Abstract

Sistem Penjaminan Mutu Internal (SPMI) or the Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) in three private universities in Samarinda has been implemented using Perencanaan, Pelaksanaan, Evaluasi, Pengendalian, dan Peningkatan (PPEPP) or Planning, Implementation, Evaluation, Control, and Improvement, including evaluating control and improvement of Higher Education standards. This study was conducted with the following objectives. First, it described the implementation of IQA in evaluating control and improvement of higher education standards in three private universities in Samarinda. Second , it explained the inhibiting factors and proposed possible solutions. The data of this qualitative study were collected through (1) in-depth interviews, (2) observations, (3) photographs, and (4) documentation. The data went through interactive transformation data analysis proposed by Miles and Huberman (1994), including data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion. The validity of the data included data credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Findings confirmed the followings. First , the implementation of IQA was not yet optimal in evaluating control and improvement of the higher education standards as mentioned in the ministerial regulation of the Research, Technology, and Higher Education Ministry Number 62 of 2016 Article 5 Paragraph 1 and Number 44 of 2015 concerning the National Higher Education Standards. Second , the inhibiting factor was related to the inadequate management of the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) and follow-up plans for internal quality audits, outputs, and achievements. The solutions proposed in this study included conducting follow-up plans and improving the learning process SOP, the lesson planning SOP, class schedule, and learning outcomes. Essential documents should always be made available, including semester program documents, Satuan Acara Perkuliahan (SAP) or Course Units, and lecturing schedules to achieve sustainable quality improvement in three private universities in Samarinda.

Highlights

  • Sistem Penjaminan Mutu Perguruan Tinggi (SPM-PT) or Quality Assurance (IQA)1 of higher education is regulated in Law Number 20 of 2003 concerning the National Education System, Law Number 12 of 2012 concerning Higher Education, Ministerial Regulation of the Research, Technology, and Higher Education Ministry Number 44 of 2015 concerning National Higher Education Standards, Number 32 of 2016 concerning Accreditation of Study Programs and Universities, and Number 62 of 2016 concerning the Higher Education Quality Assurance System

  • As mentioned in Article 5 Paragraph (1), Internal Quality Assurance (IQA) for the national education system in Indonesia consists of a cycle with five main steps: determination, implementation, evaluation, control, and

  • IQA implementation at Universitas Widyagama Mahakam Samarinda has been inadequate in follow-up assessment based on monitoring and evaluating the implementation of learning processes in the study programs based on the standards of learning management

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Sistem Penjaminan Mutu Perguruan Tinggi (SPM-PT) or Quality Assurance (IQA) of higher education is regulated in Law Number 20 of 2003 concerning the National Education System, Law Number 12 of 2012 concerning Higher Education, Ministerial Regulation of the Research, Technology, and Higher Education Ministry Number 44 of 2015 concerning National Higher Education Standards, Number 32 of 2016 concerning Accreditation of Study Programs and Universities, and Number 62 of 2016 concerning the Higher Education Quality Assurance System. 8(1), June 2021 e-ISSN: 2549-8673, p-ISSN : 2302 – 884X www.erudio.ub.ac.id the Ministerial Regulation of the Research, Technology, and Higher Education Ministry Number 62 of 2016, which regulates IQA for higher education. Gaps in implementing IQA in the higher education institutions in Samarinda are regarded as reasonable considering that some universities still focus on physical improvement while others are at self-actualization, which allows them to determine their special programs. The diversity in implementing models of IQA might be affected by different quality at the university level and different university leaders’ awareness of quality

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call