Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
Jultje Aneke Rattu
Faculty of Humanities, Sam Ratulangi University, Kampus Unsrat Street, Manado, Indonesia
Keywords: Empowering, human cultural capital, industry 4.0
Abstract: Decentralisation of development and easy access to information are increasingly high in the industrial
revolution 4.0. in Indonesia, even in the cities and districts. The previous industrial revolution, such as 1.0,
2.0, and 3.0, have not been able to solve various social problems, economic inequality, and cultural shock.
The emergence of industrial revolution 4.0 facilitates various communication needs and develops cultural
innovation. One form of solving these problems is social and cultural innovation. The social and cultural
innovation has existed so far. However, this effort can improve its quality and variety by utilising 4.0
technologies, such as cloud, IoT, and others. This study discusses empowering human cultural capital
starting from (1) What are opportunities for social and cultural innovation in an era of industrial revolution
4.0; (2) What is the development of social and cultural innovation that utilises the 4.0 innovation?
Development of the industrial revolution 4.0 creates live streaming that allows devices to show various
kinds of performances, such as traditional performances. Also, there is a social media that accommodates
human interaction using machines or devices connected to the internet so that they can communicate online.
In this case, it is closely related to social and cultural innovation that encourages the development of culture
and art.
1 INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is dealing with an era of development of
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) which is
said to crush all who are in front of it (avalanche)
(Dhakidae, 2017) in the 21st-century era. The
phenomenon of disruption occurs widely, ranging
from government, economics, law, politics, to urban
planning, construction, health services, education,
business competition and also social relations
(Kasali, 2017). Disruption of education has become
a social and cultural phenomenon in the global era.
Yoga (2017, 2018) explained that social phenomena
related to Disruption of Education continue to occur
in the 21st century. There are four aspects related to
the disruption of education. First, the generation
associated with Student (Neo-Millennials) is the
generation that is directly related to something
online once born into the world, thus creating a “gap
generation” with the previous generation. Second,
Parent (Hyper-Demanding), namely an increase in
the number of “middle class” which causes an
increase in needs, including for the needs in
education, thus increasing homeschooling. Third,
Technology (Disruptive Technologies), which is a
very rapid technological development, so that it
changes the way/method of learning fundamentally.
Fourth, Skills (Irrelevant skills) obtained in schools
(memorisation, and multi-choice) that are “not
appropriate” with the required skills (creative and
innovative). This social and cultural reality
reinforces the challenges of educational
development in Indonesia. On the other hand,
dehumanisation in education continues to occur in
the era of globalisation which causes a crisis of the
nation’s character which becomes a social
phenomenon that continues to occur in the lives of
Indonesian people (Dwiningrum, 2013). Likewise,
the devaluation of education becomes a social fact in
the lives of the world’s people that is difficult to
avoid (Dwiningrum 2017).
The challenges of development education in the
21st century are very complex because two
principles must be realised, namely quality and
equality. Every country is trying to implement an
education system that can apply these two
principles. However, the results were not optimal,
for example, the German state scored elite students,
but it was not superior compared to Ireland, which
pursued quality and equality. According to Sahlberg,
616
Aneke Rattu, J.
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0.
DOI: 10.5220/0010706800002967
In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE 2019) - Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable 4.0 Industry, pages 616-627
ISBN: 978-989-758-530-2; ISSN: 2184-9870
Copyright
c
 2021 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved

Finland is “a model of a modern, publicly financed
education system with widespread equity, good
quality, large participation-all of this at a reasonable
cost”, partly because of the way the strong social
support for children and families that enable all
children to come to school ready to learn, without
challenges that many experiences in less well-
supported contexts (Hammond, 2017: 32). South
Korea, which scored elite schools, has not been
prosperous.
In contrast, Italy, Spain, and Mexico pursue
equality, although it has not yet been accompanied
by quality. It is in contrast to Singapore, which
continues to develop an education system that is
responsive and proactive to the demands of 21st-
century education. According to Ng (2017: 63-64),
in education systems, meritocracy is generally
translated into giving priority in school choices or
allocating higher levels of education resources to
those who are with merit. The Singapore education
system is highly democratic and competitive.
Students compete for a place in their schools based
on their merit. Schools competitor attract good
students. Through a competitive education system,
the government provides opportunities according to
students’ abilities, regardless of religious, race,
language, culture, or socioeconomic backgrounds
differences. However, a meritocracy system faces a
paradox, as explained by Ng (2017, p. 61), that
selfish meritocracy will occur, so the education
system develops compassionate meritocracy that can
help us build a resilient and inclusive society. From
these examples, it can be concluded that educational
development is considered successful if it can at
least apply the two principles, namely improving
quality and equality simultaneously. What about the
results of education in Indonesia? The answer to that
question is not easy, because the education system
should ensure that quality education is provided for
everyone.
The inequality that originates from quality and
equality is still a social and cultural phenomenon in
Indonesia. One of them is the problem of dropout
that still occurs at all levels of education and occurs
in all regions in Indonesia. The reality of school
dropouts is not just an academic problem, but the
source of the problem tends to be non-academic
which requires comprehensive handling because
education is the foundation needed to achieve
competitive national progress in facing global
challenges. The realisation of the Indonesian
government since 1984, which has formally sought
equal distribution of primary school education,
followed by compulsory education for nine years
starting in 1994, should have been strengthened
again so that the phenomenon of school dropouts
can be resolved entirely. In line with Law Number
20 the Year 2003 regarding the National Education
System, article 5 paragraph (1) states that “Every
citizen has the same right to obtain quality
education”, and Article 11, paragraph (1) states
“Government and Regional Government must
provide services and facilities, and ensure the quality
of education for every citizen without discrimination
“. The 1945 Constitution mandates that every citizen
has the right to education to improve the quality and
welfare of his life. Educational development is one
of the top priorities in the national development
agenda, because of its significant role in achieving
progress in various fields of life: social, economic,
political, and cultural. The principles of quality and
equality formally have a legal basis for regulating
the education system in Indonesia. Therefore, the
Indonesian government still needs to think of a
strategic and comprehensive way to overcome the
problem of dropping out in the era of disruption.
The problem of school dropouts that are still
found in Indonesia proves that education policies
have not been able to overcome structural problems.
This problem will have an impact on the quality of
life of the community at large. Personally, the
impact will not be optimal for individuals to develop
the potential and the right to a quality life. Zamroni
(2017) states that educational inequality cannot be
separated from the existence of social inequalities
that will strengthen one another that has a self-
supporting prophecy so that the inequality develops
even greater. That is, overcoming the problem of
quality inequality requires changes in the social and
cultural structure of society that is conducive socio-
economically and culturally for improving the
quality of education. Therefore, the development of
Indonesian education is increasingly massive, with
the phenomenon of disruption that continues to
occur in the 21st century. In this paper, two main
points will be discussed, namely 1) how is culture-
based education implemented in schools? 2) what is
the role of teachers in the 21st century?
2 DISCUSSION
2.1 Education in Theory of
Perspectives
Inequality in the quality of education in a
sociological and cultural perspective can be analysed
from various theories. From the perspective of
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
617

structural-functionalist theory, it describes the
dysfunctional consequences for a social system.
Ritzer (2012: 429-435) proves that schools, as the
educational institutions have not performed their
social functions optimally. Schools that should be
able to become media socialisation that produce
students who develop potential optimally and
become human characters have not been maximally
carried out. Schools is a sound social system, as
explained by John Goodlad, and have not yet
realised social-school goals optimally (Dwiningrum,
2016b: 70-78). In this perspective, education
problems face structural problems that are not easy
to disentangle in an era of disruption that requires
social and cultural adaptability and flexibility.
Schools from the perspective of conflict theory
that emphasises the concept of social stratification
said that with the existence of social classes (Ritzer,
2012: 4604-462), there was an imbalance in the
quality of education that will create widening social
inequalities. The practice of education capitalisation
encourages inequality in the quality of education at
all levels of education. Schools limit the opportunity
to get better and higher education to most people.
This fact is reinforced by the still limited
opportunities for citizens to get the education to a
higher level, especially in university studies, which
have not reached 10% of Indonesia’s population.
The structure of society contributes to an
increasingly more substantial social and cultural
disparity that results in quality imbalances in
Indonesia. If it is related to the era of disruption, it
can be assumed that educational development will
face increasingly intense conflicts of interest.
Whereas in the era of disruption, conflicts of interest
can be reduced if the culture has the power to build
new interpretations in the life of society so that
conflict should be reduced.
On the other hand, the perspective of symbolic
interactionism theory emphasises the concept of
socialisation as a dynamic process (Ritzer, 2012:
625-629). It allows one to develop the ability to
think by learning through interaction with symbols.
The quality imbalance occurs because, in the
practice of learning, not all schools can build
symbols that strengthen quality improvement into
awareness and needs of all elements involved in the
learning process at school. The role of the teacher is
still varied in teaching the knowledge needed by
students. The teacher is still trapped by teaching the
symbol of knowledge that is the transfer of
knowledge. The teacher in teaching in the class is
stuck with knowing not being. As a result, students
have not yet formed into personal character,
achievement, and resilience.
On the other hand, the ability of teachers
determined by competence is still diverse between
schools, so that the professionalism of teachers is
also different in quality. Therefore, results and
achievements between schools tend to be different.
This result happens because teachers have not been
able to optimally develop their competencies, such
as academic, ideological, pedagogical, personal,
social, cultural, spiritual, humanitarian, and
anticipatory competencies (Siswoyo, 2017: 11). In
the era of disruption, the understanding of symbols
in the educational process in schools can be
strengthened more systemically, so students can
respond to the meaning of symbols following the
unlimited development of science. Even in the
context of education and the revolutionary era 4.0
that has moved, such as IT-based education, the
activity of building the same interpretation becomes
a cultural dialogue.
The socio-cultural approach with differences in
backgrounds is not the arena of conflict in
development, but a social and cultural capital that
can move all elements of society to be involved in
the process. The problem of educational
development must be carried out with a cultural
approach so that strengthening cultural identity in
global culture is maintained by the Indonesian as a
cultured and dignified nation. Therefore, the partial
education development process will cause various
increasingly complex social and cultural problems
that should be avoided in the education development
process. Education needs to strengthen knowledge
about global perspectives so that national
independence remains strong in global challenges.
Education plays a role in supporting national
development that is capable of producing quality and
character of the generation of the nation. Global
change with education liberalisation requires
educational institutions to be able to produce quality
students who can compete in order to be accepted by
the market.
As a consequence, educational institutions are
becoming more towards knowledge-based economy
institutions. Therefore, education must still refer to
the power of cultural dialogue, as explained by Gal
(2005 in Baker: 274). This condition is reflected in
the Global Perspective for Teacher Education article
on the importance of cross-cultural dialogue that
helps teachers develop an international
understanding of contemporary world events,
specifically by demonstrating how culture and
context impact educational values, decisions, public
ICVHE 2019 - The International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE) “Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable
4.0 Industry”
618

policies, and practices. Local knowledge and a
commitment to culturally traditional ways of
interacting and communicating values can enhance,
rather than detract the form of academic
achievement and developing global perspectives.
2.2 Disruption in 21st Century
Education
Cultural dialogue is a critical aspect built in the 21st-
century education era. This aspect is related to the
demands of education in the 21st century, which
emphasises readiness in facing the industrial
revolution 4.0, which emphasises the future of
education. “It is, therefore, a new vision of learning
starting right now; more important to know why you
need something, knowledge or skill, and then where
to find it - rather than cramming your head full don’t
try to learn everything; built around each individual,
their personal choices of where and how to learn,
and tracking of performance through data-based
customisation... whatever sits you; learning together
and from each other - peer to peer learning will
dominate, teachers more as facilitators, communities
built around shared learning and aspiration”(Fisk,
2018). For Indonesia, education development that
refers to these principles is still tricky, because the
process of education development is still on a
fundamental problem, namely the quality problem.
The problem of education in Indonesia is very
complicated because it is not limited to quality
problems, but also very severe challenges in the era
of disruption. The first problem, quality inequality in
Indonesia is structural because quality disparities
occur at all levels of education and are still found in
all regional conditions in Indonesia. Likewise, social
performance as a determinant of school quality is
not the same between schools, so school results and
achievements will be different (Jencks in Hurn,
1993). In the article “Do schools make differences”
prove that schools have contributed to the
emergence of differences, student performance, and
inequality in school. The still differences in IQ and
student motivation accumulatively will affect school
performance (Hurn, 1993). Education is a right that
must be obtained by all Indonesian people, not
specific group or even groups that can enjoy
education with quality results. Educational
development is one of the top priorities in the
national development agenda, because of its
significant role in achieving progress in various
fields of life: social, economic, political, and
cultural. What is the structural approach to
overcoming quality problems in the challenges of
education in the 21st century? Inequality in the
quality of education is cultural stems from the
persistence of differences in community perceptions
about the importance of fighting for education and
school rights and student achievement. According to
Zamroni (2017: 7-8), educational and social
inequality will lead to perceptions for its citizens
who in the next turn will affect the attitudes and
behaviour of citizens as individuals. In this context,
children’s motivation for school cannot be separated
from the socio-cultural and economic conditions of
the family how to strengthen their existence in the
demands of education that are transformative
continually moving to meet the criteria for education
4.0 in the 21st century that emphasises Education
4.0: Empowering education to produce innovation,
while the educational position in Indonesia is still
proceeding from education 1 to 3. Meaning of
education 1.0: centuries of experience with
memorisation, Education 2.0: Internet-enabled
learning, Education 3.0: Consuming & Producing
knowledge (Fisk, 2018). Meanwhile, concerning
Jencks’s opinion, the phenomenon of the existence
of culturally deprived and debates between cultural
differences and cultural deficits is a challenge for the
development of education in Indonesia (Hurn, 1993,
pp.110-136).
Besides, the challenges of education face the
development of society in the era of the highly
complex industrial revolution 4.0. Teachers must be
able to develop student competencies to improve the
quality of education in the 21st century to deal with
educational competence in the 21st century. Quality
improvement requires a comprehensive approach so
that the results are more optimal because it is not
possible to implement the one fit for all policy.
Nowadays every school should have adaptability
and flexibility in facing the demands and challenges
of change in the 21st-century era because many
problems must be faced, one of which is the
disruption phenomenon which is an obstacle to
improve the quality of education which is still very
complicated.
The second problem is the phenomenon of
disruption that is unavoidable in the era of the 21st
century, especially for disruption of education which
is interpreted as something uprooted from its roots,
because the result is in the form of various forms of
innovation, technology, and platforms. According to
Clayton M. Christensen, who has introduced the
term of disruption, it is in line with the emergence
and development of information technology
applications and the changing form of
entrepreneurship into a start-up. This word shifts
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
619

from the term known after the world war, namely
“destruction” introduced by Schumpeter (Kasali,
2017). Disruption is a revolution that occurred
during the Asian economic crisis (1997) and the
United States (2008), young people around the
world are so passionate about building start-ups
rather than looking for work as explained by
Rhenald Kasali (2017) which illustrates that younger
generation is not just entrepreneurship, but rather
“disrupting” industry, rejuvenating, and dismantling
old approaches in new ways.
Disruption will continue until the balance point.
Disruption is an innovation that will replace the
entire old system in a new way. Disruption replaces
old physical technology with digital technology that
will produce something new, more efficient and
useful (Kasali, 2017: 34). The phenomenon of
changes that occur is accompanied by resistance, the
contention of rules, and fierce competition in
regulatory matters. Therefore, now we need wise
leaders who can think openly (Kasali, 2017: 163). In
this context, the act of self-corruption is more
important than letting themselves be disrupted by
newcomers. The concept of disruption is needed in
order to understand better the social and cultural
phenomena involved in the era of disruption. Kasali
(2017: 162) explains some of the main concepts
related to disruption, namely a process that does not
occur immediately but starts from ideas, research or
experiments, then the creation and development of
business models. When successful, entrants will
expand their business at the lowest market point that
is ignored by the incumbent, then slowly grind up, to
the segment that is already controlled by the
incumbent. By entering the market with a new
business model that is different from what the old
players have done, business model innovation
becomes essential. In this context, not all disruptions
succeed in becoming perpetrators of disruption or
destroying incumbent positions that do not have to
always turn into disruptors. Many strategies can be
adopted by the incumbent, including continuing
sustainable innovation and forming other units that
serve disruptor. Technology is not a disruptor but an
enabler. In the development of IT, other tools are
needed to support success. Disruption can spread
deflation which causes prices to fall because the
disruptor starts a low-cost strategy. Disruption in
exponential civilisation has changed the world
which no longer moves linearly and gradually in the
way of human thinking but moves very fast and
faster. As explained by Peter H. Diamandis, it was
concluded that humans will not experience the
constraints of a linear mindset, but rather connect the
framework by applying the 6 D principle as follows
(Kasali, 2017):
Phases Description
Digitize Digitizing causes other humans to
exchange ideas and exchange ideas,
because it can be done in two
directions, and innovation moves
quickly.
Deceptive There is a change in social patterns in
several places or companies that only
occur in certain companies or are
localized, so that it will not spread its
influence. There is a tendency to act
slowly which causes the incumbent to
continue using the old way in respond
to problems that occur.
Disruptive technology has made
innovations and created new
markets and replaced old ones.
Turbulence occurs because of
an internal meeting.
Demonetization The process of displaying the
work or role of money.
Community life is depicted by
obtaining it for free, but at the
same time showing a free
business model from
companies that make a profit.
Dematerialisation The process of destroying
goods or services, from old to
new. For example, roll film to a
digital camera that does not
require plastic or paper
printing.
Democratization The state of human life that
everything becomes easy and
inexpensive, so many things
are increasingly available and
affordable to meet everyone's
needs.
The above phenomenon requires a change in
people’s mindset. Likewise, education is getting
more robust in the face of the era of disruption. The
teacher must change their mindset. The task of
teachers in the era of disruption is to make students
who have creative and innovative characters, so
ICVHE 2019 - The International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE) “Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable
4.0 Industry”
620

students have high adaptability in facing creative
and innovative times that require character values
that never give up, honest, creative, innovative,
tolerant, disciplined, resilient, and self-confidence.
For people who celebrate change, disruption is the
future. However, some people who feel comfortable
with the present situation and are afraid of change
will think that this is the beginning of extinction.
The problem is, for education that can play a role in
the era of disruption, this is an opportunity to fix the
problem of education in Indonesia.
For the Indonesian people, the development goal
is still trying to maintain cultural identity during the
industrial revolution 4.0, which crushed the nation’s
culture into a global culture that is increasingly
difficult to reduce. Today society is increasingly
dynamic in facing the impact of the dynamics of the
industrial revolution 4.0 that is still ongoing in social
life that requires high responsive abilities and
proactive attitudes. To understand the dynamics of
the 4.0 industrial revolution, we can review the
article presented by McKinsey & Company in its
report titled “An Incumbent’s Guide to Digital
Disruption” which formulates four stages of the
position during a technological distrust era, namely:
middle noise (signals amidst the noise). In 1990,
Polygram was recorded as one of the largest
recording companies in the world. However, in 1998
the company was sold when MP3 technology had
just been discovered. The owner still felt the peak of
the glory of Polygram at that time and obtained an
optimal sales value.
Another example is the traditional newspaper
industry that pursues circulation and revenue from
advertising. The emergence of a threatening internet
is exploited by Schibsted, a Norwegian media
company that uses the internet to anticipate threats
while taking advantage of business opportunities.
This company is disruptive to their core business
through internet media which eventually becomes
the backbone of their business in the future. At this
stage, the company (incumbent) responds to
technological developments quickly by shifting the
comfortable position of the core business that they
are involved in following the trends in technological
development, consumer preferences, regulations,
and shifts in the business environment (a change
takes hold). At this stage, the change is already
apparent, both technologically and economically.
However, the impact on financial performance is
still relatively insignificant, so it cannot be
concluded if the new business model will be more
profitable or vice versa in the long run. However,
this insignificant impact was taken seriously by
Netflix in 2011 when they shook off their core
business, shifting the business focus from DVD
rental to streaming. This situation is a big decision
that succeeded in maintaining the company’s
sustainability in the future, so it does not follow the
bankruptcy of its competitors, such as Blockbuster.
The third stage is the inevitable transformation. At
this stage, the new business model has been tested
and proven to be better than the old business model.
Therefore, incumbent companies will accelerate the
transformation towards a new business model.
However, the transformation at this stage will be
more severe considering that incumbent companies
are already relatively large and fat, so that they are
not as agile and adaptable as start-up companies that
come with new business models.
Therefore, the company has been depressed on
the side of financial performance. It will reduce the
budget and even some business activities and focus
only on the core business of the incumbent
company. The fourth stage is an adaptation to a new
balance (adapting to the new normal). At this stage,
incumbent companies have no choice but to accept
and adjust to a new balance, because industry
fundamentals have changed, and incumbent
companies are no longer as dominant players.
Incumbent companies can only strive to survive
during competition. At this stage, even the decision-
makers in incumbent companies need to be
observant in making decisions, like Kodak coming
out faster from the photography industry so that it
does not experience deepening loosening. From
these stages, each company should be able to
conduct early detection of the company’s position,
so that it can set appropriate anticipatory measures.
The toughest challenge is precisely for market
leaders, who usually feel superior and disruptive
attacks that are only directed at minor competitors
whose performance is not excellent.
Therefore, incumbent companies need to
continue to move quickly and aggressively to follow
the direction of the changing business environment
in welcoming the era of the fourth generation
industrial revolution (Industry 4.0). Reed Hasting,
CEO of Netflix, once said that it is rarely found
companies die because they move too fast. However,
the opposite is often found that companies die
because they move too slowly (Hassim, 2016). By
understanding the stages in the 4.0 revolution, the
world of education is increasingly massive, because
Indonesia is currently still moving from education
2.0 to education 3.0 and still faces problems to
proceed to education 4.0. Therefore, the choice to
design culture-based education is expected to reduce
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
621

problems in the era of disruption. The problem is
how the world of education can respond to changes
that are accelerating, while the educational process
is still not considered responsive to change? The
disruptive phenomena that occur in all aspects of
social life should be addressed proactively, so that
the disruption that occurs does not cause social
problems, but instead becomes a dynamic social
change towards a better quality of life. Humanistic
approach and dialogue become one of the exciting
alternatives to consider in managing education in the
era of disruption.
2.3 Culture-based Education Is Facing
Disruption
Humans as “man in culture” prove that every human
being cannot be separated from culture. In the era of
revolution 4.0, the debate about the existence of
culture has become increasingly important, because
the global culture has begun to enter all lines of
human life in the world. Therefore, strengthening
cultural-based education in the era of disruption
became a fascinating discussion. For Indonesia,
culture-based education is essential. There are
several key reasons: first, culture quality is still low,
second, the existence of local culture has begun to
be displaced globally, third, the process of social
interaction is shifted from traditional to modern
systems; and fourth, the teacher competencies were
primarily not based on IT culture in the 4.0
revolution era.
Development of the concept of culture-based
education requires the synergy of social roles.
Culture-based education is strengthened, sharpened,
and developed with quality-based concepts and
practices. As explained at the beginning of the
discussion, the problem of quality is still a problem
of education in Indonesia. The concept of culture-
based education emphasises the strengthening of
socio-cultural values to preserve and develop the
local culture to build the nation’s character. In this
context, culture is the basis of learning activities that
have content about culture in intra-curricular and
extra-curricular activities in schools. The learning
process at school provides an introduction,
knowledge, habituation, and acculturation of cultural
values as a foundation for carrying out social
activities. Besides, the school environment that
builds school culture should be adapted to the needs
of students for the spirit of learning in the 21st-
century era. It needs to be understood that learning
from a cultural perspective is a whole and
comprehensive learning process of diversity that
exists in a community. Therefore, the learning
process designed as the national curriculum is
intended to produce a scientific mindset as an
expression of cultural embodiment.
Moreover, technological and scientific progress
is a reflection of a success cultured and characterised
human being. Culture-based education is a strategy
for creating a learning environment and learning
planning that integrates character education into a
foundation in the learning process at school so that
students become personal characters. Likewise,
multicultural education is needed to build
perspectives in the face of globalisation. Character
education is a conscious and planned effort to create
an atmosphere, as well as the process of empowering
the potential and educating students to build unique
personal or group characters both as citizens.
Character education will form a personality that
encourages individuals to act, behave, say, and
respond to something that happens in social life
(Dwiningrum, 2013).
Multicultural education is expected to be a force
to transform schools, from schools full of inequality
to awareness and justice, including the
transformation of school policies, teacher attitudes,
learning materials, ways of evaluation, counselling
guidance, and learning styles. The implementation
of education which is carried out democratically and
fairly, and is not discriminatory by upholding human
rights, religious and cultural values, and national
pluralism that will create a school where all students
are comfortable and feel at home in school.
Comfortable schools make it easy for students to
strengthen their minds and pave the way to make it
happen. Comfortable school means the teacher
builds a new “space”, a comfortable “room” for all
students with different backgrounds to develop their
potential optimally. “Comfortable” schools and
quality teachers encourage student resilience, so
students will continue to be motivated to learn
according to their abilities and social capacities in
the challenges of the 21st century (Dwiningrum,
2017). As explained by Panth (2017), the role of the
educator becomes more challenging and more than
that of an individual who just teaches to prepare the
student to pass the examination. Instead, he or she is
now a facilitator, coach, and teacher who devotes his
time to the development of a whole spectrum of
knowledge, skills, values, and disputations. In this
context, culture-based education is designed by
creating learning environments and designing
learning experiences that integrate culture as part of
the learning process at school. Culture-based
education emphasises the realisation that culture is a
ICVHE 2019 - The International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE) “Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable
4.0 Industry”
622

fundamental aspect of education and a way to
express or communicate an idea and knowledge
needed in the face of an era of disruption. This
condition is intended as an essential part of the
learning process by strengthening social and cultural
values in shaping student character. The impact of
education that will be felt by students is more
contextual meaning related to a particular cultural
community, on the other hand, the learning process
is more interesting, enjoyable for students, and
makes students become personal characters in a
multicultural community environment.
The purpose of culture-based education is to
develop the affective potential of students as
individuals who have character and can become
individuals who are confident, independent, creative,
and national-minded by developing a school
environment as a learning environment that is safe,
honest, full of creativity, and friendship, as well as
with a sense of importance in implementing cultural-
based educational praxis. School culture determines
the adaptability of schools. Values developed by
schools will influence the behaviour of school
residents as explained by Coleman who
recommended that components in “climate value”
including leadership, staff cooperation, student
behaviour, teacher control over school and
classroom policy, and teacher morals (Ballantine,
1997: 19) will influence behaviour in schools.
School culture is expected to be able to respond
to the era of disruption. With school culture, the
school can adapt to its changes. The culture
developed by schools is primarily determined by the
quality of objectives. Therefore, culture in the
perspective of school quality as externalisation is
strengthened in activities in schools that shape
meaningful and characterised behaviour
(Dwiningrum, 2017). School culture as a cultural
capital will build habituation which is expected to be
able to shape the character of students. Cultural
capital is the capital for improving school quality.
Cultural capital will be sufficient if all school
members make “quality value” as a spirit in school
improvement. Cultural capital, explained by
Bourdieu, namely capital has a comprehensive
definition. It includes material things (which can
have symbolic value) and various attributes that are
‘untouched’ but have cultural significance, for
example, prestige, status, and authority (referred to
as symbolic capital) and cultural capital (Harker,
1990: 13-16). Cultural capital can include a wide
range of properties, such as art, education, and
language forms. Capital serves as a social relation
contained in an exchange system, and this term is
extended “to all forms of goods - both material and
symbolic, without distinction - which presents
themselves as rare and worthy to be sought in a
particular social formation. With cultural capital,
education will move dynamically in responding to
each change with more proactivity and “positive
thinking”.
Agreeing with Cheng (2005), the paradigm shift
becomes an important aspect that must be studied, so
that educational development is not trapped by the
phenomenon of disruption that is included in all
aspects of human life. The most effective strategy in
building a culture-based education in the 21st
century is to make a paradigm shift. The work is not
easy, because it requires synergistic structural and
cultural changes. The change in paradigm is
essential to be reconstructed because the disruption
effect has changed social and cultural processes
which are increasingly accelerating in the education
process. Cheng’s thought (2005) is interesting to
discuss because the change in the educational
paradigm in the era of globalisation is related to
changes in the education system in the aspects of
“learning” and “teaching” that underlie the basic
concepts for changes in the education system in the
21st century which are considered more responsive
in addressing digitalisation era. In general, the
change in the education paradigm can be described
in the following table:
Table 1: Paradigm Shift in Learning.
New CMI-
Triplization
Paradigm
Traditional site-Bounded
paradigm
Individualised
Learnin
g
Reproduced Learning
 The student is
the Centre of
Education
 Individualised
Programs
 Self-Learning
 Self-Actualising
Process
 Focus on How
to Learn

Sel
f
-
R
ewardin
g
 The student is the
Follower
of teacher
 Standard Programs
 Absorbing Knowledge
 Receiving Process
 Focus on How to Gain
 External Rewarding
Localised and
Globalised
Learnin
g
Institution-Bounded
Learning
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
623

 Multiple
Sources of
Learning
 Networked
Learning
 Lifelong and
Every Where
 Unlimited
Opportunism
 Word-Class
Learning
 Local and
International
 Teacher-Based Learning
 Separated Based-
Learning
 Fixed Period and
Within
Institutions
 Limited Opportunities
 Site-Bounded Learning
 Mainly Institution-based
experiences
2.4 The Role of Teachers in the 21st
Century
Teachers in the 21st century must change the
mindset from the fix-mind set to the growth mindset.
Therefore, a teacher can design education with a
pedagogical planning multiliteracy approach by
preparing students to have various competencies.
First, having competencies for collaboration across
countries and cultures, religions and languages, as
well as having diversity competencies with excellent
knowledge, attitudes, and actions, so that they can
collaborate with all in the world. Second, having
competence in global communication can use
language that can be understood by the world
community, both verbal and written communication
and both in reading and writing aspects, so that it
can become an essential part in an industrial
company, service, or others. Third, mastering
information technology well, to access information,
communication, delivery of information to the
public, and even to store data needed to be opened at
any time, movable, and can be accessed at any time
and in any place, so it is beneficial in the process of
making a decision. Fourth, have excellent critical
thinking skills, be able to turn problems into
opportunities for progress, innovative, creative
thinking, and even have excellent problem-solving
skills which can all be developed with training in the
learning process or specialised training outside the
regular schedule of subjects that are usually based
on scientific discipline (Rosyada, 2017). What is the
role of the teacher to develop the learning process
while still integrating the value of character in
shaping student competency?
The teacher plays the role of facilitator and
mediator, who can encourage students to learn and
think critically in pleasant situations. Teachers are
no longer a primary source and learning centre, but
rather play a role as a catalyst in facing accelerated
learning in the digital age. The teacher must be able
to be an inspiration for students in arouse students’
curiosity in connecting between facts and the faster
development of science and technology. The teacher
is a friend to share, tell stories, and collaborate to
achieve goals to shape the quality of students.
Therefore, teachers are required to prepare students
who have the critical thinking, communication,
collaboration, creativity, and innovation which are
described in detail as follows (Peter Fisk, 2015).
Table 2. Development of 21st Century Student
Competencies
Competence
The abilities developed for students include:
Critical Thinking
♣ Ability to develop ways of thinking that
emphasise the correctness of processes and
procedures, as well as the integrity of thinking
based on theory and regulation.
♣ Ability to use scientific, data-based thinking
methodologies, theories, regulations and concepts,
as well as objective analysis with the right
techniques and methods.
♣ Ability to develop cognitive skills or strategies to
increase the probability of achieving outcomes.
♣ Ability to convey logical argument effectively,
able to think systemically, able to formulate
conclusions, and be able to do problem solving
effectively.
Communication
♣ Ability to use language that is understood by
everyone, can convince the recipients, the message
is concise, clear, and in accordance with the
expected target outcome,
♣ Ability to receive all messages delivered and will
influence the recipient to follow or at least not
reject the information.
♣ Ability to interpret the message as intended by
the sender of the message.
Collaboration
♣ Ability to collaborate by forming a consortium to
carry out extensive projects or only develop
cooperation by helping each other in completing a
job.
♣ Ability to develop skills possessed by someone to
have specific social roles. Three essential
components of collaboration are networking,
coordination, and cooperation.
♣ Ability to develop networks with fellow partners
to exchange information and to carry out mutually
beneficial cooperation, and can do so concrete steps
to develop collaboration to achieve shared goals
and benefits.
Creativit
y
and Innovation
ICVHE 2019 - The International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE) “Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable
4.0 Industry”
624

♣ Ability to give birth to an idea, a new concept to
solve a problem, or the ability to give birth to a new
prototype to give birth to a new product that will be
produced.
♣ Divergent thinking skills that can provide
different solutions from others about a problem.
♣ Ability to develop experience and exchange
information with other people.
Source: Boris, Aberšek (2017). Fisk, P. (2018),
Yoga (2018).
Based on the explanation above, it can be
concluded that the teacher has complex tasks.
Therefore, teachers in the 21st century face a severe
problem if they do not have sufficient competence.
In competitive challenges, teachers must be
consistent towards the quality objectives. This
situation is critical for teachers to realise because
school quality improvement is not instantaneous, but
a dynamic process that must be undertaken patiently,
measured step by step with clear and definite
directions. Improving school quality requires theory.
However, its implementation will not be smooth and
as comfortable as existing theories, due to dynamic
quality improvement that is highly related to various
factors or variables that are not all can be controlled
by schools (Zamroni, 2009: 28). Therefore, in the
context of education in the 21st-century teachers
enter the professional era. “Educators are
professionals” who are legally regulated by Law
Number 20 the Year 2003 Article 39 paragraph 2.
Professionals are work or activities carried out by a
person and become a source of living income that
requires expertise, skills or skills that meet quality
standards or norms specific and requires
professional education. Therefore, the role of
educators in the 21st century requires high
professionalism. In addition, to overcome the
problem of quality inequality is not an easy job. As
explained by Siswoyo (2017: 141-142) that
improving the quality of education needs to build
three essential things, namely capacity building,
empowerment, and critical mass. Capacity building
is meant to provide an opportunity for people to
work together in a new way so that the dynamics
built collectively in improving education go well.
The essence of capacity building is collegiality
relations, related to the community, courses, and
professional trust, which is very important. Two key
components of capacity building are professional
learning communities and leadership capacity.
Capacity building will build a mindset that is
conducive to improving education. According to
Yoga (2018), mindset change will be sufficient for
improving the quality of education from fixed to
growth mindset for students in school. According to
Day (2014: 99), capacity is a power - a habit of mind
focused on strengthening and sustaining the learning
of people at all levels in the educational system for
the collective purpose of enhancing student learning
in its broadest sense. It is a quality that allows
people individually and collectively, routinely to
learn from the world around them and to apply this
learning to new situations, so that they can continue
on a path to their goals in an ever-changing context.
In this context, strengthening personal and social
capacities are two essential things in facing
educational challenges.
In the face of the era of disruption 4.0, it requires
the quality teachers as well as strong resilience. As
the conclusion of several studies, school resilience
will determine the quality of schools. Dwiningrum’s
findings (2017) state that success in implementing is
determined by school resilience. However, the
question, in this case, is why school resilience is
essential to be built by the schools? The answer is
that many studies conclude that school achievement
is determined by school resilience. Even Day and Gu
state that Resilient Schools discussed the importance
of building resilience (2014: 51-86). Complex
problems that occur with the lives of teachers and
schools cannot be separated from resilience.
Resilience is needed by schools in facing the
challenges of education in the 21st century.
With school resilience, schools are more
effective in overcoming various educational
problems and are proactive in responding to changes
in policies and demands of society in the 4.0
revolution era. Resilience is needed because
resilience is part of “everyday resilience” life. The
ability to be healthy will arise when someone learns
to solve problems, develop social abilities, and
social competence (Day, 2014). School resilience
evokes adversity and adjustments to various
demands for 21st-century educational change. This
competence is related to the ability of teachers to
develop social and vocational academic
competencies (Ririkin & Hoopman in Henderson &
Milstein, 2003: 11-26; Esquivel, Doll, & Oades -
Sese, 2011: 649-651). Everyone has different
abilities in developing aspects of resilience. Schools
play a role in developing the resilience of students
and teachers that are needed to deal with various
changes and to mitigate disasters. The teacher has a
direct role in developing student resilience. Teacher
involvement in increasing school resilience is
determined by many aspects, such as personal and
social competence, school culture, and school
infrastructure (Henderson & Milstein, 2003;
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
625

Kiswarday, 2006; Condly, 2006; Poliner & Benson,
2013).
Teacher resilience is essential to be developed
because it is related to professional identity.
Resilient teachers can turn “disruption” into
“opportunity”, to develop “agility” and not get stuck
with “rigidity” causing the learning process to
become “meaningless” learning in “internet of
things”. Resilient teachers will find it easy to do
work and are not difficult to implement in the 21st
century—teachers who have sufficient competence
and can apply the “standards” needed in school
quality. A resilient teacher will become a person of
character because they can overcome the problems
in school—the equality needed for education in the
21st century done by teachers in multicultural
education. Teachers can apply the principle of
equality at the classroom level, as explained by
Zamroni (2017: 19-22). Applying multicultural
education can be seen as a way to carry out learning
that advances equality, such as not distinguishing
differences, advancing democracy, developing skills
to explore and understand.
3 CONCLUSIONS
The phenomenon of disruption occurs in the masses
in the industrial revolution era 4.0. The problem of
education in Indonesia is very complicated.
Inequality in quality and equality in building
education has become a difficult task in the era of
disruption. The educational paradigm needs to
respond to the challenges 0f 21st-century education
in order to maintain the nation’s identity during the
era of disruption. Culture-based education is
designed to overcome quality problems in Indonesia.
The principles of quality and equality, which form
the basis for educational development, must be
addressed comprehensively.
“Knowledge age” based education needed by
education in the 21st century that requires the
synergy of the social roles of teachers and students.
Strengthening character education is very important
to maintain the nation’s consistency. Multicultural
education is needed to respond to the demands of
education in the 21st century that are loaded with
differences and inequalities that require a global
perspective. The change in education paradigm
needs to be reconstructed in the education system so
that the disruption phenomenon is more interpreted
as a dynamic for improving the quality of education.
Therefore, skilled and resilient teachers are needed
to change mindsets so that they can develop a more
effective and enjoyable learning process. With the
mindset from the fix-mind-set to the growth
mindset, the teacher can be more creative and
innovative in designing learning based on
multiliteracy pedagogical planning. The teacher’s
role is to develop 4CI competencies (critical
thinking, communication, collaboration, creativity,
and innovation) in students systemically. With a
culture-based education, a student will be formed
with a superior character who can adapt and is ready
to face the problems of education in the era of
disruption.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This research was supported by [PNBP]. We thank
our colleagues from [Sam Ratulangi University]
who provided insight and expertise that greatly
assisted the research, even though they might not
agree with all interpretations/conclusions from this
paper.
REFERENCES
Baker, D. P, Wiseman, Alexander, W. 2005. ed. Global
Trends in Educational Policy. USA: ELVEIER. Jai.
Boris, A. 2017. Evolution of Competences for New Era Or
Education 4.0.
http://cpvuhk.cz/wpcontent/uploads/2017/09/Aber%C
5%A1ek.pdf, diunduh; 5 Oktober 2017.
Cheng, C. Y. 2005. New Paradigm for
Re-engineering Education. Netherlenads:
Springer.
Condly, S. J. 2017. Resilience in children: A review of
literature with implications for education, Urban
Education, 41 (3), 211–236. doi:
10.1177/0042085906287902.
Day, C. & Gu, Q. 2014. Resilient teachers, resilient
schools. London & New York: Routledge Taylor &
Francis Group.
Dhakidae, D. 2017. Era disrupsi: Peluang dan tantangan
pendidikan tinggi Indonesia. Jakarta: Akademi Ilmu
Pengetahuan Indonesia.
Dwiningrum, S. I. A. Building social harmony: Reinforce
the foundation of reseaching multicultural education
practices in Indonesia and New Zealand. Makalah
dipresentasikan pada 41
th
Pasific Circle Consortium
Jepang. JMS Aster Plaza, Hiroshima Japan. (2016,
September 4-8).
Dwiningrum, S. I. A. 2017. Developing school resilience
for disaster mitigation: A confirmatory factor
analysis”. Disaster Prevention and Management: An
International Journal, 26 (4), 437-451.
ICVHE 2019 - The International Conference of Vocational Higher Education (ICVHE) “Empowering Human Capital Towards Sustainable
4.0 Industry”
626

Dwiningrum, S. I. A. 2013. Nation’s character education
based on the social capital theory. Nation’s character
education based on the social capital theory. Asian
Social Science, Special Issue, 9 (12).
Fisk, P. 2018. Education 4.0. the future of learning will
be dramatically different, in school and throughout
life. Diunduh dari:
http://www.thegeniusworks.com/2017/01/future-
education-young-everyone- taught-together diunduh
20.
Hammond, L. D. 2017. Empowered educator. United
States of America: Yossey Bass.
Hassim, A. 2016. Revolusi Industri 4.0.| Jumat, 17 Juni
2016 | 7:14. http://id.beritasatu.com/home/revolusi-
industri-40/145390.
Henderson, N. 2003. Resiliency in schools. California:
Corwin Press. Inc.
Henderson, N. & Milstein, M. M. 2003. Resiliency in
schools: Making it happen for students and educators.
California: Corwin Press.
Hurn, C. J. 1993. The limit and possibilities of Schooling.
Encycloedia Britania.
Kasali, R. 2017. Disruption. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.
Ng, P. T. 2017. Learning from the power of paradoxes.
New York & London: Rouledge Taylor & Francis
Group.
Panth, B. 2017. dalam The Policy Brief. Improving
education quality and outcomes for national
development and development in the 21
st
century. The
HEAD Foundation. November 2017. Special Issue.
Rosyada, D. 2017. Menjadi guru di Abad 21. Diunduh
darihttp://www.uinjkt.ac.id/id/menjadi-guru-di-abad-
21/.
Siswoyo, D. 2017. Sekolah dan guru: Dalam tantangan
zaman. Yogyakarta: UNY Press.
Yoga, D. 2017. Membangun budaya inovasi di perguruan
tinggi. Materi disampaikan 8 Februari 2017 pada
Stadium General UNY.
Yoga, D. 2018. Learning HOW to Learn, Materi TOT
disampaikan 7-9 April Rektorat UNY.
Zamroni. 2009. Model mutu pendidikan: Profesionalitas
terpadu. Dalam Prosiding Seminar Nasional,
Paradigma Mutu Pendidikan di Indoensia.
Yogyakarta: Lembaga Penelitian UNY.
Zamroni. 2017. Pendidikan multikultural sebagai upaya
untuk mengurangi ketimpangan prestasi. Yogyakarta:
UNY.
Empowering Cultural Human Capital towards Industry 4.0
627