Page 51 of 464 Diagram 3: Ratio of Male to Female Teachers
– MoEC
2. Over 80 of the madrasah in the sample were private foundation madrasah and
these madrasah had lower levels of BAN SM accreditation and their principals were rated significantly lower in competence on almost all indicators.
3. MoRA supervisors and principals tended to be younger and less experienced than
MoEC counterparts when first appointed as principals or supervisors. More MoRA supervisors than MoEC supervisors were teachers when first appointed as
supervisors.
Supervisor Competency 1.
Supervisors were most competent in the Personality and Social Dimensions 2.
Supervisors were least competent in the Research and Development and Academic Supervision dimensions
Page 52 of 464
3. The level of competence varied on individual competency indicators within each
competency dimension 4.
Supervisors lacked competency in key areas related to their roles – particularly the provision of advice to teachers about effective teaching and learning, use of
laboratories to support learning, developing indicators of effectiveness, analysing and using the results of the supervision and all aspects of research and development.
5. Sex of the supervisor, educational qualifications and location were all significant
factors in the competency of supervisors. 6.
The competency levels of MoRA and MoEC supervisors were similar although MoEC supervisors generally had higher ratings of competence.
Principal Competency 1.
Principal competency was rated lowest on Supervision competency dimension and using ICT for management and teaching and learning purposes.
2. MoEC principals were rated higher than MoRA principals on most dimensions.
3. Female principals rated their competency lower than males on Managerial,
Entrepreneurship and Supervision. 4.
Level of principal qualification and school status public or private were significant variables for Managerial, Entrepreneurship, Supervision and Teaching and Learning
for MoEC principals. The higher the qualification the higher the ratings of competency
5. Public school principals rated their competency higher than private school principals
– especially for MoRA. 6.
Private madrasah principals had lowest ratings of competency. 7.
Level of school accreditation is a significant factor on all dimensions for MoEC principals. The higher the accreditation level, the higher the competency.
8. Elementary and kindergarten principals tend to rate their competency lower than
principals of other school types. 9.
On specific competency indicators rural and remote school principals generally rate their competency lower than urban or semi urban principals.
Professional Development for Principals and Supervisors 1. Most districts do not have well-developed programs to prepare and support
principals to undertake their roles as school leaders.
Page 53 of 464
2. This situation is much worse for supervisors. There is no formal preparation or induction program to prepare them and assist them to undertake their roles and
there is very little effective supervision or professional support for them after they take up the position.
Use and Understanding of Regulations 122007 and 132007 1.
Findings indicated that more work needs to be done by district offices to socialise the regulations.
2. A significant number of district education heads, supervisors and principals did not
have an adequate understanding of the content of the regulations. 3.
District offices did not regularly use the regulations for selection, appointment, promotion, supervision, performance appraisal and professional development
purposes. This was a major concern of supervisors and principals who said that appropriate selection procedures were not always implemented.
4. For supervisors and principals there was a positive between level of understanding of
the regulations and self-ratings of competence on the surveys.
4. Implications of the Study for Alignment between Research and Policy
Application in Indonesia – Issues and Challenges
Apa t f o the i po ta e of stud s fi di gs f o a education policy perspective, the design, implementation and outcomes of the study have important implications for
education research in Indonesia and the alignment of research and policy development in education.
This study was designed to link educational researchers at universities with policy makers within the national education system. How well did it achieve this goal?
There is some evidence that the study at least partially achieved this objective. The methodology used by the study provided an opportunity for six institutions and 150
researchers to participate in a large scale study, receive training and implementation experience in qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis, and engage with
school, district and national education personnel over an extended period.
Two of the most important outcomes of the study were that researchers in universities have increased their research capacity, especially in qualitative methodologies, and have a greater
understanding of the issues facing schools and school leaders in Indonesia.
Page 54 of 464
One of the criticisms made of tertiary educators in Australia, especially in the field of education, and I assume it is the same in Indonesia, is that they do not understand the
reality of the school and the challenges faced by principals and teachers. In Australia there is a fierce and ongoing debate about how well universities prepare teachers and school
leaders.
One important way of responding to this criticism is to provide tertiary educators with more opportunities to engage with and work alongside school-based educators through research
studies, school-based action research and joint program evaluations. The additional benefit of this partnership approach, and MoEC has agreed to this in relation to the present study, is
that researchers can use the findings from studies to improve their personal understanding of current issues in Indonesian education and to publish papers to build their credibility and
standing in the international research community.
The implementation of the study also identified some priorities for capacity development for researchers. In particular, the ability of researchers to collect and analyse rich qualitative
data varied considerably across the participating institutions, despite the guidance and training provided by the study team.
It was apparent that even some highly qualified tertiary educators lacked experience in conducting, recording and analysing data from interviews and focus group discussions. There
was a tendency for qualitative data collectors to accept at face value the response of interviewees and there was a lack of capacity or willingness to ask more probing questions of
interviewees and to help them reflect more deeply on their responses. In some cases the qualitative interviews were conducted like quantitative surveys.
This is an important issue that needs to be addressed by educational research institutions. For education research, observation, questioning, analysing documents and other qualitative
data collection methodologies are crucial for providing rich and credible data about schools, students and principals.
Related to this is the fact that many senior education policy-makers in Indonesia are not prepared to rely on data based on self-perception or the perceptions of others to guide
policy development. They want hard data, by which many of them mean test results.
I believe this is a very problematic approach for them to take. The self-perceptions and perceptions of colleagues, gathered through valid and reliable quantitative and qualitative
data collection methods, provide very important information for policy-makersabout the development and support needs of school personnel and school. Observation in the field by
trained personnel is essential for understanding schools and school education. If the education system relies only on cognitive testing to guide policy making it will have a
consequent effect on the relevance and quality of the resulting policies. For this reason it
