MANAGEMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ASSESSMENT IN HIGH SCHOOL: TRANSCENDENTAL FACTORS

. The purpose of this study is to examine the management of educational assessment taking into account several transcendental factors. Identification of transcendental factors arises from the context of the study based on the framework of public management and educational management. The research is focused on the weaknesses and strengths of data on the achievement of the educational standards, namely the educational assessment standard. Methodology: Concurrent triangulation design is used to examine the phenomenon of research. The Education Quality Assurance Institute contributed to this study in the form of secondary data on the report quality of education. Measures concerning eight National Education Standards are based on indicators in school self-evaluation instruments. Quality report card grades on the assessment standards are analyzed to obtain a frequency distribution consisting of standard deviations and average scores. The focuse group was set up to confirm satisfaction with the educational assessment services. The Miles-Huberman model is used as a qualitative data analysis procedure and processed using the ATLAS.ti software version 8. The research findings show that the factors of educational leadership, public service motivation, goal clarity, and commitment to values greatly influence the management of assessment in high schools in Central Java. model The model is similar to the Chuck William model. Researchers also compared Certo and Certo's model, POIC. The two models have been tested until now because they are the development of the POAC model (Terry and Franklin, 2000) POSDCO model (Koontz and O’donnell, 1976) and POSDCORB model (Gulick and Urwick, 2003). The two models try to be juxtaposed with the results of Ferrer's research about the assessment system. From a theoretical comparative analysis of management functions, this study focuses on transcendent factors in the management of educational assessment in Central Java Province, Indonesia.


INTRODUCTION
The return of authority on managing high school education from the district/city to the provincial government was realized in 2017. Since then, the task of the Provincial Education and Culture Office is not merely to carry out socialization and coordination on the implementation of educational programs. As the leading sector in the field of education, it should have strategic steps in solving educational problems, especially those that are rooted and unresolved from 2003 to 2019, namely the practice of educational assessment which has so far been oriented to academic justification. The Indonesian education world has undergone a fundamental change in the education system up to the assessment standards that began in 2003, since the advent of law number 20 of 2003 concerning the national education system. Since then, the curriculum issues have changed, national education standards have been changed to implement the 2013 curriculum, especially the centralized education assessment standards from 2003 to 2012, then fifty-fifty management between the central and regional governments in 2013-2016 and again decentralized since 2017 until now. This phenomenon shows that it is as if Indonesia repeats the history of the decentralization of valuation management that occurred between 1980 and 2002 (Puspendik.kemdikbud, 2019). This repetition of history is closely related to the Indonesian government's uncertainty over a standard format in printing the future of the nation's children.
Management of educational appraisal plays a large role in determining educational success (Popham, 2001;Wyatt-Smith and Cumming, 2009). On the other hand, educational appraisal without management appraisal is no different than a captain without a compass. Since the issue of educational assessment has been returned to the provincial government in the spirit that assessment is not justification for academic achievement, each province should have the characteristics of assessment governance that are appropriate to the characteristics of their respective regions. In this case, the Office of Education and Culture of Central Java Province was chosen to be a research site based on the highest teacher qualification level compared to East Java and West Java.  Education and Culture, 2019). In fact, until now high teacher competency has not influenced the improvement of education assessment so that it requires an appropriate model in managing educational assessment. Given, Central Java has more districts/cities, namely 34 districts/cities compared to East Java which consists of 29 districts/cities, and West Java consists of 18 districts/cities. When mapped, increasing teacher qualifications from 2016 to 2018 is not accompanied by the management of educational assessments as shown in the following table: In addition to the qualifications and design of assessment management, teacher qualifications also influence curriculum implementation (Darling-Hammond, 2004;Hodgson and Spours, 2002;D. Thompson et al., 2013). Curriculum development is a necessity while implementing curriculum design requires resource readiness, culture set, and mindset. The facts that occur in Indonesian education show that since the 2006 curriculum titled Education Unit Level Curriculum (KTSP) to the latest curriculum, namely the 2013 curriculum, the central government and even the provincial government does not guarantee the presence of a curriculum format that fits regional characteristics.
Whereas KTSP aims for each school to develop its curriculum, but the fact is that not many schools can achieve that goal (Raihani, 2007). Not yet finished with the issue of school unpreparedness in applying the curriculum, in 2013 the ministry of education and culture instructed the implementation of the 2013 curriculum. Unfortunately, teachers were not accustomed to curriculum changes so that in practice, many schools still used KTSP because of unprepared human resources and in several provinces who became a pilot began implementing the 2013 curriculum but were limited. Further development, from 2017 until now, every school has implemented the 2013 curriculum which is considered a holistic curriculum. Regrettably, the scientific approach leaves a new problem, namely that each school has not been able to touch the needs of taxonomic aspects of students to the analysis and application stages. Though the concept of the taxonomy of learning was echoed by Bloom in the mid-19th century then revised by Anderson and Krathwohl at the beginning of the millennium (Anderson et al., 2001;Bloom, 1956;Krathwohl, 2002).
Management strategy determines the achievement of objectives. (Certo and Certo, 2016;Robbins and Coulter, 2018). On behalf of balancing curriculum implementation, in 2015 authentic assessment strategies began to be put into practice. Not only that, to align between the needs of government and schools, but the assessment manager is also divided into three actors; teacher, school and government. The three actors are entitled to manage the achievements and development of students' learning. Contradictory facts reappear, the Office of Education and Culture of Central Java Province as an extension of the ministry of education does not have the right formulation in measuring the competency aspects of the social-spiritual attitude as contained in the 2013 curriculum which has authentic assessment. Even not a few schools confuse in determining the assessment of spiritual aspects.
The condition of high school education assessment in Central Java Province was reviewed based on the school self-evaluation instrument on the achievement of one of the eight National Education Standards. The eight standards include (1) graduate competency standards, (2) content standards, (3) process standards, (4) education assessment standards, (5) standards of educators and teaching staff, (6) facilities and infrastructure standards, (7) management standards, and (8) financing standards. Where, eight national education standards are the minimum criteria about the education system in the entire jurisdiction of the Unitary Republic of Indonesia (Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 32 of 2013 concerning Amendments to Government Regulation Number 19 of 2005 concerning National Education Standards, 2013). The focus of our research is on the weaknesses and strengths of data on the achievement of the fourth standard, namely the educational assessment standard. The selection of school self-evaluation instruments is due to the measurement of each indicator representing the standards to be achieved according to national education standards. Besides, school self-evaluation instruments are internal assessments that are managed directly by the school and for the benefit of the school. School residents can see themselves for one school year. For this reason, in this study, we have examined the achievement of assessment standards from 2016, 2017, until 2018.

LITERATURE REVIEW
The theoretical framework used in this study consisted of two groups. First is a review of best practice management based on public management assessment. Second, the study of management functions in public management. Public management best practice refers to the results of Ferrer's research on the educational assessment system in Latin America (Ferrer, 2006), Arnott on the impact of governance restructuring on school management in Scotland and England (Arnott, 2000), Fusarelli and Johnson about the effect of new public management on schools (Fusarelli and Johnson, 2004), Pellegrino about the design of grading systems (J. W. Pellegrino, 2009), Clarke about an effective assessment framework (Clarke, 2011), Pecheone about unifying assessments in classroom instruction (Pecheone et al., 2018), Conley and Hammond question assessment management for deeper learning (Conley and Darling-Hammond, 2013). While the study of the practice of public management functions refers to the Robbins and Coulter framework with the POLC model (Robbins and Coulter, 2018), Certo and Certo through the POIC model (Certo and Certo, 2016).
The basis of the policy in the management of assessment refers to the Regulation of the Minister of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia Number 23 of 2016 concerning Education Assessment Standards. The regulation explained that the manager of a valuation was (a). assessment of learning outcomes by educators; (b). assessment of learning outcomes by the education unit; and (c). assessment of learning outcomes by the Government. As for what is managed are student competencies in the aspects of attitude, knowledge, and skills as stipulated in the Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 20 of 2016 concerning Graduates Competency Standards. A year later, the three aspects were oriented towards the achievement of factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive dimensions (Kemendikbud, 2017). Regulation on assessment standards and graduate competency standards to respond to Indonesia's backwardness in the 2015 International Student Assessment Program (PISA) which occupies 64 positions from 65 countries. Even the latest report released by the OECD-PISA at the end of 2018 still positions Indonesia with Marocco and Lebanon (PISA, 2018). Noting this phenomenon, the Central Java province with high teacher qualifications should be able to prioritize pilot schools in the field of literacy and not stipulate Governor Regulation Number 10 of 2019 regarding Implementation of Anti-Corruption Education (semarang.bisnis.com, 2019). We are aware of the importance of anti-corruption education, but one indicator of widespread corruption is the lack of literacy, poor standards of minimum service in the field of education, as well as pure participation rates and gross participation rates that do not increase.
Eleven years ago, countries in various parts of the world had formulated a 21st-century learning framework (P21 Framework for 21st-century learning, 2009; Trilling and Fadel, 2009). Before that, Indonesia had formulated a similar thing by rolling in law number 20 of 2003 concerning the national education system which was oriented towards meeting national education standards. Unfortunately, the formulation was not enough to meet PISA expectations and the 21st learning framework, so in 2005 the Republic of Indonesia Government Regulation No. 32 of 2013 concerning Amendment to Government Regulation No. 19 of 2005 concerning National Education Standards. Again, ten years ago, namely, in 2015 Indonesia could not catch up in the world of educational assessment released by PISA. Noting this phenomenon, the government does not yet have a design regarding education management (J. Pellegrino et al., 2001;J. W. Pellegrino, 2014). In the absence of design, it has implications for the management of educational assessments at the level below it, which is carried out by the provincial government.
In addition to the lack of assessment management design, commitment to governance restructuring is a systemic obstacle (Amirrachman et al., 2013;Arnott, 2000;Bjork, 2004;Ferrer, 2006). The Indonesian government still exercises authority in managing educational assessments , "Management of educational assessment in high school: transcendental factors", Management and entrepreneurship: trends of development, Vol. 1, Issue 11, pp. 81-97, DOI: https://doi.org/10.26661/2522-1566 85 between the central government and regional governmentsbefore actually being returned to the provincial governmentnamely the formulation of 100% graduation assessments through national examinations from 2003 to 2005. In that year schools did not have the slightest right to pass the student. Then changed to 30:70 (school: government) in 2006-2010, changed again 40:60 (school: government). Then from 2011 to 2016 the management of educational assessment was at a ratio of 80:20 (School: Government). This final formulation is influenced by the issue of new public management which has a real impact on the management of educational assessments in various parts of the world (Fusarelli and Johnson, 2004) so countries in Asia are competing to improve the education system and education assessment (Bandur, 2012;Heyward et al., 2011;Patrinos et al., 2009). On the other hand, curriculum reforms are increasingly at odds with the goals of educational assessment because of the changing policies (Mukminin et al., 2019;Pratiwi, 2019;Raihani, 2007) so the goal seems ambiguous (Pandey and Rainey, 2007;Pandey and Wright, 2006). Towards 2017, the issue of returning authority from the central government to the provincial government is increasingly apparent. On the other hand, issues related to assessment as learning (Drake and Burns, 2004;Earl, 2013;Mutch, 2012;J. W. Pellegrino, 2014), assessment for learning (Black et al., 2005;Black and Wiliam, 2006;Wiliam, 2009), and assessment management oriented towards deeper learning (Conley and Darling-Hammond, 2013) also widely discussed by Indonesian scholars.
The search for an educational assessment management design that is suitable for the characteristics of the province requires an appropriate theoretical formulation. In this case, aspects of public management are examined using the POLC model (Robbins and Coulter, 2018). The model is similar to the Chuck William model. Researchers also compared Certo and Certo's model, POIC. The two models have been tested until now because they are the development of the POAC model (Terry and Franklin, 2000) POSDCO model (Koontz and O'donnell, 1976) and POSDCORB model (Gulick and Urwick, 2003). The two models try to be juxtaposed with the results of Ferrer's research about the assessment system. From a theoretical comparative analysis of management functions, this study focuses on transcendent factors in the management of educational assessment in Central Java Province, Indonesia.

METHODOLOGY
The Education Quality Assurance Institute contributed to this study in the form of secondary data on the report quality of education. Analysis of the data is to see the development of quality report cards from 2016, 2017, and 2018 on the achievement of the eight out of eight assessment standards that are standardized by the National Education Standards Agency. This quality report card consists of 598 public and private schools in 35 regencies/cities in Central Java Province. Measures to eight National Education Standards are based on indicators in school self-evaluation instruments. Quality report card grades on the assessment standards are analyzed to obtain a frequency distribution consisting of standard deviations and average scores (Bryman, 2006;Johnson and Turner, 2003;Mertens, 2010;Sandelowski, 2000).
Focus group consists of students, parents, and school community members and has been carried out to confirm satisfaction with the educational assessment services embedded with purposive-mixed-probability techniques (Creswell and Clark, 2011;Kemper et al., 2010). The sampling technique is part of the concurrent triangulation design (Creswell, 2012;Creswell and Creswell, 2018;Fetters et al., 2013;Morse, 2003;Teddlie and Yu, 2007). The Miles-Huberman model is used as a qualitative data analysis procedure (Miles et al., 2014) and processed using the ATLAS.ti software version 8.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The manager of educational assessment is oriented to the output or quality of education. Quality measures pay attention to the achievements of eight national education standards in the form of quality report cards. The measure is managed by the Education Quality Assurance Agency grouping them into 6 (six) categories, namely (1) towards National Standard Of Education 1 in the range of values from 0.00 to 2.04, (2) Towards National Standard Of Education 2 in range of values from 2.05 to 3.70, (3) to National Standard Of Education 3 in the range of values from 3.71 to 5.06, (4) Towards National Standard Of Education 4, in the range of values from 5.07 to 6.66, and (5) Meet the National Standard Of Education in the range of values 6.67 -7.00, and (6) Exceeds the National Standard Of Education if the achievement value > 7.00. The procedure for filling out a school self-evaluation instrument involves the school supervisor to carry out socialization regarding previous achievements. The school principal coordinates curriculum ship representatives and teachers. The filling is done and validated by the school principal and then deposited with the Educational Quality Assurance Institute to be corrected. If all data are valid, the Educational Quality Assurance Agency distributes quality report cards at each school at every level of education for evaluation.
The above statistical data are then continued by paying attention to thematic and categorical data at the qualitative data analysis stage. Our findings focus on determinant factors including (a) educational assessment standards that tend to be dynamic; (b) educational leadership that has not been programmed; (c) public service motivation aspects have not been fulfilled; (d) clarity of objectives in the computer-based national exams conducted by the government and school exams conducted by teachers and schools.

Educational Assessment Standards
Questioning the management of educational appraisal is very closely related to the actors who play a role in the management of educational appraisal. In this study we collected information and conducted an in-depth analysis of data released by the Educational Quality Assurance Agency, the Office of Education and Culture of Central Java Province, five sites at Semarang Central Java high schools, the National Accreditation Agency, and standards set by the National Standards Agency Education. The school as an implementer of assessment standards. The Office of Education and Culture of Central Java Province is tasked with assisting the implementation of the achievement of standards according to Norms, Standards, Procedures, and Criteria. The Education Quality Assurance Agency guarantees the quality of education and is tasked with surveying with an output report card on the quality of education. The National Accreditation Board measures the achievement of standards. The National Education Standards Agency sets standards. The role of the National Accreditation Board and the National Education Standards Agency is in the form of secondary data because their task is only to study education standards every four years. So our research focuses on three other actors.
Data released by the Institute for Quality Assurance of Education shows that the achievement of assessment standards is at an index of 83.61% and is the second-highest achievement after funding standards. A significant increase in the achievement of standards occurred in 2016-2017, namely 1.46 and continued to increase in 2018 amounting to 0.22.

Graph 1. The trend of average scores in the educational assessment standard
The phenomenon of changes in the determination of assessment and graduation from 80:30 (government: schools) in 2017 to 2021 is planned to be 100% of assessments determined by schools. This phenomenon shows that the trust of the government in schools was tapped in 2020. Whereas since 2014 the Republic of Indonesia Law No. 23 of 2014 has been issued concerning local government which explains that the provincial government is responsible for managing education, assessment up to graduation of high school and vocational high school.
Researchers investigated more deeply and found that in the quality report card there was an indicator "determining student graduation based on appropriate considerations", at 4.00-5.20 and was the smallest lift compared to other indicators. Some schools are ready for this change, but not a few are constrained because of teacher qualifications and the latest developments in making assessment instruments (Setiadi, 2016). Thematic data shows that teachers and schools tend to do academic justification. Student intelligence tends to be juxtaposed with report card grades. This mindset is still thick, considering the centralized assessment of education in Indonesia for too long.
Though seeing the latest developments shows that the learning framework of the 21 st century leads to collaboration between educators and students. In other words, the Department of Education and Culture of Central Java Province was late in responding to the latest educational developments. Mapping of the management of educational assessment aspects of meeting the assessment standards we describe as follows:

Educational Assessment Standards
Year of Quality Report

Educational leadership
The delay in the Office of Education and Culture in Central Java Province in responding to the latest developments does not make schools anxious. Although schools are merely implementing standard judgments each school plays its role through situational and transformative leadership types. This phenomenon is recorded in the teacher's effort when making decisions related to the implementation of higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) assessment and authentic assessment. Ideally, assessment of higher-order thinking skills should lead to the application and creation stages. Research findings show that most students are only able to analyze or C4 dimensions (Anderson et al., 2001;Krathwohl, 2002). When compared with ten years ago, the achievements of the dimensions C1 to C4 are significant achievements for the management of educational assessments in the province of Central Java. This achievement is an indication of the implementation of situational leadership where the teacher plays himself according to students' abilities. On the other hand, this phenomenon is very contrasting when juxtaposed with regulations regarding the assessment of higher-order thinking skills or metacognitive aspects. As noted, the rules regarding the assessment of metacognitive aspects were issued in 2014 in the Republic of Indonesia Minister of Education and Culture Regulation No. 104 of 2014 concerning Evaluation of Learning Outcomes by Educators on Basic Education and Secondary Education.  , "Management of educational assessment in high school: transcendental factors", Management and entrepreneurship: trends of development, Vol. 1, Issue 11, pp. 81-97, DOI: https://doi.org/10.26661/2522-1566 89 The aspect of transformative leadership appears from the cooperation between teachers and students which is reflected through authentic assessment. The assessment of aspects of knowledge, attitudes, and skills is a dimension in authentic assessment (Gulikers et al., 2004(Gulikers et al., , 2006Mueller, 2005). In the aspect of skills, teachers and students work together on small projects such as research on the detection of borax in meatballs, the dominance of the use of MSG in daily food, to historical research on the origin of the city of Semarang in Central Java. How teachers translate textual knowledge into contextual dimensions is an indication of transformative leadership (Wright et al., 2012;Yukl, 2010;Yukl and Lepsinger, 2004). Transformative leadership does not just influence others but how to participate in the same activities (Certo and Certo, 2016;Robbins and Coulter, 2018). However, these two types of leadership do not occur in most schools. This is where the Central Java Province's Office of Education and Culture and the Education Quality Assurance Agency need to be present to provide more space through coaching and mentoring programs called teacher-researcher programs. One of the disadvantages of education the two types of leadership are described as follows:

Public service motivation
The service on managing educational appraisal is not just measuring or formulating learning achievements in the form of numbers and descriptions. Service is not just how to plan, carry out to evaluate. Services regarding educational assessment should lead to loyalty, seriousness, and a strong commitment to the future of students. From Greece until now, motivation has been an integral part of educational services commensurate with pedagogy. All aspects of education position the motivation to shape themselves, balance emotions, and achieve achievements (Caprara et al., 2011;Christ et al., 2011;Corcoran and Tormey, 2010;H. Gardner, 2011;Gil-Olarte Márquez et al., 2006;Goleman, 2000Goleman, , 2009. The track record of public service motivation is summarized in the practice of authentic assessment of aspects of skills. The teacher and students collaborate on small-scale projects as Public service motivation is theoretically the individual's tendency to respond to unique basic motives in public institutions and organizations. This theory is based on the opinion that there are people who are interested and motivated to work in the public sector (Perry et al., 2010;Perry and Hondeghem, 2008;Perry and Porter, 1982;Perry and Wise, 1990). Public service motivation is a benchmark of achievement and performance (Pandey and Stazyk, 2008). High dedication and strong commitment shown by teachers through research is an indicator of norm-based and affective aspects. While at the rational stage or participate even advocating for social needs has not yet appeared. A summary of research findings on aspects of public service motivation is shown in the following figure:

Clarity of purpose
Educational assessments conducted by educators have achieved the goal. Likewise, the educational assessment carried out by the school through the school examination mechanism has a clear purpose. This clarity was detected from the implementation of the assessment aspects of knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Whereas the assessment conducted by the government does not show clarity of objectives in the aspects of assessment for learning and assessment as learning. Regulatively, the purpose of the national exam is directed at mapping the quality of education. Questioning the goal and some other elements as shown in the following  , "Management of educational assessment in high school: transcendental factors", Management and entrepreneurship: trends of development, Vol. 1, Issue 11, pp. 81-97, DOI: https://doi.org/10.26661/2522-1566  Noting the table above it must be shown that the computer-based national exam evaluation model is oriented towards the assessment of learning, ignoring the importance of assessment for learning and assessment as learning. The type of assessment is summative, which is separate from assessment and learning. Actors from implementing computer-based national exams are conducted by the government once a year. The school exam evaluation model is oriented towards all assessment approaches and accommodates all types of assessments conducted by teachers and schools. Two assessment models conducted by schools and the government have not been summarized in the design of the assessment. Through determinant factors predicted to facilitate policymakers and public managers in making the design of educational assessments.

CONCLUSION
Effective collaboration between the Educational Quality Assurance Agency and the Office of Education and Culture in Central Java Province is needed in improving the achievement of educational assessment standards. There is no guidance and assistance program so that research findings on teacher-researchers are ignored. The practice of public service motivation is recorded to be effective in norm-based and affective aspects, while the rational aspects were left untouched.
The clarity of the purpose of assessment is embedded in the school exams conducted by educators and schools. The computer-based national exams conducted by the government do not have clarity on aspects of assessment for learning and assessment as learning. Likewise, national examinations aimed at mapping the quality of education were not achieved. By considering the determinant factors, the design of the management of educational assessment will be easier to build.