Implementasi total quality learning untuk peningkatan berkelanjutan di tingkat sekolah dasar

  • Ratnawati Susanto 
    Universitas Esa Unggul
    Indonesia

Abstract

Total quality learning (TQL) merupakan konsep fundamental dan memiliki nilai yang menjadi kunci keberhasilan sebuah institusi manajemen layanan pendidikan dan pembelajaran di sekolah. Rancangan ini menjadi isu perdebatan dalam dunia pendidikan untuk proses dan manajemen mutu pendidikan terpadu yang menempatkan peran sentral guru dan siswa dalam tahapan pelaksanaannya. Namun masih  sangat kecil studi yang digunakan sebagai praktik terbaik untuk kebutuhan perbaikan berkelanjutan dengan keterlibatan penuh dari peran sentral guru dan siswa, Tujuan studi ini adalah untuk melakukan analisis implementasi Total Quality Learning untuk peningkatan berkelanjutan di tingkat Sekolah Dasar di Provinsi DKI Jakarta dan dengan memperhatikan kontribusi faktor gender. Studi kuantitatif dengan populasi 160 guru sekolah dasar negeri di Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Teknik pengumpulan data menggunakan  skala TQL 5 opsi, terdiri dari selalu (5), sering (4), jarang (3), kadang-kadang (2) dan tidak pernah (1), yang mengukur  tingkat kesiapterapan delapan dimensi  Total Quality Learning. Analisis data menggunakan statistik deskriptif. Hasil temuan penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tingkat kesiapterapan Total Quality Learning masih rendah (52%) dan kontribusi gender perempuan berbeda secara nyata (skor 41.21). Rekomendasi model kesiapterapan mengacu pada konstruk pembentuk model yang dioptimalkan dengan pemberdayaan gender.
References
  1. Aktan, Cobanoglu Derya; Oztemur, B. (2022). Teachers’ perceived skills, challenges and attitudes towards distance education: A validity and reliability study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 9(2), 451–469. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.959440
  2. Alexandar, R. (2014). The effectiveness of environmental education for sustainable development based on active teaching and learning at high school level-a case study from Puducherry and Cuddalore regions, India. Journal of Sustainability Education, 7(December).
  3. Barreto, D., Oyarzun, B., & Conklin, S. (2022). Integration of cooperative learning strategies in online settings. E-Learning and Digital Media, 19(6), 574–594. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530221104187
  4. Bray, B., & McClaskey, K. (2013). Personalize learning. In Learning & Leading with Technology (Vol. 5191, Issue May). http://www.my-ecoach.com/online/resources/925/PersonalizationvsDifferentiationvsIndividualization.pdf
  5. Chang, C. Y., Hwang, G. J., & Gau, M. L. (2022). Promoting students’ learning achievement and self-efficacy: A mobile chatbot approach for nursing training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(1), 171–188. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13158
  6. Crawford, L. E. d., & Shutler, P. (1999). Total quality management in education: Problems and issues for the classroom teacher. International Journal of Educational Management, 13(2), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513549910261122
  7. Hay, I. (2014). Beyond the Build : Building , Reflecting , Learning ... and Repeat. 2l Conference Proceedings - Working Out: Thinking While Building, 380–388.
  8. Hébert, A., & Hauf, P. (2015). Student learning through service learning: Effects on academic development, civic responsibility, interpersonal skills and practical skills. Active Learning in Higher Education, 16(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787415573357
  9. Katyeudo, K. K., & de Souza, R. A. C. (2022). Digital Transformation towards Education 4.0. Informatics in Education, 21(2), 283–309. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.13
  10. Kaynak, H. (2003). The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-6963(03)00004-4
  11. Kearney, S. P., & Perkins, T. (2011). Improving Engagement : The Use of ‘ Authentic Self and Peer Assessment for Learning ’ to Enhance the Student Learning Experience. In Education Conference Paper (Issue January 2016).
  12. Khurniawan, A. W., Sailah, I., Muljono, P., Indriyanto, B., & Maarif, M. S. (2021). The collaborative strategy of total quality management and school governance to improving effectiveness of vocational school-based enterprise. Journal of Educational and Social Research, 11(2), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2021-0026
  13. Komogorova, M. (2021). Pedagogical Consolidation of Pupil- Athletes ’ Knowledge of Humanities. Revista Ramaneasca Pentru Educatie Multidimensionala, 13, 168–187.
  14. Kuatova, S. B. (2020). The Role of Modern Technologies in the Learning Process Durmenov. Journal of Ethics and Diversity in International Communication, 1(8), 50–53.
  15. Kukulska-hulme, A., Bossu, C., Coughlan, T., Ferguson, R., Fitzgerald, E., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Rienties, B., Sargent, J., Scanlon, E., Tang, J., Wang, Q., Whitelock, D., & Zhang, S. (2021). Innovating Pedagogy 2021 to guide educators and policy makers. Universitat Oberta de Catalunya.
  16. Kurniasih, N., Wasliman, I., Ratnawulan, T., & Mulyanto, A. (2022). Implementation of Principal’s Total Quality Management (TQM) in Improving Teacher Professional Competence at Private Elementary School. International Journal Of Humanities Education And Social Sciences (IJHESS), 2(1), 12–23.
  17. Lei, C., & Zhu, X. (2023). Study on the Quality Assurance System of After ‐ school Service for Primary and Secondary Schools in the Context of " Double Reduction ": Based on Total Quality Management Theory. International Journal of Education and Humanities, 7(3).
  18. Litwin, M. (2014). How to Measure Survey Reliability and Validity. In How to Measure Survey Reliability and Validity. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483348957
  19. Lombardi, D., Shipley, T. F., Bailey, J. M., Bretones, P. S., Prather, E. E., Ballen, C. J., Knight, J. K., Smith, M. K., Stowe, R. L., Cooper, M. M., Prince, M., Atit, K., Uttal, D. H., LaDue, N. D., McNeal, P. M., Ryker, K., St. John, K., van der Hoeven Kraft, K. J., & Docktor, J. L. (2021). The Curious Construct of Active Learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 22(1), 8–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100620973974
  20. Luthans, Fred; Rub5ac J, Michael; Marsnik, P. (1995). Going Beyond Total Quality: The Characteristics, Techniques, and Mesure ofLearning Organizations. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 3(1).
  21. Mitreva, Elizabeth MBS; Prodanovska, V. (2010). Social Sciences Today: Active Learning, A Condition For Continous Improvement if Macedonian Institution. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  22. Ni, W., & Sun, H. (2009). The relationship among organisational learning, continuous improvement and performance improvement: An evolutionary perspective. Total Quality Management and Business Excellence, 20(10), 1041–1054. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360903247312
  23. Patel, P. M., & Deshpande, V. A. (2017). Application Of Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle For Quality And Productivity Improvement - A Review. International Journal for Research in Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET), 5(1), 197–201.
  24. Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Loaiza-Aguirre, M. I., Zúñiga-Ojeda, A., & Portuguez-Castro, M. (2021). Characterization of the teaching profile within the framework of education 4.0. Future Internet, 13(4), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi13040091
  25. Russell, J. M., Baik, C., Ryan, A. T., & Molloy, E. (2022). Fostering self-regulated learning in higher education: Making self-regulation visible. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787420982378
  26. Sasson, I., Yehuda, I., Miedijensky, S., & Malkinson, N. (2022). Designing new learning environments: An innovative pedagogical perspective. Curriculum Journal, 33(1), 61–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.125
  27. Sharma, S., Lakshminarayanan, A. S., & Ravindran, B. (2017). Learning to repeat: Fine grained action repetition for deep reinforcement learning. 5th International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2017 - Conference Track Proceedings, 2016, 1–24.
  28. Strunk, K. O., Marsh, J. A., Bush-Mecenas, S. C., & Duque, M. R. (2016). The Best Laid Plans: An Examination of School Plan Quality and Implementation in a School Improvement Initiative. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 259–309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X15616864
  29. Sumargo, B. (2020). Teknik Sampling. UNJ Press.
  30. Susanto, R. (2021). The construction of a quick TPACK evaluation tool and comparison of an integrative and transformational model. ??The International Journal of Counseling and Education, 6(2), 44–54. https://doi.org/10.23916/0020210635020
  31. Susanto, R., Agustina, N., Anwar, N., & Rachbini, W. (2022). A New Paradigm Of Basic Teaching Skills : Learner Organizational Culture And Self-Leadership Constructions. 6(6), 1–14.
  32. Susanto, R., Agustina, N., Azmi, Y., & Rachbini, W. (2021). Pedagogic Competency Model: Development from The Point of View of The Initial Characteristics of Teachers, Involvement with Organizations and Competency Development Strategies. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(8), 826–841. https://doi.org/10.48047/rigeo.11.08.72
  33. Susanto, R., Agustina, N., Rozali, Yuli Azmi, M., Tjahjono, B., & Rosyid, A. (2021). Analysis of Primary School Teachers ’ Pedagogical Competencies through Talent Search Matrix. Psychology and Education, 57(8), 360–369. http://psychologyandeducation.net/pae/index.php/pae/article/view/738
  34. Susanto, R., Agustina, N., Rozali, Y. A., & Rachbini, W. (2021). Profil kompetensi pedagogik: gender, sebuah peran kunci. Jurnal Konseling Dan Pendidikan, 9(2), 189–200. https://doi.org/: https://doi.org/10.29210/164300
  35. Susanto, R., Rachmadtullah, R., & Rachbini, W. (2020). Technological and pedagogical models: Analysis of factors and measurement of learning outcomes in education. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 7(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejecs/311
  36. Susanto, R., & Rozali, Y. A. (2022). Analisis kompetensi dan peran coach akademik terhadap kemampuan guru dalam menerapkan strategi pengembangan kompetensi pedagogik. Jurnal Konseling Dan Pendidikan, 10(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.29210/169300
  37. Tjahjono, Susanto, & Yulhendri. (2020). The Development of Collaborative Learning in The Frame work of Learning Developmnet HE 4.0. International Journal of Science, Technology & Management, 1(4), 298–305. https://doi.org/10.46729/ijstm.v1i4.95
  38. Triyanti;, Murtono;, & Utaminingsih; (2021). Problem Based Technology and Science Development to Improve Science Learning Outcomes in Elementary Schools. Anp Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 2(2), 151–156. https://journalarsvot.com/index.php/anp-jssh/article/view/171/144
  39. Turdieva, M. J. (2019). The Essence of Organizing The Process of Preschool Education. International Engineering Journal, 6, 6–8.
  40. Yurkofsky, M. (2022). From Compliance to Improvement: How School Leaders Make Sense of Institutional and Technical Demands When Implementing a Continuous Improvement Process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 58(2), 300–346. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211053597
  41. Yusof, S. M., & Aspinwall, E. (2000). Fostering Self Regulated Learning in Higher Education: Making Self Regulation Visible. Total Quality Management, 11(3), 281–294.

Downloads

PDF

Statistic

Abstract Views
: 486 times
PDF
: 22 times