Volume 06 Issue 12 December 2023
1Sri Winarsih, 2Sutrimo Purnomo
1,2State Islamic University Prof. K.H. Saifuddin Zuhri Purwokerto, Indonesia.
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v6-i12-07Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Leadership is a force that moves struggles or activities towards success. Leadership means the process of influencing group activities in the context of formulating and achieving organizational goals. Therefore, a leader must optimize management and create an organization always conducive and the quality of education increases. There are two things that characterize leaders in carrying out their duties, namely "openness and willingness to serve”. Therefore, there is a need to study the leadership of school principals and the implementation of an independent curriculum in improving the quality of education. This research is descriptive qualitative research. Observation, interviews and documentation were used as data collection techniques. The research subjects were school principals, teachers and students. Based on the research results, it shows: 1) The school principal as the leader of the organization has carried out his duties well in accordance with procedures and regulations. 2) The implementation of the independent curriculum has been running effectively, efficiently and productively. The advantages of the independent learning curriculum are: 1) making the world of education more flexible, which means removing the shackles of the world of education so that it is easier to move, 2) giving students the opportunity to deepen the lessons they take according to their needs, 3) providing a platform for students exploring general knowledge by going into society, 4) students can prepare themselves to face the world of work. An educational institution is said to be of quality if it has the following characteristics: 1) Students demonstrate a high level of mastery of learning tasks (learning tasks) as formulated in educational goals and objectives, including academic learning outcomes expressed in learning achievement. 2) The results of student education are in accordance with the demands of students' needs in their lives, so that apart from knowing something, they are also able to do something functionally for life. 3) Student educational outcomes are in accordance with environmental needs, especially the world of work. Therefore, relevance is an indicator of quality. Thus, good quality benchmarks are not absolute quality benchmarks, but relative benchmarks, namely those that suit customer needs. School quality will be good if the school can provide services that suit the needs of its customers.
KEYWORDS:Independent Curriculum, Principal Leadership, Quality of Education.
REFERENCES1) Aedi, Nur. 2012. Dasar-Dasar Manajemen Pendidikan. Bandung: Pustaka Cendekia Utama.
2) Alma, Buchari & Ratih Hurriyati. 2008. Manajemen Corporate & Strategi Pemasaran Jasa Pendidikan. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.
3) Bastian, Indra. 2001. Akutansi Sektor Publik, Edisi pertama. Yogyakarta: Badan Penerbit Fakultas Ekonomi UGM.
4) Becker G. S. 1993. Human Capital, A theoritical and Empirical Analysis with Speccial reference to Education. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
5) Buku Panduan Pelaksanaan Program Bantuan Operasional Sekolah (BOS).
6) Burhanudin. 2014. Analisis Administrasi Manajemen dan Kepemimpinan Pendidikan. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
7) Danim, Sudarwin. 2004. Motivasi dan Kepemimpinan Efektivitas Kelompok. Jakarta:PT Rineka Cipta.
8) Depag RI.1995. Al Qur’an Terjemah. Surabaya: Surya Cipta Aksara.
9) Engkoswara. 2001. Paradigma Manajemen Pendidikan Menyongsong Ekonomi Daerah. Bandung: Yayasan Amal Keluarga.
10) Fahmi, Irham. 2010. Manajemen kinerja Teori dan Aplikasi. Bandung:CV Alfabeta.
11) Fattah, Nanang. 2000. Ekonomi dan Pembiayaan Pendidikan. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
12) _______. 2003. Konsep Manajemen Berbasis Sekolah (MBS) dan Dewan Sekolah. Bandung: Pustaka Bani Quraisy.
13) _______. 2004. Landasan manajemen pendidikan. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya.
14) Handoko, Hani.1994. Manajemen Personalia dan Sumber Daya Manusia. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
15) Inpres No.5 Tahun 2006 tentang Gerakan Nasional Percepatan Penuntasan Wajib Belajar Pendidikan Dasar Sembilan Tahun dan Pemberantasan Buta Aksara.
16) Jac Fitz-enz, 2000.The ROI of Human Capital, Measuring the Economic Value of Employee Performance, New York, Amacom
17) Komariah, Aan & Cepi Triatna. 2004. Visionary Leadership Menuju Sekolah Efektif. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
18) Mangkunegara, Anwar Prabu. 2002. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.
19) Munawir, Imam. 1993. Asas-Asas Kepemimpinan dalam Islam. Penerbit Usaha Nasional.
20) Nawawi, Hadari. 1981. Administrasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: CV Haji Masa Agung.
21) Nurlaila. 2010. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia. Penerbit: LepKhair.
22) Poerwodarminto, W.J.S. 2009. Kamus Umum Bahasa Indonesia. Jakarta : PN Bakti Pustaka.
23) PP No 48 Tahun 2008 tentang Pendanaan Pendidikan.
24) Prawirosentono, Suryadi. 1999. Kebijakan kinerja Karyawan. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
25) Robbins, Stephen P. 2006. Perilaku Organisasi. Jakarta: Gramedia.
26) Rusyan, A. Tabrani. 2000. Upaya Meningkatkan Budaya Kinerja Guru. Cianjur : CV. Dinamika karya cipta.
27) Sagala, Syaiful. 2008. Administrasi Pendidikan Kontemporer. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.
28) _______. 2009. Manajemen Strategik dalam Peningkatan Mutu Pendidikan. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.
29) Suryadi, Ace.1999. Pendidikan, Investasi SDM dan Pembangunan. Jakarta: PT Balai Pustaka .
30) Suryobroto. 2004. Manajemen Pendidikan di Sekolah. Jakarta: PT Rineka Cipta.
31) Tim Dosen Jurusan Administrasi Pendidikan. 2005. Pengelolaan Pendidikan. Bandung: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.
32) Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.
33) Wahab, Solichin Abdul. 2008. Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik. UMM Press: Malang.
34) Waldo, Dwight. 1979. Public Administration Terj. Slamet Admosudarmo. Jakarta: Aksara Baru.