A MODEL OF VOCATIONAL COMPETENCY ASSESSMENT OF

INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS OF VOCATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOLS

Muhammad Akhyar
UNS HP. 081804516951; 0271 7650572

This study aims to develop a model of competency assessment. The research

population consisted of two subpopulations, namely (1) engineering and
vocational education experts, machinery practice instructors, and industry
practitioners, and (2) students of Industrial Engineering Vocational High Schools
in Surakarta. The sample from the first subpopulation was selected using the
purposive sampling technique and that from the second subpopulation was
selected using the proportional random sampling technique. The data were
collected through questionnaires, a paper-and-pencil test, and a performance test.
The data were analyzed using the descriptive technique and the LISREL model
analysis. The results show the following. First, the construct model consists of the
learning style construct, personality construct, and competency construct. Second,
there is a positive and significant relationship between students’ personality and
learning style, students’ learning style and personality, students’ learning style and
vocational competency, and there is a negative and significant relationship
between students’ personality and vocational competency. The model of
vocational competency development fits the empirical data. Third, the model of
vocational competency assessment consists of three components, namely
personality, learning style, and competency. The model is called the PLC model.

Keywords: assessment model, competency, vocational school

1. Introduction

Vocational education is an educational subsystem that specifically helps

learners prepare themselves for jobs. Finch & Crunkilton (1979) explain that
vocational education emphasizes the development of skills, performance, and
preparation for jobs. It is related not only to the development of skills, but also to
that of all competency that learners possess to express themselves in jobs.
According to Wenrich (1974), all competency that can be developed includes all
domains belonging to learners, namely knowledge, skills, and work attitudes,
while learners’ potentials include feeling, sight, thought and action. Therefore,
vocational education is directly related to the way of empowering all potentials
belonging to learners in order that they possess certain competency.
 Empirical observations by Ministry of National Education (2004) show
that most vocational high school graduates in Indonesia are not only unable to
adapt themselves to the development of science and technology, but also unable to
develop themselves and their careers in the workplace. This shows that they have
not acquired necessary competency. According to Boud & Solomon (2001),
competency refers to an ability to demonstrate what one has acquired before.
Competency attainment depends not only on the effective implementation
of a learning model, but also on the assessment system. Through an integrated
assessment system, schools obtain accurate information on the learning quality so
that they can make up for the weaknesses. Thus, assessment plays an important
role in controlling the quality of education.
Assessment is supposed to reflect understanding of integrated learning.
Assessment of vocational competency can be accurately carried out if it includes
knowledge, skill, and work attitude aspects. Besides, assessment can also be
viewed from a variety of determinant factors directly related to competency
attainment, such as a learning model and students’ personality characteristics.
Thus, a comprehensive description of students’ quality can be obtained. In this
regard, this article discusses a model of effective competency assessment and
components that constitute a model of vocational competency assessment of
industrial engineering students of vocational high schools. The discussion on
concepts, theories and facts about the model, assessment, vocational competency
is presented below.
In general, a model can be defined as a physical replication that describes
a fact (Sukardi, 2006). John J.O.I Ihalauw (2000) explains that a model is concept
pragmatically displayed. T. Raka Joni (1984) describes a model more fully that it
can be an instrument (tool), procedure, or new system. Therefore, a model can be
defined as a result of the simplification of a complex process and system so that it
is easy to understand and explain.
In the context of assessment, Nitko (1996) states that assessment is
different from evaluation. Assessment refers to a process of obtaining
information, while evaluation refers to a process of judging performance quality.
According to Stark & Thomas (1994), assessment can be defined as a process of
collecting data to identify the extent to which the performance of an institution or
its units can attain the objectives, while according to Borg & Gall (1983)
evaluation is a process of making a decision on meaning or value of an
educational program, project, material, and technique. Thus, assessment focuses
on the data collection process, while evaluation focuses on the decision making.
The main concern underlying the development of an assessment model is
finding constructs to measure. The assessment model is then developed on the
basis of the constructs and their interrelations. In this context, the main construct
to measure is competency.
Substantially, Garavan & McGuire (2001) explain that competency can be
viewed from the two aspects, namely individual’s attributes and learning
outcomes. From the former, competency is defined as one’s knowledge, skill, and
ability that result in performance. From the latter, it is defined as the extent to
which one’s performance has satisfied the necessary standard. Hoffman (1999)
states that a complex job can employ the concept of competency as an individual’s
attributes, while a simple job can use the concept of competency as learning
outcomes.
Broadly speaking, there are two types of competency, namely the generic
competency and the specific or technical competency. The former, according to
Wood & Lange (2000), includes the writing, numeracy, communication, problem
solving abilities and the social skill. Nordhaug (1998) explains that the latter
consists of knowledge of method, process, and technique designed to accomplish
particular tasks and abilities to use tools and equipment. According to Harris,
Gutrie & Hobart (1995), competency in the educational perspective is measured in
terms of three separate aspects, namely knowledge, skill, and work attitude and it
refers to specific and technical competency. The discussion on knowledge, skill,
and work attitude is presented below.
Boyett & Boyett (1998) define knowledge as understanding of how
something works and skill as an ability to apply knowledge to put something into
reality. Attitude, according to Saifudin Azwar (1988), consists of knowledge,
emotion, and behavior. Feldman (1993) states that knowledge refers to one’s
thought of and belief in an attitudinal object, emotion to feeling of an attitudinal
object, and behavior to desire to act. A combination of knowledge and emotion
can determine one’s affective level. A high affective level makes one act. Sax
(1980) states that attitude has an element of consistency. An attitude is a strong
emotion to respond to an attitudinal object consistently. Therefore, attitude can be
defined as a level of emotion that makes someone act. The action is stimulated by
a strong and stable emotion. This means that an attitude has a characteristic of
consistency to determine an action choice.
The affective domain according to Bloom’s taxonomy (Woolfolk &
Nicholich, 1984) has five objectives. They include receiving, responding, valuing,
organizing, and characterizing. The process in which someone responds to an
attitudinal object starting from receiving, responding, valuing, organizing, to
characterizing reflects a careful choice of action. On the basis of a study on the
concept of competency comprising knowledge, skill, and attitude, it can be
concluded that competency in machinery practice consists of knowledge of the
principle of operating a tool machine, knowledge of the procedure of operating a
lathe machine and a milling machine, the skill of operating a lathe machine and a
milling machine, work accuracy, and work consistency.
The competency attainment depends on the learning quality (learning
style). The learning style, according to Hermanussen, DeJong & Wierstra (2000),
is a combination of several learning activities applying certain teaching-learning
situations. It is a key to developing performance (DePorter & Hernacki, 1999).
Meanwhile, Aiken (1999) states that learning outcomes are influenced by
personality. Therefore, competency can be explained by the learning style
construct. A study conducted by Semejin, Boone, Velden & Witteloostuijn (2000)
concluded that there is a linear relationship between the personality construct and
the work achievement; meanwhile, a study by Ackerman & Heggestad (1997)
showed that there is a positive correlation between one’s personality and ability.
Oaks, Ferris, Martocchio, Buckley, & Broach (2001) found out that one’s
personality and ability can influence one’s skill. On the basis of the results of
several studies, it can be stated that competency can be explained by the
personality construct. Therefore, theoretically there are two dominant constructs
to explain competency, namely the learning style and the personality.
In the context of technical and vocational education, the work-based
learning style is relevant to be applied in vocational high schools, because
according to National Technical and Vocational Education and Training Program
(1996), vocational education is directly related to preparing one to enter the job
market. Boud & Solomon (2001) define work-based learning as a learning activity
applying certain learning situations and directly related to work. This is relevant to
the learning concept by Bower & Hilgard (1981) who state that learning is a
process of acquiring knowledge through experience involving five senses.
Therefore, it can be stated that real learning is learning in the work environment.
The optimum application the work-based learning concept will influence
students’ competency. The change in knowledge, practical experience, and
personality can be acquired when one faces a situational change. In challenging
situations and conditions, learners try to look for opportunities to obtain direct
guidance from the instructor and their smarter peers. In society, through active
processes of acquiring information, knowledge, and experience, which are
problematic, complex, and situational, learners can develop their basic potentials
to the optimum. In other words, the greater and more complex the work challenge
is, the more optimally learners can utilize their potentials. Therefore, they not only
can acquire new and practical experience, but also can develop new creativity.
This means that work-based learning is characterized by work challenge, new
experience, and work creativity.
This study involves the personality construct. In the learning theory
context, there are four personality constructs, namely locus of control, type A
behavior, self-monitoring, and sensation seeking (Semeijn, Boone, Velden &
Witteloostuijn, 2000; Aiken, 1999). According to Aiken (1999) the four
personality constructs influence learning outcomes.
In relation to the first personality construct, Pervin (1989) states that locus
of control refers to the ability to control events in life. The events are related to
anything occurring to someone. In the context of education, the events are related
to achievement and performance attained by learners. Specifically, Aiken (1999)
states that when one feels that he is being controlled, he will point to internal and
external directions. The directions are often called the directions of attribution. A
person with internal characteristics, according to Semeijn, Boone, Velden &
Witteloostuijn (2000) believe that a success depends more on internal factors than
on external factors; on the other hand, a person with external characteristics
believe that a success depends more on external factors than on internal factors.
Therefore, a locus of control refers to the directions of attribution when one
controls his learning achievement and work performance.
In relation to the second personality construct, Semeijn, Boone, Velden &
Witteloostuijn (2000) explain that type A behavior refers to behavioral patterns
belonging to one who is in a hurry, impatient, and always tries to attain excellent
achievement in a short time. Feldman (1993) explains that a person with type A
behavior is characterized by competitive, time-valuing, aggressive, and hard-
working characteristics, and dislikes being disturbed when accomplishing work.
Meanwhile, Aiken (1999) explains that characteristics of type A behavior are
aggressive, competitive, and hard-working. Therefore, a person with type A
behavior has six main characteristics, namely hard-working, aggressive,
competitive, time-valuing, fond of achievement, and seriously-working.
In relation to the third personality construct, Aiken (1999) defines self-
monitoring as a procedure for self-observation and refers to one’s sensitivity to
the environment. Meanwhile, Feldman (1993) defines self-monitoring as a
tendency to change behaviors in order to perform better in certain social
situations. Feldman’s opinion signifies that one with a self-monitoring
characteristic has an adaptive ability. This supported by Semeijn, Boone, Velden
& Witteloostuijn (2000) who state that self-monitoring refers to one’s ability to
adapt himself to the environment or certain situations he is facing. In other words,
the adaptive ability is identical to the ability to develop relationships with other
people. This means that self-monitoring refers to one’s sensitivity and adaptive
ability to the situations he is facing when he is trying to change his behaviors and
develop relationships with other people in the new situations.
A person with high self-monitoring, according to Pervin (1989), is one
who is very sensitive to situations. Specifically, Perving states that one of the self-
monitoring type has a sensitivity to an expressive behavior that he wants in a
different situation and shows his expressive behavior in accordance with social
needs. Therefore, self-monitoring has two main characteristics, namely
sensitiveness and adaptiveness.
In relation to the fourth personality construct, Aiken (1999) states that
sensation seeking is characterized by a self-prominence and a strong character.
Semeijn, Boone, Velden & Witteloostuijn (2000) explains sensation seeking is
related to motivation to make sensation. A person with strong sensation seeking,
according to Semeijn, Boone, Velden & Witteloostuijn, always try to seek new
experiences and varied, exciting events. Such a person is identical to one fond of
new challenges. Therefore, sensation seeking has two main characteristics,
namely fondness for new challenges and expression of motivation-arousing
behaviors. In accordance with the context of the discussion on personality above,
it can be concluded that personality is a certain character one possesses that
consistently directs his behaviors in every new different situation. Personality has
eleven characteristics, namely direction of attribution, hard-work, aggressiveness,
competitiveness, time-valuing character, fondness for achievement, work
seriousness, sensitivity, adaptiveness, fondness for new challenges, and
expression of motivation-arousing behaviors.
The learning style and personality variables were modified in the names
and the number of indicators. The modification was made after the factor analysis
was done. The modification of the names was made in accordance with the
instrument items constituting the factors. The aim was to obtain the nest
instrument construction. The names and the number of indicators were established
through the expert judgment method. The modification of the learning style
indicators is presented in Table 1 and that of personality indicators is presented in
Table 2.

Table 1. Factors/Indicators of Learning Styles before and after Modification

No. Previous Names New Names

Indicators Indicators
1. Work Challenge Creativity Development
2. New Experience Innovative Experience
3 Work Creativity Skill Development

Table 2. Factors/Indicators of Personality before and after Modification

No. Previous Names New Names

Indicators Indicators
1. Direction of Attribution Achievement Motivation
2. Hard work Responsiveness
3. Aggressiveness Adaptiveness
4. Competitiveness Progressiveness
5. Time-valuing Character Work Spirit
6. Fondness for Achievement Enthusiasm
7. Work Seriousness Self-confidence
8. Sensitiveness Work Commitment
9. Adaptiveness
10. Fondness for New
11. Challenge
Enthusiasm

Table 1 shows that through the instrument validation the names of the
three learning style indicators are modified but the number remains the same.
Table 2 shows that, besides the modification of the names of the personality
indicators, the number becomes smaller, from 11 indicators to 8 indicators.
In line with the theoretical review, conceptual framework, and validation
result, research hypotheses are formulated as follows:
1. The work principle knowledge (Y12), work procedure knowledge (Y13),
lathe practice skill (Y14), milling practice skill (Y15), work accuracy (Y16),
and work consistency (Y17) are valid indicators of vocational competency
(η3).
2. The creativity development (Y1), innovative experience (Y2), and skill
development (Y3) are valid indicators of learning style (η1).
3. The achievement motivation (Y4), responsiveness (Y5), adaptiveness (Y6),
progressiveness (Y7), work spirit (Y8), enthusiasm (Y9), self-confidence
(Y10), and work commitment (Y11) are valid indicators of personality
(η2).
 4. There is a positive and significant relationship between students’ learning
style (η1) and vocational competency (η3).
5. There is a positive and significant relationship between students’
personality (η2) and vocational competency (η3).
6. There is a positive and significant reciprocal relationship between
students’ learning style (η1) and personality (η2).

2. Research Method

This study was a research and development study aiming to find out a
model of vocational competency assessment. The problem under investigation
was a model of developing students’ competency and a model of assessing
students’ vocational competency. This study focused on lathe and milling practice
competencies. The assessment model was developed in accordance with the
empirical findings on the competency development model consisting of a model
of assessing the competency construct, a model of measuring the construct
determining the competency, and a structural model.
The research population consisted of two subpopulations, namely (1)
engineering and vocational education experts, machinery practice instructors, and
industry practitioners, and (2) students of Industrial Engineering Vocational High
Schools in Surakarta. The sample from subpopulation (1) was selected using the
purposive sampling technique; it consisted of nine vocational education experts,
six machinery practice instructors, and two industry practitioners who were
involved in the research instrument validation. The sample from subpopulation (2)
was selected using the proportional random sampling technique; it consisted of
607 students from vocational high schools accredited A and B. The data collection
aimed to (1) validate the instruments, and (2) test the model of competency
development. The data collection for instrument validation employed
questionnaires administered in two periods, and the model testing employed a
questionnaire, a paper-and-pencil test, and a performance test. The data on the
former were analyzed using the descriptive technique, while the data on the latter
were analyzed using the LISREL model analysis.

3. Research Findings and Discussion

a. Research Findings
The study shows the following findings. First, the construct model consists
of the learning style construct, the personality construct, and the competency
construct. The learning style construct consists of indicators of creativity
development with a factor loading (λ) of 0.603, innovative experience with a
factor loading (λ) of 0.577, and skill development with a factor loading (λ) of
0.02; the personality construct consists of indicators of achievement motivation
with a factor loading (λ) of 0.780, responsiveness with a factor loading (λ) of
0.335, adaptiveness with a factor loading (λ) of 0.190, progressiveness with a
factor loading (λ) of 0.375, work spirit with a factor loading (λ) of 0.08,
enthusiasm with a factor loading (λ) of 0.452, self-confidence with a factor
loading (λ) of 0.307, and work commitment with a factor loading (λ) of -0.05; and
the vocational competency construct consists of indicators of work principle
knowledge with a factor loading (λ) of 0.631, work procedure knowledge with a
factor loading (λ) of 0.540, lathe skill with a factor loading (λ) of 0.221, milling
skill with a factor loading (λ) of 0.316, work accuracy with a factor loading (λ) of
0.178, and work consistency with a factor loading (λ) of 0.222. Second, there is a
positive and significant relationship between students’ personality and learning
style with a relation coefficient (β) of 0.564; there is a positive and significant
relationship between students’ learning style and vocational competency with a
relation coefficient (β) of 0.905; and there is a negative and significant
relationship between students’ personality and vocational competency with a
relation coefficient (β) of -0.840. The model of vocational competency
development fits the empirical data, indicated by x2/df as big as 3.15; the
deviation of parameter values (RMSEA) is 0.062; the indices of the GFI and
AGFI model fits are 0.929 and 0.907 respectively. Third, the model of vocational
competency assessment consists of three components, namely personality,
learning style, and competency. This model is called the PLC model and
presented in Figure 2.

PERSONALITY LEARNING COMPETENCY

Achievement STYLE Work Principle
motivation (Work-based Knowledge
Responsiveness Learning) Work Procedure
Adaptiveness Creativity Knowledge
Progressiveness Development Lathe Practice
Enthusiasm Innovative Skill
Self-confidence Experience Milling Practice
Skill
Work Accuracy
Work Consistency

CRITERIA

Figure 2. The PLC Assessment Model

b. Discussion
In relation to the measurement model, the research findings show that all
the six indicators of the vocational competency are valid. Concerning the learning
style construct, there is one invalid indicator, namely the skill development with a
factor loading (λ) of 0.02, while concerning the personality construct, there two
invalid indicators, namely the work spirit with a factor loading (λ) of 0.08 and the
work commitment with a factor loading (λ) of -0.05. Those indicators are not
valid because their t-values are less than 1.96.
 In relation to the structural model, the research findings show that there is
a positive and significant relationship between learning style and vocational
competency, personality and learning style, and learning style and vocational
competency. However, the relationship between personality and vocational
competency is negative and significant with a β coefficient of 0.840 (t = -9.132; p
= 0.05). The empirical fact does not fit the hypothesis stating that there is a
positive and significant relationship between personality and competency. This
study then analyzed the data from the research sample and found out that in
vocational high schools accredited A there is a positive and significant
relationship between personality and competency, while in schools accredited B
there is a negative and insignificant relationship between personality and
competency. In relation to this finding, in practice it is necessary for teachers and
instructors to design a learning process that provides students with opportunities
to develop personality and competency in the form of complex and challenging
tasks. The factor of the measurement generalization can be a cause for the
negative relationship between personality and competency, especially in the
measurement of the practice skill aspect. According to Brennan (1983), the
measurement generalization measurement depends on the qualities of the
instruments, raters, and learning/practice environments. These factors
simultaneously determine the data accuracy. To measure students’ practice
performance, this study employed rating scales. The good quality of the
performance test instrument does not guarantee the accuracy of the obtained data.
The rater factor plays an important role when the raters assess students’ practice
performance. The data accuracy is better when the observations are made by the
same rater on the same observed object. However, this does not guarantee the data
quality, because, according to Brennan, the room lighting factor and the condition
of the room for learning and practice can influence the accuracy in the observation
of students’ practice performance. In this study, the observations on the students
were made by the teachers or instructors in their respective schools, comprising 8
vocational high schools. Therefore, the negative and significant relationship
between personality and competency may result from such factors as the school
status, the rater, and the condition of the learning setting.
The research findings also show that there is a positive and significant
between learning style and competency with a β coefficient of 0.905 (t > 1.96; p =
0.05), and there is a positive and significant between learning style and
personality with a β coefficient of 0.602 (t > 1.96; p = 0.05). This indicates that
the learning style plays a strategic role in preparing the students, because on the
one hand it can develop their competency and on the other it can develop their
personality. Therefore, the more complex and interesting the tasks designed by the
teachers are, the more opportunities the students can get to develop their
competency and personality.
In relation to the assessment model, the research findings show that the
model of vocational competency assessment consists of three components, namely
competency, personality, and learning style. An effective assessment of the
students’ vocational competency should focus on the indicators of competency,
namely knowledge of work principle and work procedure, lathe and milling
practice skills, and work accuracy and consistency. The assessment of the
students’ competency should be conducted not only on the competency as a
learning outcome but also on the factors determining the competency, namely
learning style and personality. The focus of the assessment of the students’
learning quality is on the indicators of creativity development, while that of the
students’ personality is on the indicators of achievement motivation,
responsiveness, adaptiveness, progressiveness, enthusiasm, and self-confidence.
The Ministry of National Education (2007:1) sets the criteria for the
assessment of the students’ competency; a score of 7 is in the good category, a
score of 8 is in the very good category, and a score of 9 is in the excellent
category. The assessment of students’ learning style and personality is norm-
referenced, on the basis of SBi and Mi, namely SBi = 1/6 (highest score – lowest
score) and Mi = ½ (highest score – lowest score). If a student obtains a score > Mi
+ 1.5 SBi, his score is very high; a score between Mi and Mi + 1.5 SBi is high; a
score between Mi and Mi –1.5 SBi is low; and a score < Mi – 1.5 SBi is very low.

4. Conclusions
Based on the research findings and discussion, the following conclusions
can be drawn.
1. The vocational competency construct consists of six indicators, namely
work principle knowledge, work procedure knowledge, lathe practice skill,
milling practice skill, work accuracy, and work consistency.
2. The learning style construct consists of two indicators, namely creativity
development and innovative experience.
3. The personality construct consists of six indicators, namely achievement
motivation, responsiveness, adaptiveness, progressiveness, enthusiasm,
and self-confidence.
4. There a positive and significant reciprocal relationship between students’
learning style and their personality; there a positive and significant
relationship between students’ learning style and their vocational
competency; there a negative and significant relationship between
students’ personality and their vocational competency.
5. The model of vocational competency assessment as the main research
finding is called the PLC model consisting of 3 components, namely
personality (P), learning style (L), and competency (C). The personality
consists of six factors, namely achievement motivation, responsiveness,
adaptiveness, progressiveness, enthusiasm, and self-confidence. The
learning style is an implementation of a learning model oriented to practice
(work-based learning), namely lathe and milling practices. The learning
style consists of two indicators, namely skill development and innovative
experience. The competency consists of six indicators, namely work
principle knowledge, work procedure knowledge, lathe practice skill,
milling practice skill, work accuracy, and work consistency.
References

Ackerman, P. L., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Intelligence, personality, and

interest: Evidence for overlapping traits. Psychological Bulletin, 121 (2),
219-245.
Aiken, L. R. (1999). Personality assessment: methods and practices. Toronto:
Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
Boud, D., & Solomon, N. (2001). Work-based learning: a new higher education?
Ballmoor, Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
Borg, W. R., Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: an intriduction. New
York: Longman Inc.
Bower, G. H., & Hilgard, E. R. (1981). Theory of learning. Englewood Cliffs, N.
J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Boyett, J. H., & Boyett, J. T. (1998). The guru giude: the best ideas of the top
management thinkers. Toronto: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Brennan, R. L. (1983). Elements of generalizability theory. Iowa City, Iowa: ACT
Publications.
Depdiknas. (2004). Kurikulum SMK edisi 2004. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal
Pendidikan Menengah dan Kejuruan.
DePorter, B., & Hernacki, M. (1999). Quantum learning: membiasakan belajar
nyaman dan menyenangkan. (Terjemahan Alwiyah Abdurrahman). New
York: Dell Publishing. (Buku asli diterbitkan tahun 1992.
Feldman, R. S. (1993). Understanding psychology. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.
Finch, C. R., & Crunkilton, J. R. (1979). Curriculum development in vocational
and technical education: planning, content and implementation. Boston,
Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon, Inc.
Garavan, T. N., & McGuire, D. (2001). Competencies and work-place learning:
some reflections on the retoric and the reality. Journal of work-place
learning, 13(4), 144-154.
Harris, R., Gutrie, H., & Hobart, B. (1995). Competency-based education and
training: between a rock and a whirlpool. Melbourne: Macmillan
Education Australia.
Hermanussen, J., Jong, J. A. & Wierstra, R. F. A. (2000). Learning styles in
vocational work experience. Journal of Vocational Education Research,
Volume 25, Issue 4, 1-7. Diambil pada tanggal 4 juli 2003, dari
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournal/JVER/v25n4/Hermanussen.html
Hoffman, T. (1999). The meanings of competency. Diambil pada tanggal 15
Agustus 2005, dari http://www.emerald-library.com
John. J.O.I. Ihalauw. (2000). Bangunan teori. Salatiga: Fakultas Ekonomi UKSW.
National Technical and Vocational Education and Training Program (NTVET)
(1996). Human resources development in Indonesia. Jakarta: IGTC.
Nitko, A. J. (1996). Curriculum-based assessment. Jakarta: Pusat Pengembangan
Agribisnis.
Nordhaug, O. (1998). Competence specificities in organization. International
Studies of Management and Organization, 28(1), 8-19.
Oaks, D. W., Ferris, G. R., Martocchio, J. J., et al. (2001). Cognitive ability and
personality predictors of training program skill acquisition and job-
performance. Journal of Business & Psychology, 15(4), 523-548.
Pervin, L. A. (1989). Personality: theory and research. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Sax, G. (1980). Principles of education and psychological measurement and
evaluation. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co.
Semeijn, J., Boone, C., & Velden, R.V., et al. (2000). Graduates’ personality
characteristics and labour market entry: An empirical study among dutch
economics graduates. Netherland: Research Centre for Education and
Labour Market – University of Maastricht, Faculty of Economics and
Business Administration. Diambil pada tanggal 2 Maret 2003, dari
http://netec.mcc.ac.uk/WoPEc/data/Papers/dgrumaror2001002.html
Stark, J. S., & Thomas, A. (1994). Assessment and program evaluation.
Washington, D.C.: Simon & Schuster Custom Publishing.
Sukardi. (2006). Penelitian kualitatif naturalistik dalam pendidikan. Yogyakarta:
Usaha Keluarga.
T. Raka Joni. (1984). Penelitian pengembangan dalam pembaharuan pendidikan.
Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan.
Wenrich, R. C. (1974). Leadership in administration of vocational education.
Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Pub. Co.
Wood, G. D., & Lange, T. (2000). Developing core skills. Education and
Training, 42(1), 24-32.
Woolfolk, A. E. & Nicolich, L. M. (1984). Educational psychology for teachers.
Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc.