Dergiler / IOJET / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 4

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SCHOOLOGY TO TEACH WRITING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY

Dergi
IOJET
Sayfa
943–955
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-06
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

As a result, the research findings reveal that: (1) Schoology is more effective than Picture Series to teach writing; (2) High creativity students have better writing skill than low creativity students; and (3) There is an interaction between teaching media and students’ creativity in teaching writing.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This is a quasi-experimental research with a 2x2 factorial design that was conducted at even semester of tenth grade students of a Secondary School at Central Java, Indonesia in the academic year of 2017/2018.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The sample of this research was two classes, namely, experimental class taught using Schoology (S1) and control class taught using Picture Series (P2).
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:As a result, the research findings reveal that: (1) Schoology is more effective than Picture Series to teach writing; (2) High creativity students have better writing skill than low creativity students; and (3) There is an interaction between teaching media and students’ creativity in teaching writing.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2017 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

This is a quasi-experimental research with a 2x2 factorial design that was conducted at even semester of tenth grade students of a Secondary School at Central Java, Indonesia in the academic year of 2017/2018. The sample of this research was two classes, namely, experimental class taught using Schoology (S1) and control class taught using Picture Series (P2). Each class consisted of 26 students, so the total sample is 52 students. The sample was obtained by using cluster random sampling technique. Each class was divided into two groups each of which consisted of 13 high creativity students (H) and 13 low creativity students (L). The data of this research were obtained from a writing test to find out students’ writing scores. Then, the data were analyzed by using 2x2 Multifactor Analysis of Variance ANOVA and Tukey test. The results show that the mean scores of HS1 is 85, HP2 is 73.62, LS1 is 72.31, and LP2 is 72.69. As a result, the research findings reveal that: (1) Schoology is more effective than Picture Series to teach writing; (2) High creativity students have better writing skill than low creativity students; and (3) There is an interaction between teaching media and students’ creativity in teaching writing.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

MASYHUDİANTİ, U. K., SUTOMO, N., SUPARNO, S. (2022). THE EFFECTIVENESS OF SCHOOLOGY TO TEACH WRITING VIEWED FROM STUDENTS’ CREATIVITY. IOJET, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 4, 943–955. https://ajindex.com/articles/651666

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (12)

  1. Amabile, T. M. (1996). Creativity and innovation in organization. Harvard Business School Background Note 396-239.
  2. Ardi, P. (2017). Promoting learner autonomy through schoology m-learning platform in an EAP class at an Indonesian University. Teaching English with Technology, 17(2), 55-76.
  3. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education. Canada, US: Wadsworth. Celce-Murcia, M., & Olshtain, E. (2000). Discourse and context in language teaching: A guide for language teachers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University press. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY, US: HarperCollins Publishers.
  4. Cummins, J., Brown, K., & Sayers, D. (2007). Literacy, technology, and diversity: Teaching for success in changing times. Boston, USA: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson. Fasko, D. (2001). Education and creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(3&4), 317-327.
  5. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York, US: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Harmer, J. (2004).
  6. How to teach writing. Harlow, United Kingdom: Pearson Education Limited. Harmer, J. (2007).
  7. How to teach english. Essex, UK: Pearson Education Limited. Helson, R., Agronick, G. & Roberts, B. (1995). Enduringness and change in creative personality and the prediction of occupational creativity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(6), 1173-1183.
  8. Guitterez, K.G.C., Puello, M.N., & Galvis, L.A.P. (2015). Using pictures series technique to enhance narrative writing among ninth grade students at Institución Educativa Simón Araujo. ELT Canadian Center of Science and Education, 8(5), 45-71.
  9. Jones, R. & Wyse, D. (2004). Creativity in the primary curriculum: Theory and practice. London,UK: David Fulton Publishers.
  10. Joshua, JW. Nugroho. Swastika, I Putu Agus, & Estiyanti, Ni Made. (2015). The effectiveness of e-learning implementation using social learning network schoology on motivation & learning achievement in STMIK Primakara Bali. Proceeding of the Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Teknik Informatika (SENAPATI) 2015,
  11. Bali, Indonesia: Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282604948_The_Effectiveness_of_ELearning_Implementation_using_Social_Learning_Network_Schoology_on_Motivation_Learning_Achievement_in_STMIK_Primakara_Bali.
  12. Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and classroom learning (3rd ed.). London, UK: Open University Press. Low