The Influence of Mobile Learning Toward 10th Graders’ Test Score

Abdul Halim Wicaksono

Universitas Negeri Malang, Malang, Indonesia

Keywords: Learning, Test Score, Mobile Learning

Abstract: Embracing technology in learning and education is needed to answer the challenge of this era. Mobile learning

approach is one of a kind. Technology allows student to learn anywhere and anytime. Using mobile learning

is considered to improve students’ learning outcomes. The purpose of this study is to know about different

learning outcomes between mobile learning approach and conventional approach, specifically in the test

score. This study is quantitative pre-experimental design research, and the design uses One-Shot Study Case

method. The subject of this study is 10th grade students of SMA Panjura Malang. 15 students in experimental

group and 15 more in control group. The results showed that there was no significant difference from the

utilization of mobile learning to 10th graders’ test score. The student can still finish their test with the same

result. Thus, mobile learning can still be considered as an alternative learning approach, but not much different

with conventional learning in terms of test score.

1 INTRODUCTION

Studies show that the education world faces a great

challenge to change and use variations of learning

that fit the current development. The 21st century

students’ needs and characteristics has been

drastically changed. Traditional learning approaches

make learners consuming passive content that there

must be a change, or at least complemented by a more

interactive and creative learning process (Jovanovic,

Chiong and Weise, 2012). Thus, an adaptation of

modern technology in education is needed to answer

this challenge.

The way to answer this challenge is embracing

technology to learning. There are a lot of new

innovations today in combining learning and the

latest technology. For example, mobile learning.

Mobile learning is learning across multiple context,

through social and content interaction, using personal

electronic devices (Crompton, 2013). Mobile

learning is a form of distance education that use

mobile device like smartphone, PDA, tablet and other

electronic devices to bring learning more accessible.

The use of internet and smartphone in Indonesia

has been very familiar. Digital Research Institute,

eMarketer, estimates the active user of smartphone in

Indonesia in 2018 will be more than a hundred million

users (Rahmayani, 2015). More specifically, the

Indonesian Internet Service Providers Association

(Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia,

abbreviated APJII) mentioned that the total of internet

users has reached 54.68% of the total population of

Indonesia, mostly by using smartphone (Asosiasi

Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (APJII),

2017). Besides, APJII (2017) stated that 49.42% of

the total users are 19-34 years old, the school and

productive age.

By the availability of resources, familiarity of the

internet, and also smartphone and majority of

Indonesian teenager who cannot be separated today,

mobile learning is considered to be well applied in

Indonesia. Mobile learning could be a problem

solving to the characteristic of Indonesian students.

Mobile learning is seen as a new alternative of

learning model in Indonesia.

Some previous studies regarding mobile learning

showed that mobile learning brings out some positive

impacts. Hwang & Chang, who researched about a

formative assessment-based mobile learning

approach to improve the learning attitudes and

achievements of students found that the proposed

approach not only promotes the students’ learning

interest and attitude, but also improves their learning

achievement (Hwang and Chang, 2011).

(Wang et al., 2009) on his research entitled “The

impact of mobile learning on students' learning

behaviours and performance: Report from a large

blended classroom” found that mobile learning is

Wicaksono, A.

The Inﬂuence of Mobile Learning Toward 10th Graders’ Test Score.

DOI: 10.5220/0008406900050009

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation (ICLI 2018), pages 5-9

ISBN: 978-989-758-391-9

much better to enlarge students in the learning

process. Students in this class changed from passive

learners to truly engaged learners who are

behaviourally, intellectually and emotionally

involved in their learning tasks. Besides, Nassuora

who study about student acceptance of mobile

learning in higher education in Saudi Arabia found

that the acceptance level of student on mobile

learning is on the high level (Nassuora, 2012). The

researcher surveyed 80 students and half of that were

not familiar with mobile learning, but still had a good

perception.

To be noted that those studies were not conducted

in Indonesia. In other words, there are so much

difference in the settings and characters. Then, by the

availability of resources and chances to utilize mobile

learning, is mobile learning truly fit the education of

Indonesia? Many researches on mobile learning

conducted in Indonesia, yet no one has investigated

the influence of mobile learning. Mostly about the

development of mobile learning media to solve the

school problem, with no continuance. Therefore, the

researcher is willing to conduct a research regarding

the interference of mobile learning compared to

conventional method in Indonesia, specifically on the

interference of mobile learning toward learning

achievement.

2 METHOD

This study has been conducted using pre-

experimental design with One-Shot Study Case

design. The class was divided into 2 groups,

experimental group (i.e. treated with mobile learning)

and control group (i.e. treated with conventional

method). Both groups were given a pre-test to

understand the initial state. Then, the treatment was

given to each group. At the end of the study, they

were given a post-test to measure the achievement.

2.1 Step

The initial step is identifying the problems and

objectives. The researcher was visiting SMA Panjura

to find the problems through observation and teacher

interview. At this step, the researcher evaluated

whether mobile learning could be applied.

Then, the researcher analysed the core

competence needed by the subjects. The subjects

should be able to operate mobile learning resources

(i.e. smartphone, internet) and have the prior

knowledge of the material given. The fruitfulness of

the study truly depends on those things.

On the next step, the researcher prepared the

learning material, such as, mobile learning, lesson

plan, and pre-test and post-test based on the

identification of the problems and objectives, and the

core competence of the subjects. The researcher

tested the validity and reliability of the material. If

some weaknesses found, the researcher would

evaluate and tested it back to meet the standard.

The subjects were 30 10th grader students who

have the same level. The researcher divided them into

2 groups, 15 students in the experimental group, and

15 students in the control group. The data collection

was begun with pre-test. Then, the subjects were

treated based on the group. At the end, post-test was

given to evaluate their achievement. The data was

being statistically analysed by the researcher. Figure

1 is a flowchart that describes the step-by-step

research.

Figure 1: Flowchart step by step research.

Identifying Problem and Purpose of the Study

Analyzing Basic Competencies

Preparation of research material

Test of research materialGroup determination

Revision of research

material

Experimental

Group

Control

Group

Pretest

Treatment

Post-test

Data Analyzing

Conclution

ICLI 2018 - 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation

2.2 Time and Place

The research was carried out about four months.

Starting from February to May 2017. The location is

SMA Panjura Malang, Indonesia. And the sample is

10th grade high school students.

2.3 Analysis Technique

After collecting the data, the researcher analysed the

data again to conclude the result of the study. On this

study. The analysis began with the pre-requisite test.

The pre-requisite test analysis is needed to know

whether the hypothesis testing could be carried on,

and whether the data was valid and reliable.

The pre-requisite test includes normality and

homogeneity test. Normality test is a test conducted

with a purpose of assessing whether the data

distribution in a group of data or variable is normal.

The normality test in this study used Komlogorof-

Smrinov (K-S) test with a significance α = 0.05.

Meanwhile, the homogeneity test is a test regarding

the variances of two or more distributions. In this

study, the homogeneity test used Levene’s test with a

value g f α = 0.05.

After that, the researcher analysed the data with

hypothesis testing. The hypothesis testing used 2-

tailed independent sample t-test. The significance α =

0.05. The result of the hypothesis testing would later

conclude the result of the study.

The step of analysis technique used by the

researcher is shown on Figure 2.

Figure 2: Analysis technique outline.

3 RESULT AND DISCUSSION

The result of the pre-test can be seen in the Table 1.

Table 1: This caption has one line so it is centered.

Minimum

Score

Maximum

Score

Mean

Experimental

Group

71.33

Control Group

76.00

Based on the Table 1, the control group has a

better mean score than experimental group with

76.00. The maximum score for both are 90. While by

the minimum score, the experimental group has a

higher score with 60. Based on the data, there are such

differences on initial state of both groups, but not that

significance. So, the study could still be continued.

After giving the treatment and post-test, the following

result are found.

Table 2. Post-test result descriptive statistics.

Minimum

Score

Maximum

Score

Mean

Experimental

Group

72.33

Control Group

78.67

The mean score of the control group is still better

than the experimental group by 72.33 compared to

78.67. The maximum score stays the same, 90 for

both. Then, the minimum score of the experimental

group stays higher compared to the control group by

50,

Based on both pre- and post-test, the initial state

of the subjects before and after treatment has no

significant difference. The control group stays better

on mean score either on pre- or post-test. The

experimental group stays higher on the minimum

score. The maximum score stays constant at 90. The

result indicates that no significance difference of two

applied method. But, the hypothesis testing could still

be done to the data to have a more reliable conclusion.

Thus, to continue testing the hypothesis, the data

should pass the pre-requisite test. First, normality test.

The normality test in this study used Komlogorof-

Smrinov (K-S) test with significance α = 0,05. The

first normality test had been done to the pre- and post-

test result of the experimental group. The result

shown at Table 3.

Table 3: Normality test result experimental group.

Pretest-

experiment

Postest-

experiment

Normal

Parameters

a,b

Mean

71.33

72.33

Std.

Deviation

10.259

10.499

Absolute

.265

.145

Positive

.265

.133

Negative

-.135

-.145

Test Statistic

.265

.145

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

.200

c.d

.200

c.d

a. Test distribution is normal.

b. Calculated from data

c. Liliefors significance correction

d. This is a lower bound of the true significance

The Inﬂuence of Mobile Learning Toward 10th Graders’ Test Score

In the Table 3, shows that normality score on Sig

(2-tailed) for pre-test and post-test from experimental

group are 0.200. If Asymp. Sig (2-tailed) more than

0.05 or equal, data distribution are normal. Which is

means in this case, the data of pre-test and post-test

experimental group have normal distribution. Table 4

shows the result of normality test for pre-test and

post-test control group.

Table 4: Normality test result control group.

Pretest-

control

Postest-

control

Normal

Parameters

a,b

Mean

76.00

78.67

Std.

Deviation

12.564

11.412

Absolute

.183

.244

Positive

.133

.160

Negative

-.183

-.244

Test Statistic

.183

.244

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)

.188

.200

c.d

a. Test distribution is normal.

b. Calculated from data

c. Liliefors significance correction

In the Table 4, shows that control group normality

score on Sig (2-tailed) for pre-test are 0.188 and post-

test are 0.200. Same like before if Asymp. Sig (2-

tailed) more than 0.05 or equal, data distribution are

normal. Which is means in this case also, the data of

pre-test and post-test control group have normal

distribution.

After we know that all data have normal

distribution, next is homogeneity test. The test for

homogeneity determines if two or more populations

have the same distribution of a single categorical

variable. In this study, the test using Levene’s test

with value g f α = 0,05. Table 5 shows the result of test

for homogeneity pre-test and post-test.

Table 5: Result test of homogeneity for pre-test.

Lavene Statistic

df1

df2

Sig.

.005

.944

Table 6: Result test of homogeneity for post-test.

Lavene Statistic

df1

df2

Sig.

.029

.866

In the Table 5 and Table 6, shows that Sig (2-

tailed) for pre-test are 0.944 and post-test are 0.866.

If Sig more than 0.05 or equal, then data are

homogeneous. So, data of pre-test and post-test are

homogeneous and hypothesis test can be done.

After the data pass all prerequisite test, the next is

hypothesis test. This is to examine differences in

learning outcomes between experimental groups that

use mobile learning and control groups that use

conventional learning with ordinary teachers.

Hyphothesis test using 2 tailed independent sample t

test. The formulation of the hypothesis is as follows:

H0 : There’s no significant difference from using

mobile learning to the learning outcomes for 10th

graders.

H1 :There’s significant difference from using

mobile learning to the learning outcomes for 10th

graders. The results are shown in Table 7.

Table 7: Result of independent sample test.

Group

Sig. (2-tailed)

Mean

Posttest

Experiment

0.125

72.33

Control

0.125

78.67

Table 7 shows the number of significance

obtained is 0.125. And it’s greater than 0,05. Then,

H0 is accepted. Conclusion is there’s no significant

difference from using mobile learning to the learning

outcomes for 10th graders. Mobile learning can still

be considered as an alternative learning approach, but

not much different with conventional learning in

terms of learning outcomes.

4 CONCLUSIONS

The comprehensive study about mobile learning was

still necessary. It is because the mobile learning in

Indonesia was in the early stage. This preliminary

study could support the other research or developing

mobile learning technology for student in the future

especially in Indonesia. All the data that are derived

from the result brings out the final points. The

researcher deduces some great deals that there is no

difference between the class with mobile learning and

the class with conventional learning. Mobile learning

still can be used as an alternative learning approach,

but not necessarily, the result will be better than

conventional learning.

REFERENCES

Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia (APJII)

(2017) Penetrasi & Perilaku Pengguna Internet

Indonesia, Hasil Survey 2017. Available at:

https://web.kominfo.go.id/sites/default/files/Laporan

ICLI 2018 - 2nd International Conference on Learning Innovation

Survei APJII_2017_v1.3.pdf (Accessed: 15 March

2018).

Crompton, H. (2013) ‘A Historical Overview of M-

Learning: Toward Learner-Centered Education

Through the study of recent histories’, in Berge, Z. L.

and Muilenburg, L. (eds) Handbook of mobile learning.

1st editio. New York: Routledge, pp. 3–14.

Hwang, G. J. and Chang, H. F. (2011) ‘A formative

assessment-based mobile learning approach to

improving the learning attitudes and achievements of

students’, Computers & Education, 56(4), pp. 1023–

1031.

Jovanovic, J., Chiong, R. and Weise, T. (2012) ‘Social

networking, teaching, and learning’, Interdisciplinary

Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management,

7, pp. 38–43.

Nassuora, A. B. (2012) ‘Students acceptance of mobile

learning for higher education in Saudi Arabia’,

American Academic & Scholarly Research Journal,

4(2), pp. 24–30.

Rahmayani, I. (2015) Indonesia Raksasa Teknologi Digital

Asia, Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika

Republik Indonesia: Menuju Masyarakat Informasi

Indonesia. Available at:

https://kominfo.go.id/content/detail/6095/indonesia-

raksasa-teknologi-digital-asia/0/sorotan_media

(Accessed: 14 January 2018).

Wang, M. et al. (2009) ‘The impact of mobile learning on

students’ learning behaviours and performance: Report

from a large blended classroom’, British Journal of

Educational Technology, 40(4), pp. 673–695.

The Inﬂuence of Mobile Learning Toward 10th Graders’ Test Score