LANGAUGE ASSESSMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

MULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS ANALYSIS OF ENGLISH NATIONAL

EXAM TRIAL HELD BY SMA NEGERI 1 MAJENANG IN ACADEMIC
YEAR 2016/2017

By
Rima Melati
2201414014
Rombel 205-206

ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS
SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY
2017
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
According to Big Indonesian Dictionary (2002) analysis is the breaking
down of a subject for its various parts and the study of the passage itself and the
relationships between the parts to gain a proper understanding and
understanding of the whole meaning. The analysis of items in English is called
an analysis item to empirical. That is, the analysis can only be done if a test has
been done and the answers to the items have been obtained. Grain analysis is an
activity analysis to determine the level of goodness of the items contained in a
test so that the resulting information we can use to improve the item and the
test. Related to teaching activities, evaluation is a systematic process for
determining or making decisions to what extent teaching objectives have been
achieved by students. In addition, the evaluation is also to obtain evidence of
the extent to which the teaching-learning process and the effectiveness of the
teaching program can be successful in achieving the objectives of the
curriculum in the event. Most people sometimes do not think evaluation is
necessary in every daily action to improve its performance. Evaluation directly
become the process of supervision.
Based on explanation above, the writer wants to analyse multiple choice
items. This paper will analyse the multiple choice items error through the
answer of students. The writer took multiple choice items from try out 3 national
exams of SMA Negeri 1 Majenang 2016/2017 and chose 30 samples for data
analysis.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENTS

Based on the background above, the writer formulates the problem statement
1.2.1 The test items function is appropriate or not.
1.2.2 Whether the test items have the appropriate Item Facility, Item
Differentiation, and Distractor Efficiency or not.
 CHAPTER II

2.1 GATHERING THE DATA

In this paper the writer wants to conduct the item analysis of Try Out 3 National
Exams Academic Year 2016/2017 Of SMA Negeri 1 Majenang. There are six
IPS class and 6 IPA class which are participated in trial test. The writer chose
30 samples from IPS class which is be analyse in this paper.
CORRECT
NO NAME
ANSWER
1 AGUNG BUDIYANTO 18
2 AHMAD ADE MUFIDZ 22
3 ALVI NURASYIFA 17
4 ARDHINI YUNIAR A. 23
5 ASBIK NUR H. 19
6 BELLA KUSUMA D. 13
7 CICIH PUJI ASTUTI 25
8 DEA PUTRI S. 26
9 DENNY DWI P. 21
10 DHEVY TRIE K. 17
11 DONI HARYADI 18
12 DONI SETIAWAN 20
13 HAURA HURIYAH HANIN 24
14 IHZA TAQI 21
15 ISNAERU AMALIA R. 24
16 JESIKA SARI 18
17 KHANIFATUN NISA 18
18 LIA NUR R. 22
19 NOVIA NUR YUSLIHAH 17
20 NURCHOLIS A. 18
21 ORIZA SATIFAH 19
22 REPSI KOMARETNO 19
23 RETNO AJI WIBOWO 17
24 RIZKI TITI P. 15
25 SAFRAS TIFANI 20
26 SANTI ARDEANY F. 15
27 SISKA DWI MARLIYANTI 17
28 SITI JULITA 16
29 TIA RAHAYU 16
30 ZAKARIA D.R. 20
 2.2 ANALYZING THE DATA
2.2.1 Item facility (IF)
The items should not too easy also not too difficult. In the case of
problems too easy and or too difficult to have a decent academic function.
Because when the item is too easy, less stimulate and attract interest in
learning, otherwise if too difficult it is possible that students do not interest
in learning even become desperate.
IF simply reflect the percentage of students answering the item correctly.
The formula looks like this:
#𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦
𝐼𝐹 =
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 # 𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑠 𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑚
If the results:
0,00-0,15 = the item is difficult
0,15-0,85 = the item is appropriate
0,85-1,00 = the item is easy

Below are the results of IF analysis:

Ʃ
KEY NO/CHOICES A B C D E PARTICIPANTS IF
CORRECT
A 16 1 1 24 1 3 30 1 0,03
A 17 30 0 0 0 0 30 30 1,00
D 18 9 2 3 14 2 30 14 0,47
B 19 12 11 3 2 2 30 11 0,37
C 20 0 0 29 0 1 30 29 0,97
B 21 0 23 4 1 2 30 23 0,77
A 22 26 3 0 1 0 30 26 0,87
E 23 2 19 2 4 3 30 3 0,10
B 24 5 20 4 0 1 30 20 0,67
D 25 9 2 3 12 4 30 12 0,40
A 26 16 0 3 0 1 30 16 0,53
D 27 4 7 5 7 7 30 7 0,23
C 28 8 0 5 3 14 30 5 0,17
B 29 6 13 1 0 10 30 13 0,43
E 30 3 1 0 0 26 30 26 0,87
B 31 10 12 1 5 2 30 12 0,40
E 32 3 2 1 1 23 30 23 0,77
C 33 0 0 27 1 3 30 27 0,90
B 34 7 11 4 2 6 30 11 0,37
D 35 6 1 0 23 0 30 23 0,77
B 36 0 28 0 2 0 30 28 0,93
B 37 0 27 0 2 1 30 27 0,90
C 38 9 2 17 1 1 30 17 0,57
A 39 11 11 1 2 5 30 11 0,37
D 40 0 2 0 11 17 30 11 0,37
E 41 5 0 0 9 16 30 16 0,53
E 42 7 5 14 2 2 30 2 0,07
C 43 5 12 1 0 12 30 1 0,03
C 44 9 0 20 0 1 30 20 0,67
A 45 26 4 0 0 0 30 26 0,87
D 46 1 2 1 17 9 30 17 0,57
E 47 7 4 1 14 4 30 4 0,13
C 48 17 0 11 2 0 30 11 0,37
A 49 20 0 0 9 1 30 20 0,67
D 50 1 4 24 1 0 30 1 0,03
*The results of ID above were calculate using MS Excel.
Note:
*participants = 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 # 𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑠 𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑚
*∑correct = #𝑜𝑓 𝑆𝑠 𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑡𝑒𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑙𝑦

2.2.2 Item discrimination (ID)

ID is the measurement of the extent to which an item is able to
distinguish learners who have mastered the competence with learners who
have not or lack of competence under certain criteria. More and more higher
the coefficient ID of an item, the more capable an item can distinguish the
learners who have competence with the learners who have less competence.
The formula for calculating ID is:
ℎ𝑖𝑔ℎ 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝 # 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡 − 𝑙𝑜𝑤 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝 # 𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑐𝑡
𝐼𝐷 =
1
2 𝑋 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑜𝑓 𝑦𝑜𝑢𝑟 𝑡𝑤𝑜 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝𝑠
I have data of 30 students, but in this case I only need data of top 10
and bottom 10. So I have to calculate final scores for all 30 students, then
 divide them into thirds, that is created three rank including top 10 scores,
the middle 10, and the lowest 10. To calculate ID we only need the top 10
and the lowest 10.
The classification of ID:
0,00 > 0,50 = unacceptable
0,50 = moderate
0,50 > 1,00 = acceptable
NO TOP 10 BOTTOM 10
ITEM Total ID
CORRECT INCORRECT CORRECT INCORRECT
16 1 9 0 10 20 0,1
17 10 0 10 0 20 0
18 9 1 1 9 20 0,8
19 9 1 0 10 20 0,9
20 9 1 10 0 20 -0,1
21 6 4 8 2 20 -0,2
22 8 2 8 2 20 0
23 1 9 0 10 20 0,1
24 9 1 7 3 20 0,2
25 6 4 3 7 20 0,3
26 10 0 8 2 20 0,2
27 7 3 0 10 20 0,7
28 4 6 0 10 20 0,4
29 7 3 2 8 20 0,5
30 10 0 8 2 20 0,2
31 2 8 4 6 20 -0,2
32 9 1 7 3 20 0,2
33 10 0 9 1 20 0,1
34 7 3 1 9 20 0,6
35 9 1 5 5 20 0,4
36 10 0 8 2 20 0,2
37 9 1 9 1 20 0
38 5 5 7 3 20 -0,2
39 4 6 5 5 20 -0,1
40 10 0 8 2 20 0,2
41 4 6 5 5 20 -0,1
42 1 9 0 10 20 0,1
43 0 10 0 10 20 0
 44 10 0 3 7 20 0,7
45 10 0 7 3 20 0,3
46 10 0 3 7 20 0,7
47 2 8 1 9 20 0,1
48 5 5 5 5 20 0
49 5 5 6 4 20 -0,1
50 0 0 0 10 20 0
*The results of ID above were calculate using MS Excel.

2.2.3 Distractor Efficiency

Evaluation instruments in the form of tests and objectives, in
addition to fulfil the requirements previously mentioned, should have an
effective distractor. The so-called distractors or dwarfs are options that are
not the answer key (right answer). The item which is have a good distractor
will be chosen equally by the test-takers that answer incorrectly. On the
contrary, the item which is not good, the distractors will be chosen
unequally. The distractors are considered good if the number of learners
who choose the distractors is equal or close to the ideal amount.
The table below shows the result of distractor efficiency analysis:
NO TOP 10 NO BOTTOM 10
ITEM A B C D E ITEM A B C D E
16 1* 0 9 0 0 16 0* 0 8 1 1
17 10* 0 0 0 0 17 10* 0 0 0 0
18 1 0 0 9* 0 18 5 1 1* 1 2
19 0 9* 1 0 0 19 9 0* 0 0 1
20 0 0 9* 0 1 20 0 0 10* 0 0
21 0 6* 3 0 1 21 0 8* 1 0 1
22 8* 1 0 1 0 22 7* 3 0 0 0
23 0 9 0 0 1* 23 1 5 1 3 0*
24 0 9* 1 0 0 24 2 7* 1 0 0
25 4 0 0 6* 0 25 1 1 3 3* 2
26 10* 0 0 0 0 26 8* 0 2 0 0
27 0 1 0 8* 1 27 2 2 2 0* 4
28 2 0 4* 2 2 28 4 0 0* 0 6
29 3 7* 0 0 0 29 1 2* 0 0 7
30 0 0 0 0 10* 30 2 0 0 0 8*
 31 7 2* 0 1 0 31 1 4* 0 0 5
32 0 0 0 1 9* 32 2 1 0 0 7*
33 0 0 10* 0 0 33 0 0 9* 1 0
34 1 7* 1 1 0 34 3 1* 0 1 5
35 1 0 0 9* 0 35 4 1 0 5* 0
36 0 10* 0 0 0 36 0 8* 0 2 0
37 0 9* 0 1 0 37 0 9* 0 0 1
38 4 0 5* 1 0 38 3 0 7* 0 0
39 4* 6 0 0 0 39 5* 1 0 1 3
40 0 0 0 10* 0 40 0 0 0 9* 1
41 3 0 0 3 4* 41 0 0 0 5 5*
42 2 0 6 1 1* 42 3 4 3 0 0*
43 3 4 0* 0 3 43 0 4 0* 0 6
44 0 0 10* 0 0 44 6 0 3* 0 1
45 10* 0 0 0 0 45 7* 3 0 0 0
46 0 0 0 10* 0 46 1 1 0 3* 5
47 1 2 1 4 2* 47 2 0 0 7 1*
48 4 0 5* 1 0 48 5 0 5* 0 0
49 5* 0 0 5 0 49 7* 0 0 3 0
50 0 0 10 0* 0 50 0 3 7 0* 0
Note: red* is the correct response
 CHAPTER III
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

After gathering and analysing data, here we have discussion and result.
3.1. Item Facility (IF)
We know that IF is very important in estimation the item achieves validity.
Here the result from analysis that the writer have done.

No Item IF Notes
16 0,03 Its IF is 0,03, it means the item is difficult or very difficult.
17 1,00 Its IF is 1,00, it means the item is easy or very easy.
18 0,47 Its IF is 0,47, it means the item is appropriate.
19 0,37 Its IF is 0,37, it means the item is appropriate.
20 0,97 Its IF is 0,97, it means the item is easy or very easy.
21 0,77 Its IF is 0,77, it means the item is appropriate.
22 0,87 Its IF is 0,87, it means the item is easy.
23 0,10 Its IF is 0,10, is means the item is difficult.
24 0,67 Its IF is 0,67, it means the item is appropriate.
25 0,40 Its IF is 0,40, it means the item is appropriate.
26 0,53 Its IF is 0,53, it means the item is appropriate.
27 0,23 Its IF is 0,23, it means the item is appropriate.
28 0,17 Its IF is 0,17, it means the item is appropriate.
29 0,43 Its IF is 0,43, it means the item is appropriate.
30 0,87 Its IF is 0,87, it means the item is easy.
31 0,40 Its IF is 0,40, it means the item is appropriate.
32 0,77 Its IF is 0,77, it means the item is appropriate.
33 0,90 Its IF is 0,90, it means the item is easy or very easy.
34 0,37 Its IF is 0,37, it means the item is easy or very easy.
35 0,77 Its IF is 0,77, it means the item is appropriate.
36 0,93 Its IF is 0,93, it means the item is easy or very easy.
37 0,90 Its IF is 0,90, it means the item is easy or very easy.
38 0,57 Its IF is 0,57, it means the item is appropriate.
 39 0,37 Its IF is 0,37, it means the item is appropriate.
40 0,37 Its IF is 0,37, it means the item is appropriate.
41 0,53 Its IF is 0,53, it means the item is appropriate.
42 0,07 Its IF is 0,07, it means the item is easy or very easy.
43 0,03 Its IF is 0,03, it means the item is easy or very easy.
44 0,67 Its IF is 0,67, it means the item is appropriate.
45 0,87 Its IF is 0,87, it means the item is easy.
46 0,57 Its IF is 0,57, it means the item is appropriate.
47 0,13 Its IF is 0,13, it means the item is difficult.
48 0,37 Its IF is 0,37, it means the item is appropriate.
49 0,67 Its IF is 0,67, it means the item is appropriate.
50 0,03 Its IF is 0,03, it means the item is difficult or very difficult.

3.2. Item Discrimination (ID)

The result of this ID analysis tell us if the item has high discriminating
power would approach a perfect 1,0, and no discriminating power at all would
be zero. As with IF, no absolute rule governs the establishment of acceptable
and unacceptable ID indices.

No Item ID Notes
16 0,1 Unacceptable
17 0,0 Unacceptable
18 0,8 Acceptable
19 0,9 Acceptable
20 -0,1 Unacceptable
21 -0,2 Unacceptable
22 0,0 Unacceptable
23 0,1 Unacceptable
24 0,2 Unacceptable
25 0,3 Unacceptable
26 0,2 Unacceptable
27 0,7 Acceptable
 28 0,4 Unacceptable
29 0,5 Moderate
30 0,2 Unacceptable
31 -0,2 Unacceptable
32 0,2 Unacceptable
33 0,1 Unacceptable
34 0,6 Acceptable
35 0,4 Unacceptable
36 0,2 Unacceptable
37 0,0 Unacceptable
38 -0,2 Unacceptable
39 -0,1 Unacceptable
40 0,2 Unacceptable
41 -0,1 Unacceptable
42 0,1 Unacceptable
43 0,0 Unacceptable
44 0,7 Acceptable
45 0,3 Unacceptable
46 0,7 Acceptable
47 0,1 Unacceptable
48 0,0 Unacceptable
49 -0,1 Unacceptable
50 0,0 Unacceptable

3.3. Distractor Efficiency

Distractor efficiency is one more important of measure of a multiple
choice item’s value in attest, and one that is related to discrimination.
 From the analysis above, the writer got the results as follow:
NO
NOTES
ITEM
Its ID is 0,1, which is unacceptable. Distractors B doesn’t fool anyone. All
16
distractors need revision.
Its ID is 0,00, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,C,D,E doesn’t fool anyone,
17
so all distractors need revision.
Its ID is 0,8, which is acceptable. Distractors A,B,C,E seem to be fulfilling
18
their function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0,9, which is acceptable. Distractors C,D doesn’t fool anyone, so those
19
need revision.
Its ID is -0,1, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,B,D doesn’t fool anyone,
20
so those need revision.
Its ID is -0,2 which is unacceptable. Distractors A,D doesn’t fool anyone, so
21
those need revision.
Its ID is 0, which is unacceptable. Distractors C,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
22
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,1, which is unacceptable. All distractors seem to be fulfilling their
23
function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors D,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
24
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,3, which is unacceptable. All distractors seem seem to be fulfilling
25
their function of attracting some attention
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,D,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
26
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,7, which is acceptable. All distractors seem to be fulfilling their
27
function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0,4, which is unacceptable. Distractors B doesn’t fool anyone, so it
28
need revision.
Its ID is 0,5, which is moderate. Distractors C,D doesn’t fool anyone, so those
29
need revision.
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,C,D doesn’t fool anyone, so
30
those need revision.
Its ID is -0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors C doesn’t fool anyone, so
31
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors C doesn’t fool anyone, so those
32
need revision.
 Its ID is 0,1, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,B,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
33
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,6, which is acceptable. All distractors seem to be fulfilling their
34
function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0,4, which is unacceptable. Distractors C,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
35
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,C,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
36
those need revision.
Its ID is 0, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,C doesn’t fool anyone, so
37
those need revision.
Its ID is -0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
38
those need revision.
Its ID is -0,1, which is unaccpetable. Distractors C doesn’t fool anyone, so
39
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,2, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,B,C doesn’t fool anyone, so
40
those need revision.
Its ID is -0,1, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,C doesn’t fool anyone, so
41
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,1, which is unacceptable. All distractors seem to be fulfilling their
42
function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0, which is unaceptable. Distractors D doesn’t fool anyone, so those
43
need revision.
Its ID is 0,7, which is acceptable. Distractors B,D doesn’t fool anyone, so those
44
need revision.
Its ID is 0,3, which is unacceptable. Distractors C,D,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
45
those need revision.
Its ID is 0,7, which is acccepptable. Distractors C doesn’t fool anyone, so those
46
need revision.
Its ID is 0,1, which is unacceptable. All distractors seem to be fulfilling their
47
function of attracting some attention.
Its ID is 0, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
48
those need revision.
Its ID is -0,1, which is unacceptable. Distractors B,C,E doesn’t fool anyone,
49
so those need revision.
Its ID is 0, which is unacceptable. Distractors A,D,E doesn’t fool anyone, so
50
those need revision.
Note: *red is the correct responses
 CHAPTER IV
CONCLUSION

From the analysis of test items above, the writer concluded that:
1. The function of the test item is appropriate, that is to measure the ability of
each student in doing the test items, how strong or how weak the ability of
students in doing each test items. So that teachers can see the ability of each
student and give more attention to students who need more, of course, attention
in the form of coaching.
2. After the writer done the analysis, the writer found that almost all the test items
are not appropriate. First, only 18 test items of 50 test items which are its IF is
appropriate. It means that only 36% test items which is appropriate to be tested
to the students. Second, only 6 test items which are its ID is acceptable and 1
test item which is its ID is moderate. It means that 86% test items which is
unacceptable. Last but not least, only 7 test items which are all distractors seem
to be fulfilling their function of attracting some attention. It means that 86%
test items have distractors which are do not fool anyone. No one picked it, and
therefore it probably has no utility. A revision might provide a distractor that
actually attracts a response or more.
The above descriptions indicate that the item analysis is: (1) to determine
problems with defects or non-functional use; (2) to increase the items through the
three components of analysis namely Item Facility for knowing the level of
difficulty, Item Discrimination, and Distractors Efficiency, and improve learning
through the ambiguity of test items and certain skills that cause learners difficult.
In addition, the items that have been analyzed can provide information to students
and teachers.
 REFERENCES

Brown, H. Douglas. 2004. LANGUAGE ASSESMENT, Principles and Classroom

Practices. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Maulidah, Riska. 2015. Analisis Butir Soal. Accesed on Sunday 21th, 2016 at 7.36
p.m. from (/Cing%20Blog_%20ANALISIS%20BUTIR%20SOAL.html).
Unknown. -. Panduan Analisis Butir Soal. Published Article.