School Principal Leadership Practices in the Implementation of School-Based Management: A Qualitative Case Study at SD Negeri 11 Air Kumbang

Muhammad Erfan Firdaus

Authors

Muhammad Erfan Firdaus Universitas PGRI Palembang Author

Keywords:

School-based management; school leadership; qualitative case study; financial transparency; community participation

Abstract

This study examined the leadership practices of a school principal in implementing School-Based Management (SBM) at SD Negeri 11 Air Kumbang. The research employed a qualitative case study design to obtain a comprehensive understanding of leadership roles within the school context. Data were collected through direct observation, in-depth interviews with the principal, teachers, administrative staff, and school committee members, as well as analysis of relevant school documents. The findings revealed four central leadership roles: democratic and participatory leadership in empowering staff, transparent and accountable financial management, active public relations engagement with the community, and adaptive strategies in optimizing limited resources. The principal demonstrated initiative in addressing local challenges while maintaining alignment with SBM principles. These findings highlight the significance of contextual leadership practices in supporting effective SBM implementation at the school level.

References

Anufia, T. A. dan B. (2019). Resume: instrumen pengumpulan data [Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam Negeri (STAIN) Sorong]. https://osf.io/preprints/inarxiv/s3kr6/download

Bandur, A. (2018). Stakeholders’ responses to school-based management in Indonesia. International Journal of Educational Management, 32(6), 1082–1098. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-08-2017-0200

Bandur, A., Hamsal, M., & Furinto, A. (2022). 21st century experiences in the development of school-based management policy and practices in Indonesia. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 21(1), 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-021-09293-x

Bjork, C. (2016). Decentralisation in education: Implications for policy and practice in developing countries. Comparative Education Review, 60(4), 659–681. https://doi.org/10.1086/688497

Bruns, B., Filmer, D., & Patrinos, H. A. (2019). Making schools work: New evidence on accountability reforms. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-0155-4

Bush, T. (2018). Transformational leadership and school improvement. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 46(4), 543–554. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143217739363

Caldwell, B. J. (2016). Impact of school autonomy on student achievement: Evidence from Australia. International Journal of Educational Management, 30(7), 1185–1206. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-10-2015-0144

Chapman, C., Muijs, D., Reynolds, D., Sammons, P., & Teddlie, C. (2016). The Routledge international handbook of educational effectiveness and improvement. Routledge.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute.

Day, C., Gu, Q., & Sammons, P. (2016). The impact of leadership on student outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 52(2), 221–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X15616863

Epstein, J. L. (2018). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429494673

Gümüş, S., Bellibaş, M. Ş., Esen, M., & Gümüş, E. (2020). A systematic review of studies on leadership and school outcomes in developing countries. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 48(6), 999–1020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143219869835

Gümüş, S., & Bellibaş, M. Ş. (2020). Leadership and student achievement: A systematic review in developing contexts. Educational Research Review, 31, 100345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100345

Hargreaves, A., & O’Connor, M. T. (2018). Collaborative professionalism: When teaching together means learning for all. Corwin.

Harris, A. (2017). Distributed leadership matters: Perspectives, practicalities, and potential. Corwin Press.

Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092

Leaver, C., Lemos, R., & Scur, D. (2023). Improving school management in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review. Economics of Education Review, 93, 102387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102387

Louis, K. S., & Murphy, J. (2017). Trust, caring and organizational learning: The leader’s role. Journal of Educational Administration, 55(1), 103–126. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-07-2016-0076

Malen, B., & Rice, J. K. (2018). The role of accountability in educational reform. Educational Policy, 32(3), 347–375. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904816687312

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.

OECD. (2020). School autonomy and accountability: Policy insights from PISA. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264301603-en

Pietsch, M., Aydin, B., & Gümüş, S. (2023). Putting the instructional leadership–student achievement relation in context. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 45(3), 421–445. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737231197434

Pont, B. (2020). A literature review of school leadership policy reforms. OECD Education Working Papers, 220, 1–42. https://doi.org/10.1787/8a5f3d8f-en

Pradana, R. (2022). Transparency in school operational funding management in Indonesia. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 34(2), 145–162.

Printy, S., & Liu, Y. (2021). Distributed leadership globally: The interactive nature of principal and teacher leadership. Journal of Educational Administration, 59(3), 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-09-2020-0205

Robinson, V. M. J., Lloyd, C. A., & Rowe, K. J. (2017). The impact of leadership on student outcomes. Educational Administration Quarterly, 53(5), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X17729408

Schleicher, A. (2018). World class: How to build a 21st-century school system. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264300002-en

Spillane, J. P. (2017). Distributed leadership in practice. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(2), 282–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215623782

Tao, Y., Abdul Kadir, S., & Kamarudin, N. B. K. (2025). The relationship between distributed leadership and school effectiveness. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 9(5), 3049–3062. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.905000237

Thien, L. M., & Adams, D. (2021). School autonomy and student performance. International Journal of Educational Development, 81, 102347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2020.102347

Transparency International. (2019). Strengthening transparency and accountability in public education systems. Transparency International.

World Bank. (2016). SABER school autonomy and accountability framework. World Bank.

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847