The Impact of the Low Quality of Teachers on the Learning Process Results of School Accreditation in Manggarai Regency Indonesia

 

Marianus Tapung

Universitas Katolik Indonesia Santu Paulus Ruteng, Manggarai, East Nusa Tenggara, Indonesia

Email: [email protected]

Keywords

 

ABSTRACT

Accreditation, Impact Analysis, Teacher Quality, Learning Process.

 

In 2021, Manggarai Regency had 20 schools targeted for BAN S/M NTT accreditation. This accreditation process evaluates school services based on key components such as the quality of graduates, the learning process, teacher quality, and school management, utilizing 36 core assessment points. Our research centers on understanding the intricate relationship between teacher quality components and the learning process. Employing a cross-analysis and a concise descriptive approach, we identified both positive and negative impacts within each component, either directly or indirectly. Utilizing a descriptive-qualitative method, we scrutinized accreditation results documents and conducted cross-cutting analyses to discern these impacts. Our findings revealed a significant connection between the components of teacher quality and the learning process. Specifically, the subpar performance of teachers in points 22 and 21 directly influenced the students' activeness, ability, and skills during the learning process (as evident in points 12 and 15). The primary objective of this research is to delve into this relationship between accreditation components and offer strategic solutions to address the identified negative impacts. In adhering to the research objectives, we maintain brevity in presenting the methods and results, prioritizing a focused exploration of the relationship between teacher quality components and the learning process.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

In this research study, accreditation is defined as evaluating and assessing the quality of school services through the examination conducted by assessors appointed by an independent institution, the National Accreditation Board for Schools/Madrasah (BAN S/M). These evaluations are based on quality standards set by the National Education Standards Agency (BNSP), as discussed by Saad and Asnidar in 2020. The significance of accreditation extends to various aspects, as outlined by Adha et al. (2019): (1) serving as references for enhancing quality and formulating development plans for schools/madrasahs; (2) providing feedback to empower and enhance the performance of school/madrasah residents in aligning with the institution's vision, mission, goals, objectives, strategies, and programs; (3) acting as motivation for schools/madrasahs to continuously enhance education quality in a systematic, planned, and competitive manner on different levels, from district/city to regional and international levels; (4) serving as informational resources for schools/madrasahs to garner support from the government, community, and private sector in terms of professionalism, ethics, personnel, and funds; and (5) acting as a reference for related institutions to consider the authority of schools/madrasahs as organizers of national exams (Sunarto, 2015).

Based on Permendikbud Number 59 of 2012, accreditation has four assessment components: Quality of Graduates, Learning Processes, Quality of Teachers, and School Management. These four components have a positive or negative direct or indirect relationship and impact. For example, the teacher quality component directly affects the learning process and graduate quality and has an indirect relationship and implications for school management. To see this relationship and impact, conducting a descriptive study and cross-cutting analysis of the performance level results of the 35 core assessment points of the four accreditation components is necessary. Descriptive studies and cross-cutting analysis were strengthened by the results of interviews with assessors and teachers, as well as a study of several school accreditation documents (Adom et al., 2020).

In Manggarai in 2021, out of 338, 20 (5.7%) schools are the accreditation target based on assessing assessors at the adequacy assessment stage in SISPENA (Accreditation Assessment Information System). The result of accreditation shows that the lowest average performance level is the Teacher Quality component (2.8), and the highest is the learning process component (3.3), followed by the quality of graduates (3.26) and school management (3.2). By looking at the low level of teacher quality performance, it is suspected that it has a direct or indirect negative impact on the other three components. This article focuses on the relationship and the direct negative impact of the low quality of teacher performance on the quality of learning in 20 schools in Manggarai that have become the target of accreditation in 2021.

The research on accreditation in the educational context, specifically focusing on teacher quality and its impact on various school performance components, yields significant benefits for academic development. The accreditation process serves as a valuable reference for schools in their endeavors to enhance quality and formulate improvement plans. It also provides empowering feedback for school residents to implement their vision and goals. By identifying strengths and weaknesses across different components, schools can tailor strategies for targeted improvements. The accreditation results act as motivational tools, encouraging schools to engage in competitive efforts for continuous enhancement.

Additionally, these findings serve as crucial information materials for schools to seek support from government, community, and private sectors. With a localized focus on Manggarai schools, particularly on the low quality of teacher performance and its suspected negative impact on learning, the research offers insights into inter-component relationships. It emphasizes the need for targeted interventions to improve the educational context in this region. Thus, the study contributes not only to sustainable academic development but also provides practical considerations for localized enhancements in the schools under scrutiny.

 

METHODS

Based on government-supplied data preferences, this article employs a qualitative descriptive approach to analyze and examine primary and secondary data, as referenced by Hill (2015) and Fadli (2021). Preliminary data originates from the 2021 Manggarai accreditation results document and interviews conducted with assessors and teachers, as Ibrahim (2014) indicated. Conversely, secondary data is derived from various sources, encompassing document reviews, interviews, observations during learning sessions, and questionnaires distributed to students, teachers, and parents. All secondary data is sourced from the accreditation document of the accredited school in 2021.

To present a more structured and systematic analysis, cross-cutting analysis is utilized to explore relationships between the performance levels of the four components. This includes assessing the relationship levels of the 35 core assessment items. The aim is to ensure the validity and reliability of the relationship data, thereby enhancing the overall quality of the analysis.

 

RESULTS

Data Delving in Accreditation Activities

Following standard operating procedures, to obtain accreditation results, data mining activities took place for two days at the school by two assessors who had been assigned. Before extracting data at the accreditation target schools, assessors obtained initial information about school data through adequacy assessment activities. The adequacy assessment aims to assess whether a school is eligible for visitation based on the Absolute Compliance Indicator (IPM) and Relative Compliance Indicator (IPR), and a list of document uploads on the website based SISPENA. SISPENA has become a digital tool for the 2020 Education Unit Accreditation Instrument (IASP) (Awaludin, 2017). The determination of the target school/madrasah for visitation is based on the output of the BAN S/M Dashboard Monitoring System (DMS), which informs that schools/madrasahs need to be visited due to declining quality, re-accreditation applications and community reports (Wijoyo, 2020). After the target for accreditation has been determined, the assessor assigned can conduct an adequacy assessment to assess the feasibility of the visitation. An adequacy assessment is a process of determining the adequacy of schools/madrasahs, which includes Absolute Compliance Indicators (IPM), Relative Compliance Indicators (IPR), Accreditation Filling Data (DIA), and Uploaded Completeness of Documents (DU) which are billed for accreditation. After the adequacy assessment has been carried out, the provincial BAN-S/M determines and assigns assessors to visit the target schools/madrasah.

IASP-2020 divides the assessment into 2 parts, namely: first, administrative compliance (compliance) consisting of Absolute Compliance Indicators (ICM)/Absolute Compliance Indicators (IPM) and Relative Compliance Indicators (ICR)/Relative Compliance Indicators (IPR) which has a portion 15%. Second, the performance assessment, which has a portion of 85%, is based on four components, namely: Quality of graduates (30%), learning process (25%), quality of teachers (15%), Management of schools/madrasah (15%) (Hasanah et al., 2021).

Accreditation results refer to the performance level of 35 core components of the Graduate Quality, Teacher Quality, and Learning Processes assessment. Under standard procedures, to obtain valid data, the excavation is carried out using document studies, interviews, observations during learning and the school environment, and questionnaires distributed to students, teachers, and parents (Ibrahim, 2014). The data sources are the results of the analysis of four data sources, namely the results of document review, interviews, observations during learning and the school environment, and questionnaires distributed to students, teachers, and parents. The analysis results of these four data sources then become the basis for triangulation to obtain more comprehensive, valid, and reliable data  (Hasanah, 2021).

Results of Accreditation in Manggarai in 2021

 

Table. 1 Accreditation Participant Schools in 2021

No

School Levels

Number of Schools

Number of Goals

 

%

Accredation Predicate Achievements

Predicate

A

(Excellent)

Predicate

B

(Good)

Predicate C

(Fair)

No Accreditation

1.               

SD/MI

256

12

4,6%

0

3

9

0

2.               

SMP/MTs

85

5

5,8%

0

2

3

0

3.               

SMA/MA

29

2

6,8%

0

1

1

0

4.               

SMK

15

0

0%

0

0

0

0

5.               

SLB

3

1

33%

0

1

0

0

Total

388

20

5,7%

0

7

13

0

(Data source: Elaborasi Data BAN S/M Prov NTT)

Obtaining Accreditation Results

Predicate A (Superior)    Predicate B (Good)     Predicate C (Enough)     Not accredited


 


Figure 1. Recapitulation of accreditation results for 2021 at every level of education in Manggarai

 

Thus, of the 265 Elementary Schools in Manggarai, 12 schools were targeted for accreditation (4.6%), with final accreditation scores, namely: schools with A predicate (excellent), none (0); predicate B (Good), 3 schools; predicate C (Enough), 9 schools; predicated TT (Not Accredited), none (0). Of the 85 SMP/MTs that became the target of accreditation, there were 5 schools (5.8%), with the acquisition of accreditation scores, namely the predicate A, none (0); predicate B, 2 schools; predicate C, 3 schools; predicate TT (0). Of the 29 SMA/MA, 2 schools became participants (6.8%), with final accreditation scores, namely: A predicate, none (0); predicate B, 1 school; predicate C, 1 school; and the predicate TT (0). Of the 15 SMKs, none were targeted for accreditation. Of the 3 special schools, there is 1 school that is the target of accreditation with a final grade of C. The highest percentage of participation and results is in special education and the lowest is in elementary school. Thus, the number of participants for visitation and accreditation in 2021 is 20 schools, or around 5.7% of the 388 schools in Manggarai, which are spread over 12 sub-districts, 26 sub-districts, and 145 villages.

Several things affect the level of school participation and the acquisition of accreditation scores, (Putra & Hasri, 2022): first, school readiness based on the National Education Standards (SNP) such as content standards, processes, competency of graduates, educators and education staff, facilities, and infrastructure; management, financing, education assessment (Dinihari et al., 2021). Second, before conducting a visitation and accreditation either through online (online) or offline (offline) modes, schools must first fill out a web-based Accreditation Assessment System (SISPENA). Through SISPENA, the assessor will decide the eligibility of the school for the visitation. Therefore, operator skills and data support from the academic community must support the completion of this SISPENA. The completeness of the data on SISPENA will determine the smoothness of the visitation and accreditation process in the education unit. The low ability to operate computers and internet networks is one of the factors that causes many schools not to propose themselves as participants. Third, the mode of accreditation in 2021 is following the health protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic, mostly online (Saputri & Pradana, 2021). The use of online modes in the accreditation process can be very positive, but also negative for schools and assessors. The problem of internet/signal networks in the school area and the lack of skills in processing digital devices from the school are separate obstacles in the accreditation process in the (online) network (Sukma & Hasanah, 2021). Fourth, schools are not motivated to propose accreditation because of the unclear pattern of applying reward and punishment. For example, schools that are not accredited need to be suspended for School Operational Assistance (BOS) funds or other assistance, until they get accreditation status (Muryati, 2016). Meanwhile, schools that have been accredited, in addition to receiving BOS funds, also provide other assistance for improving infrastructure, empowering teachers and education personnel, etc.

Achievement of Four Component Performance Levels in 20 Schools

To explore the quality of the relationship between the components of teacher quality and the components of the learning process, what needs to be done first is to look at the average acquisition of each assessment item from the Graduate Quality, Learning Process, Teacher Quality and School Management components. This mean score is based on the distribution of performance levels after reviewing school documents, interviews with school principals, teachers, school committees, parents, and students, and observations of school activities and learning. The performance level has a range of 1-4. Each level has a description of quality indicators with their respective keywords, namely 1: 'Not yet used to it', 2: 'Quite accustomed'; 3: 'Get used to', 4: 'Cultivate'.

The average level of achievement of 35 core assessment points on the components of Graduate Quality, Learning Process, Teacher Quality, and School Management at 20 accreditation target schools in Manggarai in 2021, as shown in Table 2.

 

Tabel 2. Average Earnings of the Four Components

Components

Quality of Graduates

Learning Process

Quality of Teachers

School Management

 

Items

Average of Result Level

Items

Average of Result Level

Items

Average of Result Level

Items

Average of Result Level

 

1

3,8

12

2,7

19

3,3

23

3,1

 

2

3,9

13

3,6

20

3,3

24

3,1

 

3

3,5

14

3,4

21

2,7

25

2,6

 

4

3,4

15

2,8

22

2,7

26

3,8

 

5

3,1

16

3,4

 

2,8

27

3,9

 

6

3,2

17

3,7

 

 

28

3,4

 

7

2,6

18

3,5

 

 

29

3,2

 

8

2,6

 

 

 

 

30

3,1

 

9

3,1

 

 

 

 

31

3,2

 

10

3,4

 

 

 

 

32

3,2

 

11

3,3

 

 

 

 

33

3,4

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

34

2,3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

35

2,9

 

11

3,26

7

3,3

4

2,8

13

3,2

 

(Data source: Data Elaboration of BAN S/M Prov NTT)

Based on the table of acquisition of all the core points of the assessment above, the average level of performance in the Graduate Quality, Learning Process, Teacher Quality, and School Management components is as follows (table 3):

 

Table 3. Average Earnings of each Component

Component

Number of Items

Average Earning Level

Quality of Level

Quality of graduates

11

3,26

Build

Learning Process

7

3,3

Get used to

Quality of Teachers

4

2,8

Just getting used to it

School Mangement

13

3,2

Get used to

Total

35

 

 

 

If depicted in the form of a bar chart, then the average acquisition of items in the components of Graduate Quality, Learning Process, Teacher Quality, and School Management, as illustrated in diagram 2:

 

 

 

 

 

Quality of               Learning Prosess       Teacher Quality      School Management

 Graduates

Number of Items

Earning Train
 

 

 

 


Figure 2. Average Performance Level Achievement of each Component

 

From Table 3 figure 2, the lowest average level of performance is the Teacher Quality component (2.8). The highest is the component of the learning process (3.3), followed by the quality of graduates (3.26) and school management (3.2). When converted into level quality, the Teacher Quality component is included in the predicate of 'quite familiar', while the components of the learning process, quality of graduates, and school management are included in the predicate of 'getting used to'.

In the accreditation process, the calculation and analysis of the level of each assessment item on the four components becomes very important as a basis for determining the performance of the assessed school. Based on Table 2, the total distribution of level acquisition in accreditation activities for 20 schools is shown in Table 4.

 

Table 4. Distribution of Accreditation Performance Level Achievements in 2021

School Levels

Total

LEVEL

TOTAL ITEMS

1

2

3

4

SD/MI

12

133

241

55

3

432

SMP/MTs

5

66

88

19

2

175

SMA/MA

2

28

28

14

0

70

SMK

0

0

0

0

0

0

SLB

1

18

15

7

0

40

TOTAL

20

245

372

95

5

717

(Data Source: Data Elaboration of BAN S/M Prov NTT)

 

If depicted in the form of a bar chart, then the total distribution of the acquisition of accreditation activity levels in 2021 in Manggarai, is shown in Figure 3.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

Total Items
 

 


                  Figure 3. The Total Number of Accreditation Activity Level Earnings in 2021

 

This qualitative descriptive study is comparable to the results of the mapping of 35 quality assessment indicators in 20 schools targeted for accreditation in 2021. Of the 35 core indicators, BAN S/M NTT identified 5 (five) indicators that fall into the good category and 5 (five) indicators in the lowest category. The description of the indicator assessment data shows that several indicators fall into the good and poor categories, as shown in Table 5.

Table 5. Quality Assessment Indicators with 'Good' and ' Poor' Categories.

No

5 Indicators

Average of Result Levels

5 Indicators

Average of Result Levels

1

with the highest score

3.90

with low category

2.70

2

Fostering a conducive school environment

3.90

Continuous professional development for teachers

2.60

3

Religious behavior in school/madrasah activities

3.80

Innovation and creativity skills of students according to the characteristics of the 21st century

2.60

4

Student Discipline Behavior

3.80

Critical thinking and problem-solving skills according to the characteristics of the 21st century

2.30

5

Communication and interaction between the school and parents and the community builds internal harmony

3.70

Provision of student guidance and counseling services for achievement and achievement development

1.60

(Data source: Data Elaboration of BAN S/M Prov NTT)

 

Cross Analysis of Components of Teacher Quality and Learning Process

The level of performance achievement of the Teacher Quality component is the lowest at 2.8. Based on the IASP 2020, for the Teacher Quality component, there are 4 assessment points, namely: "Teachers develop active, creative, and innovative learning plans by optimizing the environment and utilizing ICT or other means according to the context" (point 19); “Teachers conduct self-evaluation, reflection, and competency development for performance improvement regularly” (point 20); “Teachers carry out continuous professional development to improve knowledge, skills, and insights” (point 21), and “Teachers develop creative and innovative strategies, models, methods, techniques, and learning media” (item 22). Of these four items, the lowest level of performance is items 21 and 22 with a value of 2.7 each (the predicate 'quite used to').

Based on field findings, a study of individual assessment documents, and interviews with 3 assessors, the low level of performance of these two items is due to several things: First, when the assessor conducts a study, both during the adequacy assessment at SISPENA and during field checks, the document contains records of activities teachers related to sustainable professional development to improve knowledge, skills, and insights, is very minimal. Most of the visited schools lacked documents such as certificates, charters, plaques, and certificates. Supposedly, documents must exist to inform that teachers have participated in sustainable professional development activities, such as in the learning community of the Teacher Working Group (KKG), Subject Teacher Consultation (MGMP), Principal Working Group (KKKS), Principal Working Meeting (MKKS), attend online and offline seminars, take part in outstanding teacher competitions, etc. (Sukirman, 2020). Second, after conducting interviews, most teachers said that they rarely participate in self-development activities for various reasons, such as the density of activities at school, cost, distance, and computer facilities and internet networks. Some teachers said that they had participated in self-development activities but did not get a certificate as evidence. Third, after reviewing documents related to teacher activities in developing creative and innovative strategies, models, methods, techniques, and learning media, they also experienced low conditions. The Learning Implementation Plan (RPP) document is still not contextual and relevant to school situations and conditions. Strategies, models, methods, techniques, and learning media have not described the existence of creativity and innovation. Most lesson plans are the result of modifications from the internet which are uncritical and uncreative. This was confirmed when the assessors made learning observations, where teachers were less able to manage creative and innovative learning, both from the use of strategies, models, methods, and techniques, as well as the use of learning media (Fatimah & Kartikasari, 2018). Apart from the individual factors of teachers who lack learning insight and critical and creative attitudes, it is also due to the supervisory function which is the responsibility of school principals and school supervisors that are not optimal (Isbianti & Andriani, 2021).

                  Meanwhile, in the Learning Process component, there are two low assessment items, namely item 12 with a level of 2.7, and item 15 with a level of 2.8. Point 12 relates to the teacher's efforts to make learning take place actively by involving all students and developing higher-order thinking skills so that an effective learning process occurs under the learning objectives in the education unit. Item 15 relates to students participating actively in learning and the learning atmosphere in the classroom is fun.

After conducting cross-cutting techniques, the causes of the low levels of items 12 and 15 are directly and indirectly related to teacher quality, school management, and the quality of graduates. However, what is directly related to these two items is the component of teacher quality, more specifically, item 21 and item 22. With low-level gains in items 21 and 22 (2.7) where teachers have the fact that teachers are low in continuous professional development to improve knowledge, skills, and insights and the lack of teacher efforts to develop creative and innovative strategies, models, methods, techniques, and learning media, have a direct impact on the teacher's low skills in designing active learning by involving all students and developing higher-order thinking skills and effective learning by the objectives of learning in the education unit. Thus, the continued impact is that students do not participate actively in learning and the learning atmosphere in the classroom becomes boring and burdensome.

The description of the cross-relationship between items 21 and 22 in the Teacher Quality component with items 12 and 15 in the Learning Process component can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 4. Cross-Cutting Components of Teacher Quality and Learning Process

 

Based on diagram 4, it can be concluded that there is a cross-relationship between the four items in the components of teacher quality and the learning process, namely:

1.          Teachers are not yet capable enough to apply strategies, models, methods, and techniques, as well as the use of learning media which aims to make students active in developing higher-order thinking skills (Asyafah, 2019). Due to the low skills in applying strategies, models, methods, and techniques, as well as the use of learning media, the learning process is not effective by the learning objectives in the education unit  (Setyosari, 2017). This also has an impact on the low active participation of students in learning and causes the learning atmosphere in the classroom to be boring and burdensome for students.

2.          Teacher insight on learning that accommodates 21st-century learning related to empowering critical thinking, creativity, communication, and collaboration skills is still quite low (Kim et al., 2019). This is because teachers rarely carry out continuous professional development to improve knowledge, skills, and insights in terms of learning and education. From the results of document reviews and interviews, there are still many teachers in Manggarai who rarely participate in self-development activities through learning community forums and sharing good practices, such as the Teacher Working Group (KKG), Subject Teacher Consultation (MGMP), Principal Working Group (KKKS)., Principal Working Meetings (MKKS), attending online and offline seminars, participating in outstanding teacher competitions, etc. (Anwar, 2011). This is confirmed by the lack of documentary evidence such as certificates, charters, plaques, and certificates.

3.         After conducting document reviews and interviews, some teachers are not accustomed to conducting educational and learning research and publishing research in official journals (Alber et al., 2022). Meanwhile, research and scientific publications have several objectives, namely: first, to broaden the teacher's knowledge in terms of situations and conditions, especially to provide solutions to overcoming various learning problems in the classroom or education in the regions. Second, by conducting research and publishing research results, teachers have shared good practices with other teachers at school and outside of school. The published research results will inspire fellow teachers who read them.

Thus, to overcome the low level of teacher performance on the teacher quality component in points 21 and 22, which causes the low level of performance in points 12 and 15 on the component of the learning process, the following suggestions are given, as follows:

For teachers

Teachers must be involved in continuous professional development (PKB) activities aimed at creating quality changes in the learning process (Basri et al., 2021). With these changes, students can have better knowledge and skills, show a deep understanding of the teaching material, and be able to show what they know and can do. PKB includes various ways and/or approaches, in which teachers continuously learn to meet their professional competency standards and efforts to renew and improve professional competencies during their working period. PKB is carried out with a holistic commitment to the structure of personal skills and competencies or an important part of professional competence (Abakah et al., 2022). With this PKB activity, teachers can build a commitment to be professional by meeting professional competency standards on an ongoing basis (Merliza & Retnawati, 2018). PKB is the key to optimizing career development opportunities both now and in the future. For this reason, PKB must encourage and support changes, especially in the practices and development of teacher careers. PKB, in the context of developing knowledge and skills, is the responsibility of teachers, individually and socially, in forming a learning society (Sudirtha, 2017).

Teacher self-development activities can be in the form of functional education and training (training) and collective activities of teachers to achieve and/or improve the teaching profession's competence, including pedagogical, personality, social, and professional competencies (Kusumawati, 2021). Functional education and training are the activities of teachers who attend education or training to achieve professional competency standards set by law. Meanwhile, collective teacher activities involve participating in scientific meetings or joint activities aimed at achieving standards or above the standards of professional competence set. The participation of teachers in teacher groups/consultations (KKG, MGMP, KKKS, MKKS) must be proven by a certificate. The certificate is evidence of the involvement in activities in the teacher group/consultation, signed by the Head of the District/City/provincial Education Office at the suggestion of the Head of the Group/Working Deliberation.

The education office and school principals

The education office and school principals need to encourage teachers to be involved in learning communities (learning communities) both internally and externally to schools (Sudirtha, 2017). Learning communities can enable teachers to develop in these three areas: First, self-development and increasing their professionalism to have qualified competencies in learning and mentoring, including implementing additional tasks relevant to school functions. Second, making scientific publications as a form of teacher contribution to improving the quality of the learning process in schools and the development of the world of education in general (Rusdarti et al., 2019). Scientific publications can be in the form of Classroom Action Research (CAR) covering problems teachers face, such as learning interactions relating to learning achievement, learning discipline, etc., or publications in textbooks, enrichment, and remedial books. In addition, teachers are encouraged to publish innovative ideas about education and be published in mass media or journals (Nahdi et al., 2021). Teachers are also motivated to be able to make presentations in scientific forums as marketing or resource persons at seminars, scientific workshops, and scientific discussions. Third, teachers need to create innovative works that can support improving the quality of learning. This innovative work aims to develop, modify, or create discoveries as a form of teacher contribution to improving the quality of the learning process in schools and the development of the world of education, science/technology, and the arts (Murtiningsih et al., 2018). This innovative work includes discovering appropriate technology, invention, creation or development, manufacturing or modifying learning tools, teaching aids, and practicum.

 

CONCLUSION

                  In the realm of accreditation, the assessment of educational quality in Manggarai's 20 schools reveals a troubling negative correlation between low learning process performance and inadequate teacher quality. The qualitative analysis underscores that the suboptimal quality of learning, particularly in fostering 21st-century skills and student engagement, directly results from teachers' insufficient grasp of diverse pedagogical approaches and the absence of relevant learning resources. Furthermore, the low educational insight factor and limited participation in professional development activities among teachers accentuate these challenges. Interventions are essential to address this, whether led by individual teachers, school principals, or the local Education Office. However, a more robust theoretical foundation is needed to bolster the efficacy of these interventions. Despite these proposed interventions, the research acknowledges limitations, relying primarily on accreditation data from Manggarai and lacking perspectives from students and parents. Future research should encompass a broader context, incorporating diverse perspectives and extending beyond Manggarai to offer a more comprehensive understanding of teacher quality challenges and potential interventions.

 

REFERENCES

Abakah, E., Widin, J., & Ameyaw, E. K. (2022). Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Practices Among Basic School Teachers in the Central Region of Ghana. SAGE Open, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221094597

Adom, D., Mensah, J. A., & Dake, D. A. (2020). Test, Measurement, and Evaluation: Understanding and Use of the Concepts in Education. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 9(1), 109–119.

Alber, A., Erni, E., Ningsih, R., & Hermaliza, H. (2022). Pelatihan Penulisan Artikel Ilmiah bagi Guru-Guru MGMP Bahasa Indonesia SMP se-Kota Pekanbaru. Jurnal Dedikasia : Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 1(2), 106. https://doi.org/10.30983/dedikasia.v1i2.5146

Anwar, R. (2011). Pengaruh Musyawarah Guru Mata Pelajaran (Mgmp) Terhadap Peningkatan Profesionalisme Dan Kinerja Mengajar Guru Sma Negeri Kota Tasikmalaya. Jurnal Administrasi Pendidikan, 13(1), 1–12.

Asyafah, A. (2019). Menimbang Model Pembelajaran (Kajian Teoretis-Kritis atas Model Pembelajaran dalam Pendidikan Islam). TARBAWY : Indonesian Journal of Islamic Education, 6(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.17509/t.v6i1.20569

Awaludin, A. A. R. (2017). Akreditasi Sekolah sebagai Suatu Upaya Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan di Indonesia. SAP (Susunan Artikel Pendidikan), 2(1), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.30998/sap.v2i1.1156

Basri, S., Nurochmah, A., & Syamsu, K. (2021). Pelaksanaan Pengembangan Keprofesian Berkelanjutan Bagi Guru Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Ilmiah Ecosystem, 21(3), 464–474. https://doi.org/10.35965/eco.v21i3.1245

Fadli, M. R. (2021). Memahami desain metode penelitian kualitatif. HUMANIKA, 21(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.21831/hum.v21i1.38075

Fatimah, F., & Kartikasari, R. D. (2018). Strategi Belajar Dan Pembelajaran Dalam Meningkatkan Keterampilan Bahasa. Pena Literasi, 1(2), 108. https://doi.org/10.24853/pl.1.2.108-113

Hasanah, E. (2021). Best Practice Penjaminan Mutu Lulusan Berbasis Iasp 2020 Di Sekolah Menengah Kejuruan. Jurnal Administrasi Dan Manajemen Pendidikan, 4(2), 178. https://doi.org/10.17977/um027v4i12021p178

Hasanah, E., Sukirman, S., Priyambodo, P., & ... (2021). Pelatihan Penjaminan Mutu Lulusan Menggunakan IASP 2020 di SMA Muhammadiyah 2 Yogyakarta. JAPI (Jurnal Akses …, 6, 193–200.

Hill, A. P., Witcher, C. S. G., Gotwals, J. K., & Leyland, A. F. (2015). A qualitative study of perfectionism among self-identified perfectionists in sport and the performing arts. Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, 4(4), 237.

Ibrahim, H. A.-H. (2014). Quality Assurance and Accreditation in Education. Open Journal of Education, 2(2), 106. https://doi.org/10.12966/oje.06.06.2014

Isbianti, P., & Andriani, D. E. (2021). Pelaksanaan Supervisi Akademik oleh Kepala Sekolah Menengah Pertama Negeri di Klaten Jawa Tengah. Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan: Jurnal Ilmiah Administrasi, Manajemen Dan Kepemimpinan Pendidikan, 3(1), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.21831/jump.v3i1.39020

Kim, S., Raza, M., & Seidman, E. (2019). Improving 21st-century teaching skills: The key to effective 21st-century learners. Research in Comparative and International Education, 14(1), 99–117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214

Kusumawati, E. (2021). Effects of Self-Awareness and Sense of Belonging on Teachers’ Professionalism. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(2), 2725–2728.

Merliza, P., & Retnawati, H. (2018). Continuing professional development (CPD) for junior high school mathematics teachers: An evaluation study. Research and Evaluation in Education, 4(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v4i1.18757

Murtiningsih, Hanifah, N., & Agustina, R. T. (2018). Modifikasi Media Pembelajaran Untuk Pengembangan Keprofesian Berkelanjutan (PKB) Guru Sekolah Dasar. ABDIMAS PEDAGOGI: Jurnal Ilmiah Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 1(2), 136–141.

Muryati, I. (2016). Pengelolaan Dana Bos Pada Sd Negeri Di Upt Pelayanan Pendidikan Kecamatan Moyudan Kabupaten Sleman. Jurnal Akuntabilitas Manajemen Pendidikan, 4(2), 237. https://doi.org/10.21831/amp.v4i2.10802

Nahdi, D. S., Sudirno, D., Jatisunda, M. G., Cahyaningsih, U., Rasyid, A., Aripin, I., Ansori, Y. Z., & Mulyani, H. S. (2021). Meningkatkan Kompetensi Profesional Guru Sekolah Dasar Melalui Publikasi Karya Ilmiah Pada Jurnal Elektronik. BERNAS: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 2(2), 641–646. https://doi.org/10.31949/jb.v2i2.1231

Putra, S., & Hasri, S. (2022). Manajemen Akreditasi Sekolah Upaya Peningkatan Mutu Pendidikan. 6, 13832–13838.

Rusdarti, R., Slamet, A., & Prajanti, S. D. W. (2019). Pengembangan Keprofesian Berkelanjutan Dalam Pembuatan Publikasi Ilmiah Melalui Workshop Dan Pendampingan Bagi Guru Sma Kota Semarang. Rekayasa, 16(2), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.15294/rekayasa.v16i2.17562

Saputri, E. A., & Pradana, S. A. (2021). the Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic in Teaching and Learning Activity. English Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa Inggris, 14(2), 131–145. https://doi.org/10.24042/ee-jtbi.v14i2.9783

Setyosari, P. (2017). Menciptakan Pembelajaran Yang Efektif Dan Berkualitas. JINOTEP (Jurnal Inovasi Dan Teknologi Pembelajaran) Kajian Dan Riset Dalam Teknologi Pembelajaran, 1(5), 20–30. https://doi.org/10.17977/um031v1i12014p020

Sudirtha, I. G. (2017). Membangun Learning Community Dan Peningkatkan Kompetensi Melalui Lesson Study. JPI (Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia), 6(1), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.23887/jpi-undiksha.v6i1.8683

Sukirman, S. (2020). Efektivitas Kelompok Kerja Guru (KKG) dalam Peningkatan Kompetensi Guru. Indonesian Journal of Education Management & Administration Review, 4(1), 201–208.

Sukma, O., & Hasanah, E. (2021). Best Practice Kepemimpinan Kepala Sekolah dalam Meningkatkan Nilai Akreditasi di SMPN 5 Airgegas Bangka Belitung. Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, Vol. 8(No. 2), 147–158.

Sunarto, M. J. (2015). Improving students soft skills using thinking process profile based on personality types. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 4(3), 118–129.

Wijoyo, H. (2020). Sosialiasi Sistem Penilaian Akreditasi (SisPenA) Badan Akreditasi Nasional Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini (PAUD) dan Pendidikan Non Formal (PNF) di Kecamatan Bantan, Kabupaten Bengkalis, Propinsi Riau. Jpm: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 1(1), 7–10.

 

Copyright holder:

Marianus Tapung (2024)

 

First publication rights:

International Journal of Social Service and Research (IJSSR)

 

This article is licensed under: