Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on

a Pilot Course For Engineering Economy

Renny Eka Putri

, Rusnam

, and Intan Pertiwi

Department of Agricultural Engineering, Andalas University, Padang, Indonesia

Keywords: Computer-Assisted, Cooperative Learning, Engineering Economy.

Abstract: Cooperative learning is a teaching-learning strategy that emphasizes joint attitudes or behaviors in working

or helping among others in a regular group structure of cooperation, consisting of two or more persons. This

objective of the research is Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on A Pilot

Course for Engineering Economy. This research is started by changing the previous method of learning theory

to computer-based. Then, at the end of the semester students are asked to fill in questioners to evaluate the

implementation of the lecture. The results show that 93% of students stated strongly agree and agree that the

learning process computer-based technical techniques currently help increase interest in learning. In

conclusion, the application of the computer-based cooperative method to technical economics course can

increase student participation of lecture and also show the increased participation of the student due to the

dynamic learning situation when compared with previous learning. From the assessment, the result shows the

application of this method can increase a student’s test score.

1 INTRODUCTION

The learning process is one of the implementations of

the development of student knowledge given in the

field of education. Education is one of the national

development fields that aims to improve human

quality. To achieve these goals, education must be

carried out systematically and based on science and

technology. The approach of Student-Centered

Learning (SCL) is a learning model that places

students as the center of the learning process

(Dewayani, 2006; Had, 2017; Kurdish, 2009 ). In

applying the concept of Student-Centered Learning,

students are expected to be active and independent

participants in the learning process, who are

responsible and initiative to recognize their learning

needs, find information sources to be able to answer

their needs, build and present their knowledge based

on the needs and sources they find (Marioara, 2015;

Postareff et.al., 2018; Tyabaev et.al., 2015).

The Engineering Economics course is one of the

compulsory subjects in the Agricultural Engineering

Study Program in the group of Skills and Skills

Ability (MKK) courses. This course weights 3 credits

without practicum. This topic studies the

understanding and scope of technical economics, the

concept of time value of money, compound interest,

equivalence, Present Worth analysis, Cash Flow

analysis, rate of return analysis, analysis future

worth, payback period, NPV, B / C ratio, sensitivity,

IRR, economic life, depreciation, analysis of the cost

of agricultural equipment and machinery, analysis

break even point. This course is downstream of a

business analysis plan so that it can expect the value

of the benefits received. Engineering economics

course is one of the fields of science to predict profits,

length of time and amount obtained in doing the

planning business. Good economic analysis in

business planning will result in value benefits that are

like and more efficient and effective.

To obtain learning outcomes according to what is

expected, the lecturer of this course has teaching

materials such as power points and teaching

materials. The learning model that has been applied

to this course is a conventional learning model or

what is known as Teacher Center Learning (TCL)

which is carried out by explaining the theory,

providing examples of problems and independent

assignments. The assessment carried out in measuring

student learning outcomes that have been applied is

based on UAS and UTS scores 40%, UAS 40%, Quiz

10%, assignments 10%. In even semester 2016/2017

for 2 (two) different classes (grades A, B, and C)

Putri, R., Rusnam, . and Pertiwi, I.

Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on a Pilot Course For Engineering Economy.

DOI: 10.5220/0008679800690075

In Improving Educational Quality Toward International Standard (ICED-QA 2018), pages 69-75

ISBN: 978-989-758-392-6

shows that there are students who fail or who get D

and E. However, the percentage the number of

students who get A as the highest score is 23% of the

total students, and the A-score is 31% of the total

students of class A, B and C as many as 120 people.

These results illustrate that the timber production

process has been running well but not optimal. It can

be inferred by the presence of D and E values of 3%

each.

Besides that, the current learning system is not

perfect because the teaching system is still teaching

learning and students are not equipped with the ability

to make computer application programs to facilitate

the completion of cases in the field of Agricultural

Engineering. With the expectation that if the learning

system into a learning center teaching (cooperative

method) and computer-based technology created

teaching, students are motivated to follow this course.

Moreover, also can increase student’s final grades.

The purpose of this study is to study the effect of

computer-assisted cooperative learning methods on a

pilot course of engineering economy.

2 METHODOLOGY

Based on the problems found in the previous teaching

system, this study applies a cooperative method with

computer-based teaching technology. As previously

informed, this lecture is not equipped with practicum,

so students do not understand the material presented.

For this reason, in this research activity, students were

given direct assistance in a computer laboratory. The

material presented uses a computer program

(software) supporting this subject.

2.1 Methodology or Output

Achievement Strategies

Based on the problems found in the previous teaching

system, this study applies cooperative methods to

computer-based teaching technology. As previously

informed, this lecture is not equipped with practicum,

so students do not understand the material presented.

For this reason, in this research activity, students were

given direct assistance in a computer laboratory. The

material presented uses a computer program

(software) supporting this subject. The expected

outcome of the improvement and development of

learning methods and student assessments is the new

RPKPS and Classroom Action Research (PTK)

articles that will be sent as one of the articles in an

international seminar that will be held by LP3M. To

achieve these outcomes, a methodology or strategy

for achieving the output is needed.

2.2 Learning Plan

Relevance shows the existence of teaching material

relations with the needs and conditions of students.

Student motivation will be maintained if they

consider what is learned is useful. One strategy to

show the relevance of lectures is by telling students

what they can do after learning lecture material. It

means having to explain learning outcomes or by

explaining the benefits of knowledge or skills to be

learned and how it can be applied in later work.

Teaching materials are written in the form of RPS /

RPKPS. In the RPS / RPKPS Economics subjects,

Previous techniques have explained the learning

outcomes of this course. However, the RPS / RPKPS

needs to be developed so that it is by the learning

method that will be developed, namely the learning

method with the SCL approach.

2.3 Development of Learning Methods

TCL learning models that have been implemented so

far will be converted into learning models Student

Centre Learning (SCL). This is done to support

efforts to realize the expected competencies. SCL

learning model, currently proposed to be a learning

model that should be used because it has several

advantages. They are (1) students or students will be

able to feel that learning is their own because students

are given wide opportunities to participate; (2)

students have strong motivation to participate in

learning activities; (3) the growth of a democratic

atmosphere in learning so that there will be dialogue

and discussion to learn from each other - to teach

among students; and (4) can add insight into the mind

and knowledge for lecturers or educators because

something experienced and delivered by students

may not be known before by the lecturer (Kurdish,

2009; Postareff et.al., 2018; Sudjana, 2015). The

advantages of the SCL learning model will be able to

support efforts towards effective and efficient

learning.

The learning system that will be applied is centred

on students or SCL using methods cooperative

learning. Cooperative learning is a teaching and

learning strategy that emphasizes shared attitudes or

behaviours in work or helps among others in the

structure of regular cooperation in groups, consisting

of two or more people (Munir et.al., 2018). This

model is based on cognitive learning theory and

social learning theory. The steps of learning

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

according to cooperative learning are divided into

several stages with the sequence of indicators,

namely: conveying goals and motivating students,

presenting information, organizing students into

learning groups, guiding groups learning, evaluating,

and giving awards. For classroom management

according to the cooperative learning model, it is

translated into grouping, cooperation, and class

management. In the cooperative learning model, there

are three evaluation models, namely: competition

evaluation model, individual evaluation, and

cooperative learning evaluation (Tisha et.al., 2016;

Saborit et.at., 2016; Navarro-Pablo et.al., 2015;

Slavin, 2015).

By applying this element means coordinating

student activities in achieving goals, then the things

we can build in the teaching and learning process are

as follows: 1) know and trust each other, 2) be able to

communicate accurately and not ambitiously, 3)

accept and mutual support and 4) able to resolve

conflicts constructively.

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Lecture Situation Analysis

The study was carried out on technical economics

subjects consisting of 3 parallel classes including

Class A, Class B, Class C with the number of students

each class respectively as follows; 41 people, 35

people, and 28 people. Figures 1 and 2 below show

the atmosphere of computer-based engineering

learning systems. In this lecture students get material

including: NPV, B/C Ratio, IRR, Economic Age,

Depreciation, Analysis of the cost of agricultural

equipment and machinery, BEP Analysis, Analysis of

the cost of agricultural equipment and machinery and

BEP using computers and Analysis of NPV, IRR, B/C

ratio BEP using computers for agricultural processing

cases. Lectures are held at the computer laboratory of

the Department of Agricultural Engineering, Andalas

University, Padang. This labor can accommodate 40

students for one lecture.

In the previous year, the learning method used

was teaching center learning. With this method, there

are several disadvantages, namely that the lecturer

teaches in front of the class and students complete the

problems using a calculator. Calculations with a

calculator (manually) require a long time and require

a try and error in the solution. Therefore, lectures

become less effective, so that in this study, students

have used computers to solve all cases related to

agricultural techniques using computers. After being

given the material, students are given application

questions related to the analysis of the cost of

agricultural equipment and machinery. They

complete the task directly in labor. Assignments are

given in two types, namely personal and group

assignments.

3.2 Questionnaire Data Analysis

To evaluate the improvement of the learning, the

study was conducted to see the effect of changes in

learning methods carried out on student admission.

The questionnaire contains ten questions that are

easily understood by respondents. A survey was

conducted to students at the end of the lecture. Table

1 is a list of items contained in the questionnaire.

Table 1: List of questionnaire questions

Question

Learning using media (computer) is more fun

than just lecturing.

I am better able to follow the learning well about

what the lecturer explained when using the media

compared to lectures alone.

I feel bored quickly when I follow the learning

that only records and listens without any direct

interaction

Learning with conventional methods (lectures)

makes me bored quickly and tends to prefer to

talk with friends rather than pay attention to the

material presented

Learning process of Computer-Based Economics

currently helping to increase interest in learning

Lecturers currently have used interactive learning

media

Economics of Engineering Lessons Computer-

based on material at this time is not boring.

Do you think that Computer-Based Economics

Engineering Students become easier to

understand

Current learning media are by the applicable

curriculum

After lecturing, students have been able to

analyze the economic tools and machinery of

agriculture quickly and accurately

From the results of questionnaires that have been

distributed to students after lectures were conducted,

it is found that 52% strongly agree while 42% agreed

that learning using media (computer) was more fun

than just lecturing. However, there are still 3%

students who feel learning to use a computer is not

fun.

Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on a Pilot Course For Engineering Economy

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 1: Percentage of Student Satisfaction Levels on

Learning Methods

Fig. 1 shows that students are better able to learn well

about what the lecturer explained when using the

media compared to lectures alone. This can be proven

in the percentage of students who strongly agree at

43% and students who agree 49%. However, there are

still as many as 1% students who cannot follow the

learning well about what the lecturer explained when

using the media compared to lectures alone.

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 2: Percentage of Student Bored Level on the

Learning Without Interaction Method

Based on the data analysis that has been done, it turns

out that students easily feel bored when they only

record and listens to the lecturer without any direct

interaction. This is apparent from the result, where

36% of students strongly agree, and 43% agree with

the statement; only 4% of students do not agree with

the statement. The result means that the number of

students who like the learning methods is nine times

more than those who do not..

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 3: Percentage of Student Bored Levels on Learning

with Conventional Methods

The picture shows that 24% strongly agree and 48%

agree to the statement that learning using

conventional methods (lectures) makes students feel

bored. They prefer to talk with friends rather than pay

attention to the material presented by the lecturer.

However, 9% of the students prefer conventional

methods rather than discuss with friends.

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 4: Percentage of Student Satisfaction Levels on

Learning Process of Computer-Based Economics

Based on data analysis, it can be stated that the current

learning process of Computer-Based Engineering

Economics can help increase learning interest. This

can be proven in the percentage of students who

strongly approve and approve it, respectively by 36%

and 57%, although in reality there are also 7% of

students who feel that they are still not interested in

this learning method. In short, students who strongly

agree that this learning method can help increase

interest in learning is 8 times greater in number than

students those who state that this learning method

cannot help increase learning interest.

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 5: Percentage of Student Satisfaction Levels on

Interactive Learning Media

As much as 48% of students strongly agree and 49%

of students agree that lecturers currently use

interactive learning media. However, there are also

3% of students who state that this learning method is

not interactive.

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 6: Percentage of Student Satisfaction Levels on

Computer-based Economics of Engineering

Figure 6 shows that many students feel computer-

based economic engineering class today is not boring.

This is evidenced from the percentage of students

who highly approve (44%) and approve (48%).

When compared with the percentage of students who

feel bored with this method as much as 8%, the

number of students who feel not bored is six times

more than students who feel bored..

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 7: Percentage of Student Understanding Level on

Computer-Based Economics Engineering Students

Based on the results shown in the figure above, it can

be stated that there are still students who do not

understand this computer-based learning economics.

This is evidenced from the percentage of students

who do not understand, which is 3%. However, with

the economic learning of computer-based techniques

this resulted in students as much as 38% strongly

agree and 47% agreed that the economics of

computer-based engineering learning was easier to

understand.

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 8: Percentage of Student Satisfaction Levels on the

Current Learning Media

Based on the data analysis above, it can be stated that

the current learning media is by the applicable

curriculum. This is evidenced by the percentage of

students who approve of this by 65%, and the

percentage of students who strongly approve is 25%.

Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on a Pilot Course For Engineering Economy

SS = strongly agree, S = agree, RR = hesitation, TS = disagree, STS

= strongly disagree

Figure 9: The Percentage of Student Ability Level to

Conduct Economic Analysis

Based on the data analysis shown above, it can be

stated that students have been able to conduct an

economic analysis of agricultural equipment and

machinery quickly and precisely after lectures using

this computer-based technique learning method. It

can be proven in the percentage of 56% of approved

students and 21% of highly approving students.

3.3 Evaluation of Student Exam Result

To see the success of the implementation of this

lecture, a comparison was made between the value of

students in the previous year (2016/2017 academic

year) with current students (2017/2018 academic

year). Based on the comparison between the students'

grades in the previous year (2016/2017 school year)

with the current student scores (2017/2018 school

year), it can be stated that the current student grades

are better than those in the previous year. It can be

proven from the percentage of A value of, which is

38% in this year, and 18% in the previous year. This

means that the percentage of students who got A has

increased 2 times.

4 CONCLUSIONS

From the research conducted it can be concluded that

the application of technology is needed to improve

the quality of learning given to students. From the

results of the research data shows that students more

easily understand the material using computer media.

From the questionnaire results that had been

distributed to students after the lecture was

conducted, it was found that students considered 52%

strongly agree and 42% agreed that learning using

media (computer) was more fun than just the lecture

method. From the aspect of value, the percentage of

the value of A in the 2017/2018 academic year

increased 20% compared to that in the 2016/2017.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank Andalas University

Grand number 004/UN.16.18.3/LP3M/PTK/2018 for

providing financial support or this project.

REFERENCES

Dewayani, Sylvi. 2006. "Student-Centered Learning",

Quality Improvement Workshop Materials for Student

Center Learning Learning Techniques. Yogyakarta:

UGM

Hadi, R, 2007. From Teacher-Centered Learning to

Student-Centered Learning: Changes in Learning

Methods in Universities. Insania, Vol. 12, No. 3. p.

408419.

Kurdish, FN. 2009. Application of Student-Centered

Learning from Teacher Centered Learning Subjects in

Health Sciences in the Health Study Program.

Education Forum, Volume 28, Number 2.

Marioara, Luduşan. The Education Change for in Need

Student-centred Learning. Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, Volume 191, 2015, Pages 2342-

2345, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.562.

Munir, M.T., Saeid Baroutian, Brent R. Young, Susan

Carter, Flipped classroom with cooperative learning as

a cornerstone. Education for Chemical Engineers,

Volume 23, 2018, Pages 25-33,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2018.05.001.

Navarro-Pablo, Macarena, Emilio J. Gallardo-Saborido.

Teaching to Training Teachers through Cooperative

Learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,

Volume 180, 2015, Pages 401-406,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.136.

Postareff, Liisa, Markus Mattsson, Anna Parpala. The

effect of perceptions of the teaching-learning

environment on the variation in approaches to learning

– Between-student differences and within-student

variation. Learning and Individual Differences,

Volume 68, 2018, Pages 96-107,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.10.006.

Saborit, J. A., Javier Fernández-Río, José Antonio Cecchini

Estrada, Antonio Méndez-Giménez, David Méndez

Alonso. Teachers' attitude and perception towards

cooperative learning implementation: Influence of

continuing training. Teaching and Teacher Education,

Volume 59, 2016, Pages 438-445,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.020.

Slavin, Robert E. Cooperative Learning in Schools,

Editor(s): James D. Wright, International Encyclopedia

of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition),

Elsevier, 2015, Pages 881-886,

https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.92028-2.

ICED-QA 2018 - International Conference On Education Development And Quality Assurance

Sudjana, S., D. 2005. Participatory Learning Methods and

Techniques. Bandung: Production.

Tisha, L.N. Emerson, Linda English, KimMarie

McGoldrick, Cooperative learning and personality

types. International Review of Economics Education,

Volume 21, 2016, Pages 21-29,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2015.12.003.

Tyabaev, Andrey E., Svetlana F. Sedelnikova, Alexey V.

Voytovich. Student-Centered Learning: The

Experience of Teaching International Students in

Russian Universities. Procedia - Social and Behavioral

Sciences, Volume 215, 2015, Pages 84-89,

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.11.578.

Study Effect of Computer-Assisted Cooperative Learning Methods on a Pilot Course For Engineering Economy