Full Text
The research has aim to describe the result of the content analysis, the presentation, and the instrument readability of the Indonesian proficiency test. The method used in the research was the qualitative descriptive research method. The objects that were examined in the research were the instruments of Indonesian proficiency test which consists of five parts, namely listening, responding the rules, reading, speaking, and writing. The analysis technique used was the content analysis with the data validity test using the triangulation theory. Based on the result analysis towards the content, the presentation, and the instrument readability of the Indonesian proficiency test, it could be concluded that the instrument of Indonesian proficiency test was still containing some weaknesses. It was related to the content aspect which had analyzed based on the tested skill and the materials. The skill of responding the rules in the Indonesian proficiency test has not relevant yet with the assessment theory of pragmatic and communicative. The materials tested in the Indonesian proficiency test allows the differences of ability based on the background of test participants. The multiple choice test form in Indonesian proficiency test consider as the weaknesses of the instrument.
References
1. Alibakhshi, Goudarz dan Ali, Hassan Ghand. (2011). External validity of TOEFL section of Doctoral Entrance Examination in Iran: a mixed design study. Theory and Practice in Language Studi 1 (10) 1304-1310.
2. Behfrouz, Behnam & Nahvi, Elham. (2013). The effect of task characteristics on IELTS reading performance. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics 3 (1) 30-39.
3. Brown, H. Douglas. (2004). Language assesment, principles and classroom practice. San Fransisco: Longman.
4. Gilliland, John. (1972). Readability. London: Holder and Stoughton.
5. Ginting, Setia. (1997). Mencari formula keterbacaan bahasa Indonesia untuk kepentingan pengajaran. Jurnal Widya 146 (14) 56-62.
6. Klare, G.R. (1984). Readability: Handbook of reading research. New York: Longman Inc.
7. Nababan, M. Rudolf. (2003). Teori Menerjemah Bahasa Inggris. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
8. Namdar, Sara & Bagheri, Mohammad Sadegh. (2012). The effect of instructing impression management behaviour on maximizing applicants’ performance in the IELTS speaking test. English Language Teaching, 5 (4) 150-160.
9. Nurgiyantoro, Burhan. (2010). Penilaian pembelajaran bahasa berbasis kompetensi. Yogyakarta: BPFE.
10. Solihah, Atikah & Dony Setiawan. (2005). Bedah Soal UKBI. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa, Departemen Peniikan Nasional.
11. Suladi; Astuti, Wiwiek Dwi, & Biskoyo, K. (2000). Keterbacaan kalimat bahasa Indonesia dalam Buku Pelajaran SLTP. Jakarta: Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
12. Tim UKBI. (2003). Uji kemahiran berbahasa Indonesia. Jakarta: Pusat Bahasa, Depdiknas.
13. Veerappan, Veeramuthu dan Sulaiman, Tajularipin. (2012). A review on IELTS test, its test results and inter rater reliability. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2 (1) 138-143.
14. Widiastuti, Udiati. (2006). Uji kemahiran berbahasa Indonesia sebagai sarana evaluasi dalam perencanaan bahasa di Indonesia. Linguistik Indonesia 24 (1).