AN ANALYSIS OF SUMATIVE TEST

OF SMPN 09 KOTA BENGKULU

By :

1. Fiayu Ningsih (1321110098)

2. Maya Purnama Sari (1221110081)

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
MUHAMMADIYAH UNIVERSITY OF BENGKULU
2017
1. INTRODUCTION

Test is divice to reinforce learning and to motivate the students or as a mean of assesing
the students performence in language (Heaton in Indah 2000). There are three kinds os test
that is given at senior high school namely formative test, sub formative test and summative
test.

The sumative test is the most important of all because that test is given to determine the
students final mark. The summative test is given at the end period of study. The final test
execution is device to know how far the students ability in mastering the textbook material.

At SMP 9 Kota Bengkulu, the test is admistered on Tuesday, December 6th 2016. This
test is followed by four class. They are VIII A, VIII B, VIII Cand VIII D, with totaly 128
students.. But, in this assesment the writer only take one class. There is VIII A with totaly 33
students.

2. TEST ANALYSIS
2.1 VALIDITY
Validity refers to extent to which the test measure what it was intended test measure.
This mean that relates directly to purpose of the test. The purpose of the test was to provide
the tester with information wheather the test taker can be accepted to a certain program; the
test will be valid if the result gave accurate indication. Thus, regardless of the test-taker
knowledge, the test will be valid if it give information about the test takers knowledge in
relation to that specific program.
a. Content validity
Content validity is must represent the material that needs to be tested
(Heaton,1975). Based on data analysed, the result showed that the content validity of the
test at SMPN 9 Kota Bengkulu is appropriate as sylabus and the material of the test is too
appropriate material have tought.

b. Face validity
Face validity is the way the item look to the examination, test administrators,
educators (Heaton, 1975). Face validity is important to make students interested to answer
the question of a test.
 Based on the analysed, the result showed that the face validity at SMPN 9 Kota
Bengkulu dont have directions so, make the students be confused and then the letter
question is unneat.

2.2 REABILITY
Reability ask wheather an assesment instrument administered to the same respondents as
a second time would yield the same results (Cohen,1944). Reability of items were calculated
by using KR 20 and KR 21 formula. The result of item reliablity were calculated by using KR
20 formula showed that r count 0,45 And the results of item reability by using KR 21 formula
showed that r count 0,67 (see appendix 2 and 3)

2.3 ITEMS
For the analyzed the items, the writer took 27% for upper group and 27% for lower
group from the total of the students. So, there were 33 studentss answersheet consisted of 9
students answersheet from upper group, and 9 students answersheet from the lower group.
a. Dificulty
Level of item difficulty tell about the extent to which the item is difficult or
easy (Heaton,1975). Based on analyzed the data, it showed that there were 16 items
was difficult, 18 items was moderate and 16 item was easy. (see appendix 4)
b. Disrimination
Level of item discrimination tell about the extent to which the item is
discriminating between low level students and the high level students (Heaton,
1975). Based on analyzed the data, it showed that there were 21 items was very
good, 8 items was good, 3 items was marginal and 18 item was poor. (see appendix
4)
c. Distractor
Based on the analyzed the data, the writer found that some item dont have
fuction and should change to better distractot on order the question can use to the
next test. The analyzed of item, can see on appendix 4.

3. Conclusion
Based on the data analyzed above, the writer made conclusion as follows.
1. The items still have weakness in content validity and face validity so, it made the
student is not exaited.
 2. The reability of item showed that 0,45 and 0.47 by using KR 20 and KR 21.
3. From analysis the items of question, the writer found some items have each
different dificulty and descrimination. From easy until difficult and from very
good until poor. And then distractor of items still unfunction to use in the next
test.

4. Suggestions
Based on the results of analzed above, the writer give suggestions as follows.
a. To make a valid test, the teacher had to preparea table specification first in order to
make a test that proper with the table of specification.
b. It is hope that, if the teacher still want to use this test, she should improves the test
item for the future testing.
Appendix 2 (KR 20)

Mean = x = 930 = 28,18 = 28

N 33

SD: 2 = 1180 = 35,75 = 5,97

n 33

R = n ( 1- )
n-1 2

50 20,2
= ( 1- (6)2 )
501

50 20,2
= 49 ( 1- )
36

= 1,02 (1- 0,56)

=1,02 ( 0,44)

=0,448

= 0,45

Appendix 3 (KR 21)

()
R= 1 ( 1- . 2
)

50 28(5028
= 501 ( 1- )
50.(6)2

50 28(22)
= ( 1- )
49 50.36

616
=1,02( 1- )
1800

=1,02 ( 1-0,34)

=1,02( 0,66)

= 0,67