Abstract

Purpose of the study: The purpose of this article is to provide information about the description of the assessment process to assess students' psychomotor abilities in craft life skills in the Package A Program with locations in PKBM Al Ishlah, Central Jakarta.

Methodology: The research method used descriptive qualitative. Data is collected through qaqan questionnaires, interviews, and documentation. The results of the data collection show that educators more often apply the assessment process in the practice of making handicrafts in the package a program. Documentation is used to analyze the psychomotor assessment instruments used by educators.

Main Findings: The results of this study are assessment processes that help teachers to see the work of students, students will produce handicrafts.

Applications of this study: A Program with locations in PKBM Al Ishlah, Central Jakarta.

Novelty/Originality of this study: The researcher also provides recommendations to educators to use the assessment process with a rubric assessment so that the results are more credible and valid.

References

  1. Badriyah, Z. (2010). Efektivitas penilaian portofolio terhadap hasil belajar Matematika materi pokok relasi dan fungsi. IAIN Walisongo.
  2. Barnawi, A. M. (2012). Strategi & kebijakan pembelajaran pendidikan karakter. Yogyakarta: Ar-Ruzz Media.
  3. Basuki, I., & Hariyanto, M. S. (2014). Asesmen Pembelajaran. Bandung, PT Remaja Rosda Karya.
  4. Chusmir, L. H., Koberg, C. S., & Mills, J. (2001). Male-female differences in the association of managerial style and personal values. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(1), 889–896. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1989.9711700
  5. Commins, W. D., & Fagin, B. (1954). Principles of educational psychology.
  6. Eisner, E. W. (2000). Benjamin Bloom. Prospects, 30(3), 387–395. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02754061
  7. El-Sayed, M., & El-Sayed, J. (2012). Importance of psychomotor development for innovation and creativity. International Journal of Process Education, 4(1), 89–94.
  8. Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan » Republik Indonesia. (2015). Target Kemendikbud Dalam Pengembangan Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Tahun 2017.
  9. Kunandar, D. (2013). Penilaian Autentik (Penilaian Hasil Belajar Peserta Didik Berdasarkan Kurikulum 2013). Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
  10. Mahtonami, B. (2018). Analisis implementasi kebijakan permendikbud nomor 28 tahun 2016 tentang sistem penjaminan mutu pendidikan dasar dan menengah di kota medan (Studi Kasus Di Dinas Pendidikan Provinsi Sumatera Utara Dan SMK Swasta. UNIMED.
  11. Mairesse, O., Macharis, C., Lebeau, K., & Turcksin, L. (2012). Understanding the attitude-action gap: functional integration of environmental aspects in car purchase intentions. Psicologica: International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology, 33(3), 547–574.
  12. Marshall, J., & Reason, P. (2007). Quality in research as “taking an attitude of inquiry.” Management Research News, 30(5), 368–380. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170710746364
  13. Mulyasa, E. (2014). Guru dalam implementasi kurikulum 2013. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.
  14. Olson, V. D. (2008). Instruction of competent psychomotor skill. College Teaching Methods & Styles Journal (CTMS), 4(9), 27–30. https://doi.org/10.19030/ctms.v4i9.5568
  15. Paresti, S., Nuswantari, D. S. H., Sukri, S., & Chaerudin, I. (2017). Prakarya SMP/MTs kelas VIII semester 1. Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.
  16. Paro, K. M. La, Hamre, B. K., Locasale-Crouch, J., Pianta, R. C., Bryant, D., Early, D., … Burchinal, M. (2009). Quality in kindergarten classrooms: Observational evidence for the need to increase children’s learning opportunities in early education classrooms. Early Education and Development, 20(4), 657–692. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802541965
  17. Ryan, G. (1993). Student perceptions about self-directed learning in a professional course implementing problem-based learning. Studies in Higher Education, 18(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079312331382458
  18. Simpson, E. J. (1966). The Classification of Educational Objectives, Psychomotor Domain.
  19. Singer, R. N., & Chen, D. (1994). A classification scheme for cognitive strategies: Implications for learning and teaching psychomotor skills. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 65(2), 143–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1994.10607609
  20. Smith Myles, B., Hilgenfeld, T. D., Barnhill, G. P., Griswold, D. E., Hagiwara, T., & Simpson, R. L. (2002). Analysis of reading skills in individuals with Asperger syndrome. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 17(1), 44–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/108835760201700104
  21. Snelson, C. (2010). Mapping YouTube" video playlist lessons" to the learning domains: Planning for cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 1193–1198. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
  22. Spenciner, L. J., Cohen, L., & Cohen, L. G. (2002). Assessment of children and youth with special needs. Allyn & Bacon.
  23. Sumaryanta, Mardapi, D., Sugiman, & Herawan, T. (2018). Assessing Teacher Competence and Its Follow-up to Support Professional Development Sustainability. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1), 106–123. https://doi.org/10.2478/jtes-2018-0007
  24. Twigg, C. A. (2003). Improving quality and reducing cost: Designs for effective learning. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(4), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091380309604107
  25. Undang-Undang, R. I. (2008). Nomor 20 Tahun 2003 tentang Sisdiknas dan Peraturan Pemerintah RI Nomor 47 Tahun 2008 tentang Wajib Belajar. Bandung: Citra Umbara.
  26. Winkel, W. S. (2004). Psikologi pengajaran (Teaching psychology). Jakarta, Indonesia: PT. Grasindo.
  27. Witte, R. H. (2012). Classroom assessment for teachers. McGraw-Hill.
  28. Zaghloul, A. R. M. (2001). Assessment of lab work: a three-domain model; cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. Age, 6, 1.