CONCLUTION AND SUGGESTION

I.

CONCLUSION
From the data of the test, we can say that the test is pretty reliable. Since,
most results of the items were not functioning vary and couldnt perfectly
distinguish between upper and lower students. However, the item analysis
statistics of item discrimination and item difficulty help us to decide which
item could be kept and which should be discharged in creating a new
revised version of the test. Moreover, the distracter efficiency analysis is
also useful for supporting items that have option that arent working
properly as would be expected.
A good test that could be use for us as teachers in assessing students
should includes some easy items to test the low achievers of class and
also should includes some difficult items to test the high achievers of the
class. According to Garret (1981:164) the normal curve can be taken as a
guide in the selection of difficulty indices. Thus, 50% items might have
difficulty indices between .25 and .75. Similarly, 25% indices are larger
than .75 and the other 25% are smaller than .25. The same criteria were
adopted while selecting the items for the test on the basis of P-value by
Patel (1993:163).
Commonly, items can be said as a better if discriminating power of items
is higher. It can be said that most of the items need to have discri,mination
index above .20 to be better. According to remmers, Gage and Rummel,
(1967), items with dicrimination index above .20 are regarded as having
sufficient discrimination power to be used in academics achievement.
Ebel and Frisbe (1991:232-233) opine that achievement test items should
have indices of discrimination of 0.30 to 0.39 is reasonably good but
possibly subject to improve, 0.20 to 0.29 is marginal items usually
subjected to improvement and below 0.19 is poor items are to be rejected
or further improved by new revision.

II.

SUGGESTION
Based on thedata of analysis above, we could give some suggestion:
From the result of IF analysis, most of the tast items were given for
students are not so easy but there are some items that need revision to
be used again in the test because there are some items that have IF of
0.97. it means that from the total number of students, only one student
that answered wrongly. So, the items are too easy for the students.
From Distracter Eficiency anallysis, we can see some option that were not
chosen by students. The function of distracter is not perfectly work. So, if
the distracter is not proper in the function, it shoulbe replaced with other
more attractive and realistic option.

From ID analysis, we also find that there are some items that total correct
answer of low-ability students is higher than high-ability students. Good
discrimination power shouldnt show the data. It should be reversed. So,
the option of items should be recheck again and make sure that the
options are realistic and relevant.