E. Validity and Reliability of the Instrument
According to Hughes, to be valid a test must provide consistently accurate measurements. It must therefore be reliable.
3
Reliable based on Heaton, if the test administer to the same candidates on different occasions, then, to the extent that it
produces differing results, its reliable.
4
To make the test more valid, the writer made commands for the tes writing. First, the writer write explicit specifications
for the test which take account of all that is known about the constructs that are to be measured. The writer also included a representative sample of the content of
these in the test. Second, the writer use direct testing. Its reference should be made to the research literature to confirm that measurement of the relevant
underlying construct has been demontrated using the testing techniques that are be employed.
As a writing test, the writer could require candidates to write down a narrative text based on the picture series. There are some requirements : minimal three
paragraphs, each paragraph consists of eight sentences and the candidates must
think the cohesive, unity, and clarity in their writing.
To administered the writing test, the writer used as analytic score in order to be more reliable in scoring students’ writing. The following rating scale desived
by Jacob, et al.’s 1981:
5
3
Arthur Hughes, Testing for Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 50.
4
J. B. Heaton, Writing English Language Test. New York: Longman Inc., 1995, p. 162.
5
op. cit., p. 104.
Scoring Element Scale
Quality Description
Content
30-27
26-22 Excellent to
Very Good
Good to Average
Knowledge – substantive – thorough
development of thesis – relevant to
assigned topic.
Some knowledge of subject – adequate
range – limited development of thesis –
21-17
16-13 Fair to Poor
Very Poor mostly relevant to topic, but lack detail.
Limited knowledge of subject – little
substance – inadequate development of
topic.
Does not show knowledge of subject – non
substantive – not pertinent – OR not
enough to evaluate.
Organization
20-18
17-14
13-10
9-7 Excellent to
Very Good
Good to Average
Fair to Poor
Very Poor
Fluent expression
– ideas clearly statedsupported
– succinct – well organized
– logical sequencing – cohesive.
Somewhat choppy – loosely organized but
main ideas stand out – limited support –
logical but incomplete sequencing.
Non fluent
– ideas confused or disconnected
– lacks logical sequencing and development.
Does not communicates – no organization
– OR not enough to evaluate.
Kategori