Reconstruction Of Humanistic Education In The Era Of Society 5.0
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51672/alfikru.v19i2.879Keywords:
Humanistic, Human-Centered, Reconstruction, Society 5.0Abstract
The era of Society 5.0 has brought fundamental transformations to education through the integration of intelligent technologies oriented toward human well-being. However, in practice, this development also generates serious challenges, particularly the potential dehumanization of education due to the dominance of technology and instrumentalistic approaches to learning. This article aims to examine the urgency and direction of reconstructing humanistic education in responding to the era of Society 5.0 through dialogue and synthesis of humanistic and critical educational thought. This study employs a qualitative–conceptual literature review method, utilizing critical analysis of educational, humanities, and Society 5.0-related literature. The findings indicate that humanistic education plays a strategic role as a value-based foundation in maintaining a balance between technological advancement and the strengthening of human dimensions in education. The reconstruction of humanistic education in the era of Society 5.0 involves reorienting educational goals, transforming the role of educators, developing dialogical and reflective learning processes, and internalizing ethical values, empathy, and social responsibility. This article is expected to provide a conceptual foundation for the development of future educational paradigms that are adaptive to technological change while remaining firmly oriented toward human values.
References
Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1993). Islam and secularism. International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization (ISTAC).
Biesta, G. (2015). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315635861
Biesta, G. (2020). Educational research: An unorthodox introduction. Bloomsbury Academic.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2018). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Dewantara, K. H. (1967). Bagian pertama: Pendidikan. Majelis Luhur Persatuan Taman Siswa.
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum.
Fukuyama, M. (2018). Society 5.0: Aiming for a new human-centered society. Japan Spotlight, 27(5), 47–50.
Giroux, H. A. (2011). On critical pedagogy. Continuum.
Giroux, H. A. (2020). On critical pedagogy (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.
Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd ed.). Harper & Row.
Nata, A. (2012). Ilmu pendidikan Islam. Kencana Prenada Media Group.
Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn. Charles E. Merrill Publishing.
Selwyn, N. (2019). Should robots replace teachers? AI and the future of education. Polity Press.
Shiroishi, Y., Uchiyama, K., & Suzuki, N. (2018). Society 5.0: For human security and well-being. Computer, 51(7), 91–95. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/MC.2018.3011041
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Tight, M. (2019). Theory and method in higher education research (Vol. 5). Emerald Publishing.
Tilaar, H. A. R. (2009). Kekuasaan dan pendidikan: Kajian manajemen pendidikan nasional dalam pusaran kekuasaan. Rineka Cipta.
Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.
Williamson, B. (2021). Education and technology: Key issues and debates. Bloomsbury Academic.
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112.https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
