Keefektifan manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA (Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing) di Kota Yogyakarta

Ekaresta Prihardjati Saputro; Suharsimi Arikunto

doi:10.21831/amp.v6i1.8066

Keefektifan manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA (Bahasa Indonesia bagi Penutur Asing) di Kota Yogyakarta

Ekaresta Prihardjati Saputro, Prodi Manajemen Pendidikan PPs UNY, Indonesia
Suharsimi Arikunto, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

10.21831/amp.v6i1.8066

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA di lembaga BIPA Kota Yogyakarta. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian evaluasi dengan pendekatan kombinasi kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Model evaluasi yang digunakan adalah discrepancy evaluation model. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa implementasi manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA (1) aspek perencanaan program mencapai 93%, kesenjangan 7% dengan kriteria “sangat efektif”; (2) aspek pengorganisasian program mencapai 99%, kesenjangan 1% dengan kriteria “sangat efektif”; (3) aspek pelaksanaan program mencapai 93%, kesenjangan 7% dengan kriteria “sangat efektif”; (4) aspek pengawasan program mencapai 86%, kesenjangan 14% dengan kriteria “sangat efektif”. Secara keseluruhan keefektifan manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA memiliki kriteria “sangat efektif”, dengan capaian 93% kesenjangan 7%.

Kata kunci: evaluasi; keefektifan; manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF BIPA (INDONESIAN LANGUAGE FOR FOREIGNER) PROGRAM MANAGEMENT IN YOGYAKARTA

Abstract

This study is aimed to evaluate the management of BIPA learning program of BIPA course in Yogyakarta. This research is an evaluation research with the combination of qualitative and quantitative approach. Evaluation model used in this research is discrepancy evaluation model. The result of the study shows that the implementation of the management of BIPA learning program (1) the planning program is 93% performance, 7% discrepancy with criteria “very effective”; (2) the organizing aspect is 99% performance and 1% discrepancy with criteria “very effective”; (3) the implementing aspect is 93% performance and 7% discrepancy with criteria “very effective”; (4) the monitoring aspect is 86% performance 14% discrepancy with criteria “very effective”. After all the effectiveness of the management of BIPA learning program have “very effective” criteria, with 93% performance and 7% discrepancy.

Keywords: evaluation, the effectiveness, BIPA program management

Keywords

evaluasi; keefektifan; manajemen program pembelajaran BIPA

Full Text:

PDF

References

Arikunto, S. & Jabar, C.S. (2009). Evaluasi program pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.

Alqahtani, A .A & Alajmi, S.S. (2013). Psychological stress in language learning: A contempory view beyond teaching methods learning. Journal of education and practice, 6(5), 168-171

Baah, K. D & Tawiyah, K. A. (2011). Influencing organisational behaviour through the application of learning theories. European Journal of Business and Management,3(11), 10-18.

Borich, G.D. (2007). Effective teaching method. (6th ed). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc. Pearson Education Upper Saddler river.

Buscato, D. (1997). Proposed framework for a whole language program at the tertiary level. Guidelines: a periodical classroom language teachers, 19(2), 1-8.

Combs, P. H. & Ahmed, M. (1985). Memerangi kemiskinan di pedesaan melalui pendidikan non-formal. (Terjemahan dari Yayasan Ilmu-ilmu Sosial). Jakarta: CV. Rajawali.

Daft, R. L. (1991). Management. (2th ed). New York: Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Diamantatou, C. & Hawes, T. (2016). Foreign language learning, motivation and the market economy. Journal of education and learning, 5(1), 95- 103.

Gurses, M.O. & Adiguzel, O.C. (2013). The effect of strategy instruction based on the cognitive academic language learning approach over reading comprehension and strategy use. Journal of education and learning, 2(5), 55-68.

Keputusan Menteri. (2004). Keputusan Menteri Tenaga Kerja dan Transmigrasi RI Nomor 20, Tahun 2004, tentang Tata Cara Memperoleh Izin Mempekerjakan Tenaga Kerja Asing.

Kroll, J. & Sunderman, G. (2003). Cognitive process in second language learners and bilinguals: The development of lexical and conceptual representations. The hanbook of second language acquisition, 5, 104-129.

Madya, S. (2013). Metodologi pengajaran bahasa: dari era prametode sampai era pascametode. UNY Press.

Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks. SAGE Publications.

Saeed, S. & Zyngier, D. (2012). How motivation influences Student engagement: A qualitative case study.Journal of education and learning, 1(2), 252-267.

Suyitno, I. (2007). Pengembangan bahasa ajar bahasa Indonesia untuk penutur asing (BIPA) berdasarkan hasil analisis kebutuhan belajar. Wacana, 9, 62-78.

Suwarto, A. & Ishartiwi. (2013). Persepsi warga sekolah tentang program percepatan belajar di SMP Pangudi Luhur Domenico Savio Semarang. Jurnal Akuntabilitas Manajemen Pendidikan, 1(1). Retrieved from http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jamp/article/view/2308/1913

Toci, A. (2014). The importance of age in foreign language learning. Journal of education and practice, 5(2), 118-122.

Worthen, B.R. & Sanders, J.R. (1981). Educational evaluation: Theory & Practise. Belmont California: Wordsworth Publishing Company Inc.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/amp.v6i1.8066