Electronic Versus Printed Book: A Comparison Study on the Effectivity of Senior High School Physics Book

A. Suyatna, H. Maulina, I. Rakhmawati, R. A. N. Khasanah


This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of senior high school physics book both interactive electronic and printed, viewed from the difference in gender and material characteristics. The research used Quasi-Experimental Design with Non-Equivalent posttest-pretest control group design. The data were collected through physics tests from six senior high schools in Lampung Province, Indonesia and analyzed on ANOVA and multiple comparisons to determine the differences in learning outcomes (affectivity) and interaction between interactive electronic and printed, gender, and material characteristics. The results showed that there were different learning outcomes caused by interactive electronic and printed physics book (p=0.000<0.05). The learning outcomes using interactive electronic books were better than using printed books for both male and female students while gender differences did not affect physics learning outcomes for both interactive electronic and printed books (p=0.963>0.05). There was no interaction between interactive electronic and printed books and gender (p= 0.298>0.05). There are differences in learning outcomes caused by physical material characteristics (p= 0.000< 0.05). Therefore, it concluded that the high school interactive physics electronic book was effectively used as a learning resource for both male and female students.


effectiveness interactive electronic book, gender, physics material characteristics

Full Text:



Aremu, A., & Efuwape, B. M. (2013). A Microsoft Learning Content Development System (LCDS) Based Learning Package for Electrical and Electronics Technology-Issues on Acceptability and Usability in Nigeria. American Journal Of Education Research, 1(2), 41-48.

Ambarwati, D., & Suyatna, A. (2018, January). Interactive design for self-study and developing students’ critical thinking skills in electromagnetic radiation topic. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 948, No. 1, p. 012039). IOP Publishing.

Andina, E. (2011). Buku Digital dan Pengaturannya. Jurnal Aspirasi, 2(1), 79-95.

Aulia, MK., Suyatna, A. &Sesunan, F. (2017). Pengembangan Modul Pembelajaran Menggunakan Learning Content Development System (LCDS) Materi Kinematika Gerak. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika, 5(5), 97-109.

Bancong, B., & Song, J. Do Physics Textbooks Present the Ideas of Thought Experiments?: a Case in Indonesia. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 7(1), 25-33.

Chesser, W. D. (2011). The E-Textbook Revolution. Library Technology Reports, 47(8), 28-40.

Chin, E. C., Williams, M. W., Taylor, J. E., & Harvey, S. T. (2017). The Influence of Negative Affect on Test Anxiety and Academic Performance: An Examination of the Tripartite Model of Emotions. Learning and Individual Differences, 54, 1-8.

Ebied, M. M. A., & Rahman, S. A. A. (2015). The Effect of Interactive E-Book on Students’ Achievement at Najran University in Computer in Education Course. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(19), 71-82.

Faulconer, E. K., Griffith, J., Wood, B., Acharyya, S., & Roberts, D. (2018). A Comparison of Online, Video Synchronous, and Traditional Learning Modes for an Introductory Undergraduate Physics Course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1-8.

Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Sahidu, H., & Herayanti, L. (2017). Virtual Laboratory to Improve Students’ Problem-Solving Skills on Electricity Concept. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(2), 257-264.

Hänze, M., & Berger, R. (2007). Cooperative Learning, Motivational Effects, and Student Characteristics: An Experimental Study Comparing Cooperative Learning and Direct Instruction in 12th Grade Physics Classes. Learning and Instruction, 17(1), 29-41.

Haycock, K. (2007). Collaboration: Critical Success Factors for Student Learning. School Libraries Worldwide, 13(1), 25.

Higgins, J., Moeed, A., & Eden, R. (2018). Video as a Mediating Artefact of Science Learning: Cogenerated Views of What Helps Students Learn From Watching Video. Asia-Pacific Science Education, 4(1), 6-16.

Holaday, L., Selvig, D., Purkiss, J., & Hortsch, M. (2013). Preference of Interactive Electronic Versus Traditional Learning Resources by University of Michigan Medical Students during the First Year Histology Component. Medical Science Educator, 23(4), 607-619.

Hoogerheide, V., Loyens, S. M., & van Gog, T. (2016). Learning from Video Modeling Examples: Does Gender Matter?. Instructional Science, 44(1), 69-86.

Hoseth, A. E., & McLure, M. (2007). Perspectives on E-books from Instructors and Students in The Social Sciences. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 51(3), 278–288.

Huang, J., Kumar, S., & Hu, C. (2018). Gender Differences in Motivations for Identity Reconstruction on Social Network Sites. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 34(7), 591-602.

Taufani, D. R., & Iqbal, M. (2011). Membuat Konten E-learning dengan Microsoft Learning Content Development System (LCDS). Bandung: Universitas Komputer Indonesia.

Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., & Rowlands, I. (2010). Scholarly E-books: The Views of 16,000 Academics. New Information Perspectives, 61(1), 33–47.

Jeong, H. (2012). A Comparison of the Influence of Electronic Books and Paper Books on Reading Comprehension, Eye Fatigue, and Perception. The Electronic Library, 30(3), 390-408.

Kang, Y. Y., Wang, M. J. J., & Lin, R. (2009). Usability Evaluation of E-books. Displays, 30(2), 49-52.

Kartono, K. (2007). Psikologi Anak (Psikologi Perkembangan). Bandung: Mandar Maju.

Kim, H., & Kim, J. O. A. N. (2013). Reading from an LCD Monitor Versus Paper: Teenagers’ Reading Performance. International Journal of Research Studies in Educational Technology, 2(1), 1-10.

Lin, C. C. (2009). Learning Action Verbs with Animation. The Jalt Call Journal, 5(3), 23-40.

Lopez-Zafra, E., Garcia-Retamero, R., & Martos, M. P. B. (2012). The Relationship Between Transformational Leadership And Emotional Intelligence from a Gendered Approach. The Psychological Record, 62(1), 97-114.

Margolin, S. J., Driscoll, C., Toland, M. J., & Kegler, J. L. (2013). Eâ€readers, Computer Screens, or Paper: Does Reading Comprehension Change Across Media Platforms?. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(4), 512-519.

Marx, J. D., & Cummings, K. (2007). Normalized change. American Journal of Physics, 75(1), 87-91.

Nuralinda, Y., Nyeneng, I. D. P., & Suana, W. (2017). Implementasi Modul Pembelajaran Berbasis LCDS untuk Meningkatkan Penguasaan Konsep Siswa SMA. Jurnal Pembelajaran Fisika, 5(5). 45-55.

OECD. (2015). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Results form PISA 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-Indonesia.pdf.

Reynolds, R. (2011). Trends Influencing the Growth of Digital Textbooks in US Higher Education. Publishing Research Quarterly, 27(2), 178-187.

Robinson, S. (2011). Student Use of a Free Online Textbook. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15(3), 1-10.

Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Courduff, J., Carter, K., & Bennett, D. (2013). Electronic Versus Traditional Print Textbooks: A Comparison Study on the Influence of University Students’ Learning. Computers & Education, 63, 259-266.

Sahal, M. (2016). Hasil Belajar Fisika dan Aktivitas Siswa berdasarkan Gender melalui Penerapan Model Pembelajaran Kolaboratif pada Materi Pokok Optik di Kelas X MA Al-Ihsan Boarding School Kampar. Jurnal Online Mahasiswa (JOM) Bidang Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan, 3(1), 1-10.

Salmon, L. G. (2014). Factors that Affect Emergent Literacy Development when Engaging with Electronic Books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 42(2), 85-92.

Sjarif, D. R., Yuliarti, K., Wahyuni, L. K., Wiguna, T., Prawitasari, T., Devaera, Y., ... & Afriansyah, A. (2016). Effectiveness of a Comprehensive Integrated Module Using Interactive Lectures and Workshops in Understanding and Knowledge Retention about Infant Feeding Practice in Fifth Year Medical Students: A Quasi-Experimental Study. BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 210-222.

Steinmayr, R., & Spinath, B. (2008). Sex Differences in School Achievement: What are the Roles of Personality and Achievement Motivation?. European Journal of Personality: Published for the European Association of Personality Psychology, 22(3), 185-209.

Suyatna, A., Distrik, I. W., Herlina, K., Suyanto, E., & Haryaningtias, D. (2018, September). Developing Interactive E-Book of Relativity Theory to Optimize Self-Directed Learning and Critical Thinking Skills. In AIP Conference Proceedings (Vol. 2014, No. 1, p. 020065). AIP Publishing.

Suyatna, A., Anggraini, D., Agustina, D., &Widyastuti, D. (2017). The Role of Visual Representation in Physics Learning: Dynamic Versus Static Visualization. Journal of Physics: Conference Series,909, 1-8.

Wobbrock, J. O., Findlater, L., Gergle, D., & Higgins, J. J. (2011). The Aligned Rank Transform for Nonparametric Factorial Analyses Using Only Anova Procedures. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors In Computing Systems (pp. 143-146). ACM.

Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. A. (2010). E-books or Textbooks: Students Prefer Textbooks. Computers & Education, 55(3), 945-948.

Yang, Y., Cho, Y., Mathew, S., & Worth, S. (2011). College Student Effort Expenditure in Online Versus Face-To-Face Courses: The Role of Gender, Team Learning Orientation, and Sense of Classroom Community. Journal of Advanced Academics, 22(4), 619-638.

Yukselturk, E., & Bulut, S. (2009). Gender Differences in Self-Regulated Online Learning Environment. Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 12-22.


  • There are currently no refbacks.