RESEARCH PAPER
Effect of Learning Strategies and Independence of Student Learning Outcomes Learning Science Skin Disease and Sex
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Faculty of Medicine, INDONESIA
Publish date: 2018-06-14
 
European J Hlth Biol 2018;7(1):em1
KEYWORDS:
TOPICS:
ABSTRACT:
The objective of this research is to study the effect of instructional strategy and learning independency toward learning outcome in Dermatology studies. The research was conducted at the Christian University of Indonesia, with 58 university students as samples, selected randomly. And using experiment method with 2 x 2 factorial design. Finding of the research are as followed: (1) learning outcomes of the students with cooperative strategy are higher than those who received expository strategy; (2) there is interaction between instructional strategy and learning independency of the students; (3) learning outcomes of the students with high learning independence are higher when cooperative strategy is used than when they learn with expository strategy (4) learning outcomes of the students with low learning independence are higher when cooperative strategy is used than when they learned with expository strategy. Result of the research showed that students’ learning outcomes on Dermatology studies could be improved by applying appropriate instructional strategy with considering university students’ capability.
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR:
Dameria Sinaga   
Universitas Kristen Indonesia, Jalan Kelapa Hybrida RA15 No.1, Pegangsaan Dua, Kelapa Gading, 14250 Jakarta Utara, Indonesia
 
REFERENCES (18):
1. Arnold, H. L., Odom, R. B., & James, W. D. (Eds). (1990). Diseases of the Skin Clinical Dermatology. In Clinical Dermatology. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Company.
2. Bloom, S. B. (1979). Taxonomy of Education Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. London: Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd.
3. Dick, W., & Carey, L. (1990). The Systematic Design of Instructional. New York: Harper Collins Publishers College.
4. Gagne, M. R. (1975). Essential of Learning for Instruction. Hindale: Dreyden Press.
5. Gagne, M. R., & Briggs, L. (1979). Principles of Instructional Design. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
6. Grounlund, N. E., & Linn, R. (1990). Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching. New York: Mac Millan Publishing Company.
7. Hammond, M., & Collins, R. (1991). Self-Directing Learning Critical Practice. London: Kogan.
8. Haryono, A. (1998). Learning Strategies. Jakarta: Directorate of Secondary Education, Directorate General of Primary and Secondary Education, Department of Education.
9. Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-Directed Learning: a Guide for Learner and Teacher. New York: Cambridge Adult Educational.
10. Kozma, R, et al. (1978). Instructional Techniques in Higher Education. New Jersey: Englewood Cliffs.
11. Lindzey, G., & Aronson, E. (1968). The handbook of social psychology. New Delhi: Publishing Limited.
12. Murwani, S. (2008). Applied Statistics: Data Analysis Techniques. Jakarta: PPS UHAMKA.
13. Pannen, P. (1997). Self-Study. Jakarta: PAU Directorate General of Higher Education Department of Education.
14. Sanjaya, V. (2007). Process-Oriented Learning Strategy Education Standards. Jakarta: Prenada Media Group.
15. Sewart, D., Keegan, D., & Holmberg, B. (1984). Distance Education. New York: Chapman and Hall Inc.
16. Siregar, E. (2007). Textbook, Teaching and Learning Theory. Jakarta: Jakarta State University.
17. Spenser, T. D., & Kass, N. (Eds.). (1970). Perspective in Child Psychology. New York: Mc-Graw Hills Book Company.
18. Utami, J. (n.d.). SC. Levels of Education toward Independence and Creativity Shelf Lives. Jakarta: Indonesia Demographic Association of PKLH Ministry.
ISSN:2165-8722