PENTINGNYA RUBRIK PENILAIAN DALAM PENILAIAN KETERAMPILAN VOCATIONAL SISWA
Abstract
Penilaian menjadi komponen penting dari setiap pendidikan. Apabila guru benar-benar melakukan penilaian dalam kegiatan pengajaran, efektivitas belajar siswa dapat ditingkatkan. Pada kenyataannya guru kurang memahami penilaian yang tepat. Terlepas dari kenyataan bahwa penilaian kinerja terlalu sulit untuk dilakukan. Tetapi guru harus disiapkan untuk melaksanakan penilaian kinerja. Rubrik adalah standar kinerja untuk kompetensi tertentu. Terlepas dari apakah kriteria untuk rubrik berasal dari pengembang atau dari standar eksternal, kriteria dalam rubrik harus peka terhadap tujuan, sesuai dengan tahapan perkembangan, bermakna, jelas, layak, dan dapat digeneralisasikan. Pengembangan rubrik dapat berupa holistik, analitik, atau kombinasi keduanya. Rubrik holistik merupakan konstruksi yang mengandung berbagai tingkat kinerja yang menggambarkan kualitas tugas, kuantitas tugas, atau keduanya. Rubrik analitik merupakan konstruksi yang terdiri dari kriteria yang dibagi ke dalam berbagai tingkat kinerja. Tidak ada prosedur yang ditentukan untuk mengembangkan rubrik, karena rubrik merupakan konstruksi yang tergantung pada tujuan. Rubrik penilaian menghasilkan sejumlah manfaat kepada siswa, guru dan lembaga. Rubrik memberikan masukan dan umpan balik untuk membantu meningkatkan keterampilan, dan menjadi cara yang ampuh untuk mengklarifikasi tujuan dan keterampilan siswa. Kendala-kendala utama adalah dalam perumusan tingkatan indikator-indikator keterampilan yang komprehensip, visibel, dan mudah diamati.
References
Andrade, H., (2005). Teaching with rubrics: The good, the bad, and the ugly. College Teaching 53 (1), 27–30.
Bernier, R. (2004). Making yourself indispensible by helping teachers create rubrics. CSLA Journal, 27(2), 24–25.
Bresciani, M.J., Zelna, C.L., & Anderson, J.A. (2004). Assessing student learning and development: A handbook for practitioners. National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Callison, D. (2000). Rubrics. School Library Media Activities Monthly, 17(2), 34–36, 42.
Campbell, C., & Collins, V. L. (2007). Identifying essential topics in general and special education introductory assessment textbooks. Educational Measurement, Issues and Practice, 26, 9–18.
Costa, D. S. J., Mullan, B. A., Kothe, E. J., & Butow, P. (2010). A web-based formative assessment tool for masters students: a pilot study. Computers &
Djemari, M., (1996). Penilaian Unjuk Kerja Sebagai Usaha Meningkatkan Kemampuan Sumber Daya Manuasia, Pidato pada Upacara Dies Natalis XXXII, IKIP Negeri Yogyakarta.
Hall, E., Salmon, S., (2003). Chocolate chip cookies and rubrics, helping students understand rubrics in inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children 35 (4), 8–11.
Hart, D. (1994). Authentic assessment:A handbook for educators. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.
Isaacson, J., Stacy, A., (2009). Rubrics for clinical evaluation: objectifying the subjective experience. Nurse Education in Practice 9 (2), 134–140.
Knight, J., Allen, S., Tracy, D., (2010). Using six sigma methods to evaluate the reliability of a teaching assessment rubric. The Business Review, Cambridge 15 (1), 1–6.
Kohn, A., (2006). The trouble with rubrics. English Journal 95 (4), 12–15.
Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4–16.
Linn, R.L., (1996). “ Performance assessment”. Journal educational Research. Vol 3, No. 23. p 9.
Luft JA (1999) Rubrics: Design and use in science teacher education. J Sci Teacher Educ 10(2):107–121
Lunney, M., Sammarco, A., (2009). Scoring rubric for grading students' participation in online discussions. CIN: Computers, Informatics Nursing 27 (1), 26–31.
Marriott, P. (2009). Students’ evaluation of the use of online summative assessment on an undergraduate financial accounting module. British Journal of Educational Tech-nology, 40, 237–254.
McColskey, W., & O'Sullivan, R. (1993). How to assess student performance in science:Going beyond multiple-choice tests. Greensboro: SouthEastern Re¬gional Vision for Education, University of North Carolina.
Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 25,
Montgomery, K. (2000). Classroom rubrics: Systematizing what teachers do naturally. The Clearing House, 73(6), 324-328.
Moskal, B. M. (2000). Scoring rubrics: What, when and how? Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation.
Moskal, B., Leydens, J., (2000). Scoring rubrics development: validity and reliability. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation 7 (10)
Newell, J., Dahm, K., Newell, H., (2002). Rubric development and inter-rater reliability issues in assessing learning outcomes. American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition (Session 2613).
Popham WJ (1995) What’s wrong- and what’s right-with rubrics. Educ Leadership 55(2):72–75
Popham, W. J. (2009). Assessment literacy for teachers: Faddish or fundamental? Theory Into Practice, 48(1), 4–11.
Popham, W.J. (2003). Test better, teach better: The instructional role of assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Popham, W.J. (2005). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Spence, L., (2010). Discerning writing assessment: insights into an analytical rubric. Language Arts 87 (5), 337–350.
Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: the absence of assessment FOR learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 758–765.
Suskie, L., (2009). Assessing student learning: a common sense guide, 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Tierney, R., & Simon, M. (2004). What’s still wrong with rubrics: Focusing on the consistency of performance criteria across scale levels. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(2),
Truemper, C., (2004). Using scoring rubrics to facilitate assessment and evaluation of graduate-level nursing students. The Journal of Nursing Education 43 (12), 562–564.
Wang, T. H. (2007). What strategies are effective for formative assessment in an e-learning environment? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23,171–186.
Wiliam, D., & Black, P. (1996). Meanings and consequences: A basis for distinguishing formative and summative functions of assessment? British Educational Research Journal, 22,537–548.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
