Suitability location for inclusive high school in Bekasi ...

40

e-ISSN 2597-9949

JGLITrop Vol.5, No.1, April 2021

© 2021 Department of Geography FMIPA UI

Journal homepage: www.jglitrop.ui.ac.id

Suitability location for inclusive high school in

Bekasi City West Java Province based on school

capacity

Galuh Izma Hasanah, Triarko Nurlambang, Faris Zulkarnain

Department of Geography, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science,

Kampus UI Depok, 16424

E-mail: [email protected]

Received: 09 October 2020; Accepted: 30 April 2021; Published: 30 April 2021

Abstract. The development of inclusive education provider school must also be supported by the

provision of good and optimal education facilities. In this study an evaluation was conducted on

senior high school (SMA) located in three (3) sub-district areas in Bekasi City, namely Kecamatan

Medan Satria, Kecamatan Jatiasih , and Kecamatan Bekasi Utara. These three areas were selected

based on the percentage of the availability of the highest educational facilities in Bekasi. The

Determination of location was chosen based on consideration through the site of school capacity

variables based on the quantitative method. The results showed school characteristics can be seen

as quality of the capacity for each school. In this study, it can be seen that schools can accommodate

1-7 study groups on average, the proportion of facilities and infrastructure for children with special

needs reaches 55.5%. The research showed that the calculation of school's capacity resulted in

20% of total number of schools in suitable criteria, 27% of schools that were in moderately suitable

criteria, 50% were in less suitable criteria, and only 3% of schools were in marginally suitable

criteria

Keywords: School Capacity, Senior High School, Inclusive school

1. Introduction

In schools that provide inclusive education, persons with disabilities still face physical barriers i.e.

access to stairs, classrooms, laboratories and libraries, and non-physical barriers such as: emotional

isolation and bullying from friends and parents, and discriminatory behavior from teachers (Murdianto

& Jayadi, 2020; Amka, 2017; Wibowo & Muin, 2018). At the formal education level, in general,

expanding access and increasing equitable distribution of education are still the main problems (Lithari

& Rogers, 2017). In this case, children who need special attention (children with special needs) also

have not fully received good education services (Hakim, 2016; Lithari & Rogers, 2017). As stated in

Article 11 of Law Number 20 of 2003 explains that to ensure equal distribution of educational

opportunities, the government is obliged to provide services and facilities as well as to ensure the

implementation of quality education for every citizen without discrimination (Hakim, 2016).

The existence of space use can vary according to age, condition of the child and available facilities

(Elsley, 2004; Lithari & Rogers, 2017). The ease of mobility and not endangering students with special

needs is a requirement for the formation of schools that provide inclusive education, which is basically

the capacity of the school itself (Cousins, 2005; General Guidelines for Implementing Inclusive

Education, 2011). Referring to the Special Guidelines for the Implementation of Inclusive Education at

mailto:[email protected]

41

Hasanah et al. (2021). Jurnal Geografi Lingkungan Tropik (Journal of Geography of Tropical Environments), 5 (1), 40-52

the Ministry of National Education, Directorate General of Management of Primary and Secondary

Education, Directorate of Special School Development in 2007, in learning at schools, the facilities and

infrastructure needed by children with disabilities include assessment tools, physical training tools, self-

development tools and motion development, orthotic and practical tools, and academic aids. Based on

the Regulation of the Minister of National Education RI Number 24-year 2007 which includes facilities

and infrastructure for SD / MI, SMP / MTs, and SMA / MA. The provisions stipulated in this standard

include educational units, land area, buildings, infrastructure and facilities. This study reviews the

educational unit in which it regulates the number of study groups and existing infrastructure at the

school. From this background, geography as a science that studies phenomena that exist on the earth's

surface and their contents takes a role in the field of education. One of them is related to the evaluation

of the suitability location of high schools (SMA) that provide inclusive education in Bekasi City.

Previous studies have already investigated the geographic perspective for assessing the general school’s

location around the globe (Thelin & Niedomysl, 2015; Pearman & Swain, 2017; He & Giuliano, 2008;

Yoon et al., 2018). However, the research about inclusive high school is quite new.

2. Research Methodology

2.1. First Sub Subject

Bekasi City has three sub-districts with the highest percentage of available educational facilities, namely

Medan Satria sub-districts, Jatiasih sub-districts, and North Bekasi sub-districts. The availability of

educational facilities is taken from the number of schools per population multiplied by one hundred

percent (Ariastita, 2017). Of the three sub-districts with the highest percentage of availability

educational facilities, there are nine (9) schools in Medan Satria District, seven (7) schools in Jatiasih

District, and fourteen (14) schools in North Bekasi sub-districts.

2.2. Process and Data Analysis

2.2.1. School’s Study Group

The capacity is taken based on the number of study groups that can be accepted by each school. With

the standard of the Ministry of Education and Culture, namely one study group (rombel) consisting of

32 children, but for schools that provide inclusive education, the presence of special needs students is

limited to only 8 people per study group. So that the more study groups each school received, the more

students will be in the school.

Table 1. School’s Study Group Assessment

Source Variable Variable Units Criteria Weight Scale

Standard

Operational

Procedure for the

Delivery of

Inclusive Education,

Ministry of National

Education, 2007

PERMENDIKNAS

Number 33, 2008

School

Capacity

31 - 37 Study Group Very Suitable

0,148

5

22 - 30 Study Group Suitable 4

14 – 21 Study Group Moderately Suitable 3

8 – 13 Study Group Less Suitable 2

1 – 7 Study Group Marginally Suitable 1

2.3. School Facilities and Infrastructure

The existence of facilities and infrastructure is illustrated through the calculation of the percentage of

educational statistics proposed by Sudidjono in 2012. Through this data analysis stage, the researcher

can describe the percentage value of the adequacy of facilities and infrastructure. These statistical

calculations can be seen in formula 1.

42


(𝑃 = 𝑓

𝑁× 100%)....................................................................................................................... (1)

remarks :

P = Percentage number

f = The number of subjects in a certain category

N = amount required

If each facility and infrastructure value has been obtained, the percentage can be divided by 2

(based on the percent of facilities and infrastructure) to get an average percentage of all facilities and

infrastructure in each school, which can be seen in formula 2.

(P SarPras = P Sarana +P Prasarana

2)……………………………………………………………..(2)

Table 2. Assessment of School Facilities and Infrastructure

Source Variable Variable

Units Criteria Weight Scale

Standard Operational

Procedure for the Delivery of

Inclusive Education, Ministry

of National Education, 2007

(Elsley, 2004)

Infrastructure

>58% Very

Suitable

0,148

5

50 - 57% Suitable 4

42 - 49% Moderately

Suitable 3

35 – 41% Less Suitable 2

27 – 34 % Marginally

Suitable 1

The parameters determined in collecting data on the availability of facilities and infrastructure for

schools that provide inclusive education consist of 5 types of facilities and 7 types of infrastructure.

with the result that if the percentage calculation for facilities is included, a total of 5 n facilities and 7 n

infrastructure will form the suitability level. It should be remembered that all the existing criteria must

be met by each unit variable if the variable unit can be said to be available.

Table 3. Criteria for School Facilities and Infrastructure

Source Variable Variable Units

Standard Operational Procedure

for the Delivery of Inclusive

Education, Ministry of National

Education, 2007 (Elsley, 2004)

Facilities

Classroom

Library room

Laboratory

School's Health Clinic Room

Toilet

Playground Exercising

Self-Development and Movement

Building

Infrastructure

Movement Ability Assessment Tool

Self-Building Tools

Physical Exercise Tools

Academic props

43


3. Results and Discussion

3.1. School’s Study Group

Data for study groups that can be accepted by schools is taken from the 2020 Bekasi City education

main data (DAPODIK). It can be seen that public schools are a type of school that has a higher capacity

than private schools. So that public schools can be said to be very suitable to become schools that

provide inclusive education. The capacity of each object school can be seen in table 4.

Table 4. School Capacity

Sub-District School Study Group Scoring

Medan Satria

SMAN 10 Bekasi 32 5

SMAS Attaqwa 4 1

SMAS Bina Tunggal 3 1

SMAS Cindera Mata 12 2

SMAS Galatia 6 1

SMAS Islam Al-Azhar Harapan Indah 6 1

SMAS Patriot Bekasi 9 2

SMAS Penabur 18 3

SMAS Taman Harapan 1 17 3

North Bekasi

SMAN 20 Bekasi 11 2

SMAN 14 Bekasi 35 5

SMAN 4 Bekasi 31 5

SMA Galajuara 5 1

SMA Islam Al-Azhar 8 18 3

SMA IT Al Muchtar 5 1

SMA Kristen Penabur Summarecon 11 2

SMA PGRI 2 Kota Bekasi 6 1

SMAS Darut Taubah 6 1

SMAS Flora 4 1

SMAS Islam An Nur 3 1

SMAS It Gema Nurani 6 1

SMAS Mutiara 17 Agustus 15 3

SMAS Taman Harapan 2 6 1

Jatiasih

SMAN 11 Bekasi 30 4

SMAS Ar Ridwan 6 1

SMAS Gema Islami 3 1

SMAS IT Yapidh 13 2

SMAS Malidar 6 1

SMAS Mudi Al Aziziyyah 3 1

SMAS Tulus Bhakti 17 3

There is only one public school in Jatiasih sub-district, so in this sub-district the highest capacity

is at SMAN 11 Bekasi. Followed by private schools that have less capacity than SMAN 11 Bekasi,

namely SMA Tulus Bhakti which is in moderately suitable criteria, SMAS IT Yapidh with less suitable

criteria and four other high schools with marginally suitable criteria, namely SMA Gema Islami, SMA

Mudi Al Aziziyyah , SMA Malidar, and SMA Ar Ridwan.

In Medan Satria sub-district, there is only one public school type, namely SMAN 10 Bekasi. So

that the school can accommodate more children with special need is SMAN 10 Bekasi and the least is

SMA Bina Tunggal according to the number of study groups accepted in each school. So, it can be said

that SMAN 10 Bekasi is very suitable to be developed into a school that provides inclusive education

in Medan Satria sub-district because of the large number of students accepted. Followed by private high

44


schools consisting of SMA Penabur Harapan Indah and SMA Taman Harapan 1 which is classified as

moderately suitable criteria, SMA Cindera Mata and SMA Patriot Bekasi which are classified as less

suitable criteria and SMA At taqwa, SMA Al Azhar Harapan Indah, SMA Galatia, and SMA Bina

Tunggal which are classified as marginally suitable criteria.

In North Bekasi sub-district, schools that can accommodate the most children with special need

are SMAN 4 Bekasi and SMAN 14 Bekasi, while the smallest is SMA Islam An-Nur which a private

high school. However, in this sub-district there are public schools with capacities that are not that much

compared to other public schools, namely SMAN 20 Bekasi. So that for SMAN 4 Bekasi and SMAN

14 Bekasi are included in the category very suitable to be developed into schools that provide inclusive

education while other schools that are entirely private are SMA Flora, SMA Galajuara, SMA Darut

Taubah, SMA Gema Nurani, and SMA IT Al Muchtar. SMA An-Nur, SMAS Taman Harapan 2 and

SMA PGRI 2 in Bekasi City are included in the category of schools that are in marginally suitable

criteria to be developed into schools that provide inclusive education. However, in this sub-district other

private schools are in the category of schools that are moderately suitable criteria and less suitable to

be developed into schools that provide inclusive education, namely SMA Islam Al Azhar 8 and SMA

Mutiara 17 Agustus which are included in the moderately suitable criteria. SMAK Penabur

Summarecon and SMAN 20 Bekasi are also included in less suitable criteria.

3.2. School Facilities and Infrastructure

The existence of facilities and infrastructure is marked based on coding 1 (available) and 0 (not

available). The Percentage calculation of the availability of facilities at each school can be seen in table

5 and table 6. From these data it can be seen that the additional of academic learning aids are not only

specific to children with disabilities. All schools in three sub-districts that have the highest percentage

of availability of educational facilities are not available with facilities that support the existence of

children with disabilities except for one school, namely SMAS AT Taqwa, which has the status of a

private school, the school gets assistance from the government in the form of wheelchairs for children

with disabilities.

Table 5. Percentage of School Facilities Availability

School

Movement

Ability

Assessment

Tool

Physical

Exercise

Tools

Self-

Building

Tools

Alat Bantu

Belajar

Akademik

Percentage

(%)

SMAN 10 Bekasi 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Attaqwa 0 0 1 1 50

SMAS Bina

Tunggal 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Cindera

Mata 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Galatia 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Islam Al-

Azhar Harapan

Indah

0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Patriot

Bekasi 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Penabur 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Taman

Harapan 1 0 0 0 1 25




SMA Galajuara 0 0 0 1 25

45


School

Movement

Ability

Assessment

Tool

Physical

Exercise

Tools

Self-

Building

Tools

Alat Bantu

Belajar

Akademik

Percentage

(%)

SMA Islam Al-

Azhar 8 0 0 0 1 25

SMA IT Al

Muchtar 0 0 0 1 25

SMA Kristen

Penabur

Summarecon

0 0 0 1 25

SMA PGRI 2

Kota Bekasi 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Darut

Taubah 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Flora 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Islam An

Nur 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS It Gema

Nurani 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Mutiara

17 Agustus 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Taman

Harapan 2 0 0 0 1 25


SMAS Ar

Ridwan 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Gema

Islami 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS IT Yapidh 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Malidar 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Mudi Al

Aziziyyah 0 0 0 1 25

SMAS Tulus

Bhakti 0 0 0 1 25

Table 6. Percentage of School Infrastructure Availability

School Classroom Library

room

Laboratory Toilet School's

Health

Clinic

Playground

Exercising

Playground

Exercising

Persentase

(%)

SMAN 10

Bekasi

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS

Attaqwa

1 0 1 1 1 1 0 71

SMAS Bina

Tunggal

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS

Cindera

Mata

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 71

SMAS

Galatia

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 71

46



room


Health

Clinic

Playground

Exercising

Playground

Exercising

Persentase

(%)

SMAS Islam

Al-Azhar

Harapan

Indah

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMAS

Patriot

Bekasi

1 0 1 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS

Penabur

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMAS

Taman

Harapan 1

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS 11

Bekasi

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS Ar

Ridwan

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 71

SMAS

Gema Islami

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS IT

Yapidh

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS

Malidar

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 71

SMAS Mudi

Al

Aziziyyah

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS Tulus

Bhakti

0 0 0 0 1 1 0 29

SMAN 20

Bekasi

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAN 14

Bekasi

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAN 4

Bekasi

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

SMAS

Galajuara

1 0 0 1 1 1 0 57

SMA Islam

Al-Azhar 8

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMA IT Al

Muchtar

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMA

Kristen

Penabur

Summarecon

Bekasi

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMA PGRI

2 Kota

Bekasi

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 71

SMAS Darut

Taubah

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMAS Flora 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 43

47



room


Health

Clinic

Playground

Exercising

Playground

Exercising

Persentase

(%)

SMAS Islam

An Nur

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 71

SMAS It

Gema

Nurani

1 1 0 1 1 1 0 71

SMAS

Mutiara 17

Agustus

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 86

SMAS

Taman

Harapan 2

1 1 0 0 1 1 0 57

Similar to facilities, the three sub-districts with the highest percentage of availability of educational

facilities were on infrastructure which focused not only on the presence or absence of infrastructure in

school but on whether the infrastructure was accessible to all, Especially for children with special needs.

The availability of infrastructure is also seen in the accessibility of infrastructure that can be reached by

the children with special needs. The school with the highest percentage has an elevator in school

building which allows children with special needs able to easily mobilize from one room to another.

This can be seen in SMAS Al-Azhar and SMAK Penabur. Unlike schools that have elevator

facilities, some schools facilitate the transfer of space in order to be reached by students with special

needs, namely SMA Mutiara 17 August. And the school which only consists of one floor, namely SMAS

Gema Islami which should be easily accessible, however the laboratory infrastructure is not available

and access to the toilet is difficult even though is located on the 1st floor.

So that from all the percentages of infrastructure availability, it can be seen that the schools with

highest percentage in Medan Satria sub-District are SMAS Al-Azhar Harapan Indah and SMA Penabur

with a percentage of 86% and the smallest are SMAN 10 Bekasi and SMA Taman Harapan 1 with a

percentage of 57%.

For Jatiasih Sub-district, the highest percentage are SMAS Ar Ridwan and SMA Malidar with a

percentage of 71% and the smallest percentage was at SMA Tulus Bhakti with a percentage of 57%.

Meanwhile, for North Bekasi sub-District, the highest percentage was at SMAS Al-Azhar 8, SMAK

Penabur Summarecon Bekasi, SMAS Mutiara 17 Agustus, and SMA ITAl Muchtar with 86% and the

smallest percentage was SMA Flora with 43%. To get the suitability class criteria, the average

percentage of the existing facilities and infrastructure must be found first. So that the results can be seen

in table 7.

Table 7. Value of Facilities and Infrastructure Percentage

Sub-

District School Name

%

Facilities

%

Infrastructure

%

Average Scoring

Medan

Satria

SMAN 10 Bekasi 25 57 41 2

SMAS Attaqwa 50 71 60.5 5

SMAS Bina Tunggal 25 57 41 2

SMAS Cindera Mata 25 71 48 3

SMAS Galatia 25 71 48 3

SMAS Islam Al-Azhar

Harapan Indah 25 86 55.5 4

SMAS Patriot Bekasi 25 57 41 2

48


Sub-


%

Facilities

%

Infrastructure

%

Average Scoring

SMAS Penabur 25 86 55.5 4

SMAS Taman Harapan 1 25 57 41 2

Jatiasih

SMAS 11 Bekasi 25 57 41 2

SMAS Ar Ridwan 25 71 48 3

SMAS Gema Islami 25 57 41 2

SMAS IT Yapidh 25 57 41 2

SMAS Malidar 25 71 48 3

SMAS Mudi Al Aziziyyah 25 57 41 2

SMAS Tulus Bhakti 25 29 27 1

North

Bekasi




SMAS Galajuara 25 57 41 2

SMA Islam Al-Azhar 8 25 86 55.5 4

SMA IT Al Muchtar 25 86 55.5 4

SMA Kristen Penabur

Summarecon Bekasi 25 86 55.5 4

SMA PGRI 2 Kota Bekasi 25 71 48 3

SMAS Darut Taubah 25 86 55.5 4

SMAS Flora 25 43 34 1

SMAS Islam An Nur 25 71 48 2

SMAS IT Gema Nurani 25 71 48 2

SMAS Mutiara 17 Agustus 25 86 55.5 4

SMAS Taman Harapan 2 25 57 41 2

After getting the average percentage of facilities and infrastructure, scoring can be determined

based on the percentage and the multiplication of results. So it can be seen based on the variables of

facilities and infrastructure for all schools in 3 districts.

In three sub-districts, the suitability for public high schools in Medan Satria Subdistrict, Jatiasih

Sub-district and North Bekasi Sub-district are less suitable criteria. Whereas for private high school,

the criteria vary from very suitable, to marginally suitable in terms of facilities and infrastructure as

schools that provide inclusive education. In Medan Satria Sub-district itself, a private school, namely

SMA At Taqwa which is included in the category very suitable by following per under the overall

percentage of 60.5%, followed by two other private high schools namely SMA Penabur Harapan Indah

and SMA Al Azhar Harapan Indah which are included in the category according to the percentage

55.5%. SMA Cindera Mata and SMA Galatia which are moderately suitable criteria according to the

percentage of 48%, but there are also private high schools with less suitable criteria in Medan Satria

sub-district, namely SMA Taman Harapan 1, SMA Bina Tunggal, and SMA Patriot Bekasi

For Jatiasih Sub-district, three categories of suitability have been formed, namely moderately

suitable criteria for private high school which are SMA Malidar and SMA Islam Ar Ridwan with a

percentage of 48% and the less suitable criteria owned by public SMA, namely SMAN 11 Bekasi as

much as 41% and private SMA namely SMA Gema Islamic, SMA Mudi Al Aziziyyah, SMAS IT

Yapidh. Meanwhile, marginally suitable criteria was at SMA Tulus Bhakti with a percentage of only

27%.

In North Bekasi sub-district, schools with the suitable criteria are in private high schools, namely

SMA IT Al Muchtar, SMA Darut Taubah, SMA Al Azhar 8, SMAK Penabur Summarecon, and SMA

49


Mutiara 17 Agustus with a percentage of facilities and infrastructure for children with special needs in

schools is 55, 5%. And for the moderately suitable criteria, there is only one private high school in this

sub-district, namely SMA PGRI 2 Bekasi City as much as 48%, while for the less suitable category in

North Bekasi District, it is dominated by private high school, namely SMA Galajuara, SMA IT Gema

Nurani, and SMA Taman Harapan 2 and SMA An-Nur with a percentage of 41%. Although there are

public high schools, namely SMAN 4 Bekasi, SMAN 14 Bekasi, and SMAN 20 Bekasi, which fall into

this category.

2.3.1 Suitability of School Locations for Inclusive Education Based on School Capacity

The total value of this summation is used to find out which schools are suitable to be developed into

schools that provide inclusive education based on school capacity.

Table 8. Value of the Suitability of School Capacity

Sub-


Study

Group

Score

Facilities and

Infrastructure

Score

Total

Score

Medan

Satria

SMAN 10 Bekasi 5 2 7

SMAS Attaqwa 1 5 6

SMAS Bina Tunggal 1 2 3

SMAS Cindera Mata 2 3 5

SMAS Galatia 1 3 4

SMAS Islam Al-Azhar Harapan

Indah

1 4

5

SMAS Patriot Bekasi 2 2 4

SMAS Penabur 3 4 7

SMAS Taman Harapan 1 3 2 5

Jatiasih

SMAS 11 Bekasi 4 2 6

SMAS Ar Ridwan 1 3 4

SMAS Gema Islami 1 2 3

SMAS IT Yapidh 2 2 4

SMAS Malidar 1 3 4

SMAS Mudi Al Aziziyyah 1 2 3

SMAS Tulus Bhakti 3 1 4

North

Bekasi



SMAN 4 Bekasi 5 2 7

SMAS Galajuara 1 2 3

SMA Islam Al-Azhar 8 3 4 7

SMA IT Al Muchtar 1 4 5

SMA Kristen Penabur Summarecon

Bekasi

2 4

6

SMA PGRI 2 Kota Bekasi 1 3 4

SMAS Darut Taubah 1 4 5

SMAS Flora 1 1 2

SMAS Islam An Nur 1 2 3

SMAS IT Gema Nurani 1 2 3

SMAS Mutiara 17 Agustus 3 4 7

SMAS Taman Harapan 2 1 2 3

After being calculated based on the calculation of the suitability by adding up the scoring of each

sub variable, it can be concluded that the value of the location of the school that provides inclusive

50


education in the city of Bekasi is based on the school layout. The number of scores generated is divided

into several criteria which have been adjusted to the existing criteria in the variable. The scoring of each

criterion can be seen in table 9.

Table 9. Value and Criteria of Capacity Conformity

Total Score Criteria

>8 Very Suitable

7 - 8 Suitable

5 – 6 Moderately Suitable

3 – 4 Less Suitable

1 – 2 Marginally Suitable

So that it can form a map to evaluate the suitability of school location that provide inclusive

education. The results showed that the calculation of school's capacity resulted in 20% of total number

of schools in Suitable category, 27% of schools that were in Moderately Suitable criteria, 50% were in

less suitable criteria, and only 3% of schools were in marginaly suitable criteria in three research sub-

districts with highest percentage of educational facilities in Bekasi City.

Figure 1. Distribution of Senior High School in North Bekasi Sub-District Based on School Capacity

Legend

51


Figure 2. Distribution of Senior High School in Jatiasih Sub-District and Medan Satria Sub-District

Based on School Capacity

4. Conclusions

School characteristics can be seen as quality of the capacity for each school. In this study, it can be seen

that schools in three sub-districts with the highest percentage of educational facilities availability can

accommodate 1-7 study groups on average, the proportion of facilities and infrastructure for children

with special needs reaches 55.5%. The research showed that the calculation of school's capacity resulted

in 20% of total number of schools in suitable criteria, 27% of schools that were in moderately suitable

criteria, 50% were in less suitable criteria, and only 3% of schools were in marginally suitable criteria.

52


References

Amka (2017). Problems and challenges in the implementation of inclusive education in Indonesia.

International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 7(10), 159-167.

Ariastita, P.G. (2017). Strategi Penerapan Kota Kompak Berdasarkan Pola Urban Compactness di Kota

Bekasi.

Cousins, J. (2005). Disabled children who need permanence: Barriers to placement. Adoption &

Fostering, 29(3), 6-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/030857590502900303

Elsley, S. (2004). Children’s experience of public space. Children and Society, 18(2), 155–164.

https://doi.org/10.1002/chi.822

Hakim, L. (2016). Pemerataan akses pendidikan bagi rakyat sesuai dengan amanat Undang-Undang

Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional. EduTech: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan

Dan Ilmu Sosial, 2(1), 53–64. Retrieved from:

http://jurnal.umsu.ac.id/index.php/edutech/article/view/575

He, S.Y. & Giuliano, G. (2018). School choice: understanding the trade-off between travel distance and

school quality. Transportation, 45, 1475-1498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-017-9773-3

Lithari, E. & Roger, C. (2017). Care-less spaces and identity construction: transition to secondary

school for disabled children. Children’s Geographies, 15(3), 259-273.

https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2016.1219021

Murdianto, M. & Jayadi, S. (2020). Discriminative stigma against inclusive students in vocational high

school in Mataram, Indonesia. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious

Understanding, 7(1), 614-622. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2016.1219021

Pearman, F.A. & Swain, W.A. (2017). School choice, gentrification, and the variable significance of

racial stratification in urban neighborhoods. Sociology of Education,90(3), 213-235.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717710494

Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia (PERMENDIKNAS). 2008. Standar sarana

dan prasarana untuk Sekolah Dasar Luar Biasa (SMA PENYELENGGARA PENDIDIKAN

INKLUSIF), Sekolah Menengah Pertama Luar Biasa (SMPLB), dan Sekolah Menengah Atas

Luar Biasa (SMALB). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional RI Nomor 33 Tahun 2008.

Thelin, M. & Niedomysl, T. (2015). The (ir)relevance of geography for school choice: Evidence from

a Swedish choice experiment. Geoforum, 67, 110-120.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.003

Wibowo, S.B. & Muin, J.A. (2018). Inclusive education in Indonesia: Equality education Access for

disabilities. The 1st International Conference on South East Asia Studies, KnE Social Sciences,

484-493. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i5.2351

Yoon, E., Lubienski, C., & Lee, J. (2017). The geography of school choice in a city with growing

inequality: the case of Vancouver. Journal of Educational Policy, 33(2), 279-298.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1346203

https://doi.org/10.1177/030857590502900303

https://doi.org/10.1002/chi.822

http://jurnal.umsu.ac.id/index.php/edutech/article/view/575

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-017-9773-3

https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2016.1219021

https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2016.1219021

https://doi.org/10.1177/0038040717710494

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.11.003

https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i5.2351

https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2017.1346203

Suitability location for inclusive high school in Bekasi ...

Documents

Transcript of Suitability location for inclusive high school in Bekasi ...