Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Assignment 2
An Evaluation of Indonesian
National Examination
Table of Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
Overview of Indonesian National Examination ...................................................................................... 1
Historical of Indonesian standardized examination ........................................................................... 1
Defining Indonesian National Examination and Its Purposes ............................................................. 2
UN Characteristic ................................................................................................................................ 3
The Impact of UN .................................................................................................................................... 3
Positive impact of UN ......................................................................................................................... 4
Negative impact of UN ........................................................................................................................ 4
Fairness, Reliability and Validity of UN ............................................................................................... 6
Suggestion for Indonesian National Examination ................................................................................... 7
Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 9
Reference ................................................................................................................................................ 9
Appendix ............................................................................................................................................... 11
An Evaluation of Indonesian National
Examination
Introduction
There are major controversies in implementing the national examination. This can be seen
from the various media such as television, newspaper and internet arguing whether such
exams are beneficial. The policy makers believe that by establishing such examinations,
teachers will be pushed to teach better and students will be motivated to learn more
(Shepard, 1991). However, there is no guarantee this examination will ensure high quality
instruction and greater students learning.
This paper discussion is organized in three parts. The first part is an overview of the
Indonesian national examination. The second part describes the impact of the national
examination in the Indonesian context. The third part presents the suggestion solution from
my perspective in implementing the national examination in Indonesia.
In this section a brief history of the national examination in Indonesia and its purposes will be
discussed as well as the characteristic of Indonesian national testing.
The national examination has become a dominant feature in the Indonesian educational
system. It has been implemented for almost five decades. Afrianto (2008:1) explains that
the first standardized examination was held in Indonesia in 1965 and called “Ujian Negara”
(State exam). This exam was practiced until 1975 and measured almost all subjects that are
The national examination- known as UN- is a standardized test 2 which is done nationally to
measure and assess the learners’ competency in particular subjects in primary and
secondary education (Kemdiknas, n.d.). Clause 3 of the Decree No. 75/2009 from the
ministry of education states four purposes for conducting the UN. Firstly, mapping the
competency and quality of Indonesian national education; secondly, determination of
students graduation from one education level; thirdly, selection basis into the next
education level; and lastly, a basic supervising and providing support to a particular school
due to an effort to improve the education quality (Permendiknas, 2009). The vice president
of Indonesia, Boediono, currently said that “the objective of the National Examination (UN)
is to raise the standard of education in the country. It is intended to measure the level of
their scholastic abilities and to improve their standard” (Embassy of Indonesia, 2011).
The UN practice in Indonesia is conducted three times after the completion of each level of
education: primary-grade 6, lower secondary-grade 9 and upper secondary-grade 12
(SEAMEO, 2001). Those exams differ from the exam for entering the higher education which
also done nationally. Thus, if Indonesian students want to have a full education, they have
to sit in four different exams. This situation of course is really difficult for students because
all they have to do is prepare their selves for the examination.
Focusing on the characteristic of upper secondary UN, one of the main features is that the
government uses the “minimum threshold” for the students to achieve in order to pass the
examination. This threshold, commonly known as a passing grade is increased year by year.
In the beginning year of the UN implementation, the minimum score was 3.01 (within the
scale 1-10) for each subject. This mean, to pass the exam, the students have to have 30.1%
correct answers to get 3.01 (out of 10). This threshold then increased to 5.01 in 2006
(Afrianto, n.d). In 2008, it increased to 5.25 and based on the decree No. 75/2009 clause 20,
the government stated the average minimum score is at 5.50 with a minimum score of 4.00
for 2 subjects and 4.25 for other subjects-6 subjects in total (Permendiknas, 2009). These
increments have the purpose of increasing the quality of the students and also increasing
the national education competencies (Pikiran Rakyat Online, 2008).
Since there are serious consequences from the UN result, this national testing could be
categorized as a high stakes testing. Hubber (2011a:2 ) defines high stakes testing as “a
testing program whose result have important consequences for students, teachers, school
and districts which could includes promotion, certification, graduation, denial or approval“.
The Impact of UN
As UN is a very high stakes test, it is believe that such exam could have a significant effect on
the education system. Many arguments that the UN has had negative impacts on students’
Positive impact of UN
There are a number of important advantages of applying the high-stakes testing. National
examination “engenders a degree of national homogeneity in educational standards and
practice” (Madaus, 1991:229). Madaus also explains that this kind of testing influences
curriculum, teaching and learning in desirable ways. Hence, high-stakes testing can lead to a
focus instruction and also will give students and teachers a specific aim to achieve. This is
highly relevant to the Indonesian situation with its large area to control. UN can assure that
every student would have the same education. It also could trigger a motivational force for
students and teachers. A fear of achieving a low score which could lead to failure would
motivate the learners to study harder and teachers to teach better (Shepard, 1991).
However at some point this situation will be misleading which will be discussed in the next
section.
Negative impact of UN
The controversies of having UN have become a major focus since it was first implemented,
especially in achieving the minimum average score that use to make pass/fail decision. As
already mentioned, UN could motivate students to learn more and teachers to teach better,
but somehow this situation is misleading. Teachers have begun to “teach to the test”
(Darling-Hammond, 1991:221). Most of the class work is oriented toward recognizing the
The amount of oxygen gas used is 12 liter, how much is the volume SO3 gas will be
formed?
a. 6 liter
b. 12 liter
c. 18 liter
d. 24 liter
e. 36 liter
From the above example, clearly, most of the time, many teachers do the drill and practice
instruction to make the students understand how to solve the stochiometric equation. This
type of question could identify the misconceptions of students in their calculation of finding
out the amount of gas will be formed, however, this type of question only shows the
misconception of the basic knowledge, not the critical thinking skills as explained above.
Since there is a pressure to achieve high test scores for specific subjects, it could “narrow
the curriculum” (Madaus, 1991:228). Both teachers and students give high attention
exclusively to the material covered in the exam, thus the non-tested subjects as well as the
Another subsequent effect of the UN is the fear of failing which has encouraged some
students to cheat. The effect of failing not only affects students’ school life, as they are
required to sit in the high-school for another year and repeat the exam, but also leads to the
embarrassment in the society as students who fail will get a stupid stigma (The Glipmax
News, 2011). The situation worsens because this situation is supported by teachers and
principal. They are afraid of being judged of having a poor quality teacher or as a bad school
which will affect the schools’ reputation (Dienim, 2008).
Finally, implementing the UN only bring extravagance for the national budget. As we know
in Indonesia, there are three UN which are done in primary, lower and upper secondary
level. Thus, each year Indonesia has to do three national examinations. In 2009, the budged
spent for UN almost reached 255 billion rupiah (Lubis, 2010). It would be better if these
funds were used to improve the educational facilities in Indonesia.
We already know that the purpose of UN is for graduation. However, UN seems to ignore
one of the main assessment principles, namely that is should be fair, valid and reliable
(Hubber, 2011b; Killen, 2005). The aspect of fairness, reliability and validity of the UN are
the main concerns in evaluating whether Indonesia should implement this very high stakes
examination or not. The first consideration is UN only measures one skill -the cognitive. In
education, students’ performance comprises of three aspects: cognitive, psychomotor and
affective (Harti, n.d.). How can the government simply decide students’ achievement by
ignoring these two aspects? UN result could be “invalid and unreliable” since it cannot
represent the real ability of the students and seems to measure examination ability
Since the UN is a standardized examination that is done nationally, the type of questions
given to urban and rural areas will be similar. The controversy here is how can government
fail/pass the students when the quality of education in rural and urban areas is so different?
Urban areas might have better facilities and high qualified teachers compared to the schools
in rural areas (Dienim, 2008). The students in rural areas must be so aggrieved, not only
because they have poorer access to education facilities but also they have less chances of
passing the exam. It seems government does not consider the fairness of UN (Lubis, 2010).
Most of the exam candidates simply feel UN is an unfair test. If the government wants to
have a standardized examination, they should also standardize the school quality, teachers’
competence and the facilities needed in the learning and teaching process for each school in
Indonesia. Additionally, it is very not fair to make a fail/pass decision in three or four day
exam. Three years of learning in upper secondary with its effort seems to be ignored by the
government which is clearly they cannot accurately assess the actual progress of the
students (Dienim, 2008). I personally believe that the graduation decision should be decided
by the teacher and school who know the students’ progress and achievement from time to
time.
Considering all of the negative aspects of the UN, we need to re-think how the national
examination would not create such negative effects. There is a new reformulation from
government that is going to be applied this year. It is similar with a previous UN which
measures 6 specific subjects and has a minimum 5.50 average score. The difference is, the
average score not only depends on the exam but it also depends on the school exam (ujian
sekolah, abbreviated as US). The proportion of calculating the score is 60 percent of UN and
40 percent of US (Berita Fenomenal, 2011).
Reference
Darling-Hammond, L 1991. “The implication of testing policy for quality and equality”, The
Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 73, No. 3, pp. 220-225, accessed on 27 January 2011 from
JSTOR
Dienim 2008, “Ujian Nasional : Meningkatkan Standard Lulusan VS Kebohongan Publik”
accessed on 5 February 2011 from http://organisasi.org/ujian-nasional-
meningkatkan-standard-lulusan-vs-kebohongan-publik
Embassy of Indonesia 2011, ” VP: National exam intended to raise education standard”,
accessed on 4 February 2011 from http://embassyofindonesia.eu/vp-national-exam-
intended-to-raise-education-standard/
Hubber, P 2011a. ‘Week 5: high stakes and normalized testing”, Power point presentation.
Deakin University.
Killen, R 2005. Programming and assessment for quality teaching and learning. Thomson,
South Melbourne.
Lubis, R 2010, “Tinjauan historis pelaksanaan ujian nasional (UN) dampak bagi siswa dan
guru”, Proceeding Seinar International Pendidikan 2010 & Lomba Karya Ilmiah Guru
Sumatera Bagian Utara 2010 (NAD-Sumut-Riau-Kep. Riau-Sumbar).
Madaus, GF 1991. “The effect of important test on students: Implication for a national
examination system”,The Phi Delta Kappan, vol. 73, No. 3, pp. 226-231, accessed on
27 January 2011 from JSTOR
Depdiknas 2009. “UN SMP dan SMA April, UASBN SD Mei 2009”, Pusat Informasi dan Humas
Depdiknas. Accessed on 4 February 2011 from
http://www.diknas.go.id/headline.php?id=61
Permendiknas 2009, “Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Nomor 75 tahun 2009 tentang
Ujian Nasional”, accessed on 3 February 2011 from
http://www.depdiknas.go.id/produk_hukum/permen/permen_75_2009.pdf
Pikiran Rakyat Online 2008, “Standar nilai UN akan dinaikkan”, accessed on 4 February 2011,
from http://www.pikiran-rakyat.com/node/80683
Shepard, AL 1991. “Will national tests improve student learning?”,The Phi Delta Kappan, vol.
73, No. 3, pp. 232-238, accessed on 27 January 2011 from JSTOR
The Glipmax News 2011, “National Exam System Violates Student's Rights”, accessed on 4
February 2011 from http://glipmax.com/national-exam-system-violates-students-
rights.htm
Volante, L 2004, “Teaching to the test: what every educator and policy-maker should know”,
Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy, No. 35, accessed on 5
February 2011 from
http://www.umanitoba.ca/publications/cjeap/articles/volante.html
Wragg, EC 2001. Assessment and Learning in the Secondary School. RoutledgeFalmer, New
York.
1. The electron configuration of one element with atomic number 28 and mass number
59 is....
a. [Ar] 4s2 3d8
b. [Ar] 4s2 4p1
c. [Ar] 4s2 3d10 4p1
d. [Xe] 6s2 4f3
e. [Xe] 6s2 5d3