School-based management in marginal areas: Satisfying the political context and student needs

Relationship between the upper stream factors

The findings show that direct and indirect relationships between PCs of education officials, PL, TP, staff and parental participation are important to produce SE and SA. In this context, the focus is in the issue of PL and TP. PL mediates the indirect relationship between PC and SE and SA, whereas TP becomes a mediator of indirect relationships of all the upper stream (PC, PL and CP) with SE and SA (Moradi et al., 2012). For PL, in the previous research (Hallinger, 2011; Hallinger and Heck, 2010), it can be seen that there are several concepts indicating that PL could have a significant impact on student learning, including SA. Firstly, Hallinger’s synthesis in previous decades of research shows that leadership has direct and indirect relationships with student outcomes. Secondly, it was found that leadership drives (mediated effects) changes in improvement capacity. Under certain conditions, there is a reciprocal relationship in the elements of school’s capacity for academic improvement, namely achievement and school growth. The important thing from this finding is that studies for school improvement suggest to strengthen the collaborative leadership of school principals and TP. More in this sharing shows that principals always encourage staff involvement in professional development programs and use their skills for the benefit of school development. In addition, it is clear from the analysis that the principals studied have skills in resolving internal crises, show flexible and responsive administrative characteristics and support teacher recommendations for school improvement.

In the context of political policy, the role of the principal’s leadership and strategy is shown in the formulation of the school’s vision and mission and human resource management as an indicator of implementing SBM effectively in secondary schools (Allen et al., 2018b; Vally and Daud, 2015). The principal’s role is reflected in his leadership as a social institution that plays an important role in people’s lives. Schools are transformers of the mind and also signs of the culture and development of a country. Therefore, all education problems are the main focus and interest of all parties because without an effective education system, the country will collapse. Being an important person at school, the principal functions as an administrator, manager and leader. An effective headmaster who is responsible of the administration involves a group of employees in a way that is accepted and valued. There are various leadership theories, and the most important thing in the implementation of SBM is the charismatic theory to guide in the initial stages (Cheng, 1995). Characteristics of leaders are personalities that are attractive and liked. Second, human relations theory presents the characteristics of a leader who gives serious attention to the task and to collaborate with his people and not be autocratic (Cheng, 1995; Owens, 2005). Third, theories X and Y in short, if the principal considers his subordinates to be lazy and irresponsible then they will be, and vice versa if the principal considers his subordinates to be diligent and responsible then they will become so. Finally, situational leadership theory states that different conditions require different leadership styles and intelligence to understand the culture, the environment and the local community.

The results above indicate that in the upper stream, the role of school leaders and TP becomes very important as an intermediary between the indirect relationship of PC with SE and SA. This indicates that the roles of the principal and teachers are equal. The theory of SBM democracy states that the principal is always open, accessible and eager to communicate, friendly and always able to share experiences for school improvement. Furthermore, he needs to always appreciate and lead discussions or ideas presented by the teachers and consider arrangements proposed by staff to be more effective in management. In this theory, the principal also needs to participate in school activities or programs to show the team spirit. He must be someone who is always able to provide and encourage teachers and other staff to contribute energy and ideas from time to time. The theory of democracy is expressed in the laissez-faire theory when there are no restrictions or no control. The laissez-faire leadership theory gives teachers a great deal of autonomy, where they have a very large role and space to make decisions. But in conditions that are crucial and important for the future, the principal must demonstrate transformational leadership (Hoy and Miskel, 2005; Owens, 2005). Effective school leaders always try to increase both material and intangible capacity through their decisions, strategies and actions (Dinham and Crowther, 2011).

Green (2015) in his research states that within the framework of school improvement, the actions of school leaders are based on school work in certain communities. Exemplified in urban areas, leaders develop a broad vision for schools and society, positioning schools as important community assets that change culture and fight for the progress of society and schools. To support school reformation and improvement policies, Warren (2005) describes strong collaboration between urban schools and community-based organizations. In his case study, Warren argues that each management model seeks to develop new, stronger and more collaborative relationships with community members, parents and teachers. In building this collaborative bond, Warren’s findings show that community organizations are important for developing social capital between schools and communities, and the problem of unequal power dynamics must be addressed when community groups work together with schools.

Students’ needs in SBM implementation

SBM also means that management and decision-making in the curriculum, staffing, financial planning and budgeting are made at the school level (David, 1989). It is believed that this change will increase school productivity and effectiveness, as well as improve SA (Odden and Wohlstetler, 1995). In addition, the influence, role and accountability of principals and teachers will improve school management and administration and make them better than traditional methods. However, this would mean additional workload, and even risk management and accountability administration for principals and teachers. In line with this, in terms of implementation, teachers are encouraged to design curricula, choose teaching and learning materials and actively participate in planning and school decision-making (Dunlop and Goldman, 1991), all of which are directed towards meeting students’ needs.

SBM is more successful in Indonesia than in other developed countries because the implementation of SBM directly focuses on the needs of students. In this research, the needs of students are represented in significance of covariance relationship between SE and SA. However, this success cannot be compared to schools in countries such as Malaysia (Vally and Daud, 2015) which are highly dependent on the internal conditions of their schools. In a previous study in Malaysia, Zarina (2003), using the school management initiative model, found a significant relationship between the factors of location and index and the type of SE and quality of administrators. He also found the principal’s management strategy towards an effective SBM, namely a high management style that involves a positive relationship between teachers, parents and the community. The involvement of parents is increasingly meaningful in the formulation of the school’s vision and mission (Quesel et al., 2017). Meanwhile, the relationship of CP to impact on SA is done through the central role of the teacher.

Teacher involvement in SBM and management style is at a good level. In reviewing the organization’s tendency towards SBM, Zarina (2003) emphasizes the seven characteristics of effective school management, that is, setting out missions, customary practices, management of different role strategies, human relations, quality of management and effectiveness index. The research findings indicate a significant relationship between factor location and effectiveness index, not directly oriented towards the teaching process and student needs, and a significant relationship between facilities and practices and management strategies. This implies that the impact of the success of SBM only reaches the level of middle management, while the main issue is the needs of students. Recommendations from the World Bank survey in Indonesia (2013) confirm that the success of SBM has not yet revealed the increasing capacity of school principals, teachers and school committee members, the increasing ability of school staff to make managerial and teaching changes and the development of the education office ability to support the fulfilment of students’ needs (The World Bank, 2013).

SBM in secondary schools that are oriented towards meeting the needs of students cannot only be done by the principal or teachers. The school must involve many stakeholders, both from inside and outside the school as teachers cannot just work alone. Research by Kraft et al. (2015) showed that most teachers in their research acknowledged that their individual efforts in accepting the challenges of their work and expanded responsibilities were not sufficient in assuring the success of their students’ achievement. Other studies have shown that students’ success cannot only be the responsibility of the school. Parents contribute greatly to the success of student education (Campbell, 2011; Desforgers and Abouchaar, 2003; Loveless, 2003). Students’ success is even contributed by the role of family and relatives. For students in primary school or students who have special needs, the role of relatives is needed to help students become successful in their study. In traditional societies, with low and poor economical background, students’ success is also contributed by relatives, neighbours and the donor community. In secondary schools, students’ success is influenced by the collaboration of the school with the industrial world.

The second key in supporting the effectiveness of schools that are oriented towards meeting the needs of students is the central role of teachers in facilitating the implementation of an effective learning process. In Indonesia, the main tasks of teachers are stipulated in the law (4/2005). As explained in detail in the law, the position of teachers is as educators in schools and that teachers’ main tasks are teaching, training, guiding and evaluating student learning outcomes. In the era of autonomy with demands for increasingly competitive learning outcomes in global competition, school governance is not enough to be only done by the principal and/or teachers. Leadership, management systems and collective work and partnerships are increasingly becoming the demands. Reformation in strengthening the autonomy of schools aims to make the system more flexible and responsive to the needs of the social environment (Dubs, 2005; Hangartner and Svaton, 2013; Huber, 2011). An administrator needs to find places and ways to communicate effectively with individuals and community organizations to gain more information on the ones that are interested in schools. Only then can they discuss the needs of the school and community together to meet the needs of students.

It must be understood by school administrators that the relationship between the school and the community will never be complete and there is a possibility of trouble. The problem that often arises in the relationship between schools and the community is the complexity of the components in the community. A factor that often triggers problems is the community norms that are often different from professional norms (school). In addition, the second factor that often causes problems with the relationship between schools and the community is the community’s efforts to evaluate what is happening in the school and want the school as an initiator in everything that is needed by the community. Often the community also demands to be further involved in the decision-making process at school. In response to this, an administrator should not automatically fulfil all the desires of the community. He needs to find a way to coordinate all of these to be aligned with their hopes of improving and developing the vision and mission to achieve school academic achievement (Allen et al., 2018a; Gamage, 2008). So, to show the orientation to the academic needs of students, there are four markers of factors that influence the school autonomy through SBM. First, it is measured based on the number of final decisions made by the school in relation to the school managerial field. The decision, as reported by the school principal, was made without the intervention of stakeholders outside the school, such as from the district, subdistrict, province or country. Second, the influence of the principal on school managerial affairs: measured by the level of influence on the managerial affairs of the school, including the development of vision, goals and school work plans, procurement of goods and materials and school facility planning. Third, the teacher’s influence in teaching: measured based on activities such as syllabus development, teaching methods and materials, student grouping and selection of exam materials. Finally, parent and community suggestions: measured based on the number of school affairs that get suggestions from parents.