http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.

php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
STANDARDIZING EDUCATION THROUGH NATIONAL
EXAMINATION IN INDONESIA: THE REFLECTION
OF PREVIOUS EXAMINATION POLICY
Alfian
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
alfian@uinjambi.ac.id

Abstract
Article Info Indonesia is reforming its national education system in order to develop
Received: 29/03/2023 national educational quality. In response to this reform agenda the Ministry
Revised: 15/04/2023 of Education and Culture has carried out several changes, such as National
Accepted: 27/04/2023 Examination which is one of the core components for mapping this quality
standard. The objectives of examination) are based on the Ministry of
National Education decree focus on measuring student achievement to
inform educational quality at the provincial, regency, and school district
level. The reform attempts to enhance educational accountability. In
addition, the results of the examination were previously used as one of the
determinants for student graduation. The examination is a semi-high-stake
test where students’ success or failure raises psychological and ethical
issues. Furthermore, the use of examination as the instrument to inform the
educational quality is debatable. This paper aims to provide a critical
analysis of the assessment policy using standardized test) in Indonesia by
using Bacchi`s (2009) six questions of “what`s the problem represented to
be” (WPR). This framework is used to explore what is the problem
represented to be in standardized test examination policy in Indonesia
secondary high school. The psychological and the ethical issues as well as
an alternative assessment method for improving learning and educational
quality will also be addressed at the end of this paper.
Keywords: Examination, assessment, educational quality, semi-high-stake test, ethical and
psychological issues

1. INTRODUCTION
Assessment is defined as the process of gathering information and identifying student
performances and needs through variety of procedures and products aimed at understanding and
improving student learning (Linn and Miller, 2005). The function of assessment in education is to
measure the progress of students, to make decision for screening, to monitor the progress of a student,
to plan the instructional process and modification, and for accountability decisions (Salvia, Ysseldyke,
Bolt, 2010). In addition to these, assessment is also aimed at providing feedback for modifying teaching
and enhancing learning (Black & William, 1998) which will improve educational quality. In lines with
the purpose and the function of assessment in education as well as to response to the Law No. 20/2003,
chapter 26 article 57 about National Education System which requires the government to conduct
assessment in order to control educational quality nationwide and to provide educational accountability
to the public, the Minister of National Education and Culture (MoNEC) of Indonesia has established
the policy in on National Assessment.
The National Assessment policy has been established for years which were previously called
National Examination/. This examination policy was established to measure student achievement which
functions to inform educational quality at the provincial, regency, and school district level which reflect
the purposes of the national evaluation in Law No. 20/2003. In addition, the examination was also used
for decisive criteria to graduate from primary and secondary level of education (Permendikbud/
MoNEC decree No. 3/2013). However, the use of high-stake test examination result as an instrument

Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1312
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
to inform educational quality and the decisive criteria are contested among scholar, society and law
makers.
This paper aims to provide a critical analysis of the assessment policy using high stake test in
Indonesia by using Bacchi`s (2009) six questions of “what`s the problem represented to be” (WPR).
This framework is used to explore what is the problem represented to be in examination policy in
Indonesia secondary high school. The implementation of examination policy and the issue arising from
the examination will also be discussed. In addition, the possible solution to the improvement of learning
and educational quality through assessment will also be addressed at the end of this paper.

Previous National Assessment policy in Indonesia

The feature of national assessment policy within the Indonesia context has been a standardized
test. This kind of assessment has been administered for years which was called National Examination.
The national examination is constructed on the basis of multiple-choice items consisting of 40-50
questions for each subject. Students need to finish the test within the allocated time, around 120 minutes
for one subject. This means that students will sit for the national exam for at least three days in
accordance to the number of subjects tested in the examination.
Several subjects in the group of science and technology are tested depending on the educational
level of students. For example, there are three subjects that are assessed at the primary level, namely:
Mathematics, Indonesian language and natural science. At the junior secondary level, there are four
subject assessed, Indonesia language, Mathematics, English Language and Natural Science. Lastly,
there are basically six subjects tested for senior secondary level depending on their major either natural
science or social science or language. However, all majors either Natural science, Social science,
Language or Vocational area or Religious school are required to take Indonesia language, English
language, and Mathematics examination. Beside these subjects, the other three subjects are depending
on their major, for example natural Science major consists of Physic, Chemistry, and biology, Social
science consist of economy, sociology, and geography subjects, Language Major requires to take
Indonesia Literature, Anthropology, and Other Foreign language, and Vocational level is only required
take extra one competency test which is a practicum test, and Religious school (MA) needs to take three
other subjects related to Islamic religion (BNSP, 20013).
In terms of the implementation of the national examination, it is carried out as one of the
requirements for completing each education level. The first implementation of the examination was
conducted before completion primary level at grade 6. The second implementation of the examination
was conducted before the completion of junior secondary level at grade 9 and the last implementation
of the examination was conducted before completing the senior secondary level at grade 12. Currently,
the national examination result is for informing educational quality and but not for the decisive criteria
for graduation from certain level.
Ten year ago,as a decisive criterion, the government uses the minimum threshold for students to
achieve in order to graduate from certain level. In 2013 of the examination, the minimum threshold for
senior secondary level is 5.5. However, this passing grade was not solely determined whether a student
can graduate or not from certain level, but the graduation criteria will be determined by combining the
examination grade with school grade in which 40% is contributed from school exam grade and 60 %
are taken from the examination grade (BNSP, 2013).

2. METHOD
What’s the ‘problem’ of examination policy represented to be?
The national examination policy represents problem in some areas of education based on its
function. There is accountability agenda that the government has provided education to all citizens and
the government ensures that the educational standards have been achieved. Another agenda is
Educational Quality improvement. The quality improvement agenda explicitly stated that the
government requires improving educational quality and fairness nationally. In this policy, the
government ensures that the entire educational institution nationwide meets the quality standard and the
student have access to a good quality of education as a mean to develop their intellectual, social, and
personal potential to the highest level ((Nieto & Bode, 2008) cited in Glimps & Ford (2008). From the
Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1313
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
quality improvement agenda, there is a need to map educational quality nationwide by conducting
assessment in the form of National Examination. It is expected that the examination result can inform
educational quality nationwide. From this perspective, the problem is represented to be: Current
education quality is low which means that students are inadequate in achieving the quality standard.
Therefore, examination is required to be conducted to improve the educational quality.
n this paper, the quality improvement agenda will be the focus of the analysis. The government
agenda for improving educational quality by using the examination result is contested by scholar, stake
holder and society. Some argue that the examination result can be used to inform educational quality
nationwide which will help the government to improve educational quality. On the other hand, most
people argue that the examination is a high stake test which has little effect to the improvement of
learning. There is a little information about studensstudents’ achievement could be shown from this test
which is similar to an assessment of learning which assesses student for the purpose of judging the
achievement. Moreover, the examination only assesses lower cognitive domain of students although it
allows for an efficient means of testing large amounts of content ( Pugh, et al., 2016), thus it definitely
cannot be used to inform the quality of education. These contestations of examination policy will be
further discussed in the in this paper.

What presuppositions or assumptions underlie this representation of the ’problem?

The examination policy is based on the “deep seated assumption” that the educational quality can
be measured by assessing the student’s achievement using a specific assessment method. In this sense,
it was believed that the examination result can show the student achievement which will be able to
inform educational quality. However, the examination is a standardized test categorized into high stake
test which shows a little information about student’s achievement. High stake test data constitutes
“degrees and qualifications are routinely mis-manipulated, tend to be unreliable, and give incomplete
and uninformative pictures of student’s achievement” (Knight, 2002. p. 107). This means that
examination does not guarantee that students learning can be measured and enhanced because it relies
on the measurement and grades. It might be able to determine measurement outcome, however, it is
not clear what the results actually signify (Hanson, 2000). Therefore, the information about student
achievement should be sought through variety of assessments (Linn and Miller, 2005). In this sense,
the process and procedure in collecting information involves several methods of assessment, such as
portfolio, test, project, et (Alfian, et al, 2022).
Another assumption from the problem representation is that standardized test are able to assess
three domains of educational purposes, Cognitive: mental skill (knowledge), Affective: growth in
feelings or emotional areas (attitude), and Psychomotor: Manual or Physical skills (skills) which are
absolutely important for student live. These all three domains including personality development,
communication, initiative and creativity are very important because this reflect how people think, learn,
grow, feel and act (Ferro 1993). These areas are also essential for student to compete in the global
market. However, the examination only covers intellectuality without considering personality
development, communication, initiative and creativity (Munandar, 2012). This means that the other two
domains are neglected because these domains are difficult to measure and assess using traditional
summative testing like the examination (Knight, 2002). So, in order to see the educational quality, we
should consider and assess these three domains.

3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

How has this representation of the ‘problem’ come about?
A good educational quality will produce strong human resources who are ready to compete and
benefit economically in the global market as the impact of globalisation. Stewart (1996) states that good
human resources will also get benefit in growing the economy in the globalisation era. The students as
prospective human resources have been trying to develop their knowledge and skills for this global
competition. One way to improve students’ skill and knowledge is through providing a good quality of
education. However, it is not all Indonesian have access to a good quality of education. In another
words, the quality of education in urban area and in rural has a very significant differences in terms of
educational facilities and resources. In this case, there will be discrepancy of human resources between
Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1314
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
rural and urban area. As a result, the economy and the readiness to compete in the globalisation of urban
area are much better prepared than those in rural areas.
In term of human resources quality, it can be seen from the development of human resources or
Human development Index (HDI) of a country. HDI is a summary of human development which implies
the progress of a country based on several factors such as life expectancy, education, literacy, and gross
domestic product per capita/ health, education and income (United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP, 2013)). During the period of 1980 and 2012 Indonesia`s HDI experienced different degrees of
progress toward increasing. During this time, there were 49 % increases or average annual increase is
about 1.3 % ( HDR, 2013 ). This means that during the period of 1980`s, the Indonesian`s HDI was
very low which indicated the low quality of education. According to the UNDP report in 2013,
Indonesia is ranked 121 from 186 countries which is the lowest human development index (HDI) among
the neighbouring countries, such as Philippines 114), Thailand (103), and Malaysia (64). Since
education is one of the components in HDI, this means that the quality of Indonesia education is
considered the lowest among their neighbouring countries. This trend fosters the low quality of human
resources.
In response to the low HDI result and the need for global competition, the Indonesian
government has been trying to improve education quality in order to develop qualified human resources.
As a consequence, the government had made standardization of educational quality nationwide.
Therefore, there was a need for using specific standardization for measuring student’s achievement.
The government used the examination as an instrument to inform educational quality in order to
improve the quality of education. It was believed that the examination was one of the assessment
methods that is considerably able to measure the progress of students, to map educational quality
nationwide and improve the quality of education in general. By using at the examination result, the
government are able to diagnose the strength and the weaknesses of the educational program that has
been launched.

What is left unproblematic in this problem representation? Where are the silences? Can the
‘problem’ be thought about differently?
The government agenda in improving educational quality through the national examination was
clearly represented and it ignores the learning process. Consequently, there are those who are neglected
in the representation of the examination policy. There are also issues and perspectives that are silenced
in the problem representation. Teacher right to do assessment has been ignored and the assessment
objectives were not considered carefully. Teacher right to do the assessment is presented on the Law of
National Education System no. 20/2003, article 58. This law emphasized that the students ` learning
process, progress, and remedy is assessed by the teacher. The construction of examination questions
did not involve the teachers. It was designed by the central government. In this case, teacher right to
assess the student has been ignored by the government. Furthermore, the process of learning for three
years also ignored since the final examination result was used as decisive criteria. This kind of
assessment is similar to the notion of assessment of learning which has a little impact to the student’s
achievement and learning (Earl, 2003).
Assessment of learning in some cases constitutes high stake testing in which determines whether
students can pass or fail. Hubber (2011a. p2.) defined high stakes test as “a testing program whose result
have important consequences for students, teacher, and school and restricts which could include
promotion, certification, graduation, denial or approval”. High stake also provides little improvement
of the knowledge or skill because there is a little feedback that students received from the test. So,
there will be limited potential for improving for learning, skill, and or knowledge (Marchant 2004).
High stake tests also provides the effect to the teachers. High stake test which is associated with
standardized testing force teacher to change their teaching strategies, such as drilling to increase
students test scores (Cimbricz, 2002; Paris & Urdan, 2000). Furthermore, Teachers tend to use the
material for teaching that are similar to the testing and spent more time in preparing students for the test
( Marchant, 2004). As a result, the topics which are not to be tested are ignored by teacher (Cimbricz,
2002). The UN has also caused the psychological issues among teacher and students which will lead
to the ethical issue that will be discussed in next section.
Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1315
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
What effects are produced by this representation of the ‘problem’?
Several effects may be produced from the problem representation, such as the government
objectives to improve educational quality through the national examination might not be fulfilled, the
assessment objective to improve learning and teaching process may not be achieved, and the current
assessment policy have provided an ethical and psychological impact to the teacher and student. One
of the effects resulted from the problem representation is that the teaching and learning process cannot
be improved, as a result educational quality will remain low. The nature of assessment objectives is to
plan the instructional process and modification which is very important for better learning (Salvia,
Ysseldyke, Bolt, 2010). In planning the better teaching and learning, there should be information which
is gathered through assessment in which its primarily concerned is providing feedback information to
the teacher and students that students and teacher need to interpret (Hattie, 2003). The examination
objective did not accumulate this purpose of assessment since it promotes assessment of learning.
Assessment of learning is to certify learning and report to the students and parent about the students’
progress. The purpose of this assessment is to make decision about student’s future program or
placement (Earl, 2003). This assessment relies on the summative test which provides several
disadvantages, such as there is no feedback to the students and teacher which means that student hardly
interpret their leaning about where to go, how to go and where next to. (Hattie, 2003).
The implementation of examination policy for improving the educational quality has also
affected teacher and students psychologically which will lead them to the ethical issues. According to
Syahril (2007), students were worried about their mental and physical condition during the days of the
exam. Students were very stressful before, during and after the exam. A very sad story as the impact of
national examination was coming from the capital city of Indonesia and Bali. In Jakarta, a student was
found dead after hanging himself because of feeling frustration in facing UN (TVone, 2013). Another
student in Bali was also found dead hanging himself after knowing that he was failed in the final
examination. These psychological impacts lead the teachers and school administrator to the unethical
way to solve the examination problem.
A number of teachers and school administrators were reported to facilitate cheating on the
examination. There are several ways which were used by the teachers and school administrators in
facilitating cheating. The first, teacher and school administrator were reported to leak the answer to the
students before the day of the exam. The second, the answer keys were distributed during the exam by
using small paper, text messaging to students’ mobile phone, writing on the whiteboard or reading
aloud. The third, after the exam, the teachers revise students answer on the answer sheet before it was
sealed and sent to the party who was in charge in assessing the test (Syahril, 2007). These effects of the
representation of the problem were widely reported in the media.

How/ where has this representation of the ’problem’ been produced, disseminated and defended?
How could it be questioned, disrupted and replaced?
The representation of the problem in the examination policy has led the researcher, educator, and
scholar and stake holder to conduct studies in the area of examination and had been reported in the form
of articles (eg, Sulistyo, 2009; Syahril, 2007; Umam, 2011; Musthopa, 2004). These representations
of the problems are also reproduced in the magazine, newspaper and social media TV, radio, Wiki and
personal blog etc. These people have debated the represent of problem in the examination policy.
Several scholars who support the implementation of examination had written in the Journal and other
media about the important of national examination. Sulistyo (2009) strongly argues that the government
commitment to use the national examination to improve educational quality was reasonable. However,
he agrees with some of ideas that final examination cannot be used as graduation criteria. This argument
is supported by the former Vice president of Indonesia, Jusuf Kalla who believes that examination was
very important to measure student achievement (Kompas.com, 2013).
For those who were against the implementation of examination also expressed their opinion. A
headline article in The Jakarta Post (2013), one of English newspapers in Indonesia, entitled “House
calls for Exams annulment” reported that several law makers asked the legality of the implementation
of the national examination. For example, a lawmaker Marlinawati of the United Development Party
stated “Articles 57 and 58 of the law on national education grant school, and not the government, the
Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1316
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
authority to evaluate the learning outcomes of the students. Thus holding the national exams is against
the law”. This statement implicitly states that the examination were considerably invalid instrument to
show the student’s achievement. It is the school or the teacher assessment or formative assessment that
can clearly reveal the student achievement. Another article entitled “ the national exam is a violation
of children`s rights” at the same newspaper reported that the Indonesian Commission on Child
Protection (KPAI) emphasized that UN had fail to test the competence of students and it restricted the
children right to develop themselves. This commission also stated that the examination proposal has
triggered the stress and anxiety among students, teachers and parents.
Looking at the debate around the examination policy, the question might arise about what kind
of assessment is considerably eligible to improve learning that could the beneficial backwash to improve
the educational quality. To answer these questions Earl (2003) has emphasized moving assessment of
learning to assessment for learning. The final examination emphasized on the important of assessment
of learning in which it is used for making judgement of students. This mean does not mean that
assessment of learning is less important. It is also important, however, it provide a little impact to the
improvement of student quality, therefore, it is suggested the implementation of assessment for learning
and assessment as learning as an alternative way of replacing the examination policy.
It seems that assessment for learning may be appropriate with the main purpose of assessment
which is to improve students’ performance and improve learning which will increase the quality of
education for better human resources since it offers many advantages. According to Earl (2003),
assessment for learning is ongoing, diagnostic, and formative assessment through classroom assessment
in which teacher collects information or data by using varieties of resource, portfolio, observation, and
test, etc. This assessment occurs frequently in the middle of learning as a formative assessment. It is an
interactive assessment in which teachers also provide feedback to scaffold next steps of learning which
can enhance learning. This assessment is also conducted repeatedly as the continuous assessment will
improve performance and behaviour (Ridderinkhof, Ullsperger et al. 2004).

4. CONCLUSION
The government Policy in assessment methods using standardized test as a way to improve the
educational quality had been contested among scholar, society and law makers. Many believe that
national examination was inadequate methods to inform educational quality because it is a standardized
test which are considered a less valid instrument to show students achievement. This kind of assessment
may have a little impact to enhance classroom learning. In addition, the examination was only testing
low cognitive students while education quality should be seen from three areas of educational domains,
affective, psychomotor, and cognitive. On the other hand, some people still believed that examination
were considerably an appropriate instrument to inform educational quality nationally although it had
produced psychological and ethical effects to the teacher and students.
Government with their examination policy was similar to the assessment of learning which is
only looking at the final result of learning without considering the process of learning. This kind of test
cannot show the students achievement which reflects the quality of education. Therefore, it is suggested
that current trend in the assessment tend to adopt assessment for learning which accumulate classroom
assessment. Finally, the fanla examination was still required to be conducted as one of the instruments
to standardise and to inform educational quality although this instrument should be utilized with many
others instruments that might be representative to inform the quality standard of education. However,
it was suggested that the examination should not be not be used as a graduation criterion.

REFERENCES
[1] Alfian, A., Rasyid, M. N. A., Habibi, A., Noprival, N., & Yusuf, M. (2022). Classroom
Assessment Practices of EFL Lecturers with Current Curriculum Implementation: Where
Policy Meets Practice. REiLA: Journal of Research and Innovation in Language, 4(3),
320-334. https://doi.org/10.31849/reila.v4i3.11005
[2] Amrein, A. T., & Berliner, D. C. (2003). The effects of high-stakes testing on student
motivation and learning [Electronic version]. Educational Leadership, 60 (5), 32.
Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1317
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
[3] Aritonang, M. S. (2013). House calls for exam annulment. Retrieved on June 2, 2013
from http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/04/27/house-calls-exams-annulment.html
[4] Black, P., & William, D. (1998). Inside the black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom
Assessment. Retrieved on June 5, 2013 from
http://flo.flinders.edu.au/pluginfile.php/551209/mod_resource/content/1/BlackWiliam_1998_Bl
ackBox.pdf
[5] Hattie, J. (2003). Formative and Summative Interpretations of Assessment Information. New
Zealand: The University of Auckland
[6] BNSP. (2003). Prosedur Operasi Standar. Retrieved on June 2, 2013 from
http://118.98.223.68/dokumen/un2013/POS-UN-SMP-SMA-SMK-dan-UNPK-Tahun-2013.pdf
[7] Boud, D. (2007). Reframing assessment as if learning were important. Rethinking assessment in
higher education: Learning for the longer term, 14-25.
[8] Earl, Lorna. (2003). Assessment as learning: using classroom Assessment to Maximise Students
Learning. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
[9] TVOne. (2013). Kabar Siang. Jakarta. Retrieved on June 1, 2013 from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUIQXUOdHuU
[10] Cimbricz, S. (2002). State-mandated testing and teachers’ beliefs and practice [Electronic
version]. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(2), 1-22.
[11] Ferro, T. R. (1993). "The influence of affective processing in education and training." New
Directions for Adult and Continuing Education 1993(59), 25-33.
[12] Glimps, B. J., & Ford, T. (2008). Using internet technology tools to teach about global diversity.
The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(2), 91-95.
[13] Hanson, F. (2000). How tests create what they are intended to measure. In A. Filler (Ed.).
Assessment: social practice and product (pp. 151-167). London: Routlledge Falmer
[14] Hubber, P (2011a). ‘Week 5: high stakes and normalized testing”, Power point presentation.
Deakin University.
[15] Hartwig, K. A. "Using a social justice framework to assess educational quality in Tanzanian
schools." International Journal of Educational Development (0).
[16] Herman, J., J. Dreyfus, et al. (1990). the effects of testing on teaching and learning. Los Angeles,
University of California
[17] HDR. (2013). Human development report 2013. Retrieved on June 4, 2013 from
http://hdrstats.undp.org/images/explanations/IDN.pdf
[18] Knight, P. (2002). The Achilles`s heel of quality: The assessment of students learning.
Quality in Higher Education, 8 (1), 107 – 115
[19] Kompas.com. (2013). JK: Jangan salahkan UN. Retrieved on June 5, 2013 from
http://edukasi.kompas.com/read/2013/04/23/18245226/twitter.com
[20] Lidice, A. and G. Saglam (2013). Using Students’ Evaluations to Measure Educational
Quality. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, (0), 1009-1015.
[21] Linn, R.L. & Miller, M.D. (2005). Measurement and assessment in teaching. New Jersey,
USA: Pearson Prentice Hall
[22] Marchant, G. J. (2004). What is at stake with high-stakes testing? A discussion of issues
and research Electronic version]. Ohio Journal of Science, 104 (2), 2-7.
[23] Musnandar, A. ( 2012). Letter: Problematic educational management. Retrieved on June 2, 2013
from http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/06/29/letter-problematic-educational-
management.html
[24] Paige, K., M. Chartres, et al. (2008). "Using teacher stories to reveal quality educational
practice: An Eastern Cape experience." International Journal of Educational
Development 28(5), 524-533.
[25] Paris, S. G., & Urdan, T. (2000). Policies and practices of high-stakes testing that
influence teachers and schools [Electronic version]. Issues in Education, 6(1), 83.

Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1318
http://infor.seaninstitute.org/index.php
JURNAL SCIENTIA, Volume 12 No 2, 2023 ISSN 2302-0059
[26] Permendikbud (2013). Peraturan menteri Pendidikan dan kebudayaan Republik
Indonesia tentang Kriteria kelulusan peserat didik dari satuan pendidikan... Retrieved on
June 6, 2013 from
http://pendidikan.jogjakota.go.id/files/Permendikbud%20No%203%20Th%202013.pdf
[27] Pugh, D., De Champlain, A., Gierl, M., Lai, H., & Touchie, C. (2016). Using cognitive
models to develop quality multiple-choice questions. Medical teacher, 38(8), 838-843.
[28] Rahmi, U. (n.d). An evaluation of Indonesian National Examination. Retrived on July,
2013 from http://www.scribd.com/doc/48858766/An-Evaluation-of-Indonesian-
National-Examination-By-Ulfa-Rahmi
[29] Ridderinkhof, K. R., M. Ullsperger, et al. (2004). The role of the medial frontal cortex in
cognitive control. Science Signaling 306, 443-447.
[30] Salvia, J., Ysseldyke, J., Bolt, S .(2010). Assessment: In Special and inclusive education.
Belmont: Wadsworth
[31] Shepard, L. A. (1989). Inflated Test score Gains: Is it Old Norms or teaching the test?’.
University of California, LA : Centre for the study of evaluation
[32] Sulistyo, G.H. (2009). English as a measurement standard in the national examination:
some grassroot`s voice. TEFLIN, 20 (1), 1-24
[33] Syahril, I. (2008). Standardized testing in Indonesia secondary school education: an
analysis on the Impact of national exit exam (2005-2007). Retrieved on 8 may 2013 from
http://iwansyahril.blogspot.com.au/2008_01_01_archive.html
[34] The Jakarta post. (2013). House calls for exams annualment. Retrieved on June 5 from
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/04/27/house-calls-exams-annulment.html
[35] Umam, C. (2011). National examination of English : Validity and reliability based `
[36] UNDP (2013). Human Development report (2013). Retrieved on 25/5/2012 from
http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/corporate/HDR/2013GlobalHDR/Englis
h/HDR2013%20Report%20English.pdf
[37] UU No 20. (203). Undang _ Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 20 Tahun
2003.Retrieved on June 2, 2013 from http://www.unpad.ac.id/wp-
content/uploads/2012/10/UU20-2003-Sisdiknas.pdf
[38] Wragg, EC 2001. Assessment and Learning in the Secondary School. RoutledgeFalmer,
NewYork.

Jurnal Scientia is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-
NC 4.0)
1319