CFA in SEM by LISREL-Assisted to Test The Construct Validity of The Performance of The Sanrobone Elementary School Principal in South Sulawesi Province
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61942/msj.v3i1.282Keywords:
CFA, construct validity, LISREL, principal's performance, SEMAbstract
This study aims to test the validity of the construct of the performance of elementary school principals in South Sulawesi Province using CFA in SEM on the LISREL application based on the components of leadership, management, and personality. This type of research is ex-post facto. The number of samples collected through stratified purposive random sampling was 100 respondents with details of 15 principals, 75 class teachers, 5 religious-teachers, and 5 sports teachers in elementary schools in Sanrobone. The data collection technique used a principal performance questionnaire with 4 indicators of leadership, 4 indicators of management, and 7 indicators of personality, as well as documentation of the principal's performance. The research data were analyzed using descriptive statistical from CFA data. The results showed that the construct validity tested using CFA on the principal's performance in the leadership, management, and personality components showed goodness of fit based on the results of the goodness of fit index with the measurement model on the Absolute/Predictive fit Index criteria, namely on RMSEA 0.0057 from the limit value ≤ 0.08; RMR 0.069 from the limit value ≤ 0.1, on the Comparative Index criteria, namely on IFI and CFI each 0.92 from the limit value> 0.90, although on the Parsimony fit Index criteria, namely PNFI and PGFI each below the limit value> 0.90 but not significant. The conclusion of each indicator item contribution also shows that it is greater than the selected standardized solution value, which is greater than 0.3, so it is strong enough to explain the latent variable (principal performance).
Downloads
References
Anonymous. 2001. Factor analysis. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 10(1-2), 75-82. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. 1991. Conventional Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation Perspective. Psychological Bulletin,110(2), 305-314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.2.305
Daengneam, B., Deebhijarn, S., & Saengnoree, A. 2023. Integrative Medicine and Health Training for Thai General Practitioners (GP): A SEM Analysis. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 23(1), 75-88. https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v23i1.5783
Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. 2006. Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 14 Tahun 2005 tentang Guru dan Dosen. Jakarta: Biro Hukum dan Organisasi Sekretariat Jenderal Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
Dubrin. A. J. 2001. Leadership: Researce Findings, Practice, and Skills. Boston: Hounghton Mifflin Company.
Effiyanti, T., Sukirno, Widihastuti, Retnawati, H. Confirming the Effect of Motivation on Teacher Performance in Elementary School: a Meta-Analysis. TEM Journal, 12(1), 519-528. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM121-62
Feist, Jess, & Gregory, J., F. 2013. Theories of Personality. Ed.8. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Garson, D. 2006. Factor Analysis, Path Analysis & SEM. http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/index.htm
Ghozali, Imam. 2008. Desain Penelitian Eksperimental. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Hadi, Samsul. 2008. Konstruk Kinerja Kepala Sekolah Dasar Di Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, (1),(9), 20-39.
Halim, Humaiah, Nur. & Anas, Suwardi. 2018. Pendekatan Analisis Jalur (Path Analysis) Pada Kinerja Guru Matematika SMA Negeri di Kota Makassar Ditinjau dari Motivasi Kerja, Komitmen Kerja, Kompetensi Profesional Dan Kompetensi Pedagogik. Jurnal MSA (6)(1), 13-19.
Joreskog, K. & Sorbom, D. 1993. Lisrel 88: Structural Equation Modeling with the SIMPLIS Command Language. Hillsdale, NJ: Scientific Software International.
Joreskog, Karl. G.& D. Sorbom.1993. LISREL 8. Structural Equation Modeling With the SIMPLIS Command Languanges.Chicago:SSI, Inc.
Kusuma, Marhaendra. 2013. Penerapan Path Analysis Untuk mengetahui Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Kinerja Tenaga Administratif Perguruan Tinggi. Cahaya Aktiva, 3(1). 11-35.
Miles, M. B., dan Huberman, A. M. 1992. Qualitative Data Analysis. Second edition. London: Sage Publications.
Northouse, T., G. 2003. Leadership: Theory and Practice. New Delhi: Response Book.
Nunally, J. 1978. Psychometric Theory (2nd ed.). New York : McGraw Hill.
Nursam, Nasrullah. 2017. Manajemen Kinerja. Journal of Islamic Education Manajemen, 2(2), 167-175.
Palisungan, Daud, M. 2011. Pengaruh Iklim Kerja dan Iklim Sekolah terhadap Kinerja Guru SMK di Kabupaten Tana Toraja. Tesis. Tidak diterbitkan. Program Pascasarjana Program Studi Administrasi Pendidikan Konsentrasi Manajemen Pendidikan Universitas Negeri Makassar.
Rafiuddin. 2020. Pena abadi sekolah dasar. Semarang: Cahya Ghani Recovery.
Sedarmayanti. 2011. Manajemen Sumber Daya Manusia, Reformasi Birokrasi dan Manajemen Pegawai Negeri Sipil. Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama.
Stapleton. 1997. Basic Concepts and Procedures of Confirmatory Factor Analysis. http://ericae.net/ft/Cfa.HTM
Supardi. 2016. Kinerja Guru. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Suparlan. 2006. Guru Sebagai Profesi. Yogyakarta: Hikayat Publishing.
Terry, R., G. 2006. Prinsip-prinsip Manajemen. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Rafiuddin Rafiuddin, Irham Irham, Nurjihadin Nurjihadin, Syarifuddin Syarifuddin, Farah Alfian Ghofar Rahmat

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.