AN ANALYSIS OF DISTRACTOR IN MULTIPLE-CHOICE TEST A STUDY AT THE SECOND GRADE STUDENTS
OF SMA N 15 PADANG
Rince Putri Ramadani*), Armilia Riza, M.Pd, **), Rika Afriyanti, M.Pd***)
*)Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat [email protected]
**)Staf Pengajar Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat [email protected]
***)Staf Pengajar Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat [email protected]
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to know about distractor function in multiple-choice of students’ mid semester test at second grade of SMA N 15 Padang. This research was descriptive.
The sources of data were multiple-choice test and students’ answer sheet with total 227 students to be analyzed in qualitative and quantitative. Document check list was an instrument that contained seventeen indicators to know the function of distractor in qualitative. In analyzing quantitatively, a formula was used to know the function of distractor from total students chose each alternatives of distractor. Based on the findings, the function of distractor in qualitative was excellent classification because got value 81-100 from the items fulfilled indicators of distractor. In analyzing quantitative, distractor function well was had by two items in number 4 and 32. Item number 4 with good criteria for option A and E were chosen by 12 students, option B was chosen by 7 students and option C was chosen by 8 students in very good category. Meanwhile in number 32 with good criteria that option A and B were chosen by 6 students, option C was chosen by 16 students and option D was chosen by 15 students.Other alternative in all items also had good and very good criteria, but some of it also must be revised because had less than good criteria, and must be changed because had bad and very bad criteria.
Skripsi ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui fungsi pengecoh dalam pilihan ganda ujian tengah semester pada siswa kelas sebelas SMA N 15 Padang. Jenis penelitian ini adalah deskriptif.
Sumber data penelitian ini yaitu soal pilihan ganda dan lembar jawaban siswa yang berjumlah 227 siswa untuk di analisa secara kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Document cek list merupakan instrument yang berisikan tujuh belas indikator untuk mengetahui fungsi pengecoh secara kualitatif. Dalam menganalisa secara kuantitatif, sebuah rumus digunakan untuk mengetahui fungsi pengecoh dari jumlah siswa yang memilih setiap pilihan dari pengecoh. Berdasarkan penemuan, fungsi pengecoh secara kualitatif adalah excellent karena memiliki nilai rentang 81-100 untuk soal yang memenuhi indikator pengecoh. Di kuantitatif, pengecoh yang berfungsi baik hanya ditemukan pada dua nomor yaitu 4 dan 32. Nomor 4 dengan kriteria bagus untuk pilihan A dan E yang dipilih sebanyak 12 siswa, pilihan B dipilih sebanyak 7 siswa dan pilihan C dipilih sebanyak 8 siswa dengan kriteria sangat bagus. Sementara nomor 32 dengan kriteria bagus untuk pilihan A dan B dipilih sebanyak 6 siswa, pilihan C dipilih sebanyak 16 siswa dan pilihan D dipilih sebanyak 15 siswa. Pilihan lain dalam semua soal juga memiliki kriteria bagus dan sangat bagus, akan tetapi beberapa pilihan juga harus diperbaiki karena memiliki kriteria kurang bagus, serta ditukar karena memiliki kriteria buruk, dan sangat buruk.
Key words: Distractor, Multiple-Choice Test
INTRODUCTION
Test is an instrument used by teacher to know students’ achievement in teaching and learning process. Test is given to measure and assess students’ ability in understanding the lesson or materials that have been learned in classroom.
Furthermore, teacher also can know how students’ knowledge and performance in answering by giving test. In learning process, multiple-choice is a kind of test that usually used in testing students’ ability.
Teachers use the kind of this test to make students accustomed to multiple-choice test because it is used in national examination in any levels of schools. Multiple-choice test consists of some formats. They are stem, options, and one key answer. Meanwhile, option is an alternative to be chosen in which one of them consists of one correct answer or key answer and the others are incorrect answer. Key answer is the best answer to be chosen in the
question or statement of a stem that other option as distractors or incorrect answer that also have possibility to be chosen by students.
Distractor is incorrect answer of alternatives in an item to deceive students to choose it that uncertain with correct answer.
Distractor in analyzing item is important to do to know about distribution of answer that will be possibility to be chosen by students and also get information about distractor function. In investigating about the answer distribution of an item can be known how many students choose key answer, distractor that are interested to low students ability to be chosen and also to know distractor that are not interested to be chosen by high students’ ability. Furthermore, the distractor function well if many poor students choose incorrect answer than high students’ ability.
Based on explanation above, that the function of distractor in item analysis gets to be done by two ways such as quantitative and qualitative. Analyzing distractor in quantitative can be done by analyzing each option that students choose as their answer from students’ answer sheet in multiple- choice test. Then, analizing distractor in qualitative to find the function can be done
by analyzing construction of distractor had matched or not based on some theories in constructing it.The purpose of this research was to find out the function of distractor item in multiple-choice of students’ mid semester test at second grade of SMAN 15 Padang in academic year 2015/2016.
Multiple-choice test is a kind of tests that used in any level school in testing the level of students’ cognitive understanding.
Moreover, it is easy to grade on students’
score, and guessing is difficult. According to Kline (2000:239), multiple-choice items has two parts, the stem which contains the question or problem and the options which constitute a set of possible answer, one of which the subject has to select. Most test constructors supply four or five options.
Furthermore, according to Crawford (2004:9) states that one of four choices will be the correct (or best) answer; the other three will be incorrect answer called distractor or throwaways. In creating distractor, there are several steps are needed to apply it in multiple-choice item.
According to Nitko (1996:146) in crafting distractor as follow: (1) Functional and plausible alternatives. (2) Homogeneous alternatives. (3) Put repeated words in stem.
(4) Consistent correct punctuation. (5) Arrangement of the alternatives. (6) Grammatically correct relationship to the stem. (7) Overlapping alternatives. (8) Avoid a collection of true-false alternatives.
(9) Avoid “none of the above”. (10) Specific determiners. (11) Avoid “all of the above”.
(12) Avoid technical and unfamiliar wording. (13) Do not make a distractor too plausible.
RESEARCH METHOD
The design of this research was descriptive research. According to Gay, Geoffrey, and Peter (2000:275), a descriptive study determines and describes the way things are. The researcher analyzed the function of distractor qualitatively and quantitaively in multiple-choice test at second grade students of SMAN 15 Padang in academic year 2015/2016. The researcher used document as source of data. It is also explained by Taylor, Sinha and Goshal (2006:114) though some documents are
subjective in nature, others are authentic, reliable and authoritative and thus they are used widely in research. Researcher used multiple-choice test and students’ answer sheet of students’ mid semester at second grade of SMAN 15 Padang as document to analyze the data.
The researcher did several steps in collecting the data for this research. First, researcher went to the school SMAN 15 Padang to meet the teachers who teach in second grade. Second, researcher asked to the teachers about students’ ability in answering multiple-choice test. Third, researcher asked teachers’ permission to see multiple-choice test and students’ answer sheet in answering the test. Fourth, researcher asked teachers’ permission to copy multiple-choice test to analyze in qualitative to know the writing good distractor and students’ answer sheet to analyze in quantitative to know how many students chose each option as data to do this research. Last, researcher took home it and began to analyze multiple-choice test and students’ answer sheet as source of data.
To analyze the function of distractor in qualitative, the reseacher used document check list indicators as instrument to see construction of distractor. The instrument contained seventeen indicators based on some theories in constructing distractor in multiple-choice test. In this research, each number that total forty items were given sign check list to the table yes or no whether fulfilled indicators of constructing distractor
.
To find the function, researcher used criteria to determine the construction of distractor.Then, in analyzing quantitatively, researcher found out how many students chose key answer and each distractor by using a formula to know the function of distractor. There were 61 students in both of high and low group that gotten of 27% from totally 227 students at eleventh grade. In getting the result, researcher compared how many students chose each alternative from both of group, and then counted it by using formula to find the function of distractor.
Criteria of distractor determined distractor that had function well in multiple-choice test
.
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The researcher found findings after conducting the research and analyzing the data. The findings of this research are relevant to research question “How is the function of distractor item in multiple-choice of students’ mid semester test at second grade of SMAN 15 Padang?” Furthermore, the answer from this question can be seen as following table. In analyzing qualitative, function of distractor to see constructing of distractor had good function because in excellent classification and got value 81%- 100%. There were thirty five items into excellent classification because the items fulfilled indicators and also five items in very good classification.
Table Classification of distractor in items and number question from indicators
Classification Number questions
Excellent
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16,17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40
Very Good 9, 10, 26, 31, 39
Good —
Poor —
Very Poor —
Then, in analyzing quantitative to find distractor function well were gotten in item number 4 and 32. It can be seen in number 4 from low students’ ability that chose option A and E by 12 students in good criterion, option B was chosen by 7 students in good criterion, and option C was chosen by 8 students in very good criterion.
Meanwhile in number 32 from students’ low ability, option A and B were chosen by 6 students, option D was chosen by 16 students, and option E was chosen by 15 students in good criteria.
The information can be interpreted that the function of distractor in qualitative had good function because in excellent criterion. Meanwhile in quantitative, distractor function well was had by two
items in number 4 and 32 in good and very good criteria.
CONCLUSION
Based on the finding as already discussed in the previous chapter, the researcher concluded, in qualitative distractor had good function because in excellent criterion. It is known from the items that fulfilled indicators and got value 81% - 100% in constructing distractor. In quantitative, distractor function well was had by two numbers in 4 and 32. Both of numbers had good and very good criterion that many of students in low ability chose distractors than high students’ ability.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The researcher would like to exprees my sincere gratitude to my first advisor Armilia Riza, M.Pd. who have guided the researcher to complete this thesis and gave valuable knowledge, suggestion, and support for her. The researcher’s sincere thanks also goes to the co-advisor Rika Afriyanti, M.Pd for the continuos support of her research, for her guidance, advice, suggestion and support in finishing this thesis.
REFERENCES
Gay, LR. Mills Geoffrey E and Airasian P.
2000. Educational Research Competnecies for Analysis and Applications. New Jersey: Prentice- Hall Company.
Crawford, Linda L. 2004. Gaines and Coleman: Florida Real Estate Exam Manual. Chicago: DearbonTM Real Estate Educatioon
Kline, Theresa J. B. 2005. Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation. California:
Sage Publications Ltd.
Nitko, Anthony J. 1996. Educational Asessment of Students. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall, Inc.
Taylor, Bill, Gautam Sinha and Taposh Goshal. 2006. Research Methodology: A Guide for Researcher in Management and Social Science. New Delhi:
Prentice-Hall of India Private Limited.
