SCORE MARK-UP IN ENGLISH ASSESSMENT
Keywords:
English Assessment, Score Mark-Up, Qualitative Approach, Motivation, Teaching StrategyAbstract
Score markup is a bad phenomenon in educational research, but it is not widespread researched. Thus this research was aroused because of the aforesaid phenomenon. Based on the aforesaid issue this research was generally aimed at analysis of avoidable score mark-up in English assessment in senior secondary school and involving three variables that are: 1) strategy of avoidable score markup; 2) manner of teachers assess students' English learning; 3) English teachers to assess students with low comprehension of English subjects deduction.
Then, it belongs to a case study that is qualitative research, and then, it involves with SMAN 1 Yogyakarta as a research setting. Then, the research instrument is questionnaires, interviews, documentation, and peers debriefing. Further, the research participants are English teachers, non-English Language teacher, students (graders). In this case, the result of the research has research validity i.e = 0.751; the average of National Examination is about 82.00 that it is higher than the School Examination is 66.78 that means the phenomenon
of score markup does not occur. Remedial teaching and remedial tests have been solutions to enhance graders' motivation. The effectiveness of the Layanan Klinis is a solution for lower students who still need enhancement of the teaching method.
References
Arikunto, S. 2012. Dasar-Dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. 2nd Ed. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara. BSNP. (2018). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 4 Tahun 2018. Available at: http://bsnp-indonesia.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Permen-4- Tahun-2018.pdf. [Accessed: 12th August 2018]
Brookhart, S.M. & Nitko, A. J. 2008. Assessment and Grading in Classrooms. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Brown, H.D. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and Classroom Practices. 4th Ed. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
___________. (2007). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. 3rd Ed. New York: Addison Wesley Inc.
DÓ§rnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and Researching Motivation. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Duverge, G. (2016). Constrasting classrooms: instructional differences between between pedagogy vs. andragogy. Available at: https://online.pointpark.edu/education/pedagogy-vsandragogy/. [Accessed: 28th June 2018].
Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606. Available at: http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol8/iss4/6/. [Accessed: 13rd December 2016].
Harmer, J. 2007. The Practice of English language Teaching 4th Ed.. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Hermayawati. (2011). Budaya Dongkrak Nilai. Available at: ttp://maya.mercubuanayogya.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/KR-ONLINE-BUDAYA-DONGKRAKNILAI.htm. [Accessed: 27th October 2016].
Hornby, A.S. et.al. (2015). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. 9th Ed. Oxford: United Kingdom.
Johnson, R. B. & Christensen, L.B. (2014). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
O’Malley, J. M. & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic Assessment for English Language Learners: Practical Approaches for Teachers. New York: Addison Wesley.
Rachman, T. (2013). Sekolah Curang di SNMPTN Harus Dikenai Sanksi. Republika. [Online] 1st February. P.1. Available at: http://www.republika.co.id/berita/pendidikan/duniakampus/13/02/01/mhjfpj-sekolah-curang-di-snmptn-harus-dikenai-sanksi. [Accessed: 27th October 2016].
Rice, F. P., & Dolgin, K. G. (2008). The Adolescent: Development, Relationships, and Culture. 12th Ed. Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Septiani, A. (2013). 24 III.METODE PENELITIAN A.Populasi Penelitian Penelitian ini. Available at: http://digilib.unila.ac.id/1717/9/Bab%203.pdf. [Accessed: 1st July 2018].
Tavakol, M. & Dennick, R. (2011). Making Sense of Cronbach’s Alpha. Available at: https://www.ijme.net/archive/2/cronbachs-alpha.pdf. [Accessed: 9th June 2018].
Tilaar. H. A. R. (2006). Standarisasi Pendidikan Nasional: Suatu Tinjuan Kritis. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
Weimer, M. (2015). Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Types of Test Questions. Available at: http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/educational-assessment/advantages-anddisadvantages-of-different-types-of-test-questions/. [Accessed: 11th December 2016].
Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th Ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
