Article Sidebar

Submitted
September 22, 2026
Published
September 29, 2026
Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 13 Download : 12

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study examines the factors causing implementation problems of the school-based learning community policy in private vocational high schools (SMK) in DKI Jakarta and formulates strategies to address them. The 2023 survey from the Center for Educational Standards and Policy identifies SMK as the level with the greatest challenge in DKI Jakarta, with 35.7% of schools yet to establish learning communities and 35.3% of teachers not actively participating. The study employs a qualitative approach through comparative case studies at SMKS Kharismawita 2, categorized as ineffective or not yet implementing learning communities according to the guideline, and SMK Al Falah, categorized as effective or already implementing learning communities according to the guideline. Data collection involved in-depth interviews with eight informants across levels from the Ministry of Education, BPMP DKI Jakarta, the Provincial Education Office, and the two case schools, supplemented by direct observation and document review. The analysis applies Van Meter and Van Horn's (1975) framework with six implementation variables. The findings show that the implementation problems result from a combination of three factor layers. The first layer concerns systemic failure production from policy standards and inter-organizational communication. The second layer concerns systemic deficit reinforcement from resources and socio-economic-political conditions. The third layer concerns the interaction of implementing agency characteristics and implementor disposition that functions as a mediator determining local compensation for the failures of the first and second layers. The distinguishing factor is not the structural conditions of the first two layers, but the principal's leadership capacity with internal accountability mechanisms at the third layer. The study recommends a model of implementation strategy designed for four levels of actors: the Ministry and its technical units, the Provincial Education Office of DKI Jakarta, schools, and the school-organizing foundations.

Keywords

learning community Professional Learning Community private vocational schools Van Meter and Van Horn policy implementation

Article Details

References

  1. Brown, B. D., Horn, R. S., & King, G. (2018). The effective implementation of professional learning communities. Alabama Journal of Educational Leadership, 5, 53–59.
  2. Bryson, J. M. (2004). What to do when stakeholders matter: Stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Management Review, 6(1), 21–53.
  3. Chatra, E., Sari, N., & Putra, A. (2023). Metodologi penelitian kualitatif: Praktik penelitian sosial. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi.
  4. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership, 61(8), 6–11.
  5. Graham, P. (2007). Improving teacher effectiveness through structured collaboration: A case study of a professional learning community. RMLE Online, 31(1), 1–17.
  6. Hord, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
  7. Jalaludin, J., Latip, A., & Ismail, S. (2022). Tinjauan literatur sistematis terhadap implementasi komunitas pembelajaran profesional. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 11(3), 432–445.
  8. Jaya, I. M. L. M. (2020). Metode penelitian kuantitatif dan kualitatif: Teori, penerapan, dan riset nyata. Yogyakarta: Anak Hebat Indonesia.
  9. Kemendikbudristek. (2023). Pedoman optimalisasi komunitas belajar. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Guru dan Tenaga Kependidikan.
  10. Lujan, N., & Day, B. (2010). Professional learning communities: Overcoming the roadblocks. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 76(2), 10–17.
  11. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1992). Analisis data kualitatif: Buku sumber tentang metode-metode baru (T. R. Rohidi, Penerj.). Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia Press.
  12. Mindich, D., & Lieberman, A. (2012). Building a learning community: A tale of two schools. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
  13. Nurhadi, A., & Purnama, S. (2025). Implementasi komunitas belajar di sekolah dasar: Tantangan dan praktik baik. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar, 16(1), 23–38.
  14. Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and learning: Critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35(1), 202–216.
  15. Rizqi, A., & Syafika, M. (2024). Kondisi pendukung komunitas belajar profesional di Indonesia: Tinjauan literatur. Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan, 19(2), 145–162.
  16. Sanchez, Y. (2018). The role of administrative support in sustaining professional learning communities. International Journal of Educational Leadership, 13(2), 88–104.
  17. Schuck, S., Aubusson, P., Kearney, M., & Burden, K. (2013). Mobilising teacher education: A study of a professional learning community. Teacher Development, 17(1), 1–18.
  18. Servage, L. (2008). Critical and transformative practices in professional learning communities. Teacher Education Quarterly, 35(1), 63–77.
  19. Sunaengsih, C., Anggarani, M., Amalia, M., Nurfatimah, S., & Nurzakiyah, C. (2020). Principal leadership in the implementation of effective school management. Mimbar Sekolah Dasar, 7(1), 35–45.
  20. Teague, G. M., & Anfara, V. A. (2012). Professional learning communities create sustainable change through collaboration. Middle School Journal, 44(2), 58–64.
  21. Van Meter, D. S., & Van Horn, C. E. (1975). The policy implementation process: A conceptual framework. Administration & Society, 6(4), 445–488.
  22. Watson, C. (2014). Effective professional learning communities? The possibilities for teachers as agents of change in schools. British Educational Research Journal, 40(1), 18–29.
  23. Wood, D. R. (2007). Professional learning communities: Teachers, knowledge, and knowing. Theory Into Practice, 46(4), 281–290.