Multimedia development to improve character analysis thinking skills through value-based learning approaches

  • Arifin Arifin 
    STKIP 11 April Sumedang
    Indonesia

Abstract

This research aims to develop interactive multimedia that can improve the quality of education, especially in strengthening students' character and personality, both holistically and comprehensively, according to the expectations of Indonesia's applicable curriculum. Qualitative methods are used in this study to get a complete picture to determine the developed multimedia response. The subjects of this study were one principal, two teachers, and five students. The instruments used in this study were in-depth interviews, observation, and documentation of the learning process using the developed multimedia. The results showed that students, in general, can use this multimedia in the learning process. There needs to be elaboration with teachers in different disciplines to present the material's depth according to the lessons. This research is recommended to all related parties who contribute to the development of students' quality following graduate standards' demands. In turn, it will produce a generation that is ready to enter a new era of knowledge, a better understanding of resources and factors that can affect both directly or indirectly, and it should be the basis for all related components and policymakers.
Keywords
  • an interactive multimedia courseware
References
  1. Artigue, M., & Blomhøj, M. (2013). Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(6), 797–810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6
  2. Bodemer, D., & Dehler, J. (2011). Group awareness in CSCL environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1043–1045. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.014
  3. Bravo, C., Duque, R., & Gallardo, J. (2013). A groupware system to support collaborative programming: Design and experiences. Journal of Systems and Software, 86(7), 1759–1771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2012.08.039
  4. Bryman, A. (2014). June 1989 and beyond: Julia Brannen’s contribution to mixed methods research. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 17(2), 121–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2014.892653
  5. Chen, C. M., & Tsai, Y. N. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers and Education, 59(2), 638–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.001
  6. Chin, K. Y., Hong, Z. W., Huang, Y. M., Shen, W. W., & Lin, J. M. (2016). Courseware development with animated pedagogical agents in learning system to improve learning motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(3), 360–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2013.851089
  7. de Barba, P. G., Kennedy, G. E., & Ainley, M. D. (2016). The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12130
  8. Doerr, H. M., & Lesh, R. (2011). Models and Modelling Perspectives on Teaching and Learning Mathematics in the Twenty-First Century. 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0910-2_26
  9. Essel, H. B., Osei-poku, P., & Opoku-asare, N. A. (2016). Self-Paced Interactive Multimedia Courseware: A Learning Support Resource for Enhancing Electronic Theses and Dissertations Development. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(12), 74–84.
  10. Järvelä, S., & Hadwin, A. F. (2013). New Frontiers: Regulating Learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.748006
  11. Kessler, G., Bikowski, D., & Boggs, J. (2012). Collaborative writing among second language learners in academic web-based projects. Language Learning and Technology, 16(1), 91–109.
  12. Kolb, S. M. (2012). Grounded Theory and the Constant Comparative Method : Valid Research Strategies for Educators. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 3(1), 83–86. Retrieved from http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/articles/Grounded Theory and the Constant Comparative Method.pdf
  13. Krupat, E., Sprague, J. M., Wolpaw, D., Haidet, P., Hatem, D., & O’Brien, B. (2011). Thinking critically about critical thinking: Ability, disposition or both? Medical Education, 45(6), 625–635. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03910.x
  14. Larson, R. W., & Rusk, N. (2011). Intrinsic Motivation and Positive Development. In Advances in Child Development and Behavior (1st ed., Vol. 41). https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386492-5.00005-1
  15. Linder, S. M., Powers-Costello, B., & Stegelin, D. A. (2011). Mathematics in Early Childhood: Research-Based Rationale and Practical Strategies. Early Childhood Education Journal, 39(1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-010-0437-6
  16. Markram, B. H. (2012). transform neuroscience and medicine and reveal new ways of making more powerful computers It ’ s time to change the way we study the brain . 306(June), 50–55.
  17. Philip, T. M., Way, W., Garcia, A. D., Schuler-Brown, S., & Navarro, O. (2013). When educators attempt to make ‘community’ a part of classroom learning: Thedangers of (mis)appropriating students’ communities into schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 34, 174–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2013.04.011
  18. Piaw, C. Y. (2014). Effects of Gender and Thinking Style on Student’s Creative Thinking Ability. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 5135–5139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1087
  19. Schmidt, K., & Bannon, L. (2013). Constructing CSCW: The first quarter century. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: CSCW: An International Journal, 22(4–6), 345–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-013-9193-7
  20. Wallace, J. R., Oji, S., & Anslow, C. (2017). Technologies, Methods, and Values. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 1(CSCW), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134741
  21. Yilmaz, D., Tekkaya, C., & Sungur, S. (2011). The Comparative effects of prediction/discussion-based learning cycle, conceptual change text, and traditional instructions on student understanding of genetics. International Journal of Science Education, 33(5), 607–628. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500691003657758

Downloads

PDF

Statistic

Abstract Views
: 519 times
PDF
: 223 times