Satisfaction, Motivation, and Learning Outcomes Students in

Blended Learning Environment

I. Nasrulloh1*, D.Rahadian1, S.H.Bariah1, Y.Purwanti1, K.A.N.Imania1

1
Department of information system, Institut Pendidikan Indonesia, Jl. Pahlawan
No.32, Garut 44151, Indonesia

*imannasrulloh@gmail.com

Abstract. Blended learning is a blend of face-to-face learning and e-learning. The purpose of
this study is to determine the level of satisfaction, motivation, and student learning outcomes in
blended learning. Student learning outcomes include knowledge and science process skills.
The current study’s sample consists of 158 students in junior high schools. All students already
have a computer or smartphone, with the provision of blended learning treatment. The
instrument used in this study was the distribution of questionnaires and tests of learning
outcomes. The results showed a level of student satisfaction of 85% with a very satisfied
category. Furthermore, student motivation in blended learning by 87.23% showed a very good
response. Based on the N-Gain test, the blended learning approach can increase student
knowledge by 0.65 in the medium category. The average value of students' science process
skills on the blended learning approach is 65.32% with the medium category.

1. Introduction
The development of technology requires the implementation of education and learning to apply
innovative learning models. Education, in particular, learning the use of information and
communication technology has a positive impact because with the development of information and
communication technology the world of education has begun to show significant changes [1] [2].
Blended learning is a learning model that can be applied in the implementation of learning by utilizing
information and communication technology. Blended learning systems combine face-to-face
instruction with computer-mediated instruction [3] [4]. Blended learning is the thoughtful integration
of classroom face-to-face learning experiences with online learning experiences [5] [6] [7]. Categories
the main distinctions between traditional academic and e-learning environments [8].

Table 1. Differences between face to face and online learning environment

Face to face Learning Online Learning
Focus of course Group Individual
Focus of content Teacher Centered Student-centered
Form Synchronous Asynchronous
Time Scheduled Anytime
Place Classroom Anywhere
Flexibility Standardized Customized
Content Stable, durable Dynamic, transitory
Number of students Space delimited Without limits
Instructor preparation Some (transparencies) Extensive pre-preparation
Distribution of materials Hard copy Electronic download
Interaction Spontaneous Structured
Range of interactivity Full interactivity Limited interactivity
Research on blended learning has contributed to learning outcomes including the application of
blended learning can improve science learning outcomes compared to only direct learning [9]. The use
of Course Networking in blended learning can improve student learning outcomes [10]. Blended
learning using Moodle in Integrated Science learning can improve the cognitive abilities of junior high
school students [11]. There is a positive relationship between blended learning and motivation with
student learning outcomes [12]. Evaluation of blended learning has given positive results regarding
conceptual understanding, enthusiasm, and confidence in learning science and metacognitive reflection
on students' learning [13]. Learning with web-based blended learning can increase the average value
of student achievement [14]. The purpose of this position paper is to determine satisfaction, learning
motivation, and student learning outcomes on blended learning in junior high school.

2. Methods
The current study’s sample consists of 158 students in junior high schools. All students already have a
computer or smartphone, with the provision of blended learning treatment. The instrument used in this
study was the distribution of questionnaires and tests of learning outcomes.

Table 2. Distribution the Participants of the study

Demographic Variables Number of Students Percentage
Gender Male 68 43%
Female 90 57%
Device Personal Computer 33 21%
Smartphone 125 79%
Learning IPA Terpadu 158 100%

The distribution of questionnaires aims to determine student responses about student satisfaction and
motivation, students were asked to express their opinions with the Likert scale. So, they have checked
“1” if they strongly disagree, “2” if they disagree, “3” if they have no clear opinion, “4” if they agree
and “5” if they strongly agree with the given statement. Student learning outcomes test aims to
determine the knowledge and skills of students' scientific process. Normalized gain (g) to provide an
overview of increased learning outcomes between before and after learning.

Table 3. Interpretation of Normalized Gain [15]

Normalized Gain Score Interpretation
-1.00 < g <0.00 Decrease
g = 0.00 Stable
0.00 < g < 0.30 Low
0.30 < g < 0.70 Average
0.70 < g < 1.00 High

Table 4. Percentation of Science Process Skills Category [16]

Persentase (%) Criteria
≥ 85 Very Good
70-85 Good
55-70 Medium
40-55 Less
≤ 40 Very Less
3. Results and Discussion
Survey results : Distribution of Questionnaires
The survey results obtained from distributing questionnaires to 158 students after receiving the
blended learning model are presented in table 5.
Table 5. Student statements and responses for blended learning
Number of responses for:
Statement
1 2 3 4 5
I liked the learning activities performed in this
0 0 12 19 127
blended learning
Blended learning in the classroom is more effective
0 0 29 42 87
instead of just using face-to-face learning
Blended learning assignments give me opportunity
1 1 18 25 113
to read and learn more
With blended learning the information is obtained
0 2 9 47 100
by more than one way
Blended learning gives us deeper information of the
3 11 25 26 93
subject
My devices (smartphone and pc) help me in
4 11 17 78 48
learning
How to learn in blended learning is good 5 3 3 39 108
Blended learning can provide knowledge rather than
2 2 0 59 95
learning in the classroom
I consider the blended learning challenging 10 14 9 41 84
Blended learning contributes to social interactions
10 16 19 78 35
with friends
Blended learning contributes to unlimited learning
0 0 1 15 142
time
Blended learning contributes to a place of learning
1 0 3 21 133
without limits
The material in the mixed learning platform is well
7 2 16 66 67
organized
With Blended learning you can control how fast or
0 6 0 12 140
slow you move through lessons
Blended learning reinforces interaction between
0 7 7 20 124
teacher
Total Respondents: 158

Based on table 5, results show that student satisfaction with the use of blended learning in learning
IPA Terpadu obtained results with an average of 85% (very satisfied). According to students'
responses to statement one, most of them like blended learning. Furthermore, the high response of
students strongly agrees on statements 10 and 11 that blended learning has provided students learning
opportunities without being limited by place and time. This is a very positive thing about the right to
learn students can get access to learning in accordance with the learning objectives. Statement 14,
regarding student learning progress can be facilitated by blended learning, students can adapt
according to their ability to fast or slow understand the material.
 Table 6. Student statements about learning motivation
Number of responses for:
Statement
1 2 3 4 5
I can learn faster with this model 1 14 34 42 67
My course is blended learning
0 0 17 55 86
helped me get more information
Blended learning has increased
0 9 18 31 100
myinterest in learning
Blended mode learning boosted
mymotivation to achieve of 0 0 9 11 138
success
I have no difficulty learning by
2 2 12 43 99
using blended learning
Blended learning needs to be
applied to other subjects so that 1 0 3 16 138
my learning motivation increases
Blended learning improves
learning skills in learning IPA 14 3 13 56 72
Terpadu
Total Respondents: 158

Student responses about learning motivation showed results of 87.23% (very good). High response to
statements 3, 4, and 6 regarding the use of blended learning has increased student interest in learning
and student motivation. In addition, statement 6 shows that students strongly agree if blended learning
is applied to other learning.
Students Learning Outcomes
Pretest is carried out before the use a blended learning approach aims to measure students' initial
abilities. Then posttest was carried out to find out the students' knowledge after applying emulsions
(epub) with a blended learning approach. The giving of questions was adjusted to the 5 categories of
cognitive questions (Anderson & Krathwhol). Results of the pretest and posttest :
Table.7. Pre-
Pre-Post Test Score Differences
Post Test Score
20 17.27
15.15 14.44 Differences
15 13.93
12.3
MEAN

10 8.28
5.95
4.44
5 2.72 1.61
0
Remembering Understanding Application Analysis Create
Pretest
Posttest
 Tabel 8. Percent Assessment of Science Process Skills
Aspects of
No Science Process Indicator Percent (%)
Skills
1 Observations  Formulate problems and 72.63
hypotheses
 Observe objects according to 69
procedures
 Using a measuring instrument 76.63
correctly
 Compare using appropriate 74.50
measuring instruments
 Perform unit conversions on 80.25
observed (objects)
Mean 74.6
2 Make Inference  Collect relevant facts 78.13
(information) according to
observations
 Use patterns 55.50
 Relationship between aspects 55.63
observed
 Conclude up the observations 71.13
Mean 65.09
3 Communicate  Make observations / experiments 57.13
in the form of graphs / tables /
diagrams clearly
 Explain the results of the 59
experiment
 Explain the report systematically 52.63
Mean 56.25
Mean of Science Process Skills 65.32

4. Conclusion

 Results show that student satisfaction with the use of blended learning in learning IPA
Terpadu obtained results with an average of 85% (very satisfied).
 Student responses about learning motivation showed results of 87.23% (very good).
 The posttest results show the highest average remembering ability of 17.27 (86.35%)
compared to other categories of knowledge aspects (cognitive) after applying treatment with a
blended learning approach to science learning.
 Average value of science process skills after applying the elektronic book (epub) with a
blended learning approach of 65.32% in the medium category.

5. Acknowledgments
The research activities described in this paper were funded by Institut Pendidikan Indonesia
Garut in the context of the project. Furthermore, we would like to thank IPI Garut and students on a
junior high school in Kabupaten Garut for their feedback.
References
 [1] Jackson Kipchirchir Machii and J. K. Kyalo, “Assessment of Cloud Computing Adoption for
E-Learning by Institutions of Higher Learning,” Int. J. Sci. Res. Innov. Technol., vol. 3, no. 2,
p. 11, 2016.
[2] D. Darmawan, Teknologi Pembelajaran. Bandung: PT Remaja Rosda Karya, 2015.
[3] C. R. Graham, Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends and future directions. The
handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Fransisco: Pfeiffer,
2006.
[4] K. Thorne, Blended Learning: How to Intergrate Online Learning and Traditional Learning.
2003.
[5] D. R. Garrison and H. Kanuka, “Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in
higher education,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 95–105, 2004.
[6] J. Bersin, The Blended Learning Book Best Practices, Proven Methodologies and Lesson
Learned. San Fransisco: John Weley, 2004.
[7] C. C. Wai and E. L. K. Seng, “Exploring the Effectiveness and Efficiency of Blended Learning
Tools in a School of Business,” Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 123, no. 2, pp. 470–476, 2014.
[8] B. P. Valiathan, “Blended Learning Models,” pp. 2000–2003, 2002.
[9] H. Purwatiningsih, “Pengaruh Blended Learning Dan Gaya Belajar Terhadap Hasil Belajar
IPA,” J. Teknol. Pendidik., vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 94–104, 2015.
[10] H. Prasetyorini and Mustaji, “Pengembangan Materi Pada Mata Pelajaran IPA Dalam Platform
Course Networking sebagai Media Pembelajaran secara Blended Learning untuk meningkatkan
HasilBelajar dan Keterampilan,” J. Teknol. Pendidik. UNESA, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2016.
[11] R. Budiharti, E. Y. Ekawati, D. Wahyuningsih, and F. F. H, “The Utilization Of The Blended
Learning With Moodle Media To Improve the Junior High Students’ Cognitive Ability,” J.
Cakrawala Pendidik. UNY, no. 1, pp. 140–148, 2015.
[12] N. Ibrahim, “Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Matematika Dengan Blended Learning Dan Motivasi
Berprestasi Siswa,” J. Teknol. Pendidik. UNJ, vol. 26, no. 17, pp. 95–102, 2012.
[13] Y. C. Lee, “Blended learning for building student-teachers ’ capacity to learn and teach
science-related interdisciplinary subjects The case of Hong Kong,” Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J.,
vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 166–181, 2016.
[14] T. Bayrak and B. Akcam, “Understanding Student Perceptions of A Web-Based Blended
Learning Environment,” J. Appl. Res. High. Educ., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 577–597, 2017.
[15] R. R. Hake, Analyzing Change/Gain Score. USA: Dept. of Physics: Indiana University, 1999.
[16] Arikunto Suharsimi, Penelitian Tindakan Kelas. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara, 2007.