DEVELOPMENT OF A DIGITAL COGNITIVE DIAGNOSTIC ASSESSMENT FOR DIFFERENTIATED LEARNING IN VOCATIONAL HIGH SCHOOLS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32832/educate.v11i2.24247Keywords:
Digital Cognitive Diagnostic Assessment, Differentiated Learning, Slido, Pancasila Education, Vocational High SchoolAbstract
Digital transformation in education requires the implementation of assessments that can quickly and accurately identify students’ learning needs and support differentiated instruction. However, diagnostic assessments in vocational high schools are still not being optimally utilized as a basis for instructional decision-making. This study aims to develop a Slido-based digital cognitive diagnostic assessment model for Pancasila Education and to test its validity, practicality, and applicability. The study employed a Research and Development (R&D) approach using the ADDIE development model. Data were collected through observations, interviews, questionnaires, expert validation, and the digital diagnostic assessment instrument, and were then analyzed using both quantitative and qualitative descriptive methods. The results showed that the model achieved an average expert validation score of 90.63%, a practicality score of 90.17%, a feasibility score of 92.23%, and a student response rate of 91.95%, all of which were categorized as “very good.” These findings indicate that the Slido-based digital cognitive diagnostic assessment model is valid, practical, and suitable for identifying students’ prior knowledge and misconceptions in real time, enhancing learning engagement, and supporting differentiated instruction in Pancasila Education courses at vocational high schools.
References
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: An introduction (4th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. New York, NY: Springer.
Chiu, T. K. F., et al. (2024). Using generative artificial intelligence tools to explain and enhance experiential learning for authentic assessment. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14111172
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Geiger, V., et al. (2021). Identifying pedagogical factors influencing the use of diagnostic assessment in secondary classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00392-5
Hughes, M., et al. (2024). On the use of an online polling platform for enhancing student engagement in an engineering module. Education Sciences, 14(5), 536. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14050536
Kuzminska, O., et al. (2024). Digital competence of higher education applicants. Information Technologies and Learning Tools. https://doi.org/10.33407/itlt.v101i3.5530
Luckin, R., et al. (2024). Challenges and opportunities for classroom-based formative assessment and artificial intelligence. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100213
Lüdtke, O., et al. (2024). Towards a framework to support the implementation of digital formative assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2024.2344700
Mahmud, S., et al. (2025). Teachers’ reflections on utilizing Slido to enhance learner engagement. World Journal of English Language, 15(5), 242. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n5p242
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Muntean, C. H., et al. (2024). Exploring the potential of artificial intelligence tools in educational measurement and assessment. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14090984
Niculescu, B., et al. (2024). Digital assessment: A survey of Romanian higher education teachers’ practices and needs. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020158
Pallitt, N., et al. (2023). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080756
Redecker, C., et al. (2024). A meta-synthesis study on the use of e-assessment tools in education. Education Sciences. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030241
Rienties, B., et al. (2022). Formative assessment strategies for students’ conceptions: The potential of learning analytics. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13195
Sugiyo, R. A., Effendi, Y. R., & Iswahyudi, D. (2025). The impact of AI ChatGPT on the challenges and opportunities for civics teachers in the Gen Z era. Jurnal PTI (Pendidikan dan Teknologi Informasi), 12(2), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.35134/jpti.v12i2.240
Schneider, S., et al. (2022). The cognitive-affective-social theory of learning in digital environments (CASTLE). Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 1025–1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09626-5
Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D. S., & Semmel, M. I. (1974). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children: A sourcebook. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ilham Maulana, Yulius Rustan Effendi, Luluk Masruroh Zuhri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors grant the journal copyright of the work licensed under CC-BY-SA or The Creative Commons Attribution–ShareAlike License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
