2. The results of the experts’ validation on test items
Even though all the respondents accepted the indicators, some correction and improvement were needed. The respondents gave researcher some
suggestions to fit the indicators with the test items of the test product. The results are presented in the table below.
Table 4.3 The result of experts’ validation
Language Knowledge Indicators
The learners are able to:
Comments Expert 1
Expert 2 Expert 3
Expert 4
Organizatio nal
Knowlegde Grammatical
Knowledge 1. discriminate
sounds, stress, and
intonation of words.
Okay Okay, but
test items only have
1 syllable Achieved
Okay
2. listen and understand a
growing range of
vocabulary. The item
does not reflect the
indicator Okay
Achieved Okay
3. listen and understand a
growing range of
structure of sentences and
short dialogue.
Okay Okay, but
it’s better not to
write the questions
on the sheet
Achieved Okay
Textual Knowledge
4. predict meaning
from a range of cues in the
dialogue. Dialogs
need revisio
n Okay
Achieved Okay
Pragmatic Knowledge
Functional Knowledge
and Sociolinguistic
Knowledge 5. understand
the connection
between ideas by
recognizing words and
sentences of the context.
Dialogs and items
needs revision
Okay Listenin
g part 5 number
5 is too abstract
to answer
Listenin g part 5
number 5 needs
revision
Organisatio nal
Knowlegde Grammatical
Knowledge 6. utter sounds,
words, and sentences
clearly with appropriate
pronunciatio n and
intonation. Need to
have two parts:
a. about
me b. about
things around
me Okay
Achieved Okay
Textual Knowledge
7. speak with cohesive and
well- organized
sentences. - More
commu nicativ
e
- Need TPR
Okay, but should
build a strong
cohesively in
scattered pictures
Achieved Okay
Pragmatic Knowledge
Functional Knowledge
and Sociolinguistic
Knowledge 8. use language
to get what they want, to
learn, to imagine
things, to think about
things. Needs
TPR Okay
Achieved Okay
9. use oral language
appropriate to the
language use situation that
Needs TPR
Okay Achieved
Okay
From the data above it was found that the test items for indicators number 1, discriminate sounds, stress, and intonation of words, were accepted but one of
the respondents found that the items in the test only consisted one syllable. She suggested the words should be varied. The other respondent advised to put the
words into contextual sentences. Therefore the test items needed to be revised. The next finding was in indicator number 2, listen and understand a growing
range of vocabulary, the respondent said the items of the test did not reflect the indicator chosen. There were very few of vocabularies used. It meant the
vocabulary used did not represent the growing range of the vocabulary. All the respondents agreed that the test items for indicators number 3 were accepted. The
designed test items represented the indicators. There was a note for the questions of the test items. One of the respondents suggested the questions did not need to
be written on the sheet. While the others said it was still accepted to write the questions on the sheet. In the indicators number 4, predict meaning from a range
of cues in the dialogue, the respondents found only the dialogues for the test items needed to be revised to make them more contextual. However the dialogues and
the test items should be revised for indicators number 5, the revision was needed to make the test items more challenging for the children. Indicators number 6 and
7 were used to measure the students’ spoken ability. The respondents accepted the test items, however one respondent said it was needed two parts of the test items.
they are in.
She explained the students were not only able to express the meaningful spoken text about themselves but also things around them appropriately. The purpose was
that the words and sentences they produced would be more communicative. Not all the students had the same competence, therefore one of the respondent advised
there was needed to provide a Total Physical Respond TPR method to elicit the students’ ability. Another respondent advised the pictures given need to be revised
because the students should build a strong cohesive spoken text to make the text more communicative. Indicators number 8 and 9 were chosen to measure the
students’ functional and sociolinguistics knowledge. To achieve this competence the students must be able to fullfil these indicators, use language to get what they
want, to learn, to imagine things, to think about things and use oral language appropriate to the language use situation that they are in. A mini dialog was
provided to fit the indicators and the language knowledge. The respondents agreed the test item was more communicative. Furthermore she explained the
competence which was measured could be achived but still the TPR was needed in this test item.
B. PRODUCT REVISION
Kategori