Adaptation Pattern on Information Technology Fusion at Universitas

Negeri Malang in Implementing the Life Based Learning

Eka Pramono Adi, Henry Praherdhiono and Yulias Prihatmoko

Department of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia.

Keywords: IT Fusion, LMS, MOOC, Life Based Learning.

Abstract: Adaptation patterns are conducted in life based learning to facilitate the implementation of Tran’s disciplinary

implementation. Learning Management System and Massive Open Online Courses applied in learning is an

IT Fusion in learning innovation. IT Fusion Stages are 1) Analysis; 2) Development Plan; 3) System

Development; 4) Testing and Implementation; 5) Formative Evaluation. Comprehensive adaptation

conducted by the Universitas Negeri Malang has answered the doubts about LMS and MOOC technology

combined in learning.

1 INTRODUCTION

In 2008, the Universitas Negeri Malang has built

online technology allowing one of the learning

innovations that facilitate learning. The opportunity

of learning through online technology is simply to

build a learning resource that allows many people to

access learning opportunities that are usually unlikely

to happen or occur (Weise & Christensen, 2014). The

emergence of the Massive Open Online Courses

(MOOC) has recently been a major step forward for

education. Hundreds of thousands of users access this

online learning platform, with thousands of enrolees

in each MOOC and academic offerings from some of

the world's most prestigious universities. Universitas

Negeri Malang in learning service requires

consideration of its development.

Universitas Negeri Malang has been using Life

Based Learning (LBL) as the foundation of

philosophy of learning. LBL is an identical activity of

open source access learning pattern. The use of the

term LBL, has consequences for the development of

a wealth of abundant learning resources, so that the

term open learning is one of the LBL patterns.

Assumptions and some premises underlying the

explanation of LBL. LBL is an open and flexible

learning and open attitude about teaching and

learning practice (Rodriguez, 2012). Despite rapid

development, the Universitas Negeri Malang needs to

establish a system of 1) open licensing of access to

learning resources; 2) providing open access to

learning provided by the Universitas Negeri Malang;

and 3) development of open platforms compatible

with the device (many with commercial LMS

software).

The logging of open access learning studies has

developed significantly. Research on open education

evolves in two different directions: 1) open education

resources (OER) (Veletsianos, 2013; Abramovich

and McBride, 2018; Moyle, 2018; Walji and

Hodgkinson-Williams, 2018). In general, the basic

vision of the development is to improve accessibility

to learning on a global scale. The OER study has a

focus on how to produce and publish learning

resources with open licenses. On a micro scale, these

developments are not accompanied by thinking on

educational institutions. As well as how an institution

adapts to the development of OER in a new context

including student psycho-social factors and users that

influence the use of OER. For MOOC and open

lectures, the most prominent research challenges are

related to feedback scalability and support, open

lecture education design, and new integration.

Successful development of LBL is a form of

learning with constructivism paradigm. Collaboration

is an implementation of learning model on LBL.

Collaboration like learners is a major activity in open

learning (Fu and Hwang, 2018; Hämäläinen, Lanz

and Koskinen, 2018; Sung and Hwang, 2018).

Studies by (Khalil and Ebner, 2017) discuss

collaborative learning groups in the MOOC. Based on

a brief overview of the MOOC-related clustering

approach (groupings based on content and users), the

Adi, E., Praherdhiono, H. and Prihatmoko, Y.

Adaptation Pattern on Information Technology Fusion at Universitas Negeri Malang in Implementing the Life Based Learning.

DOI: 10.5220/0008407300260032

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation (ICLI 2018), pages 26-32

ISBN: 978-989-758-391-9

researchers introduced the results of an exploratory

study conducted on a MOOC offered to a local

student population and at the same time can be

followed by users from around the world. Universitas

Negeri Malang in adapting requires a pattern of

learning development that utilizes OER in MOOC as

a service model.

Continuous innovation in learning is a favourable

condition for open learning. MOOC presentation

form is the right choice. MOOC in its use is a learning

environment that facilitates in generating new ideas

for students. (Leach and Hadi, 2017) focuses on user

research to explore new categories to appreciate

learning behaviours and use of badges (symbols /

icons) in visualizing learners' subcontracts in the

MOOC. Another new idea is in Research by (Pappas,

Giannakos and Mikalef, 2017) exploring the

evaluation of tasks with video. According to the

study, this type of task is highly relevant if it is done

outside the test period (ie only a structured task rather

than a UTS or UAS). In addition, this study highlights

the role of emotion in relation to the learner's

acceptance of the task burden. Despite the research,

some findings need to be sharpened by the practical

development of how future design practices of

institutions including the Universitas Negeri Malang

are able to construct ideas and embed any ideas of

thought in open learning.

Information Technology fusion in learning is the

terminology of Educational Technology (Richey,

2013). Some of the new terms in the terminology are

LMS and MOOC. Neither in the Universitas Negeri

Malang or any other MOOC still not get the same

position with the LMS. This means that LMS is still

viewed as an official system or simply approached

with xMOOC (Kennedy, 2014). Although the MOOC

is still in debate, it is undeniable that the

MOOC has gained recognition and good

response. In 2011 the MOOC on Introduction to

Artificial Intelligence, run by Sebastian Thrun and

Peter Norvig at Stanford University, reached 160,000

registrations (Rodriguez, 2012). The availability of

MOOCs has since grown rapidly, with over 4200

being released by the end of 2015 (Shah, 2015). So

the adaptation of Universitas Negeri Malang is to

build the MOOC which is integrated with LMS.

The development of IT Fusion is intended to

provide a contextual overview and LBL system that

must be done by the Universitas Negeri Malang. LBL

systematically forced Malang State University to

adapt and develop innovative learning. Concrete

adaptation, needs to be done by developing

innovative learning systems. IT fusion in LBL needs

to be adapted by incorporating technology in the

learning system to be able to be applied trans

disciplinary so as to strengthen the capability of

students in Universitas Negeri Malang.

2 DEVELOPMENT METHODS

The development of IT fusion at Universitas Negeri

Malang through the phases that are tailored to the

characteristics of the development of OER and OEP

learning. The pattern of learning development

undertaken is the development of IT LBL fusion with

the main characteristic of On-line web-based

activities shown in Figure 1. Stages of OER and OEP

development in Life-Based Learning through MOOC

loading. As a form of Transdisplinary inter-

department using other stages: 1). Analysis; 2).

Development Plan; 3) System Development; 4)

Testing and Implementation; 5) Formative

Evaluation. Pattern development is a way to describe

the process. But in the field activities made context-

based adjustments.

Figure 1: System development patterns.

Adaptation Pattern on Information Technology Fusion at Universitas Negeri Malang in Implementing the Life Based Learning

2.1 Analysis

Analysis is done by looking at the institutional

readiness to the technical ground. Observation is done

by looking at 1) some policies, 2) learning

implementation system, 3) Student activity pattern

and lecturer in open learning.

2.2 Development Plan

The design of development is based on 1) What are

the possible learning patterns in Malang State

University, 2) The layout pattern that is able to

increase the learning activity, 3. The assessment

pattern that can be implemented in the LBL system

2.3 System Development

System development is done by 1) Selection of LMS

and MOOC platform, 2) Initiation of hardware and

software support capabilities, 3) Development of

learning content, 4) Fusion IT by synchronizing

software and hardware.

2.4 Trial and Implementation

Testing is done by doing a series of activities. The

testing activities were conducted in the laboratory and

the server centre of Education Technology

Department of Universitas Negeri Malang. Testing is

done to test 1) the stability of software that has been

installed in the server, 2) the speed of software in

responding to access. Implementation is done by 1)

uploading learning content, 2) Setting the learning

pattern.

2.5 Formative Evaluation

Formative evaluation is done by looking at 1)

collaboration activities on LMS and MOOC, and 2)

student learning outcomes during LBL learning

followed. Formative evaluation is not final, but it

leads to the improvement of learning patterns.

Figure 2: Ecological patterns of IT fusion in LBL.

ICLI 2018 - 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Universitas Negeri Malang has adaptation with LBL

learning pattern. LBL learning pattern is designed

with LBL context of students and lecturers. The

ecological pattern that emerged in the meeting agreed

with some lecturers of system experts was the

ecology of Fusion IT showed in Figure 2. Students

with several lecturers have agreed that LMS and

MOOC need to strengthen user insights. The

strengthening of ecology is a sharpening of scientific

awareness that MOOC is a form of learning

innovation with the potential to revolutionize and

transform learning (Adams et al., 2014; Kennedy,

2014). The success of social interaction within

MOOC has emerged alongside open learning (open

source and open source software) (García-Peñalvo,

Fidalgo-Blanco and Sein-Echaluce, 2018; Martin-

Fernandez et al., 2018). New ideas emerging in lesson

activities promise medium-term consequences such

as models of reasoning for universities using Trans

disciplinary.

Students and lecturers interpret the pattern of

LMS and MOOC with unique thinking. In the lesson

plan agree that subject can be offered open learning

or MOOC. MOOC display was developed with the

construction of a course in LMS can be seen in Figure

3.. Adaptation of the pattern of content shows that

lecturers at the Universitas Negeri Malang have made

a leap of LBL learning technology, but the lecturer

considers the open LMS is a MOOC in IT fusion. The

meaning of MOOC and LMS is a form of gradual

adaptation in the learning process (García-Peñalvo,

Fidalgo-Blanco and Sein-Echaluce, 2018;

Sheshasaayee and Bee, 2018). The reason for offering

MOOC containing LMS is a form of adaptation to

LBL learning. Some of the things that need attention

are the implementation of LBL learning patterns are

1) MOOC user ability in LBL meaning, 20

accessibility and reach, 3) continuity of blended LMS

research and MOOC online, and 4) how to enter the

pleasure to teach and try and obtain new ideas in

online learning.

Figure 3: Patterns of LMS developed in MOOC.

Adaptation Pattern on Information Technology Fusion at Universitas Negeri Malang in Implementing the Life Based Learning

Figure 4: One of the MOOC content assessment results by students.

Figure 5: Application settings based on learning block.

Students have the courage to do a direct

assessment of some of the content offered shown in

Figure 4. This indicates that the student has sensitivity

in the assessment of learning. Students look

enthusiastic in following the learning. The highest

rating is in the range 3 to 4 on scale 5. Assessments 3

and 4 of about 41.7% indicate trust and confidence in

the pattern of technical aspects of online-based

learning. Other studies also indicate the most robust

pattern of MOOCs use. Many assumptions and

predictions are offered about the user and what the

user might achieve. Some predictions about the end

of higher education (Kolowich, 2013) are the ease and

belief of digital education for users, even for those

with special needs (Coughlan, 2014) the absorption

of online learning has increased (Opara-Martins,

Sahandi and Tian, 2014; Baxter, Callaghan and

McAvoy, 2018; Geiger et al., 2018).

At first, it was clear that the design of the MOOC

was very different from designing an LMS at a lecture

at the Universitas Negeri Malang. This view is in line

with how to design open material for unknown users

(Macleod et al., no date). Adaptation is done when the

lecturer design any lecture, must have several groups

of students. The adaptation is seen for S-1 level users

at Universitas Negeri Malang and Level S-2. When

the Department of Education Technology Universitas

Negeri Malang create the first MOOC in 2017.

Adaptation patterns can also be done for the

Universitas Negeri Malang. So what needs to be done

is to put the LMS pattern on the MOOC without

taking into account the number of users. No need to

be debated again "who is the user of tens of thousands

of people who will be enrolling for short, free study

in an online open lecture that no longer offers

qualification or credit". Learning pattern is what the

user wants.

An adaptation pattern is technically a web

management needs to be done to ensure the layout

and content remains the best. Admin needs to make

settings based on an interesting learning design

shown in Figure 5. The digital learning environment

of MOOC and LMS is a major factor of learning

comfort (Praherdhiono, 2014; Praherdhiono and

Pramono Adi, 2017). Good and professional

management needs to be adapted. This is because

ICLI 2018 - 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation

there are many doubts about MOOC and LMS. Low

MOOC completion rates, difficulties in verifying

participant identity, low eligibility and low quality of

education resources (Bartolomé and Steffens, 2011;

Zapata-Ros, 2015). The low success of MOOC and

LMS lies in the absence of clear development

standards and pedagogical models in the types of

learning MOOC and LMS (Guàrdia, Maina and

Sangrà, 2013; Aceto et al., 2014). In this case,

technological adaptation should see a pedagogical

quality indicator on MOOC and LMS technologies as

IT Fusion. So that the pattern of technological

adaptation should be comprehensive and include a 1)

pedagogical approach, 2) learning activities, 3)

evaluation, 4) user experience, 5) motivation and 6)

resources (de la Garza, Sancho-Vinuesa and

Zermeño, 2015).

4 CONCLUSION

Pattern of technology adaptation is a strategic step in

realizing IT Fusion. The success of IT fusion is the

success of developing the capabilities of learners. The

IT fusion in LBL applied in MOOC and LMS needs

to be adapted before being applied to the trans-

discipliner curriculum. Innovation is the ease of

learning activities through LMS technology that

opened into MOOC. Another pattern of adaptation is

web-based learning into learning and learning

activities that require policy support. Open learning

with student innovations. Learning materials

developed can be OER and OEP. The novelty of the

adaptation pattern on LMS and MOOC is to create

MOOC connections built by lecturers and learners by

making LBL content connections. The LMS and

MOOC content will have unlimited connections and

are related to each other.

REFERENCES

Abramovich, S. and McBride, M. (2018) ‘Open education

resources and perceptions of financial value’, The

Internet and Higher Education, 39, pp. 33–38.

Aceto, S. et al. (2014) ‘Mapping and Analysing Prospective

Technologies for Learning-Results from a Consultation

with European Stakeholders and Roadmaps for Policy

Action (No. JRC88469)’, Joint Research Centre

(Seville site).

Adams, C. et al. (2014) ‘A phenomenology of learning

large: the tutorial sphere of xMOOC video lectures’,

Distance Education, 35(2), pp. 202–216.

Bartolomé, A. and Steffens, K. (2011) Technologies for

self-regulated learning. In Self-regulated learning in

technology enhanced learning environments.

SensePublishers.

Baxter, J., Callaghan, G. and McAvoy, J. (2018) ‘Creativity

& Critique in Online Learning: Exploring and

Examining Innovations in Online Pedagogy’.

Coughlan, S. (2014) Online Mooc courses deliver Ebola

health advice.

Fu, Q. K. and Hwang, G. J. (2018) ‘Trends in mobile

technology-supported collaborative learning: A

systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to

2016’, Computers & Education, 119, pp. 129–143.

García-Peñalvo, F. J., Fidalgo-Blanco, Á. and Sein-

Echaluce, M. L. (2018) ‘An adaptive hybrid MOOC

model: Disrupting the MOOC concept in higher

education’, Telematics and Informatics, 35(4), pp.

1018–1030.

Geiger, V. et al. (2018) ‘An interdisciplinary approach to

designing online learning: fostering pre-service

mathematics teachers’ capabilities in mathematical

modelling’, ZDM, 50(1–2), pp. 217–232.

Guàrdia, L., Maina, M. and Sangrà, A. (2013) ‘MOOC

design principles: A pedagogical approach from the

learner’s perspective.’, ELearning Papers, 33, pp. 1–6.

Hämäläinen, R., Lanz, M. and Koskinen, K. T. (2018)

Collaborative Systems and Environments for Future

Working Life: Towards the Integration of Workers,

Systems and Manufacturing Environments, In The

Impact of Digitalization in the Workplace. Springer.

Kennedy, J. (2014) ‘Characteristics of massive open online

courses (MOOCs): A research review, 2009-2012’,

Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 13(1).

Khalil, M. and Ebner, M. (2017) ‘Clustering patterns of

engagement in Massive Open Online Courses

(MOOCs): the use of learning analytics to reveal

student categories’, Journal of computing in higher

education, 29(1), pp. 114–132.

Kolowich, S. (2013) ‘The Professors behind the MOOC

Hype. Chronicle of Higher Education’.

de la Garza, L. Y. A., Sancho-Vinuesa, T. and Zermeño, M.

G. G. (2015) ‘Indicators of pedagogical quality for the

design of a Massive Open Online Course for teacher

training’, International Journal of Educational

Technology in Higher Education, 12(1), pp. 104–118.

Leach, M. and Hadi, S. M. (2017) ‘Supporting, categorising

and visualising diverse learner behaviour on MOOCs

with modular design and micro-learning’, Journal of

Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), pp. 147–159.

Macleod, H. et al. (no date) ‘MOOCs: Designing for the

Unknown Learner’.

Martin-Fernandez, L. et al. (2018) Addressing Knowledge

Management and Virtual Learning Communities in

MOOC Using Open Resources and Gamification, In

Global Implications of Emerging Technology Trends.

IGI Global.

Moyle, K. (2018) ‘Leading school-based coaching to

evaluate Open Education Resources’.

Opara-Martins, J., Sahandi, R. and Tian, F. (2014) ‘Critical

review of vendor lock-in and its impact on adoption of

cloud computing’, in In Information Society (i-Society),

International Conference on IEEE, pp. 92–97.

Adaptation Pattern on Information Technology Fusion at Universitas Negeri Malang in Implementing the Life Based Learning

Pappas, I. O., Giannakos, M. N. and Mikalef, P. (2017)

‘Investigating students’ use and adoption of with-video

assignments: lessons learnt for video-based open

educational resources’, Journal of Computing in Higher

Education, 29(1), pp. 160–177.

Praherdhiono, H. (2014) ‘Convenience of Learning

Environment for Student Special Education With

Cyberwellness Concept’, in Proceeding International

postdraduate University Kebangsaan Malaysia.

SEAMOSEN.

Praherdhiono, H. and Pramono Adi, E. (2017)

‘Constructing Learning Results as Learning Object

Through Open Learning System’.

Richey, R. C. (2013) Encyclopedia of terminology for

educational communications and technology. New

York: Springer.

Rodriguez, C. O. (2012) ‘MOOCs and the AI-Stanford Like

Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats

for Massive Open Online Courses’, European Journal

of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 15(2).

Shah, D. (2015) ‘By the numbers: MOOCs in 2015’. Class

Central.

Sheshasaayee, A. and Bee, M. N. (2018) Analyzing Online

Learning Effectiveness for Knowledge Society. In

Information Systems Design and Intelligent

Applications. Singapore: Springer.

Sung, H.-Y. and Hwang, G.-J. (2018) ‘Facilitating effective

digital game-based learning behaviors and learning

performances of students based on a collaborative

knowledge construction strategy’, Interactive Learning

Environments, 26(1), pp. 118–134.

Veletsianos, G. (2013) ‘Open practices and identity:

Evidence from researchers and educators’ social media

participation’, British Journal of Educational

Technology, 44(4), pp. 639–651.

Walji, S. and Hodgkinson-Williams, C. (2018) ‘Factors

enabling and constraining OER adoption and Open

Education Practices: lessons from the ROER4D

project’.

Zapata-Ros, M. (2015) ‘Teorías y modelos sobre el

aprendizaje en entornos conectados y ubicuos, Bases

para un nuevo modelo teórico a partir de una visión

crítica del “conectivismo”’, Education in the

Knowledge Society, 16(1), pp. 69–102.

ICLI 2018 - 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation