Implementation of the New Student Admission Policy Based on Zoning Systems in Indonesia
In 2018, the Minister of Education released Education Regulation (Permendikbud) No. 14 of the year 2018. The purpose of this regulation is that schools must accept new students who live within a certain radius of the school. The implementation of the new student admission policy at the elementary, junior high, and senior high school levels in Surabaya has led to protests and even demonstrations of the rejection of new student admissions based on zoning that is considered discriminatory, unfair, and does not pay attention to the academic achievements of prospective new students. For this reason, the purpose of this study is to analyze why the implementation of the registration of the new student admission (PPDB) policy was rejected in Surabaya, and to analyze any efforts that can be made to implement the PPDB policy effectively. The analytical method used is qualitative by using a focus group discussion (FGD) approach with three main groups: parents, teachers, and officers of Surabaya City Education (Dispendik Surabaya). The results indicate that the implementation of the zoning-based PPDB policy was rejected because each school did not yet have quality teachers and infrastructure, and thus lacked opportunities for students with high academic achievements. Also, not all schools had a good culture and environment, which is called culture lag. In order for the student admission policy based on zoning to be implemented effectively, the central government must work together with the local government to improve the quality of each school. School quality includes the provision of hardware and software. Provision of hardware includes learning space facilities, learning facilities, and teacher competencies. Provision of software includes internet access, online learning modules, and school culture systems. Dispendik Surabaya must also increase the intensity of communication to the public, achieve adequate, socialization and improve coordination between the Ministry of Education and Culture and the local governments.
Keywords: student admission policies, preparing infrastructure, communication, socialization.
CHEN Y., & KESTEN O. Chinese college admissions and school choice reforms: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 2017, 125(1): 99-139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/689773
AKABAYASHI H., & NAOI M. Subject variety and incentives to learn: Evidence from public high school admission policies in Japan. Japan and the World Economy, 2019, 52: 100981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japwor.2019.100981
GRAU N. The impact of college admissions policies on the academic effort of high school students. Economics of Education Review, 2018, 65: 58-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.03.002
DAMARJATI D. Sekolah Berdasarkan Sistem Zonasi, Setuju atau Tidak? DetikNews, 2019. https://news.detik.com/pro-kontra/d-4594558/sekolah-berdasarkan-sistem-zonasi-setuju-atau-tidak
FIRMANSYAH T. Wali Murid di Surabaya Demo Zonasi PPDB Hingga Malam Hari. REPUBLIKA.CO.ID, 2019. https://nasional.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/daerah/ptd9ze377/wali-murid-di-surabaya-demo-zonasi-ppdb-hingga-malam-hari
WINARNO B. Kebijakan Publik Teori & Proses. PT Buku Kita, Jakarta, 2007.
AGUSTINO L. Dasar-Dasar Kebijakan Publik. CV. Alfabeta, Jakarta, 2012.
VAN METER D. S., & VAN HORN C. E. The Policy Implementation Process: A Conceptual Framework. Administration & Society, 1975, 6(4): 445-488. https://doi.org/10.1177/009539977500600404
GRINDLE M. S. Public Choices and Policy. 1980.
EDWARD III G. C. Implementing Public Policy. Congressional Quarterly Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1980.
MAZMANIAN D. H., & SABATIER P. A. Implementation and Public Policy. Harper Collins, New York, 1983.
WEN H., XIAO Y., and ZHANG L. School district, education quality, and housing price: Evidence from a natural experiment in Hangzhou, China. Cities, 2017, 66: 72–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.03.008
WAHYUNI D. Pro Kontra Sistem Zonasi Penerimaan Peserta Didik Baru Tahun Ajaran 2018/2019. Info Singkat: Kajian Singkat Terhadap Isu Aktual dan Strategis, 2018, 10(14): 13–18.
ZOHRABI M. Mixed method research: Instruments, validity, reliability and reporting findings. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2013, 3: 254-262. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.3.2.254-262
GENTLES S. J., CHARLES C., PLOEG J., and MCKIBBON K. Sampling in qualitative research: Insights from an overview of the methods literature. The Qualitative Report, 2015, 20: 1772–1789. https://www.miguelangelmartinez.net/IMG/pdf/2015_Gentles_Sampling_Qualitative_Research__TQR.pdf
MOHAJAN H. K. Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 2018, 7(1): 23-48. https://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v7i1.571
DELORS J. The treasure within: Learning to know, learning to do, learning to live together and learning to be. What is the value of that treasure 15 years after its publication? International Review of Education, 2013, 59: 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-013-9350-8
SUGIYONO. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta, Bandung, 2010.
KRUEGER N. The Impact of Prior Entrepreneurial Exposure on Perceptions of New Venture Feasibility and Desirability. Entrepreneurial Theory and Practice, 1993, 18(1): 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301800101
- There are currently no refbacks.