47 THE INFLUENCE OF ASSESSMENT, SELF-EFICATION THROUGH STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES IN INDONESIAN LANGUAGE IJUDIN Universitas Negeri Jakarta ijudinspd@gmail.com ABSTRACT This study aimed to learn the results of Indonesian subject which used peer assessment and teacher assessment by the techniques of oral presentations at high school students on the level of different self-efficacy students. The sample was taken were 40 respondents. The data was collected by using an experimental method. Samples were obtained by using stratified random method or multistage random method. The design of treatment which was used was the analysis design treatment by level 2 x 2. The results were found that 1). The test results proved that the average of learning outcomes of Indonesian subject in a group of students who were given ratings by peers had significantly different results compared to the average of learning outcomes of Indonesian subject assessment who were given by the teacher. Keywords:Peers Assessment, teacher assessment, self-efficacy INTRODUCTION Based on developing learning theories, the center of learning no longer exists with the teacher but on the student. Various teaching methods place students as the main actors in the learning process. In this case the teacher is the facilitator. Thus the assessment process can also be done not only by the teacher but students can also be involved to participate in the assessment. In the alternative assessment mentioned that self-assessment and peer assessment can be done to obtain information about the results of teaching and learning. The assessment activities involving these students can be started since the assessment plan. The teacher and students form plans and carry out assessments. In this case students are given the opportunity to participate in determining assessment planning. Keith J. Topping in his article provides a definition of peer evaluation. According to him peer assessment as an arrangement in which individuals consider the amount, level, value, quality, or success of the product or the results of learning from peers of similar status. The productswhichcan be assessed may include writing, oral presentations, portfolios, test performance, or other skilled behavior. Peer assessments can be summative or formative. The goal of formative view presented here is to help students help each other in their other learning plan, identify strengths and weaknesses, target areas for corrective action, and develop metacognitive and other personal and professional skills. Peer feedback is available in larger volumes and with greater closeness than teacher feedback. (Topping, 2009) A good thing for increasing student potential in learning is student participation in assessment. Peer assessments are recognized as making their work better. This shows that peer assessment can produce higher quality student’swork. Students feel peer assessment has improved their work, students feel their work and their understanding of subjects improved. (Mulder, Pearce, & Good, 2014) Self-efficacy is a person's belief in his ability to complete a particular task. Bandura said that self-efficacy is an assessment of someone's ability to act in order mailto:ijudinspd@gmail.com to improve the performance. (Bandura, 2012) This opinion is also in line with the opinion of Luthans who said that self-efficacy is an individual's belief in his ability to mobilize his/her motivation, source of knowledge and the way in act so successfully in carrying out specific tasks in accordance with a context which has determinated. (Luthans, 2012 ) In line with the opinion above self-efficacy is one's belief in his ability to complete tasks to achieve his goals. Likewise, the same opinion was expressed by a psychologist Jennifer that the problem of self-efficacy is one's belief in his ability to perform special behaviors successfully. (Jennifer M. George, 2011) Each student has his own efficacy. This efficacy is not the same for every student. High self-efficacy is a high belief that a person has about his ability to do something. In someone with a high level of self-defication, self-confidence is also high and this will ultimately affect one's performance. Self-confidence in one's high abilities will help people to feel more calm and help people be able to concentrate better. In contrast, low self-efficacy is a low level of belief about someone's ability to do something. When a person has low self-confidence in his/her abilities, some of his/her energy is lost because he/she does not have the confidence and confidence that he/she is able to carry out the task. What can a person do when he/she does not have confidence in his/her abilities? Self-efficacy affects motivation both when individuals get rewards and when individuals do it of their own free will. The higher the self-efficacy, the greater the motivation and performance. Cherrington argues that self-efficacy is one's belief in his ability to carry out a specific task and in some ways has similarities with self-esteem and locus of control (Cherrington, 1994) The differences in the level of confidence in one's abilities possessed by these students will have differences in the results of the Indonesian language assessment. Two types of assessment that are experimented with will give two different results about the assessment of Indonesian in accordance with the level of self-confidence held by students. Variables that want to know the correlation is as formulated in the description of research objectives, namely to find out: 1. The differences in Indonesian learning outcomes between students which is given peer assessments and students which is given teacher ratings, 2. Interaction between types of assessment with self-efficacy on Indonesian language learning outcomes, 3. The difference between Indonesian learning outcomes and peer assessment and Indonesian learning outcomes in teacher assessment of students who have high self-efficacy, 4. The difference between Indonesian learning outcomes and peer assessment and Indonesian learning outcomes in teacher assessment of students who have low self- efficacy. METHOD This research was conducted in class X semester two in Bogor Regency. The research stages are divided into three stages which include the preparation phase, the experimental stage and the final stage. The preparation phase is in the form of research proposal preparation, the experimental stage in the form of 48| JISAE. Volume 6 Number 1 February 2020. 49 conducting experiments in schools and the final stage in the form of data processing and analysis followed by the preparation of research report. The approach in this study used a quantitative research approach. The quantitative approach is based on the philosophy of Positivism, whose studies emphasize objective phenomena that are studied quantitatively. The method used is a quasi-experimental method. The target population in this research is all high school students in Bogor Regency. In this study the sample was taken from a group of students in grade X. Sampling was done by multistage random sampling. Based on the sampling, four groups of students will be obtained as follows: (1) the first group is a group of students who have high self-efficacy by giving peer assessment A1B1, (2) the second group, is a group of students who have high self- efficacy by being given an assessment A2B1 teachers, (3) the third group is a group of students who have low self-efficacy with peer assessments given A1B2, and (4) groups of students who have low self-efficacy with A2B2 teacher ratings. Table 3.2 Distribution of Samples to Each Group According to Treatment Self Efficacy (B) Type of Assessment Amo unt (A1)Peer Assess ment Teache rRatin g (A2) HighSelf Efficacy (B1) 15 15 30 Low Self- Efficacy( B2) 15 15 30 Amount 30 30 60 Next is the treatment plan: Peer Assessment Teacher Assessment 1. 1. Conditioning each class to ensure that the class of samples to be treated is balanced. This is intended if there is a change after the experiment is only caused by the treatment not because of other factors. 2. Treatment in the form of 2. The class is given treatment in the form Peer Assessment Teacher Assessment assessments by peers. of teacher's assessment. 3. Researchers take data using written test instruments 3. Researchers take data using written test instruments Data analysis was performed covering two things, namely descriptive analysis and hypothesis testing. The first hypothesis testing used statistical analysis of Variance (Anava), while to test the second hypothesis used the analysis of the average difference test. The third and fourth hypotheses are used a one-party difference test analysis. To analyze the data collected, the two way Varian (Anava) analysis technique is designed by level 2 x 2, to see two things, namely, the main effect and the simple effect. Testing the main effect (main effect) to determine differences in the results of problem solving between students who are treated peer assessment and students who are treated teacher assessment. If it is tested that there is a significant difference, then the test is continued with the Tukey test to determine the different mean reliability. In other words, the treatment variables that cause a high response to the dependent variable. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Based on hypothesis testing, it proves that Indonesian learning outcomes in both treatments have significant differences. In the assessment by peers the average group of students has a higher value than the assessment by the teacher on students who have high self-efficacy. While the average group of students who were given an assessment by the teacher of Indonesian learning outcomes was higher than the average group of students who were rated by peers in a group of students who had low self-efficacy. The testing of the hypothesis in this study was caused by various factors and was explained as follows: 1. Average Learning Outcomes of Indonesian Students in Groups Graded by Peers and Average Learning Outcomes of Students Graded by Teachers. The results of data analysis using two-way ANAVA at the significance level α = 0.05, mentioned above, give the value of Fcount (Ft) = 4.12 greater than Ftable (Ft) = 4.04. This means that H0 is rejected. The test results prove that the average learning outcomes of Indonesian in groups of students who are rated by peers have significantly different results compared to the average learning outcomes of groups of students who are rated by teachers. The first hypothesis testing shows that the average score of Indonesian learning outcomes given a peer rating of 40.00 with a standard deviation of 2.42 is higher than the average score of student learning outcomes assessed by teachers that is equal to 35, 20 with deviations the standard is 2.27. Based on the test results, it is known that the application of assessments conducted by peers can more effectively improve student learning outcomes. Peer assessment techniques make students have to study again during the assessment 50| JISAE. Volume 6 Number 1 February 2020. Copyright ©LPPM Universitas Negeri Jakarta 51 process. When the students doing an assessment indirectly, they have to do learning again in the form of doing an assessment for their peers. Peer assessment can improve self-assessment, and can produce metacognitive benefits including: increased student responsibility and autonomy; development of evaluative skills; insight into assessment procedures and expectations for high quality work; students work harder with the knowledge that they will be assessed by their peers; The potential to provide increased levels of feedback without increasing demands on tutors; and pushes deeper than surface learning. In addition, peer assessments are recommended as a means of improving work skills. Another thing is that peer assessments can increase students' potential for learning in student participation in assessment. Peer assessments must be recognized that students have made their work better. This shows that peer assessment can produce higher quality student work. Students feel peer assessment has improved their work, students feel their work and their understanding of subjects improved. Peer assessments show the purpose of making the learning process more effective. That goal is as follows. First peer assessment as a means of social control. This can sometimes be used as a substitute for the teacher and as a preventative measure, to ensure that students do not become lazy because their presence will be noticed by their peers. The second objective is peer assessment as a means of goal evaluation. Using peer appraisal as an appraisal tool is the clearest practice in this regard, however, there is still substantial variation in the exact configuration of the appraisal setting, which leads to a more complex link to the concept of quality objectives. The relationship of peer assessment with staff assessment can take two forms. On the one hand, peer assessment is sometimes considered a partial substitute for staff assessment, but on the other hand, it is often part of a triangulation approach to assessment where student learning is reviewed from several data sources or with multiple assessors. The third goal of peer assessment as a means of learning goals. Although being used as a control tool might be considered as support for learning too, the paradigm shift from testing culture to assessment culture shows us that assessment can do more for learning support. Many scholars support the idea that peer assessment must also be considered a tool for learning. The fourth goal of peer assessment as learning to assess goals. Students learn to become assessors through peer assessment. This is learning on a meta- level, beyond the benefits of learning to directly receive feedback and assess the work of others. Learning-how-assessing is an important part of being a lifelong learner. Lifelong learners are faced with an assessment of the learning tasks they face throughout their lives. The fifth goal of peer assessment as an instrument of active participation in a goal. Students are allowed to know the purpose of the assessment carried out. Active student participation influences the direction of the purpose of the assessment conducted. Finally, we distinguish the fifth goal that is very different from other goals. In the previous section, student involvement in assessment always served a higher goal: ensuring that certain actions occurred or others were avoided, providing high quality assessment information. 2. Interaction between Assessments Made by Peers and Assessments Made by Teachers on Student Learning Outcomes in Indonesian Language Subjects The results of data analysis using two-way ANAVA at the significance level α = 0.05, mentioned above, give the value of Fcount (Ft) = 27.78 greater than Ftable (Ft) = 4.01. This means that there is a significant interaction between the types of assessment (A) and student self-efficacy (B) on the results of learning Indonesian. In other words the type of assessment has a relationship to students' self-efficacy on learning outcomes in Indonesian subjects. The form of interaction between peer assessment and teacher assessment can be seen in the following figure: Figure 4.7. Graphic interaction assessment of peer assessment and assessment by teachers on student learning outcomes in Indonesian subjects Each assessment has different characteristics. These different characteristics will allow students to be influenced in their response. In the implementation in class, students will respond in a way that is not the same. Characteristics of assessment by peers make students more confident and have higher enthusiasm. This is because students are directly involved in evaluating their peers. This process will awake students' confidence in their own abilities. Her confidence arose. This is what makes students have self-efficacy that appears very open. When the assessment is done by the teacher makes students inactive in the assessment process, students are only the subject of the assessment and are not the assessors. This process allows students not to have the opportunity to participate in grades. The effectiveness of the assessment conducted by the teacher for student success in learning is less than when the students were involved in the process of assessing learning outcomes. Students do not have the opportunity to further develop their abilities. Exploration of belief in the abilities of students has become non-existent. The characteristics of the two types of assessment above show the important role of confidence in the ability of the self towards Indonesian language learning outcomes. Self-efficacy that arises in assessments conducted by peers affects the learning outcomes of Indonesian. In contrast to that in assessments conducted by teachers to make self-efficacy does not appear optimally. 52| JISAE. Volume 6 Number 1 February 2020. Copyright ©LPPM Universitas Negeri Jakarta 40.00 35.33 35.20 37.27 32.00 33.00 34.00 35.00 36.00 37.00 38.00 39.00 40.00 41.00 A1 A2 B1 B2 53 3. Indonesian Language Learning Outcomes in Groups of Students Who Have High Self-Efficiencies Graded Peer Ratings Higher than Groups of Students Graded by Teachers The results of data analysis using the F Test, students who were given peer ratings were higher at the significance level α = 0.05, mentioned above, giving a value of Fls = 4.67 greater than Tlsd (Ft) = 1.80, then H0 rejected. Which means there are differences in learning outcomes between the two groups of students who are given peer assessment and teacher assessment. The average group of students shows that the results of learning Indonesian that use peer assessments and have high self-efficacy have a value of an average value of 40.00 with a standard deviation of 2.42 higher than the learning outcomes of the group of students who used the assessment by the teacher. The findings in this study indicate that the group of students who have high self-efficacy will be more effective learning by peer assessment than using the assessment by the teacher. With peer assessment, students have the opportunity to participate in the assessment process. 4. Indonesian Language Learning Outcomes Specifically for Groups of Students Who Have Low Self-Efficacy Graded with Peer Ratings Lower Value Compared to Groups of Students Graded by Teachers The results of the analysis of Indonesian learning outcomes data using the F Test. Students with low self-efficacy who were rated by peers had a significant average difference compared with the average group of Indonesian learning outcomes for students who were rated by teachers. The average learning outcomes of groups of students who get an assessment by peers is better compared to the learning outcomes of groups of students who get an assessment by the teacher. With a significance level α = 0.05, giving the value of Flsd = 0.213 smaller than Tlsd (Ft) = 2,434, then Ho is rejected. Which means there are significant differences between the two groups. This condition is based on empirical conditions encountered in the field. The fourth hypothesis which states that there are differences in Indonesian language learning outcomes between those using peer assessment and teacher ratings on students who have low self-efficacy. CONCLUSION The conclusions of the results of this study are: 1) Based on the test results, it is known that the application of assessments conducted by peers is more effective than assessments conducted by teachers in improving student learning outcomes in Indonesian subjects. The assessment techniques used by peers make students have to go through repetitive learning periods during the assessment process. Students when doing an indirect assessment must learn again in various forms such as preparing items and analyzing answers to the results of peers' tests. 2) When the assessment conducted by the teacher makes students inactive in the assessment process. Students are only the subject of the assessment and are not the assessors. This process allows students not to have the opportunity to participate in grades. The effectiveness of the assessment conducted by the 54| JISAE. Volume 6 Number 1 February 2020. Copyright ©LPPM Universitas Negeri Jakarta teacher for student success in learning is less than if students were involved in the process of assessing learning outcomes. Students do not have the opportunity to further develop their abilities. Exploration of belief in the abilities of students has become non-existent. 3) The findings in this study indicate that the group of students who have high self- efficacy will be more effective in learning by peer assessment than using teacher assessment. With peer assessment, students have the opportunity to follow the assessment process. 4) The fourth hypothesis states that there are differences in Indonesian language learning outcomes between those using peer assessment and teacher assessment in students who have low self-efficacy. REFERENCES Bandura, A. (2012). Social Foundations of Thought and Action. In The Health Psychology Reader. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446221129.n6 Cherrington, D. J. (1994). Organizational Behavior: The Management of Individual and Organizational Performance. Allyn and Bacon. Jennifer M. George, G. R. J. (2011). Understanding and Managing Organizational Behavior, 6th Edition. In Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040635 Luthans, F. (2012). Organizational Behaviour An Evidence-Based Approach. In McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787414527391 Topping, K. J. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405840802577569