112 report text, while the revised result of report text might be submitted later.
Actually, the first respondent did not prepare the specific assessment to assess the students’ mastery of report text production. The students, as stated in the
lesson plan, were only asked to make a draft. It could be concluded that the second content skill in this instructional process could not be measured since
there was no apparent assessment for the writing skill. Overall, the second assessments prepared by the first respondent had moderate validity since the
intended result could fairly represent that the students would be able to understand the theory, language features, and specific information of recount
text but it gave a little time for the students to practice producing report text
in which the students could perform their ability in writing the text.
C. First Document of the Second Respondent
a. The Content
The second respondent stated that her material was about the use of past tense, especially in reading and writing skills. She stated two goals,
namely 1 the students are able to understand the function of past tense and 2 the students are able to understand the pattern of past tense. From those goals,
the second respondent stated five objectives. The first objective was that the students are able to state the function of past tense. Second, the students are
able to write down the pattern of past tense. Third, the students are able to mention some verbs in second form [verb 2]. Fourth, the students are able to
identify the meaning of some verbs. Fifth, the students are able to pronounce some verbs.
The content was about the ability to understand the use of past tense for reading and writing but the formulation of the objectives stated by the
second respondent did not specify the content to be achieved by the students. The five objectives did not match with the content skills, which were reading
and writing skills and similar to those of the first respondent, the objectives formulated by the second respondent did not mention the outcomes of the
instruction but they stated only the learning activities. Since there were not
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
113 any statements of learning outcomes, the writer used the objectives formulated
by the respondent as the base to analyze the second respondent’s assessments. The objectives intended that after the instruction the students should
able to understand the function, the pattern, and the verbs of past tense but those objectives did not mention the outcomes that related to reading and
writing skills. Actually, the learning of the past tense use in the first grade of senior high school is integrated with the learning of recount text, in which
reading and writing skills are involved. Nevertheless, the second respondent tried to learn the past tense separately, in which the recount text was also
involved in her instruction but not stated apparently. Since the objectives became the basis of the assessment, the analysis
of the content validity of the assessment was based on the objectives stated. Similar with the analysis before, the objectives stated were simple,
measurable, and action-oriented but they lacked in clarity and time- specification. The first, second, and third objectives clearly pointed to the
understanding of the function, use, and pattern of past tense as the basis to learn and use past tense. The fourth and fifth objectives were not clear since
they were too general and ambiguous. Although the writer could assume that the identification and pronunciation of the verbs were related to the verb in
past form or verb 2, the respondent should specify the formulation of her objectives that the verbs were in past form to avoid ambiguity. Furthermore,
the fourth and fifth objectives formulation did not involve the content skills to be mastered. They focused on the vocabularies improvement.
Although the formulation of the objectives were not appropriate with the formulation of the content and they stated the learning activities instead of
the learning outcomes, the writer concluded that the content of the second respondent instruction was the ability to use past tense for reading and writing
skills. The intended assessment result should match with the content if it was supposed to have high content validity. The assessment should be able to
predict that if the students were able to achieve the outcomes intended by the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
114 assessment result, the students were able to understand the use of past tense in
various text and able to write particular text using past tense.
b. Content Validation
The assessment was started by giving two initial questions. The first question asked the students to mention the function of past tense, while the
second questions asked about the pattern of past tense. Those two questions required the students to present their understanding of the basic theory of past
tense, which were the function and pattern. Those questions were well asked at the beginning of the assessment to make sure that the students knew about
the basic concept of past tense. The next assessment consisted of three activities, namely completing
the sentences with the correct form of verbs, underlining the correct verbs that will best complete the sentences, and finding the meaning and the correct
second form of forty verbs. The first activity, called gap-filling task, is to create sentence completion stems where test-takers read part of a sentence and
then complete it by writing a word or phrase. The task represented the some microskills of reading, namely recognizing a core of words, interpreting word
order patterns and their significance, and recognizing grammatical word classe, the verb. The second activity required the students to complete the
sentences with the correct verbs. The activity represented the same microskills of reading with the first activity. The third activity dealt with vocabulary and
grammar task and involved the skill of writing. The task required the students to use grammatical system, the tense.
All of those three activities dealt with the verbs. The second respondent wanted the students to be familiar with the verb in the second form
which was used to produce sentence in simple past tense. The second respondent wanted to make clear that simple past tense always uses verb two.
She had her students to be familiar with the verb two form when the students wanted to produce a sentence in simple past tense. Besides, in the third
activity, the second respondent asked the students to find the meaning of the
PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
115 verbs and change them into verb two. The activity intended that the students
would add their vocabularies of some verbs and know the second form of those verbs. Although there was an addition for the vocabularies, the students
learned about the verb also. Learning about simple past tense did not finish at that point, the verb. There were some other aspects which should be
understood by the students. The adverb of time for past tense, for example, was one of the aspects which should be learnt also, and many more.
Unfortunately, it was stated in the lesson plan that the skills involved are reading and writing but the assessment did not serve those skills. The
assessment result did not represent that at the end of the instruction the students were able to understand a text or article. It had little attention for
writing skill, too. The students were not given sufficient place to improve their reading and writing skills about past tense through the assessment. It could be
concluded that the assessment had low content validity in reading and writing skill of simple past tense but it had moderate content validity for the
understanding of simple past tense.
D. The Second Document of the Second Respondent
