Transformasi Riset Manajemen Pendidikan: Pendalaman Teknik Pengumpulan Data Berbasis Bukti (Evidence-Based)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55123/sosmaniora.v5i3.8214Keywords:
Education, Evidence, Management, Qualitative, QuantitativeAbstract
This study analyzes how data collection techniques construct evidence in educational management research, focusing on the fit between instruments and the social-organizational phenomena under investigation. A focused PRISMA-based Systematic Literature Review was conducted on articles published from 2021 to 2026. Of 120 initial records, 7 articles met the strict criteria because they explicitly reported research designs, data sources, instruments, and the functions of data integration. The extracted data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Interviews or focus groups appeared in 6 articles, questionnaires or surveys in 4, documents or literature in 3, secondary data in 2, and process logs in 1; 5 articles employed mixed-methods designs. The synthesis identified three evidentiary functions: mapping patterns, explaining social-psychological mechanisms, and contextualizing institutional processes. In studies of trust, collaboration, mental health, and school quality, quantitative instruments were effective for identifying trends and relationships, whereas interviews, focus groups, and documents explained the meanings, relationships, crisis experiences, and organizational boundaries underlying those patterns. The novelty of this study lies in an instrument-phenomenon fit matrix that assesses data collection techniques according to their evidentiary functions rather than merely contrasting qualitative and quantitative approaches. The findings are limited to methodological patterns within the selected corpus and should not be interpreted as prevalence estimates for the entire field of educational management research.
Downloads
References
Chen, P., & Chang, Y.-C. (2024). Incorporating creative problem-solving skills to foster sustainability among graduate students in education management. Cleaner Production Letters, 7, 100082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clpl.2024.100082
El Galad, A., Betts, D. H., & Campbell, N. (2024). Flexible learning dimensions in higher education: Aligning students’ and educators’ perspectives for more inclusive practices. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1347432. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1347432
Ertem, H. Y. (2024). School leadership fostering mental health in the times of crisis: Synthesis of school principals’ views and PISA 2022. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 695. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-02195-6
Ghamrawi, N., Shal, T., Ghamrawi, N. A. R., Abu-Tineh, A., Alshaboul, Y., & Alazaizeh, M. A. (2025). A Step-by-Step Approach to Systematic Reviews in Educational Research. European Journal of Educational Research, 14(2), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.14.2.549
Huber, S. G., & Pruitt, J. (2024). Transforming Education Leadership through Multiple Approaches to Develop and Support School Leadership. Education Sciences, 14(9), 953. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090953
Jing, M., Guo, Z., Wu, X., Yang, Z., & Wang, X. (2025). Higher Education Digital Academic Leadership: Perceptions and Practices from Chinese University Leaders. Education Sciences, 15(5), 606. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050606
Karim, A., Fathurohman, O., Sulaiman, S., Marliani, L., Muhammadun, M., & Firmansyah, B. (2025). How do principals act as leaders and managers in boarding and public schools in Indonesia? Cogent Education, 12(1), 2445354. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2445354
Keravnos, N., & Symeou, L. (2026). Practices, behaviours and actions of highly trusted primary school principals in Cyprus: An in-depth examination. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 54(2), 464–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/17411432241262388
Lushaj, M., & Shatri, V. (2026). Contemporary leadership models and collaboration in primary schools: A mixed-methods study on school quality. Frontiers in Education, 11, 1741935. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2026.1741935
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), 1006–1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pilcher, N., & Cortazzi, M. (2024). “Qualitative” and “quantitative” methods and approaches across subject fields: Implications for research values, assumptions, and practices. Quality & Quantity, 58(3), 2357–2387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-023-01734-4
PRISMA Statement. (2024). PRISMA Statement. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. https://www.prisma-statement.org/
Raza, M., Gilani, N., & Waheed, S. A. (2021). School Leaders’ Perspectives on Successful Leadership: A Mixed Methods Case Study of a Private School Network in Pakistan. Frontiers in Education, 6, 656491. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.656491
Sánchez-Martín, M., Gutiérrez-Sánchez, M., Olmedo-Moreno, E. M., & Navarro-Mateu, F. (2024). A systematic review to evaluate the risk of bias of meta-analyses reporting experimental educational interventions focused on academic performance. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2385785. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2385785
Sanda, Y., Warman, W., Pitriyani, A., & Yesepa, Y. (2022). Peningkatan mutu perguruan tinggi melalui manajemen pendidik dan tenaga kependidikan. Jurnal Akuntabilitas Manajemen Pendidikan, 10(1), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.21831/jamp.v10i1.47855
Sauer, P. C., & Seuring, S. (2023). How to conduct systematic literature reviews in management research: A guide in 6 steps and 14 decisions. Review of Managerial Science, 17(5), 1899–1933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00668-3
Shaheen, N., Shaheen, A., Ramadan, A., Hefnawy, M. T., Ramadan, A., Ibrahim, I. A., Hassanein, M. E., Ashour, M. E., & Flouty, O. (2023). Appraising systematic reviews: A comprehensive guide to ensuring validity and reliability. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 8, 1268045. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2023.1268045
Verheijen-Tiemstra, R., Ros, A., Vermeulen, M., & Poell, R. F. (2024). Barriers to collaboration between school teachers and child care workers: Implications for HRM and school leadership. International Journal of Educational Management, 38(1), 96–114. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-04-2023-0169
Wallwey, C., & Kajfez, R. L. (2023). Quantitative research artifacts as qualitative data collection techniques in a mixed methods research study. Methods in Psychology, 8, 100115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metip.2023.100115
Yu, X., & Jang, G. (2024). A framework for transformational leadership to enhance teacher’s work performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1331597. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1331597
Zhou, Y., Zhou, Y., & Machtmes, K. (2024). Mixed methods integration strategies used in education: A systematic review. Methodological Innovations, 17(1), 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/20597991231217937
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ricky Firmansyah, Ai Nurhasan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
