<![CDATA[Penelitian ini berangkat dari ketidakseragaman praktik dalam penyelenggaraan pendidikan inklusif di Kota Padang. Tujuan penelitian yaitu menganalisis mekanisme diskresi guru dan kepala sekolah sebagai street level bureaucracy serta bagaimana komunikasi kebijakan, sumber daya, dan budaya organisasi lokal membentuk variasi implementasi pada jenjang TK hingga SMP di Kota Padang. Melibatkan 47 informan dari 9 sekolah serta UPTD LDPI, data dikumpulkan melalui wawancara, telaah dokumen, serta observasi. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa meskipun prinsip penerimaan tanpa diskriminasi dipahami secara konsisten, tingkat kesiapan sekolah dan pemahaman praktis terhadap implementasi bervariasi. Para pelaksana memanfaatkan diskresi untuk menyesuaikan layanan dengan kebutuhan anak, dinamika orang tua, serta beban kerja dan kemampuan sekolah. Diskresi yang muncul bukan sekedar respons terhadap tekanan struktural sebagaimana dijelaskan Lipsky, melainkan membentuk adaptive discretion yakni diskresi reflektif yang mempertimbangkan dilema moral, nilai profesional, dan kepentingan institusional. Pola ini dipengaruhi budaya birokrasi lokal yang menekankan kehati-hatian, harmoni, dan penyelesaian kasus secara situsional, sehingga menghasilkan implementasi yang tidak seragam. Studi ini memperluas teori street level bureaucracy, bahwa diskresi dalam konteks inklusi pendidikan juga merupakan arena negosiasi etis, bukan sekedar respons teknis keterbatasan aturan dan sumber daya. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan SOP, koordinasi lintas jenjang dan penguatan kapasitas agar praktik inklusi menjadi lebih konsisten dan akuntabel. This study stems from the inconsistency of practices in the implementation of inclusive education in Padang City. The objective of this study is to analyze the discretion mechanisms of teachers and principals as street-level bureaucracy and how policy communication, resources, and local organizational culture shape variations in implementation at the kindergarten to junior high school levels in Padang City. Involving 47 informants from 9 schools and the UPTD LDPI, data were collected through interviews, document reviews, and observations. The findings show that although the principle of non-discriminatory acceptance is understood consistently, the level of school readiness and practical understanding of implementation varies. Implementers use discretion to tailor services to children's needs, parental dynamics, and school workload and capabilities. The discretion that emerged was not merely a response to structural pressures as described by Lipsky, but rather formed adaptive discretion, which is reflective discretion that considers moral dilemmas, professional values, and institutional interests. This pattern was influenced by the local bureaucratic culture that emphasized caution, harmony, and situational case resolution, resulting in inconsistent implementation. This study expands on the theory of street-level bureaucracy, arguing that discretion in the context of educational inclusion is also an arena for ethical negotiation, not merely a technical response to regulatory and resource constraints. Therefore, standard operating procedures (SOPs), cross-level coordination, and capacity building are needed to make inclusion practices more consistent and accountable.]]>
