Article Sidebar

Download
pdf
Statistic
Read Counter : 1289 Download : 676

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Artikel ini bertujuan menganalisis divergensi aktor-individual dalam pengelolaan bank soal digital menghadapi kebutuhan pemanfaatan big data pada masyarakat era 5.0. Kompleksitas divergensi tata kelola organisasi dilihat dari pendekatan berpikir sistem dimulai dari identifikasi permasalahan, pembuatan model konseptual, serta usulan yang berbasis tindakan secara menyeluruh dari setiap pemangku kepentingan. Ragam metode berpikir sistem yang digunakan berupa Soft Systems Methodology untuk menjawab pertanyaan penelitian yang menganalisis secara keseluruhan pemikiran, perkataan, dan tindakan pemilik
masalah. Hasil dari pendekatan sistem menunjukkan, transformasi digital di dalam pengelolaan bank soal mengalami hambatan ketercapaian pemanfaatan big data karena adanya divergensi institusional berupa hibridasi tata kelola administrasi publik yang disebabkan oleh mekanisme power, attraction, dan mimesis. Solusi yang dapat dilakukan dalam mendorong percepatan transformasi digital pertama terletak pada aspek power di level makro perlu adanya tata ulang aturan kelembagaan tranformasi digital yang terarah
dan spesifik. Kedua pada aspek attraction perlu adanya penguasaan kompetensi bahasa pemrograman, data base enginering, dan data mining di setiap pegawai yang terlibat. Ketiga, pada aspek mimesis, organisasi dapat merujuk pada praktik terbaik keberhasilan organisasi lain. Kesimpulan penelitian menunjukkan terdapat dua belas aktivitas divergensi aktorindividual yang menyebabkan hibridasi administrasi publik dan empat di antaranya mendukung perwujudan tranformasi digital.


This article aims to analyze the divergence of individual actors in managing digital item banks in facing the needs of using big data in the 5.0 eras. The complexity of divergence in organizational governance captured from the systems thinking approach starting from the problems of making, conceptual models, and based on the overall actions of each stakeholder. Various systems thinking methods are used in the form of Soft Systems Methodology to answer research questions that analyse the overall thoughts, words, and
actions of the problem owner. The results of the systems approach show that digital transformation in bank management is experiencing obstacles to achieving the use of big data due to institutional divergences in the form of hybridization in public administration governance caused by power, attractiveness and mimesis. The solution that can be done in encouraging the acceleration of the first digital transformation lies in the aspect of power at the macro level, there is a need for a directed and specific restructuring of the digital
transformation institutional rules. Second, in the aspect of attraction, it is necessary to master the competence of programming languages, database techniques, and data mining for every employee involved. Third, in the mimetic aspect, organizations can refer to the best practices of other organizations’ success. The conclusion of the study shows that there are twelve individual actor-divergent activities that cause hybridization of public administration and four support the realization of the digital transformation.

Keywords

transformasi digital reformasi birokrasi bank soal soft systems metholodogy digital transformation bureaucratic reform item bank

Article Details

Author Biography

Sudarsono Hardjosoekarto, Universitas Indonesia

Pascarsarjana, Departemen Sosiologi, Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, Universitas Indonesia

How to Cite
Muhammaditya , N., & Hardjosoekarto, S. (2021). DIVERGENSI TRANSFORMASI DIGITAL PENGELOLAAN BANK SOAL MENGHADAPI ERA MASYARAKAT 5.0. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 6(1), 54-77. https://doi.org/10.24832/jpnk.v6i1.1893

References

  1. Ajinaja, M. (2017). “The Design and Implementation of a Computer Based Testing System Using Component-Based Software Engineering Michael.” Journal of Applied Computation, 01(01), 1–7. http://www.ijcst.com/vol8/2/13-michael-ajinaja.pdf
  2. Alharbi, A.S., Halikias, G., Basahel, A.M., Yamin, M. (2020). Digital governments of developed nations and Saudi Arabia: a comparative study. Conference: 2020 7th International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom), 255–260. https://doi.org/10.23919/INDIACom49435.2020.9083686
  3. Azizah, S. H., & Fitriani, L. (2016). Rancang Bangun Aplikasi Bank Soal Program Studi Teknik Informatika Sekolah Tinggi Teknologi Garut. Jurnal Algoritma, 13(1), 63–69. https://doi.org/10.33364/algoritma/v.13-1.63
  4. Beckert, J. (2010). Institutional Isomorphism Revisited : Convergence and Divergence in Institutional Change Author ( s ): Jens Beckert Source : Sociological Theory , Vol . 28 , No . 2 ( June 2010 ), pp . 150-166 Published by : American Sociological Association Stable URL : 28(2), 150–166. https://doi.org/http://www.jstor.com/stable/25746221
  5. Chambers, T. (2020). ‘Lean on me’’: Sifarish, mediation & the digitisation of state bureaucracies in India.’ Ethnography. https://doi.org/10.1177/1466138120940755
  6. Choi, Y., & McClenen, C. (2020). Development of adaptive formative assessment system using computerized adaptive testing and dynamic bayesian networks. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 10(22), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10228196
  7. Csapó, B., & Molnár, G. (2019). Online diagnostic assessment in support of personalized teaching and learning: The eDia system. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(JULY). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01522
  8. Curtis, S. (2019). Digital transformation—the silver bullet to public service improvement? Public Money and Management, 39(5), 322–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2019.1611233
  9. De Waele, L., Berghman, L., & Matthyssens, P. (2015). Defining hybridity and hybrid contingencies in public organizations: An alternative conceptual model. Studies in Public and Non-Profit Governance, 4, 113–154. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2051-663020150000004005
  10. Deguchi, A., Hirai, C., Matsuoka, H., & Nakano, T. (2020). Society 5.0: A people-centric super-smart society. Society 5.0: A People-Centric Super-Smart Society, 1–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2989-4
  11. Dirgahayani, P., Yesuari, A. P., Wulansari, T. R., & Sutanto, H. (2020). The Formation of Network Governance in Accelerating the Implementation of TOD : the Case of Jakarta MRT Phase 1 , Indonesia The Formation of Network Governance in Accelerating the Implementation of TOD : The Case of Jakarta MRT Phase 1 , Indonesia. Case Studies on Transport Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2020.10.006
  12. Dobbins, M., Niemann, D., & Martens, K. (2018). Explaining Policy Convergence and Polity Divergence in Federal Systems : German and Swiss Higher Education Revisited. April, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjy005
  13. Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Public Management Research Association New Public Management Is Dead: Long Live Digital-Era Governance. Source: Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, 16(3), 467–494. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3840393
  14. Dwivedi, P., Shankar, R. T., Meghana, B., Sushaini, H., Sudeep, B. R., & Pooja, M. R. (2021). Designing an Adaptive Question Bank and Question Paper Generation Management System. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 1133, 965–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3514-7_72
  15. Faruqi, U. Al. (2019). Future Service in Industry 5.0. Jurnal Sistem Cerdas, 2(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.37396/jsc.v2i1.21
  16. Gong, Y., Yang, J., & Shi, X. (2020). Towards a comprehensive understanding of digital transformation in government: Analysis of flexibility and enterprise architecture. Government Information Quarterly, 37(3), 101487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101487
  17. Gupta, P. K. (2014). Mobile Examination System. August. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.2116.9288
  18. Hardjosoekarto, S. (2012). Construction of Social Development Index as a Theoretical Research Practice in Action Research by Using Soft Systems Methodology. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 25(6), 493–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-012-9237-9
  19. Iswanto, A. (2020). Divergent Interpretations and Inter-Organizational Relations of Halal Product Guarantee Policy in Indonesia. 67–79. https://doi.org/10.22146/jsp.
  20. Janpla, S., & Wanapiron, P. (2019). System Framework for an Intelligent Question Bank and Examination System. July. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijmlc.2018.8.5.734
  21. Kareborn. (2004). Basic principles of SSM modeling: An examination of CATWOE from a soft perspective. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii, 40(2), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1023/B
  22. Ketui, N., Homjun, K., Poonyasiri, K., Deepinjai, J., & Luekhong, P. (2016). Item-based approach for online exam performance and its application. 2016 13th International Conference on Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and Information Technology, ECTI-CON 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/ECTICon.2016.7561297
  23. Kharchenkova, S. (2019). Bringing Art Market Organizations to China : Cross-Border Isomorphism , Institutional Work and its Unintended Consequences. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305741019000389.
  24. Khater, E., Hegazy, A., & Shehab, M. E. (2016). Ontology-based adaptive examination system in e-learning management systems. 2015 IEEE 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Information Systems, ICICIS 2015, 243–250. https://doi.org/10.1109/IntelCIS.2015.7397228
  25. Kosba, E., Badawy, O., & Sabri, P. (2013). Intelligent Examination System to Support Teacher ’ s Reflection Measurement of Students ’ Guided Feedback.
  26. Kuzminska, O., & Mazorchuk, M. (2016). Models and tools for information support of test development process in learning management systems. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 1614, 632–639.
  27. Lu, P., Cong, X., & Zhou, D. (2014). The research on web-based testing environment using simulated annealing algorithm. Scientific World Journal, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/167124
  28. Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2013). The second wave of digital-era governance: A quasi-paradigm for government on the Web. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 371(1987). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2012.0382
  29. Muellerleile, & Robertson. (2018). Digital Weberianism: Bureaucracy, Information, and the Techno-rationality of Neoliberal Capitalism. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 25(1), 187. https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.25.1.0187
  30. Mutmainah, S., Kemendikbud, P., & Selatan, T. (2017). Feasibility Study of Bank Soal. 21, 14–26.
  31. OECD. (2018). PISA 2018 released financial literacy items. August, 1–27. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/test/
  32. Pakpahan, R. (2016). Computer based national exam model: Its benefits and barriers. Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 1(1), 19–35. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/124980-none-a7dd8e51.pdf
  33. Permatasari, Y. I., Hardjosoekarto, S., & Salomo, R. V. (2019). Institutional Transformation of Public Private Partnership to Ensure Low Transaction Costs: Case Study of Infrastructure Provision at the Ministry of Public Works and Housing of the Republic of Indonesia. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 33(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-019-09485-w
  34. Muhammaditya, N. & Hardjosoekarto, S. (2021). Driving Bureaucracy Towards Post NPM : Case Studies And TNA Item Bank Management. 11(1), 51–60. https://doi.org/10.26858/jiap.v11i1.19344
  35. Priatmoko, S., Kabil, M., Purwoko, Y., & Dávid, L. D. (2021). Rethinking sustainable community-based tourism: A villager’s point of view and case study in Pampang Village, Indonesia. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(6), 0–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063245
  36. Rahmanto, F., Pribadi, U., & Priyanto, A. (2021). Big Data: What are the Implications for Public Sector Policy in Society 5.0 Era? IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 717(1), 012009. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/717/1/012009
  37. Rajamani, K., & Kathiravan, V. (2013). An adaptive assessment system to compose serial test sheets using item response theory. Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Pattern Recognition, Informatics and Mobile Engineering, PRIME 2013, 120–124. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICPRIME.2013.6496458
  38. Reis, J., Amorim, M., Melão, N., & Matos, P. (2018). Digital transformation: A literature review and guidelines for future research. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 745(May), 411–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77703-0_41
  39. Reynold & Holwell, S. (2010). Systems Approaches to Managing Change: A Practical Guide. In Philosophy of Management (Vol. 15, Issue 3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40926-016-0039-5
  40. Sangodiah, A., & Ramendran, S. P. R. C. (2017). An integration of unsupervised approach of machine learning in item bank test system. Advanced Science Letters, 23(11), 11162–11165. https://doi.org/10.1166/asl.2017.10242
  41. Sasongko, N. A. (2020). STRATEGI NASIONAL KECERDASAN ARTIFISIAL INDONESIA Strategi Nasional Kecerdasan Artifisial adalah arah kebijakan nasional yang memuat area fokus dan bidang prioritas teknologi kecer... October.
  42. Segev, E. (2020). Textual network analysis: Detecting prevailing themes and biases in international news and social media. Sociology Compass, 14(4), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12779
  43. SIAP. (SIAP Puspendik). (2017, 27 Agustus). (Soal Pilihan Ganda PG) (File video), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0jEFSmS4KA
  44. Sunderland, M., Batterham, P., Carragher, N., Calear, A., & Slade, T. (2019). Developing and Validating a Computerized Adaptive Test to Measure Broad and Specific Factors of Internalizing in a Community Sample. Assessment, 26(6), 1030–1045. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191117707817
  45. Tassabehji, R., Hackney, R., & Popovič, A. (2016). Emergent digital era governance: Enacting the role of the “institutional entrepreneur” in transformational change. Government Information Quarterly, 33(2), 223–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.04.003
  46. Turner, M., Prasojo, E., & Sumarwono, R. (2019). The challenge of reforming big bureaucracy in Indonesia. Policy Studies, 0(0), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2019.1708301
  47. Uyar, A., Coureilles, D., Minimes, L., & Rochelle, L. (2019). Drivers of convergence / divergence of corporate governance codes of MENA countries Hany Elbardan * Ahmed Yamen. 13(3).
  48. Wang, B., Qin, X., Wang, C., Huang, W., Song, Y., & Cui, X. (2020). A distributed exam item bank system based on hadoop ecosystem. Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Educational Informatization, CSEI 2020, 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1109/CSEI50228.2020.9142493
  49. Wang, M. H., Wang, C. S., Lee, C. S., Lin, S. W., & Hung, P. H. (2014). Type-2 fuzzy set construction and application for adaptive student assessment system. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, 888–894. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2014.6891894
  50. Yan, C. (2016). Functional Design of English Online Examination System Based on ASP Technology. Icemaess 2015, 1140–1144. https://doi.org/10.2991/icemaess-15.2016.231