Hybrid e-Learning in Industrial Revolution 4.0 for Indonesia Higher Education

Husain Syam, Muhammad Basri, Amirullah Abduh, Andi Anto Patak, - Rosmaladewi

Abstract


Hybrid e-learning brings traditional learning together digital learning to accommodate the current development technology era as Industrial Revolution 4.0. The study aims to explore the perceptions, strategies, and challenges of lecturers in using hybrid e-learning in their teaching. This case study employs both quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative data were used on-line questionnaire, and the qualitative data are gained via interviews. The quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS descriptive statistics, and the qualitative data were analyzed through interactive thematic data analysis. The findings reveal that there are several categories of the usefulness of hybrid, the institutional support, the impact of hybrid e-learning on subject mastery, and the percentage use of hybrid e-learning.  Also, lecturers encounter mostly practical challenges in using hybrid e-learning. The study implies that lecturers may adopt the strategies of applying hybrid e-learning used by lecturers for a similar setting in different contexts. The study recommends that the more familiar the lecturers with the updated technology, the better the use of technology in their teaching. More importantly, the use of hybrid e-learning should be in the form of formal policy of the university so that it will be used ubiquity in many academic activities and settings. Higher education institutions should be able to change learning models that are by the needs of the Industrial Revolution 4.0 era


Keywords


hybrid; e-learning; higher education; industrial revolution 4.0.

Full Text:

PDF

References


M. Martyn, “The hybrid online model: Good practice,” Educ. Q., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 18–23, 2003.

N. A. Buzzetto-more, “Hybrid Learning Defined,” J. Inf. Technol. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 153–156, 2006.

N. Tvenge and K. Martinsen, “Integration of digital learning in industry 4.0,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 23, pp. 261–266, 2018.

M. Baygin, H. Yetis, M. Karakose, and E. Akin, “An effect analysis of industry 4.0 to higher education,” in 2016 15th international conference on information technology-based higher education and training (ITHET), 2016, pp. 1–4.

B. Xing and T. Marwala, “Implications of the fourth industrial age for higher education,” Think., no. 73, 2017.

A. A. Hussin, “Education 4.0 made simple: Ideas for teaching,” Int. J. Educ. Lit. Stud., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 92–98, 2018.

H. M. S. Ahmed, “Hybrid E‐Learning acceptance model: Learner perceptions,” Decis. Sci. J. Innov. Educ., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 313–346, 2010.

A. Benešová and J. Tupa, “Requirements for education and qualification of people in Industry 4.0,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 11, pp. 2195–2202, 2017.

C. Prinz, F. Morlock, S. Freith, N. Kreggenfeld, D. Kreimeier, and B. Kuhlenkötter, “Learning factory modules for smart factories in iIndustrie 4.0,” Procedia CiRp, vol. 54, pp. 113–118, 2016.

K. Schuster, L. Plumanns, K. Groß, R. Vossen, A. Richert, and S. Jeschke, “Preparing for industry 4.0–Testing collaborative virtual learning environments with students and professional trainers.,” Int. J. Adv. Corp. Learn., vol. 8, no. 4, 2015.

S. Jaschke, “Mobile learning applications for technical vocational and engineering education: The use of competence snippets in laboratory courses and industry 4.0,” in 2014 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 2014, pp. 605–608.

A. Klašnja-Milićević, B. Vesin, M. Ivanović, and Z. Budimac, “E-Learning personalization based on hybrid recommendation strategy and learning style identification,” Comput. Educ., vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 885–899, 2011.

A. Hudriati, A. A. Patak, and M. Basri, “Assessing Indonesian University Students ’ Preferences on Mendeley Reference Manager for Scientific Writing,” Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 2211–2218, 2018.

A. A. Patak, H. A. Naim, and R. Hidayat, “Taking Mendeley as Multimedia-based Application in Academic Writing,” Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol., vol. 6, no. 4, p. 557, Aug. 2016.

M. Basri and A. A. Patak, “Exploring Indonesian students’ perception on Mendeley Reference Management Software in academic writing,” in 2015 2nd International Conference on Information Technology, Computer, and Electrical Engineering (ICITACEE), 2015, pp. 8–13.

A. A. Patak and E. Akib, Mendeley: citation & PDF reference manager plus jejaring sosial. Arus Timur, 2012.

C. Guan, D. Ding, and K. W. Ho, “E-Learning in Higher Education for Adult Learners in Singapore,” Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 5, no. 5, 2015.

A. Tsai and C. Yun, “A Hybrid E-learning Model Incorporating Some of the Principal Learning Theories,” Soc. Behav. Pers., vol. 39, no. 229, pp. 145–152, 2011.

I. Zitter and A. Hoeve, “Hybrid Learning Environments: Merging Learning and Work Processes to Facilitate Knowleedge Integration andf Transitions,” OECD Educ. Work. Pap., vol. 81, no. 01, 2012.

B. P. Woolf, Building intelligent interactive tutors: Student-centered strategies for revolutionizing e-learning. Morgan Kaufmann, 2010.

E. B. Johnson, Contextual teaching and learning: What it is and why it’s here to stay. Corwin Press, 2002.

H. Firman and B. Tola, “The future of schooling in Indonesia,” J. Int. Coop. Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 71–84, 2008.

R. D. Kuntoro and S. Al-Hawamdeh, “E-learning in higher educational institutions in Indonesia,” J. Inf. Knowl. Manag., vol. 2, no. 04, pp. 361–374, 2003.

P. O. Lating, Hybrid E-learning for Rural Secondary Schools in Uganda. Sweden: Bleking Institute of Technology, 2006.

V. Terzieva, E. Paunova, and P. Kademova-katzarova, “Implementation of ICT Based Teaching in Bulgarian Schools.”

S. K. Toor, “Hybrid Model for e-Learning at Virtual University of Pakistan,” Elev. J. e-Learning, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2005.

F. G. Hamza-lup and S. White, “Design and Assessment for Hybrid Courses : Insights and Overviews,” vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 122–131, 2015.

A. Abduh and R. Rosmaladewi, “Language policy, identity, and bilingual education in Indonesia: a historical overview,” XLinguae, vol. 12, no. 219–227, 2019.

R. Ramly and A. Abduh, “Exploring Cognitive Concepts in the National Assessment of the Indonesian Language,” New Educ. Rev., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 142–152, 2018.

L. C. Medina, “Blended learning : Deficits and prospects in higher education,” Aust. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 42–56, 2018.

A. Aldridge and K. Levine, Surveying the Social World. Buckingham - Philadelphia: Open University Press, 2001.

R. P. Fisher and N. Schreiber, “Interview protocols to improve eyewitness memory,” Handb. Eyewitness Psychol. Vol. I Mem. Events, 2017.

V. Braun, V. Clarke, N. Hayfield, and G. Terry, “Thematic analysis,” Handb. Res. Methods Heal. Soc. Sci., pp. 843–860, 2019.

G. Guest, K. M. MacQueen, and E. E. Namey, Applied thematic analysis. Sage, 2011.

R. E. Boyatzis, Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Sage, 1998.

M. T. Okano, “IOT and industry 4.0: the industrial new revolution,” in International Conference on Management and Information Systems September, 2017, vol. 25, p. 26.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.9.4.9411

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.



Published by INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development