Design and Implementation of Schoology-Based Blended Learning Media for Basic Physics I Course

W. Suana, N. Maharta, I D. P. Nyeneng, S. Wahyuni

Abstract

This research was conducted to: (1) design a Schoology-based blended learning media for Basic Physics I course on the topics of vector quantity, linear motion, and translational dynamics, (2) describe the validity of the product, (3) describe the products effectiveness in enhancing students conceptual understanding and problem solving skills, and (4) describe students responses towards the media and blended learning model. The development procedures employed were ADDIE model which consisedt of five stages: analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. In development stage, the assessment had been conducted by two experts to assess validity of media both in content and construct aspects. The results showed that the validities in content aspect and construct aspect were very good and good, respectively. The results from classroom implementation revealed the effectiveness of the product in enhancing students conceptual understanding and problem solving skills. Students responses towards the products utility, attractiveness, and easiness as blended learning media were also positive. The conclusion was that the media was valid and effective as blended learning media of Basic Physics I course.

Keywords

basic physics i; blended learning (BL); schoology

Full Text:

PDF

References

Alim, F. (2007). Evaluation of a Blended Course from the Viewpoint of Constructivism. Online Submission. (Available online at http://files.eric.ed.gov/full-text/ED500169.pdf; accessed on January 12, 2016).

Aspden, L., & Helm, P. (2004). Making the connection in a blended learning environment. Educational Media International, 41(3), 245-252.

Aycock, A., Garnham, C., & Kaleta, R. (2002). Lessons learned from the hybrid course project. Teaching with technology today, 8(6), 9-21.

Barbour, M. K., & Reeves, T. C. (2009). The reality of virtual schools: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 52(2), 402-416.

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17-66). Springer Netherlands.

Black, E. W., Beck, D., Dawson, K., Jinks, S., & DiPietro, M. (2007). Considering implementation and use in the adoption of an LMS in online and blended learning environments. TechTrends, 51(2), 35-53.

Collopy, R. M., & Arnold, J. M. (2009). To blend or not to blend: Online and blended learning environments in undergraduate teacher education. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 85-101.

Comer, D. R., & Lenaghan, J. A. (2013). Enhancing discussions in the asynchronous online classroom: The lack of face-to-face interaction does not lessen the lesson. Journal of Management Education, 37(2), 261-294.

Eliana, E. D. S., Senam, S., Wilujeng, I., & Jumadi, J. (2016). The effectiveness of project-based e-learning to improve ict literacy. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(1), 51-55.

Fadde, P. J., & Vu, P. (2014). Blended online learning: Benefits, challenges, and misconceptions. Online learning: Common misconceptions, benefits and challenges, 33-48.

Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems. The handbook of blended learning, 3-21.

Helms, S. A. (2014). Blended/hybrid courses: A review of the literature and recommendations for instructional designers and educators. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(6), 804-810.

Kazu, I. Y., & Demirkol, M. (2014). Effect of blended learning environment model on high school students academic achievement. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 78-87.

Kenney, J., & Newcombe, E. (2011). Adopting a blended learning approach: Challenges encountered and lessons learned in an action research study. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 15(1), 45-57.

King, S. E., & Cerrone Arnold, K. A. T. I. E. (2012). Blended learning environments in higher education: A case study of how professors make it happen. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 25(1), 44-59.

Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 282-293.

Lpez-Prez, M. V., Prez-Lpez, M. C., & Rodrguez-Ariza, L. (2011). Blended learning in higher education: Students perceptions and their relation to outcomes. Computers & Education, 56(3), 818-826.

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. US Department of Education. (Available at http://www2.ed. gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf; accessed on January 21, 2016).

Medved, J. P. 2016. The Top 8 Fr ee/Open Source LMSs. (Available at http://blog.capterra.com/author/jpmed-ved; accessed on February 12, 2016).

Michinov, N., & Michinov, E. (2008). Face-to-face contact at the midpoint of an online collaboration: Its impact on the patterns of participation, interaction, affect, and behavior over time. Computers & Education, 50(4), 1540-1557.

Nugroho, E. F. 2015. 12 Free / Open Source Learning Management System (LMS) Terbaik. (Available at http://bpp-tik.kominfo.go.id/2015/03/ 10/857/12-free-open-source-learning-management-system-lms-terbaik; accessed on January 29, 2016).

Odwyer, L. M., Carey, R., & Kleiman, G. (2007). A study of the effectiveness of the Louisiana Algebra I online course. Journal of research on technology in education, 39(3), 289-306.

Parkes, S., Zaka, P., & Davis, N. (2011). The first blended or hybrid online course in a New Zealand secondary school: A case study. Computers in New Zealand Schools: Learning, Teaching, Technology, 23(1), 1-30.

Peterson, C. (2003). Bringing ADDIE to life: Instructional design at its best. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(3), 227-241.

Poon, J. (2013). Blended learning: An institutional approach for enhancing students learning experiences. Journal of online learning and teaching, 9(2), 271-289.

Pratt, K., & Trewern, A. (2011). Students experiences of flexible learning options: What can they tell us about what they need for success. Computers in New Zealand Schools, 23(2), 137-152.

Smart, K. L., & Cappel, J. J. (2006). Students perceptions of online learning: A comparative study. Journal of Information Technology Education, 5(1), 20119, 201-219.

Sumarti, S. S., Supardi, K. I., & Sumarni, W. (2015). The development of lecture model of chemical education management based on lesson study to improve chemistry teacher candidatesprofesionalism. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 4(1), 11-14.

Uzun, A., & Senturk, A. (2010). Blending makes the difference: Comparison of blended and traditional instruction on students performance and attitudes in computer literacy. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(3), 196-207.

Wijayanti, A., & Basyar, M. A. K. (2016). The development of thematicintegrated e-portfolio media web blog based to increase the scientific literacy of elementary teacher education programs student. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 5(2), 284-290.

Wu, J. H., Tennyson, R. D., & Hsia, T. L. (2010). A study of student satisfaction in a blended e-learning system environment. Computers & Education, 55(1), 155-164.

Yapici, ?. ., & Akbayin, H. (2012). The effect of blended learning model on high school students biology achievement and on their attitudes towards the internet. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(2), 228-237.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.