Implementation of Internal Quality Assurance System Private College to Improve the Quality of Graduates in The Era of the Industrial Revolution 4.0

Abstract

This research generally aims to find an overview of the Implementation of the Internal Quality Assurance System (SPMI) of Private Universities to Improve the Quality of Graduates in the Era of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 and who are the object of research at the Satya Negara Indonesia University (USNI) and the Kusuma Negara College of Teacher Training and Education. (STKIP-KN). According to the results of the research, the implementation of the internal quality assurance system in private universities in Jakarta from the two universities that became the object of research in general is in accordance with the stages of the process, but has not yet exceeded the results of the quality standards set. This research is a qualitative research with a case study method approach and according to Law Number 12 of 2012 Article 52 it is stated that higher education quality assurance is a systemic activity to improve the quality of higher education in a planned and sustainable manner, and quality assurance as referred to is carried out through the principles of establishing, implementing, evaluation, control and improvement (PPEPP) of Higher Education standards. The theoretical basis used is Total Quality Management. Universities that are the object of research, have established an internal quality assurance unit called the Quality Assurance Institute (LPM), as the controlling unit for the implementation of the Internal Quality Assurance System (SPMI) to plan, implement, and develop and compile the necessary documents, namely the Policy SPMI, SPMI Manual, SPMI Standard, SPMI form document, and Standard Operational Procedure (SOP). Research on SPMI implementation shows that: (1) SPMI policies and concepts in the form of academic documents and quality documents are prepared by LPM, (2) LPM is the coordinator in planning and implementing, (3) SPMI implementation is implemented and supported by the SPMI Cycle design; (4) Evaluation of SPMI implementation is carried out according to schedule; (5) SPMI implementation development refers to ISO quality management and BAN PT. Conclusion: The implementation of SPMI USNI and STKIP-KN has similarities with the PPEPP process stages approach and there are differences because the vision and mission of the two universities are different. The recommendation is that the management of USNI and STKIP-KN to realize the quality of graduates according to their vision needs to strengthen the position of the quality assurance institution (LPM) and continue to carry out a sustainable quality culture, and be supported by the development of network technology at every stage of the PPEPP process.