Enhancing Students’ Learning Motivation by Applyıng Reflectıve Pedagogy to Modules for Junıor High School

Abstract

The Reflective Pedagogy Paradigm is an art of thinking and doing something thoughtfully that incorporates humanistic values into conscious subjects consciously. This paradigm endorses the meaning of each topic within learning materials based on the studentsʹ own experience. Students take into their consciousness life values with learning materials by themselves or by their groups in order that they can practice it in daily life. This study is aimed to develop an eligible module using reflective pedagogy and revealing the impact of the use of module on students’ motivation to study and experience. In this study, the developmental research method was used for resolving learning problems within eight grade of Junior High School Students during the Catholic religion class. ADDIE analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation model was used as the module development method in this study. This study used the non‐test method as the data collection technique with questionnaire and interview as the instruments. The data analysis techniques used in this research were descriptive quantitative methods. The results of this research show that the use of the module in eight graders Junior High Schools categorized as eligible based on media and material experts. Thus, it can be concluded that the module is suitable for use. The improvement appeared after the implementation conducted using the reflective pedagogy module. The result shows that students’ motivation is significantly higher than before using the module according to t‐test calculation. The result of post‐test and pre‐test score is statistically different so that means that the implementation of the reflective pedagogy in religion subject improves learning motivation

Keywords

• teaching material,reflective pedagogy,learning motivation,module

References

1. Collins, S. R. (2008). Enhanced student learning through applied constructivist theory. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 2(2), 1‐9.
2. Connor, K. R. (2014). Accompanying the student: The Ignatian pedagogical paradigm and prior learning. Jesuit Higher Education: A Journal, 3(1), 40‐47.
3. Csinos, D. M. (2010). ʺCome, follow meʺ: Apprenticeship in Jesusʹ approach to education. Religious Education, 105(1), 45‐62.
4. Dick, W., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2009). The systematic design of ınstruction. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.
5. Duminuco, V. J. (2000). The Jesuit ratio studiorum: 400th anniversary perspectives. New York: Fordham University Press.
6. Font‐Guzmán, J. N. (2014). Using Ignatian pedagogy in a mediation course. Jesuit Higher Education: A Journal, 3(1), 48‐63.
7. Freeman, J. C. (2012). Adopting killer Ignatian apps for facebook: Employing Jesuit pedagogy to enrich student ınvolvement in social media. Jesuit Higher Education: A Journal, 1(1), 113‐124.
8. Hadar, L. L. (2017). Opportunities to learn: Mathematics textbooks and students’ achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 153‐166.

9. Hamalik, O. (2003). Proses Belajar Mengajar. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.
10. Hartana, A., Setyosari, P., & Kuswandi, D. (2016). Penerapan strategi pembelajaran paradigma pedagogi reflektif terhadap peningkatan hasil belajar dan motivasi berprestasi pelajaran ilmu pengetahuan alam kelas V sekolah dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan, 1(4), 765‐779.
11. Hayes, C. X. (2006). Paradoxes, Parallels and Pedagogy: a case study of Ignatian Pedagogy and teachers’ perceptions of implementation in Australian Jesuit Schools. Faculty of Education, School of Religious Education. Australia: Australian Catholic University.
12. Henson, K. T. (2003). Foundations for learner‐centered education: A knowledge base. Education, 124(1), 5‐16.
13. Hilton, J., & Plummer, K. (2013). Examining student spiritual outcomes as a result of a general education religion course. Christian Higher Educatio, 12(5), 331‐348.
14. International Commision of the Apostole of Jesuit Education [ICAJE]. (1993). Ignatian pedagogy: A practical approach. Rome: International Commission on the Apostolate of Jesuit Education.
15. Ihssen, B. L. (2011). Designing courses for significant learning: Voices of experience. Teaching Theology & Religion, 14(2), 198‐199.
16. Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., & Rowlands, I. (2010). Scholarly e‐books: The views of 16,000 academics. New Information Perspectives, 61(1), 33‐47.
17. Jármai, E. M., & Bérces, E. (2012). Development of emotional competencies and reflective learning in communication courses. Procedia‐Social and Behavioral Sciences, 69, 745–754.
18. Jerald, C. D. (2009). Defining a 21st‐century education. Retrieved November 14, 2017, from www.centerforpubliceducation.org.
19. Joyce, B. R., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2017). Models of teaching (9th edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson.
20. Keller, J. M. (1999). Motivation in cyber learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technolog, 1(1).
21. Keller, J. M. (2008). First principles of motivation to learn and e3‐learning. Distance Education, 29(2), 175‐185.
22. Kolvenbach, P. H. (2014). The caracteristics of jesuit education: An abridge version. London. Jesuit Institute
23. Loving, G. D. (2011). The religious experience project: Bringing an experiential dimension to teaching religion. Teaching Theology & Religion, 14(2), 249.
24. Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the ellusive ADDIE model: Performance improvement. In A. Kovalchick, & K. Dawson, Educational Technology: An Encyclopedia (pp. 34‐36). Santa Bbara, CA: ABC‐ Clio.
25. Proulx, J. (2006). Constructivism: A re‐equilibration and clarification of the concepts,and some potential implications for teaching and pedagogy. Radical Pedagogy, 8 (1).
26. Rockinson‐Szapkiw, A. J., Holder, D. E., & Dunn, R. (2011). Motivating students to learn: is there a difference between traditional books and e‐books? . Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2011 (pp. 235–239). AACE.
27. Sardiman, A. M. (2005). Interaksi dan motivasi belajar mengajar. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
28. Schunk, D. H., Pintrich, P. R., & Meese, J. (2007). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (3rd edition). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29. Subagya, J. S. (2012). Paradigma pedagogi reflektif. Yogyakarta: Kanisius.
30. Uno, H. B. (2013). Teori motivasi dan pengukurannya (Motivation theory and its measurement). Jakarta: Bumi Aksara.
31. Wang, J., & Guthrie, J. (2004). Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, amount of reading and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 162‐186.
32. Witfelt, C. (2000). Educational multimedia and teachersʹ needs for new competencies: A study of compulsory school teachers’ needs for competence to use educational multimedia. Education Media International, 37 (4), 235—241.
33. Woody, W. D., Daniel, D. B., & Baker, C. (2010). E‐books or textbooks: Students prefer textbooks. Computers & Education, 55 (3), 945‐948.