The Role of School-Based Management as a Determinant of the Effectiveness of the Implementation of Education in Schools

School-based management is a new method of managing school resources more effectively, which gives the principal greater authority in taking all participatory actions directly against all components of the school community. As such, this study seeks to ascertain the function of school-based administration in determining the efficacy of education implementation in schools. The data collection technique for this study is qualitative, utilizing descriptive methods and a literature review. The study's findings indicate that implementing school-based management is critical to the success of educational performance in schools, since the principal is given increased power and authority to manage all available resources in the school. Besides that, school-based management also involves the community through the school committee in every policymaking. It is hoped that every policy taken can be more targeted, which has implications for school progress. In this study, the authors also found that SBM monitoring and evaluation is needed to obtain the correct information to be used for appropriate decision making.


INTRODUCTION
The superiority of a nation no longer rests on natural wealth but on the authority of human resources (HR), namely educated personnel who can respond to challenges very quickly. Overall, in Indonesia, Indonesian human resources' quality is currently lagging behind the human resources of developed countries and neighbouring countries, such as Malaysia and Thailand (Taryanti & Djuwita, 2019). This fact is more than enough to encourage education experts and practitioners to conduct systematic studies to fix or improve the national education system. In line with the idea of decentralization of education management, school management functions need to be maximally empowered so that they can run effectively to produce the quality of graduates expected by the community and the nation (Nurhadi, 2006). This needs to be supported by a set of instruments that will encourage schools to continuously improve the effectiveness of their management functions so that they can develop into learning organizations. (Armstrong & Foley, 2003).
The execution of excellent education is inextricably linked to the development of educators' and education personnel's (CAR) competence and professionalism, while also taking into account other elements such as facilities, infrastructure, and funding. The principle is one of the PTK, and his or her job has a major and strategic impact on teacher professionalism and educational excellence in schools (Jelantik, 2015). The principal's leadership position is critical to an educational institution's success. Because the principal is the institution's leader, he or she must be able to guide the institution toward attaining the established goals. Principals must be able to adapt to changes in educational legislation and living in a globalized world (Fitrah, 2017).
The challenging tasks faced by school principals are increasingly diverse and rapidly changing. This challenge can be responded to by schools more quickly if school managers implement policies that consider schools as the centre of their attention (Hamzah, 2013). The concept of school-based management development (SBM) was developed in response to a management system controlled by external authorities. Efforts to develop ideas and theories of school-based management have been carried out for several years, and since 1999 the SBM concept has been piloted in several schools in Indonesia. Some schools are willing to implement SBM, but they are hampered by the lack of understanding of applying the concept operationally (Yalianto & Sutrisno, 2015).
In some parts of the world, SBM has been born with several different names, including "school-based governance", "school self-management", and even known as "school site management" or "school-based management". These terms do have meanings with slightly different emphases. However, these names have the same spirit, namely schools are expected to become more autonomous (not just technical implementing units) in the implementation of school management, especially in the use of 3M, namely man, money, and materials (Gamage & Zajda, 2009).
In SBM, the prominent role of the community is in decision making, together with the principal and teachers hold deliberations. Thus, all school activities that include finance, learning, infrastructure, and various components that support the smooth running of education in schools are the school's responsibility that has been approved by the community (Pratiwi, 2016). In other words, all school policies and programs are determined by the school committee based on deliberation from members of regional education officials, school principals, teachers, representatives of parents of students, community leaders, and local officials where the school is located (Aziz, 2015).
In essence, the essence of SBM is increasing school autonomy, increasing the participation of school members and the community in education administration, and increasing the flexibility of managing school resources. Therefore, the implementation of SBM is appropriate to apply an idiographic approach (allowing various ways to implement it) so that there is no one same recipe to be involved in all schools (Wohlstetter & Odden, 1992). It's just that one thing must be noted that changing central-based management to school-based management is not a one-time process and good results, but is a process that takes place continuously and involves all parties responsible for the implementation of school education (Fullan & Watson). 2000).
Schools carry out the function of being at the forefront of serving community education, so schools must respond quickly to existing changes and follow the standards set by the Ministry of Education and Culture (Nurmaini et al., 2014). Schools, as organizational units that have autonomy, have the right to regulate themselves. The operation of SBM requires the steps of formulating the scope of management activities that have been outlined in ministry regulations in the form of management standards that must be followed by schools (activities bound by rules) and activities that are fully regulated by schools (complete autonomy) (Murniati & Usman, 2009).
Through this paper, the author tries to explain how to learn and understand school-based management as a determinant of the effectiveness of education in schools which is a breakthrough in the world of education. It is hoped that this research can provide suggestions for ideas to advance the world of education in the future.

B. METHOD
The type of research that the author uses is descriptive qualitative research. According to Moleong, qualitative research is rooted in a scientific background as a whole, relies on humans as research tools, utilizes qualitative methods of inductive analysis, directs research targets to find theories that are more concerned with process than results, selects a set of criteria to write data validity, the research design is temporary. The research results are agreed upon by the research subjects (Moloeng, 2007). According to Sugiyono (2005), qualitative research methods are used to examine the condition of natural objects (Natural Setting). Researchers as a critical instrument (Key Instrument). In this study, the author also uses a literature review approach in taking data related to this research. Literature review or literature study is an activity that is required in research, especially academic research whose primary purpose is to develop theoretical aspects as well as aspects of practical benefits so that by using this research method, the author can quickly solve the problem to be studied.

C. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
In general, school-based management (SBM) may be defined as a management style that empowers schools with more autonomy (authority and responsibility), flexibility/adaptability, and direct engagement of school members (teachers, students, administrators, and workers), and the community (parents, community leaders, scientists, entrepreneurs, and so on). These measures are taken to enhance school quality in accordance with national education policy and applicable laws and regulations. Schools are granted autonomy when they are given the authority and duty to make decisions based on their own needs, capabilities, and expectations, as well as those of the community or current stakeholders (Caldwell, 2005).
Management, according to the Education Administration Lecturer Team at the University of Education Indonesia in Bandung, is an inherent part of the educational process and cannot be separated from it. As a result, without management, educational goals cannot be fulfilled ideally, effectively, or efficiently. The notion is applicable to educational institutions that demand effective and efficient administration. Within this framework, awareness grows of the critical nature of School-Based Management (SBM), which vests schools and teachers with complete authority to manage/regulate education and teaching, plan, organize, supervise, and lead human resources and goods to assist in implementation learning to follow the goals that have been established. SBM must also be tailored to the needs and interests of students, instructors, and the local community. As a result, it is critical to recognize that management's primary duties are planning, implementation, oversight, and development. The four functions are thus a continual process in practice.
Concerning the four primary management functions, they may be summarized as follows: (1) Planning is a methodical procedure for deciding on future activities. Additionally, planning is a set of rules that are methodically gathered and created based on observable facts that may be utilized as work guides. Planning entails comprehending what has been accomplished, the issues encountered, and alternative solutions, as well as carrying out the prioritized actions chosen proportionately. Educational program planning serves at least two primary functions: (a) planning is a systematic effort that entails the development of a series of actions that will be taken to accomplish organizational or institutional goals while taking into account available resources; and (b) planning is an activity that entails the efficient and effective use of limited resources to accomplish organizational or institutional goals. (2) Implementation is the process of transforming plans into concrete activities in order to accomplish goals effectively and efficiently. The developed plans will only be valuable if they are implemented properly and efficiently. Each company must have a powerful and persuasive voice throughout implementation, since without it, the educational process as planned would be impossible to achieve. (3) Supervision is an ongoing effort to watch in a systematic and continuous manner; documenting, explaining, instructing, guiding, and resolving different issues that are not right and rectifying errors. Additionally, supervision is critical to the effectiveness of the overall management process, and it must be regarded holistically, integrated, and not restricted to specific tasks. (4) Coaching is a set of attempts to professionally manage all aspects of an organization in order for them to work properly and for plans to accomplish goals to be implemented. Efficiencies and effectiveness. Effective and efficient school management involves the integration of the four major management functions in the administration of education-related sectors of activity. Effective and efficient school administration is intended to improve the overall quality of education.
SBM seeks to improve the quality of education, particularly in rural areas, by allowing schools and communities to establish an educational vision in response to regional realities and autonomously carry out the educational idea. Supriono & Sapari (2001) affirm that the goal of applying SBM is to increase management efficiency while also increasing the quality and relevance of teaching in schools. Additionally, Ismail (2018) states that the goal of implementing SBM is to improve the overall quality of education, including the quality of learning, the quality of the curriculum, the quality of human resources, including teachers and other education personnel, and the overall quality of educational services. Meanwhile, Slamet (2000) stated that the purpose of school-based management is to empower schools, particularly their human resources (principals, teachers, employees, students, parents, and the surrounding community) by providing authority, flexibility, and other resources to address issues that arise. By the school in question. Mulyasa (2004) places a greater emphasis on community participation, stating that SBM aims for school autonomy and community or stakeholder participation to have high involvement models, with the model serving as a foundation for each element to be able to contribute to the improvement of educational quality, efficiency, and equity of distribution. Myers & Stonehill (1993) stated that the purpose of implementing SBM provides several advantages, (a) enabling competent people in schools to make decisions that can improve learning, (b) providing opportunities for the entire school community to make critical decisions, (c) ) focuses on responsibility for the decisions taken, (d) leads to creativity in designing programs, (e) redirects resources to support the achievement of goals developed by each school, (f) directs to a budget that to ensure that parents and teachers are aware of the financial status of schools, the limits of expenditure and costs of these programs, and (g) improve teacher morality and nurture the emergence of new leaders. The University of Southern California then stated that the goal of SBM is to gain a better understanding of how decentralized governance and management mechanisms can support innovative approaches to teaching and learning, particularly in mathematics, science, and social studies, in order to create high-performing schools. SBM seeks to get a deeper understanding of how decentralized governance and administration may promote innovative ways to teaching and learning, particularly in mathematics, science, and social studies, in order to raise student success. Among the several purposes listed above, the objectives of SBM result in the following: (1) Improving the quality of education by enabling school initiatives to manage and empower existing resources, and (2) raising school residents' and community members' understanding of the importance of education. Through decision-making, (3) increasing school International Journal Publishing INFLUENCE: International Journal of Science Review Volume 3, No. 1, 2021 https://internationaljournal.net/index.php/influence/index 51 accountability to parents, the community, and the government for school quality, (4) increasing healthy competition among schools to achieve the expected level of education, and (5) empowering existing schools to produce graduates who are effective and efficient.
In his book School-Based Management, Nurkolis (2003) describes that there are eight characteristics of School-Based Management, including: 1. Schools with SBM have a mission or aspiration to run a school to represent a group of shared hopes, beliefs and school values, guide school members in educational activities and provide work direction. This mission has a significant influence on the function and effectiveness of the school because, with this mission, the school community can develop the right school organizational culture, build a high commitment to the school, and have the initiative to provide a better level of educational service. 2. Educational activities are carried out based on the characteristics of the needs and situation of the school. The nature of the activity is fundamental for schools to improve the quality of education because it indirectly introduces changes in school management from external control management to a school-based model. 3. There is a process of changing management strategies involving human nature, school organization, decision-making styles, leadership styles, use of power, and management skills. Therefore, in implementing SBM, the change in management strategy is more concerned with aspects of development that are appropriate and relevant to school needs. 4. Freedom and authority in the effective management of resources to achieve educational goals, to solve academic problems faced, both for education personnel, finance and so on. 5. SBM demands the active role of schools, school administrators, teachers, parents, and parties related to education in schools. With SBM, schools can develop students and teachers according to the characteristics of each school. In this context, schools play a role in developing initiatives, solving problems, and exploring all possibilities to facilitate effective learning. Likewise, with other elements such as teachers, parents, school committees, school administrators, education offices, and so on according to their respective roles. 6. SBM emphasizes human relations that tend to be open, cooperative, team spirit, and mutually beneficial commitment. Therefore, the organizational climate tends to lead to commitment so that school effectiveness can be achieved. 7. The administrator's role is crucial in the SBM framework, including the qualities that administrators have. 8. In SBM, school effectiveness is assessed according to multilevel and multifaceted indicators. Assessments of school effectiveness should include learning processes and methods to assist school progress. Therefore, the evaluation of school effectiveness must pay attention to multiple levels, namely at the school, group, and individual levels, as well as multifaceted indicators, namely school inputs, processes and outputs, and student academic development.
The framework for adopting SBM is to develop schools that are autonomous, collaborative, transparent, and accountable, as stated in PP 17, 2007 article 49; "The administration of education units at the primary and secondary levels employs school-based management, as specified by: 1. Independence Independence may be defined as the ability to manage and care for oneself; independence in terms of programs and financing is the major indicator of school independence. Thus, school independence refers to the school's ability to govern and manage the school community's interests on its own initiative, in accordance with applicable national education laws and regulations.

Partnership
Each school member has a specific function and role. The relationship between school members is based on partnership or partnership, which is a form of equal relationship in sharing responsibilities according to their positions and roles.

Participation
Schools may achieve its goal if all residents participate in carrying out their duties and responsibilities. Involvement of school residents in school administration must take into account their competence, authority limitations, and relevance to the participation objective. Increased engagement of students and community members in school management fosters transparency, strong collaboration, accountability, and educational democracy. The issue at hand is transparency about programs and funds.

Openness
Openness provides opportunities for school residents to find out what is happening and understand the actual conditions of the school. This understanding became the beginning of the growing concern of the school community. SBM accountability must be understood as a model of granting greater authority to schools. As a consequence, schools must be responsible for what they do. For this reason, schools are obliged to be accountable to the public for what they do due to the mandate given by the public. That means public accountability concerns the public's right to obtain responsibility for school administrators.
The targets for school-based management are outlined in Permendiknas no. 19 of 2007 on education management, and include the following six objectives: (a) program planning; (b) work plan implementation; (c) monitoring and evaluation; (d) school/madrasah leadership; (e) management information system; and (f) special assessment. Each objective is further subdivided into target items, and the program planning component, for example, is broken into four components: the school's vision, purpose, objectives, and work plan.
To formulate work plans, schools need to conduct school self-evaluations, as regulated in Ministerial Regulation 19 of 2007 concerning school management, Minister of National Education Regulation Number 63 of 2009 concerning Education Quality Assurance System. The implementation of SBM emphasizes more on formulating how SBM practices are implemented in daily activities at school. Alison Bullock discloses activities that have long been autonomous at school and Hywel Thomas in "school at the centre" 1997 pages 7-8, covering the scope of activities (1) student admissions; (2) student assessment; (3) selection information, in the form of documents, published outside the school (4) funding includes decisions on extracting and using funds. With the implementation of SBM, Caldwell and Spinks (in Alison Bullock and Hywel Thomas in "school at the centre" 1997 page 7) report greater autonomy in school management activities, which include decentralization: 1. Educational content/knowledge (decentralization of decision-making regarding the curriculum including the formulation of final graduate goals); 2. Technology (decentralization of decision-making concerning technological means of teaching and learning); 3. Authority (decentralization in making school policies); 4. Materials (decentralization of decision-making regarding the use of facilities, materials and tools); 5. Empowerment of human resources/people (decentralization of decisions related to the allocation of human resources for teaching); 6. Time (decentralization of decision making regarding the percentage of time in teaching and learning activities), and 7. Finance (decentralization of decision making regarding the distribution of funds).
The implementation of SBM in Indonesia has not fully automated management activities as formulated by Caldwell and Spinks. The performance of SBM in Indonesia refers to Permen 19 of 2007. Monitoring is a monitoring process to obtain information about the implementation of SBM. So, the focus of monitoring is monitoring the performance of SBM, not on the results. To be precise, the focus of monitoring is on the components of the SBM process, both regarding the decision-making process, institutional management, program management, and the management of the teaching and learning process. At the same time, evaluation is a process to obtain information about the results of SBM. So, the focus of the evaluation is on the results of the SBM. This result information is then compared with the targets that have been set. If the results are following the targets that have been developed, it means that SBM is effective.
On the other hand, if the results are not following the set targets, the SBM is considered ineffective (failed). Therefore, every school that implements SBM is expected to have data on student achievement before and after SBM. This is important to do so that schools can easily compare student achievement before and after SBM. If after SBM there is a significant increase in achievement compared to before SBM, it can be assumed that SBM is quite successful.
SBM monitoring and evaluation aims to obtain information that can be used for decision making. Monitoring results can be used to provide input (feedback) for improving the implementation of SBM. At the same time, the evaluation results can provide information that can be used to provide feedback on the entire SBM component, both in context, input, process, output, and outcome. The inputs from the results of monitoring and evaluation will be used for decision making.

D. CONCLUSION
School-based management is a new method in increasing the effectiveness of education in schools because it provides broad authority and authority for schools, especially for school principals to manage their resources owned by the school. The context of implementing SBM is forming schools that have independence, partnership, participation, openness, and accountability as mandated in Government Regulation No. 17 of 2017. Meanwhile, school-based management monitoring is carried out to obtain information about the implementation of SBM. So, the focus of monitoring is monitoring the performance of SBM, not on the results. To be precise, the focus of monitoring is on the components of the SBM process, both regarding the decision-making process, institutional management, program management, and the management of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the evaluation of school-based management can provide information that can be used to provide input on all components of SBM, both in context, input, process, output, and outcome.