Students' Perception Of Using Google Form In English Test At English Education Departement Of STAI Hubbulwathan Duri

Indah Dwi Sukmawati

doi:10.63435/jjee.v2i2.112

Authors

Indah Dwi Sukmawati STAI Hubbulwathan Duri

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.63435/jjee.v2i2.112

Keywords:

Students’ Perception, Google Form, Englist Test

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to find the perception of TBI students using Google Form in the English test. The design of the research was a survey. In this research, the writer conducted a descriptive survey. The sample in this study was 32 students. The data collection techniques used tests; questionnaires and documentation. According to the poll results, 23.5% of the majority of students said that using Google Forms helped them learn to read and made the process easier. Regarding the use of Google Forms, 11.25% of students are neutral, 15.5% of students disagree, 8.25% of students definitely disagree, and 42% of students strongly agree. These findings reveal many drawbacks to using Google Forms as well as the perception of students that using them positively improves learning despite the possibility of cheating.

References

Agung, B., Syaefulloh, S., Ridwan, I. M., Mamun, A. M. H., Sumpena, D., & Yulianti Zakiah, Q. (2019). Google Form-Based Learning Assessment. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 253(2018), 529–531.

Alharbi, A. S., & Meccawy, Z. (2020). Introducing Socrative as a tool for formative assessment in Saudi EFL classrooms. Arab World English Journal, 11(3), 372-384.

Atlantis Press Hricko, M., & Howell, S. L. (2006). Online Assessment and Measurement: United States of America: Information Science Publishing.

Dobson, J. L. (2008). The use of formative online quizzes to enhance class preparation and scores on summative exams. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(4), 297-302 Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016).

Freud, S. (1900). The Interpretation of Dreams. Macmillan.

Ghasemi, B., & hashemi, M. (2011). ICT: Newwave in English language learning/teaching.

Haddad, R. J., & Kalaani, Y. (2014). Google Forms: A Real-Time Formative Feedback Process for Adaptive Learning. 24.649.1-24.649.14

Iqbal, et,.al. 2018. Using Google form for Student Worksheet as Learning Media. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, Nassaji, H. (2015).

Jazil, S., Manggiasih, L. A., Firdaus, K., Chayani, P. M., & Rahmatika, S. N. (2020, May). Students’ Attitudes Towards the Use of Google Forms as an Online Grammar Assessment Tool. In International Conference on English Language Teaching (ICONELT 2019) (pp. 166-169).

King, C. G., Guyette, R. W., Jr., & Piotrowski, C. (2009). Online exams and cheating: An empirical analysis of business students' views. Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1-11.

Lee, J. S. (2006). Exploring the relationship between electronic literacy and heritage language maintenance. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), 93-113.

Mahbub, M. A. (2020). An investigation into undergraduate students' perception of Kahootmediated e-assessment. Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies, 7(2), 269- 296.

Pajares, F. (1997). Current directions in self-efficacy research. Advances in Motivation and Achievement, 10(149), 1-49.

Procedia –social and Behavioral Science, 15, 3098-3102 Gürişik, A., & Demirkan, Ö. (2019). Opinions of high school students about Plickers: One of the online formative assessment tools. International Journal of Scientific Research and Innovative Technology, 6(1), 11-25.

Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. In Language Teaching Research Mulatsih, B. (2020).

Sari, A. B. (2020). Google Forms as an EFL Assessment Tool: Positive Features and Limitations. Premise: Journal of English Education, 231-250 Sweeney, T., West, D., Groessler, A., Haynie, A., Higgs, B., Macaulay, J., MercerMapstone, L., & Yeo, M. (2017).

The British University in Dubai (BUiD) Fageeh, A. I. (2015). EFL student and faculty perceptions of and attitudes towards online testing in the medium of Blackboard: Promises and challenges. JALT CALL Journal, 11(1), 41- 62.