Capabilities Comparison of Surabaya and Malaysia Economic Teachers in Innovative Learning Model Application

Year 2019, Volume: 4 Issue: 4, 564 - 572, 01.10.2019

Bambang Suratman Yoyok Soesatyo W Aspodo Tjipto Subroto

https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.628359

Abstract

The objective of this study is to compare the capability of economic teachers in applying innovative learning models betw een teachers in Surabaya and Malaysia. Survey research methods, w ith data sources or participation of all high school / vocational school economics teachers in Surabaya City and economic teachers in Malaysia. Sampling technique uses probability random sampling, by appointing 100 teachers from Surabaya and 100 teachers from Malaysia. Techniques for collecting data use: (1) Questionnaire via email, (2) documentation study, on learning devices, w ith research instruments consisting of: (1) questionnaire, (2) learning device documents. Data from this study result are analyzed using descriptive statistics and SEM, to describe comparison in innovative learning models betw een teachers in Surabaya and Malaysia. The conclusions in this study include: (1) The understanding betw een Surabaya and Malaysia economic teachers has a significant effect on the innovative learning models application, (2) the ability of economic teachers not to support significantly in applying innovative learning models, (3) sustainable self-development for economic teachers in Surabaya and Malaysia have a significant effect on inner skills, applying innovative learning models in their classrooms

Keywords

Teacher’s capability , innovative learning , Surabaya , Malaysia

References

• Abidin, Y. (2016). Desain Sistem Pembelajaran Dalam Konteks Kurikulum 2013. Bandung: PT. Refika Aditama. Alma, B. (2009). Guru Profesional (Menguasai Metode dan Terampil Mengajar). Bandung: PT. ALFABETA. Chijioke, O. (2013). Appraisal of theoretical models of psychomotor skills and applications to technical vocational education and training ( Tvet ) system in Nigeria. Journal of Research and Development, 1(6), 25–35.Direktorat Pembinaan Sekolah Menengah Atas Direktorat Jendera l Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah (2017). Model-Model Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Kementrian Pendidikan dan KebudayaanEngr. Amaechi, O. J. (2016). Strategies of effective teaching and learning practical skills in technical and vocational. Training Programmes in Nigeria, 5(12), 598–603.Fauziah, R., Abdullah, A. G., & Hakim, D. L. (2013). Pembelajaran Saintifik Elektronika Dasar Berorientasi Pembelajaran Berbasis Masalah. Invotec, IX. Volume (2), 165–178.Fernandez C, Joanna C, Chokshi S. (2003). A U.S.-Japan lesson study collaboration reveals critical lenses for examining practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19: 171–185. Goldhaber, D.and E. Anthony. (2007). Can teacher quality be effectively assessed? National board certification as asignal of effective teaching. The Review of economic and Statistics 89(1):134-150Huda, M. (2014). Strategi Pembelajarandalam Pendidikan Ekonomi. Yogyakarta: Pustaka PelajarIsmail , M.I. (2010). Kinerja dan Kompetensi Guru dalam Pembelajaran.: Lentera Pendidikan 13(1) 44-63. Jeynes W.(2008). W hat w e should and should not learn from the Japanese and other East Asian educational systems. Educational Policy, 22: 900–927. Jacobs J.K. & Morita E )2002).Japanese and American teachers’ evaluations of videotaped mathematics lessons. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33: 154–175. Joseph, Engr. Amaechi O dan Thomas C. Godstime. (2016). Strategies of effective teaching and learning practical skills in technical and vocational training programmes in Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific Research Engineering & Technology (IJSRET), ISSN 2278 – 0882 Volume 5, Issue 12, December. Kementerian Pendidikan Nasional. Direktorat Jenderal Peningkatan Mutu Pendidik dan TenagaKependidikan. (2010). Pedoman Pelaksanaan Penilaian Kinerja Guru (PK Guru). Jakarta. bermutuprofesi.orgMunib, A. (2010). Pengantar Ilmu Pendidikan. Semarang: Unnes Press. Pribadi. A, B. (2009). Model Desain Sistem Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Dian Rakyat. Rumini, S. (2006). Psikologi Pendidikan. Yogyakarta: Unit Percetakan dan Penerbitan (UPP) Universitas Negeri Yogjakarta.. Sanjaya, W . (2008). Pembelajaran Strategi Berorientasi Standar Proses Pendidikan. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media. Soesatyo, Y. (2017). Pelatihan Penulisan Proposal PTK bagi guru-guru Ekonomi di Sidoarjo. Surabaya: Pascasarjana Unesa. Sugihartono. (2007). Psikologi Pendidikan. Yogyakarta: Universitas Negeri Yogjakarta (UNY) Press. Sugiyono. (2013). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung: Alfabeta. Susanto, A. (2015). Teori Belajar dan Pembelajaran di SD. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group. Rusman. 2014. Model-model Pembelajaran: Mengembangkan Profesionalisme Guru. Jakarta: Rajaw ali Press. Tóth, P. (2012). Learning strategies and styles in vocational education. Acta Polytechnica Hungarica, 9(3), 195–216.W arsita, B. (2008). Teknologi Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Rineka CIpta. W einstein C.E. & Hume L.M. (1998).Study strategies for lifelong learning. W ashington, DC: American Psychological Association;.View ArticleGoogle ScholarW inkel, W . . (2009). Psikologi Pengajaran. Yogyakarta: Media Abadi. W orld Bank (2003). Education in Indonesia: From crisis to recovery. W ashington, DC: East Asia and Pasific Regional Office