REPORT TITLE: National Exam Preparation for Stage 6 Students of
Indonesian school in Saudi Arabia
Introduction
The Indonesian School in Riyadh (ISR)
has curriculum and policy similar to public school in Indonesia. The school has
five days intra curricular and one-day extra curricular activities. The school only has
science program in Stage 6 for a limited number of students, while in Indonesia and other Indonesian schools in
Makah and Jeddah have science and social program.
However, the school has a priority
program to achieve the best quality outcomes and give opportunities for
students to continue to study at their preferred university in Saudi Arabia and
or Indonesia. The school decided to use Instructional System Design (ISD) as
complement of blended leaning activities.
The
Learners
For this paper I will be
focusing on class of 16 students in Year
11 and 14 students in Year 12 who are preparing for university. Students
who rank in the top five in both Year 11 and Year 12 will get free entry to
study in many universities in Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. The students who have
position as the best three in Stage 6 will get scholarship in those universities.
The students not
only want to take majors that relates to science such as Science,
Technology Engineering and Math (STEM), but they also want to take opportunities
to study in social
programs, such as Business, Government and Law (BGL).
The students in the science program have opportunities to choose majors in STEM
and or BGL in university but
students in social programs cannot choose STEM. However, students who have goals to continue to study BGL in university have the challenge to learn numbers of
subjects that are not available in the Stage 6. For these reason, preparation to study
in university should start in Year 11.
Successful students in the best three will receive
‘special award’ and have their names written on the board list on guest room wall in the school. The
students who do not rank in the best
five can take opportunity in
both public and private universities through
selection test.
The students in Stage
6 are able to work as individual or in-group. The majority students have had experiences
to support annual events in Overseas Indonesian
School Competition (OISC) and International School Exhibition in
Riyadh (ISER).
Students need
to optimize
their opportunity to study in university by appropriate environment and eLearning mechanism as supplement of
classical methods.
Learning Barriers and The Learners Need
The school has policy to
Bring Your Own Devices (BYOD) and
during class time or structured activities devices should only be used for learning process. All classrooms have
reliable Wi-Fi access, one set computer with
an LCD projector and each student have an iPad and mobile phone, but there are number
of potential barriers and learners need that could be highlighted in
this program, as shown on Table 1.
Table1. Barrier Learners Face and
Learners Need
No
|
Potential Barriers
|
Learners Need
|
1.
|
Languages level University Requirements:
-
Saudi Arabia
University
-
Indonesian
University
|
Arabic Level ≥ 6,50
Indonesian Level ≥ 7,00
|
2.
|
Learning Materials:
-
Limited social studies’ books print
|
Provide eBooks
|
3.
|
Instructors:
-Lack of instructors for face-to face in class
|
Classroom and Online
Tutorial
|
4.
|
Internet Access:
-Limited access
during school hours
|
Unlimited internet
access
|
5.
|
School Policy on Gadgets
-No mobile phone
in the classroom
|
Exemption for only
Stage 6
|
6.
|
Motivation:
-Cram
-Competition effects
|
Prepare earlier and
integrated
Parents and teachers’
support
|
7.
|
Cultural:
-Female students
need to be accompanied by father or
brother for beyond school activities
|
Activities
centralized at school and or at home
|
The Learning Need
In order to meet the requirements from universities in Indonesia
and Saudi Arabia, the ISR has various programs
for developing interactive learning to achieve the best scores in two National
Exams in Year 11 and Year 12. These activities should be applicable
in school and beyond. The students in Year 11 and Year
12 need to learn number of subjects in social program for they are
not given in the science program as seen
on Table 2.
Table 2. Specific Subjects for
Science and Social Programs in Stage 6 in Indonesian curriculum.
Science Program
|
Social Program
|
Biology
|
Geography
|
Physics
|
Sociology-Anthropology
|
Chemistry
|
Economics
|
Math
|
Accountancy
|
The students need social subjects instructors who
can assist them both online and offline. The
Instructors could be experienced teachers from
Indonesia and/or Indonesian Post Graduate students at local university in
Riyadh that
have capability to support interactive learning process by blended learning strategy. Marzano and
Hattie (2015), study show the impact of teachers’ ability to student achievement as illustrated
in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Teachers’ ability and
students achievement
The students are able to use the required technology with some
assistance when needed. All students in
Stage 6 have unlimited Internet access
at home and they are strongly
motivated to achieve the best scores in
national exams and to continue to
study in university. The summative assessment of this program is narrowed to the result of try out Exam
local Saudi Arabia every semester and national
exam result.
Contextual Analysis
Analysis of Learning Context
The ISR has
experiences on some eLearning programs. Every year, Stage 5 students
participate in OISC and ISER in which students have to speak Indonesian, Arabic
and English in their performance. However, this
program is aimed to support student
personally in both Year 11 and
Year 12 exams. Berge and Giles (as cited on Becker, Newton,
Sawang, 2013) stated that the potential to deliver learning tailored to the specific
needs of learners, essentially offering "just-in-time and just-for-me
learning" are the most common arguments in favor of eLearning.
Based on the choice to use
National Exam Practice Test (NEPT) or
National Exam Preparation (NEP), Hattie, (as cited on Killian, 2014) pointed out for over 800,000
studies, he found that practice test
had only a small effect on student achievement. The school has a strategy to modify curriculum to achieve the goal by NEP and students in Year 11 are
given social subject in intra curricular
activities for two hours everyday
and it would continue for students in Year 12.
According to
Indonesian curriculum, History, Physics,
Art and Information Communication and Technology (ICT) are included in intra
curricular activities. The school
decided to teach Stage 6 students on the
exam subjects as priority. One-day extra
curricular activity has modified to teach students on those subjects.
Khanna (2013) stated that one of issue in eLearning is lack of instructors. The school
has strategy that each social subject is
given four hours every week, which are two
hours in class and two hours online. In comparison, conventional classes for social program, each subject is given six hours every week.
Each subject has
working activities which are students’ discussion,
presentation and classical test for two hours in classroom every month. These activities in purpose are aim to support students working together in
productive ways. Use group work only once students have developed some
level of proficiency and structure roles, so that each student must make meaningful contributions (Killian, 2015).
In addition, the main subjects on science program are
given as it, for students have had learning activities intensively for all science
subjects on Stage 5. The students in Year
9 and Year 10 are given extra learning materials for Stage 6 and extra
tutorials both online and offline on those subjects as preparation for OISC and ISER events. Those events can have
positive impact on improving students’ competence in science subjects as Belfield & Levin (2002) argued that competition appears to raise performance of students and
instructors.
The Learning Environments
The eLearning environments that
support NEP should give chances for
students and instructor to have interaction
intensively. Hirumi (2013) stated that
these interactions involve setting and
conforming the learning outcomes,
two-way traffic communication, providing feedback to initiate and facilitate
discussion, in purpose to reach the
learner needs. The inter-relationship would be focused on context,
content and learning instruction both offline and online.
The content need to be
relevant, useful, practical, organized
and engaging (Guiterez, 2014). The content need to be dispensed
and comprehensive in every activity to meet student expectation to reach the
best scores in two national exams. Instructional
System design (ISD) should be useful and
relevant to design and learning material to support the students need.
ISD could reshape and revolutionize teaching; indeed, technology is, as Berson & Berson (2010, p.
2) point out, a
necessary and integral part of the modern classroom, and a “learning environment without it would be completely out
of touch”.
Leonidis, Margetis, Antona, &
Stephanidis (2010, p. 465) claimed, ISD would
result in “greater user-friendliness,
more efficient services support, user-empowerment, and support for human
interactions”.
Such classrooms
would use online tutorials, e-textbooks,
adaptive learning systems, personalized ‘playlists’ and data analytics
to “’reshape
learning’” through “real-time feedback;
individualization and personalization of the educational experience; and
probabilistic predictions to optimize
what students’ learn”
(Williamson, 2014).
Williamson (2014) also argued that, blended learning is socially networked, so that students can
“learn… at home, at school and online”. The students could collaborate on projects more easily, but also use social networks to connect to instructors in Indonesia and or
in Saudi Arabia. Ally (as cited on Siragusa,
Dixon & Dickson, (2007) stated that online learning
has flexibility of access from anywhere
and anytime.
In the context of NEP, our classrooms could mean lessons
more effectively tailored to students’ needs;
software could test students’ abilities and identify problem areas. The learning
process could also use data about
students’ tastes and interests to suggest input (books, videos, newspapers,
etc.), which they would want to read for their own sake, rather than because they have been told to read them; they would therefore have more motivation
for NEP.
Motivation
Siragusa, et al. (2007) pointed
out that enrolled students in university have
variety of background and reasons for studying.
The teaching strategies for Stage 6 students of ISR should clarify exactly what students want to know and be able to do
by the end of each lesson. Killian (2015), shows the evidence based on that strategies have
more impact than most. Students should have
a vision of what will they be able
when accomplish this program. Students will be uncomfortable if they
desire what’s on the other side. If they are not
sure of the benefits of this learning
solution is going to sink once the learning activities gets tough. Hillman
(2003) stated that the beginning point for learning is a problem in which the student wants to resolve.
Siragusa et al. (2007) argued that students who motivated intrinsically could develop a deeper understanding of subject matter content. In contrast, Godin (as
cited on Nesvig, 2014) pointed out about motivation on a new learning endeavor, students are fun at first, but they become aware of
their limitations as “the dip” and is frustrated on what they want to
accomplish and what they are capable of, as
illustrated in Figure 2.
Figure 2. The gap between effort
and result.
Solution Evaluation
The Framework
Learning Management System (LMS)
solution must work effectively and provide unlimited Internet access among
students and instructor. Adlington, Nader and Parkes, (2015) stated that the
implementations of appropriate eLearning resources are needed to designing an
effective learning process. Dick and Carey (DC) model has chosen as ISD because
it meets Stage 6 students’ need. This model assumes the learner is active in
the learning process, integrates the learner needs, skills and learning context
into the design. DC model has flexibility that allow in more personalization of
the learning design to suit the smaller demographic of learners (Clark, 2004),
in which interrelation with two eLearning tools solution will be discussed.
ELearning Solution 1: MissionV
This eLearning tool was chiefly aimed at inspire and engage
children who is at risk of underachieving. It can give opportunities
to the student thorough understanding with better information retention,
commitment to tasks beyond school time, increased motivation through affective
feedback, peer acceptance and interaction with struggling students, and
adaptability of the technology to suit a range of student abilities (Galvin
& Burke, 2012). In addition, students communicate and plan their projects
via their digital character or avatar making this a truly immersive and
engaging experience. MissionV Website (2015) shows the program also fostered
peer teaching between students, which provided opportunities for reflection,
motivation and created a learning community on social subject within the
classrooms as seen on Figure 3.
Figure 3. Virtual reality
classroom activities.
MissionV and the Learning Needs
Based on combination of barrier
learners face, learners’ need and six aspects of learner interaction as Hirumi
(2013) describes, MissionV is appropriate eLearning tool to use as complement
of blended learning activities. MissionV could construct interaction between
Learner-Instructor (LI), Learner-Learner (LL), Leaner-Other (LO),
Learner-Content (LC), Learner-Tool (LT) and Learner-Environment (LE). Galvin
(2012) argued that through the Virtual World environment of MissionV, students’
understanding was deeper.
MissionV would facilitate Stage 6
students of ISR to be able to work as personal or in-group. Wilde (as cited on
Abrosimova, 2014) said that everyone on the team is important, and students
need to working together and benefit for different skills, specializations of
their team members.
Stage 6 students have had
experiences on OISC and ISER as personal and in-group competition. Belfield
& Levin (2002, p. 39) argued that increased competition and higher educational
quality are positively correlated. In addition, students are motivated by
teachers and parents to achieve the best scores in two National Exams in Year
11 and Year 12.
MissionV could use to answer Stage
6 students need to upgrade their language level, e-books access, motivation and
culture issues. Engagement of LI, LL, LC, LT and LE with task continued at
home, refining creations and solving problem online (Galvin, 2012). Stage 6
students can have opportunities to perform on site with unlimited text,
graphics, articles, photograph, images and illustrations, also collaborate in
virtual reality classroom fosters social integration of students as projected
on Table 3.
Table 3. Interactions of MissionV
and Learners Need
No
|
Learners Need
|
MissionV
|
Interaction
|
1.
|
-Arabic Level ≥ 6,50
-Indonesian Level ≥ 7,00
|
-Provide
peer teaching
-Virtual
platform and headsets for inspiring creative learning
-Lesson
plan
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both offline and online. It could use text,
articles and images, for instance.
|
2.
|
- Social studies’ books print
|
-Provide
peer tutoring opportunities
-Lesson
plan
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
3.
|
-Classroom and Online Tutorial
|
-Provide
peer tutoring opportunities
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
4.
|
-Unlimited Internet
access during school hours
|
-Collaboration
in virtual reality classroom
-Lesson
plan
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in classroom activities
|
5.
|
-Mobile phone exemption
|
-Collaboration
in virtual reality classroom
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in classroom activities
|
6.
|
-Crams’ solution
-Parents and teachers
support
|
-Introduce
new approach to rewards
-Virtual
game-based experience
-Collaboration
in virtual reality classroom
-Lesson
plan
|
-LI, LL, LC and LE in both offline and online.
-Game application.
-Peers teach LI and LL.
-Cooperative learning LI, LL, LC and LE.
|
7.
|
-Female students
need to be accompanied by father or
brother for beyond school activities
|
-Collaboration
in virtual reality classroom
-Provide
peer tutoring opportunities
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
MissionV and DC Model
The pedagogical flexibility of the MissionV system means that
the program can be applied to a range of different contexts. It has met with
the characteristics of the DC model; which are flexible, goal
oriented, focused on the ability of learners and performance objectives (Dick,
Carey, & Carey, 2009).
MissionV is illustrated with a
lesson plan or mission that has potential right across the curriculum
particularly for history, geography, literacy and the visual arts (MissionV
Website, 2015). It shows the evidence that MissionV could identify
instructional goal, conduct instructional analysis, analysis learners and contexts
(Hussain & Ismail, 2008), and others stages on DC Model. In addition,
MissionV is applicable for DC Model and Stage 6 students’ goal in social
subjects and NEP program in ISR, as seen on Table 4.
Table 4. Link between MissionV and DC Model
No
|
MissionV
|
DC Model
|
1.
|
-Virtual reality can produce will eventually veer students’
desire for exploration more toward intellect and away from play.
|
Identify Instructional Goal
|
2.
|
-Virtual reality
introduces new approach to rewards.
|
Conduct
Instructional Analysis
|
3.
|
- Virtual platforms and headsets are the new tools for inspiring
creative learning.
|
Analysis Learner
and Contexts
|
4.
|
-Virtual reality introduces new approach to rewards.
|
Write Performance Objectives
|
5.
|
-Rewards for achievements.
|
Develop Assessment Instrument
|
6.
|
-Virtual reality introduces new approach to rewards.
|
Develop Instructional Strategy
|
7.
|
-Rewards for achievements.
|
Develop and Select Instructional Material
|
8.
|
-Virtual reality introduces new approach to rewards.
|
Develop and
Conduct Formative Evaluation of Instruction
|
9.
|
- Rewards for
achievements.
|
Revise
Instruction and design
|
10.
|
-Collaboration of creativity and new tech.
-Provide peer teaching.
|
Conduct Summative Evaluation
|
ELearning Solution 2: Facebook Close
Group (FBCG)
In 2010, Facebook made it possible
to create closed groups that allow asynchronous and synchronous interactions
between members (Meishar-Tal, Kurtz, Pieterse, 2012, p. 1). As well as digital
media, on FBCG, students are able to share information in written form such as
on group chat, and with other media types, such as pictures and videos.
Students and Instructors can take opportunities to get involve in these
programs, and more active to produce the culture (Jenkins, et al 2009).
Popularity of Facebook can be use
as eLearning tool for Stage 6 students because all of them have an access for
it. Using combination face –to-face with FBCG approach in eLearning process can
be constructed to accommodate student preferences for improving their abilities
on social subjects. We construct to the technology, and the technology also
constructs us (Schultz, 2015).
Facebook could construct
interaction between LI, LL, LO, LC, LT and by FBG as shown on Figure 4.
Figure 4. FBCG Alumni of
Indonesian school in Riyadh
FBCG and the Learning Needs
Hocoy (2013) stated that Facebook would
generate good publicity, provide currency with the tech-savvy, and draw the attention
of new audiences. The advantages of using FBCG for Stage 6 students of ISR are:
(1) From their own news feeds,
students could check updates, reminders, request and notification regularly on
the Facebook Wall.
(2) They could submit assignments
or their critical response on the forum by Facebook Discussion board.
(3) Students and instructor could
post question, ideas or link to some sites by Facebook wall page at anytime. The
FBCG platform also let students participate in the virtual classroom of social
subjects with instructor in Indonesia and/or Universities in Riyadh and bring
diverse and global perspectives to the conversation (Hocoy, 2013).
(4) Students and instructor have
opportunities to post images and videos. It has been shown that Facebook kept
all the students ‘in touch’ due to activities (Cover, 2014).
Based on specific needs for Stage
6 students of ISR, VanDoorn & Eklund (2013, p. 6) claimed, “Text-based communication
between Facebook users is free of charge regardless of geographical distance.
It is a synchronous text-based on Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) medium;
teacher and student converse through typed messages in real time”. In this
context, interaction of LI, LL, LO and LC could deliver by Facebook Wall,
Discussion Board and Chat to study not only Arabic and Indonesian, but also
social subjects and solve the cultural issue for female students, as projected
on Table 5.
Table 5. Interaction of Facebook
and Learners Need
No
|
Learners Need
|
FBCG
|
Interaction
|
1.
|
-Arabic Level ≥ 6,50
-Indonesian Level ≥ 7,00
|
-Facebook
Wall
-Discussion
Board
-Images
and videos
-Chat
|
LI, LL, LC and LE online. It could use text, articles, images
and chat, for instance.
|
2.
|
- Social studies’ books print
|
-Facebook
Wall
-Discussion
Board
-Chat
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
3.
|
-Classroom and Online Tutorial
|
-
Facebook Wall
-Discussion
Board
-Images
and videos
-Chat
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
4.
|
-Unlimited
Internet access during school hours
|
-Applicable
on gadgets
-Accessible
anytime
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in classroom activities
|
5.
|
-Mobile phone exemption
|
-Applicable
on iPads and Computers
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in classroom activities
|
6.
|
-Crams’ solution
-Parents and teachers
support
|
-Facebook
Wall
-Create
group of discussion
-Games
-Chat
and Share on forum
|
-LI, LL, LC and LE in both offline and online.
-Game application.
-Peers teach LI and LL.
-Cooperative learning LI, LL, LC and LE.
|
7.
|
-Female students
need to be accompanied by father or
brother for beyond school activities
|
-Accessible
from home and school
|
LI, LL, LC and LE in both 2 hours offline and online, also
monthly activities
|
FBCG and DC Model
Meishar-Tal et al. (2012, p. 2) argued that the FBCG contains at
least two of the three components of learning management systems, the digital
content component and the interaction component, and thus raises the
possibility that Facebook could turn into a learning environment and serve as
an alternative LMS. It has met with the components of the DC model that
utilized sharing common attributes in education (Hussain & Ismail, 2008);
which is flexible, goal oriented, focused on the ability of
learners and performance objectives (Dick, Carey, & Carey, 2009). FBCG have
meet with components of DC Model, such as Develop and Select Instructional
Material as shown on Figure 5.
Figure 5. Instruction Material on
FBCG
The evidence of FBCG shown that
the response of students was overwhelmingly positive (Hocoy, 2013), and it could
identify instructional goal, conduct instructional analysis, analysis learners
and contexts (Hussain & Ismail, 2008), and others stages on DC Model. In
addition, FBCG is applicable for all steps on DC Model and Stage 6 students’
goal in social subjects and NEP program in ISR, as seen on Table 6.
Table 6. Link between FBCG and DC Model
No
|
DC Model
|
FBCG
|
1.
|
Identify Instructional Goal
|
Yes
|
2.
|
Conduct
Instructional Analysis
|
Yes
|
3.
|
Analysis Learner and Contexts
|
Yes
|
4.
|
Write Performance Objectives
|
Yes
|
5.
|
Develop Assessment Instrument
|
Yes
|
6.
|
Develop Instructional Strategy
|
Yes
|
7.
|
Develop and Select Instructional Material
|
Yes
|
8.
|
Develop and
Conduct Formative Evaluation of Instruction
|
Yes
|
9.
|
Revise
Instruction and design
|
Yes
|
10.
|
Conduct Summative Evaluation
|
Yes
|
Recommendation
In order to meet NEP requirements,
Guided Experiential Learning (GEL), which are Goals, Reason and Activation, Demonstration,
Application, Integration and Assessment (Clark, 2004) and interaction of LI,
LL, LC, LO and LE in the DC model, MissionV and FBCG need to be determined as
the best solution for Stage 6 students.
Both eLearning tools have similar
capabilities to reach the goal, including learning objectives, problems on
social subjects that need to be solved and what students will be able to do at
the end of NEP. MissionV and FBCG could demonstrate and describe reasons and
activation. It also would answer the questions about value and utility such as
why is learning social subjects important, and the risk if students avoid to
learning it, as shown on Table 7.
Table 7. Design of MissionV and
FBCG on GEL
No
|
Guided
Experiential Learning (GEL)
|
MissionV
|
FBCG
|
1.
|
Goal
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
2.
|
Reason and
Activation
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
3.
|
Demonstration
|
Yes.
Limited evidences
|
Yes.
Many evidences
|
4.
|
Application
|
Yes,
limited, but it possible to use
|
Yes,
applicable. All students on Facebook
|
5.
|
Integration
|
Yes.
Online and offline
|
Yes.
Online and offline
|
6.
|
Assessment
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
The Impacts of MissionV and FBCG in Learners Context
On Year 9 and Year 10, students
have had experiences to use three languages; Indonesian, English and Arabic on
OISC and ISER events in which could improve students’ competence (Belfield
& Levin 2002). Students are familiar with FBCG as eLearning tool to support
those events. In this regard, the school could use FBCG to reduce a tension
because students do not need to adapt to a new eLearning tool like MissionV,
for example.
Students need focus on two
national exams on Year 11 and Year 12, and modify curriculum is needed to
achieve the best scores by NEP. Stage 6 students have to study science and
social programs in the same time and it needs an eLearning strategy in which
effective and efficient to support social subjects in both classroom and
online. MissionV and FBCG could use to facilitate the blended learning
activities. However, application of social subjects are a new program in
MissionV .
The Impacts of MissionV and FBCG in the Learning Environments
MissionV
achieved this through “providing a highly creative, totally immersive, game
based learning environment,” (MissionV Website, 2015). Meanwhile FBCG is clear
from the feedback that an intimate and stimulating environment can be created
online with a relatively large number of students (Hocoy, 2013). These
interactions involve setting and conforming the learning outcomes, providing
feedback to initiate and facilitate discussion to reach the learner needs
(Hirumi, 2013).
MissionV and FBCG could support
students by online tutorial, e-book and classroom activities to optimize their
opportunity to reshape learning at home, at school and online. However, the
students could collaborate in NEP more easily with FBCG to connect to
instructors in Indonesia or Saudi Arabia, because they already have Facebook
application on their gadgets. Combination of FBCG in the classroom could mean lessons
more effectively tailored to students’ needs, could test students’ abilities
and identify problem areas among female students and limitation Internet access
during school hours, for instance.
The Impacts of MissionV and FBCG in Motivation
MissionV and FBCG motivate LI, LL,
and LO on NEP to reach the best scores in two national exams. Stage 6 students
know that NEP should use as strategy to support learning activities on social
subjects and the opportunities to continue to study in universities in
Indonesia and/or Saudi Arabia by three top rank, the best five or selection
test. The students who motivated intrinsically could develop a deeper understanding
of social subjects content (Siragusa et al. 2007). In addition, FBCG provide
more opportunities for Stage 6 students in NEP program, as shown on Table 8.
Table 8. Advantages of
MissionV and FBCG
A
D
V
A
N
T
A
G
E
S
|
MissionV
|
FBCG
|
1.
Free cost
2.
Each step is iterative (MissionV
Website, 2015).
3.
3D Immersive Technology (Keane, 2011).
4.
Challenging, collaborative and creative
learning (Keane,
2011).
5.
Accessible and can be used at school
and at home (MissionV Website, 2015).
6.
Can provide opportunities for peer
group development (Keane,
2011).
7.
Instructors led and students driven, teacher could explain in
classroom and students continued beyond (Keane, 2011).
8.
Innovative and is making excellent use
of cutting edge technologies (Keane, 2011).
|
1.
Free cost
2.
Creating a personal and group identity
(Pempek et al., 2009)
3.
Creating strong interpersonal
connections asynchronous and synchronous among users (Meishar-Tal et al.,
2012)
4.
Providing a safe, intimate environment
in which the participants can confidently express their personal feeling (Van
Doorn & Eklund, 2013).
5.
Affording shy students the opportunity
to take an active part in discussion and learning process (Van Doorn &
Eklund, 2013)
6.
Offering a convenient forum for holding
informal discussion on subjects relating to learning task (Van Doorn &
Eklund, 2013)
7.
Introducing the students to different
cultures as well as to different linguistic codes (Blattner, 2009)
8.
Raising the students’ awareness of the
importance of creating an academic network and/or social network (Bosch,
2009)
|
However, there is no eLearning
tool that could accommodate all of the students’ need and give guarantee for
successfully program, as well as FBCG that has some negative impacts for
students are:
1. Students
who don't study or pay attention in class do not get good marks in their exams
(Khan & Bakhsh, 2015).
2. The
environment is not solely responsible for the creation of learning dynamics.
3. The
role of the instructors in designing the task and the motivation of learners
are contributing to the success of the activity and the dynamics that were
developed (Meishar-Tal et al., 2012).
MissionV also has negatives aspect
such as system failure and lack of skilled instructors as shown on Figure 6.
Figure 6. Disadvantages of MissionV
Justification
FBCG should be chosen as eLearning
tool on NEP for it is familiar in ISR in which students have had used it on
OISC and ISER events, and majority students are veteran of those events. OISC and ISER can have positive impact on
improving students’ competence in science subjects as Belfield & Levin
(2002) argued that competition appears to raise performance of students and
instructors. In addition, FBCG could be use to reduce barriers of LT in
learning strategy, especially on social subjects.
FBCG is more accessible for interaction
of LI and LL, because it applicable for students’ gadgets and instructors in
Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. As comparison, MissionV has some access issues on
iPad (Keane, 2011). Furthermore, interaction LI also could deliver asynchronous
because of different time zones between Riyadh and Indonesia.
FBCG are providing a safe,
intimate environment in which the participants can confidently express their
personal feelings, interpersonal connections asynchronous and synchronous among
users and motivated students to reach the goal (Dunn, 2013; Meishar-Tal et al.,
2012; Van Doorn & Eklund, 2013).
The implementations of FBCG is
needed to designing an effective learning process effectively (Adlington et
al., 2015) and efficient for Stage 6 students in ISR and lead students to reach
the best scores in national exams. However, raising the students’ awareness of
the importance of creating an academic network and/or social network (Bosch,
2009).
References
Abrosimova, K. (2014). 5 ways
virtual reality will change education. Retrieved from
Adlington, R., Nader T., &
Parkes, M. (2015). Unit 426 Foundation of eLearning, Topic 1 –
Introduction
to eLearning. Retrieved from
Becker, K., Newton, C., &
Sawang, S (2013). A learner perspective on barriers to e-learning. Australian
Journal of Adult Learning 53(2).
211-233.
Belfield, C., & Levin, H.
(2002). The Effects of Competition on Educational Outcomes: A review of US
Berson, I.R. & Berson, M.J.
(2010). High-Tech Tots: Childhood in a
Digital World. Information Age
Publishing,
1–4.
Blettner, G. (2012). Facebook-ing
and the Social Generation: A New Era of Language learning.
Bosch, T.E. (2009). Using online
social networking for teaching and learning: Facebook use at the
University
of Cape Town. Communicatio, South African
Journal for Communication Theory and Research 35(2)
Clark, D. (2004). The Dick and
Carey Model. Retrieved from
http://www.nwlink.com/%7Edonclark/history_isd/carey.html
Cover, R. (2014). Separating Work
and Play: Privaacy, anonymity and the Politics of Interactive
Pedagogy
in Deploying Facebook in Learning and Teaching. Retrieved from
Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey,
J.O. (2009). The Systematic design of Instruction. Retrieved from
http://www.instructionaldesign.org/models/dick_carey_model.html
Galvin, C., & Burke, I.
(2012). MissionV Schools Pilot Programme. Retrieved from
http://missionv.ie/archives/date/2012/08
Gutierrez, K. (2014). Targeting 6
Social Learning Needs in eLearning Environments. Retrieved from
Hillman, W. (2003). Learning How
to Learn: Problem based Learning. Australian
Journal of Teacher
Education. 28(2).
Hirumi, A. (2013). Grounding
e-Learning Interactions to facilitate Critical Thinking & Problem Solving.
Retrieved
from
Hocoy, D. (2013). Facebook as
Learning Management System: the Good, the Bad, and the
Unexpected.
Retrieved from
http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/12/facebook-as-learning-management-system-the-
good-the-bad-and-the-unexpected
Hussain, R., & Ismail, A.
(2008). Fitting Instructional System Design Models with WBLE Planning: The
Case
of Dick, Carey & Carey Model. Retrieved from http://eprints.um.edu.my/9365/1/Fitting_instructional_systems.pdf
Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R.,
Weigel, M., Clinton, K., & Robison, A. J. (2009). Confronting the
Challenges
of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. Massachusetts:
The MIT Press
Keane, M. (2011). MissionV –
Virtual Worlds technology for the support of High potential Students.
Retrieved
from http://www.slideshare.net/MissionV/missionv-virtual-world-technology-for-the-support-of-high-potential-students
Khan, S., & Bakhsh, S.T.
(2015). A Study on the Role of Facebook in E-Learning. I.J.
Education and
Management Engineering. 28(5)
1-11
Khanna, N. (2013). Overcoming
eLearning Training Barriers. Retrieved from
Killian, S. (2015). Top 10
Evidence Based Teaching Strategies. Retrieved from
Leonidis, A., Margetis, G.,
Antona, M., & Stephanidis, C. (2010).
ClassMATE: Enabling Ambient
Intelligence
in the Classroom. International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation 4(6),
465-68.
Marzano, R., & Hattie, J.
(2015). Top 10 Evidence Based Teaching Strategies. Retrieved from
http://www.evidencebasedteaching.org.au/evidence-based-teaching-strategies/
Meishar-Tal, H., Kurtz, G., &
Pieterse, E. (2012). Facebook Groups as LMS: A Case Study. The
International Review of
Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 13(4). 1-16.
Nesvig, B. (2014). The hidden
Barrier To Learning And What You Can Do About It. Retrieved from
http://elearningindustry.com/the-hidden-barrier-to-learning-and-what-you-can-do-about-it
Pempek, T.A., Yermolayeva, Y.A.
& Calvert, S.L. (2009). College students’ social networking
experiences
on Facebook. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology 30(-) 227-238
Schultz, U. (2015, April 23). How
Social Media Shapes Identity [Video files]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSpyZor-Byk
Siragusa, L., Dixon, K.C., &
Dixon, R. (2007). Designing Quality eLearning Environments in Higher
VanDoorn, G., & Eklund, A.A.
(2013). Facebook to Facebook: Social Media and the Learning and
Teaching potential of symmetrical, synchronous communication. Journal of University Teaching &
Learning Practice. 10(1). 1-14.
Williamson, B. (2014). Smart
Schools in Sentient Cities. DML Central,
30 October. Retrieved from
http://dmlcentral.net/smart-schools-in-sentient-cities/
Figure 1. Retrieved from
http://www.evidencebasedteaching.org.au/evidence-based-teaching-strategies/
Figure 2. Retrieved from
Figure 3. Retrieved from
http://www.hypergridbusiness.com/2014/09/5-ways-virtual-reality-will-change-education/
Figure 4. Retrieved
from
https://www.facebook.com/groups/480258738660345/
Figure 5. Retrieved
from
Figure 6. Retrieved
from
