The Effectiveness of Learning Activity Based Costing (LABC) in

Teacher Education Institution Based on Science Cluster in Cost

Unification Context

Abubakar Abubakar

Department of Education Administration, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Dr. Setiabudi No.229, Bandung, Indonesia

abubakarditruna@upi.edu

Keywords: Fund, learning activity, effectiveness, productivity index.

Abstract: Learning Activity Based Cost model is applied and adopted in higher education. The prior concept is Activity

based cost. When it based on student learning activity at undergraduate program (S1, the researcher named

this model as LABC. ABC model is developed in higher education and set by directorate general of Higher

Indonesian in calculating cost unification. For higher education. But unfortunately, the problem rose that

teacher education institution in adopting and implementing cost unification(UKT/BKT) still received small

amount and insufficient than by public university. Meanwhile learning portion for learning practices and

theory in this institution used more money than public universities with learning ratio 70:30. For practices

and theory due to this institution developed vocational model. The problem is how department or study

program in every cluster both UPI and UM as a representative of teacher education with smaller money will

able to adopt and implement LABC model effectively suitable with student cost they received and reached

high productivity index. Actually, there is a gap between actual and expected result by every cluster with fund

they received. On the other hand, department or study program face the barrier in implementing LABC due

to university still using money budget and implement LABC inconsistently. The impact is not only tri dharma

unreached the highly level, but also productivity index is low specifically for research and writing academic

journal.

1 INTRODUCTION

Indonesian government set and granted operational

cost for public higher education since year 2012, and

this program continued until now. It ‘s strategic

policy for actualilizing equaity and equality but in

implementing this program university faces the

chalenges. The grants is not only for regular

university but also for autonomuos public university

which open several student recruitment, e.g public

national student selection and local university

selection with different tariff.

Developing higher education is viewed as human

investmen for manpower needs and benefits for

global competitiveness nationwide and international.

Now adays the cheap cost for every citizent to enter

public higher education is the national problem to be

solved. The trend is that cost for public universities

rise every year and higher than private one. It can

be said that private is lower cost than public

universities in general. On the other cases, The

government has differenciated the cost of student

fees for public universities and teacher education

intitutions and it set by ministry of research and

higher education. According to prior research result

that there are gap both of them on cost unification

tariff. For example cost unification in mechanical

engineering program in public university 9 million

rupiahs and 6.5 million rupiahs per smester for

teacher education institution and implied that cost

must be accompanied with more government

subsidies. Implementing operational cost for public

universities is based on ministry of education

regulation number 58, year 2012. Sentence 1, which

Said:

Operational cost of public higher education is

held by government and called BOPTN is as cost

assistant from government was given to Public

higher education for costing the lack of

operational cost by impact of no elevating

education fees in public higher education.

358

Abubakar, A.

The Effectiveness of Learning Activity Based Costing (LABC) in Teacher Education Institution Based on Science Cluster in Cost Uniﬁcation Context.

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2017) - Volume 2, pages 358-361

ISBN: 978-989-758-314-8

The difference of Higher education performance

based on learning activity based cost model both

public universities and teacher education institution is

caused by the portion of practice and learning theory

with ratio 70:30 in teacher education as vocational

institution. It means that a lot of money spent for

buying practice stuff and doing workhsop in student

learning activity. The criteria of adequacy, equity,

appropriateness and effectiveness for costing study

program as a research focus and correlated with

Productivity indeces in every teacher education.

For conceptual framework on analyzing data and

theory, the reseacher hold the financing theory about

cost-quality relationship and the ‘laws’ of higher

education cost from R. Bowen (1981) and its impact

for university productivity (Sulivan, et al, 2012). The

research problem is how LABC implemented

effectively and its impact in improving academic

performance, output profile and productivity indices

from UPI and UM.

2 METHODS

This research used mix method both quantitative and

qualitative as policy evaluation in financing higher

education. This model is related with quantitiatave

and qualitative analysis in reaching policy objectives

to be quit or continue, (Patton Sawicki, 1986:305). It

s also related with making decision (Levin and Mc

Ewan, (2001:10). The Approach in evaluation of

higher education financing policy is the cost oriented

evaluation. It assumed that its government institution

and others has a lot of budget for financing their

porgrams. Two method were used both cost benefit

analysis and cost effectiveness approach and use

cross section and time series data.

Two sample for this research are Universitas

Pendidikan Indonesia (UPI) located in Bandung, west

Java and Univesrsitas Negeri Malang (UM) located in

East Java. Finally, for data analysis the reseacher

compare two sample related to cost effectiveness and

productivy of each institution. Unit analysis for two

sample represented as in table 1.

Table 1: The research sample form two university.

Science Cluster

UPI

Technology/

Engineering

Architecture

Electric

engineering

Science education

Chemistry

science

education

Chemistry

science

education

Social education

Economics

Education

Accounting

Education

For analyzing the productivity, the researcher uses

category for measuring Productivity Indexes as in

table 2:

Table 2: Productivity index.

81-100

Very High

61-80

High enough

51-60

Lower

- 50

Very lower

And the productivity Calculation can be broken

down into four steps:

1. Allocate the quality and expenditure data to the

education function.

2. Calculate the change in the quantity data from

periode to periode.

3. Calculate the input index

4. Calculate the productive index, (Sulivan, et al,

2012:69-71)

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

UPI and UM were founded in 1954 as higher

education of teacher education (PTPG). For adapting

the changing these two institutions have became the

University since 1999 and set by govenment

regulation and has wider mandate and cross-

fertalization for science educations program and non

science eduations program. UPI with Leading and

outstanding vision as an autonomous university but

UM still strugle for reaching those status. UM is

positioning his campus with “the learning

university”. Both universities reach own prestige for

academic and non academic manner. The calculating

and implementing of cost unification for study

program in each instituion is deliberately done by

their university. UPI places his status as corporate

university and planed to became World Class

University (WCU). For describing the improvement

of each institution indicated by academic

performance, Output profile and Productivity indices

can be present as follow.

The Effectiveness of Learning Activity Based Costing (LABC) in Teacher Education Institution Based on Science Cluster in Cost

Uniﬁcation Context

359

Table 3: Performance gain of two institutions.

Study Program

performance

UPI

Accounting

Architecture

Chemistry

economics

Electric

enginering

chemistry

Accreditation

Research

Journal

Patten

Cooperation and

collaboration

with external

Lecturer

Unification cost

11 million

16 million

17, 6 million

8,4 million

9 million

18 million

Table 3 shows that UPI and UM rearch different

academic performance. Each institution has

accredited from B to A. UM has two A’s and one B

accreditation study program. UPI has two B’s and one

A accrediatation study program. Research and

science journal is vary between two university and

UPI is more productive in doing research and writing

journal. We can analys it from ratio journal and

reseacrh with lecturer from each study program/

department. Cooperation element describe how study

program collaborative with external institution. Cost

unification between university shows the strengh of

learning activity and UPI is higher than UM.

Table 4: Profile of Output between Two Institutions.

Output

Profile

UPI

Accountin

g Ed

Architecture

Chemistry

Ed.

Economics

Electric

engineering

Ed.

Chemistry

Ed.

Study time

4 years

5,2 years

4,3 years

4 years

4,7 years

4,2 years

yudisium

3,22

3,24

3,4

3,23

3,01

Waiting

time

3 months

2-3 months

3,5-5

months

5 months

4 months

Table 2. shows that three cluster of study program

at UPI and UM rearch academic achievement by each

study program by average of study time range from

4-5,2 years and 4- 4,7 years. It means student finish

their studies from 8 – 10 for UPI and 8-9 smesters for

UM. Average of student yudisium is range from 3,01

– 3,4 at UM and 3,22-3,24 at UPI or good

achievement. Finally, the waiting time to work is

range from 2-3 months for UPI, and 3-5,5 months for

UM. It means the ouput from UPI is relatively faster

than UM to get their jobs (see in table 4).

Table.5: Productivity Index on Tridarma of HE.

Tridharma and support

UPI

(Percent)

Educations (teaching)

Research

Public service

Supporting elemen

Cooperation-collaboation

Table 5 indicates that productivity index for

tridharma achievement of two universities almost the

same. It range from 55-82 percents. It means that

education (teaching) element gain the very high rank.

Research, public service and support element range

72-76 percents or good enough rank, but cooperation

or collaboration between universities is only 55-58

percents or lower. It indicated that cooperation and

collaboration of these clusters with external element

must be elevated and need struggle from the leader of

ICES 2017 - 1st International Conference on Educational Sciences

360

study program/department. Tridharma of higher

education both universities show not only the strength

and weakness but also the opportunity and treat.

Teaching element is strong but the others still weak

and treat for competitiveness. Teacher education as

vocational institution use cost by portion 70:30 for

practice and theory learning. Doing pratices need

more resources and need much money. According to

research finding for tridharma shows that study

programs has a problem for budgeting their study

program in their own capacities because of financing

these elements is regulated by university finance

policy. The university grant the funds to all study

program/department and all units in university after

they proposed budget by RKAT (anual plan and

budget) and the funds drop to them periodically.

Every units is monitored and evaluated by internal

auditor just in case they find problem in using money

effectively and efficiently.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Implementing of learning activity based cost (LABC)

in teacher education institution is the new way of

budgeting system that set by ministry of research and

higher education. This budget model generates the

direct cost for academic and indirect cost for

managerial aspect on financing university and also

study program and departement. This model reflects

the managing cost of university that accompanied

with government regulation in operational cost for

HE (BOPTN) for eligible public university and fund

received yearly. On the other hand, teacher education

institution (university) implements cost unification

for managing fund resource from their students.

These new public institution must be race with old

public university. They must be competete their

academic performance, output and productivity with

public university. According to core business of the

institution, intitution budget and fligh hour of

managing university seems to be far different among

them. Cost and productity seems to be corelated and

indicated that there are cost-quality relatinship in

these institution, but their cost effectiveness still

lower. It can be implied that enough and proportional

budget for them can elevate their productivity index

on tri dharma of Higher education. In this case,

teacher education instituion must achieve the higher

achievement but got smaller portion in receiving

grant from government than public university. It

seems to be second level to received the fund from

minstry. Finally, they ordered to be contibuted to

achieve higher rank unversity globally.

REFERENCES

Bowen R., H., 1980. The Cost of Higher Education, HOW

much Do Colleges and Universities Spend per Student

and How Much Should They Spend? Jossey-Bass

Publisher, San Francisco.

Hicks T. D., 1992. Activity –Based Costing for small and

Mid-Sized Businesses, Implementation Guide, New

York: John Wiley and Sons.

Levin., Mc Ewan, 2001. Cost Effectiveness Analysis,

Method and Application (Second Edition), California:

Sage Publications, Inc.

Patton., Sawicki. 1986, Basic Method of Policy analysis

and Planning, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, engglewood

Cliffs.

Sulivan A.T, et.al., 2012, Improving Measurement of

productivity in Higher Education, Washington: The

National Academies Press.

The Effectiveness of Learning Activity Based Costing (LABC) in Teacher Education Institution Based on Science Cluster in Cost

Uniﬁcation Context

361