Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Journal

ANALISIS BUTIR SOAL MATA PELAJARAN PENGANTAR ADMINISTRASI PERKANTORAN

Economic Education Analysis Journal · Vol. 5 No. 1 (2016)

ISSN
2502-356X, 2252-6544
Published
2016-04-07
Publisher
Universitas Negeri Semarang
Language
eng

Abstract

Tujuan yang ingin dicapai untuk mengetahui kualitas soal UAS bentuk pilihan ganda dan uraian secara kuantitatif dan dapat terdeteksi soal yang baik dan jelek.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu metode kuantitatif deskriptif. Pengumpulan data menggunakan dokumentasi, wawancara, dan observasi. Analisis data untuk mendeteksi kualitas soal yang baik dan jelek yaitu dengan program Anates 4.0.5.Hasil analisis kuantitatif reliabilitas soal pilihan ganda sebesar 0,68 artinya soal tidak reliabel. Tingkat kesukaran: 1(5%) butir soal sangat sukar, 2 (10%) butir soal sukar, 11 (55%) butir soal sedang, 5(25%) butir soal mudah, dan 1(5%) butir soal sangat mudah. Daya pembeda: 7(35%) butir soal sangat baik, 7 (35%) butir soal baik, 1(5%)butir soal cukup, dan 5(25%) butir soal sangat jelek. Fungsi distraktor: 15(18,75%) tidak berfungsi, dan 65 (81,25%) berfungsi. Soal uraian memiliki reliabilitas sebesar 0,70 berarti reliabel. Tingkat kesukaran: 0(0%) butir soal sangat sukar dan sangat mudah, 2(20%) butir soal sukar, 6(60%) butir soal sedang, dan 2(20%) butir soal mudah. Daya pembeda: 0(0%) butir soal sangat baik dan sangat jelek, 3(30%) butir soal baik, 7 (70%) butir soal cukup.The purpose who want to reach to know about the quality of that multiple item test and essay and then can detect good and bad item.The method was used in this research is descriptive quantitative method. Collecting data use documentation, interview, and observation and then the analysis data for detecting the quality of good and bad item using a program Anates 4.0.5.The result of the quantitative analysis showed that the reliability of the test multiple choice was 0,68, it was not reliable. The difficulty level of one item (5%) very difficult,two items (10%) were difficult, eleven items (55%) were moderate, five items (25%) were easy, and one items (5%) very easy. The discrimination of seven items (35%) was very good, seven items(35%) were good, one item (5%) were satisfactory, and five items (25%) were not good. The distractor function offife teen (18,75%) were not functioned and sixty five (81,25%) were functioned. Items essay have a reliability was 0,70, it was reliable. The difficulty level of 0 item (0%) very difficult and very easy, twoitems (20%) were difficult, six items (60%) were moderate, two items (20%) were easy. The discrimination of 0 item (0%) was very good and very not good, three items (30%) were good, seven items (70%).Â

Collaboration network of the authors

40 authors · 54 co-authorship links · showing the 40 most connected

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • IPB University
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Hengky PramusintoAffiliation unknown3
Marimin MariminIPB University2
Bestari Dwi HandayaniAffiliation unknown2
Teguh Hardi RaharjoAffiliation unknown1
Aan IkhsanantoAffiliation unknown1
Zulfatun Ni'mahAffiliation unknown1
SyarifuddinAffiliation unknown1
SutarAffiliation unknown1
Srigati SrigatiAffiliation unknown1
Sri Muji SusiloAffiliation unknown1
Anggita Gilang PertiwiAffiliation unknown1
Dwi Endah PrasetyoAffiliation unknown1
Eri KhoiriyahAffiliation unknown1
Farih MansurAffiliation unknown1
Ade RustianaAffiliation unknown1
Hidayah LatifahAffiliation unknown1
Harnanik HarnanikAffiliation unknown1
Mulyani SeptiAffiliation unknown1
S.Martono S.MartonoAffiliation unknown1
Ariesa PrihatantiAffiliation unknown1
Gading PuspaningtyasAffiliation unknown1
Muhsin MuhsinAffiliation unknown1
Hasni RahmawatiAffiliation unknown1
Muwartiningsih MuwartiningsihAffiliation unknown1
Lova LoveianaAffiliation unknown1
Moh Lutfi FadilAffiliation unknown1
Siti NurkhalimahAffiliation unknown1
Saptiana Nata EkaAffiliation unknown1
Masasti SuciAffiliation unknown1
Ana Mariska WulansariAffiliation unknown1
Nita RahmawatiAffiliation unknown1
Zuhdan Kamal AbdillahAffiliation unknown1
Dewi Cahyani PurwaningsihAffiliation unknown1
Eka WidhiyartiAffiliation unknown1
Elmawati ElmawatiAffiliation unknown1
Nur’aini Diah SariAffiliation unknown1
Yulita RahmaniaAffiliation unknown1
Toni PrayogoAffiliation unknown1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

Metadata source: OAI-PMH (metadata jurnal) https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/eeaj/oai, first harvested 5 Nov 2026, last seen 5 Nov 2026.
Original metadata (oai_dc)
<oai_dc:dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/  http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
	<dc:title xml:lang="en-US">ANALISIS BUTIR SOAL MATA PELAJARAN PENGANTAR ADMINISTRASI PERKANTORAN</dc:title>
	<dc:creator>Rahmasari, Dias</dc:creator>
	<dc:creator>Ismiyati, Ismiyati</dc:creator>
	<dc:description xml:lang="en-US">Tujuan yang ingin dicapai untuk mengetahui kualitas soal UAS bentuk pilihan ganda dan uraian secara kuantitatif dan dapat terdeteksi soal yang baik dan jelek.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu metode kuantitatif deskriptif. Pengumpulan data menggunakan dokumentasi, wawancara, dan observasi. Analisis data untuk mendeteksi kualitas soal yang baik dan jelek yaitu dengan program Anates 4.0.5.Hasil analisis kuantitatif reliabilitas soal pilihan ganda sebesar 0,68 artinya soal tidak reliabel. Tingkat kesukaran: 1(5%) butir soal sangat sukar, 2 (10%) butir soal sukar, 11 (55%) butir soal sedang, 5(25%) butir soal mudah, dan 1(5%) butir soal sangat mudah. Daya pembeda: 7(35%) butir soal sangat baik, 7 (35%) butir soal baik, 1(5%)butir soal cukup, dan 5(25%) butir soal sangat jelek. Fungsi distraktor: 15(18,75%) tidak berfungsi, dan 65 (81,25%) berfungsi. Soal uraian memiliki reliabilitas sebesar 0,70 berarti reliabel. Tingkat kesukaran: 0(0%) butir soal sangat sukar dan sangat mudah, 2(20%) butir soal sukar, 6(60%) butir soal sedang, dan 2(20%) butir soal mudah. Daya pembeda: 0(0%) butir soal sangat baik dan sangat jelek, 3(30%) butir soal baik, 7 (70%) butir soal cukup.The purpose who want to reach to know about the quality of that multiple item test and essay and then can detect good and bad item.The method was used in this research is descriptive quantitative method. Collecting data use documentation, interview, and observation and then the analysis data for detecting the quality of good and bad item using a program Anates 4.0.5.The result of the quantitative analysis showed that the reliability of the test multiple choice was 0,68, it was not reliable. The difficulty level of one item (5%) very difficult,two items (10%) were difficult, eleven items (55%) were moderate, five items (25%) were easy, and one items (5%) very easy. The discrimination of seven items (35%) was very good, seven items(35%) were good, one item (5%) were satisfactory, and five items (25%) were not good. The distractor function offife teen (18,75%) were not functioned and sixty five (81,25%) were functioned. Items essay have a reliability was 0,70, it was reliable. The difficulty level of 0 item  (0%) very difficult and very easy, twoitems (20%) were difficult, six items (60%) were moderate, two items (20%) were easy. The discrimination of 0 item (0%) was very good and very not good, three items (30%) were good, seven items (70%). </dc:description>
	<dc:publisher xml:lang="en-US">Universitas Negeri Semarang</dc:publisher>
	<dc:date>2016-04-07</dc:date>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
	<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion</dc:type>
	<dc:type xml:lang="en-US">Peer-reviewed Article</dc:type>
	<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
	<dc:identifier>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eeaj/article/view/10007</dc:identifier>
	<dc:source xml:lang="en-US">Economic Education Analysis Journal; Vol 5 No 1 (2016): Economic Education Analysis Journal</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2502-356X</dc:source>
	<dc:source>2252-6544</dc:source>
	<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
	<dc:relation>https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/eeaj/article/view/10007/6474</dc:relation>
</oai_dc:dc>