The Influence of Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor Assessment Based on SPSS and SmartPLS Software on the Effectiveness of Learning Outcomes Evaluation Management at Senior High Schools in Jember Regency

Amin Silalahi; Basuki Hadiprayogo; Karnadi; Balthasar Watunglawar; Nugroho Edi Santoso

doi:10.55506/icdess.v3i1.172

Authors

Amin Silalahi Universitas PGRI Argopuro Jember
Basuki Hadiprayogo Universitas PGRI Argopuro Jember
Karnadi Universitas PGRI Argopuro Jember
Balthasar Watunglawar Universitas PGRI Argopuro Jember
Nugroho Edi Santoso Universitas PGRI Argopuro Jember

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55506/icdess.v3i1.172

Keywords:

Learning Outcome Assessment, Educational Technology, SPSS, SmartPLS, Assessment Management

Abstract

This study investigates the effects of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains on the effectiveness of learning outcome assessment management at senior high schools in Jember Regency, Indonesia. Utilizing a quantitative survey approach, data were collected from 100 teachers through validated questionnaires. Analysis employed SPSS and SmartPLS software, revealing a model with an R² of 0.999, indicating excellent explanatory power. Results demonstrated that affective (beta = 0.573) and psychomotor (beta = 0.424) domains significantly positively influence assessment management effectiveness, while cognitive (β = 0.003) shows no significant effect. These findings highlight the prominent roles of emotional and practical skills in assessment management. The integration of SPSS and SmartPLS enhances analytical precision, supporting data-driven decision-making. This research contributes to the development of technology-based assessment models, emphasizing the importance of managing affective and psychomotor domains to improve educational quality.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alkharashi, M., & Sargent, J. (2018). Impact of Cognitive Assessment on Educational Management. Journal of Educational Technology, 15(2), 45-59.

Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., & Bloom, B.S. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longman.

Arikunto, S. (2009). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Rineka Cipta.

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Longmans.

Cheng, G., et al. (2018). Technology in Educational Assessment: Benefits and Challenges. Educational Review,70(4), 390-404.

Field, A. (2013). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. Sage.

Fredricks, J. A., et al. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.

Ghozali, I. (2013). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program IBM SPSS. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

Ghozali, I. (2016). Aplikasi Analisis Multivariate dengan Program IBM SPSS. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.

George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). Using SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference. 11.0 Update.Allyn & Bacon.

Guskey, T.R. (2003). How Classroom Assessments Improve Learning. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 6-11.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R.E. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Pearson Education.

Hair, J. F., Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Long Range Planning, 50(5), 422-445.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.

Harlen, W., & James, M. (1997). Assessment and Learning: Differences and Relationships Between Formal and Informal Approaches to Assessment. Studies in Educational Evaluation.

Hidayat, R., & Suryanto, A. (2019). Strategi meningkatkan mutu penilian dalam pendidikan. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengembangan, 30(1), 45-58.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A New Look at PLS-SEM. Statistics in Medicine, 34(7), 1053-1062.

Huang, J., et al. (2018). Validity and Reliability of Performance-Based Assessments in Educational. Educational Measurement, 37(1), 21-34.

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2014). Technology-Enhanced Learning and Pedagogy: Challeges and Opportunities. Research in Learning technology, 22.

Krauss, S. E., et al. (2017). Teachers’ Use of Data in Classroom Instruction, Educational Assessment, 22(2), 123-138.

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. Guilford Publications.

McKenzie, J., Wores, J., & Bate, E. (2013). Teaching and Learning in the Digital Age. Routledge.

McMillan, J. H. (2014). Classroom Assessment: Principles and Practice. Pearson.

Nitko, A.J., & Brookhart, S. M. (2014). Educational Assessment of Students. Pearson.

Nurhadi. (2012). Penilaian pembelajaran dalam Kurikulum Berbasis Kompetensi. Jurnal Pendidiakan dan Pengajaran, 45(2), 123-134.

Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS Survival Manual. McGraw-Hill Education.

Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (1991). The International Study of Computer Use in Education: Final Report. University of Twente.

Schumacker, R. E., & Lomax, R. G. (2016). A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation modeling. Routledge.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach. Wiley.

Simpson, E. J. (1972). The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain. National Foundation of Educational Research.

Suryanto, A. (2018). Pengaruh pengelolaan penilaian terhadap hasil belajar siswa. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 25(2), 123-135.

Suharno. (2016). Pengaruh Penggunaan perangkat Lunak Statitik Terhadap Kompetensi Guru. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pengajaran, 49(2), 120-130.

Tuckman, B. W. (2012). Conducting Educational Research. Wadsworth.

Wang, Y., et al. (2019). Digital Tools for Educational Assessment: A Review. Computers & Education, 129, 261-273.

W.Harlen & M. James (1997). Assessment and Learning: Differences and Relationships. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 4(3), 365-379.