47
Firstly, the researcher portrayed the content validity of the tests. There were 60 students arguing that material of the test really represented the section
they had to master. It meant that 98 students had positive perception about it. In addition, there were 71 students who implied that the tests results described
their performance. Taking note on these findings, it was apparently described that based on the students’ perceptions, the tests truly had content validity. Secondly,
the researcher depicted face validity of the tests. It was demonstrated that 88 students admitted the instructions of the tests were clear. To be detailed, there
were 54 students who affirmed the clarity of the instructions of the tests. Likewise, 67 students confessed the tests could be done in the allotted time. The
researcher argued that the tests were considered valid, specifically having face validity since they had clear instructions and the questions can be answered in
allotted time. Thirdly, the researcher illustrated the third aspect of test validity, namely
construct validity. There were 77 students who admitted that the tests really measured their ability in mastering vocabulary items. It meant that the majority of
the research participants agreed with that statement. In addition, nearly everyone confessed that the tests encouraged them to master a number of vocabulary items
as sixty students admitted it.
b. Perceptions on the Validity of the Test Based on the Interview
To follow up and verify the students’ responses obtained from the questionnaire, the researcher carried out an interview. The researcher found that
five interviewees, namely Student A, student B, student C, student D and student PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
48
F considered that the test contained content validity. They affirmed that the test material really represented the section they had to study. In other words, the
material they had to study was relevant with the test administered. Besides, the material they had to master was meaningful and useful to lead them doing the test.
Nonetheless, there was one interviewee, namely student E who argued that he was confused with the test material. He confessed that he was never prepared
to master the section he had to study. Thus, he even did not know whether the material signified the section he had to master.
In relation to the face validity of the test namely the instructions of the tests, the researcher found that all interviewees admitted the clarity of the
instructions of the tests. As described in the questionnaire results, there were 88 students confessing that the instructions of the tests were clear. Thus, through
their responses in the interview, the interviewees had verified the data acquired from the questionnaire.
Moreover, there were four interviewees who admitted that the tests really measured their ability in mastering vocabulary. Student A, student B, student D
and student F had similar responses. Generally, they confessed that the tests were able to measure to what extent they had mastered vocabulary items. The tests
indeed measured just the ability to master vocabulary items, not the other ability. It meant that their responses reinforced construct validity of the tests. Regardless
of the other two interviewees who argued that the tests did not measure their ability in mastering vocabulary, it could be concluded that the tests actually
covered the construct validity. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
