Karakteristik butir soal ujian akhir semester mata pelajaran sejarah

Authors

  • Anis Faridah SMA Negeri 1 Pangkalpinang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30863/ekspose.v20i2.1819

Keywords:

Butir Soal, Sejarah, Teori Tes Klasik, Ujian Akhir Semester, Tingkat Kesukaran

Abstract

This research is a study of quantitative descriptive. The purpose of this research is to describe the characteristics of final semester exam items for grade XI in the History subject at SMA N 1 Pangkalpinang using classical test theory approach. The research of the subject were 138 students of class XI in Social Sciences Major. The result of the research shows that final exam questions in the history subject class XI of SMA N 1 Pangkalpinang is proper to use. This shows that from the validity of the items which there are 39 items of questions (97.5%) which are proven empirically valid with a 0.818 reliability coefficient. Other than that, there are 27 items of questions (67,5%) that can fulfill the criteria for the difficulty level, distinguishing power, and distractor function so it can be used directly to measure the students ability without correction. While 12 items of questions (30%) need to be fixed and 1 item of question (2,5%) is declared to be invalid so it can't be used to measure the students ability in History Subject.

Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif kuantitatif. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah mendeskripsikan karakteristik butir soal ujian akhir semester (UAS) mata pelajaran Sejarah kelas XI SMA N 1 Pangkalpinang menggunakan pendekatan teori tes klasik. Subjek penelitian berjumlah 138 peserta didik kelas XI jurusan IPS. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa soal UAS mata pelajaran Sejarah kelas XI SMA N 1 Pangkalpinang telah layak digunakan. Hal ini dibuktikan dari validitas butir soal yang mana terdapat 39 butir soal (97,5%) terbukti valid secara empirik dengan koefisien reliabilitas sebesar 0,818. Selain itu terdapat 27 butir soal (67,5%) yang memenuhi kriteria tingkat kesukaran, daya beda, dan keberfungsian distraktor sehingga dapat digunakan langsung untuk mengukur kemampuan peserta didik tanpa perbaikan. Sedangkan sebanyak 12 butir soal (30%) perlu dilakukan perbaikan dan 1 butir soal (2,5%) dinyatakan gugur sehingga tidak dapat digunakan untuk mengukur kemampuan peserta didik pada mata pelajaran Sejarah.

References

Arikunto, S. (2013). Prosedur Penelitian: Suatu Pendekatan Praktik. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.

Azwar, S. (2015). Reliabilitas dan Validitas (4th ed.). Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Azwar, S. (2016). Konstruksi tes kemampuan kognitif. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.

Danni, R., & Tauratiya, T. (2020). Analisis Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Mahasiswa Program Studi Hukum Keluarga Islam IAIN Syaikh Abdurrahman Siddik Bangka Belitung. Tarbawy : Jurnal Pendidikan Islam, 7(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.32923/tarbawy.v7i1.1191

Danni, R., Wahyuni, A., & Tauratiya, T. (2021). Item Response Theory Approach: Kalibrasi Butir Soal Penilaian Akhir Semester Mata Pelajaran Bahasa Arab. Arabi : Journal of Arabic Studies, 6(1), 93–104. https://doi.org/10.24865/AJAS.V6I1.320

Fisher, W. (2007). Rating scale instrumen quality criteria. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 21(1), 1095.

Fraenkel, J. L., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. . (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). New York: Mc Graw-Hill Company.

Iskandar, A., & Rizal, M. (2018). Analisis Kualitas Soal di Perguruan Tinggi Berbasis Aplikasi TAP. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 22(1), 12–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v22i1.15609

Mahjabeen, W., Alam, S., Hassan, U., Zafar, T., Butt, R., Konain, S., & Rizvi, M. (2017). Difficulty Index, Discrimination Index and Distractor Efficiency in Multiple Choice Questions. Annals of PIMS-Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto Medical University, 13(4), 310–315. Retrieved from https://www.apims.net/index.php/apims/article/view/9

Mardapi, D. (1998). Analisis Butir dengan Teori Tes Klasik dan Teori Respons Butir. Jurnal Kependidikan, 28, 25–34.

Mardapi, D. (2008). Teknik Penyusunan Instrumen Tes dan Nontes. Yogyakarta: Mitra Cendikia Offset.

Mardapi, D. (2016). Pengukuran penilaian dan evaluasi pendidikan (2nd ed.). Yogyakarta: Nuha Litera.

Naga, D. S. (1992). Pengantar teori sekor pada pengukuran pendidikan. Jakarta: Gunadarma.

Ramadhan, S., Mardapi, D., Prasetyo, Z. K., & Utomo, H. B. (2019). The Development of an Instrumen to Measure the Higher Order Thinking Skill in Physics. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 743. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.743

Ratnaningsih, D. J., & Isfarudi, I. (2013). Analisis Butir Tes Objektif Ujian Akhir Semester Mahasiswa Universitas Terbuka Berdasarkan Teori Tes Modern. Jurnal Pendidikan Terbuka Dan Jarak Jauh, 14(2), 98–109. Retrieved from http://jurnal.ut.ac.id/index.php/jptjj/article/view/402

Retnawati, H., & Hadi, S. (2014). Sistem bank soal daerah terkalibrasi untuk menyongsong era desentralisasi. Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 20(2), 183–193. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17977/jip.v20i2.4615

Retnawati, Heri. (2016). Validitas, reliabilitas dan karakteristik butir. Yogyakarta: Nuha Medika.

Reynolds, C. R., Livingston, R. B., & Willson, V. (2009). Measurement and Assessment in Education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Rindermann, H., & Baumeister, A. E. E. (2015). Validating the interpretations of PISA and TIMSS tasks: A rating study. International Journal of Testing, 15(1), 276–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2014.966911

Santoso, A., Kartianom, K., & Kassymova, G. K. (2019). Kualitas butir bank soal statistika (Studi kasus: Instrumen ujian akhir mata kuliah statistika Universitas Terbuka). Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v6i2.28900

Solichin, M. (2017). Analisis Daya Beda Soal, Taraf Kesukaran, Validitas Butir Tes, Interpretasi Hasil Tes dan Validitas Ramalan dalam Evaluasi Pendidikan. Dirasat: Jurnal Manajemen Dan Pendidikan Islam, 2(2), 192–213. https://doi.org/10.26594/DIRASAT.V2I2.879

Stiggins, R., & Chappuis, J. (2012). Introduction to student invoved assessment for learning (6th ed.). Boston: Addison Wesley.

Sudjana, N. (2016). Penilaian Hasil Belajar Proses Belajar Mengajar. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya.

Susetyo, B. (2015). Prosedur Penyusunan dan Analasis Tes. Bandung: PT Refika Aditama.

Suwandi, S. (2010). Model Assesmen dalam Pembelajaran (2nd ed.). Surakarta: Yuma Pustaka.

Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011, June 27). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, Vol. 2, pp. 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd

Wibawa, E. A. (2019). Karakteristik Butir Soal Tes Ujian Akhir Semester Hukum Bisnis. Jurnal Pendidikan Akuntansi Indonesia, 17(1), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.21831/JPAI.V17I1.26339

Yusup, F. (2018). Uji Validitas dan Reliabilitas Instrumen Penelitian Kuantitatif. Tarbiyah : Jurnal Ilmiah Kependidikan, 7(1), 17–23. https://doi.org/10.18592/TARBIYAH.V7I1.2100

Downloads

Published

2022-03-14

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 2 (2021)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with Ekspose: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum dan Pendidikan agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 

  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.

  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.