Dwi Anggorowati Rahayu, Fida Rachmadiarti, M. Jacky, Rusly Hidayah, Supriyanto Supriyanto

Best Practice Implementasi Mobilitas Akademik Magang di Universitas Negeri Surabaya

Introduction

Best practice implementasi mobilitas akademik magang di universitas negeri surabaya. Teliti best practice implementasi magang MBKM di Universitas Negeri Surabaya. Program mobilitas akademik ini terbukti efektif membekali mahasiswa hard & soft skill dan pengalaman industri berharga.

Abstract

Kegiatan pembelajaran magang merupakan pelaksanaan dari kebijakan Merdeka Belajar Kampus Merdeka (MBKM) yang dicanangkan oleh Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Republik Indonesia. Tujuan dari kebijakan ini adalah untuk memperkaya pengalaman dan pengetahuan mahasiswa melalui keterhubungan dengan industri. Program ini telah dilaksanakan sejak tahun 2020, namun hingga saat ini belum ada evaluasi yang menyeluruh untuk menilai keberhasilan implementasinya, sehingga penelitian ini menjadi sangat penting untuk dilakukan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menghasilkan informasi mengenai efektivitas dan efisiensi program pertukaran mahasiswa yang dapat digunakan sebagai masukan dalam pengambilan keputusan kebijakan. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah desain evaluatif dengan pendekatan kualitatif deskriptif, menggunakan model evaluasi CIPP, dan data dikumpulkan melalui Google Form. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pelaksanaan program magang di Universitas Negeri Surabaya berjalan dengan baik sesuai dengan tiga skema magang yaitu Magang Kementrian, Magang Program Studi dan Magang Universitas. Universitas Negeri Surabaya berhasil mempersiapkan aspek akademik dan non-akademik dengan baik, sehingga mahasiswa memperoleh pengalaman hard dan soft skill bersama industri, pembelajaran yang optimal, pemahaman pola kerja, serta peningkatan prestasi akademik mereka.

Review

This paper presents a timely and relevant evaluation of the implementation of the Merdeka Belajar Kampus Merdeka (MBKM) internship program at Universitas Negeri Surabaya (UNESA). Given that the MBKM policy, launched in 2020, has lacked comprehensive evaluation, this research fills a significant gap by providing initial insights into its on-the-ground execution. The study's objective to generate information on the program's effectiveness and efficiency for policy decision-making is commendable, positioning the work as a valuable contribution to understanding the practical outcomes of a major national educational initiative. The use of an evaluative design with a descriptive qualitative approach, employing the CIPP model, provides a structured framework for the assessment. The findings indicate a largely successful implementation of the internship program at UNESA across its three designated schemes (Ministry, Study Program, and University internships). A key strength highlighted is UNESA's effective preparation of both academic and non-academic aspects, which seemingly fostered a conducive environment for student development. The research effectively demonstrates tangible benefits for students, including the acquisition of essential hard and soft skills through industry engagement, optimal learning experiences, a clearer understanding of professional work patterns, and even an improvement in academic achievement. These positive outcomes underscore the potential of the MBKM program when robustly implemented and managed at the institutional level. While the study provides a positive account of the program's implementation, the abstract leaves some room for further detail and critical discussion. The methodology describes a "descriptive qualitative" approach with data collected via "Google Form," which could benefit from further elaboration on how qualitative depth was achieved through this method. For an evaluative study intended to inform policy, a more nuanced discussion of potential challenges, areas for improvement, or unexpected outcomes beyond the overwhelmingly positive findings would enhance its utility. Future iterations of this research could also more explicitly detail the specific metrics or qualitative indicators used to assess "effectiveness and efficiency" within the CIPP model, thereby strengthening the empirical basis for the conclusions and providing richer input for broader policy refinement.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.