M01282

(1)

1

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SCHOOL COMMITTEE’S

PERFORMANCE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

IN TINGKIR DISTRICT, SALATIGA

(Shinta Dewi, M.Pd., email: anastasia.shintadewi@gmail.com; Dr. Bambang S.Sulasmono,M.Si., email: sulasmonobambang@yahoo.com;

Dr.Bambang Ismanto,M.Si., email: bam_ismanto@yahoo.com)

Abstract

School based management is a management model that gives an autonomy or independent in a school to develop and make progressive toward the school itself by involving the role of society, in the form of a school committee. The purpose of this research is to determine the significance of difference School committee’s performance between Public and Private Elementary Schools in Tingkir District, Salatiga. As many as 90 teachers who are in public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga are involved as well as the school committees and the school principals. The data is taken using questionnaire distributed to the teachers and followed by interviewing and doing an observation toward the school committees and the school principals.

The research data was analyzed using two independent – sample t-test analysis, which used 16th SPSS program. The result of this study shows that there is a significance difference School committee’s performance between Public and Private Elementary Schools in Tingkir District, Salatiga as indicated by t-value =4.903 and a significance as 0,000 > 0,05.

Key words: School, management, autonomy, committee, performance

Problem description

National education has a function to develop ability and character as well as prestige civilization in the term of education nation life. In order to reach the goal, it is needed a comprehensive education system that requires participation actively students themselves, school society and society. This issue cannot deny that there is a relation in giving, supporting, and relying on between the education institution and society. Besides, it is to change the former paradigm which stated that there was a taboo for family and society to interfere the education implementation and authority the teachers in school (Bandur, 2009).

(2)

2 The reason autonomy given to schools is one of the changing government systems from centralistic to decentralization. It caused since schools rely on the long mechanism bureaucracy decision and the policies produced are not suitable with the schools condition. As a result, schools lose their independent, motivation, and creativity to develop and make a progress in quality education (Umaedi, 2010).

Board educations in regency/city and school committee in schools are born to overcome the education problems (Budimansyah, 2008). The existence of Board educations and school committee are referred to the constitutively no. 25 in 2000 about national development program in 2000-2004 and as the implementation, it is produced the national education ministerial decree No. 044 in 2002 about Board educations and school committee.

As national education ministerial decree No. 044 in 2002 about Board educations and school committee, the school committee has four essential roles, they are: advisory, supporting, controlling, and mediator agency. The effectiveness of school committee is also as a concept of school based management that involving education stakeholder in maintaining the education process extensively (Hendarmoko & Samsudin, 2008).

Hamzah (2004) in Suratman (2011) tried to conduct a research and the result showed that the role of school committee in Junior high school in public and private schools in Selorejo district, Malang city ran good in each schools. The role of school committees went well not only by attending the meeting staff, but they also had initiative to develop school by giving advisory, supporting in energy and infrastructure, controlling in education process, and be a mediator in improving the school quality. Haryuni (2012) also found the same result toward the role of school committee in Puspitaloka cluster, Bandungan. The school committee was active and gave supports in financial, time and energy toward the schools’ success.

(3)

3 school committee in public schools was better than private schools. Faridatus (2008) further conducted a research titled the participation of school committee in improvement of quality education in Blitar regency found a significance difference in the role of school committees in private and public junior high schools. The school committee in public was better than in private schools; it was caused by the lack of socialization of the changing conceptual parent teacher association or BP-3 toward school committee in private schools.

According to Jewel and Siegall (in Samsudin, 2008), the implementation of school committee in public and private schools must have differences. Some factors that influence the performance of each can be from (1) the individual, such as the people’ characteristic, people’ interest, people’ motivation, age, gender, the level of education and experience, (2) situation, such as the facilities, work equipment, environment, (3) social and the organization, such as: the policy, exercise, and wage. The difference in doing the role brings an influence toward the development of the school (Guskey, 2001). Some regards the role of school committee in public is not better than private schools and vice versa (Aedi, in Suratman, 2011).

Considering all the explanations above, this research was going to be conducted in an attempt to investigate the schools committee’s performance between public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga. In Tingkir district, public and private elementary schools have the same characteristics. In the mean of support, best part of society is a worker and minor of them are a farmer. In culture and religion side, almost all of the society has high regards in religious values.

From pre-research, the research was done toward three people from elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga. There, the researcher got the same result that the school committee’s performance ran less optimally. Based on the pre-research result and sustained by other relevant result researches, the researcher conducted a deeper research in order to get a vivid picture about the school committee’s performance between public and private elementary schools.

From the background of study, the statement of the problem is “is there a significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga?

(4)

4 a. Ho: 1 = 2

It means there is no a significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga b. H1: 1≠ 2

It means there is a significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga The research methodology

The type of this research is a comparative that is to know whether there is a significance difference the school committee’s performance between public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga and the approach applied is mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative methods).

The population in this research is all the teachers that are in Tingkir district as many as 270 people. According to Hadi (1988), if the population is more than 100 people, the sampling technique can be got by taking minimal 25% from the population. So, the researcher did the sampling technique as many as 30% from 270 people and acquired 90 people. Regarding that public elementary schools are more than private schools, 60 people are taken to be the representative the public schools and 30 people are taken to be the representative the private schools. The researcher distributed the questionnaire to those teachers in public and private schools. Besides that, the researcher also conducted an interview and observation toward the school committee and the principals in order to check the credibility data acquired from the teachers.

The school committee’s performance is obtained from the operational guidelines and indicator the school committee’s performance from basic and intermediate management education of directorate general (2005) that described as the empiric indicator. The researcher applied to use likert scale that has five alternative answers to determine more or less the school committee’s performance. The respondent asked to choose one of the alternative answer that described the condition of the school committee in his school and the assessment is got by giving score 1 to the answer “never”, score 2 to the answer “seldom”, score 3 to the answer “sometimes”, score 4 to the answer “often”, score 5 to the answer “very often”.

(5)

5 difference the school committee between public and private elementary schools, in Tingkir district, Salatiga. The rule to accept and refuse the research hypotheses is if the probability of t-value bigger than 0,05, so Ho is accepted and H1 is refused (Ghozali, 2005); it means there is no significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools, in Tingkir district, Salatiga. Whereas, if the probability of t-value smaller than 0,05, so Ho is refused and H1 is accepted; it means there is significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools, in Tingkir district, Salatiga. However, before doing t-test, it is needed to do variance test in order to know whether the variance of population has the same value or not (Sugiyono, 2010). The researcher used 16th SPSS program to analyze and work over the data.

Result and discussion

The respondents of the research are the teachers, the school committee and the school principals who are in Tingkir district, Salatiga. The sample taken are the representative from each cluster in Tingkir district, those are SDN Gendongan 01 that is a core school, SDN Gendongan 02, SD Kanisius Gendongan and SD IT Nidaul Hikmah that are in Kanigoro cluster, SDN Kutowinangun 04 and SDN Kutowinangun 11 that are in Muwardi clsuter, SDN Kutowinangun 08 that is in Sudirman cluster and SDN Tingkir Tengah 02, SD Tingkir Lor 02 that is a core school, SDN Kalibening and MI Azaz Islam Kalibening that are in Joko Tingkir cluster.

Entirely, the difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private schools as advisory, supporting, controlling ad mediator agencies can be seen from Table 1.1. below:

Table 1.1.

The Difference of The School Committee’s Performance As An Advisory, Supporting, Controlling and Mediator Agency Between Public And Private Schools In Tingkir District,

Salatiga

The difference of the school committee’s

performance between public and private schools

T-value

Sig t Decision

Advisory, supporting, controlling and mediator agency

(6)

6 Table 1.1. above shows totally the difference of the school committee’s performance as an advisory, supporting, controlling ad mediator agency between public and private schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga. It can be seen from the result of t-value=4.903 with the significance probability smaller than 0,05, that is 0,000, so the decision taken is, Ho is refused and H1 is accepted. It indicated that there is a significance difference the school committee’s performance as an advisory, supporting, controlling and mediator agencies between public and private schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga.

Discussion

After knowing the result that there is a significance difference the school committee’s performance as an advisory, supporting, controlling and mediator agencies between public and private schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga, below is the criteria of the level of school committee’s performance’s success as stated in operational guidelines and indicator the school committee’s performance from basic and intermediate management education of directorate general (2005),

a. Very successful (the grade between 90-100) b. Successful (the grade between 70-89) c. Less successful (the grade between 50-69) d. Not successful (the grade between 0-49)

In order to measure the criteria, used the pattern as follows (Depdiknas, 2005): Indeks: x 100

Note:

SR : real score SI : ideal score

The comparison of the school committee’s performance as advisory agency between public and private schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga can be seen as follows:

1. The school committee’s performance as advisory agency between public and private

elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga

(7)

7 Table 1.2

The School Committee’s Performance As Advisory Agency Between Public and

Private Elementary Schools In Tingkir District, Salatiga

NO The school committee’s performance as advisory

agency

Public

schools

Private

schools

1. Holding and making the data about the economic social of

the parents

4. Conveying advice, considerations, and recommendation

toward the school

Not

Successful

Not

Successful

5. Giving advice, considerations, and recommendation

written toward the school by giving file copy to education

department and board education

Not

Successful

Not

Successful

6. Giving advice to the school in the term of development of

local curriculum

Successful Not

Successful

7. Giving input to the school in the term of arranging the

visions, missions, purposes, policies, and school programs

Successful Not

Successful

8. Giving advice to the school in the term of arranging the

visions, missions, purposes, policies, and school programs

Successful Not

Successful

9. Giving advice to the school in improving the enjoyable

studying-learning process

Successful Successful

Giving advice is very important for the school committee because he is the representative from society and as a school partner in the school development for the future. It is intended to schools not to distort from what the society’s will; that is schools which are able to make realization from society’s aspiration and try to create a useful generation that later will go back to society itself.

(8)

8 similar to Kumilayla’s research (2010) that the result showed the role of school committee both in public and private schools walked together in designing and applying the policies, made vivid to the school’s mission and vision through the operational school program referred to government decision. The school committee and schools are conscious toward the role of school committee as a partner of school.

2. The school committee’s performance as supporting agency between public and private

From Table 1.3. below shows the difference of the school committee’s performance as supporting agency between public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga

Table 1.3.

The School Committee’s Performance As A Supporting Agency Between Public And

No. The school committee’s performance as a supporting

agency

Public schools Private

schools

1. Holding a staff meeting regularly or incidental with parents

and society

Not Successful Successful

2. Trying to look for financial from the help of the business

and industry world to the students who are not able to

(9)

9 9. Holding innovative activities to improve society’s

awareness and commitment, such as: making a bazaar or

stage entertainment to the schools

10. Lending a hand to the schools in creating relationship and

cooperation between parents and society

Completely, the school committee’s performance as a supporting agency in public schools is better than private schools. It is assumed because of the variety of the school committee’s professions that are considered bring advantage toward the schools in the term of maintaining the relation with private sectors and education stakeholder. Moreover, there is an awareness and great care from education stakeholder in helping the quality improvement in schools. This result has the same result in Adriani (2010) and Kumilayla (2010)’s research that the school committee involved both in school programs and extracurricular that were indicated in doing cooperation with the business and industry world and as s result it brought academic and non-academic achievement toward the schools themselves.

3. The school committee’s performance as controlling agency between public and private

From Table 1.4. below shows the difference of the school committee’s performance as a controlling agency between public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga

Table 1.4.

The school committee’s performance as a controlling agency between public and

private elementary schools in Tingkir district Salatiga

No. The school committee’s performance as a controlling

agency

schools

1. Holding a staff meeting regularly and incidental with the

school principals and teachers

2. Often holding a short visit to the schools or teachers in

schools

3. Asking explanation about the students learning outcomes to

the schools

(10)

10 Controlling done by the school committee means as transparency and preventive ways toward the schools in order to the policies taken by the schools are appropriate and suitable with what the stakeholder’s expectation, since the output processed by the institutions belong to society and will go back to the society (Kardoyo, 2005).

Overall, the school committee’s performance in private schools is better than public schools. It is assumed the lack of the school committee’s understanding in public schools about the role, function and duty of the school committee as a controlling agency. The result is similar to Hartadi’s (2012) research that showed the school committee as a controlling agency did not involve in school programs. It caused by the society’s paradigm that gives the education management fully to the schools to control. This condition is different from the private schools in the research that shows the school committee involves directly toward the school program, knows about the reports and financial statements and holds the regular and incidental staff meeting.

4. The school committee’s performance as mediator agency between public and private

From Table 1.5. below shows the difference of the school committee’s performance as a mediator agency between public and private elementary schools in Tingkir district, Salatiga.

Table 1.5.

The School Committee’s Performance As A Mediator Agency Between Public And

No The school committee’s performance as a mediator

agency

schools

1. Developing harmony cooperation and relation with all

education stakeholder, especially with the business and

industry world

2. Holding possibility relation with other institutions or having

memorandum of understanding (MOU) to develop schools

3. Asking aspiration or advice from society through

distributing questionnaire

Not Successful Not

Successful

(11)

11 The school committee in conducting his role as a mediator agency has a duty to link the school with parents, society and also government. In other words, the school committee should be a mediator in order to make conducive communication and interact well among those three elements.

Overall, the school committee’s performance as a mediator agency in private schools is better than public schools. It is assumed because the member of the school committee in private schools has many professions that are considered being easy to convey the information about the development of the school to education stakeholder. It is indicated by the school committee’s initiative to walk out with large society from different education elements which care toward the education.

The success of forming the school committee in schools does not happen by making whatever the school committee and as a compulsory to have the institution in school as stated in national education ministerial decree No. 044 in 2002 about Board educations and school committee. The success of education implementation is not the responsible for the government, but also from the province/regency/city government, parents, society or education stakeholder. It is needed a synergy relation among all those elements as a way to society participation in managing the education (Hasbullah, 2006).

Conclusion

Based on the data analysis and the discussion, it can be concluded that there is a significance difference between the school committee’s performance of public and private elementary schools, Tingkir district, Salatiga as an advisory, a supporting, controlling, and mediator agency.

Entirely, the school committee’s performance in private schools as a supporting, controlling and mediator agency is better than public schools. It cannot deny there is private school’s characteristic that the cost of education sourced by the parents. Thus, the school committee’s performance is hoped to give positive contribution in developing and maintaining the quality of school. Besides that, there is also a care from the member of school committee and education stakeholder to improve the quality of school.

(12)

12 there is a big role from school foundation as the owner of the school which takes the school policies made.

References

Ali, M. 1987. Penelitian kependidikan: Prosedur dan strategi. Bandung: Angkasa. Arikunto, S. 2007. Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: Bumi aksara.

Ariyati. 2011. Peran Komite Sekolah dalam Manajemen Berbasis Sekolah di Sekolah Dasar Gugus Maju Kecamatan Secang. Tesis. UKSW: Salatiga

Armansyah. 2009. Peranan dan Pemberdayaan Komite Sekolah dalam penyelenggaraan pendidikan di SMA Kota Binjai. Tesis. USU: Medan.

Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan. 2007. Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia Nomor 19 Tahun 2007 Tentang Standar Pengelolaan Pendidikan. Jakarta. Bandur, A. 2009. The implementation of school-based management in Indonesia: Creating

conflicts in regional levels. Journal of NTT Studies, 1 (1).

Budimansyah, D. Januari 2008. Peningkatan mutu pendidikan melalui penguatan partisipasi masyarakat. Journal of Educationist, 2(1).

Cheng, Y.C. 1987. The theory and characteristics of school-based management. International Journal of Education Management, 7(6).

Cranston. 2001. Collaborative decision- making and school-based management: Challenges, rhetoric and reality. Journal of Education Enquiry, 2 (2).

Creswell, J.W. 2009. Research design (pendekatan kualitatif, kuantitatif dan mixed). Jogjakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Depdiknas. 2005. Acuan Operasional dan Indikator Kinerja Komite Sekolah. Dirjendikdasmen. Jakarta : Depdiknas.

Depdiknas. 2006. Manajemen Sekolah. Jakarta: Depdiknas Dirjen Dikdasmen Direktorat Pendidikan Menengah Umum.

Faridatus, S. 2008. Partisipasi Komite Sekolah dalam peningkatan mutu pendidikan di SMA se-Kabupaten Blitar. Tesis. UM: Salatiga.

Fullan, M. 1999. The challenge of school change. Australia: Skylight Training and Publishing, Inc.

Ghozali, I. 2005. Aplikasi analisis multivariate dengan program SPSS. Semarang: Badan Penerbit.

Gojali, I. & Umiarso, September 2010. Manajemen mutu pendidikan di era otonomi pendidikan. Jogjakarta: IrCiSoD.

Guskey, T. October 2001. Parents School Support Committee. Educational Leadership Journal, 4.

Hadi, S. 1988. Statistik jilid 2. Yogyakarta: Andi offset.

Hafid, A. Desember 2011. Model manajemen berbasis sekolah. Lentera Pendidikan, 14 (2), 189-201.

Hartadi, D. 2012. Fungsi Komite Sekolah di SMA Negeri dan Swasta, Kabupaten Pontianak. Jurnal Publika, 1 (1).

Hasbullah. 2006. Otonomi Pendidikan, Kebijakan Otonomi Daerah dan Implikasinya terhadap Penyelenggaraan Pendidikan. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

(13)

13 Mutu Pendidikan, 1(3), (http://isjd.pdii.lipi.go.id/admin/jurnal/13083140.pdf accessed in 9 Maret 2013).

Kardoyo, 2005. Pengaruh kepemimpinan kepala sekolah dalam pembiayaan sekolah dan peran Komite Sekolah terhadap kinerja sekolah. Disertasi. UPI: Bandung.

Kumillayla, A. 2010. Peran Komite Sekolah dalam penetapan kebijakan sekolah (studi kasus di SD Negeri Kepanjenkidul 3 Kota Britar dan SD Islam Terpadu AL-Hikmah Bence. Skripsi. UM: Malang

Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan. 2012. Peningkatan wawasan kependidikan pengurus komite sekolah. Jakarta: Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar.

Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional. 2010. Era Mutu SMP. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Manajemen Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah.

Keputusan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Nomor 044/U/2002 tentang Dewan Pendidikan dan Komite Sekolah.

Khaeruddin, dkk. 2007. Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan (KTSP). Jogjakarta: Nuansa Aksara, Cet. II.

Kusdaryani, W., Mujiyono, & Winaryo. Desember 2008. Efektivitas Peran Komite Sekolah dalam Meningkatkan Kualitas Pendidikan di Sekolah Dasar di Kecamatan Doro Kabupaten Pekalongan. Jurnal Media Penelitian Pendidikan, 2 (2).

Mulyasa, E. 2003. Menjadi kepala sekolah professional. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya Offiset. Nurkolis. 2003. Manajemen Berbasis sekolah. Jakarta: PT Grasindo.

Nurkolis, S. Desember 2012. Peran Komite Sekolah dalam peningkatan kualitas Sekolah di Kota Semarang. JMP, 1 (3).

Osorio, F., Fassih, T., & Patrinos, H. 2009. Decentralized Decision- making in Schools (The theory and evidence on school-based management). New York: Anchor.

Pantjastuti, S. 2008. Komite Sekolah dan prospeknya di masa depan. Yogyakarta: Hikayat Publishing.

Priyono, Y. 27 Maret 2012. Ambang kematian sekolah Swasta. Harian rakyat Kalbar (the political refence).

Rohmah, N. 2010. Peran Komite Sekolah dalam meningkatkan mutu pendidikan agama Islam di SMP Negeri 13 Malang. Tesis. UIN Malang.

Samsudin, H. Desember 2008. Efekfitas pelaksanaan kinerja dan fungsi Komite Sekolah pada jenjang sekolah menengah (SMP) pertama negeri dan swasta. Jurnal Lingkar Mutu Pendidikan, 1(3).

Sugiyono. 2009. Metode penelitian pendidikan. Bandung: CV Alfabeta. ………….. 2011. Statistika untuk penelitian. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.

Sukmawati. September 2011. Strategi peningkatan mutu pendidikan melalui manajemen berbasis sekolah. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 9(2).

Suratman. 2011. Perbedaan antara peran Komite Sekolah SMP Negeri 1 Kedungjati Kabupaten Grobogan dan SMP Muhammadiyah 13 Wonosegoro Kabupaten Boyolali. Tesis. UKSW: Salatiga.

Suryana, A. 2010. Kebijakan Komite Sekolah dalam pengembangan pendidikan berbasis

masyarakat di Kabupaten Ciamis.

(http://file.upi.edu/Direktori/FIP/JUR._ADMINISTRASI_PENDIDIKAN/1972032119990

(14)

14 Sutikno. 2004. Pengaruh manajemen sekolah, pengelolaan pembelajaran dan Komite Sekolah terhadap mutu pendidikan di SMP Rintisan Manajemen Berbasis Sekolah. Tesis. UNDIP Semarang.

Widodo, S. 2008. Peran Komite Sekolah SMP di Kota Semarang. Jurnal Media Penelitian, 2(2),