Evaluation of English Texts' Readability in National Examination in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26555/adjes.v9i1.38Keywords:
National Examination, English texts, Evaluation, Texts' ReadabilityAbstract
The National Examination is still considered one of the main national-scale tests. As one of the subjects tested, English has used many texts in National Examination. This study evaluates the quality of reading texts' readability in the English National Examination for Junior High School from 2014/2015-2018/2019. 2019/2020 and 2020/2021 are not tested due to their cancellation under the health protocol implemented by the government. The study follows the quantitative descriptive evaluation approach. The SMOG formula is used to measure the texts' readability. From the last five English National Examination tests, 31 texts were tested. There are three aspects evaluated: the number of texts per test, words per text, and readability. The study results showed that there are 87 texts used in total from 2014-2015 to 2018/2019. Among them, only 31 texts exceed 150 words. The average texts quantity is 6,2, and the annual growth is 13,6%. The average number of words per text is 224,1, and the yearly growth is 4,6%. The main aspect, the average score of texts readability is 9,71 or at the level "Easy to Read" suitable to 6th Grader, and the annual growth of texts' readability is 3,9%. The study results show an improvement in quantity and quality, specifically for the readability, of the texts used in the English National Examination.
References
Alderson, J. C., & Banerjee, J. (2001). Language testing and assessment (Part I). Language Teaching, 34(4), 213–236. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444800014464
Alderson, J. C., & Banerjee, J. (2002). Language testing and assessment (Part 2). Language Teaching, 35(2), 79–113. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444802001751
Benjamin, R. G. (2012). Reconstructing readability: Recent developments and recommendations in the analysis of text difficulty. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9181-8
Collins-Thompson, K. (2014). Computational assessment of text readability. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 165(2), 97–135. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.165.2.01col
Cresswell, J. W. (2014). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Ink.
Crossley, S. A., Skalicky, S., & Dascalu, M. (2019). Moving beyond classic readability formulas: new methods and new models. Journal of Research in Reading, 42(3–4), 541–561. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12283
Divina, M. (2009). A study on the reading skills of EFL university students. TEFLIN Journal, 20(1), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v20i1/37-47
Eviyuliwati, I., & Sarwan, C. A. (2018). The Effect of hamburger strategy on students’ reading comprehension of recount texts. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 5(1), 49–60. https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v5i1.9880
Iftanti, E. (2012). A survey of the English reading habits of EFL students in Indonesia. TEFLIN Journal, 23(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v23i2/149-164
Khoshbakht, F., & Gorjian, B. (2017). Using authentic materials in teaching reading comprehension to EFL learners. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Learning, 2017(2), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.jalll.20170302.03
Klare, G. R. (1974). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10(1), 62. https://doi.org/10.2307/747086
Manongga, D., Iriani, A., & Wijono, S. (2018). Public opinion on national exam policies in Indonesia. International Journal of Information Technology and Business, 1(1), 24–35. https://doi.org/10.24246/ijiteb.112018.24-35
McLaughlin, G. H. (1969). SMOG grading —– A new readability formula. Journal of Reading, 12(8), 639–646.
Ngabut, M. N. (2015). Reading theories and reading comprehension. Journal on English as a Foreign Language, 5(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.23971/jefl.v5i1.89
Nurhidayah, N. H., & Arrasyid, F. I. (2017). Synchronization of English students’ worksheets (Lks) to the curriculum. ELT Echo : The Journal of English Language Teaching in Foreign Language Context, 2(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.24235/eltecho.v2i1.1589
Powell, R. R. (2006). Evaluation research: An overview. Library Trends, 55(1), 102–120. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2006.0050
Putra, T. K., & Abdullah, D. F. (2019). Higher-order thinking skill (HOTS) questions in English national examination in Indonesia. The Journal of Educational Development, 7(3), 178–185. https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.2019.11.1.145-160
Rohmah, H. (2018). The implementation of Herringbone technique in reading comprehension at second semester of non-English department. Celt: A Journal of Culture, English Language Teaching & Literature, 18(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.24167/celt.v18i1.555
Rosidin, U., Herpratiwi, Suana, W., & Firdaos, R. (2019). Evaluation of national examination (UN) and National-based school examination (USBN) in Indonesia undang. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3), 865–875. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.827
Rossi, P. H., & Wright, J. D. (1984). Evaluation research: An assessment.
Sabrina, A. (2016). A language assessment analysis of English national examination in Indonesia. EduLite: Journal of English Education, Literature and Culture, 1(2), 177. https://doi.org/10.30659/e.1.2.177-195
Sutari, V. R. (2017). National examination in Indonesia and its backwash effects: Teachers’ perspectives. 9th International Conference on Applied Linguistics, 82, 331–333. https://doi.org/10.2991/conaplin-16.2017.76
Vajjala, S., & Meurers, D. (2012). On improving the accuracy of readability classification using insights from second language acquisition. The 7th Workshop on the Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications, 163–173.
Wang, L. W., Miller, M. J., Schmitt, M. R., & Wen, F. K. (2013). Assessing readability formula differences with written health information materials: Application, results, and recommendations. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 9(5), 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2012.05.009
Widiyaningsih, A., & Septiana, T. I. (2019). An analysis of the higher order thinking skills (HOTS) in the national examination of English subject at junior high school level. ELT-Echo, 4(2), 138–146.
Yorio, C. A. (1969). Some sources of reading problems for foreign-language learners. Language Learning, 21(1), 107–115.
Yusuf, Q., & Fauzan. (2016). EFL students’ difficulties in comprehending English reading texts. Proceedings of the 1st English Education International Conference (EEIC) in conjunction with the 2nd Reciprocal Graduate Research Symposium (RGRS) of the Consortium of Asia-Pacific Education Universities (CAPEU) between Sultan Idris Education University a, 2015, 510–514.
Zamanian, M., & Heydari, P. (2012). Readability of the text: State of art. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.1.43-53
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Mohamad Syafri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES) agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) and adapt (remix, transform, and build upon the material) the work for any purpose, even commercially with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in Ahmad Dahlan Journal of English Studies (ADJES).
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
