The Effect of EDBOT in Assessing Literal Reading Comprehension in MTsN 4 Padang

Tridara Rizkia, Arwemi Arwemi, Haryudi Nizar

Abstract


This study investigates the effect of EdBot, an AI-powered digital assessment platform, on seventh-grade students' literal reading comprehension at MTsN 4 Padang. A quasi-experimental post-test only control group design was employed with cluster random sampling, resulting in Class VII.1 (n=31) as the experimental group and Class VII.4 (n=32) as the control group. Both groups received identical guided reading instruction using descriptive texts but differed in assessment method: EdBot for the experimental class and conventional paper-based tests for the control class. The instrument comprised 42 multiple-choice items measuring five literal reading comprehension indicators — specific information, main idea, vocabulary in context, inference, and reference — based on Brown's (2004) framework. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Shapiro-Wilk normality test, Levene's homogeneity test, and Independent Samples T-Test via SPSS version 25. The experimental class achieved a mean score of 80.29 (Good), compared to 70.38 (Fair) in the control class. The T-Test yielded t = -
4.274 with sig. = .000 (p < 0.05), confirming that EdBot has a significant positive effect on students' literal reading comprehension performance. It is concluded that EdBot is an effective digital assessment medium that enhances engagement, provides real-time feedback, and fosters a low-anxiety testing environment at the junior high school level.

Keywords


EdBot, digital assessment, literal reading comprehension, descriptive text, quasi-experimental

Full Text:

PDF

References


Afflerbach, P., Pearson, P. D., & Paris, S. G. (2008). Clarifying differences between reading skills and reading strategies. The Reading Teacher, 61(5), 364–373.

Allen, J. (2000). Yellow brick roads: Shared and guided paths to independent reading 4–12. Stenhouse Publishers.

Baker, E. L. (2008). Formative assessment: A policy perspective. In H. L. Andrade & G. J. Cizek (Eds.), Handbook of formative assessment (pp. 21–36). Routledge.

Barrett, T. C. (1976). Taxonomy of reading comprehension. In R. Smith & T. C. Barrett (Eds.), Teaching reading in the middle grades. Addison-Wesley.

Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. Pearson Education.

Cassady, J. C., & Johnson, R. E. (2002). Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(2), 270–295.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

Gonzalez, M., & Cunnings, I. (2019). The role of motivation and digital tools in EFL reading comprehension. Journal of English Language Teaching, 8(2), 135–145.

Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills: A practical guide to reading comprehension exercises. Cambridge University Press.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S. D. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research (2nd ed.). Libraries Unlimited.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15548/rielt.v1i1.14930

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Ruang Jurnal Program Studi Tadris Bahasa Inggris
Fakultas Tarbiyah dan Keguruan
Universitas Islam Negeri Imam Bonjol Padang
email: [email protected]

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.