EFEKTIFITAS ADMINISTRASI PUBLIK DALAM SISTEM PENDIDIKAN: STUDI PERBANDINGAN INDONESIA DAN JEPANG
Main Article Content
Abstract
Public administration effectiveness is a crucial factor in supporting the success of a country's education system. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of public administration in the education system through a comparative study between Indonesia and Japan. The research method used is a qualitative approach using literature review techniques, including various scientific journals and relevant education policy documents. The study results indicate that public administration in education in Indonesia still faces several challenges, such as bureaucratic complexity, limited administrative capacity at the regional level, and suboptimal coordination between the central and regional governments, which impacts inequality in education quality. Meanwhile, Japan has a more structured and consistent public administration system, characterized by a clear division of authority, professionalism of its personnel, and the implementation of continuous policy evaluation. This study concludes that effective public administration contributes significantly to improving the quality and equity of education. The findings of this study are expected to serve as considerations for policymakers in efforts to improve educational administration governance in Indonesia.
Article Details
Section
Articles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Ananda, A., Gistituati, N., Pascasarjana, S., Padang, U. N., Artikel, I., Pendidikan, S., & Education, J. (2024). STUDI KOMPARATIF SISTEM PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA DAN. 12(1), 408–412.
Bp, S. A., Ananda, A., & Gistituati, N. (2021). The comparative study on Indonesian and Japanese basic education. 3(6), 380–386.
Darma, R., & Pendidikan, K. (2024). MENGATASI KESENJANGAN PENDIDIKAN. 7, 15429– 15436.
Halawa, D. P., Telaumbanua, M. S., & Buulolo, D. (2023). Perbandingan sistem pendidikan indonesia dan jepang. 6(1).
Siami, A. N. (2025). Comparative Study : Education Policy in Indonesia Versus Japan in Realizing Sustainable Development Goals 4 ( Quality Education ). 3(03), 208–214. https://doi.org/10.58812/eslhr.v3i03
Sommer Harrits, G. (2011). More than method?: A discussion of paradigm differences within mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 150–166.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010a). Putting the human back in ‘“human research methodology”’: The researcher in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 4, pp. 271–277. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010b). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. sage.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage publications.
Main Article Content
Abstract
Public administration effectiveness is a crucial factor in supporting the success of a country's education system. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of public administration in the education system through a comparative study between Indonesia and Japan. The research method used is a qualitative approach using literature review techniques, including various scientific journals and relevant education policy documents. The study results indicate that public administration in education in Indonesia still faces several challenges, such as bureaucratic complexity, limited administrative capacity at the regional level, and suboptimal coordination between the central and regional governments, which impacts inequality in education quality. Meanwhile, Japan has a more structured and consistent public administration system, characterized by a clear division of authority, professionalism of its personnel, and the implementation of continuous policy evaluation. This study concludes that effective public administration contributes significantly to improving the quality and equity of education. The findings of this study are expected to serve as considerations for policymakers in efforts to improve educational administration governance in Indonesia.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Ananda, A., Gistituati, N., Pascasarjana, S., Padang, U. N., Artikel, I., Pendidikan, S., & Education, J. (2024). STUDI KOMPARATIF SISTEM PENDIDIKAN INDONESIA DAN. 12(1), 408–412.
Bp, S. A., Ananda, A., & Gistituati, N. (2021). The comparative study on Indonesian and Japanese basic education. 3(6), 380–386.
Darma, R., & Pendidikan, K. (2024). MENGATASI KESENJANGAN PENDIDIKAN. 7, 15429– 15436.
Halawa, D. P., Telaumbanua, M. S., & Buulolo, D. (2023). Perbandingan sistem pendidikan indonesia dan jepang. 6(1).
Siami, A. N. (2025). Comparative Study : Education Policy in Indonesia Versus Japan in Realizing Sustainable Development Goals 4 ( Quality Education ). 3(03), 208–214. https://doi.org/10.58812/eslhr.v3i03
Sommer Harrits, G. (2011). More than method?: A discussion of paradigm differences within mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(2), 150–166.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010a). Putting the human back in ‘“human research methodology”’: The researcher in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, Vol. 4, pp. 271–277. Sage Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010b). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. sage.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2008). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage publications.