23
Student’s Perception and Learning Outcome Achievement on
Blended-Flipped Learning
I Made Supartha Utama Department of Agricultural Engineering, Udayana Univerity, Indonesia
Linawati and NMAD Wirastuti Department of Electrical Engineering, Udayana University, Indonesia
Tsuyoshi Usagawa
Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, Kumamoto University, Japan
Correspondent email: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Blended learning has developed in Udayana University, and Moodle is used as the learning
platform for the online activities. Class activities are still compulsory and a minimum of sixteen times
face to face have to be performed for each course. Postharvest Engineering is one of the courses for a
bachelor degree at the faculty of agricultural technology was designed as a model of blended and
flipped learning to gain more effective strategy in achieving student learning outcomes of the course.
The targeted students were nine students from Udayana University (Unud) and 19 students from Sam
Ratulangi University (Unsrat). Lesson plans for sixteen weekly bases of learning were developed for
online and face to face (class and practical) activities. The loading time of learning was three credit
semester unit or equal to 510 min (3 x 170 min) per week. The 150 min (3 x 50 min) was used for class
activities, and 170 min was provided for practical-laboratory work or field study of which was depended
on the unit learning outcomes. The rest of time for about 290 – 360 min was allocated for online
activities. The online learning resources were provided which consisted of learning modules, narrated
power point presentations, web-linked of relevant references and YouTube movies. Students were
flexible to choose other references relevant to the unit learning outcomes. Student regular online
activities were self-learning and assessment; others were depending on the unit learning outcomes,
such as short-long essay assignment, uploading reports of problem-based learning and laboratory
practical works. Feedback was given to the assignments and reports using analytic or holistic rubrics.
The class activities are mostly student discussion and presentation as well as Q/A to allow them showing
up their knowledge construction. The perception of students toward the learning was very positive. The
grade achievement of the course outcomes for students at Unud were 45% “A” grade and 45% “B”
grade, and no student gained “C” and “E” grade. Only one student received “D” grade. Students at
Unsrat were 63% achieved “A” grade, 31% “B” grade, no student received “C” and “D” grade, and only
one student got “E” grade. The students who received “D” and “E” grades were due to their lack of
online and class activities.
Keywords: Blended learning, flipped learning, postharvest engineering.
Student’s Perception and Learning Outcome Achievement on Blended-Flipped Learning
I Made Supartha Utama, Linawati, Ni Made Wiriastuti, Tsuyoshi Usagawa.
Udayana University - Bali
OUTLINES
• Background
• Designing and implementing blended learning and flipped class room
• Student Achievement and their perception about online learning
• General Conclusion
• Future improvement for the Learning
• Needs for efficient and effective learning • Students have to ICT literate • Students have to be able in utilizing a variety
of learning resources • Students need for more independent in
learning • Funding from University and government for
e-learning
• Indonesia Qualification Framework (KKNI) and National Standards of Higher Education
• Class activities are still compulsory and a minimum of sixteen times face to face have to be performed for each course.
• Moodle is used as E-LMS for the online activities.
• Postharvest Engineering is one of the courses for bachelor students for both at Udayana and Sam Ratulangi Universities
• Two groups of students taken this course: Udayana University (9 students) and Sam Ratulangi University (19 students)
ASS
ESSM
ENT
• Students mastery of the concepts of post-harvest handling techniques of fresh horticultural products
• Students are able to develop post-harvest technology to prepare products according to the needs of different market levels
• Students are able to apply postharvest handlings of horticultural products to maintain quality and shelf life
• Students are able to analyze and criticize practices of postharvest handling of horticultural products to make changes to its improvement.
• Students can work in a team to design projects related to the improvement of post-harvest handling of horticultural products
Week: I dan II
Expected LO of students
Ability to explain the phenomena that occurred during the post-harvest period as a basis for developing the concept of handling. Able to analyze properly several postharvest quality parameters,
Achievement criteria / indicator
Depth of understanding (cognitive domain) / accuracy of explanation Teamwork (Valuing) (affective domain) / level of participation and contribution in group works Response to lab-work (psychomotor domain) / level of accuracy on quality parameter analysis
Learning Topic
and resources
The Nature and Structure of Postharvest Horticultural Products: • The basics of postharvest horticultural products • The importance of postharvest physiology in developing postharvest technology • Grouping of harvest products based on morphology • Types of tissues of harvest products • Cell structure
Learning Resources – On-line
Teks Slide (ppt) Audio Video URL
• The Importance of Postharvest Physiology.
• The Practical-lab work Guide
l
Science and Practice of
Postharvest Physiology
The Nature and
Structure of
Postharvest Products
Cell Structure
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8S3b_3QlONk
http://www.biologi-
sel.com/2012/06/struktur
-sel-hewan-dan-sel-
tumbuhan.html
Method of Learning
On-line F2F (Clas activities/Practical Works) Self learning Structured task
Short presentation, group discussions and student presentations (development of inter-personal skills)
Laboratory works
Allocated times
On-line (Clas activities/Practical Works)
2 x 2 x 60 minutes self learning;
2 x 2x 60 minute structured tasks
2 x 2 x 50 minutes Class Activity
2 x 1 x 170 minutes Practicum
Learning Assessment
Method Instrument Weight
On-line F2F On-line F2F • Long essay assignment
and feedback • Quiz • Forum
Observation (Q/A) Presentation
• Holistic Rubric • Multiple choices and T/F (Online
Format) • Forum (Online format)
Holistic rubric
10 %
Learning Experiences of students
On-line F2F (Class activities) Learn to be independent Report writing practices Self assessment
Learning in groups and discussions (development of inter-personal skills) and presentation
Practice on measuring the parameters of horticultural post harvest product quality
Media of Learning
On-line F2F (Class activities)
On-line: computer / gadget devices and internet access
Classroom learning: Computer, head projector (in focus) and stationery
Equipment for Practical works in the laboratory
Facilitator
On-line Activities Class and Lab-work Activities
I Made Supartha Utama Pande Ketut Diah Kencana
Gede Arda
• Resources Provided:
– Modules/teaching books
– Worksheets
– Power point presentation with narration
– Slide show
– Video Movie
– Website links
– E-Library
– Other relevant Resources
• Activities: – Students read and learn the modules – Students uploaded work sheets and
given feedbacks by the facilitator – Students learn other resources given
on the web-Moodle – Forum – Short/Long Assignments – Problem based learning
• Assessments: – Quiz and Forum – Work sheet - feedback – Structured Task / Assignments -
feedback – Feedback on the PBL and Lab-works
Reports – Middle and end semester test
• Activities:
– General Review and Discussion (QA)
– Problem solving in learning faced by students
– Overall Learning Evaluation
• Learning Resources Provided:
– Guidance for PBL
– All relevant learning resources on the web-Moodle
• Assessments:
– Rubric and feedback for report of PBL
– Rubric for individual performance in group work (intra-inter personal skills of group members)
• Activities: – Students work in different groups (4-5
students per group)
– Students find problems directly on the field
– Two different relevant problems submitted and one selected by the facilitators for the topic of PBL
– The groups develop reports for PBL and uploaded into the web-moodle
– The facilitators give feedbacks using the rubric (Maximum 2 times feedback)
– Two PBL in one semester
– Individual performance of students in group works is assessed using rubric
• Learning Resources:
– Manual of lab-practical works
– Equipments
• Assessment:
– Feedback given to the lab-practical reports.
– Rubric for individual performance in group work (intra-inter personal skills of group members)
• Activities: – 4 topics of laboratory works
provided. – 3 topics selected to be
implemented. – Students are divided into
groups, each group consists of 4-5 students.
– The practical works were guided by facilitators.
– The report s of practical works have to be uploaded on the web-Moodle. Facilitator gives feedback (maximum 2 times feedbacks)
Formative Assessment Proportion of Score
Problem Based Learning 1 : 15%
Problem Based Learning 2 : 15%
Laboratory /Practical Based Learning : 15%
Work Book : 10%
Forum 10%
Summative Assessment
Multiple Choice Based Assessment (weekly Quiz) : 15%
Middle Semester Test : 10%
End Semester test : 10%
100%
Grading Scale
80-100 A
65- <80 B
55-<64 C
45-<54 D
<45 E
55.5 % Grade A; 33.33 % Grade B.
No. Name
Formative Assessment Sumative Assessment Total
Achievement
Grade PBL 1 PBL 2 Lab work
Rprt Work book
Forum Quiz MST EST
15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 15% 10% 10%
1 Ramendra Ginting 10.1 12.0 11.0 7.8 8.6 14.0 9.0 8.0 80.4 A
2 Oki Prasetya 10.8 9.8 10.3 8.4 8.0 14.1 9.2 9.4 79.9 A
3 Syaiful Bahri 10.8 12.5 11.6 9.0 9.0 14.9 9.2 9.6 86.5 A
4 Andri Frans Kalvin 10.8 12.0 11.4 8.5 8.4 12.0 8.0 9.0 77.3 B
5 Made Arya N. Inggas 10.8 12.5 11.6 8.7 8.5 14.1 9.4 9.6 85.2 A
6 Novel Pardosi 10.5 9.0 9.8 8.3 8.6 12.3 9.4 9.4 77.3 B
7 I.B. Santa Sulaksana 10.1 11.5 10.5 8.4 8.1 13.2 9.3 9.0 80.0 A
8 G. S. Monica Siahaya 9.8 0.0 4.9 7.3 8.4 13.0 7.6 0.0 50.9 D
9 Henry Yanto Manalu 10.7 9.2 9.9 8.2 8.5 13.8 8.4 9.6 78.2 B
No Name
Formative Assessment Sumative Assessment Nilai
Setelah dibobot
Grade PBL 1 PBL 2 Lab work
rpt Work Book
Aktivitas Forum
Quiz UTS UAS
15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 15% 10% 10%
1 Conchita Adam 11.55 12.3 13.5 8.5 8.255 14.85 9.2 9.2 87.36 A
2 Fiqih Albanjar 12.3 13.5 13.5 9.19 9.038 15 9.4 10 91.93 A
3 Yoan Bolung 12.3 13.5 12 7.23 7.331 13.8 8.2 10 84.36 A
4 Marsela Ering 11.1 10.05 12 5.18 7.835 13.5 9.2 8.6 77.46 B
5 Lusia Fambrene 11.25 11.25 13.5 6.74 6.938 13.65 9.4 9.4 82.13 A
6 Veybi Makanoneng 8.55 11.25 10.5 6.26 5.817 12.6 6.2 9 70.18 B
7 Anasthasia Mamentu 11.25 12.3 10.5 8.93 8.32 14.25 9 8.6 83.15 A
8 Herwin Manurung 10.5 10.05 12 6.96 7.257 12 8.6 9.6 76.97 B
9 Vina Manurung 10.5 11.7 12.75 7.54 8.109 12.6 9.6 10 82.80 A
10 Berandon Nelwan 12.3 10.5 13.5 8.00 9.068 15 9.6 10 87.97 A
11 Meini Papunas 12.3 11.25 12.75 5.49 7.583 13.8 9 10 82.17 A
12 Olivia Purukan 12.3 10.5 12.75 9.29 8.431 14.85 9.8 10 87.92 A
13 Ralpchio Purukan 9 0 0 3.88 5.722 14.25 32.85 E
14 Kristof Ruata 8.25 8.25 10.5 5.80 6.875 12 7.2 8 66.88 B
15 Regina Rumaratu 12 12.75 13.5 8.49 7.83 13.65 9.2 7.6 85.02 A
16 Falen Sandana 12.3 12.3 13.5 8.75 8.075 14.55 9 9.4 87.88 A
17 Yulpin Sasea 11.25 11.25 13.5 4.75 6.667 11.7 8.4 8.4 75.92 B
18 Eklesia Tomasoa 11.7 12.3 13.5 8.40 7.716 14.55 8.4 9.6 86.17 A
19 Linda Ulaan 11.1 10.05 13.5 6.56 7.1 12.6 8.4 7.8 77.11 B
63% Grade A; 32% Grade B.
The result of On-line Learning Survey Udayana University
• This has been a very good learning to develop individual discipline and ability of students to work in a
group. Suggestion: The division of student group should be based on the need of students, so the
students can work well with the group mates.
• This online learning is very good and students have to manage time properly
• This lecture has been going fluently, but the task in this lecture sometime too much in a week.
• The e-learning has been very good; student can learn to manage time especially with other activities in
different courses. Suggestion: Quiz and other applications should be automatically open in accordance
with the setting time.
• The group members are prefer selected by students
• I think this online learning has been very good. From this study I will be more discipline in learning to get
more knowledge and skills from the teachers/facilitators which are beneficial for my future. Thank you.
• I think a lot of important lessons that can be found in the online learning, where we as students are
required to be more diligent and creative.
• This online learning has been structured well and good experience for me, despite the fact that at the
beginning of the new learning method I am a bit of stress. Later. I found the learning is very useful for me
because every week I gain new knowledge from the course materials.
• Learning achievements of students at Udayana University showed 66.7 % gained Grade A and 22.2 % Grade B , while students at University of Sam Ratulangi showed 63% gained grade A and 32% Grade B.
• Perception of students for the e-learning very positive.
• Formative assessment is very helpful for online learning to develop student learning outcomes.
• Ability to work in a team for some students still needs to be developed.
• No significant technical problems faced during the online learning of the course
