The purpose of this research was to determine the difference of the item difficulty levels, the item discrimination powers, and the test reliabilities between the ordinary multiple choice (OMC) test and the association multiple choice (AMC) test. The population of the research was the second grade students of SLTPN 15 Bekasi, consisting 112 respondents. This quasi experimental research had utilized two group, randominized subjects post-test only design, using two treatments for each respondent, by giving them the OMC test and the AMC test after three week. The result of this research showed that the items difficulty levels of the AMC test was higher or the AMC test was more difficult than the OMC test. The research also indicated that the items discrimination powers of the AMC test was higher or the AMC test was more effective to differentiate between the higher ability testee and the lower ability testee than the items the OMC test. This research also indicated that not different test reliability between the AMC test and the OMC test.
Keywords: the difficulty level, the discrimination power, the reliability test, the ordinary multiple choice (OMC), the association multiple choice (AMC).

Anastasi, Anne dan Susan Urbina. Tes Psikologi. Jakarta: Prenhallindo, 2007.

Arikunto, Suharsimi. Dasar-dasar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Bumi Aksara, 2009.

Azwar, Saifuddin. Tes Prestasi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar, 2006..

Azwar, Saifuddin. Reliabilitas, Validitas, Interpretasi dan Komputasi. Yogyakarta: Liberty, 2006.

Depdikbud. Pedoman Penulisan Soal Hasil Belajar IPS. Jakarta: Balitbang, Sisjian, 2007.

Depdiknas. Pedoman Penulisan Soal Bentuk Pilihan Ganda IPS SMP. Jakarta: Dinas Pendas, 2004.

Blood, Don F. dan Budd William. Educational Measurement and Evaluation. New York: Harper and Row, 2002.

Crocker, L dan J. Algina. Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc, 1996.

Crombach, Lee J. Essential Of Psychologycal Testing. New York: Harper & Row, 2004.

Fernandes, H.J.X. Testing and Measurement. Jakarta: Depdikbud, 2004.

Gronlund, Norman E. Contruction Achievement Test. Englewood Chiffs: Prentise-Hall, 2002.

Hehahia, A.D. Pengaruh Jumlah Alternatif Tes Obyektif Bentuk Pilihan Ganda Terhadap Reliabilitas, TingkkatKesukaran dan Daya Pembeda. Tesis. Jakarta: PPsUNJ, 2007.

Hopkins, Charles D dan Antes, Richard L.Classroom Measurement and Evaluation. Illionis, F.E. Peacock, 1999.

Joni , T. Raka. Pengukuran dan Penilaian Pendidikan. Surabaya: Karya Anda, 2006.

Masidjo, Ign. Penilaian Hasil Belajar Siswa di Sekolah. Yogyakarta:Kanisius, 2005.

Naga, Dali. S. Pengantar Teori Skor pada Pengukuran Pendidikan. Jakarta: Gunadarma, 2002.

Nurkancana, Wayan dan Supartana. Evaluasi Hasil Belajar. Surabaya: Usaha Nasional, 2002

Purwanto, Ngalim. Prinsip-Prinsip dan Teknik Evaluasi Pengajaran. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya. 2001.

Sirait, Bistok. Bahan Pengajaran Untuk Mata Kuliah Evaluasi Hasil Belajar Siswa. Jakarta: Depdikbud, 2009.

Slameto. Evaluasi pendidikan. Jakarta: Bina Aksara, 2008.

Silverius, Suke. Evaluasi Hasil belajar dan Umpan Balik. Jakarta: Gramedia, 2001.

Sujarwadi, H.S. Perbedaan Karakteristik Soal dan ReliabilitasTes pilihan Ganda Biasa dengan pilihan Ganda KompleksMata Pelajaran Kimia. Tesis. Yogyakarta: PPs UGM, 2009.

Sujana, Nana. Penilaian Hasil Proses Belajar. Bandung: Remaja Rosdakarya,2002.

Sudijono, Anas. Pengantar Evaluasi Pendidikan. Jakarta: Grasindo Persada, 2006.

Suryabrata, Sumadi. Pengembangan Tes Hasil Belajar. Jakarta: Rajawali, 2007.

Ulfa, Maria. Perbandingan Validitas dan Tingkat Kesukaran Butir Soal Antara Bentuk Tes Pilihan Ganda Biasa, Pilihan Ganda Asosiasi dan Benar Salah pada Mata Pelajaran Pendidikan Agama Islam. Tesis. Jakarta: PPs UNJ, 2008.

Umar, Yahya. Berbagai Permasalahan Bentuk Soal Uraian dan Pilihan Ganda dalam Ujian. Buletin Pengujian dan Penilaian. Jakarta: Depdikbud, 2010.