Pembelajaran Adaptif Berbasis Teknologi: Upaya Meningkatkan Keterlibatan dan Hasil Belajar Siswa

Muharleni

doi:10.67467/jisep.v2i2.110

Authors

Muharleni State University of Padang Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.67467/jisep.v2i2.110

Keywords:

adaptive learning, educational technology, student engagement, learning outcomes, reading comprehension

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the effectiveness of technology-based adaptive learning in improving student engagement and Indonesian language learning outcomes among elementary school students. The study employed a quantitative approach using a quasi-experimental design with a non-equivalent control group design. The participants consisted of 60 fifth-grade students from an elementary school in Padang, Indonesia, divided into an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group received adaptive learning through a Learning Management System (LMS) equipped with personalized learning features, while the control group received conventional instruction. The learning focus was on reading comprehension and identifying main ideas in nonfiction texts. Data were collected through learning achievement tests, student engagement questionnaires, and classroom observations. Data analysis was conducted using paired sample t-test, independent sample t-test, N-Gain, and Cohen’s d effect size analysis. The findings revealed that technology-based adaptive learning significantly improved students’ learning outcomes compared to conventional learning (p < 0.05), with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.12). In addition, student engagement in the experimental group was higher across cognitive, emotional, and behavioral dimensions. The results indicate that adaptive learning supported by technology creates a more personalized, interactive, and meaningful learning experience. Therefore, technology-based adaptive learning has strong potential to support literacy development and improve the quality of Indonesian language learning in elementary schools in the digital era.

References

Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00282-x

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a Theory of Instruction. Harvard University Press.

Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2020). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Fullan, M., Quinn, J., & McEachen, J. (2018). Deep Learning: Engage the World Change the World. Corwin Press.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis (8th ed.). Pearson Education.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi. (2022). Asesmen Nasional: Laporan Hasil Pendidikan Indonesia. Kemendikbudristek.

Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education. Pearson Education.

OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills: Education 2030. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/19939019

OECD. (2021). OECD Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the Frontiers with Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain and Robots. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/589b283f-en

Pane, J. F., Steiner, E. D., Baird, M. D., & Hamilton, L. S. (2017). Informing Progress: Insights on Personalized Learning Implementation and Effects. RAND Corporation. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR2042

Piaget, J. (1970). Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child. Viking Press.

Redecker, C. (2021). European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu. Publications Office of the European Union.

Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8

Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to Differentiate Instruction in Academically Diverse Classrooms (3rd ed.). ASCD.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

Walkington, C., & Bernacki, M. L. (2020). Personalization of instruction: Design dimensions and implications for cognition. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 169–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1743808

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(39), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2