The Effect of Integrated Project based Learning MOOCs on Student

Results of Vocational High School Students

Ahmad Mursyidun Nidhom*, Amat Mukhadis, Januar Kustiandi, Andika Bagus Nur Rahma Putra,

Azhar Ahmad Smaragdina, Aulia Herdiani, Setiadi Cahyono Putro

Universitas Negeri Malang

Keywords: Mooc’s, PJBL

Abstract: MOOCs which is currently known as one of the gates of learning in the XXI century into technology-based

learning that has advantages in the learning process, the learning must integrate a blend of conventional

models and digital shields in their application. This study aims to determine the results of the combination

of digitalization of learning that is characterized by MOOCs that are integrated with the PJBL (project-

based learning) model. The study design used an experimental research design that used a quasi-

experimental design with the mechanism of pretest and posttest through group design. The population in

this study were all students of class X of Batu Islam Vocational High School 2018/2019 which totaled 259

students, this was due to the vocational high school had long used the PJBL through a series of approaches

to produce student work products that could be exhibited regularly while the school was holding the certain

event. The sample used is two classes. The instruments used were questionnaire sheets, student affective

sheets, project assessments, and written tests. Hypothesis testing uses t-test and simple linear regression.

The results of the t-test conclude the differences between the significant variables of multimedia learning

outcomes between the experimental and control groups. The results of a simple linear regression test

concluded that there is a significant effect between the application of an integrated MOOC PJBL on the

learning outcomes of vocational students in the experimental group whose influence can be predicted

through a regression equation that gives rise to effective and relative contributions of each variable

1 INTRODUCTION

MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) is a new

paradigm of learning development based on digital

content (Suswanto et al., 2017), the new paradigm

raises variation of learning which is expected to

improve the quality of learning process and the

quality of student learning outcomes. Learning is a

process that is more than just receiving information,

memorizing and memorizing in learning. In order to

truly understand and apply his knowledge, students

must find problems and then grapple with ideas to

find ways to solve the problem.With learning that

tends to be centered on teacher students are more

passive in receiving information and have less

opportunity to develop their creativity. In this case

the student assumes that his role is only as a

spectator only and they feel that the teacher will

provide knowledge only if they are present in the

classroom. This situation makes the students less

motivated and less responsible in teaching and

learning process and it will affect the quality of

learning that is not only seen from the results of

learning alone, but also from the process.

MOOC integrates with PJBL (project-based

learning) to be one solution to answer it, because it

focuses on digitizing results and focuses on the

concept of learning development through a

discipline, involving students in problem-solving

activities and other learning tasks, giving students

opportunities for brainstorming, working in groups,

and peak producing valuable, creative and

innovative student work products (MayTruong

2016). MOOC also provides an important role to

provide creative self-directed learning assisted by

video and animation, and other literature as a source

of science besides teachers, This will make students

more active in reconstructing and concluding a

problem so that with the application of learning

fusion can improve student learning outcomes

vocational schools (Stracke and Teixeira n.d.).

Learning in vocational schools especially in Batu

Nidhom, A., Mukhadis, A., Kustiandi, J., Putra, A., Smaragdina, A., Herdiani, A. and Putro, S.

The Effect of Integrated Project based Learning MOOCs on Student Result of Vocational High School Students.

DOI: 10.5220/0008783401230127

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Research Conference on Economics and Business (IRCEB 2018), pages 123-127

ISBN: 978-989-758-428-2

123

Islam Vocational Schools has actually used the use

of a project-based learning approach through craft

and entrepreneurship subjects, but it is problematic

when teachers get assignments outside the

classroom, students are not active in learning

without assistance from teachers. Integration of

MOOC with PJBL will provide solutions to

problems like this so that even though teachers and

students are separated by distance and time do not

interfere with learning because it can be done

through asynchronous and synchronous.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 MOOCs

MOOCs are a development of open-distance

learning (PTJJ) in the form of online courses as well

as open and large open course materials with the aim

of enabling unlimited participation and accessible

through LMS (Learning Management System). In

addition to providing conventional content of

material and image texts, MOOCs also provide

video, animation and discussion of issues (case

studies), MOOCs also provide an interactive user

forum that helps in building communities for

educators and vocational school learners(Zee et al.,

n.d.).

Figure 1: MOOCs Providers Around The World

(source: online,

https://www.class-

central.com/report/mooc-providers-list/)

MOOCs began to be introduced in 2013, until

now MOOCs have grown to more than 10 providers,

in figure 1 seen EDX, COURSERA, UDACITY,

MIRIADA etc occupy the ranks of MOOCs in the

world. In Indonesia alone MOOCs began to be

known in early 2015 which marked the start of a

busy development of LMS used with Blended

Learning.

2.2 PJBL

PJBL (project-based learning) is different from PBL

(problem-based learning), although there are

similarities between the two. The similarity is that

both types of learning are science-based science of

mercury, emphasizing active student learning

environment, group work (collaborative), and

authentic assessment approach (authentic

assessment). The difference lies in the difference of

objects. In PBL, students are more encouraged in

activities that require problem formulation, data

collection, and data analysis (related to the

diagnostic process), in PJBL students are more

encouraged in design activities: formulating jobs,

designing (designing), calculating, project, and

evaluate results.

PJBL emphasizes the creativity of learners to

make projects from environmental issues, through a

series of activities that are gradual, learners are

invited to convey and listen to ideas, reflect the

framework of ideas and develop it in a project.

Interaction process is what makes PJBL able

juxtaposed with MOOCs that notabennya use of

technology needed when extracting ideas from the

digital world. The role of PJBL in learning is

maximal if supported by an authentic learning

environment through a series of stages ranging from

1). Apperception; 2). Introduction of material; 3).

Interlude material; 4). Main material and 5).

Evaluation (Richmond and Striley, 1996).

PJBL is actually not new learning, PJBL has the

potential to be developed thoroughly in the aspect of

education because it focuses on a result to be

achieved by learners. PJBL is not only used in

education, but it is also used in the world of work,

this is why PJBL is currently used as one of the good

methods to develop creativity and work ethic

appropriate for 21st-century learning.

2.3 LEARNING OUTCOMES

Learning outcomes are defined as the ability

possessed by students after receiving the learning

experience .In the national education system the

formulation of educational purposes using the

classification of learning outcomes according to

Bloom that broadly divides into 3 domains, namely

affective, psychomotor, and cognitive domains. The

details are as follows: a). Cognitive Sphere, with

respect to intellectual learning outcomes consisting

of six aspects: knowledge, understanding,

application, analysis, synthesis and assessment; b).

Affective Sphere, with respect to attitudes and

IRCEB 2018 - 2nd INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH CONFERENCE ON ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS 2018

124

values. Affective spheres include five levels of

ability to accept, answer or react, rate, organization

and characterize with a value or complex value; c).

Psychomotor domains, covering motor skills,

manipulation of objects, neuromuscular coordination

(linking, observing),(Thompson, Christensen, and

Wittmann 2011), the full picture in figure 2. The

types of cognitive learning outcomes are more

dominant than affective and psychomotor because

they are more prominent, but affective and

psychomotor learning results should also be part of

the assessment results in the learning process in

school.

Figure 2: Learning Outcomes (source:(Nidhom, KH,

and Sudjimat 2015)

Learning outcomes are the abilities possessed by

learners after they have received the learning

experience through a series of learning processes.

Learning outcomes are used by educators to be used

as criteria, measures and benchmarks in achieving a

learning objective. This can be achieved if the

student has understood the learning accompanied by

a change in behavior that is better afterward.

(Wheeler 2015), divides 3 kinds of learning

outcomes: (1) skill through a series of habits, (2)

knowledge through the process of understanding, (3)

attitudes seen from the desire to change.

3 METHODS

This study is an experimental study using quasi-

experimental design. The use of the design aims to

investigate possible cause-and-effect by using more

than one experimental group with different treatment

conditions. In this study the classes have been

formed prior to the research so that research is not

possible to randomly change the members of each

class. The research designs used are listed in Table

Table 1: Research Design Tabel

Group Initial Test Treatment Learning

Outcome

test

Exp.

Control

Notes:

Exp = Experiment Class

Cont = Control Class

= Initial Measurement

= Final Measurement

= MOOCs PJBL

= LMS Learning

In both groups (experiments and controls)

preceded by a pre test after it was treated, at the end

of the treatment was done post test in both groups.

The instrument used is a questionnaire to test the

successful use of integrated PJBL MOOCs and the

value of multimedia learning outcomes due to the

integrated use of MOOCs PJBL. For measurement

of learning result data using t-test and continued

using linear regression to reveal effective

contribution and relative donation of MOOCs usage

and use of LMS in control class.

4 RESULTS

Student learning result data is the value data

obtained after the students were given the treatment

obtained from the sum of 30% posttest value, 20%

affective value and 50% value of the project. From

the result of the average learning result, it is known

that the experimental class average value (81.00) is

higher than the control class average (76.00). From

the results of research and data analysis using SPSS

can be seen that there are differences in learning

outcomes between control classes and experimental

class. Student learning result data is obtained from

data of posttest value, project value, and affective

value of student in terms of student affective

appraisal rubric, product observation rubric,

presentation observation rubric and report portfolio.

Description of student learning result data for

posttest can be seen in Table 2.

Tabel 2: Student Result for Post-test Data

Group No.of

students

Min Max Mean

Std.

Dev.

Exp.

Control

78.25

75.00

4.487

7.162

The Effect of Integrated Project based Learning MOOCs on Student Result of Vocational High School Students

125

From Table 2 it can be seen that the average

score obtained by the experimental class (Exp.) is

higher than the average score obtained by the control

class (Control). Test of end-ability data normality

(student learning outcomes) experiment class and

control class can be seen in Table 3.

Table 3: Normality Test of Student Result of Class of

Experiment and Control Class

Group N

Std

Dev

Asym

p-Sig

Conclu-

sion

Expe-

riment

29 81,00 6.621 ,355 Normal

Control 29 75.76 8.264 ,236 Normal

In Table 3 it can be explained that the students'

learning outcomes of the experimental class and the

control class have a probability value (Asymp-Sig)

greater than 0.05, then the data is normal.

Tabel 4: Test-t Two Parties Data Learning Results Student

Test-t Two Parties Data Results in Student Learning

5 DISCUSSION

In Table 4 it can be seen that the students'

learning outcomes have a greater than a t

able

, so Ho

is rejected and H

accepted, so there are differences

in learning outcomes between students taught by

Project Based Learning model using Brain Storming

approach with direct learning demonstration. Based

on t

-test

results and the average obtained in Table 4

also can be stated that the students' learning

outcomes of the experimental class are higher than

the control class. the average initial ability of

students obtained by the experimental group is 66.48

with a standard deviation of 9,113. While the

average obtained a control group of 69.17 with a

standard deviation of 8.358. Descriptively, the

average experimental group is higher than the

control group average. This means that there is a

difference in the students' initial ability of the

experimental group and the control group. However,

in Table 3 it can be proved that there is no difference

in the students' initial ability of the experimental

group and the control group because the obtained

count

of 1,171 is smaller than

table

1.740. (H

accepted). Whereas if looking at the probability

(significant level) using Sig criteria. (p) = 0.548 is

greater than 0.05, so the assumption of research

which states that both groups of samples have the

same level of ability can be proven.

6 CONCLUSION

Based on the results of the research and data

analysis, the conclusions can be obtained as follows:

There are significant differences in multimedia

learning outcomes between the experimental groups

taught by the application of PJBL integrated

MOCCs with the control group taught with LMS, as

evidenced by hypothesis testing on the result and

discussion In addition, there is also a significant

effect between the application of PJBL integrated

MOOCs on multimedia learning outcomes in the

experimental group, as evidenced by simple linear

regression analysis that produces a significance

value that is much smaller than the normal boundary

of the intersection, so Ho is rejected and Ha is

accepted. Based on the results of research and

discussion that has been described, it can be given

suggestions including: For schools, the results of this

study are expected to be a consideration in an effort

to improve the application of learning models in

vocational schools, because learning with the

application of integrated PJBL MOOCs has been

shown to improve student learning outcomes. For

teachers, good time management is needed for the

implementation of learning, so that students can

really use the time to discuss, explore students'

creative ideas, conduct group practicum, and

understand the material being studied. For students,

it is expected to be able to use education well

because the teacher has tried to provide the best

service as best as possible.

REFERENCES

MayTruong, Huong. 2016. “Integrating Learning Styles

and Adaptive E-Learning System: Current

Developments, Problems and Opportunities.” Elsevier:

Computers in Human Behavior 55(B): 1185–93.

Nidhom, Ahmad Mursyidun, Ahmad Sonhadji KH, and

Dwi Agus Sudjimat. 2015. “Hubungan Kesiapan

Belajar, Lama Pembelajaran, Kesesuaian Tempat Dan

Group

test

able

Experiment

81,0656

2,666 1,740

Control

77.4232

IRCEB 2018 - 2nd INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH CONFERENCE ON ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS 2018

126

Partisipasi DU/DI Dengan Hasil Prakerin Peserta

Didik Kompetensi Keahlian TKJ Di SMK Kota Batu.”

Innovation of Vocational Technology Education

11(1): 1–14.

Stracke, Christian M, and António M Teixeira. “Building

a Common Quality Reference Framework for

Improving, Assessing and Comparing MOOC

Design.”

Suswanto, Hary, Ahmad Mursyidun Nidhom, Andika

Bagus Nur Rahma Putra Putra, and Jehad A H

Hammad. 2017. “Developing An LMS-Based Cross-

Platform Web Application For Improving Vocational

high School Students’ Competitiveness In ASEAN

Economic Community.” Pendidikan Sains 5(3): 72–

79.

Thompson, John R., Warren M. Christensen, and Michael

C. Wittmann. 2011. “Preparing Future Teachers to

Anticipate Student Difficulties in Physics in a

Graduate-Level Course in Physics, Pedagogy, and

Education Research.” Physical Review Special

Topics-Physics Education Research 7(1): 1–11.

Wheeler, S. 2015. Learning with ’e’s: Educational Theory

and Practice in the Digital Age. Wales: Crown House

Publishing.

Zee, Tim Van Der, Dan Davis, Jasper Ginn, and Fred

Paas. “Evaluating Retrieval Practice in a MOOC :



The Effect of Integrated Project based Learning MOOCs on Student Result of Vocational High School Students

127