An Evaluation of the Utilization of Special Allocation Funds in the Field of Vocational Secondary Education

Authors

  • Hermansyah Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia, Universitas Ibnu Sina Batam, Indonesia. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61841/n6229y13

Keywords:

CIPP, evaluation, special allocation funds, utilization

Abstract

This study aims to provide information on how well the utilization of special allocation funds (DAK) in vocational secondary education in terms of the context, input, process, and product components.This study is an evaluation study using the research model of CIPP (context, input, process, product) developed by Stufflebeam. The sample consists of 181 respondents from five vocational high schools of national priority. The data were collected using questionnaires and through observations, interviews, and documentation. The instrument validation uses expert judgment, Aiken v index, and the product-moment correlation test for the questionnaire. The reliability testing uses the Alpha Cronbach formula. Data were analyzed using quantitative descriptive analysis methods.The results of the study show that the utilization of DAK in the vocational secondary education sector of the components of: (1) context, describing the utilization of DAK in the vocational secondary education sector in:

(a) 10 SMKN Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 95%; (b) State Vocational School in Padang in a very good category with a percentage of 95.7%; (c) SMKN 2 Sawahlunto in the very good category with a percentage of 67.4%; (d) SMK 9 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 52.5%; (e) SMK 4 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 65.3%; 2) inputs: (a) SMK 10 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 45%; PP Negeri Padang State Vocational School in the excellent category with a percentage of 82.5%; (c) SMKN 2 Sawahlunto in the very good category with a percentage of 52.3%; (d) SMK 9 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 42.5%; (e) SMK 4 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 44.1%; 3) process: a) SMK 10 Padang in the good category with a percentage of 50%; (b) State Vocational School in Padang in the very good category with a percentage of 86.9%; (c) SMKN 2 Sawahlunto in the very good category with a percentage of 47.8%; (d) SMK 9 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 40%; (e) SMK 4 Padang in the good category with a percentage of 50%; 4) product: (a) 10 SMKN Padang in the good category with a percentage of 50%; (b) State Vocational School in Padang in the very good category with a percentage of 47.7%; (c) SMKN 2 Sawahlunto in the good category with a percentage of 54.3%; (d) SMK 9 Padang in the excellent category with a percentage of 32.5%; (e) SMK 4 Padang in the good category with a percentage of 44.1%.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. BPS,“JumlahSMAdanSMK,”2016.[Online].Available:https://www.bps.go.id/statictable/2015/09/14/183 8/jumlah-sekolah-guru-dan-murid-sekolah-menengah-kejuruan-smk-di-bawah-kementrian-pendidikan- dan-kebudayaan-menurut-provinsi-tahun-ajaran-2011-2012-2015-2016.html.

2. K. Kemendikbud, “Ringkasan Eksekutif Capaian Kinerja Badan Akreditasi Nasional Sekolah / Madrasah ( Ban-S / M ) Periode 2012-2017,” no. 21, 2017.

3. A. Heikkinen, “Models, Paradigms or Cultures of Vocational Education,” Eur. J. Vocat. Train., no. 32, 2004.

4. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia Nomor 19 Tahun 2005, STANDAR NASIONAL PENDIDIKAN. Indonesia, 2005, pp. 1–95.

5. Permendikbud no 8 Tahun 2018, Petunjuk Operasional Dana Alokasi Khusus Fisik Bidang Pendidikan. 2018, pp. 1689–1699.

6. P. M. P. dan K. R. I. N. 3 T. 2019, Petunjuk Teknis Bantuan Operasional Sekolah Reguler. 2019, pp. 1– 116.

7. Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 5 Tahun 2018, Petunjuk Teknis Dana Alokasi Khusus Fisik. 2018, pp. 1–10.

8. J. Tedjawati, “Kajian Pelaksanaan Dana Alokasi Khusus Bidang Pendidikan,” J. Pendidik. dan Kebud., vol. 17, no. 5, p. 608, 2011, doi: 10.24832/jpnk.v17i5.53.

9. E. Newman, “Budgeting and Fund Allocation in Higher Education in Ghana,” J. Educ. Vocat. Res., vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 275–286, 2013, doi: 10.22610/jevr.v4i9.131.

10. D. j. Stufflebeam, Evaluation models : viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation: Localizador. 2000.

11. J. Yoo, “The impact of conflict among political actors on implementing South Korea’s new teacher evaluation policy: A case study with implications for education policymaking,” Stud. Educ. Eval., vol. 61, no. November 2018, pp. 94–104, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.03.006.

12. by L. Daniel Stufflebeam and A. J. Shinkfield San Francisco, “Evaluation Theory, Models & Aplications,” B. Rev. J. Multidiscip. Eval., vol. 6, no. 11, pp. 2007–2009, 2009.

13. Peraturan Menteri Keunagan Republik Indonesia Nomor 112 /PMK.07/2017, Pengelolaan Transfer ke Daerah dan Dana Desa. 2017, pp. 1–88.

14. A. Kozakai, K. Ono, T. Nomura, N. Takano, and T. Shibahara, “Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

, Medicine , and Pathology Usefulness of objective evaluations by fl uorescence visualization device for di ff erentiating between super fi cial oral squamous cell carcinoma and oral lichen planus,” J. Oral Maxillofac. Surgery, Med. Pathol., vol. 32, no. September, pp. 0–1, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.ajoms.2019.09.010.

15. F. R. Johnson, J. C. Yang, and S. D. Reed, “The Internal Validity of Discrete Choice Experiment Data: A Testing Tool for Quantitative Assessments,” Value Heal., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 157–160, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.07.876.

16. L. R. Aiken, “valid-invalid) validity-moderate validity).,” no. V, pp. 955–959, 1980.

17. F. N. Kerlinger, “Kerlinger (1986) Foundations of Behavioral Research (3rd edition).pdf.” 1986.

Downloads

Published

30.06.2020

Issue

Vol. 24 No. 6 (2020): 24 (6) 2020

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

You are free to:

  1. Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
  2. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
  3. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms:

  1. Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
  2. No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Notices:

You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .

No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.

How to Cite

Hermansyah. (2020). An Evaluation of the Utilization of Special Allocation Funds in the Field of Vocational Secondary Education. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(6), 1666-1674. https://doi.org/10.61841/n6229y13