VALUES EDUCATION IN J. DROST'S PERSPECTIVE

This research aims to delve into the thoughts of J. Drost, which emphasizes values as the primary foundation in the school education system. Colossus Gonzaga School is highlighted as an 'alternative' model that emphasizes the presence of values in education while interpreting education as a humanitarian effort. The method of literature review is employed with steps including the identification of primary references regarding Drost's writings, critical analysis, comparison, and synergy, as well as compiling findings with the identification of weaknesses and strengths of Drost's thoughts. The results indicate that values become the main foundation in the implementation of the education system, underpinning Pater Drost's concept. The establishment of Colossus Gonzaga School emphasizes the importance of values in educational orientation, particularly in interpreting education as a humanitarian endeavor. Amidst the domination of education during the New Order era under the reign of Soeharto, where education was viewed as a rigid instrument of power, Drost's ideas emerged as an alternative that sought to liberate education from the shackles of values that eroded the essence of education. These principles are also reflected in the development of Colossus Gonzaga School as a Catholic institution striving to develop the dignity of students through the liberation of human values.


INTRODUCTION
J. Drost is known as a Catholic intellectual who made significant contributions to academic thought, particularly in the fields of education and schooling (D.Drost, 2019;Popkewitz et al., 2017).Although Drost emerged from the Catholic educational tradition, his thoughts embody universal values that transcend ideological and religious boundaries.In the development of educational thought, Drost focused on Gonzaga College, where he formulated ideas both philosophically and practically.This paper aims to elucidate Drost's thoughts on values in education, which constitute one of the main focuses of his educational philosophy (Maemonah, 2015;Mesiono et al., 2022).Examination of Drost's writings is undertaken to comprehend the practical implications of his ideas, manifested in the form of Gonzaga College, as well as to interpret the social-political context that implicitly indicates incongruities between governmental educational perspectives and those of Drost.This discussion encompasses three vital aspects of Drost's intellectualism: the delineation of the social and ideological roots of educational values by Father Drost, the relevance of Drost's educational ideas within the context of social reality, and the practical implications of Drost's educational values in their implementation.
Drost's fundamental thinking fundamentally incorporates the principle of values as the primary foundation of his educational conception.Therefore, values play an exceedingly significant role in the structure of education; without them, education would lack meaningful substance.When we refer to history, every educational figure in Indonesia also emphasizes the importance of "values" in the substance of their educational conception.For instance, Ki Hadjar Dewantara promotes nationalist values through the concept of Tut Wuri Handayani and a tripartite approach to education that encompasses the family, school, and youth movement.This is because these educational centers have crucial roles and distinctive characteristics (Tilaar, 2015, p. 15).Consequently, "values" become a highly vital element in the foundation of education.
The concept of values-based education, which is the focus of this paper, holds immense significance in educational issues and research.The absence of "values" in the educational orientation to interpret the educational process as a humanizing effort has inspired various educational figures in Indonesia.For example, Ki Hadjar Dewantara's concept of Taman Siswa, was a response to the injustices of the Dutch colonial education system, even though the ethical politics of that time did not fully address the issues of popular education.Moh.Syafei proposed the concept of INS Kayu Tanam as a response to Dutch colonization (Afdhal, 2023;Afdhal & Ramdhan, 2023).Meanwhile, Father Mangun established SDKE Mangunan during the New Order era, which undoubtedly cannot be detached from J. Drost's role in the establishment of Gonzaga College.Essentially, Drost's educational ideas do not differ greatly from those of other educational figures, namely, attempting to foster the exploratory, critical, and imaginative capacities of students as the primary priority in the educational and learning process.Moreover, in the socio-political context, Drost's educational ideas were more vocal during the New Order and post-reform era, where his educational ideas were actively discussed both in written and oral forms in various educational forums.

RESEARCH METHOD
The research method employed in this study is a structured literature review method (Creswell, 2017).Firstly, the identification of primary reference sources closely related to J. Drost's writings is conducted, whether in the form of books, journal articles, conference papers, or other relevant documents.The next step is the systematic collection of reading materials from the identified sources.This collection process involves searching for and selecting appropriate literature in line with the research focus.Once gathered, these reading materials are then critically analyzed to understand the substance and arguments contained within J. Drost's thinking.This analysis involves comparing and contrasting various sources to highlight similarities and differences in approaches or perspectives expressed by J. Drost and other relevant authors.
Furthermore, a comprehensive evaluation of the collected literature is conducted, critically examining every aspect of J. Drost's thinking, including both weaknesses and strengths.This evaluation covers aspects such as relevance, accuracy, credibility, and the significance of the arguments presented.Finally, the findings from this analysis are systematically organized by identifying and summarizing the weaknesses and strengths of J. Drost's thinking reflected in the analyzed literature.Thus, through the application of this structured literature review method, a deep and comprehensive understanding of J. Drost's thinking and his contribution to the educational context can be attained.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The Biography of J. Drost J.I.G.M. Drost was born on August 1, 1925, in Batavia as the eldest son of Mr. H.A.J Drost and M.R.L. Eckmann.During his childhood, Drost did not receive education at kindergarten due to the lack of facilities in his hometown, Bondowoso.After spending some time in Indonesia, Drost was then sent to the Netherlands for primary and secondary education.He spent around 6 years completing his basic studies at HBS (Hogere Burgerschool) and approximately 5 years completing his secondary education.However, his university experience was brief as the campus where he was studying was closed due to World War II, which struck the Netherlands after only one year of his studies at Universiteit Nan Amsterdam (Hunaida, 2017).
Eventually, Drost was forced to move to Germany and work as a blacksmith in an iron factory.However, feeling discontent with his job, teenage Drost decided to flee to the Netherlands.He hid in a rural area and disguised himself as a farm laborer for a year.The life during the war and his disguise became bitter parts of his reality.On February 1, 1946, he entered the Novitiate at Mariendaal.After completing the Novitiate, he returned to Indonesia on October 8, 1949, and joined Girisonta to continue his Juniorate until August 1949.From this experience, it is evident that at that time, when Indonesia faced the issue of Dutch colonization and the spirit of the homeland's fighters asserted their nationalism, Drost also felt similar sentiments.Although not actively involved in the struggle for independence, Father Drost later embedded his love for Indonesia through his concepts and ideas in education, indirectly reflecting his love and nationalist spirit towards his homeland, Indonesia (Aripin & Nurdiansyah, 2022).
In 1952, Drost successfully obtained a bachelor's degree in philosophy by writing a thesis on "De realiteit van de wereld bij Sankara" (the reality of the world according to Sankara).Although he initially aspired to continue his studies in history, this did not materialize due to his high grades upon completing HBS B, which led him to enroll in the natural sciences department, only available in Bandung at that time.Drost graduated in physics from ITB at the end of 1975.After completing his education in Bandung, Drost did not immediately choose to become an educator or teacher; instead, he decided to pursue further studies in theology.In 1961, he completed his theological degree by writing a thesis entitled "Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam Sebagai Jalan Menuju Agama" (Natural Sciences as a Path to Religion).Then, on August 22, 1960, Father Drost was ordained as a priest in Yogyakarta by Mgr.Soegijopranoto, S.J., a prominent Bishop in Indonesia.Since then, Drost's career as a theologian led him to take on roles as a spiritual guide.His educational and teaching endeavors became closely linked with the foundation of his theological and religious knowledge, guiding him with a calm heart in shepherding his congregation.
In addition to serving as the Rector of IKIP Sanata Dharma, Drost was also active as an extraordinary lecturer at various State IKIPs and often delivered public lectures at various campuses during that time.Besides teaching, Drost also played a role as a shepherd of the flock, especially the Catholic community at Stasi Kalasan within the educational organization of the Society of Jesus, which began on May 1, 1975.On July 1, 1997, Father Drost was appointed as a member of the Commisio Educationis.His term as Rector of IKIP Sanata Dharma ended in 1976 and he was succeeded by Father A.M. Kadarman, S.J.On January 1, 1977, Drost was appointed as the director of SMA Kanisius Jakarta by the Society of Jesus.In this role, he showed his sympathy towards children, which led him to commit to Kanisius schools.From there, Drost continued to be inspired to lead secondary schools in various places.For example, he served as the chairman of the Wacana Bakti Seminary in Jakarta and established a school for the public named Kolese Gonzaga in 1987, where seminarians could also be educated at an affordable cost.Towards the end, Drost was appointed as the Community Superior at the Seminary and was seconded by the Prayoga Foundation in Padang from July 1, 1993, to April 1, 1994.Lastly, Drost was appointed as the assistant to the Vicar for Categorial Pastoral Ministry at the Jakarta Cathedral.Despite being 72 years old, Drost remained actively engaged in commenting on various educational and teaching issues in various forums, as his extensive experience in the field of education kept him closely connected to the educational world.

Gonzaga College and Educational Praxis
In this context, Drost emphasizes the importance of education and freedom.Under Drost's leadership, Kolese Gonzaga sought to make education and freedom the core of its educational practices.Founded in 1987, Kolese Gonzaga aimed to address the educational challenges during the New Order era, where the education system was seen as not facilitating the development of critical imagination among students (Reichgelt, 2021).In practice, the establishment of the school was certainly influenced by the political power of the New Order regime at that time, meaning that the implementation of the concept of education and freedom as its educational principle carried significant risks (Pradita, 2023).Although not exhaustive, this writing can serve as a guide to understanding Drost's ideas in the field of education.Drost's educational ideas reflect his universal humanistic attitude to understanding the essence of education.Therefore, giving meaning to freedom in education poses a complex challenge in the world of education.However, Drost successfully demonstrated this through Kolese Gonzaga (Afriansyah, 2020).
Considering the societal perception tends to delegate full responsibility for education to schools, Drost was concerned about contemporary educational issues.Schools and educational institutions, as well as culture, can monopolize education.Therefore, Drost always emphasized the importance of the family's role in education.According to him, the family plays a more significant role than schools.Drost believed that education and learning are two different aspects, and schools must be able to provide an educational teaching process and educate through teaching (B.R. Drost & Levine, 2023).The process of cultural transmission is tangible evidence of the continuity of the educational world through the school system in instilling authentic knowledge values for the welfare of humanity.
The crisis continues to be a part of our educational institutions, especially in the statemanaged schooling system.This crisis encompasses structural, managerial, and cultural aspects, ultimately adversely affecting students indirectly (García-Carmona & Toma, 2024;Hill, 2021).As expressed by Harry Passow, various barriers in the school environment can compromise children's rights, especially those from poor families.They can be disadvantaged if opportunities to develop mental and language abilities are limited, as well as if there are sharp differences between the values held at home and those in the school or classroom environment.Thus, this crisis has reduced students' freedom in the learning process at school.To address this crisis, Drost's ideas about the goals of education, which emphasize the individual perspective, may be considered relevant and contextual to the challenges of contemporary education.These ideas can also serve as a remedy for the crisis in the education world, which tends to emphasize collaboration as the solution to various educational problems (Masenje et al., 2024).
During the New Order regime, education within the schooling system lost its essential spirit, namely the micro perspective of education, which serves as the foundation for the orientation of school and educational development.This micro perspective emphasizes the learner as the subject of education, and it is here that Father Drost's contribution to his educational conception becomes relevant in the discussion of educational development.Through this micro perspective of education, Drost introduced many educational values.One of them is the emphasis on the idea of freedom in the learning process, as well as the application of educational practices that align with humanitarian values as the moral orientation of his education (Cooper et al., 2022;N. Drost, 2022).

Value Deficit and Loss of Freedom
The schooling system often becomes the subject of intense debate among intellectuals and education scholars today, considering that schools never reach a level of perfection and are constantly confronted with various issues worldwide.Criticism is often seen as a path towards improvement or ideal perfection.Critiques arise due to various crises resulting from hidden dysfunctions (Anand et al., 2020;Schaedler et al., 2022).In the context of education, Henry A. Giroux states that schools have become intense national debating centers, with various groups ranging from conservative to radical engaged in this discourse, often triggered by crises in their implementation.The views on these crises are influenced by the characteristics of each group and heavily influenced by their ideologies.Therefore, according to Giroux, Paulo Freire often addresses themes in his work as "critical language" and "alternative language" (Conbere & Swenson, 2020;Wiedner et al., 2020).
According to Drost, schools should be institutions that enhance students' intellectual awareness, rather than forcing them to do things they are not yet capable of.Here, schools should surpass what students already possess, helping to shape their attitudes and personalities.The critique put forth by Father Drost essentially stems from the value of individual freedom in the context of education.However, the freedom referred to is not excessive, but rather a freedom that can motivate the critical development of individual learners in understanding education through schooling."Freedom" and "values" become the foundational orientation in the implementation of education, while also serving as critical language and alternative language for Drost's ideas (Egan et al., 2022).
In the modern era, schools play a crucial role in all aspects of societal life.Therefore, Drost's statement that schools are the sole educational institution has become a reality.However, before delving further into the phenomenon of school monopoly, which has politicized families and communities within the education system, it is necessary to acknowledge that the assumption that this question has become a statement has already occurred within the current education system (Kuleto et al., 2021;Lipson et al., 2022).As a result of several inaccurate arguments, schools have indirectly influenced the lives and roles of communities and families, leading them to believe that schools are the sole educational institution.This can lead to the loss of the primary status and role of families and communities as the primary educators in education.
It seems that the views of Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner differ from the commonly held perspective, as they highlight how schools create alienation in society.According to them, conventional schools today have become a source of hostility, especially for underprivileged urban children, as seen in phenomena in America.Postman explains that, although these failures may not be apparent, these children still exist within society, and they continue to grow incessantly.The costs incurred to modify the school environment far exceed the costs needed to instill attitudes and skills in the younger generation to enable them to participate and contribute positively to society, rather than becoming enemies of society (Yang & Talha, 2021).According to Illich, the monopolistic nature of schools makes it difficult for students to distinguish between process and substance.When teaching material is added, it does not always guarantee an improvement in the quality of learning.This results in a new logic among students, where they equate the teacher with learning, moving up a grade with education, a diploma with ability, and fluency in speech with the ability to express new ideas.Ultimately, children are accustomed to receiving services rather than genuine assessment (Beudaert, 2023;Hutcheon, 2023).
According to Drost, schools should not assert their right to separate the roles of parents and the community as integral parts of education.For Father Drost, schools should be places where genuine interaction between individuals occurs, without domination.However, the strict production logic in the world of education has blurred the spirit of teaching and educating.By adopting production logic, schools have lost the essence of development through humanistic values for students.As a result, the spirit has faded the meaning of education and the teaching process, as well as between outcomes and processes, and between diplomas and their purposes.Such constraints press us to change that old paradigm (Mu'ammar & Mahfud, 2020;Robert, 2021).Ultimately, schools no longer advocate for a broad understanding of the meaning of education; the logic remains that education is synonymous with schooling, which ultimately only fosters production dominance.Excessive demands from parents for their children's academic achievements have disrupted the national education system.Many parents are not aware or even refuse to accept their children as they are, and instead force them to engage in various extracurricular activities to achieve high grades.For Father Drost, education is not a tool to subdue someone through repressive processes, both mentally and individually, both within the school institution structure and government policies.Such coercion will only create false characters, not formed essentially in the mental and individual process.Therefore, if schools only reproduce false characters, their role in creating students with mature and independent characters in community life becomes limited.According to Drost, independent and mature individuals are those who know themselves, their strengths and weaknesses, and then can take responsibility and care for others.
Drost's critique of the role of education aligns with Ki Hadjar Dewantara's thoughts on the three essential elements of education.Since the colonial period in 1935, Ki Hadjar Dewantara has put forward the concept of the tri-center of education consisting of family, school, and youth movements.According to him, each educational center has a unique yet interconnected purpose (Tilaar,15).The family plays a crucial role in shaping the character of students, but nowadays, many parents demand more from schools, sometimes disrupting the national education system.Drost also highlights this phenomenon, expressing that parents often demand things that are not in line with a child's development.For example, emphasizing academic subjects at the kindergarten and elementary school levels, forces children to attend specific lessons or courses, even if they have no interest or talent in those areas.This is not a form of accepting children as they are but rather a portrayal created by parents.Such actions are no longer for the benefit of the child but more for the satisfaction of the parents, which ultimately can be seen as direction rather than genuine guidance.
Through the process of reflecting on Drost's thoughts, it can be concluded that every educational space plays an important role in strategies of domination.If these educational spaces practice domination, then children or students can become "victims."Students should develop according to their capacities, with supporting roles from family, society, and school providing supervision, guidance, and encouragement as motivation.However, excessive demands from parents or schools beyond a child's abilities can stifle their creativity.According to Drost, children's abilities should be nurtured so they can develop strong self-confidence.If the demands are too heavy, it will only instill a lack of confidence in the child.In this regard, the relationship between school and child development can be more specific by considering criteria such as highly gifted, average, and not very gifted children.This categorization should be adjusted to the child's learning pattern to prevent frustration.The role of parents is crucial in accepting children as they are and providing supervision, guidance, and motivation according to the child's needs.

Education or Teaching?
According to Drost, education and teaching have different meanings that are often misunderstood.Education involves human interactions that cannot be formalized because they occur in everyday life with anyone and anywhere.On the other hand, teaching is formal because it is related to methods, learning theories, as well as learning facilities, and infrastructure.Although the learning process is important, Drost emphasizes that an educational approach is essential.In the learning process, learners not only receive knowledge transfer but also should experience implicit guidance.Effective teaching is a two-way experience in the learning process that stimulates the attention, cognition, and motivation of learners to acquire knowledge, skills, or certain qualities that can bring about changes in them.
In Drost's view, an individual's learning should not be forced like a machine driven in various ways to achieve production results as parents desire.Parents should play a more active role in responding to the limitations of children without pressing them to the extent that it inhibits creativity.Drost believes that the functional relationship between the three main elements of education -parents, society, and school -is important to maintain the harmony of values in society, both personal and open within the school environment.He emphasizes that education and learning are two different concepts but are often equated by society, which becomes a problem in the current education system.Education involves instilling values in one's character while learning focuses on intellectual development.Therefore, education tends to be informal, involving family and environmental interactions, while learning occurs through the formal organized process in schools.
Values in education are efforts to instill character in individuals, which are not always universal as they can be influenced by the beliefs, habits, or cultures of individuals from various backgrounds.On the other hand, the formal education system aims to instill universal knowledge and values in individuals so that they can adapt to society.Both of these processes require reflection from individuals to achieve a balanced accumulation between the roles of parents and schools in social life, with the principle of subsidiarity emphasizing collective interests over personal interests.However, what is more, important is to create a learning process that focuses on educating as the value of the teaching and learning system.This is the core of the educational idea according to Drost.However, there is currently an imbalance in responding to educational issues due to the breakdown in communication between the roles of parents and schools in maintaining societal balance.To understand Drost's ideas about the purpose of education, we need to pay attention to how important it is to emphasize issues such as children's rights, the individual strengths of learners, collaboration between teachers and students to reinforce learning values, and the role of peer groups in shaping identity that must be guided properly.Drost opposes efforts to weaken the education system, such as excessive emphasis on standardization and collectivization, which neglects problem-solving at the individual level.For him, the solution to educational problems lies in changing individual attitudes as part of the societal system.
In this context, the progressive philosophy considered in this discussion emphasizes the development of the current education system, which places students as the main focus of the teaching and learning process at school.Similar to Drost, Dewey also opposed traditional and authoritarian educational authority.The authoritarian and traditional educational approach, which emphasizes the role of the teacher as the highest authority, has led to the obscuring of authentic values or personalities of students.Therefore, progressive philosophy is used to explain the purpose of education by considering the central role of students in the educational process.The close relationship between progressive educational philosophy and Drost's educational perspective lies in the emphasis on the role of experience in the educational process.Dewey considered experience to play a key role, and in his philosophy of "instrumentalism," he emphasized that philosophy must be embodied in concrete action, not just in metaphysical thought.Therefore, Dewey used the term "child-centered curriculum," where the curriculum and the child are seen as separate yet interconnected entities in the educational process.The curriculum is viewed as a continuous reconstruction that showcases the learning process of students through a well-organized body of knowledge (Afdhal, 2023).
Understanding the traditions of liberal and progressive education becomes essential in unraveling Drost's educational thinking patterns.Although it is difficult to provide a definite label that Drost adheres to progressive or liberal ideology, this can be understood through an understanding of Drost's ideas that give an active role to students as subjects of education.According to Drost, students are active subjects whose presence is essential in formulating educational policies, school policies, and even policies in every classroom.On the other hand, the transformation of individual students' experiences into educational practices is something attempted to be implemented by Drost at the Kolese Gonzaga School.For Drost, the development of values is the main foundation for education progress, especially in the school environment.However, currently, there is a very mistaken assumption that can disrupt the overall learning process.The concept of value highlights the importance of self-reflection, starting from teachers, students, and school principals, to all stakeholders (Panesi et al., 2020).Nowadays, schools are often run like factories, where the principal acts as the production manager and teachers as production workers.However, the learning process is actually about shaping humans, not just making them intelligent.Students are young individuals who are in the process of formation, not raw materials to be processed.Therefore, a school principal should act as a leader, not just a manager.In his critique, Drost asserts that a school principal or teacher who only performs their duties well is not an educator but merely a teaching machine (Betters-Bubon et al., 2022;Hogan et al., 2023).
Freedom is the pathway to individual creativity development, especially in the context of education where individuals are the primary subjects.Through freedom, the power of exploration and imagination can continue to flourish within the dynamics of human knowledge.Additionally, freedom also enables individuals to cultivate their critical abilities.One example of implementing freedom in education is at Kolese Gonzaga, where students are granted freedom in terms of school attire, and learning processes to explore their ideas.Regarding school attire, Kolese Gonzaga implements the use of batik by allowing trousers and shoes in various colors, not limited to black and white.The batik used also does not feature symbols such as student council or emblems near the sleeves but rather a plain batik according to the student's preferences.Apart from attire, the practical implications of students' freedom can also be seen in policies related to hairstyles.At Kolese Gonzaga, male students are permitted to have long hair, although this may be viewed as "unusual" considering societal norms that expect education to be closely associated with rigid rules, especially during the New Order era.Education during that time viewed that hair should be short (crew cut), uniforms should be worn, and selfexpression should conform to state-established regulations.However, since its establishment, Kolese Gonzaga has implemented practices of freedom on a small scale.
According to Drost, implementing practices of freedom in education represents a cultural shift in schools, differing from the conventional methods typically employed in government educational institutions.During the New Order era, there was a tendency to regard teenagers with long hair (referred to as "gondrong" in Indonesian) as rebellious, while educated youth were expected to appear neat with short hair or even crew cuts.However, at Gonzaga, students with long hair and who wore the uniform "freely" were considered to be intelligent and high-achieving in school.
This view has been confirmed by Drost through his writing titled "School Uniform" in 1982.Drost stated that the issue of uniforms is not fundamental in education.However, efforts to standardize in all forms do not align with the spirit of "Bhineka Tunggal Ika" (Unity in Diversity) that we know.All primordial bonds must be unified in the spirit of national unity.Additionally, it should be noted that the existence of the private sector is a value that should not be disregarded.As a government partner, the private sector wants to maintain its identity as an equal partner, so the government must adhere to the "Tut Wuri Handayani" (leaders are like guiding hands).Furthermore, Drost emphasized that if uniforms are used as a tool to foster national pride, it may threaten the sustainability of that national pride.This is because the emergence of tribalism is caused by a lack of proper education about pride in ethnicity within the context of national togetherness.

Implications of Drost's Educational Values
Drost views education as a fundamental apparatus of values.Through this philosophical foundation, an understanding of Drost's thoughts can be elucidated as an analytical unit that enables the explanation of intellectual spirit within his educational philosophy.Bertens states that values are related to subjects, emerge in practical contexts, and involve attributing additional qualities to objects.Additionally, values also encompass a moral dimension in their reality, as they are involved in moral actions that are subsequently connected to various other fields of knowledge (Sotiriou et al., 2021).
From here, we can understand a series of meanings from Drost's ideas about education, both in the school environment, society, and the family.For Drost, education should be regarded as a form of respect for individual values.Therefore, moral values become the main foundation in Drost's thinking to acknowledge the rights of children as individuals or subjects in the education process.Drost opposes all forms of discrimination against respect for the individual or children's rights in the context of education.Although Drost places family and society as educational forces or as moral values of schools to prevent domination, if there is domination over the family and societal structures in demanding that schools conform to their wishes, Drost still strives for the moral values of schools as educational institutions that do not solely conduct the education process.He argues that the main force of education lies within the family.In maintaining the moral values of education, Drost emphasizes the importance of the micro perspective of education to achieve the goals of education, namely the freedom of individuals as subjects in the implementation of education.
The essence of moral values in education according to Drost is the power of the individual as a benchmark for the progress of education.In a broader context, Drost seeks to introduce the concept of "elitism," which often becomes his idea in interpreting teaching in school institutions.He often emphasizes that schools must be able to compete in every subject without fear of being considered "elite schools" that only produce "intellectual elites" as social pillars with their intellectual prowess.The basic moral value of education demands respect for the rights of individual students as a moral obligation, both within the family, society, and school.On a broader level, such as at the macro level encompassing values, culture, economic values, or even political values, they must support the existence of individuals without directing them toward detrimental influences.In this context, Drost's defense of the interests of the individual as the subject of education becomes a critique of educational policies that often sideline individual interests.This represents Drost's resistance to educational forces that tend to overlook the role of the individual as the subject of education with curricula and school cultures that do not accommodate individual needs.

CONCLUSION
Drost is an educator who emerged based on his ideas and concepts of education applied practically at the Gonzaga College School, where he also participated in its development.His educational idea can be described as simple, that education means shaping character and that teachers have a moral responsibility to transmit their knowledge to students as part of the cultural formation process.Teachers are also expected to build awareness, reflection, and imagination in students so that they understand the essence of education in school.According to Drost, educational provisions should come from the awareness and will of the family, society, and school to develop an educational perspective that is not solely focused on the role of the school.Schools should be public spaces that encourage social activism and involvement of families and communities in supporting education.Therefore, the foundation of education should be based on values prioritizing humanistic education.There are several important notes in examining the idea of values as the main foundation of education development in Drost's view.One of them is the recognition that students are the subjects of education, which forms the basis for building humanistic education.The progress of education is reflected in how much schools give roles to students in their structure, as students are the force in reproducing value systems both within families and communities.Therefore, Drost's significant attention to primary and secondary education demonstrates his dedication to developing educational ideas and practices.One interesting expression by Drost is "accept the child as they are," a philosophical phrase about complex humanism that is relevant in today's complex educational context.By seeing students as the subjects of education, schools practically move towards understanding themselves as genuine educational and teaching institutions.This principle is reflected in Drost's strong progressive philosophy, which places students as the primary subjects of education.