EVALUATION OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTEGRATIVE THEMATIC LEARNING: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH APPROACH PHENOMENOLOGY

This research aims at evaluating the implementation of integrative thematic learning. This research is an evaluation of the CIPP model with a qualitative approach phenomenology. Data were collected through observations, in-depth interviews, and documentation. The informants in the study were principals, teachers, and students. Data were analyzed using a qualitative method that is descriptive and critical. The results show that the implementation of integrative thematic learning in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School Yogyakarta has been carried out quite well, both in planning, implementation, and assessment of processes and learning outcomes. The implementation is success because it has been supported by excellent teachers' competence and adequate facilities and infrastructure supporting the learning process. Besides, teachers also have the motivation and spirit of learning. The implementation of integrative thematic learning of curriculum 2013 has a positive impact on student learning outcomes from both aspects of knowledge, attitude, and skills. From the knowledge aspect, the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013 can deliver the best value to the national exam in the top 10 of Yogyakarta. The attitude aspect of the student spirit in learning shows an increase in students' confidence. As for the skill aspect, students become creative and innovative in both thinking and working. However, constraints are still found: handbooks for students have not been distributed equally by the government, and the lack of teachers' understanding of the way of the subject complaint that corresponds to the sub-theme.


Introduction
National education is one of the development sectors that has a vision of the realization of education system as a strong social institution, to empower all Indonesians to develop into high-quality human that is intelligent and merciful to God the Almighty, noble, healthy, knowledgeable, capable, creative, independent, democratic, and responsible (Murtikasari, 2013, p. 107).
In realizing quality human beings, the Indonesian government is continually striving to improve the quality of education by implementing policies through curriculum 2013. The curriculum 2013 has been applied in response to today's demands and challenges, both internal and external challenges. The internal challenges are related to the gold generation estimated in 2020-2035 as a demographic bonus. External challenges are related to the current existence of globalization and Indonesian's participation in the international study of Trens in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), which are successful (Suharto, 2013, pp. 66-67).
With the changing of the curriculum, it then impacted the learning system, in elementary schools, such as the teaching system implemented in integrative thematic. Thematic learning is essentially not a new thing in the Indonesian education world. In Curriculum 2006 (Kurikulum Tingkat Satuan Pendidikan or KTSP), thematic learning has already been applied. Only the system and rules of implementation are different. In Curriculum 2006 (KTSP), thematic learning is only implemented in low-grade, with systems and rules, and teachers are required to design their thematic learning device, both in the syllabus, lesson plan, and theme mapping. In practice, some teachers are confused about implementing thematic learning, so the thematic learning in KTSP has not been done correctly, and tends to be implemented in fragmentary. It has been strengthened by some research results, one of which is by Aryasi (Kristiantari, 2014, p. 463) which reveals that in carrying out the-matic learning in KTSP, teachers have not been able to translate the lesson plan and syllabus in the field. Thus, learning is both partial and conventional. Similarly, in judgment, the gems still do lessons instead of each theme.
The problem arises from the implementation of the curriculum 2013 to answer the difficulties of teachers in the field by implementing integrative thematic learning. Integrative thematic learning is carried out at all levels, both low and high class with the system and the rules that the teachers no longer develop their own learning devices as found in the curriculum 2006 (KTSP), but they need a complete handbook with learning tools, from planning to evaluation. It is expected that integrative thematic learning in the curriculum 2013 can be implemented with well.
However, in reality, the teacher is still having trouble. It is because, in the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013, teachers are required to apply active learning with scientific approaches and authentic assessments, while teachers are accustomed to implementing conventional learning and give the students score in the form of numbers.
The curriculum 2013 has been tested on several elementary schools throughout Indonesia, especially in the Special Region of Yogyakarta. There are about 52 elementary schools in both public and private schools, one of them is Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School in Yogyakarta City. Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School implemented the curriculum 2013 since the curriculum's enactment until now. In order to see the success in its implementation, an evaluation in the framework of improvement is critical to be carried out.
Therefore, this research is important to provide information on the implementtation of the integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013, which includes; (1) context, (2) input, (3) the learning process, (4) output of learning. In addition to these four aspects, this research also discusses the 97 factors supporting and inhibiting the implementation of integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013 in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School, Yogyakarta City.

Curriculum Evaluation
Stufflebeam views evaluation as "a process of delineating, obtaining, and providing useful information for judging decision alternatives" (Oliva, 1992, p. 489). In addition, many experts have essentially developed a curriculum evaluation. According to Suharsimi (2007, p. 24), there are approximately seven models of evaluation expressed by the six experts, namely: (a) Tyler with a purpose-oriented model, (b) Scriven with a freelance model of purpose, (c) Stake with countenance, (d) Michael Scriven with formative-summative model, (e) the CSE-UCLA (CSE stands for the Center for the Study of Evaluation, and UCLA stands for the University of California in Los Angeles), (f) Stufflebeam and friends with CIPP, and (g) Malcolm Provus with gaps.
From those evaluation models, this study uses a CIPP evaluation model proposed by Stufflebeam. The CIPP model has been chosen on the grounds. This model is a more comprehensive, easy, and practical model. The CIPP model is the most widelyknown and applied model by evaluators. The CIPP model used in the study was developed by Stufflebeam and friends in 1967 at Ohio State University. The evaluation of the CIPP model consists of four aspects, namely, context, inputs, processes, and products (Darodjat & Wahyudhiana, 2015, p. 5).
Context evaluation is emphasized on the grounds as a basis for determining the objectives of the curriculum, whether it is general, institutional, curricular, or general instructional purposes. Input evaluation has been emphasized on resources (teachers, media, materials, and modules), and the use of strategies (learning strategies, learning experiences, and learning environments) to achieve goals. The evaluation process is aimed at determining the weaknesses of the plan and implementation of the curriculum, as well as at acquiring the information of various program activities as an ingredient in making decisions, such as improvement, enhancement, and development of the curriculum. Product evaluation aims to determine the success of the program in the form of learning outcomes, both attitudes, knowledge, and skills. These elements can be illustrated in the chart, as presented in Figure 1.
Furthermore, each of these elements is the Context, Inputs, Processes, and Products that have the criteria as the relevant standards, as follows. On the Context element, in the vision, mission, and program developed, there is conformity to implement the integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013. On the Input element, the availability of resources, such as competent teachers in the field, is adequate to succeed in the learning. Facilities and infrastructure, Figure 1. CIPP Evaluation Model such as learning media, learning environment, and learning resources, are adequate. Besides, the learning process is actively and pleasantly conducted by using scientific approaches, promoting character education, and using authentic judgment. On the Product element, students are not only proficient in knowledge but also good both in morals and skills, so that the graduates produced are not only intelligent intellectually, but also morally to avoid immoral action.
One of the ten models, which deals with an integrative thematic learning model, is the webbed model. The webbed model is an integrated learning model that uses a thematic approach. Thematic approach, according to Hidayah (2015, p. 37), is a learning approach that integrates several competencies into certain subjects. Ministry of Education and Culture also conveys that integrative thematic learning is a learning approach that combines various competencies from learning content based on the theme in which the system allows students to learn in active, holistic, meaningful, and authentic ways (Julianti & Mawardi, 2018, p. 206). From those two opinions, it can be inferred that integrative thematic learning is a Webb model learning approach that integrates the various competencies of learning content in an active teaching system, which is holistic, meaningful, and authentic.
Integrative thematic learning has several foundations, one of which is a philo-sophical foundation. It is the first foundation as a design built up in integrative thematic learning supported by three traditions of philosophy, namely: progressivism, constructivism, and humanism.

Progressivism Stream
Progressivism stream has the principle that learning is centered on learners, that emphasizes creativity and activity, and are problem-solving (Assegaf, 2011, p. 20). It goes from thinking that education should be "life" itself, not preparation for life, learning should be directly associated with the child's interest, learning through problem-solving should be precedence from the strict repetition of the subject, the role of the teacher is not to demonstrate, but to guide, the school must enhance the cooperation efforts, not competing, only the treatment that has democratized can actually improve the role of the idea, and child's personality has been freely expressed, and it is necessary to pay attention to the correct growth conditions (Assegaf, 2011, pp. 204-205). This flow rejects the authoritarian learning systems, book-oriented texts, memorization, learning that is limited in class so that the learners are isolated to real life, and promoting punishment in building student discipline. Based on those principles of learning, an educator from the progressivism stream, in this case, a teacher, should have some views on education, including (1) the curriculum is developed tailored to the needs of learners, (2) learners basically have a learning interest, if not frustrated by adults, (3) the task of the teacher is not as a class ruler, but rather as a mentor and advisor for students' learning, (4) learning is conducted not only in classrooms but also outside classes, (5) learning activities should focus on problem solving, (6) the school climate is created democratically and cooperatively (Indriani, 2019, p. 41).

Constructivism Stream
The constructivism stream has the view that knowledge is not something that is already finished but continues to process. In the learning system, learners give a direct experience of conjugant knowledge gained through contextual study (Majid, 2014, pp. 87-88).

Humanism Stream
This stream looks at learners as a unique creature. The purpose of learning, according to humanistic theory, is human humanizing. The task of educators is to help students develop their unique self-potential. One of the humanistic figures is Abraham Maslow, who is famous for his motivational theory about the hierarchy of basic human needs: physical necessity, sense of security, love and compassion, appreciation, and self-actualization. Regarding this view, then in conducting learning, teachers should pay attention to the basic needs of learners so that motivation and attention are well developed (Maslow, 2017, pp. 70-80).
From those foundations, integrative thematic learning has different characteristics with other subjects. The different characteristics are, among others, (1) being student-centered, (2) providing a direct experience, (3) the separation of subjects is not very clear, (4) presenting the concepts of various subjects, (5) being flexible; (6) using learning principles while playing and having fun (Ahmadi & Amri, 2014, pp. 192-193).

Curriculum 2013
The term curriculum was firstly used in sports at the ancient Greek, derived from the word curio and curere. At that time, the word curriculum was interpreted as the distance to be traveled by a runner. People termed it with a race place or a running place from start to finish (Raharjo, 2012, p. 15). In its development, then the curriculum is used in education. In this field of education, the curriculum has expanded. The first curriculum sees as a series of subjects, just the material to be given to learners (Asifudin, 2009, p. 93).
The curriculum is now more broadly defined. In Law of Republic of Indonesia No. 20 of 2003 on national education system, it is said that the curriculum is a set of plans and arrangements regarding content and materials and the way it is used as a guideline for organizing activities of learning and teaching (Fadlillah, 2014, p. 15). Understanding the curriculum has two dimensions, namely, as a plan and arrangement about the content and material, and as a way to teach learning activities.
Regulation The process standard is the criteria for the implementation of learning in the unit of education to achieve the competency standards of graduates. The process standard is developed referring to the standard competency of the graduates and the predefined content standards by the provisions in the Government Regulation Number 19 of 2005 concerning education standards. The learning process in the education unit is organized to be interactive, inspiring, fun, challenging, and motivating to make learners actively participate, to provide ample space, improve creativity, and become independent according to their talent, interests, and physical and psychological development (Suharto, 2013, pp. 208-209).
Thus, the principles of learning used include encouraging learners to find out the problem-solving, encouraging learners to learn with various sources, applying learning with a scientific approach, applying learning with competency-based, learning in integratedly-organized environment, balancing between softskills and hard skills, develop the creativity of learners, utilization of information technology and communication in learning, and paying attention to individual characteristics and the cultural background of learners (Suharto, 2013, pp. 208-209).

Research Method
This research is an evaluation of CIPP model with a qualitative approach of phenomenology that uses the principles of qualitative research of Bogdan and Biklen, namely, done in a natural condition, searching directly to the data source, and the researchers become the key instrument, being descriptive, data collected in the form of words or images, putting more emphasis on the process than the outcome, the analysis is conducted inductively, and putting more emphasis on meaning (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982, pp. 27-29). In collecting the data, the researchers were in the field or at the research site for a relatively long time so that the problems studied related to the issues can be revealed more clearly, accurately, objectively, and in-depth. Meanwhile, for the phenomenological approach used to understand the meaning of human behavior based on understanding, thought subjects were researched instead of the thought researchers.
The research took place at the elementary school of Muhammadiyah Suronatan in Yogyakarta City. Data collection techniques used in the study were observations, in-depth interviews, and also documentation. The informant in this study was principals, teachers, and students. Triangulation was done to obtain data validity. Data were analyzed interactively until they were saturated, referring to Miles and Huberman's technique. The activities carried out were data collection, data reduction, data presentation, and data conclusions drawing or verification (Miles & Huberman, 1994, pp. 10-12) as presented in Figure 2.

Findings and Discussion
This evaluation study examines four aspects of context, input, process, and product. In addition to these four contexts, supporting factors and the implementation of the integrative thematic learning curriculum 2013 are also discussed.
From the context aspect, there is conformity between the vision, mission, and program developed by the school with the objectives of the implemented integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013. From the input aspect, the availability of resources is adequate to succeed in the learning, such as competent teachers in the field, facilities, and infrastructure (learning media, learning environment, and learning resources). From the aspect of the learning process, it is conducted actively and pleasantly, using scientific approaches, promoting character education, and using authentic judgment. In terms of the product, not only does it result in intellectually intelligent students, but it is also able to produce morally brilliant students.

Context
In the aspect of context, the implementation of the integrative thematic learning in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School in Yogyakarta is in line with the curriculum 2013 preparation, which seeks to develop the gold generation to have competence. The main points of the 21stcentury learning are collaboration, highlevel thinking, creativity, and communication. Therefore, the teacher is encouraged to organize learning with a new paradigm oriented towards the development of creativity, activity, and noble character with scientific approaches and authentic judgment.
It is important to note that the vision of Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School is "forming superior students based on faith, sciences, and technology." The missions conducted include (1) cultivating Islamic values in everyday life, (2) implementing active learning to develop students' maximum potential, (3) developing the entire potential of school citizens to achieve a level of excellence, (4) improving the faith and mastery of sciences and technology by working with the school citizen and related parties, and (5) improving discipline in various aspects so that students become superior and dignified humans (Documentation, 2018). As an effort to support the vision and missions, the school develops various programs in the form of extracurricular activities, including robotics, computer skills, dance, painting, futsal, music skills, vocal, swimming, archery, holy site, drum band, and cooking class (Interview result, 2018). Special character-based learning, according to the headmaster, has been implemented first by the school, but the implementation is not maximized yet. The new policy, through the curriculum 2013 that is in the process of teaching the character education, precisely has given a reformation for the school because it can strengthen the program developed by Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School, especially in the assessment of the attitude aspect. Previously, the policy implementation is only limited to integration in the learning process and has not created any format of attitude assessment, such as observation sheets, selfassessment, peer assessment, and journals (Interview result, 2018).
Based on the results of the interview, it is noted that the implementation of the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013 is tailored to the needs and developments of the times, in this case, is the 21st-century development that demands various competencies, namely collaboration, communication, high-level thinking, and creativity. It was done to prepare the golden generation, which is in 2045, to make Indonesia has a demographic bonus. Therefore, through the policy of curriculum 2013, the nation is expected to compete in the era of globalization as it is known today as the era of the Industrial Revolution 4.0.

Input
The evaluation of inputs focuses on teachers, learning resources, learning media, and learning strategies because some ele-ments play an essential role in the success of the integrative thematic implementation of the curriculum 2013. Teachers at Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School have an understanding of the implementation of integrative thematic learning of curriculum 2013. The results of interviews with some teachers, both in the low class and in high class, reveal that they understand the change in the learning with curriculum 2013. According to them, in the implementation of integrative thematic learning, teachers must apply active learning by promoting character education to develop attitudes, knowledge, and skills. Also, teachers prosecuted in the process of learning to implement scientific measures and conduct an authentic judgment (Interview results, 2018). The teacher of training activities has owned the understanding. Meanwhile, the headmaster said that almost all teachers in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School Yogyakarta had attended training, both the training organized by the government and held internally by the inviting experts. Thus, the teachers are better prepared to implement the integrative thematic learning in curriculum 2013.
The learning resources in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School, such as the library, internet, laboratory, and good school environment in the form of a mini garden, are quite adequate. The mini garden was used by teachers and students as a learning resource, especially in the theme of plants and the environment. The media available is also quite adequate, such as LCD, which has already been installed in every class. Besides, the learning media also include a human skeleton, globe, and map, which are in good condition. The learning strategy applied is varied by implementing four learning models: problem-based learning, project-based learning, discovery learning, and cooperative learning (Observation result, 2018).
The availability of various facilities and infrastructure, especially internet and LCD, is because the school develops not only students' faith, but also their knowl-edge and skills of science and technology. It means that the carrying capacity of the school is to prepare millennials to master technology, as we enter the digital era.

The Learning Plan
Based on the results of a lesson plan documentation designed by the teacher, the following data are obtained. A lesson plan designed by the teacher is a design of integrative thematic learning of curriculum 2013 using scientific approaches. The components developed are, among others, identity, core competencies, basic competencies, indicators, learning objectives, learning materials, learning approaches and methods, media, tools and learning resources, learning steps, and assessments.
Indicators develop the core competencies and basic competencies using operational verbs, and various levels of the domain (cognitive, affective, and psychomotor), meaning that in the indicators developed by the teacher, the balance between soft skills and hard skills is shown. The purpose of learning is designed to describe student activity following the method to be used. The learning methods designed have varied, such as questions and answers, discussions, lectures, and experiments. With the varied methods of learning, the teacher has no direct effort to apply student-centered learning, as required by the curriculum 2013. Learning with curriculum 2013, according to Prasetyo (2017, p. 102), has several characteristics: (1) the studies use scientific approaches, (2) learning is performed not only in classrooms but also in the environment and society, (3) teachers are not the only learning resources; instead, teachers act as facilitators and motivators.
Steps-designed learning already describes active learning, and each step demonstrates scientific activities. In this case, teachers' role in designing learning is not only limited to exploration activities, elaborations, and confirmation but also observing activities, solicitation, collecting infor-mation, and communicating. Furthermore, the evaluation aspect has been designed by the teacher well with various domains, namely cognitive, affective, and psychomotor, by advancing the process assessment (written, observation of attitudes and performance).
Based on the analysis of the results of the study, a related learning plan can say that the teacher has both designed the learning with scientific approaches and by the principles of learning the curriculum 2013. Nevertheless, the teacher still needs to learn in terms of combining subjects that correspond to the theme and sub-theme of learning. Meanwhile, the researchers examine the theme and sub-theme in one of the action plan samples designed by the teacher. In this case, the theme is learning about the ecosystem, with the sub-theme of the relationship of living creatures in the ecosystem. Teacher-combined subjects include sports education, civilization, bahasa (language), and mathematics. The themes are studies related to the ecosystem and the subthemes of the relationship of life in the ecosystem. The subjects that correspond to the theme are science, social science, language and arts, and skill.
Besides, the researchers also see the inconsistency of material designed with basic competencies in each subject, in which the material included in the lesson plan, among others, are food chains, building a space in the form of a beam, and a plane figure that is a circle. In addition, the basic competencies in each subject are (1) physical education, sport, and health competencies essentially understand and practice variations and combinations of locomotor and non-locomotor basic motion patterns, (2) the basic competence to understand the diversity of social, cultural, and economic body in the frame of Bhineka Tunggal Ika (unity in diversity) concept, (3) Indonesian language's competence to explore text information on book reports on food and food chains, human health, ecosystem balance, as well as nature and influence of human activities, (4) mathematical competence is essentially the concept of the generation and withdrawal of root of the rank of two and a modest number of three ranks. Exposure has apparent inconsistency between the materials that are listed on the action plan with each basic competency. These materials should derive from any basic competencies.
Due to the inconsistency between the theme and subtheme with the combined subjects, then the inconsistency of learning materials with basic competencies will impact the learning access and learning system. It is possible for teachers to implement it, but they will certainly have difficulty in moving from one subject to another and will seem to feel tired. The later implementation of the learning does not conform to integrative thematic learning characteristics. Frasandy (2017, p. 310) conveys that one of the characteristics of integrative thematic learning is the removal of one subject with the other subject not so obvious and visible. Moving is done subtly, so students do not feel that learning has changed, in which his studies focus on themes that are close to the student's life.
Based on the aforementioned explanation, it can be inferred that the teachers have understood well how to develop an action plan for integrative thematic learning in curriculum 2013, but they have not understood well yet about how to integrate the integrative thematic learning curriculum 2013 that corresponds to themes and subthemes including material suitability with basic competencies.
Furthermore, the learning media designed by teachers are quite varied, such as LCD, projector, props, both the existing one and the ones made by the teachers. The worksheet that teachers will use is the available worksheet or the ones that are created by the teachers. Teacher-designed learning resources are also varied; teachers do not only use books but also sources from the surrounding environment such as students, teachers, school gardens, labs, libraries, and other places that are relevant to learning.

The Implementation of Learning
Based on the observation results, the following information is obtained. Integrative thematic learning curriculum 2013 is implemented by exploration, elaboration, and confirmation, including the activities of observing, solicitation, collecting information, and communicating. For each teacher, learning activity is documented in a video, where the video is made as a teacher's report document to students' parents on a CD and are shared in the class by the teachers at the end of the semester.
In conducting learning, there are three activities conducted by the teachers, namely preliminary activities, core activities, and closing activities. In the preliminary activities, the teacher conducts the activities of preconception, motivation, and pre-test. In the activity, the teacher asks students to observe, sing, and tell the story according to the sub-theme to be studied. Various media are used by teachers, such as projectors, LCD, pictures, and songs, so that the students are excited.
In core activities, teachers employ various learning methods with student-centered learning. In this case, students in groups conduct experiments by observing, examining, collecting information, and also communicating. The teacher-developed material is not only from the book but also associated with the students' social context both at home, in school, and in the community. The atmosphere of the class is very dynamic and conducive, and the students enjoy learning, look joyful, and are happy to learn. Teachers assess the process of learning by observing each student, both on his attitude and work. In this case, the teacher uses the pre-designed assessment section.
Next, in the closing activity, the teacher invites students to conclude the material that has been learned together, then the teacher quizzes with some questions using the problems. At the end of the activities, the teacher gives the students a duty to ask the parents for help with the material learned as a follow-up, or material that will be studied at the next meeting.
Based on the observation of the learning activities conducted by the teacher, it can be inferred that the teacher has implemented integrative thematic learning in accordance with the curriculum 2013 principles, where the teacher, in organizing the learning, has encouraged students to find out problem-solving, to learn from various sources, has applied learning with a scientific approach, learning with competencybased, learning organized in an integrated system, has balanced the proportion of soft skills and hard skills mastery, has developed the learners' creativity, has maximized the use information, communication, and technology in learning, has concerned about individual characteristics and the cultural background of the learners.
Nevertheless, the researchers see that the alignment in one subject to another has not been so visible, and the new thing to come is the students' complaint. The complaint is due to the mistake/lack of carefulness in the selection of themes and subthemes with the combined subjects, and the and conformity of materials with the basic competencies. It can, therefore, be understood that the teachers can apply learning by the curriculum 2013 principles well, but they have not been able to implement learning yet by the characteristics of integrative thematic learning because of unsynchronized compactions with sub-theme.

Process Assessment and Learning Outcomes
Based on the results of interviews, observations, and documentation, it is revealed that the process assessment and implementation of integrative thematic learning outcomes of the curriculum 2013 involves an authentic approach that includes three domains, i.e., knowledge, attitudes, and skills. The knowledge assessment is carried out in a written test in varied problems such as multiple-choice, a marriage, a short description, and an essay. The attitude assessment is done by observation, either in class or outside class, using an observation sheet, journal, and self-assessment. Skills assessment is carried out through the perfor-mance and projects. The results of the eval--uation have been made in the form of narrative reports. The narrative reports made reveal students' success with positive words. Also, learning results are taught by teachers in the form of CDs shared with students. Students who have not succeeded in mastering certain competencies can carry out remedial efforts by editing material that has not been mastered, accompanied by their class teacher (Interview result, August 2018).
Therefore, it can be said that the evaluation system conducted by the teachers in the Muhammadiyah Suronatan in Elementary School in Yogyakarta City is good because the judgment is not only dominated by cognitive values, but also by the domain of attitudes and skills. With the assessment spanning all three domains, students are not only intellectually intelligent, but also morally intelligent.

Product
Based on the results of observation, interviews, and also documentation, information on the impact of integrative thematic learning implementation of the curriculum 2013 towards students' learning outcomes in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School Yogyakarta City is obtained as follows. (1) It encourages students to be eager to learn, because the lesson activates students, make them learn from various sources, and fun. (2) It is able to increase students' confidence because, in learning, they are encouraged to convey the results of the study in front of the class. (3) Achievement in various fields, both common and religious such as winning races and achieving the first rank of national exam results, is possible. It is in line with the information given by the B-class homeroom teacher that, since the curriculum 2013 has been established with an active learning model, students grow and become confident in performing publicly. Even some students offer themselves to perform when there are activities (Interview results, July 2018). Curriculum 2013 is a new program developed by the government. As a new program, in its implementation, it has obstacles in addition to supporters. Based on the results of interviews, there are several supporting factors and barriers in implementing integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013.

The Supporting Factors
The integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013 implementation in elementary school of Muhammadiyah Suronatan Yogyakarta can run well. It is because it is supported by many factors, including: (1) the teacher's competency, in which most teachers have been certified with the professional teacher's predicate, (2) most teachers' educational background, in which the teachers are graduates of elementary school teacher training education, (3) adequate facilities and infrastructure in supporting the learning process, such as labs, libraries, IT, school environment, etc., (4) the teachers' average age and their easy and energetic personality, which make them have the motivation and passion for learning and wanting to be invited to make a change through a learning pattern with a new paradigm.
It is important to note that before the curriculum 2013 was developed, teachers in the elementary school of Muhammadiyah Suronatan Yogyakarta have already been accustomed to applying active learning. Thus, it is very easy for the teachers there to adapt to the learning model corresponding to the demands of the curriculum 2013.

The Inhibiting Factors
Based on the results of the interview, the implementation of integrative thematic learning with curriculum 2013 has faced several obstacles, including (1) most students do not have a student handbook yet, and (2) teachers still strive to use other references that are still relevant to the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013 (Interview result, July 2018). In addition, related to the barriers, the books have not been distributed evenly. It is also in line with the results of research by Dewi et al. (2015, p. 8) performed on a state elementary school in the suburbs of Bandung. It reveals that the teachers' book based on the theme and students' books based on the subject in the state elementary school in the suburb of Bandung had not been distributed well. The next obstacle is that teachers have not understood how to integrate competencies and subjects according to the theme and sub-theme.
As previously mentioned in the aspect of the process, in the planning step, the teacher has not understood how to integrate integrative thematic learning in curriculum 2013 that corresponds to the theme and sub-theme, including material conformity with essential competencies. Thus, it impacts the implementation of knowledge, in which the alignment between one subject with the other topics has not been so visible, and the new ones seem to be the reason for which students often complain about. The complaint is due to a mistake or the lack of carefulness in the selection of themes and sub-themes. It will combine subjects and conformity of materials with the essential competencies. This process of learning is also demonstrated by Rasidi and Setiawati (2015, p. 163) that one factor of teacher difficulty in integrative thematic learning is the material that suits the theme.
Based on further searches through interviews and document study, the condition is because, during this time, the teacher only refers to the teacher handbook provided by the government, wherein it has themes and sub-themes. In each sub-theme, there are six learnings, while in the researchers' handbook, teachers see not all the competencies and subjects combined with the themes and sub-themes, especially in each of the studies of learning 1-6. Sometimes, the competencies and subjects that correspond to the theme and sub-themes are found in learning two, while teachers teach using learning 4.

Conclusion
Based on the analysis of research results, it can be concluded that the implementation of integrative thematic learning using curriculum 2013 in Muhammadiyah Suronatan Elementary School in Yogyakarta has been able to run quite well, both in planning, implementation, assessment process, and learning outcomes. However, there are some obstacles faced by teachers of the school in carrying out the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013, including: (1) students' handbook which has not been distributed evenly by the government, and (2) the lack of understanding related to the subject being complained that corresponds to the sub-theme. The integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013 has a positive impact on student learning outcomes from both the aspects of knowledge, attitudes, and skills. In the aspect of knowledge, the integrative thematic learning of the curriculum 2013 can deliver the best grades in the national exam by getting a top 10 in the city of Yogyakarta. From the attitude aspect of students' spirit in learning, it can increase student confidence and cooperation. As for the skill aspect, students become creative and innovative in both thinking and working.