Analysis of Teacher-Made Tests Used in Summative Evaluation at SMP Negeri 1 Tompaso
Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to describe the quality of English tests for use in summative evaluation in sixth semester in 2019-2020 and in fifth semester 2020-2021, The study was descriptive-and evaluative in nature in that it tried to determine the advantages (strengths) and disadvantages (weaknesses) of the summative tests used. in terms of their validity, reliability and item analysis. The data were the fifth and sixth semester students’ responses to the two test in semester examinations. The data obtained were statistically analyzed using Point-Biserial for validity, KR-20 for reliability and item analysis for level of difficulty and discrimination power. Result of the statistical and item analysis indicated that (1) concerning the validity and reliability of the fifth semester 2020/2021 summative test, the data analysis shows that all the items are valid with validity coefficient ranges between 0.53 and 0.98, whereas reliability coefficient is 0.82, meaning that the test is highly reliable. It can be concluded that the test is valid and highly reliable, (2) concerning validity and reliability of the sixth semester summative test in 2019/2020, the analysis indicates that all the items are valid with validity coefficient ranges between 0.53 and 0.85, whereas reliability coefficient is 0.88, meaning that the test is highly reliable. It can be concluded that the test is good in its validity and highly reliable, (3) Item analysis item facility of the fifth semester 2020/2021 summative test shows that item facility index of the 50 items in the test ranges between 0.55 and 0.67, meaning that the test is good in terms of its item facility index; and of 40 multiple-choice items in the sixth semester 22019/2020 summative test, 27 items are considered very good items, and 13 items are reasonably good in their discrimination power. It can be concluded that the test is good in terms of its item facility and discrimination power, and (4) Item analysis of the sixth semester 2019/2020 summative test shows that in terms of item facility, all the 50 items are recommended for use. In terms of item discrimination, the analysis shows that 30 are very good or acceptable, and, therefore, are recommended for use, 19 are reasonably good, and only 1 is marginal and subject to improvement. It can be concluded that the test is good in its item facility and discrimination power. In general, the two summative tests, one used in the fifth semester 2020 and the other one in the sixth semester 2019 are good in terms of the characteristics of a good objective type test in multiple-choice format.
References
Alderson, J. C. & Hughes, A. 1981. Issues in language testing. London: British Council.
Badara, Aris. 2016. The Quality of the Indonesian Language Teacher-Made Tests at Junior School Level. Prosiding ICTTEFKIP UNS 2015. Vol 1, No. 1.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. 1996. Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Brown, James Dean. 2005. Testing in Language Programs: A comprehensive Guide to English Language Assessment New York: McGraw-Hill EL/ELT.
Brown, H. Douglas. 2001. Teaching by Principle and Interactive Approach to language pedagogy. New York: Longman Inc.
Direktorat Pembinaan Sekolah Menengah, Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional 2010. Supervision and Evaluasi Implementation of KTSP 2009. Jakarta: DIKNAS.
Ebel, R. L. 1979. Essential of Educational Measurement. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Gay, L. R., Mills, Geoffrey E., and Airasian, Peter. 2012. Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Pearson Education, Inc.
Hadi, Sutrisno. 1997. Metodologi Research. Yogyakarta: Andi Offset.
Hamed Taherdoost, Hamed. 2016. Validity and Reliability of the Research Instrument; How to Test the Validation of a Questionnaire/Survey in a Research. IJARM, Vol. 5, No. 3, Page: 28-36, ISSN: 2296-1747
He Lianzhen & LvZhouyang. 2013. A New Perspective of Language Testing Research: Critical Language Testing. 43(6): 164-173.
Heaton, J.B. 1975. Writing English Language Test. London: Longman Limited.
Korb. Calculating Reliability of Quantitative Measures. http://korbedpsych.com/LinkedFiles/CalculatingReliability.pdf
Kubai, Edwin. 2019. Reliability and Validity of Research Instruments. Conference: NMK conference. Project: Critical Analysis of policies on Special Education in Kenya. kubaiedwin@yahoo.com
Lalogiroth, A., & Tatipang, D. P. (2020). An Analysis of English National Exam and English Teachers’perception Using Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy. Journal of English Culture, Language, Literature and Education, 8(1), 1-21.
Lebagi, Desrin., Sumardi, Sumardi., & Sudjoko, S. 2017. The Quality of Teacher-made test in EFL Classroom at the Elementary School and Its Washback in the Learning. Journal of English Education, 2(2): 97-104.
Lumentut, Y., & Lengkoan, F. (2021). The Relationships of Psycholinguistics in Acquisition and Language Learning. Journal of English Culture, Language, Literature and Education, 9(1), 17-26.
Mulyani, Heni., Tanuatmodjo, Heraeni & Iskandar, Rangga.. 2020. Quality analysis of teacher-made tests in financial accounting subject at vocational high schools. Jurnal Pendidikan Vokasi, Vol 10, No 1.
Oller, John W. 1979. Language Tests at School. London: Longman.
Oluwatayo, J. 2012. Validity and reliability issues in educational research. Journal of Educational and Social Research 2, 391-400.
Ovwigho, B. O. 2013. Empirical Demonstration of Techniques for Computing the Discrimination Power of a Dichotomous Item Response Test. IOSR Journal of Research and Method in Education; 3(2): 12-17.
Pikirang, C. C., Liando, N., & Wuntu, C. N. (2021). A Correlational Study Between Learners’satisfactions With Offline Class and English Self-Efficacy During The Covid-19 Pandemic. Journal of English Culture, Language, Literature and Education, 9(1), 73-85.
Popham, W. James. 2009. All About Assessment/Diagnosing the Diagnostic Test. Educational Leadership, Vol. 66, No. 6, pp. 90-91.
Primadani, Arin Eka & Sulistyo, Gunadi Harry. 2014. An Analysis of a Midterm English Test of the Seven Grade Accelerated Class at SMPN 3 Malang. Email: arina.gee2@gmail.com & emailgun.now@gmail.com
Rajhy, Hussein Ahmed Abdo. 2014. Five Characteristics of a good Language Test. National Journal of Extensive Education and Interdisciplinary Research, Volume II, Issue IV, p. 61-66. ISSN: 2320-1460. ISSN: 2320-1460.
Rohmah, Naelul. 2018. Validity and Reliability Study on Teacher-Made Assessment for English Mid-Term Examination. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 254. Eleventh Conference on Applied Linguistics.
Saefurrohman & Balinas, Elvira S. 2016. English Teachers Classroom Assessment. English Department Faculty of Languages and Arts, Semarang State University.
Setiabudi, Agung., Mulyadi, Mulyadi., & Puspita, Hilda. 2019. An Analysis of Validity and Reliability of a Teacher-Made Test. Journal of English Education and Teaching, Vol 3, No 4.
Straub, D., & Boudreau, M.-C. & Gefen, D. 2004. Validation guidelines for IS positivist research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 13, 380-427.
Yohana Putri. 2009. An Analysis of Teacher-Made English Final Second Semester Test for the Year Eleven Students of SMAN 1 Ambarawa in the Academic Year of 2008/2009 Based on the Representativeness of Content Standard. English Department Faculty of Languages and Arts, Semarang State University.
Weiss, C.H. 1972. Evaluation Research: Methods of Assessing Program Effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs (NJ), USA: Prentice-Hall.
Wiersma, William & Jurs, Stephen G.1990. Educational Measurement and Testing, second edition, Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
