in lectures, but also by the extent to which students have the opportunity to learn freely and with dignity.
Fair education is not education that closes access to knowledge for those who cannot afford to buy, but education that ensures every student still has the opportunity to learn.
Comments 0
Write a Comment Share your response