EVALUATION OF INDONESIAN NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK ON HIGHER EDUCATION
Binsar Antoni Hutabarat
antonihutabarat@gmail.com
Abstract: The article entitled " EVALUATION OF INDONESIAN NATIONAL POLICY FRAMEWORK ON HIGHER EDUCATION" focuses on how the application of Indonesian National Qualifications Framework has been implemented in college. So far there has been no evaluation of policy implementation research related to this research. This study was conducted at three universities in Jakarta and Tangerang. Data were collected through interviews, observation given questionnaire and documents, as well as a variety of sources. The results of this study indicate that the implementation of policies Indonesian National Qualifications Framework influenced by policy formulation components, characteristics Implementing, Managing Attitudes, Activities components, that have a linear relationship to the results of policy implementation. Policy objectives to improve the quality of Indonesian workers by improving the quality of college graduates has not been in line with expectations.
Keywords, Public policy, policy evaluation, Indonesian national qualifications framework.
INTRODUCTION
Indonesia is currently facing global competition in the field of higher education in line with the passing of globalization in all areas of life. Higher education in Indonesia entered a new decade after the Indonesian government ratified several treaties and global commitments. In the context of ASEAN, beginning on December 31, 2015 is the era of the beginning of the Era of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), from 1 January 2016, not only goods can move freely between all 10 ASEAN member countries, but also of labor, among others, nurses, architects , doctors and accountants (Sailah, 2014)
Conditions of global competition in the area of special education by the Ministry of Education responded by launching a study as outlined in the booklet on Indonesian National Qualifications Framework (KKNI) which contains about the implications and implementation strategy KKNI (2010/2011), to answer the challenges of education in the global era , which was then poured in Presidential Decree (Presidential Decree) No. 8 of the National Qualifications Framework Indonesia (KKNI) in 2012. The application of the policy implementation guideline KKNI showcased in the Regulation of the Minister of Education and Culture, number 73 in 2013.
The research focus is on how the application of KKNI been implemented in college, and whether implementation in accordance with the objectives and targets set. For more operational focus is lowered in some problem questions: 1. Are the structure and policy formulation is an alternative KKNI proper policy for universities in Indonesia in facing today's global challenges. 2. Is the application of KKNI policy can be implemented by universities in Indonesia are very diverse? 3. Is government intervention in higher education through the implementation of policies KKNI successfully improve the quality of higher education in Indonesia?
The term "public policy" as used in this study is a decision made by the government as a strategy to realize the goal of a country (Tilaar and Nugroho, 2009). According to Thomas R. Dye, the Center for public policy attention not only on what government does but including also whatever is not done by the government (Dye, 1978, Wahab, 2008).
Model of public policy has a lot of models, depending on the power system (Dunn, 2003). In general, models of public policy that can be divided into two typologies of models, namely process model (based on the stage of policy making), and the model of power (power), which is making policy decisions shaped and determined by the structure of power (Parsons, 2006).
The Model implementation of public policy. divided three models, namely the rational model of top-down (top down), the rational model of bottom-up (bottom-up) and the model theories synthesis (hybrid theories) (Parson, 2006). Top-down models emphasize mainly on the ability of decision makers to produce a firm policy purpose and the control of the implementation phase. bottom-up models are models who view the process as a negotiation and consensus formation (Frank, et al., 2015).
Study of policy evaluation is based on the understanding that the policy evaluation can be done at any stage of the policy Policy evaluation can be divided into the evaluation of policy formulation, evaluation of policy implementation, and evaluation of environmental policies, and to further evaluate the results or the impact of the implementation of a policy (Nugroho, 2006).
National qualifications framework is not only in Indonesia but also in many countries of the world. Qualification learning outcomes (learning outcomes) nationally and internationally this is what distinguishes the qualifications that ever existed (Chakroun, 2010). National qualifications framework is intended to provide guidelines to qualify educational levels are different and compared both nationally and internationally in a way that is possible. Thus, the national qualifications framework is an essential instrument for college (opaque, 2000). In general, the qualification framework can be defined as a systematic description of the qualifications of a system of education (Heron Gavin & Pam Green Lister, 2014). Following this approach, it is possible to claim that every country has a national qualifications framework (Spûdytë, et al., 2006).
Indonesian National Qualifications Framework (KKNI) stipulated in Presidential Regulation which refers to Government Regulation No. 31 of 2006 and has the same purpose as a framework. Government Regulation No. 31 of 2006 Section 1 explains, "National Qualifications Framework Indonesia hereinafter abbreviated KKNI, is the framework competence and qualifications to pair, equalizes and integrate the field of education and the field of vocational training and work experience in order to award the recognition of the competence of work in accordance with the structure of employment in the various sectors.
To evaluate the factors affecting the performance of policy implementation KKNI this study using CIPP Evaluation Model (Context Input Process Product) (Stutfflebeam, 2014). Stufflebeam is a very influential to promote the concept of this evaluation. Among these four components, the element of "context" focuses on the question, What is the purpose of the program? Is that program objectives reflect the needs of the participants, in this case, the college targeted implementation policies KKNI (Frank Fisher et al., 2015).
Research requires policy evaluation criteria, or definition of a state to be achieved regarding something that was planned. The smaller the gap (gap) between the results of the implementation of the evaluation criteria, it can be an indicator of the success of a policy. The evaluation criteria in this article refer to the Minister of Education and Culture No. 73 The year 2013 concerning the implementation of education KKNI High.
RESEARCH METHODS
The method used in this study is a qualitative research method. The qualitative methods used by the reason for the problems of research needs to be dug to gain a deeper understanding (Cresswell, 2012). Furthermore, Creswell explained: This exploration is needed, in turn, because of a need to study a group of the population, identify variables that can then be measured, or hear voices silenced. "(Creswell, 2007: 39-40).
Qualitative data can be in the form of a document or record of interview, observation records, the results of the questionnaire, the results of photos, videos, email and the results of the meeting with the respondent (Patricia J. Rogers, Delwyn Goodrick, Qualitative Data Analysis, in the Joseph S. Wholey, et.al ., 429).
Qualitative data allows readers gain an understanding that goes beyond numbers and statistical inference (Wholey, et al, 429). Qualitative data collection techniques are done by using natural conditions, the primary data source, and observation, interview, and documentation (M Djunaidi Ghony and Fauzan Almanshur, 2012). Data collection techniques used in this evaluation study were interviews (interview) to know things deeper than respondents (Sugiyono, 2012). The technique used is not structured interviews to obtain in-depth information (Sugiyono, 2012).
Qualitative data analysis techniques typically follow the steps of collecting the data collected into the categories of information compiled (John W. Cresswell and Vicki L. Plano Clark, 2007). Qualitative data collection techniques using triangulation techniques means that data collection is done continuously until getting data saturation (Sugiyono, 2012).
Furthermore, techniques for qualitative data analysis was conducted by compiling data collected through interviews, field notes, and other materials are systematically so that the findings can be material information. Data analysis was performed with data in the form of organizing that information, translate it into units to synthesize, then arrange in a pattern, choosing important to be learned, and then made a conclusion (Sugiyono, 2012).
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Structural Evaluation and Policy Formulation KKNI
Presidential Decree No. 8 of 2012 on KKNI is set to implement Government Regulation No. 32 of 2006 on System Job Training National, then the model of policy formulation KKNI in the regulation of the President can be grouped into incremental model, the model of policy formulation see public policy is essential to a continuation of the activities that have been undertaken by the government in the past. So the incremental model only policy resulted in the formulation of policy such changes are necessary (Wahab, 2008). This incremental policy weakness evident from the reasons underlying the use of this model, such as policymakers do not have the time, intellect and adequate costs for research on values that are the foundation for policy formulation (Authority, 1994).
Based on the results of the study found that there are variations in the understanding of the policy lecturer KKNI. There are professors who revealed that the policy content KKNI it is still something foreign policy determination KKNI although it has lasted a long time, ie since 2012. This shows the socialization of KKNI have not managed to unify understanding of the implementers of the structure, contents, foundation and benefits of policy implementation KKNI.
Evaluation of Environmental Policy Implementation
College as an implementer of policy application KKNI have different characteristics, because of the different colleges are implementing policies KKNI application in different ways dependent on the input provided.
external environment policy in Indonesian universities associated with the global era explained that universities in Indonesia are facing challenges that are not easy to survive in global competition. The era of openness it for quality higher education can use it to establish cooperation with universities abroad to improve the quality of higher education. However, the condition of the global competition as well as being a threat to the quality of higher education is low, and in general, the quality of education in Indonesia is still low seen from the level of accreditation institute mostly college-accredited C and has not been accredited.
Viewing Events college education is facing the threat of the global era, the policy should KKNI can be an alternative education policy to address the threat of global era. However, the findings of the data states have not yet all agree that higher education KKNI policy implementation in accordance with the goals and objectives of higher education.
KKNI Implementation Evaluation in Higher Education
Results KKNI policy implementation in higher education does not meet the expectations set. KKNI, the maximal application of this policy just as the Parsons, a policy judged in terms of its policy-makers rather than in terms of the implementation of the local and national policy makers (Parsons, 2006). KKNI policy implementation is underlying the formulation and implementation of policies, such as what is said Parsons, citing the works of Rousseau's Emile, everything is good if it is directed into the hands of the creator. Everything bad in the human hand (Parson, 2006). That is, the application of KKNI rely on government control, as appropriate, top-down models. Where implementation of a policy started with the decision made the central government. Top-down models show that this study is based on a "black box model" policy process that is inspired by the analysis system (Parsons, 200).
Without implementation, the policies just a dream or plan stored in the archive (Institute of Public Administration, 2008). Based on the above conditions in accordance with the findings of the data, at the time of application KKNI has not been accompanied by sanctions, not all colleges have committed to implementing KKNI, at least it looks from the unavailability of the products expected from the results of applying policy KKNI, let alone policy objectives KKNI itself is not considered the goal of higher education.
Performance KKNI implementation of the application based on the findings of research influenced the important factors that affect the application of KKNI in college that are not available with sufficient and consistent. Still, the professors who do not understand the policy KKNI and their variations KKNI understanding of the policy proves that the lack of understanding of KKNI policies, objectives, and benefits KKNI policy implementation, the reality according to data findings affect the commitment of lecturers and universities to implement KKNI. Factors government communications and colleges that are not yet well enough.
Evaluation of Policy Implementation KKNI
KKNI assess the implementation of policy implementation, in this case, means assessing the results of policy implementation KKNI. Based on data from interviews and questionnaires it appears that the level of achievement of the objectives and implementation of policy objectives in the college KKNI not been in line with expectations. KKNI implementation of policies based on data from a recent interview in accordance with the expectations of KKNI policy goals and objectives, namely to improve the quality of university outcomes and outputs universities closer to the world of work. Based on data from interviews found that improved product quality college curriculum has not been as expected, this happens because of the competence of lecturers not support the implementation of the policy on the application KKNI. Likewise, the attitude of the implementing influenced by the competence of lecturers and other resources, consequently, the resulting output is not as expected. Findings curriculum refers to data on products KKNI not all professors agree that the application KKNI meets expectations as a benchmark qualification to equalize college graduates with the world of work. Factors that are needed to be able to make formal and informal education equivalency was not provided with sufficient. So the resulting product does not comply with the expected input.
See cooperation among the implementing agencies that have not been in line with expectations, and not all courses have a similar association study program, by itself can not result in line with expectations. Report data on the understanding lecturers and universities to goals and objectives of the policy to improve the quality of human resources through graduate college where not all colleges meet the criteria of competence in accordance with the result, objectives, and goals of policy application KKNI not been in line with expectations.
KKNI Policy Is Elite Products
KKNI policy formulation following the mixed model, ie, between the elite model, model of the rational and public model. Model more dominant elite than two other models. Thus it can be said that this policy "is an elite product, and can be said to reflect the values of the elite to strengthen the interests of the elite (Winarno, 2007).
Based on the process of its formulation, it can be seen that the KKNI policy is the result of interaction between state institutions, like the type of policy Continental. Unlike the Anglo-Saxon policy that understands public policy as a derivative of democratic politics, and sees public policy as an interaction between the people of the state or public (Nugroho, 2009). Thus it can be understood that the model of policy formulation KKNI elitist, incremental this, not in accordance with the constitution of this country that sets Indonesia as a democracy. It should be a model formulation of education a democratic country like Indonesia adopted a model of democratic public policy. KKNI elitist policy formulation is less attention that a policy is regarded by the government, may not be good for colleges and universities. The success of the actual policy is closely linked with the right policy strategy, which could accommodate various views and interests are diverse (Abidin, 2016).
Rationally, it is difficult to understand how the government could find it out, that the best solution to make universities more quality there is in the bureaucracy, but the actor's high education indeed more understanding about how to make universities can produce outputs universities qualified to improve the quality Indonesian human resources. That is why the Government Regulation No. 4 of 2014 on the Implementation of Higher Education and Management of Higher Education article 22 paragraph 1 stipulate that universities have the autonomy to manage their own institution as a central for Tridharma College.
Autonomous management of universities includes academic autonomy, namely in terms of setting norms and operational policies and the implementation of the three responsibilities of Higher Education. Education, Research, and Community Services. Based on Government Regulation regarding the autonomy of universities is clear, that the Presidential Decree on KKNI policy contrary to the autonomy of universities.
KKNI application policy has caused controversy. One of the reasons of those who opposed the policy on the application KKNI that aims to integrate outcomes of higher education and the world of work are the concerns as it says Tilaar, higher education will lose its moral strength because its function is mainly to meet the needs of labor and industrial development solely (Tilaar, 2005). Controversy about it looks at the use of the term "competence". On the job training system used the term, job competence, and competence of the word is also used for the competence of graduates. That, job competence, in contrast to "the ability of graduates", the ability of graduates is not appropriate to use the competence of graduates, as part of the competency is the ability of graduates. Use of the term "graduate's ability" to replace "the competence of graduates" for higher education outcomes seems as a clarification of the meaning of work competency controversy. The term "graduate competence" gave birth to the view that the vision, the mission of educational institutions in the reduction only to be suppliers of labor. Higher education is used as an arena development of attitudes competing for the demand of the industry. Motif competition into the motor to improve the quality with little consideration for moral considerations. That is why there is no correlation between the output of higher education with moral improvement in society. The greater the output of higher education, but the greater corruption and nepotism (Tilaar, 2005).
KKNI policy formulation should be easily understood by higher education if its formulation involves universities (public choice model), and before the formulation was determined, to the formulation of policies KKNI socialization has been done on each college with adequate time allocation. The government should allow universities provide revisions to this policy can be implemented KKNI in college, because the issue of the management of higher education, who understand are the actors who are in college. It is due to the autonomy of universities have also been set out in the government's policy on the management of higher education. Therefore in terms of application KKNI college more appropriate way is the top model of the bottom (bottom-up), the government's role is to facilitate the needs of higher education in terms of the application KKNI. The top-down approach means that the government provides wider opportunities for universities apply KKNI (Frank, et al., 2015).
Contents President regulation No. 8 of 2012 on KKNI, just load things are a little different with the provisions KKNI in Government Regulation No. 31 The year 2006 concerning the National Employment System. The main difference is simply, if the rules of national employment system KKNI set as the qualification for graduates of vocational training, then in Presidential Decree KKNI include competence and qualifications of graduates for all types of education, either vocational training (non-formal education), formal education and informal education.
To align with Government Regulation No. 4 of 2014 on the Implementation of Higher Education and Management of Higher Education is specifically related to university autonomy, the application KKNI in college rather in the form of the guidelines, in which the application is given a wider opportunity at college.
CONCLUSION
Policy formulation KKNI incremental and elitist yet successfully socialized at all college lecturers and managers. Not to all the lecturers understand well the contents, foundation, benefits, goals, and objectives KKNI policy.
KKNI implementation of policies in universities to improve the quality of human resources through college graduates have not been in line with expectations due to due to unavailability of human resources, and access to information. Another influence is the lack of cooperation institution for KKNI implementation, as well as cooperation between other agencies that have an influence on improving the quality of higher education. This is partly because KKNI policy contrary to the autonomy of universities.
Conditions universities in Indonesia are diverse, and the unavailability of the factors affecting the resources needed executor attitude which ultimately affects the results of applying KKNI in college. Plus, KKNI policy has not been attentive to the needs of universities in Indonesia who are facing the threat of global competition in the field of higher education.
The application of KKNI in universities is mainly influenced by factors such as KKNI policy formulation that is not well understood by all universities, and it is proven by the variation of understanding about KKNI. Other factors are related to human resources, funds and access to information. Characteristics of higher education in Indonesia are generally still low, measured by accreditation levels of institutions that are generally accredited C and have not been accredited affect the commitment of implementers to implement the policy of KKNI in universities.
The performance of the university's KKNI policy is also influenced by the cooperation between implementing agencies that have not met expectations. It can be supported by the data that the elitist KKNI policy in its formulation is less involving university, it is seen from the failure of socialization of KKNI where not all lecturers understand well the content of KKNI policy.
RECOMMENDATION
The policy of KKNI in universities is recommended to continue with the improvement. The socialization of KKNi policy needs to be improved to gain a common understanding of the structure and formulation of KKNI's policies. References KKNI as a qualification college graduate should remain open to the development of science, and equalization between the world of work and the world of education and submitted to universities with autonomy.Implementation KKNI in college recommended proceeding with the repair, based on the autonomy of universities. Therefore the application of KKNI on high education should still appreciate the Vision, Mission college is not only a supplier of labor. Reference KKNI as qualified college graduates should remain open to the development of science, and equality between the world of work and the world of education submitted to the college to its autonomy, to then provide the important factors that affect the performance of the application KKNI in college. Determination KKNI application deadline need not enforced, and the government should put as a facilitator by providing access to information is consistent both at the college and the college graduates.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abidin, Said Zainal. (2016), Public Policy. Jakarta: Salemba Humanika.
Chakroun, Borhene. (2010), National Qualification Frameworks: from policy to policy learning borrowing. European Journal of Education, 45 (2).
Creswell, John W., Vicki L. Plano Calrk. (207), London: Sage Publications.
Creswell, John W. (2012), Educational Research, Boston: Pearson.
Creswell, John W. (2007), qualitative Inquiry and Research Design, London: Sage Publications.
Dunn, William N. (2013) Introduction to Public Policy Analysis. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University.
Dye, Thomas R. Understanding Public Policy. (1978). Florida: Euglewood Cliffs.
Frank Fisher, Gerald J. Miller, Mara S. Sidney. (2015) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis. Imam translator Baihaqie, Bandung: The Nusa Media.
Ghony, M Djunaidi and Fauzan Almanshur. Qualitative Research Methodology. Yogyakarta: Ar-Ruzz Media, 2012.
Heron, Gavin, and Pam Green Lister. (2014), Influence of National Qualifications Frameworks in conceptualising Feedback to Students, Social Work Education, 33 (4).
Institute of Public Administration. (2008), Public Policy Analysis. Jakarta.
Marliyah, Lili. (2015), National Qualifications Framework Policy Analysis Indonesia (KKNI). Pawayitan Scientific Magazine, 22 (1).
Opaque C. Van Der Wend. (2000) The Bologna Declaration: Transparency and Enhancing the Competitiveness of European Higher Education, Higher Education in Europe, XXV (3).
Nugroho, Riant. (2006), Public Policy. Jakarta: PT Gramedia.
Nugroho, Riant. (2009), Public Policy. Jakarta: PT Elex Media Komputindo.
Parsons, Wayne. (2006). Public Policy. Jakarta: Kencana.
Sailah, Illah.dkk, (2014). Handbook of Higher Education Curriculum. Jakarta: Ministry of Education and Culture.
Spûdytë, Irma. Saulius Vengris, Mindaugas Misiûnas. (2006). Qualification of Higher Education in the national Qualification Framework. Vocational education: Research and reality.
Stufflebeam, Daniel L. Chris L. S. Coryn. (2014). Evaluation, Theory, Models, and Aplications. New York: Josse-Bass.
Tilaar, H.A.R. and Riant Nugroho. (2008), Education Policy. Yogyakarta. Student Library.
Tilaar, H.A.R. (2005), the National Education Manifesto. Jakarta: Kompas.
Wahab, Abdul Solichin. (2008). Introduction to Policy Analysis. Malang: UMM Press.
Authority, Samodra. (1994), Public Policy. Jakarta: Intermedia.
Wholey, Joseph S. (2010). Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Widodo, Joko. (2006) Public Policy Analysis. Malang: Bayu Media.
Winarno, Budi. (2007), Public Policy: Theory, Process, Case. Jakarta: Center of Academic Publishing Serivice.
Opaque C. Van Der Wend. (2000) The Bologna Declaration: Transparency and Enhancing the Competitiveness of European Higher Education, Higher Education in Europe, XXV (3).
https://www.binsarinstitute.id/2024/09/national-qualifications-framework.htmlKarya Tulis Ilmiah, Jurnal Akademik, Kurikulum, Evaluasi Pendidikan, Hubungan Agama dan Masyarakat, Hak Asasi Manusia
http://dlvr.it/TCflpB
123.jpg)
