The Effectiveness of Blended Project Based Learning Model in Power Electrics
Practicum Course
Aswardi1*, Ganefri2, Sukardi3, Unung Verawardina4
1,2,3,4Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Padang, Indonesia
aswardi@ft.unp..ac.id1
Article History: Received: 10 November 2020; Revised: 12 January 2021; Accepted: 27 January 2021; Published online: 05 April 2021
Abstract: This research was conducted since the students‘ learning outcomes on Electrics practicum learning process are not
optimal and leads to the demand of active and innovative learning model. This research was performed using experimental method of one group posttest design. During the study, experimental class used Blended-project based learning (BPjBL) model. The research samples were the university students who enrolled in Power Electrics Practicum course in Electrics Engineering Major in Faculty of Engineering of UNP. The instrument used was the learning test outcomes. The research result proved that BPjBL learning model was classically effective and able to improve the students’ learning outcomes in Power Electrics practicum course.
Keywords: Blended-project based learning model, power Electrics practicum, industrial revolution 4.0. 1. Introduction
TVET (Technical and Vocational Education and Training) is an educational and training program balancing the students’ academic and expertise in encountering the working world known as Business World and Industrial World (DUDI). Vocational education aims to prepare graduates to work (Catts et al., 2011), (Bill Lucas et al, 2012), (Sudira, 2016). TVET in Indonesian higher education level aims to prepare the university students so that they have academic skills and competences in certain fields, thus they have high competitiveness in industrial revolution 4.0 (Verawardina, et al, 2020), (Nofrianto,2020), (Vitrani et al, 2020), (Aswardi, 2020). In order to reach the goal, higher education needs to produce several innovations in implementing the learning process.
The presence of Teacher Center Learning (TCL) transformation into Student Centre Learning (SCL) changes the students‘ learning method, so that emerging several learning methods such as independent learning, discus-sion, simulation, cooperation, Problem-Based Learning, Project-Based learning, and others. However, among several SCL that have been applied, there are some weaknesses found, such as unable to be applied fully on higher education, especially TVET which obliges students to have both academic skills and competences in certain fields according to DUDI demand.
The 21st century brings some popular changes, among them are the rapid development of Science and
Tech-nology (IPTEK) which has changed the learning paradigm, indicated by changes in curriculum, media, and tech-nology (Sudira, 2018), (Hendryani et al, 2020).
Good learning media interprets abstract concept to become easily-understood. Information technology and communication-based learning cannot be separated from learning demand in the twenty-first century. One of the demands in 21st century is technology integration to become learning media to develop learning skills. Students
need to learn how to use essential technology for daily life and productivity at workplace. In addition, teaching and learning in the 21st century learning context is that students learn materials through examples, applications
and experiences in real life (Yusuf Durachman et al., 2020).
During industrial revolution 4.0 era, previously automatic and robotic era is developed and integrated with in-formation technology and communication or also known as Internet of Thing (IOT) where each working and socio-cultural aspects are connected through internet network, so it becomes more effective and efficient. Such revolution affects the process of learning in educational institution as well, particularly in vocational education which has purpose to produce graduates who are ready to work and competent in their expertise. These graduates are expected to have industrial revolution 4.0 skills (Bhattacharyya, 2018).
The implementation of learning process on educational institution must adapt fast on changes among com-munities and working world. The educational institution refers to higher education which is expected capable to apply IOT principles during learning process. Therefore, graduates from learning process are capable to adapt on the demands around the communities and working world easily.
Virtual laboratory learning is one of the superior products resulted from the advance information technology and laboratory. According to I KetutGedeDarma Putra (2009), laboratory is a place for students to carry out experiments based on theory they learn in the classroom. The function of experiment is to support learning so as to improve and encourage students’ comprehension towards materials they have learnt. Mendoza et al. (2019) argued that virtual laboratory is a supporting media for virtual-based learning which represents the real laborato-ry in the computer-based simulation by utilizing internet network. Moreover, the presence of such experiment or practice helps the students to concretize difficult abstract learning materials, so that students are able to under-stand the whole learning materials. However, due to limited fund in providing expensive laboratory equipment and laboratory operational cost, virtual laboratory-based learning can be utilized as an alternative choice in re-placing the real laboratory to eliminate the limited laboratory equipment.
Furthermore, the danger level in conducting practicum learning process using virtual laboratory is lower compared to the implementation of practicum in laboratory, so that practicum learning becomes safer. The pres-ence of labor virtual laboratory-based learning can be utilized to complete practicum learning which cannot be done directly.
According to Russel et al. (1997), teacher should assist the students to develop their comprehension during learning activities by providing: (1) direction and organization to learn; (2) learning motivation; (3) concept explanation which is difficult to learn by the students; (4) activities which can help the students to know (aware) and improve misconceptions; and (5) opportunity to provide direction in problem-solving. The visualization from physical phenomena and relevant concepts with animation in microscopic level, as well as simulation relat-ed to students‘ daily examples can improve the students’ knowlrelat-edge visually and stimulate students more in reaching the highest comprehension level on physics science (Russel et al., 1997).
Virtual laboratory will become more ideal when operated through internet connection, so that students can carry out learning process without limited place, space and time. Students can carry out learning process in the form of experiment anywhere and anytime. Virtual laboratory can also be operated in intranet or standalone computer. Through virtual laboratory, building or physical laboratory equipment is changed into computer and software of virtual laboratory (I KetutGede Putra D, 2009). According to several explanations above, virtual laboratory clearly can be used as an alternative to assist people in improving their productivity and welfare, solv-ing their problem, estimatsolv-ing several resolution choices and implementsolv-ing the resolution, particularly its relation-ship with the implementation of effective and efficient learning process by referring to the learning goal achievement.
Previous research conducted by Nais Wulandari et al found that in addition to capable in making the students active, practicum also has weaknesses. The weaknesses of practicum are: (1) expensive equipment and materials, (2) limited space and place, and (3) high tendency of accident. To avoid those weaknesses, practicum can be done virtually through virtual laboratory by utilizing technology. Virtual laboratory is a system used to support conventional practicum system. Virtual laboratory provides opportunity both with or without internet access so that students do not need to present in participating the practicum in laboratory. This becomes effective learning because students can learn independently and actively without instructor or assistant. Through web-based ap-pearance format, it can help the students to participate in the practicum independently.
Several learning theories supporting the virtual laboratory learning are constructivism, Vygotsky, and Ausub-el learning theory. Constructivism learning theory states that students must build their own knowledge. Knowledge is a cognitive construction of someone towards an object, experience or environment. The learning essence of Ausubel is a meaningful learning, which is a process correlating new information with relevant con-cepts in someone’s cognitive structure. In a meaningful learning, new information is assimilated on the existing relevant sources in cognitive structure. Vygotsky learning theory proposed Zone Proximal Development (ZPD) and Scaffolding. ZPD is a little development above the current person self-development. Scaffolding concept provides big help for students during the initial stages of learning and then decrease the help by giving oppor-tunity for the students to take over the responsibility (Nais Wulandari, 2017).
Based on the observation on several students of a4-year diploma (D4) of Industrial Engineering, Electrical engineering major, faculty of engineering, Universitas Negeri Padang during their participation in Power Elec-trics Practicum, practicum learning process was conducted in laboratory. During the learning process, lecturer would explain the basic theories based on practicum topic then the students would carry out the practicum based on the jobsheet they have.
Practicum activities must be carefully monitored by technician or lecturer directly so that no fatal error oc-curs during practicum learning process. During the practicum learning process, students tend to perform the practicum based on jobsheet only. This certainly will affect the practicum learning activities which seems boring, less interesting and does not trigger the students to continuously become innovative and creative.
In addition, the rapid development of power electrics equipment, component, and application in daily life, es-pecially in industrial field requires the availability of a lot of practicum equipment which frequently change over the time. This causes limitation in power electrics practicum equipment which leads to the lack of implementa-tion in newest learning materials and the lack of students’ activeness. This is indicated by the presence of several students who only paid attention to their friends starting from preparing the equipment and materials, making series to perform the series experiment without actively involved in the practicum. This causes many students receive low learning outcomes, receiving C and D, while few students received A score on Power Electrics Lab.
The annual average score of Power Electrics Practicum learning outcomes on the undergraduate students of Electrics Engineering Education study program have barely improved, the score was in the categories of either more than enough category or on the average of C. Meanwhile, Power Electrics Practicum is a main course, so on the average, students should obtain score B or in good category.
In order to solve such learning problem, lecturers should make effort in doing innovative teaching, one of them is through learning model. Therefore, one of the methods to provide learning solution is by applying model that has been successfully applied, which is Blended-Project Based Learning model. This learning model is an integration between Blended Learning and Project Based Learning (PjBL).
PjBL learning model gives opportunity to lectures to manage learning in the classroom by involving project work (Thomas, et al, 1999). Meanwhile, blended learning combines online and face-to-face learning (Krismadi-nata, et al, 2020), (Verawardina, et al, 2020).
The integration of these two model learnings is needed to synergize both Blended Learning and Project Based Learning (PjBL) models in learning. Syntax of Blended-Project Based Learning (BPjBL), learning model; (1) information analysis; (2) knowledge synthesis; (3) project analysis; (4) project presentation; and (5) evalua-tion.
Current research was performed to apply and know the effectiveness of Blended-Project Based Learning model on Power Electrics Practicum course.
2. Method
Research method used was experimental method by using onegroup posttest design. In this research, the ex-perimental class used BPjBL learning model. The class received posttest at the end of the lectures. This research involved 15 students taking Power Electrics Practicum course in S1 Electrics Engineering Education, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Negeri Padang as the samples.
The data were collected by conducting learning outcomes test cognitive, psychomotor and affective, which were then analyzed aiming to know the learning outcomes during Power Electrics Practicum. The test used pre-requisite test through normality, homogeneity and Dependent sample t-tests.
3. Result and Discussion
The objectives of this research was to know the effectiveness of Blended-project based learning (BPjBL) model in power electrics practicum course, to assist the students in improving their cognitive, psychomotor and affective
Table 1. Cognitive, Psychomotor and Affective Process Results.
No Kognitif Psikomotor Afektif
1 78,69 87,11 77,27 2 78,41 82,42 75,85 3 81,82 88,67 83,24 4 73,86 83,20 76,14 5 74,72 78,13 75,28 6 75,85 80,86 77,84 7 74,43 81,64 77,84 8 75,57 84,77 75,00 9 74,15 78,13 76,14 10 75,00 78,91 75,85 11 73,58 78,52 75,00 12 71,02 75,39 80,11 13 73,30 75,00 80,40 Rerata 75,42 80,98 77,38
Based on the table, it can be seen that the average cognitive results of students are 75.42, good categories, psychomotor results are 80.98, very good categories and affective results are 77, 38 are good categories. The following shows a graph of each process as a function of the respondent.
Figure 3. Results of the Affective Process Assessment
Before the students’ learning outcomes were analyzed, the prerequisite test including normality and homoge-neity test were conducted.
1) Analysis Prerequisite Test a) Normality Test
Normality test was performed by using Kolmogorov Smirnov statistic with significance level of α = 0.05, tested using SPSS. The test result is shown in the following table:
Table 2. Normality Tests Tests of Normality
Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk
Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.
Formative .197 15 .123 .915 15 .162
Summative .167 15 .200* .925 15 .231
*. This is a lower bound of the true significance. a. Lilliefors Significance Correction
Significance score of formative data obtained 0.123. It means that the significance score obtained was more than 0.05 (0.123 > 0.05), therefore it can be concluded that the formative data was distributed normally. Meanwhile, the significance score of summative data was 0.200, which means that it was more than 0.05 (0.200 > 0.05), so, it was summed up that the summative data was normally distributed. Therefore, the two variables were both normally distributed.
b) Homogeneity Test
Homogeneity test was performed on students’ learning outcomes using levene test through SPSS software. The criteria was that the data was considered as homogenous if the significance level was more than 0.05. The test result is presented in the following table:
Table 3. Homogeneity Test ANOVA
Formative
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between Groups 41.869 4 10.467 1.379 .309
Within Groups 75.904 10 7.590
The significance score of formative and summative data variant test obtained 0.309. It means the significance score obtained was more than 0.05 (0.309 > 0.05), thus it was summed up that the variant test was homogenous. Therefore, both variables were homogenous.
2) t Test
The test conducted during the practicum in the experimental class can be identified and analyzed as follow: Table 4. t Test
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df Sig. (2-tailed) Mean Differ-ence Std. Error Difference 95% Confidence In-terval of the Differ-ence
Lower Upper
Scores
Equal variances
as-sumed 1.019 .321 6.052 28 .000 6.22133 1.02794 4.11570 8.32697 Equal variances not
assumed 6.052 27.894 .000 6.22133 1.02794 4.11534 8.32733
The significance value of t test was 0.000, thus 0.000 > 0.05. Therefore, it can be summed that there was no difference on the averaged between formative and summative scores. This was also proven by the t count score of 6.025. Compared to the t table (df= 28) which was 1.70113, t count > t table (6.025 > 1.70113). So that it can be summed up that there was significance difference on the average of formative and summative scores.
Vocational education for adult education is design to prepare students to be ready to work (Wittig, et al, 2009). Therefore, lecturers must be capable to find a way how to produce graduates who have capabilities in working. One of the ways that can be done by the lecturer is by applying effective learning mode. BPjBL learn-ing model that has been developed by researchers has syntax of: (1) information analysis; (2) knowledge synthe-sis; (3) project analysynthe-sis; (4) project presentation; and (5) evaluation. The following is the syntax of BPjBL mod-el.
Figure 4. BPjBL model.
The application of BPjBL model can optimize the students‘ individual competence. BPjBL model can also improve the students‘ creativity and innovation in learning in group, so that later can produced qualified project process during Power Electrics Practicum. BPjBL model effectiveness indicates that the application of BPjBL model is effective to be used in learning process during Power Electrics Practicum course.
4. Conclusion
Based on the research result, it shows that the application of Blended-Project Based Learning (BPjBL), with syntax of (1) information analysis; (2) knowledge synthesis; (3) project analysis; (4) project presentation; and (5) evaluation improved the students‘ learning outcomes significantly. The implication of these findings obtained good learning achievement. Students become more active and motivated in implementing the learning due to the systematic implementation of BPjBL mode. These findings recommend the lecturers to give regulation in con-ducting learning process by applying BPjBL model systematically.
References
1. Aswardi, Nellitawati, 2020. The Effects of Blended Learning Model on the Learning Outcome of Students in the Electrical Department of the University of Padang. Jour of Adv Research in Dynamical & Control Systems, Vol. 12, 03-Special Issue, 2020
2. Catts,R., Ian¸ F.¸ & Ruth,W. 2011. Vocational learning innovative theory and practice. Lon-don:Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg
3. Lucas, Bill., Spencer, Ellen and Claxton, Guy. 2012. How to teach vocational education: A theory of vocational pedagogy. United Kingdom, London: City & Guilds Centre for Skills Development.
4. Sudira, P. 2016. TVET abad XXI filosofi, teori, konsep, dan strategipembelajaranvokasionaL. Yogya-karta: UNY Press.
5. Sudira, P. 2018. MetodelogiPembelajaranVokasional Abad XXI. Yogyakarta: UNY Press.
6. Bhattacharyya, E. 2018. Stakeholders perspective on communicative competence in industry 4.0: Walk the talk of informative technologists. Les Ulis: EDP Sciences. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20185303001.
7. Wittig,W., Lauterbach, U., & Grollman, P. (2009). TVET Research Organizations and Scientific Com-munities: Challenges to the Institutionalization of TVET Research. International Handbook of Educa-tion for the Changing World of Work, Bridging Academic and VocaEduca-tional Learning, Germany: Spring-er, 1535-1554.
8. Hendriyani, Y., Ramadhani, D., Nasution, T., Susanti, W., & Verawardina, U. 2020. Examining Career Development of Informatics Engineering Vocational Education Students in the Industrial Revolution 4.0. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 11(4), 275–298.
9. Krismadinata, Unung Verawardina, Nizwardi Jalinus, Fahmi Rizal, Sukardi, Putu Sudira, Dochi Rama-dhani, Arina Luthfini Lubis, John Friadi, Ari Syaiful Rahman Arifin, Dony Novaliendry. Blended Learning as Instructional Model in Vocational Education: Literature Review. Universal Journal of Edu-cational Research, vol. 8, 11b, pp. 5801 - 5815, 2020. DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2020.082214.
10. Nofrianto, H., Jama, J., & Indra, A. (2020). Validity of Cooperative-Discovery Learning Model to Im-prove Competencies of Engineering Students. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 11(12), 1134-1138. 11. Reiter, Russel, et al. "Pharmacological actions of melatonin in oxygen radical pathophysiology." Life
sciences 60.25 (1997): 2255-2271.
12. Verawadina, U., Jalinus, N., Krismadinata, Widya, R.N., & Simeru, A. 2020. Needs Assessment of E-Learning Vocational Education. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 11(4), 262–274.
13. Vitriani, Ali, G., Nanda, D. W., Syahril, Desnelita, Y., Satria, R., & Verawadina, U. 2020. The validity of training models based on knowledge management systems. International Journal of Innovation, Crea-tivity, and Change,12(12), 726-741.
14. Wulandari, N., & Vebrianto, R. (2017, May). Studi Literatur Pembelajaran Kimia Berbasis Masalah ditinjau dari Kemampuan Menggunakan Laboratorium Virtual. In Seminar Nasional Teknologi Infor-masi Komunikasi dan Industri (pp. 709-715).
15. Yusuf Durachman, (2020). Analysis of Learning Techniques for Performance Prediction in Mobile Adhoc Networks. International Innovative Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 6, Issue.2, (pp. 46-53).
