Pembinaan Skema Pemarkahan Holistik Berfokus bagi Menggredkankarangan Pemujukan

Hashim Othman

Abstrak

Selaras dengan penyerapan idea komunikatif dalam kurikulum pen­didikan bahasa Melayu, suatu alat bagi mengukur kecekapan berbahasa berasaskan kriteria komunikatif sangat diperlukan untuk digunakan dalam penilaian bahasa kendalian sekolah, misalnya dalam penilaian kemahiran menulis. Bagi tujuan itu, makalah ini melaporkan pembinaan skema pemarkahan holistik berfokus skema komunikatif bagi meng­gredkan perlakuan karangan pemujukan mengikut kategori pencapaian. Pembinaan alat ialah yang menggunakan idea komunikatif yang menyatakan bahawa karangan merupakan perlakuan berbahasa melalui interaksi tiga komponen kecekapan, iaitu sosiolinguistik, wacana dan tatabahasa. Sebagai perlakuan, penilaiannya dibuat mengikut pendekatan holistik yang melihat karangan sebagai suatu keseluruhan. Untuk pengesahan a1at, sebanyak III buah sampel karangan yang digredkan oleh pemeriksa yang dilatih khas telah digunakan. Keputusan kajian menunjukkan skema komunikatif mempunyai kebolehpercayaan yang tinggi (0.93), di samping mempunyai kesahan kriteria, iaitu dengan koefisien korelasi yang melebihi 0.80 melalui kesahan serentak dengan a1at yang sedia digunakan di Malaysia dan pada peringkat antarabangsa.

Abstract

In line with the infusion of communicative ideas in the Malay lan­guage educational curricula, an instrument to measure the language proficiency based on the communicative criteria is sorely needed in school based assessment for e.g. in the writing skills. For this pur­pose, this article reports the development of a focused holistic scoring scheme communicative scheme to grade the writing performance of persuasive essays according to achievement categories. The develop­ment of the instrument is based on the communicative ideas, which states that composing is a language performance through the interac­tion of three components, i.e. sociolinguistics, discourse and gram­mar. As a performance, assessment is conducted holistically that viewed essays as an entity. One hundred and eleven sample essays graded by specially trained raters are used to validate the instrument. The re­search findings show that the reliability of the instrument is high (0.93), besides having criterion validity, i.e. with a correlation coefficient of more than 0.80 through concurrent validation with instruments pres­ently employed in Malaysia and internationally.

RUJUKAN

Abdul Aziz Abdul Talib, 1993. Menguji Kemahiran Bahasa: Prinsip. Teknik dan Contoh. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Anastasi, A., 1988. Psychological Testing. Edisi ke-6. New York: Macmillan Pub­lishing Company.

Azman Wan Chik, 1982. Ujian Bahasa Malaysia: Panduan dan Teknik. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publications & Distributors Sdn. Bhd.

Bachman, L.F. dan Savignon, S., 1986. “The Evaluation of Communicative Lan­guage Proficiency: “A Critique of the ACTFL Oral Interview” dlm. The Mod­em Language Journal 70, 4: 380-390.

Canale, M. dan Swain. M., 1981. “A Theoretical Framework for Communicative Competence”, dlm. The Construct Validation o/Test o/Communicative Com­petence Palmer. A.S., Peter J.M.G., dan George, A.T., (ed.) Washington: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.

Carroll, lB., 1980. Testing Communicative Performance: An Interim Study. Ox­ford: Pergamon Press Ltd.

Cooper, C.R, 1977. “Holistic Evaluation of Writing”, dlm. Evaluating Writing: Describing. Measuring. Judging oleh Cooper, C.R & Odell, L., (ed.) Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Crocker, L. dan Algina, J., 1986. Introduction to Classical and Modem Test Theory. Orlando, Florida: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.

Duran, RP., 1988. “Validity and Language Skills Assessments: Non-English Back­ground Students”, dlm. Wainer, H. dan Braun, H.1. Hillsdale, Test Validity oleh New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Publishers.

Fischer, RA., 1984. ”Testing Communicative Competence in French”, dlm. The Modem Language Journal, 68, 1: 13-20.

Goulden-Nancy-Rost, 1989. “A Comparison of Reliability and Validity of Holistic and Analytic Methods of Scoring Classroom Speeches”, dlm. Dissenation Abstracts International. 51-05A: 1441.

Hannah dan Charles-Austin, 1990. ”The Effects of Holistic Scoring and Peer-evalu­ation on the Narrative and Expository Writing of Tenth Graders”, dlm. Dis­sertation Abstracts International, 52-09A:3167.

Hashim-Othman, 2000a. “Penaksiran Kemahiran Menulis Karangan Bahasa Melayu daripada Perspektif Komunikatif: Penetapan Piawai Perlakuan Minimum dan Analisis Kecekapan”. Jurnal Dewan Bahasa, 44, 2: 193-207.

Hashim Othman, 2000b. “Penerokaan Komponen-komponen Komunikatif dan Pembinaan Skema Pemarkahan Holistik Berfokus bagi Menggred Perlakuan Karangan Bahasa Malaysia Sekolah Menengah”. Tesis Doktor Falsafah yang tidak diterbitkan, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Pulau Pinang.

Hashim Othman, 2001, “Komponen-komponen Komunikatif dalam Karangan Bahasa Melayu Sekolah Menengah”. Jumai Bahasa, 3,1: 352-377.

Hillocks, G. Jr., 1986. Research on Written Composition: New Directions/or Teach­ing. Urbana, Illinois: National Conference on Research in English.

Homburg, TJ., 1984. “Holistic Evaluation of ESL Compositions: Can It Be Vali­dated Objectively”? dlm. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 1: 87-107.

Hutchinson, c., 1990. “Communicative Competence in Language Teaching”, dlm. Handbook of Educational Ideas and Practices oleh Entwistle, N., (ed.) Lon­don: Routledge.

Hymes. D., 1972. “On Communicative Competence”, dlm. Sociolinguistics oleh Pride, J.B. dan Holmes, J., (editor). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Jacob, H. L., Zingraf, S.A. Wormuth, D.R. Hartfiel, V.F., dan Hughey, J.B., 1981. Testing ESL Composition: A Practicle Approach. Rowley, M. A.: Newbury House.

Juriah Long, 1992. “Pendekatan Pengajaran Bahasa Malaysia di Sekolah dalam Abad ke-21″, dlm. Juriah Long, Halimah Badio Zaman, Putih Mohamed, dan Zalizan Mohd. Jelas., (peny.) Aliran Dalam Amalan Pendidikan Menjelang Abad ke-21 Bangi: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1987. Sukatan Pelajaran Bahasa Malaysia 1ingkatan 1 hingga 5 Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1992. Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Bahasa Malaysia Tingkatan IV. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1994. Dra/ Buku Panduan Am Penilaian Kendalian Sekolah Menengah: Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 200 1. Sukatan Pelajaran Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah: Bahasa Melayu. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.

Kern, R.G., dan Schultz, J.M., 1992. ”The Effect of Composition Instruction on Intermediate Level French Students’ Writing Performance: Some Prelimi­nary Findings”, dlm. The Modem Language Journal, 76,1: 1-13.

Khatijah Abdul Hamid, 1996. “Wacana dalam Teks Penulisan: Satu Tinjauan tentang Perkaitan Semantik dalam Karangan Bahasa Melayu Pelajar-pelajar dalam Sistem Pendidikan di Malaysia Berdasarkan Analisis Tautan Kohesi dan Koheren”. Kertas kerja yang disampaikan dalam Persidangan Antarabangsa Pengajian Melayu Beijing dari 20 -24 Mei 1996.

Knudson, RE., 1992. “Analysis of Argumentative Writing at Two Grade Levels”. Journal of Educational Research 85, 3:169-179.

Uyod-Jones, R., 1977. “Primary Trait Scoring”, dlm. ed. Evalucting Writing: De­scribing, Measuring, Judging. Cooper, C.R & Odell, L., Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Ministry of Education Malaysia, 1997. Curriculum Specifications for SMART Schools: Bahasa Melayu KBSR-KBSM. Kuala Lumpur: Curriculum De­velopment Centre.

Mitchell, K. dan Anderson, J. , 1986. “Reliability of Holistic Scoring for the MCAT Essay” dlm. Journal of Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 10: 771-775.

Moss, P.A., Cole, N.S. dan Khampalikit, C., 1982. “A Comparison of Procedures to Assess Written Language Skills at Grades 4, 7, and 10″ dlm. Journal of Educational Measurement, 19, 1.

Odell, L., 1981. “Defining and Assessing Competence in Writing”, dlm. The Na­ture and Measurement of Competency in English oleh Cooper, C.R, ed. Urbana, Illinois: National Council of Teachers of English.

Oller, J.W. Jr., 1979. Language Tests at School: A Pragmatic Approach. London: Longman.

Pula-Judith-Jemigen, 1990. “The Function of Personal Background, Professional Training, and Work Experience on Rater Performance in Holistic Scoring Sessions: A Study of Disciplinary Enculturation and Placement Context”. dlm. Dissertation Abstracts International, 51-11A: 3714.

Vahapassi, A., 1988. “The Domain of School Writing and Development of the Writing Tasks”, dlm. The lEA Study of Written Composition I: The Interna­tional Writing Tasks and Scoring Scales Gorman, T.P., Purves, A.C. & Degenhart, R.E. The lEA Study of Written Composition I: The International Writing Teks and Scoring Scales. New York: Pergamon Press.

Varble, M.E., 1990. “Analysis of Writing Samples of Students Taught by Teachers Using Whole Language and Traditional Approaches” dlm. Journal of Edu­cational Research, 83, 5: 245-251.

Weir, C.J., 1990. Understanding and Developing Language Tests. New York: Prentice-Hall.

Weir, C.J., 1993. Communicative Language Testing. New York: Prentice-Hall.  White, E.M., 1985. Teaching and Assessing Writing. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass  Publishers. Widdowson, H. G., 1978. Teaching Language as Communication.

Oxford: Oxford University Press. Witt-Elizabeth-Anne, 1993. “The Construction of an Analytic Score Scale for the Direct Assessment of Writing and an Investigation of Its Reliability and Va­lidity (Writing Assessment)” dlm. Dissertation Abstracts International, 55­03A: 543.

(Teks Penuh)

Hantar Maklum Balas Anda