Member of Commission X of the DPR, Habib Syarief Muhammad, asked the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) to immediately improve the judging mechanism of the Smart and Careful Competition (LCC) Four Pillars. This insistence followed the controversy at the West Kalimantan Provincial level, where the jury gave different scores to answers that were substantially the same from two different schools.
Habib expressed his concern over the controversy. He assessed that inconsistencies in assessments in national events could hurt the sense of fairness and the spirit of healthy competition among students.
"The existence of differences in assessments of the same answer from two participants shows that the judging mechanism needs to be evaluated in total. We hope this will be the last incident. The evaluation system must be objective, fair, and transparent so that the credibility of the competition is maintained," Habib Syarief told reporters, Tuesday, May 12.
Habib emphasized that the assessment mechanism in the future must be formulated in more detail with measurable indicators, including accuracy, speed, and clarity of answers.
"According to the implementation instructions, the committee should monitor every stage. Post-selection evaluation is important to identify shortcomings and provide recommendations for improvement so that there are no hearing errors or jury perceptions," said the PKB legislator from the West Java District.
In order to minimize disputes in the future, Habib proposed two technical breakthroughs in the judging process. First, the jury is advised to use high-quality headsets or earphones so that they can hear the participants' answers accurately, especially in fast-paced competition situations.
Second, all race sessions must be recorded with good audio-visual quality. This recording serves as an authentic proof that can be played back if there is a protest or disagreement regarding the participant's answer. "If there is a debate, the audio recording can be played back. This is important for accountability of the assessment," he explained.
On the other hand, Habib actually appreciated the courage of the participants who delivered the protest critically. According to him, critical and analytical thinking is the main goal of understanding the Four Pillars of nationality.
"I hope this incident will not extinguish the spirit of the younger generation to continue to explore Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution, the Republic of Indonesia, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika as the foundation of the state," he concluded.
It is known that this controversy began when Group C (SMAN 1 Pontianak) answered questions related to the selection process for BPK members but was given a minus five score. On the other hand, the jury gave a score of 10 to Group B (SMAN 1 Sambas) for answers that had similar substance. The jury reasoned that Group C did not mention the Regional Representative Council (DPD) clearly, even though the participants felt that their answers were correct.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
