126 explained about past tense for her students. The last assessment procedure
clearly gave the chance for the students to practice their understanding about sentence in simple past tense. They supposed to be able to change the verb one
into verb two. Afterwards, the students were given the chances to pronounce the verbs and make ten sentences in simple past tense.
Although the assessment could not apparently represent the objectives stated, the assessments were used well to achieve those objectives.
Nevertheless, as the assessment was used to obtain the information about the students’ progress during a particular instructional process, the writer could
conclude that the assessments prepared by the fourth respondent possessed low content validity since the intended result of the assessment did not
appropriately match with the instructional content. The assessments were only used as the teaching media and were not used as a means to obtain the valid
information about the progress and achievement of the students.
H. The Second Document of the Fourth Respondent
a. The Content
The material of the fourth respondent second document was the recount text and the skill involved was writing. Literally, the writer could say
that the instructional content was the recount text writing. In order to help her students learn about how to write a recount text, the fourth respondent stated
four objectives, namely first, the students are able to decide the appropriate verb two verb in second form, second, the students are able to arrange the
words in several jumbled sentences to produce correct past tense sentences, third, the students are able to make sentences using simple past tense, and the
fourth, the students are able to produce text in the form of recount. The objectives did not state the outcomes but it only stated the
learning activities. Since there was not any part in the respondent’s lesson plan which clearly stated the learning outcomes, the writer used the objective
formulations as the basis to analyze the assessments with some elaboration on those objectives. The objectives were simple, measurable, action-oriented, but
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
127 they were not really clear and reasonable. They were lacked of time
specification, too. The first objective was not clear about what the fourth respondent wanted to achieve. Deciding appropriate verb two without any
explanation would lead the teacher to the confusion of what the students would do. If the teacher wanted the students to learn about how to change the
verb into the second form, then the formulation of the objective should be revised to avoid ambiguity. The elaboration was also needed for the fourth
objective, in which the students were expected to be able to produce a text in the form of recount text. It should be specified what kind of recount the
students should make because there were some kinds of text which were categorized into recount text, namely experience, diary entries, biography and
many more. It was interesting to see how the fourth respondent stated her
instructional objectives, she started from deciding the word, sentence, and the text. She wanted the students to learn from the basic to the text production. It
could be seen if the students achieved the first objective, then the students would be helped achieve the second, third, and fourth objectives. Sometimes,
this arrangement was ignored. This arrangement might help the students in achieving the final goal of the instruction. Finally, it was apparent that the
content was the recount text writing. The existence of evaluation instrument in the lesson plan gave the sign that the recount text production should be well
made and based on some aspects stated in the evaluation instrument.
b. Content Validation
The fourth respondent prepared two procedures for her assessment. The first was about filling the blanks of the sentences and the second was
arranging the words to make a good sentence. In the first assessment procedure, the students were given ten incomplete sentences. They had to
complete with the verbs which had already given by the teacher. They had to change the verbs if necessary. This procedure was known as reading-writing
sentence completion and grammar transformation task. The students needed to
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
128 read and know the meaning of the verbs and put them to complete the
sentences. The students also need to know the verb two form of each verb since the sentences were in the simple past tense. The second assessment
procedure required the students to be able to arrange the jumbled words to make a good sentence. All of the sentences were in the simple past tense also.
The assessment intended that the students would be able to decide the correct verb two of each verb given. The students were supposed to be able to
arrange the incomplete sentences. In the process of learning, as stated in the lesson plan, the students were also given a chance to produce some sentences
in simple past tense correctly based on the pattern of past tense. Although the ability to produce a sentence using simple past tense correctly would help the
students in their recount text, the assessment possessed moderate content validity seen from the main content which was the recount text production.
The students were given very little time to practice their ability in writing a recount text since recount text possesses more than just using simple past
tense in its writing. The student should also be given some opportunities to practice writing recount text.
I. First Document of the Fifth Respondent
a. The Content
The fifth respondent taught the ten grade of Senior High School students. The materials were recount text and the expression of invitation. The
skill which wanted to be taught was listening skill. The writer stated that the fifth respondent wanted her students to be able to respond and understand the
simple monologue in the form of recount text and the expression of invitation. The fifth respondent taught two materials in a meeting. Actually, the fifth
respondent did not taught about those material, but she conduct evaluation for the materials. She discussed only about the expression of invitation and she
continued the instruction with listening test in which the dialogue of the expression of invitation and a recount text were involved.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
129 The fifth respondent stated two objectives, namely first, the students
are supposed to be able to answer the questions based on what they have heard from the Podcast, and second, the students are able to write down the words
they heard in correct spelling. Those objectives were simple, measurable, action-oriented, and reasonable but they were lack in time specification and
were not clear derived from the instructional content. As intended for an evaluation, the students were supposed to be able to answer the questions and
write down their answers in correct spelling. Nevertheless, if the instruction was intended to help the students learn about the expression of invitation and
recount text, the objectives were not appropriately specified the intended outcomes. The objectives only stated the activities the students would be
involved during the assessment process.
b. Content Validation
The fifth respondent started her assessment by giving three initial questions to be discussed by the students before they listened to the recording
or podcast. Those initial questions were intended to prepare the students to learn about the expression of invitation through listening. The questions asked
the students about their experience in inviting their friends to their birthday party. The students were given the chance to share their experience about an
occupation in which they invited someone or some people. Those questions served as an introduction for the students to learn more about the expression of
invitation. The next part was completing or filling the blank parts from a given
dialogue by listening the dialogue recording, in this case the respondent took the podcast. The dialogue gave very good examples of the expression of
invitation. The expression of invitation was involved clearly in the dialogue so that the students could learn and identify which sentences were the
expressions of invitation. Nevertheless, the procedure only asked the students to complete the blank parts from the sentences. The part of the sentences
which were blanked were random or they were not specified, whether they
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
130 were the noun, verb, or adverb of the sentences. The respondent made fifteen
blank parts from the dialogue to be completed by the students. In case of listening, the procedure was fair, it required the students to listen carefully to
the dialogue and fill in the blank parts in correct spelling but in case of learning about the expression of invitation, the procedure did not serve the
objective appropriately. The next procedure was giving the students five comprehensive
questions related to the dialogue they heard. As stated in the assessment instruction, the students should answer the questions while they were hearing
and completing the dialogue. It was better for the students if they answered the questions right after they finished completing the dialogue, although the
questions could be answered without completing the dialogue first. The questions were about finding specific information from the dialogue.
Those assessments above were well applied for the listening practice, yet they did not serve well for the learning of the expression of invitation. The
assessment should not finish that way. The respondent should give more activities to help the students learn about the expression of invitation through
listening. The students could be asked to identify and mention in which sentence the expression of invitation existed or which sentence showed the
expression of invitation. The students would learn not only to listen to a dialogue and find the information from the dialogue, but also to identify the
expression of invitation and its responses through the listening passage given. The writer could conclude that the intended result of the assessment had high
validity for listening skill but it had low content validity for learning the expression of invitation.
Afterwards, the students should listen to a monologue about the man who told about his experience in taking a road trip with his family. The
procedure was about filling in the blank parts, too. Again, the blank parts were random and in the word level. After the students finished listening and
completing the monologue, the students should decide whether the statements given were true or false based on the monologue.
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
131 Seen from the instructional objective formulated, the assessments
prepared by the fifth respondent possessed high content validity. The assessments required the students to be able to answer the questions correctly
and write the answers in correct spelling. Nevertheless, since the objectives were not formulated the intended outcomes for the learning of the expression
of invitation and recount text appropriately, the assessments had low validity for the main instructional content which were the learning of the expression of
invitation and recount text.
J. Second Document of the Fifth Respondent
