ABSTRACT
DWI WIDIYANTI. 2013. The Theoretical Testing Model To Measure Written Communicative English Competence of Elementary School Students in Indonesia . Yogyakarta: English Language Studies. Graduate Program. Sanata Dharma University.
This research is conducted as a scientific research in English measurement in the elementary school level of Indonesia. The research was intended to provide the testing model which hopefully can be an instrument that enables educational stakeholders in Indonesia to acquire enough data to appropriately predict the language ability of the elementary school students. Such data would be critically needed in the policy making for a better improvement in the English language learning system in Indonesia.
The research has two research questions to be answered. They are: (1) what is the written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia like? (2) what is the measurement instrument of the written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia like?
To find the answers to those research questions, the researcher used the first five phases of the Research and Development method that were: research and information collection, planning, development of preliminary form of product, preliminary field testing, and main product revision. Two groups of respondents that were TEYL professionals and sixth grade students in the elementary school were involved in the process of construct validation of the testing model.
From the result of literature review and improvement feedbacks from the respondents it was discovered that the communicative written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia was theoretically formulated into two categories. The first one was the competence of text understanding (reading) that was their ability to know and comprehend the meaning of written English texts organizationally and pragmatically that they found in daily life, such as at home, at school, and in public places. The second one was the competence of text production (writing) that was their ability to create written English text organizationally and pragmatically in daily life, such as at home, at school, and public places.This was all at once answering the first research question. The blue-print and the test prototype which were the answers to the second research question were developed based on those formulated language competence and aspects of test development by considering the unique characteristics of elementary school students of Indonesia.
This research was limited to the development of the theoretical model which was still considered as a preliminary form of product in the R&D cycle. Therefore a further study on this research is highly recommended to make the testing model perfectly operational.
ABSTRAK
DWI WIDIYANTI. 2013. The Theoretical Testing Model To Measure Written Communicative English Competence of Elementary School Students in Indonesia. Yogyakarta: English Language Studies. Graduate Program. Sanata Dharma University.
Riset ini dilakukan sebagai sebuah riset ilmiah dalam hal pengukuran bahasa Inggris di tingkat sekolah dasar di Indonesia. Riset ini dimaksudkan untuk menyediakan sebuah model test yang diharapkan mampu menjadi sebuah instrumen yang memungkinkan para pemangku kepentingan pendidikan di Indonesia untuk mendapatkan data yang memadai dalam memprediksi kemampuan bahasa Inggris siswa sekolah dasar secara tepat. data semacam ini sangat diperlukan dalam rangka membuat kebijakan yang betul-betul dapat memberikan perbaikan terhadap sistem pendidikan bahasa Inggris di Indonesia.
Riset ini mengusung dua pertanyaan, yaitu: (1) Seperti apakah kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis yang komunikatif dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia? (2) seperti apakah bentuk instrumen untuk mengukur kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis yang komunikatif dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia?
Untuk memnemukan jawaban dari pertanyan-pertanyan tersebut, peneliti menggunakan lima tahapan awal dari metode Riset dan Pengembangan, yaitu: riset dan pengumpulan informasi, perencanaan, pengembangan produk awal, pengujian awal di lapangan dan revisi produk awal. Proses validasi konstruk terhadap model test melibatkan dua kelompok responden, yaitu ahli Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris Pembelajar muda dan siswa kelas enam sekolah dasar.
Dari hasil review pustaka dan masukan untuk perbaikan instrumen, diperoleh konsep bahwa kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia secara teoritis dibagi menjadi 2 kategori, yaitu: (1) Kemampuan pemahaman teks (membaca) yaitu kemampuan siswa untuk mengetahui dan memahami teks bahasa Ingrris tertulis secara organisasional dan secara pragmatis dalam kehidupan mereka sehari-hari seperti di rumah, sekolah dan tempat2 publik lainnya. (2) Kemampuan produksi teks (menulis) yaitu kemampuan siswa untuk membuat teks tertulis secara organisasional dan pragmatis dalam kehidupan mereka sehari-sehari seperti di rumah, sekolah dan tempat2 publik lainnya. Konsep ini sekaligus menjawab pertanyaan riset yang pertama. Kisi-kisi soal dan contoh model test awal dibuat berdasarkan konsep tersebut dan aspek-aspek pengembangan instrument test dengan mempertimbangkan keunikan dari karakter siswa sekolah dasar Indonesia merupakan jawaban dari pertanyaan yang kedua.
THE THEORETICAL TESTING MODEL
TO MEASURE COMMUNICATIVE WRITTEN ENGLISH
COMPETENCE OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
OF INDONESIA
THESIS
Presented as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements to Obtain theMagister Humaniora(M.Hum) Degree
in English Language Studies
by
DWI WIDIYANTI 106332009
THE GRADUATE PROGRAM OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY
A THESIS
THE THEORETICAL TESTING MODEL
TO MEASURE COMMUNICATIVE WRITTEN ENGLISH
COMPETENCE OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
OF INDONESIA
by Dwi Widiyanti
106332009
Approved by:
F.X. Mukarto, Ph.D. __________________________
A THESIS
THE THEORETICAL TESTING MODEL
TO MEASURE COMMUNICATIVE WRITTEN ENGLISH
COMPETENCE OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
OF INDONESIA
Presented by Dwi Widiyanti
Student Number: 106332009
Defended before the Thesis Committee and Declared Acceptable.
THESIS COMMITTEE
Chairperson : F.X. Mukarto, Ph.D. __________________ Secretary : Dr. B.B. Dwijatmoko, M.A. __________________
Member : Dr. J. Bismoko __________________
Member : Markus Budiharjo, M.Ed., Ed.D. __________________
Yogyakarta, January 21, 2014 The Graduate Program Director Sanata Dharma University
STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY
This is to certify that all the ideas, phrases, and sentences, unless otherwise stated, are the ideas, phrases, and sentences by the writer. The writer understands the full consequences including degree cancellation if she took somebody’s ideas, phrases or sentences without a proper reference.
Yogyakarta, November 20, 2013
LEMBAR PERNYATAAN PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI KARYA ILMIAH UNTUK KEPENTINGAN AKADEMIS
Yang bertandatangan dibawah ini, saya mahasiswa Universitas Sanata Dharma:
Nama : Dwi Widiyanti
Nomor Mahasiswa : 106332009
Dengan perkembangan ilmu pengetahuan, saya memberikan kepada Perpustakaan Universitas Sanata Dharma karya ilmiah saya yang berjudul:
THE THEORETICAL TESTING MODEL
TO MEASURE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIVE ENGLISH COMPETENCE OF ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS
OF INDONESIA
beserta perangkat yang diperlukan. Dengan demikian, saya memberikan hak kepada Universitas Sanata Dharma untuk menyimpan, mengalihkan dalam media lain, mengelolanya dalam bentuk pangkalan data, mendistribusikannya secara terbatas, dan mempublikasikannya di internet atau media lain untuk kepentingan akademis tanpa perlu meminta ijin dari saya maupun memberi royalti kepada saya selama tetap mencantumkan nama saya sebagai penulis.
Demikian pernyataan ini saya buat dengan sebenarnya. Dibuat di Yogyakarta.
Pada tanggal: 20 November 2013 Yang menyatakan,
“
In order to succeed, your desire for success
should be greater than your
fear
of failure.”
–
Bill Cosby
This thesis is dedicated to:
Allah S.W.T., my beloved husband and daughters, my parents, and
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My greatest gratitude goes to Allah SWT for showering me with His greatest love and blessings so that I can stand to complete my thesis. With the huge stuffs I was obliged to handle, completing my thesis was like an unreachable dream to me __and I almost gave it up many times. Yet, He blesses me and makes it reachable.
My endless thanks are addressed to F.X. Mukarto, Ph.D. and Dr. J. Bismoko, my major advisors for their patience and understanding, valuable guidance, and great support during the research.
My sincere thanks are also addressed to ibu Pipin, ibu Lusi, ibu Hening, and ibu Ani for being the expert respondents of my research on checking the construct validation. A bunch of thanks are also delivered to ustadz Maryanto and ustadzah Kipti, the head and English teacher of SDIT Prambanan of Yogyakarta for their incredible supports to let their students work for the trial test of the preliminary product of my research.
Thanks to mbak Atiek and Ucik, my co-researchers in doing the research who are always generous and humbly share their ideas for me to make better improvements in my thesis.
My deepest love and respect also go to my beloved husband, Muhammad Muttaqin, for his love and generous supports during my study and completing my thesis. My greatest love also goes to my two wonderful daughters, Nada Khansa Nabila and Jihan Tasbih Adha, who have let their mother take their precious time to be ‘alone’ and ‘busy’ with her study and thesis. You all are the life of my life and the spirit that makes me strong. Thank you and I love you full!
TABLE OF CONTENT
TITLE PAGE………. APPROVAL PAGES ……… STATEMENT OF ORIGINALITY………. LEMBAR PERSETUJUAN PUBLIKASI ILMIAH ………. MOTTO PAGE ……… CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION ..………..
A. Research Background ………... B. Research Position ……… ... C. Problem Identification ………... CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW ………...
A. Theoretical Review... 1. Elementary School Students ……….... a. Cognitive Growth ……… b. Social and Emotional Growth ………. c. Physical Growth ... d. Literacy (reading and writing ability) ... e. Vulnerability ... b. Concept of English Testing ... 1) Definition ... 2) Classification ... 3) Types of test Items ... 4) Meaning of Test Results ... 5) Criteria ... 3. Written Communicative English Competence ...
a. Role and Function of English ... b. Concept and Models of English Communicative
Competence ... c. Concept and Models of Written Communicative
English Competence ... 1) Reading ... a) Concept of Reading ...
b) Framework for Reading Competence of Young Language Learners as Theoretical Construct ... 2) Writing ... a) Concept of Writing ... b) Framework for Writing Competence of
Young Language Learners as Theoretical Construct ...
51 54 54
56 4. English Education in Elementary Schools of
Indonesia ... a. Role and Position of English in Indonesia ... b. English Education in Elementary School of
Indonesia ...
59 59 62 B. Theoretical Framework ...
1. Elements of the Development ... a. Underlying Philosophy ... b. Characteristics of Elementary School English
Learners ... c. English Education of Elementary Schools in
Indonesia ... d. Written Communicative English Competence of
Elementary School Students of Indonesia ... 2. Development of the Preliminary Product ... 3. The Preliminary Product ...
65 CHAPTER III: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...
A. Research Method ... 1. Research and Information Collection ... 2. Planning ... 3. Development of the Preliminary Form of the
Product ... 4. Preliminary Field test ... 5. Main Product Revision ... B. Research Setting and Respondents ... C. Research Instruments ... D. Data Gathering and Analysis Techniques ...
92 CHAPTER IV: RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION....
A. Result of Evaluation on the Preliminary Product ... 1. Formulation of Indicators of Language Competence . 2. Congruence of Indicators of Language Competence
1) Indicator 7 ... 3. Overview of the Design of the Testing Model ...
a. Overview of the Time Duration ... b. Overview of the Design from the experts’ Points
of View ... c. Overview of the Design from the Test Takers
Candidates (Students) ...
128 128 130 135 B. Preliminary Product Revision ...
1. Revision of the Blue Print ... a. Indicator 1 ... b. Indicator 2 ... c. Indicator 3 ... 2. Revision of the Test Prototype ...
a. The Purpose of the Test Making ... b. Test Design ... c. Test Instructions ... d. Test Duration ... e. Test items ... 1) Reading Comprehension Section ... a) Indicator 1 ... C. Formulation of the Final Product ...
1. Theoretical Model of Language Competence ... a. Standard Competence ... b. Criteria Competence ... c. Indicators ... 2. Blue-Print and the Iconic Model or the Prototype ...
165 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS...
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Widely held expectations of literacy development (Puckett
and Black, 2000, 100) cited by Penny Mc Kay (2006: 12) ... 18 Table 2.2: Penny Mc Kay’s framework of young language
learners’ reading ability (Mc Kay, 2006:227) ...52 Table 2.3: Weigle’s Groups of Second language writers adapted from
Bernhard ( Wegle, 2002: 6)...55 Table. 2.4. Penny Mc Kay’s framework of young language learners’ writing
ability (Mc Kay, 2006:227)...58 Table 2.4: Mc Kay’s examples of indicators of language ability of
reading and writing ...76 Table 2.5: Mc Kay’s examples of indicators of language ability
of reading and writing adjusted to Indonesia elementary school
level of education ...78 Table 2.6. The preliminary blue-print of the testing model ...91 Table 3.1: Classification of the student respondents ...103 Table 4.1: Students’ response on Text understanding Part 1, indicator 1,
item no 1 and 2 ...108 Table 4.2: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 1, item 1-2 ... 110 Table 4.3: Students’ response on Text understanding Part 2, indicator 2,
item no 3 up to 7 ... 111 Table 4.4: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 2, item 3-7 ... 110 Table 4.5: Students’ response on Text understanding Part 3, indicator 3,
item no 8 up to 12 ... 111 Table 4.6: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 3, item 8-12 ... 116 Table 4.7: Students’ response on Text understanding Part 4, indicator 4-5,
item no 13 up to 22 ... 117 Table 4.8: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 4-6, item 13-22 ...119 Table 4.9: Students’ response on Text production, Writing Part 1, indicator 7,
item no 24 up to 28 ...121 Table 4.10: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 7, item 24-28 ...122 Table 4.11: Students’ response on Text production, Writing Part 2, indicator 8,
item no 29 up to 34 ...123 Table 4.12: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
manifestation of indicator 8, item 29-34 ...125 Table 4.13: Students’ response on Text production, Writing Part 1, indicator 9,
item no 35 up to 39 ...126 Table 4.14: Conformity between students’ response and experts’ judgment for
Table 4.16: Improvement feedback from expert respondents ...130 Table 4.17: Student respondents’ opinion on the testing model ...136 Table 4.18: The hyphotezied standard competence of communicative written
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Asian countries rank in the level of English proficiency... 3
Figure 2.1: Tiffany Davis’ Ilustration of Piaget’s four cognitive development stages ... 13
Figure 2.2: Aspects of characteristics of elementary school language learners ... 23
Figure 2.3: Aspects of Testing ... 28
Figure 2.4: Types of test items (Lamprianou, 2009: 200) ... 31
Figure 2.5: Example of multiple choice ... 32
Figure 2.6: Example of true-false items (Reynolds, 2009: 211) ... 33
Figure 2.7: Example of true-false items (Reynolds, 2009: 217) ... 33
Figure 2.8: Example of essay items (Reynolds, 2009:228) ... 34
Figure 2.9: Example of short-answer item (Reynolds, 2009: 237) ... 34
Figure 2.10: Stanford-Binet Intelligence scales (Reynolds, 2009: 85) ... 36
Figure.2.11: Behaviour assessment system for children (Reynolds, 2009: 85) .. 36
Figure 2.12: Kachru’s The Outer Tongue: English across cultures (1992) ... 42
Figure 2.13: Evaluation of model of communicative English competence ... 47
Figure 2.14: Examples of Genres cited from education department of Western Australia 1997 (Mc Kay, 2006: 246) ... 57
Figure 2.16: Process of development of the testing model ... 66
Figure 2.17: Diagram of formulating cognitive aspects of young learners (age 10-11) ... 69
Figure 2.18: Diagram of formulating physical aspects of young learners (10-12 ) ... 70
Figure 2.19: Diagram of formulating emotional and social aspects of Young learners (age 10-12) ... 71
Figure 2.20: Diagram of formulating literacy aspect of young learners (age 10-12) ... 72
Figure 2.21: Diagram of formulating literacy aspect of young learners (age 10-12) ... 73
Figure 2.22: The summary of characteristics of young learners of age 10-12 ... 74
Figure 2. 23: Framework of development of the testing instrument ... 80
Figure 2. 24: Adjustment tasks’ characterization to children’s characteristics and need: cognitive aspect ... 81
Figure 2.25: Adjustment tasks’ characterization to children’s characteristics and needs: physical aspect ... 81
Figure 2.26: Adjustment tasks’ characterization to children’s characteristics and needs: social-emotional aspect ... 82
Figure 2.27: Adjustment tasks’ characterization to children’s characteristics and needs: Vulnerability aspect ... 82
Figure 2.28: adjustment tasks’ characterization to children’s characteristics and needs: literacy aspect ... 83
Figure 2.29: Tasks’ mapping adjusted to children’s characteristics and needs ... 84
Figure 2.31: Example of test item of the prototype ... 87
Figure 2.32: Simplified reading skills ... 89
Figure 2. 33: Simplified writing skills ... 89
Figure 3.1: The research design of the development of the testing instrument .. 94
Figure 3.2: The test development process (Geneese, 2007: 159) ... 95
Figure 3.3: The development process of the testing instrument ... 96
Figure 4.1: Trend line of students’ response for reading Part1, item no 1 ... 109
Figure 4.2: Trend line of students’ response for reading Part 1, item no 2 ... 110
Figure 4.3: Trend line of students’ response for reading Part 2, item no 3-7 .... 112
Figure 4.8: Trend line of students’ response for reading Part 3, item no 8-12 .. 115
Figure 4.13: Trend line of students’ response for reading Part 4, item no 13-22 ... 117
Figure 4.23: Trend line of students’ response for writing Part1, item no 24-28...121
Figure 4.29: Trend line of students’ response for writing Part2, item no 29-34...124
Figure 4.34: Trend line of students’ response for writing Part2, item no 35-39...126
Figure 4. 35: Analysis on the improvement feedback for revision ... 141
Figure 4.36: Improvement feedback for indicator 1, item 1 ... 145
Figure 4.37: Revisions for item format, indicator 1, item no 1 ... 146
Figure 4.38: Improvement feedback for indicator 2, item no 3-7 ... 148
Figure 4.39: Revisions for item format, indicator 2, item no 3-7 ... 149
Figure 4.40: Improvement feedback for indicator 3, item no 8-12 ... 150
Figure 4.41: Revisions for item format, indicator 3, item no 8-12 ... 152
Figure 4.42: Improvement feedback for indicator 4,5,6, item no 18-22 ...154
Figure 4.43: Revisions for item format, indicator 4,5,6, item no 18-22 ... 155
Figure 4.44: Improvement feedback for indicator 8, item no 29-33... 157
Figure 4.45: Revisions for item format, indicator 8, item no 29-33 ... 161
Figure 4.46: Improvement feedback for indicator 8, item no 34 ... 161
Figure 4.47: Revisions for item format, indicator 8, item no 34... 162
Figure 4.48: Improvement feedback for indicator 9, item no 35-39 ... 163
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix 1: The final products of the theoritical model Appendix 2: The questionnaires of construct validation
ABSTRACT
DWI WIDIYANTI. 2013.The Theoretical Testing Model To Measure Written Communicative English Competence of Elementary School Students in Indonesia . Yogyakarta: English Language Studies. Graduate Program. Sanata Dharma University.
This research is conducted as a scientific research in English measurement in the elementary school level of Indonesia. The research was intended to provide the testing model which hopefully can be an instrument that enables educational stakeholders in Indonesia to acquire enough data to appropriately predict the language ability of the elementary school students. Such data would be critically needed in the policy making for a better improvement in the English language learning system in Indonesia.
The research has two research questions to be answered. They are: (1)what is the written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia like? (2) what is the measurement instrument of the written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia like?
To find the answers to those research questions, the researcher used the first five phases of the Research and Development method that were: research and information collection,planning,development of preliminary form of product,preliminary field testing, and main product revision. Two groups of respondents that were TEYL professionals and sixth grade students in the elementary school were involved in the process of construct validation of the testing model.
From the result of literature review and improvement feedbacks from the respondents it was discovered that the communicative written English competence of elementary school students of Indonesia was theoretically formulated into two categories. The first one was the competence of text understanding (reading) that was their ability to know and comprehend the meaning of written English texts organizationally and pragmatically that they found in daily life, such as at home, at school, and in public places. The second one was the competence of text production (writing) that was their ability to create written English text organizationally and pragmatically in daily life, such as at home, at school, and public places. This was all at once answering the first research question. The blue-print and the test prototype which were the answers to the second research question were developed based on those formulated language competence and aspects of test development by considering the unique characteristics of elementary school students of Indonesia.
ABSTRAK
DWI WIDIYANTI. 2013.The Theoretical Testing Model To Measure Written Communicative English Competence of Elementary School Students in Indonesia. Yogyakarta: English Language Studies. Graduate Program. Sanata Dharma University.
Riset ini dilakukan sebagai sebuah riset ilmiah dalam hal pengukuran bahasa Inggris di tingkat sekolah dasar di Indonesia. Riset ini dimaksudkan untuk menyediakan sebuah model test yang diharapkan mampu menjadi sebuah instrumen yang memungkinkan para pemangku kepentingan pendidikan di Indonesia untuk mendapatkan data yang memadai dalam memprediksi kemampuan bahasa Inggris siswa sekolah dasar secara tepat. data semacam ini sangat diperlukan dalam rangka membuat kebijakan yang betul-betul dapat memberikan perbaikan terhadap sistem pendidikan bahasa Inggris di Indonesia.
Riset ini mengusung dua pertanyaan, yaitu: (1) Seperti apakah kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis yang komunikatif dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia? (2) seperti apakah bentuk instrumen untuk mengukur kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis yang komunikatif dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia?
Untuk memnemukan jawaban dari pertanyan-pertanyan tersebut, peneliti menggunakan lima tahapan awal dari metode Riset dan Pengembangan, yaitu:riset dan pengumpulan informasi, perencanaan, pengembangan produk awal, pengujian awal di lapangandanrevisi produk awal. Proses validasi konstruk terhadap model test melibatkan dua kelompok responden, yaitu ahli Pengajaran Bahasa Inggris Pembelajar muda dan siswa kelas enam sekolah dasar.
Dari hasil review pustaka dan masukan untuk perbaikan instrumen, diperoleh konsep bahwa kemampuan bahasa Inggris tertulis dari siswa sekolah dasar di Indonesia secara teoritis dibagi menjadi 2 kategori, yaitu: (1) Kemampuan pemahaman teks (membaca) yaitu kemampuan siswa untuk mengetahui dan memahami teks bahasa Ingrris tertulis secara organisasional dan secara pragmatis dalam kehidupan mereka sehari-hari seperti di rumah, sekolah dan tempat2 publik lainnya. (2) Kemampuan produksi teks (menulis) yaitu kemampuan siswa untuk membuat teks tertulis secara organisasional dan pragmatis dalam kehidupan mereka sehari-sehari seperti di rumah, sekolah dan tempat2 publik lainnya. Konsep ini sekaligus menjawab pertanyaan riset yang pertama. Kisi-kisi soal dan contoh model test awal dibuat berdasarkan konsep tersebut dan aspek-aspek pengembangan instrument test dengan mempertimbangkan keunikan dari karakter siswa sekolah dasar Indonesia merupakan jawaban dari pertanyaan yang kedua.
CHAPTER I
THE INTRODUCTION
This research is a study on English testing which concentrates on the concept and the development of the theoretical testing model to measure communicative written English competence of Indonesian elementary school students.
This chapter is an initial part which will review the background of the research, research position, problem identification, research focus, research
questions, research benefits,andproduct specification.
A. RESEARCH BACKGROUND
and money to have their English skills assessed and tested to get the recognition of their English skill as well as improvement on their English learning process.
Indonesia, as one of the biggest ASEAN countries also joins the driven spirit of acquiring English as a communicative language for its people, especially for its young generations. Indonesian government, as if they do not want to be left behind, put English as a compulsory subject in the curriculum and put it as one of the only compulsory foreign language being tested in the National education examination. Even, nowadays, there has been a rush trend of teaching the language from the earlier age. Parents are eager to introduce English to their children as early as possible by sending their children to the institutions that state themselves as putting English into their curriculum.
Figure 1.1. Asian countries rank in the level of English proficiency ( http://www.ef.co.id/epi/country-profiles/indonesia/)
education started from the junior high school level as the earliest. Yet, lately, Musliar, after the few months debate, finally has announced that English will not be abolished after all. Schools are allowed to offer the subject but as an elective subject. It should not be made compulsory.
Many people disagree with the government’s policy. Ignoring the dispute, parents keep sending their children to institutions which put English in their curriculum. And educational institutions, both government and private elementary schools and English course institutions, keep introducing English to the pupils in their curriculum but in a different strategy.
Such an uncertain situation, however, was not conducive for the pupils’ English learning atmosphere and later on may have bad impact to the pupils’ future English learning. If elementary schools are formally not allowed to include English into their curriculum, and the schools keep conducting it in their own way, the format of English teaching and learning in elementary school level will be uncontrolly designed. The impact which may come along with the situation is the uncontrolled quality assurance on the outcome. The people’s high expectation of preparing their children a weapon (by acquiring English well) to compete for good careers in the future will be unfulfilled.
school had more “aptitude and interest towards learning English that those who did not receive any English” (Kim, 2004:26). The result also showed that positive impression and attitudes with ‘regard to early language learning experiences are likely to fuel the learners’ desire for further language learning” (Kim, 2004:26). Another study also showed that the power to learn language is so great in the young child that it does not seem to matter how many languages they are willing to learn. The children have the capacity and there is no detriment to develop several languages at the same time. Therefore, learning English for the elementary school students actually means no burden for them (Kim, 2004:26).
Elementary School is considered as the basic level of education. Therefore an effectiveness English teaching method in this level is very critical for the students’ future acceptance on the English learning. The uncertain condition for the English learning in the elementary school level will mean more disadvatages for the aim of national education to produce qualified human resources. Therefore, an educative instrument which can act as a scaffolding for the people to control the quality of their children’s English learning achievement is critically needed.
decisions on what should be done for the improvement. Such reason has driven the writing of this thesis. With the intention to create an effective blue-print of English testing model, the thesis is written to formulate a blue-print and its prototype for an effective testing model which enables us to make a right decision in the improvement of English teaching and learning in elementary school of Indonesia.
B. RESEARCH POSITION
This research is conducted as a scientific research in English measurement in Indonesia in the elementary school level. The research will deal with Indonesian elementary school students and the development of the right theoretical testing model to measure their communicative written English competence.
Some studies have been conducted to do research in English test in the International scale, among of them are:
definition of language proficiency should be modified. The result of the research was a suggestion on the guidelines to dealing with test taker’s characteristics.
(2) A study on English Test-Taking Strategy Use and Students’ Test Performance by Wenxia Zhang, Meihua Liu, Shan Zhao, Qiong Xie from Tsinghua University, China. They reported on a study of the use of English test-taking strategy and its effect on students’ test performance.
There are, actually, many studies conducted in the international scale that deal with English testing, Yet, it is really rare to find any in the national scale, especially the one which deals with English testing for Indonesian young English learners. This may because there are still many people who are still sceptical about the importance of introducing English to Indonesian young English learners. Moreover, testing itself, is also still considered as a complicated stuff for young learners. With such assumption, the researcher is sure that this research can be stated as a new step in the study of English testing for Indonesian young English learners. Therefore, this research can be stated as original and, hopefully, can provide more contribution to the development of language testing literature.
C. PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION
In order to formulate a right concept and design of a testing instrument to measure the written English competence of elementary school’s students, this research will work on four key problems noted to clarify, that are: Elementary School English Learners, English Testing, Communicative Written English
Competence, and English Teaching and Learning in Elementary Schools of Indonesia.
D. RESEARCH FOCUS
The former parts of this chapter have explored the problems which might reveal in formulating a testing model for written English competence of elementary school students. Within the ‘revealed’ problems, the focus of this research will be limited specifically to the communicative written English competence of Indonesian elementary school students and the development of its theoretical testing model.
E. RESEARCH LIMITATION
This research will use Research and Development method in formulating the concept so as developing the instrument. In the Research and Development procedure, a researcher should conduct a cicly which containts 10 phases. Yet, due to the limitation of time available for the researcher, this research will only be limited to five phases of the required ten phases. The validation of the product will be conducted through a construct validation by four TEYL professionals and a ‘semi’ trial test conducted in a small number of the test taker candidates as the supplement to the experts’ improvement feedbacks.
F. RESEARCH QUESTION
The previous part of this chapter has identified the rationale behind the
research focus of the intended research. The following are the problems of the
research which are formulated into two research questions:
(1) What is the written English competence of Indonesia elementary school students like?
(2) What is the measurement instrument of the written English competence of Indonesia elementary school students like?
G. RESEARCH BENEFIT
Measurement as a part of evaluation is critical to improve the quality of the teaching and learning system. Measurement in a form of testing is probably considered as the most applied evaluation method in language education. Meanwhile, language competence is something which is abstract. To empirically see it, people mostly prefer language testing as the method of gathering information as it is considered to have more objective result. The result will enable the educational stakeholders to see how far the goal or objective of the learning and teaching process is successfully conducted. Thus, developing an effective testing model which can measure the achievement of the learning teaching process is really interesting and critical.
H. PRODUCT SPECIFICATION
The product of this research will hopefully be the theoretical testing model (blue print) and its prototype of Test of Communicative English for Elementary School Students of Indonesia (TOESI). The product is theoretically developed
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter mainly discusses about theories which will be used to build a
synthesized understanding to answer the previously set research questions so as to
develop the design and the operational of the theoretical testing model for
evaluating the written English competence of elementary students of Indonesia.
The discussion contains two sections. Section (1) is the theoretical review which
covers three main constructed theories underlying the research concept: firstly,
Elementary school students which will cover the discussion on elementary school students as young English learners. Secondly, English testing which will discuss about the philosophy, the definition and the criteria of a good testing.
Thirdly,communicative written English competencewhich will cover the role and functions of English language and exploration on communicative English
competence and the written English competence in general and for young learners
and lastly, English education in elementary schools of Indonesia. Section (2) is the theoretical framework which covers the formulation of the testing model and the hypotheses/assumptions of written English competence of Indonesian young learners.
A. THEORETICAL REVIEW 1. Elementary School Students
Elementary school students are categorized as young learners. Therefore, in
order to develop an effective testing instrument for Indonesian elementary school
characteristics is importantly acknowledged. Mc Kay (2006: 288) states that the
demand of tasks of the test should be appropriate to children’s age and their
related abilities and should not extend beyond the children’s capacity.
The term ‘young learners’ usually is referred to catch all terms for students
who are not yet adults. The term is often interpreted in different ways. It is used
by some institutions and language providers to refer to any student who has not
yet reached their maturity. In this sense, the term ‘young learners’ includes the
whole range of ages and developmental stages of children from infants, young
children and older children, through to adolescent teenagers and young people.
Slattery (2001: 4) uses the term ‘young learners’ for children aged 7 to 12 and
‘very young learners’ for those aged under 7.
As the object of the research is students of elementary school, the ‘young
learners’ mentioned in this research is the one which refers to children of their
beginning of first year of formal school that is when they are 7 years old up to
their last of first year of formal school that is when they are about 11-12 years old.
There are several things to be noticed in developing testing/assessment for
young learners. They are :
a. Cognitive Growth
In studying the cognitive development of children and adolescents, Piaget
(1896-1980) identifies four major stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational and formal operational. He believes that all children pass through these phases to advance to the next level of cognitive development. In each stage,
of the world. “Stages cannot be ‘skipped’; intellectual development always
follows this sequence” (Berk, 2008: 208). The figure below illustrates the stages
of young learners based on Piaget’s theory:
Figure 2.1. Tiffany Davis’ illustration of Piaget's four cognitive development stages cited from Meghan Hummel, and Kay Sauers (2006)
As it is shown in the above figure, the first stage, sensorimotor, begins at birth and lasts until 18 months-2 years of age. This stage involves “the use of
motor activity without the use of symbols”. Knowledge is limited in this stage,
because it is based on physical interactions and experiences. The second stage,
preoperational usually occurs during the period between toddlerhood (18-24months) and early childhood (7 years). During this stage children begin to use
language and develop their memory and imagination. In this stage, children
engage in make believe and can understand and express relationships between the
past and the future. More complex concepts, such as cause and effect relationships,
have not been learned. Intelligence is egocentric and intuitive, not logical. The
third stage,concrete operationalstage typically develops between the ages of 7-11 years. Intellectual development in this stage is shown by the use of logical and
systematic manipulation of symbols, which are related to concrete objects.
Thinking becomes less egocentric with increased awareness of external events,
is the formal operational stage that typically develops above 12 years. Adolescents and adults use symbols related to abstract concepts. Adolescents can
think about multiple variables in systematic ways, can formulate hypotheses, and
think about abstract relationships and concepts.
A description of children’s cognitive development and language learning is
presented by Mc Kay (2006, 6-7). She states that in the early years of schooling
children’s attention span is short. They are easily unfocused and distracted by
others. They can easily drop out the task when they find it difficult. From age 5 to
7, children learn continuously direct from experience. They develop their
understanding of cause and effect, such as “I can have a pet if I take care of it.”
They start developing the use of their first language to clarify thinking and
learning. They understand the meaning of the words ‘tomorrow’ or ‘yesterday’
but they may still be unsure about length of time. Before the age of 8, children do
not find it easy to use language to talk about language, such as grammar and
discourse. As children move into older age or upper eelementary grades, they start
developing into more objective thought and being able to recognize things. At the
age of 11 to 13, children begin to develop the ability to ‘manipulate’ thoughts and
ideas. The use of language has developed to the ability of predicting,
hypothesizing, and classifying. Their understanding of cause and effect also
expand. At the age of 12, children’s understanding of time has developed to “the
point where they can talk about recent events, plans for the future and career
The object of the research is the students of elementary school. Therefore,
‘young learners’ mentioned in this research is the ones which refer to children of
their end of first year of formal school that is when they are 7-12 years old. In
Piaget’s theory, it is in the stage of between the concrete operational and formal
operational stage. The character of this age young learner can be summed up as:
first, ready to use logical and systematic manipulation of symbols which related to
concrete objects. Second, begin to think less egocentrically with increasing
awareness of external events. Third, start to involve concrete references, and
fourth, they start to be able to think about cause and effect. Another theory is from
Mc Kay’s which defines it as a period in which children begin to develop: first,
their ability to ‘manipulate’ thoughts and ideas. Second, develop their use of
language to the ability of predicting, hypothesizing, and classifying. Third,
develop their understanding of cause and effect and fourth, their understanding
and ability to talk about recent events, plans for the future and career aspirations.
b. Social and Emotional Growth
Children also are growing socially and emotionally as they enter formal
school. Mc Kay (2006: 8) states that as children enter formal school, they
gradually develop from a main interest in self towards greater social awareness
and understanding of the self in relation to others and ability to function in groups.
Their need for love, security, recognition and belonging gradually shifts from
dependence on adults to peer group support and approval.
When children are 5 to 12 years of age, socially, they gain in confidence and
greatly. They learn to interact with peers, to deal with hospitality and dominance,
to learn to be leader so as to lead others, to deal with social problem and to
develop a concept of self.
At the age between 5 and 7, children develop their ability to take part in
small group task by which they learn to cooperate and share and take turns with
others. At this period, they might start to develop feelings of independence but
they still feel anxious when separated from familiar people or places.
When children are around 11 years of age, they have become sociable and
like to spend time with friends of the same sex and their ability to work and play
with other keep developing. They appear relatively calm, with short-lived
moments of anger, sadness or depression. They often are able to hide feeling of
their anxiety that they behave and act over confident. At this period, they are
defining themselves in terms of their physical characteristics and their likes and
dislikes. They are sensitive to criticism and their feeling of success or failure is
dependent on how adults and peers respond to them.
Children of the age 5 to 12 years are in a sensitive and unstable emotional
condition, therefore the assessment or test should be familiar and use texts of
familiar content, such as home and family, school, and simple genre like
children’s stories and folktales (Mc Kay, 2006: 10).
c. Physical Growth
Children physical growth is characterized by continuing and rapid
5 to 7, they develop their ability to move around, such as climbing, balancing,
running and jump. Their fine motor skill which involves developments in hand–
eye coordination such as handling writing tools, using scissors is also increasing.
In on going development progress, children, at this age, develop their ability to
hold thinner pens, drawing finer pictures and building intricate models. They are
very active, tiring easily and recovers quickly. Therefore, they may tire more
easily from sitting than from running. They love physical activities, are
enthusiastic and lively that they enjoy to play and to engage in fantasy and fun.
By the time they are 9 to 12 years age, children’s hand-eye coordination
grows better than when they are 7 or 8 years old. Their large muscle coordination
develops gradually to speed and accuracy in running, climbing, throwing and
catching activities.
Physical development needs to be considered particularly with regard to
tiredness, ability to sit still during and hand-eye coordination the test or
assessment. Tasks which involve physical activity to accompany the language
related response such as moving, pointing, circling or coloring in a picture will
help to encourage children to complete the task, especially for those in the early
grades. Children in the upper elementary school are more able to respond without
such requirement (Mc Kay, 2006: 10).
d. Literacy (reading and writing ability)
The most noticeable characteristic of young learners in language learning
understandings at the same time as they are learning the target language. Literacy
skills include children’s writing and reading ability.
The general expectations of literacy development of a child in learning their
first language can be seen in figure below:
5–7 years Are continuing to develop a sense of how writing and reading work
Combine drawing and writing to convey ideas Understand that ‘prints’ tells the story
Develop a basic vocabulary of personal words Read slowly and deliberately
Will substitute words that makes sense when reading
7–9 years Begin to understand and use writing and reading for specific purpose
May combine drawing and writing but writing can stand alone to convey meaning
Develop a rapidly increasing vocabulary of sight words
Begin to self-correct errors
Develop the ability to read silently
Increase ability to read aloud fluently and with expression
9–11 years Can expand thinking more readily through writing and reading
Continue to increase reading vocabulary Continue to self-correct errors
Read silently with increased speed and comprehension (silent reading speed greater than oral speed may result in oral reading difficulties)
11–13 years Continue to expand thinking readily through writing and reading
Continue to increase silent reading rate and time spent at reading
Continue to increase ability adjust rate and reading to suit purpose (skim, scan, select, study)
fiction and non-fiction
Begin to understand that people may interpret the same material in different ways
Mc Kay (2006: 11) states that a defining characteristic of literacy
development is that children should have developed their understanding about
how reading and writing work before they start school. These understandings
establish the foundation of literacy. She gives an example that as skills of
decoding and whole word recognition and knowledge discourse organization start
to develop from reading slowly to read aloud and silently then to ability of reading
for information or pleasure. In the early years, they convey messages through
writing with the help of drawing and catch messages through pictures. The
development of children’s writing skill counts on their progress in fine-motor
skills, ability to remember words and spelling, and ability to combine words in
sentences and paragraphs.
When children are in age of between 7 and 9, they start to do self-correct
and convey messages through writing.
By the end of elementary school or about 12 years old, children are able to
write in ways that expand their thinking and to write in required form or genre.
They are also able to read various fiction and non-fiction and start to develop their
critical literacy skills.
An interesting point which is shown by the outline of expected progress in
table 1.1, is that children have started reading and writing when they are between
language underpins their literacy development in their first language. During their
elementary school, they develop their ability to interact conversationally with
many people in different situations, goal and topics. They have developed to an
ability of talking and discussing about familiar topics such as home, family,
school and broaden topics as they experience more with the world which require
greater cognitive and linguistic abilities than conversational interaction such as
narrative, argument, description, instruction and opinions.
For second/foreign language learners, literacy knowledge from their first
language is a big support in their learning of reading and writing in the target
language, although sometimes a different script can contradict this advantage.
Therefore, Ioannou (2003: 68) says that writing in a foreign language for young
learners is difficult. It requires a mastery of a number of language areas such as
spelling, grammar, vocabulary and other skills such as handwriting and
punctuation. For most young learners writing is usually not a favorite activity.
Therefore, writing activities should be made creative, communicative and
enjoyable. It is very crucial for young learners whose primary motivation for
learning foreign or second language is not passing an exam as the adults’. They
are ‘moved’ because they are interested in the language that is on what they can
do with it, and how much fun they have in their language learning. With such
characterization, Ioannou (2003:69) suggests that tasks for assessing young
learners’ writing abilities should represent realistic and authentic situation and
generate interest and enjoyment. Mc Kay (2006:14) also points out that the
tasks such as the texts which are used for reading, the expectations in writing and
the judgments about the nature of progress of student’s performance in the tasks.
e. Vulnerability
Young learners have an extra vulnerability that requires careful attention. At
the elementary school period, children have a keen sensitivity to praise, criticism
and approval and their self-esteem is strongly influenced by experiences at school.
Children need experiences that help them to succeed and feel good about
themselves. Such experiences are significant to help them maintain their
enthusiasm or motivation and creativity. On the reverse, if they lack of positive
self concept, they will loose their motivation, self esteem and sometimes this can
have a long-term consequences. Therefore, the assessment or test tasks should
enable children experience overall success and sense of progression. As children’s
development may vary, an extreme care should be taken “to ensure that there is
some flexibility in assessment or testing tasks (e.g. tasks catering for all levels or
passes for all at different levels) so that a degree of success can be experienced by
all children” (Mc Kay, 2006: 14).
To sum up the above explanation, the understanding of elementary school
students’ characteristics is crucial in developing an effective testing instrument for
them so that the demand of tasks of the test can be appropriate to their age and
their related abilities and are not extend beyond their capacity. The understanding
requires knowledge on the cognitive growth, emotional and physical growth,
vulnerability, need and literacy of children in their beginning of first year of
school (when they are about 11-12 years old). The following figure will visualize
it:
2. English Testing a. Philosophy
According to Richards (2002) it is very essential to take or choose a basis
theory to underlie the education process. As a building needs a foundation to
make it strong and ‘safe’ to live at, a basis theory is also needed to have an ideal
system of education. The philosophy of education becomes important when
educators recognize the need for thinking clearly about what they are doing and to Figure 2.2. Aspects of characteristics of elementary school language learners
Characteristics of elementary school language
learners (children of 7 & up to 12 years old)
Social and emotional growth
Physical growth Vulneribility
Literacy
see what they are doing in the larger context -- how far they contributes to society.
Educational philosophy is not only a basis for generating educational ideas, but
also a basis for how to provide the desired instruction, such as: instructional
methodology or curricula and the evaluation methods being chosen. Therefore,
when we want to formulate a right testing method, a right educational philosophy
as the underlying theory is also crucial.
Among many different value systems in education, the writer of this thesis
classifies them into four different value systems: Classical Humanism,
Reconstructionism, Progressivism, Postmodernism. andAccountability.
Classical Humanism (Richard & Renandya, 2002: 71) focuses more on the content of the curriculum which is universal, unchanging and absolute. In English language teaching which takes Classical Humanism as the foundation, the
grammar-based curriculum in which the syllabus focuses on the grammar and
vocabulary is underpinned. In Richard’s definition of curriculum, the purpose is to
transfer knowledge of the language system to the students with their mastering
grammar rules and vocabulary as the indicator. The teaching procedures and
learning experiences deal with drilling of grammatically correct sentences,
explanation of theory and memorization of list of vocabulary. And the assessment
is done based on the students’ ability to produce grammatically accurate language
(Renandya, 2002: 71) or in other words, the measurement focused on the
knowledge about the material. It means that the value assigned, either to a
program, a component, or goal achievement, is in how the goals of the education
program are stated appropriately to the rule, how the content of materials are
accordance to the rule, to what extent learners acquire knowledge about materials,
etc.
While Classical Humanism focused on the knowledge about the material,
Reconstructionismbringsabout some kind of social change. It’s not focusing on the
content but the objective of the teaching-learning process. It views education as
the scientific management of “observable changes in behavior which can be
measured.” (Renandya, 2002:72). R.W. When social life changes, the educational
program should be reconstructed to meet the change. The process of education is
fulfilled only when the students understand why they do things. Schools foster the
habits of thought, invention, and initiative which assist the student in the desired direction. The teacher, in this philosophy, is required to be aware of the background, interests, and motivations of the students. They also should look at
the learners’ cognitive, physical, emotional, and other factors in the education
process. The measurement in this philosophy is focused on the performance of the
materials. It means that the value assigned, either to a program, a component, or
goal achievement, is in terms of performance such as how appropriate the goals of
the education program are stated, how appropriate are the process of
reconstructing the unproductive behaviors to be productive ones, to what extent
learners acquire the wanted performance, etc.
Progressivism sees education as having a purpose to enable students to
progress towards self-fulfillment. It deals with the development of understanding,
not only a passive reception of knowledge or acquisition of specific skills, but in
terms of the ‘processes’ and ‘procedures’ by which students develops
model focuses on three aspects: concepts of learner needs, interest and
development processes (Richards and Renandya, 2002: 73). Finney (Richards and
Renandya, 2002: 74) explains that this method is increasingly accepted due to the
expand of research in the field of developmental psychology. The measurement
with this philosophy is concentrated more on the competency, such as how
appropriate the goals (in terms of competency of self fulfilling) are stated, how
appropriate are the process of enabling learners to develop his/her capacity to
extend and adapt what is learnt in the face of varied and emerging demands, etc.
According to Kelly (1989: 45-46)Classical Humanismis “inadequate as the basis for curriculum design”. Absolute, universal and unchanging characters of
this philosophy are no longer able to handle the discussion of the wider purposes
of education. The globalization era and the growth of multicultural societies have
created more complexities of the learning process that the individual learner
cannot be ignored. The ethos of ‘one education for all’ is no longer able to “take
account of the widely differing needs of a massive student population” as the
‘educated’ people are no longer limited to some ‘elite’ people. Therefore,
according to Kelly, today, ‘the foundation of universal knowledge is no longer
secure and an educational philosophy based on this foundation is no longer
acceptable”. Although Reconstructionism no longer focuses on the content, some strong criticisms reveal which are summarized by Kelly as ‘it reduces people to
the level of automatons who can be trained to behave in particular ways and
precludes such concepts as autonomy, self-fulfillment and personal development.
truth. Fiharsono (2010: 10) mentions that ” in Bismoko’s words, education in the
point of view of Post modernism improves life quality in terms of both
physiological needs and growth needs (humanizing needs).” Therefore, he further
explains that in post modernism, education is to help learners be more productive
and self fulfilling while evaluation is to give value on the competency of
productivity and self actualization such as how appropriate the goals of the
education program are stated, to what extent the resources play roles in enabling
learners develop competency, etc.
In the era of globalization within which English is determined as a lingua
franca - “serving as a regular means of communication between different
linguistic groups in a multilingual speech community” (Holmes, 1997: 86), and as
Kelly (1989: 45-46) said in the previous paragraph of this thesis that
globalization era and the growth of multicultural societies has created more
complexities of the learning process that the individual learner cannot be ignored,
according to the writer of this thesis, the Postmodernism is the appropriate basis
theory to underlie the formulation of the testing instrument. Yet, the researcher
thinks that the Post modernism is better not to stand alone as the underlying
theory. The concept of Post modernism which admits that there is no such thing as
absolute, pure truth has aroused a problem that it leaves people without absolute
foundations for determining absolute truths about how they should think and live
wisely on earth. United States faced the problem in education when the
philoshopy underlying the autonomy of the education bureaucracy and
professional. The failuire of the system highlighted by low student achievement
different social classes as the impact. Such phenomenon, then, has been responded
by the people’s demand for more school accountability. The demand for
accountibility requires the authority to set the standards of how to maintain the
service to the society. The standards which are set as the system to raise schools’
productivity (Hague, 1995:103).
Hence, the researcher decides to develop the testing instrument, the
postmodernism which is accountable is choosen as the underlying theory in order
to create an accountable system which help learners be more productive, and self
fulfilled but accountable.
b. Concept of English Testing 1) Definition
Testing,according to Genesee (2007: 141) can be defined in three aspects:
First, in the aspect of content, it is about intelligence. Second, in the aspect of method, it is not a single method of collecting information. And third, in the aspect of measurement, it tells scores that reflects attributes or characteristics of
individuals and has a frame of reference.
English Testing is a part of evaluation system which (Genesee, 2007:4) is
primarily about decision making with the purpose of improving English teaching
and enhance English learning. The decision is formulated based on informed
judgment which of components to be considered are: information, interpretation
The above figure shows us the significant role of testing in making decision
for the student’s education future. Therefore, as a part of evaluation, according to
Mc Kay (2007, 20) effective testing instrument should be designed to ensure valid
and fair information on the students’ abilities and progress. A testing is validif it
measures what it is supposed to measure and it is fair when it provides
meaningful and appropriate information about students’ language use ability. She
further explains that the cost of making wrong decision as the result of wrong
testing can be low stakes or high stakes in which the former ones are relatively
minor and relatively easy to correct, on the other hand, the last ones are likely to
affect students’ lives and are difficult to correct”(Mc Kay, 2007: 20). But, as she
cites Bachman’s words, most of wrong decisions are more high stakes than we
think since many decisions that teachers and schools make have a cumulative
effect on students’ future. (Mc Kay, 2006: 20).
Figure 2.3. Aspects of testing Interpreting Information
Decision making The Purpose
2) Classification
Testing, especially language testing, has been classified in many ways.
Among which Genesee (1997: 152) classifies it according to whether they focus
on. They are (1) underlying linguistic competence, (2) specific aspects or sub-skills of language, (3) a specific testing methods, (4) a particular kind of informationand (5)certain kinds of decisions.
Underlying linguistic competence is the underlying linguistic abilities or language knowledge that a learner has acquired. It is abstract that it cannot be
observed directly. Linguistic competence is inferred on the basis of linguistic
performance which is an individual’s ability to use language appropriately or
correctly in a variety of situations such as grammatical competence, pragmatic
competence, sociolinguistic competence, strategic competence, and
communicative competence.
Specific Linguistic sub-skills usually refer to the test content. These are often described in terms of the grammatical features of language, such as spelling,
vocabulary, grammar (or syntax), pronunciation, etc. Genesee (1997: 152) says
that tests are seldom truly isolated points in nature because no test or test item
depends only on one sub-skill to elimination of all others. Performance on a
grammar test, for instance, can also reflect learner’s spelling, vocabulary or
discourse structure. Therefore, according to him, “what a test is actually called
depends on what the tester chooses to focus on, that is, what he chooses to score”
(Genesee, 1997: 153).
text have been deleted and replaced by blanks that the test taker is supposed to fill
in with appropriate words. According to Genesee (1997: 153), this test type tells
nothing about the general linguistic competence or specific skills that are being
tested.
Achievement, proficiency and performance tests refer to the types of information provided by the test. Results of the test give information about student’s attainment related to instructional objectives or a defined domain of
language. For instance, a proficiency test tells information about student’s ability
to use language in certain way.
The last is test type that describes certain kinds of decision made by using
the test results. Placement test is one of the examples of this kind of test. It is
conducted to identify appropriate levels or types of instruction for individual
students.
Genesee (1997;154) says that he cannot make generalizations about the use of the
kinds of test, because the use of a test type depend on the need of the language
class which are unique.
3) Types of Test Items
Another important decision in developing testing instrument includes the
types of test items. Reynolds (2009: 183) said that historically the popular
approach has been to classify tests items as either ‘objective’ or ‘subjective’
which usually referred to how the items were scored. (2009: 183). This approach
