Validity and Reliability of the SENOSTIK Instrument: Advancing Diagnostic Assessment in the Digital Era

Authors

Susyam Widiantho

Universitas Negeri Samarang (Indonesia)

Zaamah Mohd Nor

Universiti Teknologi MARA (Malaysia)

Sumasno Hadi

Universitas Lambung Mangkurat (Indonesia)

Widiya Aris Radiani.

UIN Antasari Banjarmasin (Malaysia)

Nor Fadzleen Sa’don

English Language Teaching Centre, Ministry of Education Malaysia, (Malaysia)

Hadayat Rahmah Hasan

Universiti Teknologi MARA (Malaysia)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2025.924ILEIID0022

Subject Category: Education

Volume/Issue: 9/24 | Page No: 182-193

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2025-09-23

Accepted: 2025-09-30

Published: 2025-10-29

Abstract

SENOSTIK is an Android-based application developed in Indonesia to assist teachers in conducting comprehensive diagnostic assessments and planning lessons in alignment with national education policy. Unlike conventional tools that focus on learning outcomes, SENOSTIK is designed to measure student characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses, covering both cognitive abilities and non-cognitive factors. This study evaluates the validity and reliability of SENOSTIK’s assessment instrument, aiming to enhance learning experiences in the digital environment. High school students were selected as respondents to reflect assessment needs across secondary education. Quantitative analysis was applied using Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) to examine construct validity and Cronbach's Alpha to test reliability. Results indicate that the instrument demonstrates strong construct validity, meeting established standards, and achieves adequate reliability. Beyond technical contributions, this study highlights the strategic role of valid and reliable diagnostic tools such as SENOSTIK in strengthening evidence-based assessment practices, significantly marking an advancement in educational diagnostic measurement in the digital era.

Keywords

Validity, Reliability, Diagnostic, Cognitive, Non-cognitive

Downloads

References

1. Bautista-Díaz, M. L., Franco-Paredes, K., & Hickman-Rodríguez, H. (2022). Objetividad, validez y confiabilidad: atributos científicos de los instrumentos de medición. Educación y Salud Boletín Científico Instituto de Ciencias de La Salud Universidad Autónoma Del Estado de Hidalgo, 11(21), 66–71. https://doi.org/10.29057/icsa.v11i21.10048 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Berrío García, N., & Zedán-Salinas, K. P. (2023). Calidad psicométrica de un instrumento: breve revisión. Poiésis, 45, 95–110. https://doi.org/10.21501/16920945.4522 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Budiarti, R. P. N., & Kamila, F. I. R. (2024). Transformative Implementation of Android-Based Point of Sale System at Shafira’s Buffet Stall. E3S Web of Conferences, 482, 02002. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202448202002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative Inquiry Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (H. Salmon, J. Scappini, C. Pearson, L. Larson, & M. Markanich, Eds.; Fourth Edi). Sage Publication. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Crossley, J. G. M. (2017). Assessing the Non-Cognitive Domains (pp. 348–372). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0531-0.ch018 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Crump, T. G. (2024). Noncognitive Impact: Is There a Rationale for Assessing Postsecondary Students beyond Their Cognitive Skill Attainment? Creative Education, 15(02), 325–345. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2024.152020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Derilo, R. C. (2024). Synergistic Effect of Learning Environments, and Familial Factors on Generation Z Learners’ Academic Achievement in Science. International Journal of Instruction, 17(4), 503–520. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2024.17428a [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Dwi Saputra, R., Dinda Marsyanadya Putri, & Jadiaman Parhusip. (2024). Proporsi Individu yang Memiliki Telepon Genggam 2021–2023 dalam Perspektif Teknologi Informasi dan Komunikasi (TIK). Informatech : Jurnal Ilmiah Informatika Dan Komputer, 1(2), 183–188. https://doi.org/10.69533/2407sv12 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. González-Quezada, E., Soltero-Sánchez, A.L.A., Huerta-Chavez, I.A., & Figueroa-Ochoa, E. (2024). Diagnostic assessment of foundational knowledge and its relationship with the teaching and learning process in a university environment. Revista Gestión Universitaria. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hadiastriani, Y., Djarot, P., & Chemistry, V. I. (2024). BIBLIOMETRIC INSIGHTS INTO ASSESSMENT PRACTICES IN THE MERDEKA CURRICULUM: IDENTIFYING OPPORTUNITIES FOR NEW ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT. JOURNAL OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND PRACTICE, 8(1), 14–38. https://doi.org/10.33751/jsep.v8i1.9652 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Huang, F., Mislevy, J., Wang, S., Wei, X., & Zhang, X. (2022). Editorial: Rigorous and high-quality efficacy studies of educational technology interventions. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.968708 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Isnawati, I. (2023). EFL TEACHERS’ ASSESSMENT LITERACY. LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, 26(2), 760–769. https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v26i2.3654 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Jannah, M., Maryani, I., & Santosa, A. B. (2024). Kesiapan Guru Sekolah Dasar dalam Implementasi Asesmen Diagnostik untuk Mendukung Pembelajaran Berdiferensiasi. Ideguru: Jurnal Karya Ilmiah Guru, 10(1), 451–459. https://doi.org/10.51169/ideguru.v10i1.1467 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Junaidah, Ambiyar, & Fahmi Rizal. (2024). Mobile-Based Digital Assessment Transforming the Learning Support Efficiency. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (IJIM), 18(23), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v18i23.51339 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kusmawan, U. (2024). Transforming digital learning and assessment strategies in higher education. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 8(1), 2025016. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2025016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lisna, L., Pristiwaluyo, T., & Suhardi, I. (2024). Pengembangan Instrumen Asesmen Diagnostik Non Kognitif untuk Siswa SMP. Jurnal Basicedu, 8(5), 3529–3537. https://doi.org/10.31004/basicedu.v8i5.8183 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Maufiroh, U. (2025). Sistematic Literature Review: Penerapan Asesmen Diagnostik Dalam Kurikulum Merdeka. COMSERVA : Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengabdian Masyarakat, 4(9), 3010–3013. https://doi.org/10.59141/comserva.v4i9.2776 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Molnár, G., & Kocsis, Á. (2024). Cognitive and non-cognitive predictors of academic success in higher education: a large-scale longitudinal study. Studies in Higher Education, 49(9), 1610–1624. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2271513 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Musah, M. B. (2024). Assessing the Unassessable (pp. 248–266). https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-0880-6.ch017 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. O. Rulida, D., C. Cano, J., & R. Andrin, G. (2024). Non-Cognitive Skills as Correlates to Academic Performance among Senior High School Students. International Journal of Science and Management Studies (IJSMS), 222–249. https://doi.org/10.51386/25815946/ijsms-v7i1p131 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Roncero, C. (2015). La validación de instrumentos psicométricos: un asunto capital en la salud mental. Salud Mental, 38(4), 235–236. https://doi.org/10.17711/SM.0185-3325.2015.032 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Rosmiati, M., Maulid, H., Brotoharsono, T., Fathan Akbar, M., Lucky P, B., & Defari, W. (2023). APLIKASI CHECKBUN SEBAGAI MONITORING KESEHATAN IBU HAMIL BERBASIS ANDROID. Prosiding Konferensi Nasional Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Dan Corporate Social Responsibility (PKM-CSR), 6, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.37695/pkmcsr.v6i0.2108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Tikno, Dharmawan, Y. S., & Ngatini. (2024). Investigating Consumer Acceptance of Mobile Payment Services in Indonesia. Procedia Computer Science, 234, 1095–1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2024.03.104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Vitoratou, S., Uglik-Marucha, N., Hayes, C., & Pickles, A. (2023). An introductory comprehensive guide for assessing measurement tool quality: the Contemporary Psychometrics (ConPsy) Checklist. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/t2pbj [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Wu, J. R., Iwanaga, K., Qisti, D. A., Bezyak, J., Chan, F., & Tansey, T. N. (2025). Psychometric validation of the Motivation To Use Digital Tools At Work Scale in a sample of state vocational rehabilitation counselors. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 62(1), 88–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/10522263241302222 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Yansa, H., & Retnawati, H. (2021). Identifikasi Praktik dan Hambatan Guru dalam Asesmen Kognitif Matematika di Masa Pandemi COVID-19. Jurnal Elemen, 7(1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v7i1.2585 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles