A Model of Distance Learning Evaluation in Implementing the Independent Learning Curriculum in Special Circumstances Such as The Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21009/jtp.v25i3.48364Keywords:
distance learning, curriculum, tyler model, coronaAbstract
This research aims to find a model for evaluating the distance learning (DL) process when special circumstances such as a pandemic or disaster occur by comparing the strengths and weaknesses of all the models studied. When the COVID-19 virus outbreak occurred globally, it became a comprehensive trigger for implementing distance education, especially in Indonesia. A new concept known as the Independent Learning Curriculum (ILC) in the distance learning (DL) process has been applied. However, as a result, all regions have not the same readiness to implement this system. Geographical and demographic conditions, which are different, have resulted in the implementation of the DL still encountering various problems. The complaints of education stakeholders regarding student participation are still lacking, and technical and non-technical problems around DL require proper evaluation. The literature study method was carried out to examine the appropriate evaluation model for the DL system with the ICL concept. As a result, an appropriate evaluation selection in the DL process is used the objective-based approach of Tyler's model. In addition, during the corona outbreak, a framework is proposed to achieve the goals according to the evaluation model selected in the DL process.
References
Abdullah, H. (2015) A conceptual framework for proactively planning and retrospectively evaluating e-learning readiness within an open distance learning (ODL) institution, IEEE 3rd International Conference on MOOCs, Innovation and Technology in Education (MITE).
Abel, B. R. (2005). Achieving success in supported learning in higher education : Case studies illuminate success factors, challenges , and future directions, Lake Mary, FL: Alliance for Higher Education Competitiveness. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://kurskedu.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Achieving-success-in-internet-supported-learning-in-higher education.pdf.
Abidah, A. et al. (2020) The impact of covid-19 to indonesian education and its relation to the philosophy of “merdeka belajar”’, Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 1(1), 38–49. doi: 10.46627/sipose.v1i1.9.
Anh, V. T. K. (2018) Evaluation models in educational program: strengths and weaknesses, VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 34(2), 140-150, doi: 10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4252.
Ananda R. and Rafida T. (2017). Introduction to Educational Program Evaluation, Edition 1. Medan: Perdana Publishing, Perdana Mulya Sarana Publishing Group.
Bekele, T.A., and Menchaca, M. (in press). (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, Volume 9(4), 373–405.
Casanova, D., Moreira, A. and Cossa, N. (2011). Technology enhanced learning in higher education: Results from the design of a quality evaluation framework, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 893–902. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.319.
Chen, H.-T. et al. (1992). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice., Contemporary Sociology, 21(1), 122. doi: 10.2307/2074800.
Cuiyan, W. et al. (2020). Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1–25.
Darmadi, H. (2015). Duties, roles, competencies, and responsibilities of being a professional teacher, Jurnal Edukasi, 13(2), 161–174 (In Indoensia).
Haron, H., Natrah Aziz, N. H. and Harun, A. (2017) A conceptual model participatory engagement within e-learning community, Procedia Computer Science, 116, 242–250. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.10.046.
Hartini, T., Misri, M. A. and Nursuprianah, I. (2018). Mapping student hots ability based on PISA and TIMSS standards to improve education quality, Eduma : Mathematics Education Learning and Teaching, 7(1). doi: 10.24235/eduma.v7i1.2795 (In Indonesia).
Hawa, A. M. and Putra, L. V. (2018). PISA for Indonesian students, Janacitra, 1(1), 1–8 (In Indonesia).
Hogan, R. L. (2007). The historical development of program evaluation: Exploring past and present, II(4),1–14.
Kim, J., Kwon, Y. and Cho, D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education, Computers and Education, 57(2),1512–1520. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.005.
Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation, Computers and Education, 49(3), 581–596. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011.
Neroni, J. et al. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education, Learning and Individual Differences (73), 1–7.
Olmsted, J. L. (2010). Application of a conceptual framework for distance learning in dental hygiene education and allied health disciplines, Journal of Dental Hygiene: JDH / American Dental Hygienists’ Association, 84(2), 81–86.
Ossiannilsson, E. and Landgren, L. (2012). Quality in e-learning – a conceptual framework based on experiences from three international benchmarking projects, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 42–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00439.x.
Owen, T. R. and Hiscox, M. D. (1977). Alternative models for adversary evaluation: variation on a theme, American Educational Research Association, 2–28.
Paolucci-Whitcomb, P. et al. (1987). Interactive evaluations: processes for improving special education leadership training, Remedial and Special Education, 8(3), 52–61. doi: 10.1177/074193258700800309.
Passerini, K. and Granger, M. J. (2000). A developmental model for distance learning using the Internet, Computers and Education, 34(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00024-X.
Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1994). What works in evaluation research?, British Journal of Criminology, 34(3), 291–306. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a048424.
Popham, W. J. (1992). Educational evaluation (3rd Edition), 372. Available at: http://www.amazon.com/Educational-Evaluation-Edition-James-Popham/dp/0205142176.
Puspitasari and Ratu, N. (2019). Description of students' concept understanding in solving pisa problems on mosharafa's space and shape content, Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 8(1), pp. 155–166 (In Indonesia).
Sintema, E. J. (2020). Effect of COVID-19 on the performance of grade 12 students: Implications for STEM education, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(7), 1–6. doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/7893.
Stufflebeam, D. L. and Zhang, G. (2017). The CIPP evaluation model, The CIPP evaluation model: How to evaluate for improveability and accountability, 20–57. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-007-6869-7 E.
Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The Philippine context’, Pedagogical Research, 5(4), p. em0063. doi: 10.29333/pr/7947.
Vrasidas, C. (1995). Constructivism versus objectivism: implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education, pp. 1–17.
Worthen, B. R., and Rogers, W. T. (1977). Uses and abuses of adversary evaluation: A consumer’s guide, American Educational Research Association.
Wraga, W. G. (2017). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction in historical context’, 4(december), pp. 227–252. Espacio, Tiempo y Educación, 4(2), 227-252.
Youker, B. W., Hunter, O. C. and Bayer, N. (2016). Who needs goals? A case study of goal-free evaluation. Journal of Multidisplinary Evaluation, 12(27), 27–43.
Youker, B. W. and Ingraham, A. (2014) ‘Goal-Free Evaluation: An Orientation for Foundations’ Evaluations’, The Foundation Review, 5(4). doi: 10.9707/1944-5660.1182.
Yusuf A.M. (2015). Educational assessment and evaluation: Pillars of information providers and education quality control activities, Edition 1. Indonesia: Kencana (In Indonesia).
Zaikin, O., Kushtina, E. and Różewski, P. (2011). Model and algorithm of the conceptual scheme formation for knowledge domain in distance learning, European Journal of Operational Research 175 (2006) 1379–1399.
Abel, B. R. (2005). Achieving success in supported learning in higher education : Case studies illuminate success factors, challenges , and future directions, Lake Mary, FL: Alliance for Higher Education Competitiveness. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://kurskedu.ru/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Achieving-success-in-internet-supported-learning-in-higher education.pdf.
Abidah, A. et al. (2020) The impact of covid-19 to indonesian education and its relation to the philosophy of “merdeka belajar”’, Studies in Philosophy of Science and Education, 1(1), 38–49. doi: 10.46627/sipose.v1i1.9.
Anh, V. T. K. (2018) Evaluation models in educational program: strengths and weaknesses, VNU Journal of Foreign Studies, 34(2), 140-150, doi: 10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4252.
Ananda R. and Rafida T. (2017). Introduction to Educational Program Evaluation, Edition 1. Medan: Perdana Publishing, Perdana Mulya Sarana Publishing Group.
Bekele, T.A., and Menchaca, M. (in press). (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, Volume 9(4), 373–405.
Casanova, D., Moreira, A. and Cossa, N. (2011). Technology enhanced learning in higher education: Results from the design of a quality evaluation framework, Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 893–902. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.319.
Chen, H.-T. et al. (1992). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice., Contemporary Sociology, 21(1), 122. doi: 10.2307/2074800.
Cuiyan, W. et al. (2020). Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1–25.
Darmadi, H. (2015). Duties, roles, competencies, and responsibilities of being a professional teacher, Jurnal Edukasi, 13(2), 161–174 (In Indoensia).
Haron, H., Natrah Aziz, N. H. and Harun, A. (2017) A conceptual model participatory engagement within e-learning community, Procedia Computer Science, 116, 242–250. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2017.10.046.
Hartini, T., Misri, M. A. and Nursuprianah, I. (2018). Mapping student hots ability based on PISA and TIMSS standards to improve education quality, Eduma : Mathematics Education Learning and Teaching, 7(1). doi: 10.24235/eduma.v7i1.2795 (In Indonesia).
Hawa, A. M. and Putra, L. V. (2018). PISA for Indonesian students, Janacitra, 1(1), 1–8 (In Indonesia).
Hogan, R. L. (2007). The historical development of program evaluation: Exploring past and present, II(4),1–14.
Kim, J., Kwon, Y. and Cho, D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education, Computers and Education, 57(2),1512–1520. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.005.
Motiwalla, L. F. (2007). Mobile learning: A framework and evaluation, Computers and Education, 49(3), 581–596. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.011.
Neroni, J. et al. (2019). Learning strategies and academic performance in distance education, Learning and Individual Differences (73), 1–7.
Olmsted, J. L. (2010). Application of a conceptual framework for distance learning in dental hygiene education and allied health disciplines, Journal of Dental Hygiene: JDH / American Dental Hygienists’ Association, 84(2), 81–86.
Ossiannilsson, E. and Landgren, L. (2012). Quality in e-learning – a conceptual framework based on experiences from three international benchmarking projects, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 42–51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00439.x.
Owen, T. R. and Hiscox, M. D. (1977). Alternative models for adversary evaluation: variation on a theme, American Educational Research Association, 2–28.
Paolucci-Whitcomb, P. et al. (1987). Interactive evaluations: processes for improving special education leadership training, Remedial and Special Education, 8(3), 52–61. doi: 10.1177/074193258700800309.
Passerini, K. and Granger, M. J. (2000). A developmental model for distance learning using the Internet, Computers and Education, 34(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00024-X.
Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1994). What works in evaluation research?, British Journal of Criminology, 34(3), 291–306. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bjc.a048424.
Popham, W. J. (1992). Educational evaluation (3rd Edition), 372. Available at: http://www.amazon.com/Educational-Evaluation-Edition-James-Popham/dp/0205142176.
Puspitasari and Ratu, N. (2019). Description of students' concept understanding in solving pisa problems on mosharafa's space and shape content, Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 8(1), pp. 155–166 (In Indonesia).
Sintema, E. J. (2020). Effect of COVID-19 on the performance of grade 12 students: Implications for STEM education, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 16(7), 1–6. doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/7893.
Stufflebeam, D. L. and Zhang, G. (2017). The CIPP evaluation model, The CIPP evaluation model: How to evaluate for improveability and accountability, 20–57. Available at: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-94-007-6869-7 E.
Toquero, C. M. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for higher education amid the COVID-19 pandemic: The Philippine context’, Pedagogical Research, 5(4), p. em0063. doi: 10.29333/pr/7947.
Vrasidas, C. (1995). Constructivism versus objectivism: implications for interaction, course design, and evaluation in distance education, pp. 1–17.
Worthen, B. R., and Rogers, W. T. (1977). Uses and abuses of adversary evaluation: A consumer’s guide, American Educational Research Association.
Wraga, W. G. (2017). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction in historical context’, 4(december), pp. 227–252. Espacio, Tiempo y Educación, 4(2), 227-252.
Youker, B. W., Hunter, O. C. and Bayer, N. (2016). Who needs goals? A case study of goal-free evaluation. Journal of Multidisplinary Evaluation, 12(27), 27–43.
Youker, B. W. and Ingraham, A. (2014) ‘Goal-Free Evaluation: An Orientation for Foundations’ Evaluations’, The Foundation Review, 5(4). doi: 10.9707/1944-5660.1182.
Yusuf A.M. (2015). Educational assessment and evaluation: Pillars of information providers and education quality control activities, Edition 1. Indonesia: Kencana (In Indonesia).
Zaikin, O., Kushtina, E. and Różewski, P. (2011). Model and algorithm of the conceptual scheme formation for knowledge domain in distance learning, European Journal of Operational Research 175 (2006) 1379–1399.
Downloads
Published
2023-12-31
How to Cite
Meok, N. J., Kamdi, W., Sutadji, E. ., & Widiyanti. (2023). A Model of Distance Learning Evaluation in Implementing the Independent Learning Curriculum in Special Circumstances Such as The Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia. JTP - Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 25(3), 619–629. https://doi.org/10.21009/jtp.v25i3.48364
Issue
Section
Full Articles
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Nixson Jeheskial Meok, Waras Kamdi, Eddy Sutadji, Widiyanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan is an Open Access Journal. The authors who publish the manuscript in Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan agree to the following terms.
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0)
-
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
-
ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
- You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.
- No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
