ANALISIS METODE CHEATING PADA TES BERSKALA BESAR
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v18i1.2128Abstract
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui: (1) karakteristik butir soal Kimia Ujian Nasional berdasarkan teori tes klasik dan teori respon butir; (2) besarnya kecurangan yang terjadi dengan menggunakan Metode Angoff's B-index, Metode Pair1, Metode Pair2, Metode Modified Error Similarity Analysis (MESA) dan Metode G2; (3) metode yang lebih banyak mendeteksi adanya kecurangan dalam pelaksanaan UN Kimia tingkat SMA/MA Negeri tahun pelajaran 2011/2012 di Provinsi Maluku. Hasil analisis dengan pendekatan teori tes klasik menunjukkan 77,5% butir memiliki tingkat kesulitan butir berfungsi baik, 55% butir daya bedanya belum memenuhi syarat, dan 70% butir memiliki pengecoh berfungsi baik dengan indeks reliabilitas tes 0,772. Analisis dengan pendekatan teori respons butir menunjukkan 14 (35%) butir cocok dengan model, fungsi informasi maksimum 11,4069 pada θ = -1,6, dan besarnya kesalahan pengukuran 2,296. Jumlah pasangan yang diduga curang adalah: menurut Metode Angoff's B-index ada 13 pasangan, menurut Metode Pair1 ada 212 pasangan, menurut Metode Pair2 ada 444 pasangan, menurut Metode MESA ada 7 pasangan, dan menurut Metode G2 ada 102 pasangan. Metode yang paling banyak mendeteksi kecurangan secara berturut-turut adalah: Metode Pair2, Metode Pair1, Metode G2, Metode Angoff's B-index, dan Metode MESA.Kata kunci: ujian nasional, karakteristik butir, metode kecurangan
______________________________________________________________
AN ANALYSIS OF METHOD OF CHEATING ON LARGE TEST SCALE
Abstract This study aimed to reveal: (1) the characteristics of items of Chemistry Test in National Examination by using the classical test theory and item response theory; (2) the amount of cheating which occured by using Angoff's B-index Method, Pair 1 Method, Pair 2 Method, Modified Error Similarity Analysis (MESA) Method, and G2 Method; (3) the methods that detected more cheating in the implementation of the Chemistry Test in National Examination for high schools in the academic year 2011/2012 in Maluku Province. The results of the analysis with the classical test theory approach show that 77.5% items have item difficulty functioning well, 55% items have discrimination that has not met the requirement yet, and 70% items have distractor that works well with the index reliability test of 0,772. The analysis using the item response theory approach shows that 14 (35%) items fit with the model, the maximum function information is 11,4069 at θ = -1,6, and the magnitude of the error of measurement is 2,296. The number of pairs who are suspected of cheating is as follows: 13 pairs according to Angoff's B-index Method, 212 pairs according to Pair 1 Method, 444 pairs according to Pair 2 Method, 7 pairs according to MESA Method, and 102 pairs according to G2 Method. The most widely detecting cheating in a row is a Pair 2 Method, Pair 1 Method, G2 Method, Angoff's B-index Method, and MESA Method.Keywords: national examination, items characteristics, methods of cheating
References
Anderman, E. M., Griesinger, T., & Wester- field, G. (1998). Motivation and cheat- ing during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology. 90, 84-93.
Anderman, E. M., Pamela, K. C., & Derek,
L. (2010). Impulsivity and academic cheating. Journal of Educational Psycho- logy. 90, 84-93.
Aziz, Deden Abdul. (September 2012). Soal Ujian Nasional SMP Diduga Bocor. Tempo Online diakses pada tanggal 30 September 2012, dari: http://www. tempo.co/read/news
Bogle, K. D. (2000). Effect of perspective, type of student, and gender on the attribution of cheating. Proceedings of Oclahoma Academic Science. Ocla- homa City, 80, 91-97.
Chula, G. K., Roger, W.G., & Chris, P. (2009). Online exams and cheating: an empirical analysis of business stu- dents' views. The Journal of Educators Online, 6, 1.
Cizek, G. J. (1999). Cheating on tests: How to do it, detect it, and prevent it. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
. (April 2001). An overview of issues concerning cheating on large- scale tests. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, in Seattle, WA.
Depdiknas (2003). Undang-Undang RI Nomor 20, Tahun 2003, tentang Sistem Pendidikan Nasional.
.(2005). Peraturan Pemerintah RI Nomor 19, Tahun 2005, tentang Standar Nasional Pendidikan.
Eisenberg, J. (2004). To cheat or not cheat: effects of moral perpective and situa- tional variables on students' attitudes. Journal of Moral Education, 33, 2, 163-178.
Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: principles and applications. Boston, MA: Kluwer Aca- demic Publishers.
Lama, M. Al. (2008). Student's attitudes toward cheat and relation to demo- graphyc factors. European Journal of Social Science. 7, 1, 140-146.
Lewkowicz, A. B. (2007). Teaching emotional intelligence, California: Corwin Press.
Lim, V. K. G., Sean, K. B. S. (2001).
Attitudes toward, and intentions to report, academic cheating among stu- dents in Singapure. Ethnic & Behavior, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 11(3), 261-274
Mardapi, Djemari. (1999). Estimasi kesalah- an pengukuran dalam bidang pen- didikan dan implikasinya pada ujian nasional. Yogyakarta: UNY.
McCabe, D. L., Linda K. T., & Kenneth,
D.B. (2001). Cheating in academic institutions: a decade of research. Ethnic & Behavior, 11(3), 219-232.
Shapiro, E. S. (2011). Academic skill problems (4th Ed.). New York: The Guildford Press.
Strom, P. S., & Strom R., D. (2007) Cheating middle school and high school. The Edu- cation Forum, 71, 104-116
Widiatmo, H. (2009). Metode untuk men- deteksi penyontekan jawaban pada tes pilihan ganda: studi kasus SMP di Ka- bupaten Garut. Pusat Penelitian Pen- didikan, Balitbang Diknas. 219-226.
Williams, J. B. (2002). The plagiarism prob- lem: are students entirely to blame. Proceedings of ASCILITE. Australia
Williams, K., M., Craig N., Delroy L.P. (2010). Identifying and profiling scho- lastic cheaters: their personality, cog- nitive ability, and motivation. Journal of Experimental Psycology. 16 (3), 293-307.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors submitting a manuscript to this journal agree that, if accepted for publication, copyright publishing of the submission shall be assigned to Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan. However, even though the journal asks for a copyright transfer, the authors retain (or are granted back) significant scholarly rights.
The copyright transfer agreement form can be downloaded here: [JPEP Copyright Transfer Agreement Form]
The copyright form should be signed originally and sent to the Editorial Office through email to jurnalhepi@uny.ac.id
Jurnal Penelitian dan Evaluasi Pendidikan by http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/jpep is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
