ISSN (Online): 2321-3418
server-injected
Education And Language
Open Access

Innovative Learning Strategies to Enhance Student Motivation and Academic Achievement: A Constructivist Learning Perspective in Islamic Religious Education

DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v12i09.el04· Pages: 3603-3613· Vol. 12, No. 09, (2024)· Published: September 15, 2024
PDF
Views: 820 PDF downloads: 321

Abstract

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of innovative, constructivist-based learning strategies in enhancing student motivation and academic achievement. The constructivist approach, which emphasizes active, project-based, and collaborative learning, was implemented in a higher education setting to assess its impact on student motivation and academic outcomes. A quasi-experimental research design with treatment and control groups was employed, involving students from various academic programs. Data were collected through questionnaires measuring learning motivation and academic performance before and after the implementation of innovative strategies. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive and inferential statistics, including t-tests to compare differences between the treatment and control groups. The findings indicate that the application of constructivist-based innovative learning strategies significantly improves student motivation and academic achievement. Active and project-based learning methods increased student engagement and facilitated better understanding of the material, as reflected in improved academic outcomes. The study also underscores the importance of a supportive learning environment, including the use of digital technology, in fostering the learning process. Limitations of the study include a limited sample size and contextual variables that may influence the results. The study provides recommendations for educational institutions to adopt innovative learning strategies and encourages further research to explore various learning approaches in greater depth

Keywords

innovative learning strategiesconstructivistlearning motivationacademic achievementquasiexperiment

References

  1. Akçayır, G., & Akçayır, M. (2018). The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges. Computers & Education, 126, 334–345.Google Scholar ↗
  2. Alamri, M. M. (2019). Students’ academic achievement performance and satisfaction in a flipped classroom in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(1), 103–119.Google Scholar ↗
  3. Alsawaier, R. S. (2018). The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(1), 56–79.Google Scholar ↗
  4. Al-Senaidi, S., Lin, L., & Poirot, J. (2009). Barriers to adopting technology for teaching and learning in Oman. Computers & Education, 53(3), 575–590. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2009.03.015DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  5. Al-Shabibi, T. S., & Al-Ayasra, M. A.-K. (2019). Effectiveness of the flipped classroom strategy in learning outcomes (bibliometric study). International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 18(3), 96–127.Google Scholar ↗
  6. Altun, S., & Yücel-Toy, B. (2015). The Methods of Teaching Course Based on Constructivist Learning Approach: An Action Research. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(6), 248–270.Google Scholar ↗
  7. Anazifa, R. D., & Djukri, D. (2017). Project-based learning and problem-based learning: Are they effective to improve student’s thinking skills? Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(2), 346–355.Google Scholar ↗
  8. Arık, S., & Yılmaz, M. (2020). The effect of constructivist learning approach and active learning on environmental education: A meta-analysis study. International Electronic Journal of Environmental Education, 10(1), 44–84.Google Scholar ↗
  9. Bara, G., & Xhomara, N. (2020). The effect of student-centered teaching and problem-based learning on academic achievement in science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(2), 180–199.Google Scholar ↗
  10. Benevides, J. L., Coutinho, J. F. V., Pascoal, L. C., Joventino, E. S., Martins, M. C., Gubert, F. do A., & Alves, A. M. (2016). Development and validation of educational technology for venous ulcer care. Revista Da Escola de Enfermagem Da USP, 50(02), 309–316.Google Scholar ↗
  11. Bhasin, B. (2012). Integration of information and communication technology in enhancing teaching and learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 3(2), 130–140.Google Scholar ↗
  12. Brdesee, H. (2021). A divergent view of the impact of digital transformation on academic organizational and spending efficiency: A review and analytical study on a university E-service. Sustainability, 13(13), 7048.Google Scholar ↗
  13. Cabı, E. (2018). The impact of the flipped classroom model on students’ academic achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(3).Google Scholar ↗
  14. Castro-Guzmán, W. (2021). Challenges of professional development for technology integration in higher education. Cuadernos de Investigación Educativa, 12(2), 82–99.Google Scholar ↗
  15. Cevikbas, M., & Argün, Z. (2017). An innovative learning model in digital age: Flipped classroom. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 5(11), 189–200.Google Scholar ↗
  16. Chang, Y.-H., Yan, Y.-C., & Lu, Y.-T. (2022). Effects of combining different collaborative learning strategies with problem-based learning in a flipped classroom on program language learning. Sustainability, 14(9), 5282.Google Scholar ↗
  17. Christopher, S. (2023). The Impact of Blended Learning Environments on Student Engagement and Academic Performance in Secondary Education. European Journal of Education, 1(1), 44–53.Google Scholar ↗
  18. Delgado, A. J., Wardlow, L., McKnight, K., & O’Malley, K. (2015). Educational technology: A review of the integration, resources, and effectiveness of technology in K-12 classrooms. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14.Google Scholar ↗
  19. Di Biase, R. (2015). Policy, pedagogy, and priorities: Exploring stakeholder perspectives on active learning in the Maldives. Prospects, 45, 213–229.Google Scholar ↗
  20. Dunleavy, M., & Dede, C. (2014). Augmented reality teaching and learning. Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 735–745.Google Scholar ↗
  21. El-Sofany, H., & El-Haggar, N. (2020). The effectiveness of using mobile learning techniques to improve learning outcomes in higher education.Google Scholar ↗
  22. Groening, C., & Binnewies, C. (2019). “Achievement unlocked!”-The impact of digital achievements as a gamification element on motivation and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 151–166.Google Scholar ↗
  23. Hornstra, L., van der Veen, I., Peetsma, T., & Volman, M. (2015). Innovative learning and developments in motivation and achievement in upper primary school. Educational Psychology, 35(5), 598–633.Google Scholar ↗
  24. Hussin, W. N. T. W., Harun, J., & Shukor, N. A. (2019). Online interaction in social learning environment towards critical thinking skill: A framework. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(1), 4–12.Google Scholar ↗
  25. Jhurree, V. (2005). Technology integration in education in developing countries: Guidelines to policy makers. International Education Journal, 6(4), 467–483.Google Scholar ↗
  26. Kalamas Hedden, M., Worthy, R., Akins, E., Slinger-Friedman, V., & Paul, R. C. (2017). Teaching sustainability using an active learning constructivist approach: Discipline-specific case studies in higher education. MDPI.Google Scholar ↗
  27. Kalina, C., & Powell, K. C. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250.Google Scholar ↗
  28. Kim, H. J., Hong, A. J., & Song, H.-D. (2019). The roles of academic engagement and digital readiness in students’ achievements in university e-learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1–18.Google Scholar ↗
  29. Kirillov, A. V, Vinichenko, M. V, Melnichuk, A. V, Melnichuk, Y. A., & Vinogradova, M. V. (2016). Improvement in the learning environment through gamification of the educational process. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(7), 2071–2085.Google Scholar ↗
  30. Lai, C. Y., Cheung, K. Y., & Chan, C. S. (2023). Exploring the role of intrinsic motivation in ChatGPT adoption to support active learning: An extension of the technology acceptance model. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 5, 100178.Google Scholar ↗
  31. Lawrence, J. E., & Tar, U. A. (2018). Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International, 55(1), 79–105.Google Scholar ↗
  32. López, M., Vegas, H., & Rodriguez, M. (2020). Project-based Learning Strategy: An Innovative Proposal for Local Education System. Int J Psychosoc Rehabil, 24(1), 1666–1681.Google Scholar ↗
  33. Nawaz, M., Kundu, S. N., & Sattar, F. (2017). Augmented reality sandbox and constructivist approach for geoscience teaching and learning. International Journal of Educational and Pedagogical Sciences, 11(6), 1645–1648.Google Scholar ↗
  34. Nevgi, A., Virtanen, P., & Niemi, H. (2006). Supporting students to develop collaborative learning skills in technology‐based environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 937–947.Google Scholar ↗
  35. Nja, C. O., Orim, R. E., Neji, H. A., Ukwetang, J. O., Uwe, U. E., & Ideba, M. A. (2022). Students’ attitude and academic achievement in a flipped classroom. Heliyon, 8(1).Google Scholar ↗
  36. Obiri-Yeboah, K., Kwarteng, K. O., & Kyere-Djan, R. (2013). Factors affecting ICT adoption in tertiary institutions in Ghana: A case of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. Information and Knowledge Management, 3(6), 13–21.Google Scholar ↗
  37. Pérez Poch, A., Sánchez Carracedo, F., Salán Ballesteros, M. N., & López Álvarez, D. (2019). Cooperative learning and embedded active learning methodologies for improving students’ motivation and academic results. International Journal of Engineering Education, 1851–1858.Google Scholar ↗
  38. Razak, A. A., Sarif, S. M., & Ismail, Y. (2022). Islamic leadership for sustainability: A systematic literature review using Prisma. Online Journal of Islamic Management and Finance (OJIMF), 2(2), 59–81.Google Scholar ↗
  39. Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.Google Scholar ↗
  40. Salam, F., Mailok, R., Ubaidullah, N., & Ahmad, U. (2016). The effect of project-based learning against students’ engagement. International Journal of Development Research, 6(2), 6891–6895.Google Scholar ↗
  41. Sansone, N., Cesareni, D., Bortolotti, I., & Buglass, S. (2019). Teaching technology-mediated collaborative learning for trainee teachers. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(3), 381–394.Google Scholar ↗
  42. Shah, R. K. (2019). Effective Constructivist Teaching Learning in the Classroom. Online Submission, 7(4), 1–13.Google Scholar ↗
  43. Shobri, A., Mahfud, M., & Amer, M. A. B. (2024). The Effect of Active Learning Methods on Motivation and Learning Achievement of Elementary School Student. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND EDUCATION, 1(4), 974–988.Google Scholar ↗
  44. Sholihah, T. M., & Lastariwati, B. (2020). Problem based learning to increase competence of critical thinking and problem solving. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 14(1), 148–154.Google Scholar ↗
  45. Signori, G. G., Guimarães, J. C. F. De, Severo, E. A., & Rotta, C. (2018). Gamification as an innovative method in the processes of learning in higher education institutions. International Journal of Innovation and Learning, 24(2), 115–137.Google Scholar ↗
  46. Stearns, T. M., & Vozikis, G. S. (2012). Interdisciplinary “Creative Destruction”: A Pedagogical Approach. Journal of Applied Business and Economics, 13(1), 11–25.Google Scholar ↗
  47. Tran, V. D. (2019). Does Cooperative Learning Increase Students’ Motivation in Learning?. International Journal of Higher Education, 8(5), 12–20.Google Scholar ↗
  48. Tutal, Ö., & Yazar, T. (2021). Flipped classroom improves academic achievement, learning retention and attitude towards course: a meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 22(4), 655–673.Google Scholar ↗
  49. Ulanday, M. L., Centeno, Z. J., Bayla, M. C., & Callanta, J. (2021). Flexible learning adaptabilities in the new normal: E-learning resources, digital meeting platforms, online learning systems and learning engagement. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 16(2).Google Scholar ↗
  50. Wahyu, E. S., Sahyar, E. M. G., & Ginting, E. M. (2017). The effect of problem based learning (PBL) model toward student’s critical thinking and problem solving ability in senior high school. American Journal of Educational Research, 5(6), 633–638.Google Scholar ↗
  51. Whiteside, A. L. (2015). Introducing the social presence model to explore online and blended learning experiences. Online Learning, 19(2), n2.Google Scholar ↗
  52. Wiggins, B. E. (2016). An overview and study on the use of games, simulations, and gamification in higher education. International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 6(1), 18–29.Google Scholar ↗
  53. Xu, J., Lio, A., Dhaliwal, H., Andrei, S., Balakrishnan, S., Nagani, U., & Samadder, S. (2021). Psychological interventions of virtual gamification within academic intrinsic motivation: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 293, 444–465.Google Scholar ↗
  54. Zhao, X., Li, X., Wang, J., & Shi, C. (2020). Augmented reality (AR) learning application based on the perspective of situational learning: high efficiency study of combination of virtual and real. Psychology, 11(9), 1340–1348.Google Scholar ↗
  55. Zheng, Y., Janiszewski, C., & Schreier, M. (2023). Exploring the Origins of intrinsic motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 47(1), 28–45.Google Scholar ↗
Author details
Irma Suryani Syamsuddin
Departmen of Islamic Religious Education, Universitas Yapis Papua Jaya Pura,
✉ Corresponding Author
👤 View Profile →