ANALYSIS OF PHYSICS TEACHERS UNDERSTANDING IN IMPLEMENTING OF ASSESSMENT AT SEVERAL SENIOR HIGH SCHOOLS IN MEDAN.
ANALYSIS OF PHYSICS TEACHERS' UNDERSTANDING
IN IMPLEMENTING OF ASSESSMENT AT SEVERAL
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
IN MEDAN
By:
Risdo Gultom
408121082
Physics Bilingual Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to fulfill the requirement for the degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2012
iv
PREFACE
Praise and thanks to Jesus Christ who has give a flood of merci and
guidance to writer. Salam to Bunda Maria for Her help in writer life, hopefully
God Blessing will abundant.
This thesis which titled is “Analysis of Physics teacher Understanding in
Implementing of Assessment at Several Senior High School in Medan is arranged
to acquire scholar degree of Physics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and
Nature Science State University of Medan.
Thank you so much to Alkhafi Maas Siregar, M.Si as thesis supervisor
who has guide and give suggestion to writer from initial research until finished
this research. Thank you so much also to Drs. Eidi Sihombing, MS, Dr. Derlina,
M.Si and Drs. J.H Panggabean, M.Si who have gave critics and suggestions to
writer. Thank you so much to Dr. Ridwan Abdullah Sani, M.Si as academic
supervisor. Thank you so much to Prof. Motlan Sirait, M.Sc,.Ph.D as Dean of
FMIPA State University of Medan and to all Mr. and Mrs. Lecturer and staff
employee of Physics FMIPA State University of Medan who have encouraged
writer.
Special Gratefully to: Dear Mother Marsaulina Butarbutar and Beloved
father Jatan Gultom for grow me up and educate me in this life. Special thank you
for my love sister Pestauli Gultom and my warmest love GreenMai (FKGL).
Thank you so much to my brothers and sisters in UK KMK St.Martinus
Unimed (specially for Willy F Sitanggang as chairman of UK KMK St. Martinus
Period 2011/2012, Mr. Thoms and Riduan Situmorang) for all of your support to
writer to finish this thesis. Thanks a lot to GELORA CHOIR. My memories will
never die with you. You always in my heart
To all of my colleagues in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED,
especially to 2008 students of Physics Bilingual 2008. Abdul Majid, Alfan
Mubarak, Rini, Azwar, Boby Pratiwi, Wita, Ester L Manalu, Fauziatul fitria,
v
Febri, Laila, Laurent Febrina, Luqmanul Hakim, Nurul Hasanah, Rahmat Nawi,
Ruth Fricilia, and Sartika Rhamadani.
I realize this thesis is out of perfect caused by my literature or knowledge.
That’s why, writer hope constructivism’s advice and suggestion in order to make
this thesis is useful for all of us.
Medan, August 2012
Risdo Gultom
ID. Number: 408121082
vi
CONTENT
Page
Legalization Page
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Contents
vi
Table List
ix
Figure List
x
Appendix List
xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1
1.1. Background
1
1.2. Problems Identification
3
1.3. Limitation of the Study
4
1.4. Problem Statements
4
1.5. Objective
4
1.6. Advantages of Research
5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Theoretical Framework
6
6
2.1.1 Educational Assessment
6
2.1.2 Types of Assessment
8
2.1.2.1 Formative versus Summative Assessment
9
2.1.3 Assessment Standard
9
2.1.4 Assessments’ Techniques according BSNP
11
2.1.5 Assessment based on KTSP
13
2.1.5.1 Authentic Assessment
13
2.1.5.2 Performance Assessment
14
2.1.5.3 Self-Evaluation
15
vii
2.1.5.4 Essay Test
16
2.1.5.5 Portfolio Assessment
17
2.1.6 Assessment Principles
17
2.1.7 Assessments’ Purpose
18
2.1.8 Assessment by Teacher
21
2.1.8.1 Why Teacher Should Know about Assessment
21
2.2 Qualitative Research
31
2.2.1 Social Situation
33
2.2.2 Survey Research
34
2.2.3 Classification of Studies by Purposes
35
2.2.4 Conducting Survey Research
36
2.2.4.1 Survey Research Strengths
39
2.2.4.2 Survey Research Weakness
40
2.2.5 Data Collection Techniques in Survey
40
2.2.5.1 Observation
40
2.2.5.2 Questionnaires
41
2.2.5.3 In-depth Interview
42
2.2.5.3.1 The Process for Conducting In-depth Interview
43
2.2.5.3.2 The Advantages and Limitation of In-depth Interview 45
2.3 Conceptual Framework
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
46
48
3.1. Research Method
48
3.2. Location and Time Research
48
3.3. Instruments of Research
48
3.4. Data Resources
48
3.5. Data Collection Techniques
49
3.5.1. Observation
49
3.5.2. Questionnaires
50
3.5.3. In-Depth Interview
50
3.6. Data Analysis
3.6.1. Analysis before Conducting Research
50
51
viii
3.6.2. Analysis during Conducting Research
51
3.6.2.1. Data Reduction
53
3.6.2.2. Data Display
53
3.6.2.3. Conclusion Drawing/Verification
53
3.7. Planning of Data Validity Testing
55
3.7.1. Credibility Testing (Internal Testing)
55
3.7.2. Transferability Testing (External Testing)
55
3.7.3. Dependability Testing
55
3.7.4. Confirmability Testing
55
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Result
56
56
4.1.1. Setting of Research
56
4.1.2. Round down of Research
57
4.1.3. Confirmability
57
4.1.4. Informant’s identities and data display
57
4.2. Discussion
60
4.2.1. The conformity of assessment’s implementation by teacher
With KTSP demanded
60
4.2.2. Behavior of Physics Teacher in Implementing of Assessment’s
Mechanism
68
4.2.3. Factors that inhibiting of Physics Teacher did not
Implement standardized assessment
4.2.4. School that implement own assessment standard
4.3 The obstacles factors in conducted of research
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
72
73
74
75
5.1. Conclusion
75
5.2. Suggestion
76
REFERENCES
77
APPENDIX
81
ix
viii
TABLE LIST
Table 4.1a
Professional Physics Teacher
59
Table 4.1b
Physics Teacher
59
Table 4.2
Professional physics teacher qualification
61
Table 4.3
Physics teacher qualification
65
Table 4.4
The discrepancy of assessment that conducted
by physics teachers to the demands of KTSP
67
ix
FIGURE LIST
Figure 2.1
Self-evaluation component
16
Figure 2.2
Teacher Evaluations (OECD, 2009)
30
Figure 2.3
Research process using qualitative research by
(Du Plessis, 2004)
32
Figure 2.4
Social Situation
33
Figure 2.5
A typical design for an ethnographic study by Ulhoi, 2007
34
Figure 2.6
Scheme of program evaluation by teacher
47
Figure 3.1
Data collection techniques
49
Figure 3.2.a Components of Data analysis (Flow model)
52
Figure 3.2.b Components of data analysis (interactive model)
52
Figure 3.2.c Illustration: data reduction, data display, and verification
54
Diagram 4.1a Professional physics teacher’s experiences
in implementing of assessment
60
Diagram 4.2b Physics teacher’s experiences in implementing
of assessment
60
Diagram 4.3
Diagram 4.4
Percentage of assessment indicator’s attainment
by professional physics teacher
63
Percentage of assessment indicator’s attainment
by physics teacher
66
x
xi
APPENDIX LIST
Page
Appendix 1
Initial Questioners for Teacher
81
Appendix 2
Observation Sheet
86
Appendix 3
Observation’s Result
87
Appendix 4
Questionnaire’s Guideline
88
Appendix 5
Data Reduction Result
91
Appendix 6
In-Depth Interview Guidelines
92
Appendix 7
Description of Student’s progressing in
Learning Progress
94
Affective Assessment Format
95
Appendix 8
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Education is one of the main pillars in the running of a nation. The better
education of a nation will produce higher quality of Human Resources (HR).
Human resources will be a valuable asset in developing the nation's progress. The
quality of character of human resources can be built and set up in schools that
have a high quality. Therefore every country has identified improving education
quality as one of its highest national priorities. Education quality progressing is
respond to the demand for increased school access, developing more effective
school planning, and implementing massive training programs for teachers and
administrators which each component has a standardization.
In Undang-Undang No.20 Tahun 2003 Chapter 1, Subsection 17 about
National Education System as stipulated in PP. 19 Tahun 2005 Chapter 1,
Subsection 1 stated that the scope of the National Education Standards include 8
standards, they are: (i) Contents Standard, (ii) Process Standard, (iii)Competency
Standards, (iv) Teaching staff and educational Administrator Standards,
(v)Facilities
and
Infrastructure
Standards,
(vi)Management
Standards,
(vii)Financial Standards, and (viii)Assessment Standards. National Education
Standards serve as the basis for the planning, implementation, and supervision of
education in order to realize the quality of national education.
Assessment standard is one of the important standards in National
Education Standard because it is needed to improve the quality of education.
Assessment standard is one part of the National Educational Standards, are
intimately associated with the mechanisms, procedures, and assessment
instruments learners learning outcomes. Based on Permendiknas No.20 Tahun
2007, government regulations mandated on three types of assessment, namely: (a)
Assessment by educators conducted on an ongoing basis to monitor the process,
progress, and improvement of learning outcomes, (b) Assessment by the education
unit aims to assess the achievement of competency standards for all subjects
1
2
according to the program as a form of transparency, professional, and
accountable institutions, (c) Assessment by the government aims to assess the
competency of national achievement in specific subjects. Implementation
assessment by government in is submitted to National Education Standards
Agency (BSNP).
Curriculum of the unit level of education (KTSP) also gives school facility
to expand, creative and innovative. With this facility expected happened a
competition in concurrence to compete to reach educator quality in accordance
with National Education Standards Agency (BSNP) according to PP No.19 Tahun
2005. Paradigm in KTSP that base on this interest emphasizes that teacher is not
just a duty conveyor to participant information to educate, however also must
become facilitator, undertake amenities learns to give the whole participant to
educate.
To know student achievement, government was seriously in national
assessment conducted by the national pass test (UN). The UN result is used as one
consideration in determining the graduation of students in the selection into the
next education level and become one of the considerations in the development and
provision of assistance to the education unit in an effort to improve the quality of
education (BSNP). Schools also perform final testing (UAS) to find out the
students achievement in all subjects. However, this result has not yet depicted
study quality and accurate process for all levels of education in each area. For that
must conducted circumstantial study relation between UN result and process,
quality, and mastery study matching with national standard education.
As the most significant resource in schools, teachers are critical to raise
educational standards. Increasing efficiency and equity of school is depending on
teacher skills, teacher’s human resources, and motivation to give the best
performance. In addition, teacher should know how to conduct a valid assessment
of student’s learning outcomes. If teacher know how to conduct a valid
assessment, so teacher know the degree of student material’s attainment, arrange
the report of student’s learning progression, and improve of their teaching and
learning process.
3
In conducting a valid assessment teacher should develop any instrument
containing any dimension of competency will be measured. Assessment of
learning outcomes by educators conducted continuously, aims to monitor the
process and learning progress of students as well as to enhance the effectiveness
of learning activities. In conducting of assessment student’s learning outcomes,
teachers should adhere to and follow the foundation and standard of assessment.
Assessment base and assessment standards have been set forth in Permendiknas
No.20 Tahun 2007.
From preliminary research, researchers get information by observe and
interview several teachers especially Physics Teacher from several schools in
Medan that teachers do not know the Education Act. They are tending to ignore it.
In addition, in carrying out an assessment of students learning outcomes, they do
not know and do not understand the assessment standards that have been set up by
the government in the Permendiknas No.20 Tahun 2007. Of course this is a
problem that must be solved by conducting a research. This research is important
because if teacher do not conducting a valid assessment, so teacher do not know
the degree of student material’s attainment, then teacher can’t arrange the report
of student’s learning progression, and finally the most apprehensive teacher can’t
improve of their teaching and learning process.
1.2
Problem’s Identification
Based on the background of the issues outlined above, some problems can
be identified are matters relating to the conduct of the evaluation in the field / in
school by teachers in the study of physics. These problems can be identified
include physics teachers at several senior high school in Medan do not know the
education act. They do not know and do not understand the assessment standard
that set up by government in Permendiknas No.20 Tahun 2007.
1.3
Limitations of the Study
Based on the background problems described above and the identification
of problems that have been described, considering the factors involved in the
4
assessment standards is very complex, as well as to research more focused, then
the problem will be limited based on the information in the search and the places
or schools that will investigated. This study will be limited as follows:
1. The teacher is Physics teacher.
2. The data will be gathering from the target school.
1.4
Problem Statement
Based on the background of the issues, identifying problems, and
limitation issues, the problems in this study can be formulated as follows:
1. Is the assessment that conducted by physics teacher in senior high
schools in Medan accordance with national education standards?
2. Are physics teacher already arrange and concerting the assessment
using a valid mechanism?
3. What are the factors abandoning the physics teachers not yet
implementing of assessment based on assessment standard?
4. Is there any school in Medan already evolving own assessment
standard?
1.5
Objectives
Based on the background of the issues, identifying problems, limitation
issues, and the problems in this study, the objectives of this research can be
formulated as follows:
1. Knowing the conformity of assessment by physics teacher at several
senior high schools in Medan with the assessment standard that set up
by government.
2. Knowing the mechanism of arrange and concerting the assessment by
physics teacher.
3. Knowing the factors are inhibiting the physics teachers in implementing
standardized assessment.
4. Knowing the school in Medan is already has and evolving own
assessment standard.
5
1.6
Advantages of Research
The researchers are expected to be useful for:
1. Providing information about the uniformity of implementation of
assessment that conducted by physics teacher with assessment
standards and curriculum set up by the government at several senior
high schools in Medan.
2. Providing information about the school is already evolving own
assessment standard.
3. Helping and encouraging the government in Medan to provide
guidance and counseling for teachers especially physics teachers about
the importance of understanding of Education Act in teaching and
learning process so that the national education goals achieved.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 CONCLUSION
Based on the results of research can be concluded that:
1. Generally, assessment that conducted by physics teachers (even have educators
certificate or not) in several SMA in Medan is less accordance with demands of
KTSP. This happens because of a lack of understanding of physics teachers about
the assessment standards that described in Permendiknas No.20 tahun 2007.
Therefore it is very necessary to conduct a socialization and training about the
implementation of authentic assessment from the government.
2. Mechanisms and technical assessment that conducted by professional physics
teachers and physics teacher have not changed. Physics teachers still tend to use
traditional assessment and achievement of learning outcomes which are seen from
the test results without a description of the progress of learners in the learning
process.
3. The factors that inhibiting physics teachers did not implement standardized
assessment are :
Teachers' understanding is not good enough to develop and implement
standardized assessment.
Socialization and guidance from the government about implementation
authentic assessment that required by curriculum is very minimal.
A schools supervisory and regulatory system is not maximum.
Size of class.
Interest and motivation of students in the following of physics subjects is
still very low.
4. Most of professional physics teachers are rarely improve the learning process in
class. Therefore, the implementation of the certification has not been right on
target.
75
76
5. Of the twelve units of senior high school (SMA) which is the object of research
there is no school has own assessment, but SMA SU already develop their own
assessment.
5.2 SUGGESTION
There are some suggestion in this research, they are:
1. Planning and designing learning should be conducted by teachers so that the
results of better quality and learning achievement.
2. Government should conduct a guidance and socialization for teacher especially for
physics teacher about the implementation of authentic assessment.
3. In qualitative research is needed researchers who are competent in a variety of
information gathering. Competencies that can be had by making a good planning,
diligent and tenacious in data reduction and data verifying then taking discussion
or sharing with supervisor and member-check in data validation.
4. In-depth interview techniques are very important in data gathered so that
researchers have diligently studied to become speaker in qualitative research.
5. The data obtained must be diverse. Therefore, researchers should be to reduce the
data and display research focus.
REFERENCES
Airasin,W. Peter. 1996. Assessment in the classroom: A concise approach. USA:
The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Arifin, Zainal. 2009. Evaluasi Pembelajaran, Prinsip, Teknik, Prosedur.
Bandung: PT.Remaja Rosdakarya.
Atkinson, Clair. 2009. North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Process. North
Carolina: NC Public Schools.
Barret, R. Jannet. 2007. The researcher as instrument: learning to conduct
qualitative research through analyzing and interpreting a choral
rehearsal. Music Education research. Vol. 9, No. 3, pp 417-433. USA:
Northwestern University School of Music, Evanston, IL.
Berry, Rita. 1999. Collecting data By In-depth Interviewing. Paper presented at
the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference,
University of Sussex at Brighton, September 2 - 5 1999.
Dave, R. 1967. Psychomotor Domain. Berlin: international Conference of
Educational Testing.
Diamond. 2009. Assessment in schools Fit for purpose? A Commentary by the
Teaching and Learning Research Program. London: Oxford Centre.
Glasow, Priscilla 2005. Fundamentals of Survey Research Methodology. Virginia:
Washington C3 Center McLean.
Good, Robert. 2011. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. Formative Use of Assessment
Information: It’s a Process, So Let’s Say What We Mean. Denver
Public Schools Journal. ISSN 1531-7714. Volume 16, Number 3.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Gultom, Syawal. 2012. Sertifikasi Guru Dalam Jabatan Tahun 2012. Kementerian
Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan Badan Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia
Pendidikan Dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan 2012.
Keefer, Reynolds, Laura. 2010.Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A
peer-reviewed electronic journal. Rubric-referenced assessment in
teacher preparation: An opportunity to learn by using., ISSN 15317714. Volume 15, Number 8.
77
78
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Kraemer, Pinsonneault. 1990. Survey Research Methodology In Management
Information Systems: An Assessment. University of California: École
des Hautes Études Commerciales de Montréal.
Krathwohl R, David. 2002. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. College of Education, The
Ohio State University.
Marhaeni, Istri A. 2007. Asesmen Otentik Dalam Rangka KTSP. Suatu Upaya
Pemberdayaan Guru dan Siswa. Makalah disampaikan pada pelatihan
KTSP bagi guru SMP/MTs di Kabupaten Tabanan tanggal 10-14
September 2007.
Mathias, Craddock. 2009. Assessment & Evaluation In Higher Education. ISSN
0260-2938. Volume 34, Number 2. http://www.informaworld.com.
Accessed on April 15th ,2012
Neale, Boyce. 2006. INTERVIEWS: A Guide for Designing and Conducting InDepth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Path finder International.
OECD. 2009. Teacher Evaluation A Conceptual Framework and examples of
Country Practices. This paper was prepared for presentation at the
OECD-Mexico Workshop Towards a Teacher Evaluation Framework
in Mexico: International Practices, Criteria and Mechanisms, held in
Mexico City on 1-2 December 2009.
Palm, Torulf. 2008. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. Performance Assessment and Authentic
Assessment: A Conceptual Analysis of the Literature. ISSN 1531-7714.
Volume 13, Number 4.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional No.20 Tahun 2007. Standar Penilaian.
Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.
Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 19 tahun 2005. Tentang Standar Nasional
Pendidikan.
Popham james. W. 1995. Classroom Assessment ,What teacher need to Know.
USA: Nancy Forsyth.
Proctor et al. 2007. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. An Investigation of Item Type in a
79
Standards-Based Assessment. ISSN 1531-7714. Volume 12, Number
18.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Pembelajaran Matematika SD/SMP.
Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional Badan Pengembangan Sumber
Daya Manusia Pendidikan Dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan Pusat
Pengembangan Dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik Dan Tenaga
Kependidikan (Pppptk) Matematika 2011.
Susetyo, Budi. 2009. Penilaian hasil belajar. Disampaikan dalam kegiatan Three
Days National Training ”Desain RPP dan Analisis Butir Soal” Tanggal
12 – 14 April 2009 diselenggrakan lembaga pendidikan dan pelatihan
Sentral Edukasia Kota Banjar.
Sugiono. 2009. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. (Pendekatan Kuantitatif,
Kualitatif, dan R&D). Bandung: ALFABETA.
Taylor et all. 1996. Program development and evaluation, collecting evaluation
data: direct observation. Madison: Cooperative Extension
Publications.
The Health Communication Unit. 1999. Conducting Survey Research. The Health
Communication Unit at the Centre for Health Promotion University of
Toronto 100 College Street, Room 213. The Banting Institute Toronto,
Ontario M5G 1L5. This workbook was developed as a resource guide
to accompany a one-day seminar.
Thomas, Ken. 2005. Learning Taxonomy In The Cognitive, Affective, and
Psychomotor Domain. Version 2.1 White Paper: Rocky Mountain
Alchemy
Ulhoi, Neergaard. 2007. Handbook of Qualitative Research Method in
Interpreneurship. USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2003
TENTANG SISTEM PENDIDIKAN NASIONAL . Bidang DIKBUD
KBRI Tokyo.
Wardhani, Sri. 2008. Standar Penilaian Pendidikan (Implikasinya Terhadap
Tugas Guru Matematika dan Sekolah). Yogyakarta : Pusat
Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan
Matematika
80
Western and Northern Canadian Protocol. 2006. Rethinking Classroom
Assessment with Purpose in Mind Assessment for Learning,
Assessment as Learning, Assessment of Learning . Canada: Manitoba
Education, Citizenship and Youth Cataloguing in Publication Data.
Woods, Peter. 2006. Qualitative Research. University of Plymouth: Faculty of
Education.
IN IMPLEMENTING OF ASSESSMENT AT SEVERAL
SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL
IN MEDAN
By:
Risdo Gultom
408121082
Physics Bilingual Study Program
THESIS
Submitted to fulfill the requirement for the degree of
Sarjana Pendidikan
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
MEDAN
2012
iv
PREFACE
Praise and thanks to Jesus Christ who has give a flood of merci and
guidance to writer. Salam to Bunda Maria for Her help in writer life, hopefully
God Blessing will abundant.
This thesis which titled is “Analysis of Physics teacher Understanding in
Implementing of Assessment at Several Senior High School in Medan is arranged
to acquire scholar degree of Physics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and
Nature Science State University of Medan.
Thank you so much to Alkhafi Maas Siregar, M.Si as thesis supervisor
who has guide and give suggestion to writer from initial research until finished
this research. Thank you so much also to Drs. Eidi Sihombing, MS, Dr. Derlina,
M.Si and Drs. J.H Panggabean, M.Si who have gave critics and suggestions to
writer. Thank you so much to Dr. Ridwan Abdullah Sani, M.Si as academic
supervisor. Thank you so much to Prof. Motlan Sirait, M.Sc,.Ph.D as Dean of
FMIPA State University of Medan and to all Mr. and Mrs. Lecturer and staff
employee of Physics FMIPA State University of Medan who have encouraged
writer.
Special Gratefully to: Dear Mother Marsaulina Butarbutar and Beloved
father Jatan Gultom for grow me up and educate me in this life. Special thank you
for my love sister Pestauli Gultom and my warmest love GreenMai (FKGL).
Thank you so much to my brothers and sisters in UK KMK St.Martinus
Unimed (specially for Willy F Sitanggang as chairman of UK KMK St. Martinus
Period 2011/2012, Mr. Thoms and Riduan Situmorang) for all of your support to
writer to finish this thesis. Thanks a lot to GELORA CHOIR. My memories will
never die with you. You always in my heart
To all of my colleagues in Physics Department FMIPA UNIMED,
especially to 2008 students of Physics Bilingual 2008. Abdul Majid, Alfan
Mubarak, Rini, Azwar, Boby Pratiwi, Wita, Ester L Manalu, Fauziatul fitria,
v
Febri, Laila, Laurent Febrina, Luqmanul Hakim, Nurul Hasanah, Rahmat Nawi,
Ruth Fricilia, and Sartika Rhamadani.
I realize this thesis is out of perfect caused by my literature or knowledge.
That’s why, writer hope constructivism’s advice and suggestion in order to make
this thesis is useful for all of us.
Medan, August 2012
Risdo Gultom
ID. Number: 408121082
vi
CONTENT
Page
Legalization Page
i
Biography
ii
Abstract
iii
Preface
iv
Contents
vi
Table List
ix
Figure List
x
Appendix List
xi
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION
1
1.1. Background
1
1.2. Problems Identification
3
1.3. Limitation of the Study
4
1.4. Problem Statements
4
1.5. Objective
4
1.6. Advantages of Research
5
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Theoretical Framework
6
6
2.1.1 Educational Assessment
6
2.1.2 Types of Assessment
8
2.1.2.1 Formative versus Summative Assessment
9
2.1.3 Assessment Standard
9
2.1.4 Assessments’ Techniques according BSNP
11
2.1.5 Assessment based on KTSP
13
2.1.5.1 Authentic Assessment
13
2.1.5.2 Performance Assessment
14
2.1.5.3 Self-Evaluation
15
vii
2.1.5.4 Essay Test
16
2.1.5.5 Portfolio Assessment
17
2.1.6 Assessment Principles
17
2.1.7 Assessments’ Purpose
18
2.1.8 Assessment by Teacher
21
2.1.8.1 Why Teacher Should Know about Assessment
21
2.2 Qualitative Research
31
2.2.1 Social Situation
33
2.2.2 Survey Research
34
2.2.3 Classification of Studies by Purposes
35
2.2.4 Conducting Survey Research
36
2.2.4.1 Survey Research Strengths
39
2.2.4.2 Survey Research Weakness
40
2.2.5 Data Collection Techniques in Survey
40
2.2.5.1 Observation
40
2.2.5.2 Questionnaires
41
2.2.5.3 In-depth Interview
42
2.2.5.3.1 The Process for Conducting In-depth Interview
43
2.2.5.3.2 The Advantages and Limitation of In-depth Interview 45
2.3 Conceptual Framework
CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
46
48
3.1. Research Method
48
3.2. Location and Time Research
48
3.3. Instruments of Research
48
3.4. Data Resources
48
3.5. Data Collection Techniques
49
3.5.1. Observation
49
3.5.2. Questionnaires
50
3.5.3. In-Depth Interview
50
3.6. Data Analysis
3.6.1. Analysis before Conducting Research
50
51
viii
3.6.2. Analysis during Conducting Research
51
3.6.2.1. Data Reduction
53
3.6.2.2. Data Display
53
3.6.2.3. Conclusion Drawing/Verification
53
3.7. Planning of Data Validity Testing
55
3.7.1. Credibility Testing (Internal Testing)
55
3.7.2. Transferability Testing (External Testing)
55
3.7.3. Dependability Testing
55
3.7.4. Confirmability Testing
55
CHAPTER IV RESULT AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Result
56
56
4.1.1. Setting of Research
56
4.1.2. Round down of Research
57
4.1.3. Confirmability
57
4.1.4. Informant’s identities and data display
57
4.2. Discussion
60
4.2.1. The conformity of assessment’s implementation by teacher
With KTSP demanded
60
4.2.2. Behavior of Physics Teacher in Implementing of Assessment’s
Mechanism
68
4.2.3. Factors that inhibiting of Physics Teacher did not
Implement standardized assessment
4.2.4. School that implement own assessment standard
4.3 The obstacles factors in conducted of research
CHAPTER V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
72
73
74
75
5.1. Conclusion
75
5.2. Suggestion
76
REFERENCES
77
APPENDIX
81
ix
viii
TABLE LIST
Table 4.1a
Professional Physics Teacher
59
Table 4.1b
Physics Teacher
59
Table 4.2
Professional physics teacher qualification
61
Table 4.3
Physics teacher qualification
65
Table 4.4
The discrepancy of assessment that conducted
by physics teachers to the demands of KTSP
67
ix
FIGURE LIST
Figure 2.1
Self-evaluation component
16
Figure 2.2
Teacher Evaluations (OECD, 2009)
30
Figure 2.3
Research process using qualitative research by
(Du Plessis, 2004)
32
Figure 2.4
Social Situation
33
Figure 2.5
A typical design for an ethnographic study by Ulhoi, 2007
34
Figure 2.6
Scheme of program evaluation by teacher
47
Figure 3.1
Data collection techniques
49
Figure 3.2.a Components of Data analysis (Flow model)
52
Figure 3.2.b Components of data analysis (interactive model)
52
Figure 3.2.c Illustration: data reduction, data display, and verification
54
Diagram 4.1a Professional physics teacher’s experiences
in implementing of assessment
60
Diagram 4.2b Physics teacher’s experiences in implementing
of assessment
60
Diagram 4.3
Diagram 4.4
Percentage of assessment indicator’s attainment
by professional physics teacher
63
Percentage of assessment indicator’s attainment
by physics teacher
66
x
xi
APPENDIX LIST
Page
Appendix 1
Initial Questioners for Teacher
81
Appendix 2
Observation Sheet
86
Appendix 3
Observation’s Result
87
Appendix 4
Questionnaire’s Guideline
88
Appendix 5
Data Reduction Result
91
Appendix 6
In-Depth Interview Guidelines
92
Appendix 7
Description of Student’s progressing in
Learning Progress
94
Affective Assessment Format
95
Appendix 8
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
Education is one of the main pillars in the running of a nation. The better
education of a nation will produce higher quality of Human Resources (HR).
Human resources will be a valuable asset in developing the nation's progress. The
quality of character of human resources can be built and set up in schools that
have a high quality. Therefore every country has identified improving education
quality as one of its highest national priorities. Education quality progressing is
respond to the demand for increased school access, developing more effective
school planning, and implementing massive training programs for teachers and
administrators which each component has a standardization.
In Undang-Undang No.20 Tahun 2003 Chapter 1, Subsection 17 about
National Education System as stipulated in PP. 19 Tahun 2005 Chapter 1,
Subsection 1 stated that the scope of the National Education Standards include 8
standards, they are: (i) Contents Standard, (ii) Process Standard, (iii)Competency
Standards, (iv) Teaching staff and educational Administrator Standards,
(v)Facilities
and
Infrastructure
Standards,
(vi)Management
Standards,
(vii)Financial Standards, and (viii)Assessment Standards. National Education
Standards serve as the basis for the planning, implementation, and supervision of
education in order to realize the quality of national education.
Assessment standard is one of the important standards in National
Education Standard because it is needed to improve the quality of education.
Assessment standard is one part of the National Educational Standards, are
intimately associated with the mechanisms, procedures, and assessment
instruments learners learning outcomes. Based on Permendiknas No.20 Tahun
2007, government regulations mandated on three types of assessment, namely: (a)
Assessment by educators conducted on an ongoing basis to monitor the process,
progress, and improvement of learning outcomes, (b) Assessment by the education
unit aims to assess the achievement of competency standards for all subjects
1
2
according to the program as a form of transparency, professional, and
accountable institutions, (c) Assessment by the government aims to assess the
competency of national achievement in specific subjects. Implementation
assessment by government in is submitted to National Education Standards
Agency (BSNP).
Curriculum of the unit level of education (KTSP) also gives school facility
to expand, creative and innovative. With this facility expected happened a
competition in concurrence to compete to reach educator quality in accordance
with National Education Standards Agency (BSNP) according to PP No.19 Tahun
2005. Paradigm in KTSP that base on this interest emphasizes that teacher is not
just a duty conveyor to participant information to educate, however also must
become facilitator, undertake amenities learns to give the whole participant to
educate.
To know student achievement, government was seriously in national
assessment conducted by the national pass test (UN). The UN result is used as one
consideration in determining the graduation of students in the selection into the
next education level and become one of the considerations in the development and
provision of assistance to the education unit in an effort to improve the quality of
education (BSNP). Schools also perform final testing (UAS) to find out the
students achievement in all subjects. However, this result has not yet depicted
study quality and accurate process for all levels of education in each area. For that
must conducted circumstantial study relation between UN result and process,
quality, and mastery study matching with national standard education.
As the most significant resource in schools, teachers are critical to raise
educational standards. Increasing efficiency and equity of school is depending on
teacher skills, teacher’s human resources, and motivation to give the best
performance. In addition, teacher should know how to conduct a valid assessment
of student’s learning outcomes. If teacher know how to conduct a valid
assessment, so teacher know the degree of student material’s attainment, arrange
the report of student’s learning progression, and improve of their teaching and
learning process.
3
In conducting a valid assessment teacher should develop any instrument
containing any dimension of competency will be measured. Assessment of
learning outcomes by educators conducted continuously, aims to monitor the
process and learning progress of students as well as to enhance the effectiveness
of learning activities. In conducting of assessment student’s learning outcomes,
teachers should adhere to and follow the foundation and standard of assessment.
Assessment base and assessment standards have been set forth in Permendiknas
No.20 Tahun 2007.
From preliminary research, researchers get information by observe and
interview several teachers especially Physics Teacher from several schools in
Medan that teachers do not know the Education Act. They are tending to ignore it.
In addition, in carrying out an assessment of students learning outcomes, they do
not know and do not understand the assessment standards that have been set up by
the government in the Permendiknas No.20 Tahun 2007. Of course this is a
problem that must be solved by conducting a research. This research is important
because if teacher do not conducting a valid assessment, so teacher do not know
the degree of student material’s attainment, then teacher can’t arrange the report
of student’s learning progression, and finally the most apprehensive teacher can’t
improve of their teaching and learning process.
1.2
Problem’s Identification
Based on the background of the issues outlined above, some problems can
be identified are matters relating to the conduct of the evaluation in the field / in
school by teachers in the study of physics. These problems can be identified
include physics teachers at several senior high school in Medan do not know the
education act. They do not know and do not understand the assessment standard
that set up by government in Permendiknas No.20 Tahun 2007.
1.3
Limitations of the Study
Based on the background problems described above and the identification
of problems that have been described, considering the factors involved in the
4
assessment standards is very complex, as well as to research more focused, then
the problem will be limited based on the information in the search and the places
or schools that will investigated. This study will be limited as follows:
1. The teacher is Physics teacher.
2. The data will be gathering from the target school.
1.4
Problem Statement
Based on the background of the issues, identifying problems, and
limitation issues, the problems in this study can be formulated as follows:
1. Is the assessment that conducted by physics teacher in senior high
schools in Medan accordance with national education standards?
2. Are physics teacher already arrange and concerting the assessment
using a valid mechanism?
3. What are the factors abandoning the physics teachers not yet
implementing of assessment based on assessment standard?
4. Is there any school in Medan already evolving own assessment
standard?
1.5
Objectives
Based on the background of the issues, identifying problems, limitation
issues, and the problems in this study, the objectives of this research can be
formulated as follows:
1. Knowing the conformity of assessment by physics teacher at several
senior high schools in Medan with the assessment standard that set up
by government.
2. Knowing the mechanism of arrange and concerting the assessment by
physics teacher.
3. Knowing the factors are inhibiting the physics teachers in implementing
standardized assessment.
4. Knowing the school in Medan is already has and evolving own
assessment standard.
5
1.6
Advantages of Research
The researchers are expected to be useful for:
1. Providing information about the uniformity of implementation of
assessment that conducted by physics teacher with assessment
standards and curriculum set up by the government at several senior
high schools in Medan.
2. Providing information about the school is already evolving own
assessment standard.
3. Helping and encouraging the government in Medan to provide
guidance and counseling for teachers especially physics teachers about
the importance of understanding of Education Act in teaching and
learning process so that the national education goals achieved.
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
5.1 CONCLUSION
Based on the results of research can be concluded that:
1. Generally, assessment that conducted by physics teachers (even have educators
certificate or not) in several SMA in Medan is less accordance with demands of
KTSP. This happens because of a lack of understanding of physics teachers about
the assessment standards that described in Permendiknas No.20 tahun 2007.
Therefore it is very necessary to conduct a socialization and training about the
implementation of authentic assessment from the government.
2. Mechanisms and technical assessment that conducted by professional physics
teachers and physics teacher have not changed. Physics teachers still tend to use
traditional assessment and achievement of learning outcomes which are seen from
the test results without a description of the progress of learners in the learning
process.
3. The factors that inhibiting physics teachers did not implement standardized
assessment are :
Teachers' understanding is not good enough to develop and implement
standardized assessment.
Socialization and guidance from the government about implementation
authentic assessment that required by curriculum is very minimal.
A schools supervisory and regulatory system is not maximum.
Size of class.
Interest and motivation of students in the following of physics subjects is
still very low.
4. Most of professional physics teachers are rarely improve the learning process in
class. Therefore, the implementation of the certification has not been right on
target.
75
76
5. Of the twelve units of senior high school (SMA) which is the object of research
there is no school has own assessment, but SMA SU already develop their own
assessment.
5.2 SUGGESTION
There are some suggestion in this research, they are:
1. Planning and designing learning should be conducted by teachers so that the
results of better quality and learning achievement.
2. Government should conduct a guidance and socialization for teacher especially for
physics teacher about the implementation of authentic assessment.
3. In qualitative research is needed researchers who are competent in a variety of
information gathering. Competencies that can be had by making a good planning,
diligent and tenacious in data reduction and data verifying then taking discussion
or sharing with supervisor and member-check in data validation.
4. In-depth interview techniques are very important in data gathered so that
researchers have diligently studied to become speaker in qualitative research.
5. The data obtained must be diverse. Therefore, researchers should be to reduce the
data and display research focus.
REFERENCES
Airasin,W. Peter. 1996. Assessment in the classroom: A concise approach. USA:
The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
Arifin, Zainal. 2009. Evaluasi Pembelajaran, Prinsip, Teknik, Prosedur.
Bandung: PT.Remaja Rosdakarya.
Atkinson, Clair. 2009. North Carolina Teacher Evaluation Process. North
Carolina: NC Public Schools.
Barret, R. Jannet. 2007. The researcher as instrument: learning to conduct
qualitative research through analyzing and interpreting a choral
rehearsal. Music Education research. Vol. 9, No. 3, pp 417-433. USA:
Northwestern University School of Music, Evanston, IL.
Berry, Rita. 1999. Collecting data By In-depth Interviewing. Paper presented at
the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference,
University of Sussex at Brighton, September 2 - 5 1999.
Dave, R. 1967. Psychomotor Domain. Berlin: international Conference of
Educational Testing.
Diamond. 2009. Assessment in schools Fit for purpose? A Commentary by the
Teaching and Learning Research Program. London: Oxford Centre.
Glasow, Priscilla 2005. Fundamentals of Survey Research Methodology. Virginia:
Washington C3 Center McLean.
Good, Robert. 2011. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. Formative Use of Assessment
Information: It’s a Process, So Let’s Say What We Mean. Denver
Public Schools Journal. ISSN 1531-7714. Volume 16, Number 3.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Gultom, Syawal. 2012. Sertifikasi Guru Dalam Jabatan Tahun 2012. Kementerian
Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan Badan Pengembangan Sumber Daya Manusia
Pendidikan Dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan 2012.
Keefer, Reynolds, Laura. 2010.Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A
peer-reviewed electronic journal. Rubric-referenced assessment in
teacher preparation: An opportunity to learn by using., ISSN 15317714. Volume 15, Number 8.
77
78
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Kraemer, Pinsonneault. 1990. Survey Research Methodology In Management
Information Systems: An Assessment. University of California: École
des Hautes Études Commerciales de Montréal.
Krathwohl R, David. 2002. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy. College of Education, The
Ohio State University.
Marhaeni, Istri A. 2007. Asesmen Otentik Dalam Rangka KTSP. Suatu Upaya
Pemberdayaan Guru dan Siswa. Makalah disampaikan pada pelatihan
KTSP bagi guru SMP/MTs di Kabupaten Tabanan tanggal 10-14
September 2007.
Mathias, Craddock. 2009. Assessment & Evaluation In Higher Education. ISSN
0260-2938. Volume 34, Number 2. http://www.informaworld.com.
Accessed on April 15th ,2012
Neale, Boyce. 2006. INTERVIEWS: A Guide for Designing and Conducting InDepth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Path finder International.
OECD. 2009. Teacher Evaluation A Conceptual Framework and examples of
Country Practices. This paper was prepared for presentation at the
OECD-Mexico Workshop Towards a Teacher Evaluation Framework
in Mexico: International Practices, Criteria and Mechanisms, held in
Mexico City on 1-2 December 2009.
Palm, Torulf. 2008. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. Performance Assessment and Authentic
Assessment: A Conceptual Analysis of the Literature. ISSN 1531-7714.
Volume 13, Number 4.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional No.20 Tahun 2007. Standar Penilaian.
Jakarta: Badan Standar Nasional Pendidikan.
Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 19 tahun 2005. Tentang Standar Nasional
Pendidikan.
Popham james. W. 1995. Classroom Assessment ,What teacher need to Know.
USA: Nancy Forsyth.
Proctor et al. 2007. Practical Assessment Research and Evaluation. A peerreviewed electronic journal. An Investigation of Item Type in a
79
Standards-Based Assessment. ISSN 1531-7714. Volume 12, Number
18.
http://pareonline.net/genpare.asp?wh=0&abt=12. Accessed on March
19th, 2012.
Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Pembelajaran Matematika SD/SMP.
Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional Badan Pengembangan Sumber
Daya Manusia Pendidikan Dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan Pusat
Pengembangan Dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik Dan Tenaga
Kependidikan (Pppptk) Matematika 2011.
Susetyo, Budi. 2009. Penilaian hasil belajar. Disampaikan dalam kegiatan Three
Days National Training ”Desain RPP dan Analisis Butir Soal” Tanggal
12 – 14 April 2009 diselenggrakan lembaga pendidikan dan pelatihan
Sentral Edukasia Kota Banjar.
Sugiono. 2009. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. (Pendekatan Kuantitatif,
Kualitatif, dan R&D). Bandung: ALFABETA.
Taylor et all. 1996. Program development and evaluation, collecting evaluation
data: direct observation. Madison: Cooperative Extension
Publications.
The Health Communication Unit. 1999. Conducting Survey Research. The Health
Communication Unit at the Centre for Health Promotion University of
Toronto 100 College Street, Room 213. The Banting Institute Toronto,
Ontario M5G 1L5. This workbook was developed as a resource guide
to accompany a one-day seminar.
Thomas, Ken. 2005. Learning Taxonomy In The Cognitive, Affective, and
Psychomotor Domain. Version 2.1 White Paper: Rocky Mountain
Alchemy
Ulhoi, Neergaard. 2007. Handbook of Qualitative Research Method in
Interpreneurship. USA: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2003
TENTANG SISTEM PENDIDIKAN NASIONAL . Bidang DIKBUD
KBRI Tokyo.
Wardhani, Sri. 2008. Standar Penilaian Pendidikan (Implikasinya Terhadap
Tugas Guru Matematika dan Sekolah). Yogyakarta : Pusat
Pengembangan dan Pemberdayaan Pendidik dan Tenaga Kependidikan
Matematika
80
Western and Northern Canadian Protocol. 2006. Rethinking Classroom
Assessment with Purpose in Mind Assessment for Learning,
Assessment as Learning, Assessment of Learning . Canada: Manitoba
Education, Citizenship and Youth Cataloguing in Publication Data.
Woods, Peter. 2006. Qualitative Research. University of Plymouth: Faculty of
Education.