SCHOOLOGY IN THE EYES OF SAMPOERNA UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20319/pijss.2020.61.456473Keywords:
Schoology, Technology, Learning Management System, Online Learning Platform, Sampoerna UniversityAbstract
The utilization of technology in postsecondary education is inevitable. The 21st-century education requires college students to actively collaborate with other learners yet engage with technology to create a more attractive and effective learning environment. Schoology is one of the platforms that enable users to create, manage, and share learning materials. Thus, this paper discusses the utilization of Schoology in Sampoerna University, which focuses on identifying (1) the way Schoology supports Sampoerna University students in achieving the learning goals, (2) the features of Learning Management System that bring positive impacts to the students, and (3) the viable improvements in the Schoology's features to boost student performance and stimulate collaboration. The study employs a quantitative method, which gathers the response from direct users to answer the research questions. Based on the results of the survey conducted to Sampoerna University students, Schoology is still a preferable online learning platform. However, Schoology developers should inevitably carry out continuous improvements to provide the optimum learning experience for Sampoerna University students.
References
Avgeriou, P., Papasalouros, A., Retalis, S., & Skordalakis, M. (2003). Towards a Pattern Language for Learning Management Systems. Educational Technology & Society, 11-24.
Ayub, A., Tarmizi, R., Jaafar, W., Ali, W., & Luan, W. (2010). Factors Influencing Students’ Use a Learning Management System Portal: Perspective from Higher Education Students. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 100-108.
Biswas, S. (2013). Schoology-Supported Classroom Management: A Curriculum Review. Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, 187-196. https://doi.org/10.15760/nwjte.2013.11.2.12
Cornell University. (2019). Collaborative Learning. Retrieved from Center for Teaching Innovation: https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/collaborative-learning
Eraut, M. (2006). Feedback. Learning in Health and Social Care, 111-118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-6861.2006.00129.x
Fukunaga, R., Sasaki, H., & Hanis, I. B. (2019). How to Evaluate a Program Written by Children: A Program Evaluation Support Tool for Elementary School Teachers. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 88-97. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2019.31.8897
Galitz, W. (2007). The Essential Guide to User Interface Design: An Introduction to GUI Design Principles and Techniques. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Garcia, L., Amat, S., Garcia, N., & Colomina, S. (2018). Schoology as an alternative to traditional teaching tools for university students. 10th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies, (pp. 7514-7520). Palma. https://doi.org/10.21125/edulearn.2018.1754
Gonzalez, A. (2014). Strategies to Get Started with Blended Learning. Voices from the Middle, 34-38.
Gupta, T. (2018). Psychoinformatics. Gujarat: Redshine Publication.
Iqbal, S., & Qureshi, I. (2011). Learning Management Systems (LMS): Inside Matters. Information Management and Business Review, 206-216. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v3i4.935
Kasim, N. N., & Khalid, F. (2016). Choosing the Right Learning Management System (LMS) for the Higher Education Institution Context: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 55-61. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v11i06.5644
Lai, Y. L., & Lee, J. (2019). Trend of Internet Usage and Learning Style of Digital Natives. PUPIL: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning, 94-102. https://doi.org/10.20319/pijtel.2019.32.94102
Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2011). New literacies: Everyday practices and classroom learning. London: Open University Press.
Maleriado, M., & Carreon, J. (2018). The Features of Quick Response (QR) Code as an Attendance Monitoring System: Its Acceptability and Implication to Classroom. The International Academic Forum.
McCormack, C., & Jones, D. (1997). Building a Web-Based Education System. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Nichols, M. (2003). A Theory for Elearning. Educational Technology & Society, 1-10.
Sampoerna University. (2019). About Sampoerna University. Retrieved from Sampoerna University: https://www.sampoernauniversity.ac.id/about-sampoerna-university/
Schoonenboom, J. (2014). Using an adapted, task-level technology acceptance model to explain why instructors in higher education intend to use some learning management system tools more than others. Computers & Education, 247-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.016
Sicat, A. (2015). Enhancing College Students’ Proficiency in Business Writing Via Schoology. International Journal of Education and Research, 159-178.
Sicilia, M. (2007). Competencies in Organizational E-Learning: Concepts and Tools. Hershey, Pennsylvania: Information Science Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-343-2
Simonson, M. (2007). Course Management Systems. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7-9.
University of Southern California. (2019, May 3). Research Guide. Retrieved from USCLibraries: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/quantitative
Valk, J.-H., Rashid, A., & Elder, L. (2010). Using Mobile Phones to Improve Educational Outcomes: An Analysis of Evidence from Asia. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 117-140. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v11i1.794
Vesely, P., Bloom, L., & Sherlock, J. (2007). Key Elements of Building Online Community: Comparing Faculty and Student Perceptions. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 234-246.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Yansen Rayadi, Widdy Wijanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
