Characteristics of Math national-standardized school exam test items in junior high school: What must be considered?

Atin Argianti; Heri Retnawati

doi:10.21831/pep.v24i2.32547

Characteristics of Math national-standardized school exam test items in junior high school: What must be considered?

Atin Argianti, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia
Heri Retnawati, Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia

10.21831/pep.v24i2.32547

Abstract

This research aims to determine the characteristics of items for the Math National Standardized School Exam (NSSE) in Junior High School (JHS) in grade 9. This study is descriptive-explorative quantitative research. The samples chosen were 293 ninth-grade students’ answers at state JHS of 3 Pati with a package of questions consisting of 30 items. The data collected is an NSSE test instrument and participants’ answers at State JHS of 3 Pati 2018/2019, collected by documentation. Experts validated the NSSE instrument, and the characteristic items of the NSSE instrument were analyzed using the classical test theory approach using Quest program. The question items of the math NSSE test at state JHS of 3 Pati are generally moderately good. Based on the classical theory approach, the result of instrument validity from expert judgment was 0.924, while the validity of items was 17 (56.7%) of items were very valid. The reliability was 0.78 (reliable category). Generally, Math NSSE items are in the easy category with a percentage of 83.3%. The discrimination index results indicate that, in general, the NSSE items are in a moderate category with a percentage of 60% (18 items). The distraction effectiveness shows that NSSE items are in the functional category with a percentage of 50%.

Keywords

item characteristics; mathematical test instrument; national-standardized school exam

Full Text:

PDF

References

Allen, M. J., & Yen, W. M. (1979). Introduction to measurement theory. Brooks/Cole.

Andrade, H. L., & Heritage, M. (2018). Using formative assessment to enhance learning, achievement, and academic self-regulation (1st ed.). Taylor & Francis.

Arifin, Z. (2012). Evaluasi pembelajaran. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Arikunto, S. (2012). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan (2nd ed.). Bumi Aksara.

Attali, Y., & Bar-Hillel, M. (2003). Guess where: The position of correct answers in multiple-choice test items as a psychometric variable. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40(2), 109–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2003.tb01099.x

Crocker, L. (2008). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Holt, Rinehard and Wiston.

Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Holt, Rinehard and Winston.

Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1972). Essentials of educational measurement (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall.

Ebel, R. L., & Frisbie, D. A. (1991). Essentials of educational measurement (5th ed.). Prentice-Hall of India.

Fernandes, H. J. X. (1984). Evaluation of educational programs. National Education Planning Evaluation and Curriculum Development.

Gronlund, N. E. (1998). Assessment of student achievement (6th ed.). Allyn and Bacon.

Istiyani, R., Muchyidin, A., & Rahardjo, H. (2018). Analisis miskonsepsi siswa pada konsep geometri menggunakan Three-Tier Diagnostic Test. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 37(2), 223–236. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v37i2.14493

Kartowagiran, B., Munadi, S., Retnawati, H., & Apino, E. (2018). The equating of battery test packages of mathematics national examination 2013-2016. SHS Web of Conferences, 42(00022), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20184200022

Linn, R. L., & Gronlund, N. E. (1995). Meansurement and assessment in teaching (7th ed.). Prentice-Hall.

Naga, D. S. (1992). Pengantar teori sekor pada pengukuran pendidikan. Besbats.

Nitko, A. J. (1996). Educational assessment of students (2nd ed.). Merrill an imprint of Prentice Hall.

Nunally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGrawHill.

Popham, W. J. (2009). Instruction that measures up: Successful teaching in the age of accountability. ASCD.

Regulation of the Minister of Education and Culture of the Republic of Indonesia No. 4 of 2018 concerning the Learning Outcome Assessment by Educational Units and the Government. (2018).

Regulation of the Minister of Education of Culture of the Republic of Indonesia No. 23 of 2016 concerning the Educational Assessment Standard. (2016).

Retnawati, H. (2016). Analisis kuantitatif instrumen penelitian. Parama.

Retnawati, H. (2017). Learning trajectory of item response theory course using multiple softwares. Olympiads in Informatics, 11, 123–142. https://doi.org/10.15388/ioi.2017.10

Retnawati, H., Kartowagiran, B., Arlinwibowo, J., & Sulistyaningsih, E. (2017). Why are the mathematics national examination items difficult and what is teachers’ strategy to overcome it? International Journal of Instruction, 10(3), 257–276. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.10317a

Shantika, E. G., & Istiyono, E. (2019). A diagnosis of students’ errors in answering the mathematics test in senior high school. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 23(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v23i2.16370

Sunarti, S. & Anggraini, D. (2013). Pengembangan bank soal dan pembahasan ujian nasional berbasis multimedia pembelajaran interaktif dengan macromedia authorware 7.0. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan, 31(3), 394–408. https://doi.org/10.21831/cp.v0i3.1138

Thomas, G., & Dawson, J. B. (1972). Item analysis and examination statics. The Union of Educational Institutions.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v24i2.32547