Error Analysis of Learning Management in the Preliminary Classroom Activities of Lower Grade Elementary School Teachers in the District of Buluspesantren Kebumen, Indonesia

This article describes research aimed to reveal the pattern of learning management errors in general preliminary activities carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers and to analyze and address the causes of these errors. The research uses a combination of school action research methods and phenomenology. The subjects of this study were teachers and students in grades 1, 2, and 3 of six elementary schools in the Buluspesantren district of Indonesia in the 2018/2019 academic year. The data sources used in this study are principals, teachers, and students. Data was collected via interviews, observation, and document study and analyzed qualitatively. The study found that the pattern of learning management errors in preliminary activities carried out by lower grade teachers in elementary schools focused on the delivery of learning and on motivational goals and that the causes of learning management errors in the elementary school preprimary teachers were unfamiliarity, forgetting, and not realizing the importance of particular steps. The research suggests that conducting action research using simulation methods would be an effective method for correcting learning management errors in the preliminary activities of elementary school lower grade teachers.


INTRODUCTION
In the current era of globalization and transformation, the teaching profession acts as a spearhead for the whole process of education and learning. Teachers are expected to be able to portray and develop their profession to meet the demands of the times, to want to improve themselves, and to be open to educational innovation. Teachers need to develop their potential, creativity, and initiative in order to anticipate the constant changes taking place in science and technology. The teacher must also be able to be a learning facilitator who can organize learning effectively and efficiently. Thus, in carrying out their duties, teachers should not solely be guided by the existing learning management techniques in their schools, but are expected to continually update the learning processes they deliver (Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 16 of 2007 concerning Standards for Qualifications and Teacher Competence).
As education administrators, teachers are required to carry out the processes of planning, organizing, implementing, and controlling educational resources to effectively and efficiently achieve educational goals. They are required to have adequate knowledge of learning management disciplines so that they can successfully manage learning across preliminary, core, and closing activities in accordance with the learning objectives in place. When managing learning, a teacher is expected to be able to create an atmosphere that is fun, interesting, and develops a spirit of learning in students. To encourage students to show interest and enthusiasm for learning, the teacher should not force students directly into core learning activities. Rather, at a preliminary stage the teacher should 1) prepare students psychologically and physically to follow the learning process; 2) motivate students to learn contextually according to the benefits and application of teaching materials to daily life, by providing local, national, and international examples and comparisons suitably adapted to the characteristics and learning levels of students; 3) ask questions that relate previous knowledge to the material to be learned; 4) explain learning objectives or basic competencies to be achieved; and 5) deliver the scope of the material and an explanation of the description of activities according to the syllabus (Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 22 of 2016 concerning Standard and Secondary Education Process Standards). In these preliminary activities, the teacher must foster interest in students toward learning. Malhotra, Joshi, Chaudhary, and Sananwal (2018) suggest that "an effective instructional system is always built upon the students' needs and interests".
The reality in the field is that the requirements of Ministerial Regulation No. 22 of 2016 as detailed above are yet to be achieved. Teachers are less concerned with the importance of efforts to attract students' attention and motivate them than they are with delivering core learning. The teacher generally manages learning by delivering target material or ensuring students can complete exam questions correctly. There are still some teachers in Indonesia who come to class to directly address core learning activities, and this is certainly the case in the Buluspesantren area of Kebumen (Observations dated June 6, 2019).
In quantum teaching and learning models, students learn without experiencing boredom because learning is accompanied by music and/or art. In the quantum teaching and quantum learning model, the slogan "Bringing them into our world and bringing us into their world" (DePorter & Hernacki, 2000;DePorter, Reardon, & Singer, 2000) is implemented. This reflects the view that learning takes place by removing the forcing of students toward the competencies that must be mastered. The teacher creates a fun atmosphere without the slightest element of boredom. This view is supported by the results of a study by Korpershoek, Harms, de Boer, van Kuijk, & Doolaard (2016) which suggested that classroom management programs provide the greatest contribution toward the effectiveness of interventions, particularly in terms of the social-emotional development of students.
Stoner and Freeman suggest that management is the art of carrying out work through people (2000, p. 6). Furthermore, these authors suggest that management is the process of planning, organizing, leading, and controlling the members of an organization to achieve intended goals effectively and efficiently. According to Hoyle (Bush & Coleman, 2000, p. 4), management is "a continuous process through which members of an organization seek to co-ordinate their activities and utilize their resources in order to fulfill the various tasks of the organization as efficiently as possible". So, management is the art of carrying out work through people continuously through planning, organizing, leadership, and control.
Learning is an activity carried out by students and educators in which there is interaction both between students and educators and between students and other students. Learning is itself a process of behavior change. Most instruction is active and experiential, requiring students to integrate various skills and content areas (Morris, 2019). So, in learning, there is a combination of the experiences of educators and students. Though the instructor instructs, students themselves can seek experience, knowledge, and skills. However, based on observations it is evident that learning activities are still dominated by teachers. The teacher has not fully identified himself as a facilitator and motivator. Based on this, it can be formulated that learning is an in-action process occurring between educators and students which begins with the acquisition of information as the basis for behavior change in order to achieve new outcomes.
As learning needs to be managed well, the idea of "learning management" has been developed. If the notion of management is associated with the notion of learning, it can be concluded that learning management is the art of structuring a learning activity by showing the process of mastering the knowledge, skills, and attitudes of the subjects who are learning. Good and Brophy, (Jones & Jones 2001, p. 3) say that " the findings show that teachers who approach classroom management as a process of establishing and maintaining effective learning environments tend to be more successful than teachers who place more emphasis on their roles as authority figures or disciplinarians" (Jones & Jones, 2001). Furthermore McCaslin and Good (Jones & Jones, 2001, p. 3) say that "classroom management can and should do more than elicit predictable obedience; indeed, it can and should be one vehicle for the enhancement of student self-understanding, self-evaluation, and the internalization of self-control." Student satisfaction can therefore be a source of uncovering the success of the management of learning and some studies have measured the success of learning management systems (LMSs) through measuring learner satisfaction (Wang, 2003;Shee & Wang, 2008;Tella, 2012). Generally, user satisfaction has held a central role in many studies as one of the measurements of the success of LMSs (Mtebe, 2015). Thus, a teacher must be able to manage learning through planning, organizing, leadership, and controlling of preliminary, core, and closing activities. For the investigation of preliminary activities addressed in this study we refer to the steps as stated in the Regulation of the Minister of Education and Culture No. 22 of 2016 concerning Standards for the Process of Primary and Secondary Education.
Based on the background provided above, the problem can be formulated as three research questions: (1) What is the pattern of learning management errors in preliminary activities that are commonly made by lower grade elementary school teachers? (2) What are the causes of mismanagement of learning in preliminary activities commonly carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers? (3) How can learning management errors in preliminary activities that are commonly carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers be corrected?

METHODS
This research uses a combination of phenomenology and school action research, i.e. it considers that researchers want to uncover and describe the meaning of important experiences of research subjects (Creswell, 2014) and then apply "repairs". Action research allows a teacher to reflect on their experiences and to use the results of these reflections as a basis for improvement. Inherent in this process is the ability to self-reflect, to critically explore what is in order to create what might be (Hughes, 2016). Dewey believed that reflection was the embodiment of an educated stance and an indication of the desire to examine one's practice for increased meaning and purpose (as cited in Dimova & Loughran, 2009). The subjects of this study are teachers and students in grades 1, 2, and 3 of elementary schools in Buluspesantren district in the 2018/2019 academic year. The sample comprises six elementary schools which had implemented the 13 revised curriculum from class 1, d. class 6. The data sources used in this study are principals, teachers, and students. The data was collected via interviews, observations, focus group discussion (FGD), and document studies, and was qualitatively analyzed.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The results of the study are revealed three patterns of class management errors in the preliminary activities carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers.

Observation results of management of learning in preliminary activities carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers.
Step 1: The preparing of students psychologically and physically to follow the learning process Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research,volume 397 was carried out by all teachers in the same way but with different tones. Generally, preparation took the form of lining up to enter class, opening greetings, checking attendance, and tidying up and cleaning around the seating of each student. Of the 18 teachers used as the subjects of the research, all effectively took steps to prepare their students and the response of students was very good. Setting up does not however mean making students tense about following the learning provided. Rather, preparing students psychologically and physically requires the creation of conditions that are clean, comfortable, safe, attractive, and happy. In addition, the learning management system used is very important for teachers as it can provide learners with resources in various formats, such as videos, quizzes, and forum discussions to support their learning and has a significant relationship with learning effectiveness (Chaw & Tang, 2018).
Step 2: Teachers can provide students with learning motivation contextually by applying teaching materials from daily life, for example by providing examples and comparisons of local, national, and international issues adapted to the characteristics and levels of students. The results of this study find that teachers did not thoroughly provide motivation to students in their preliminary activities. The structural equation model shows that students' emotions influence their self-regulated learning and their motivation, and that these in turn affect academic achievement (Mega, Ronconi, & De Beni, 2014). Not all teachers connect learning materials with applications in everyday life, give examples, or compare with local potentials. Explanations from teachers about the implementation of learning materials in daily life can make students aware of the meaningfulness of following their learning seriously. If the teacher provides many examples of the material being used practically, this can inspire students to be active and creative in their applications of learning. Learning will be more meaningful if the teacher uses material by empowering local potential and students will be more interested.
Step 3: Asking questions that relate previous knowledge to the material to be studied is an aspect of apperception. Apperception aims to link the experiences of students with the learning to be followed. The initial questions given before learning can be used to measure students' initial understanding of the material to be learned. An example of this is the study by Chen, Stelzer, and Gladding (2010), which states that using initial questions before lecturing can be used as a measure of their understanding of the concepts of physics. Of the 18 teachers studied, all applied apperception activities. However, the shape of apperception varied: some approached through questions, singing, and short stories, others by reviewing previous material. Komalasari (2018) states that the teacher presents information in the form of perception and a review of the material that has been uploaded onto the learning management system.
Step 4: Learning objectives describe learning that will be achieved and teachers are expected to convey the learning objectives to their students. Effective delivery of learning objectives will not only enhance student learning experiences in the classroom, but will favorably affect program strength and ultimately, institutional effectiveness (Johnson & Ferguson, 2018). Komalasari's research results also indicate that to motivate students the preliminary activities of teachers should convey learning objectives and communicate the basic competencies to be achieved (Komalasari, 2018). In the present study, only two of the 18 teachers investigated conveyed the learning objectives to be achieved, and generally teachers continued to core activities straight after apperception activities.

Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 397
Step 5: Delivering information about the scope of the material and an explanation of the activities to be carried out in accordance with the syllabus can provide an overview to students about learning on a particular day. This will enable each student to prepare themselves with the facilities/media/learning resources needed and helps them to be directed in carrying out their learning activities. The results of this study of 18 elementary school teachers in lower grades reveal that not all delivered the scope of the material and/or explanations of activities according to the syllabus. Teachers tended just to convey the theme of learning before commencing core activities.
The results of research into these five preliminary activities as carried out by lower grade teachers in Buluspesantren district in 2019 can be seen in Table 1.

The causes of mismanagement of learning in preliminary activities that are commonly carried out by lower grade elementary school teachers
Of the 18 teachers, all carried out Step 1 of the preliminary learning activities well but the second step was not generally performed by many of them. Based on the results of interviews with teachers who did not carry out Step 2, it appears that in some cases this was due to teachers not being accustomed to providing motivation in preliminary learning activities, while in others teachers said they simply forgot. Regarding the empowerment of local potentials in learning materials, one teacher said that it was difficult to find the time to do this along with addressing the material in the textbook that must be completed. Some teachers said they did not think of it or that it had been forgotten. In terms of examples, most teachers gave examples in learning, but the few examples given were not the same. The fourth preliminary learning activity was generally not carried out by the teachers. Some said they were accustomed to moving straight from apperception activities into core learning, while others said they had already delivered the learning activities that would be carried out on that day. Meanwhile, the cause of the teachers not carrying out the fifth step of the preliminary activities were explained as them not being aware that this step was important to be conveyed to students or feeling that the theme of learning which they had delivered meant the same thing as delivering the scope of learning material and the activities to be carried out.

How to correct learning management errors in preliminary activities that are commonly carried out by elementary school grade teachers.
The results of observations, interviews, and study planning document studies were then delivered to the study subjects through focus group discussions (FGDs) to jointly determine follow-up plans. The FGDs decided that overall improvements could be made through school action research using the simulation method. The results of observations, interviews, and document studies were used as the basis for planning Cycle I. The results of the implementation of improvements in Cycle I and Cycle II for the 18 lower grade teachers are contained in Table  2.  Activity step  Pre-cycle  Cycle I  Cycle II  1  18  18  18  2  6  14  18  3  18  18  18  4  2  12  18  5  6  14  18 The results shown in Table 2 suggest that the implementation of Step 1 in Cycles I and II continued to be carried out well by the teachers. The implementation of Step 2 in Cycle I increased to 14 teachers and in Cycle II to 18 teachers. Like Step 1, Step 3 was already well done by all teachers through all cycles. Meanwhile, for Step 4, Cycle I improved from 2 to 12 teachers in Cycle I and in Cycle II to 18 teachers.
Step 5 increased to 14 teachers in Cycle I and in Cycle II to all 18 teachers. Thus after the interventions, all 18 teachers carried out preliminary activities in learning management well, as measured according to the steps in the preliminary learning activities (as set out in the Republic of Indonesia Ministry of Education and Culture Regulation Number 22 of 2016). Science,Education and Humanities Research,volume 397 The improvement in the results in the steps of the preliminary activities in learning management can be seen in Figure 1.

CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of the research and the discussion above it can be concluded that the pattern of learning management mistakes in preliminary activities that are commonly carried out by elementary school lower grade teachers occurs in the implementation of steps 2, 4, and 5 (giving motivation, explaining learning objectives, and conveying the scope of material). The causes of learning management errors in the preliminary activities that are generally carried out by elementary school teachers are that are not yet accustomed to carrying out these steps, that they forget to carry them out, and that they are less aware of the importance of the implementation of the steps. These learning management errors in general preliminary activities carried out by lower grade teachers in elementary schools can be addressed by making improvements through action research using simulation methods.