PENGARUH MODEL KOOPERATIF TEAM GAMES TOURNAMENT (TGT) TERHADAP PENINGKATAN KREATIFITAS, KERJASAMA, DAN KETERAMPILAN BERMAIN SEPAKBOLA SISWA TUNARUNGU
Journal of ICSAR
ISSN (print): 2548-8619; ISSN (online): 2548-8600
Volume 6 Number 2; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/um005v6i22022p216
216
The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards Learning
Outcomes of Students' Multiplication Operations with Autism
Sukinah Sukinah*, Ari Anggit Triadi
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
*E-mail: sukinah@uny.ac.id
Abstract: This study aims to test the effectiveness of the blended learning model on the
learning outcomes of multiplication operations of students with autism in class VII SMPLB
at the Pembina State Special School of East Kalimantan Province. This study uses a
quantitative approach with the type of Single Subject Research (SSR). The research design
uses A-B-A'. The research subjects were three students with autism class VII SMPLB. Data
collection techniques using tests and observations. Data is presented in tables and graphs.
The data analysis technique uses analysis under conditions and between conditions. The
results showed an increase in the acquisition of test scores. The first subject got 40% at
baseline 1 to 70% at baseline 2. The second subject got 30% at baseline 1 to 50% at
baseline 2 The third subject got 30% at baseline 1 to 60% at baseline 2. Based on these
findings, it can be concluded that the blended learning model is effective on learning
outcomes of multiplication operations of students with autism. This conclusion is based on
increasing scores of all three subjects and is supported by a low percentage of overlap.
Keywords: Blended Learning Model, learning outcomes of multiplication operations,
students with autism.
INTRODUCTION
Teaching and learning activities in the world of education in general before the COVID -19
pandemic took place with teachers and students meet each other directly with a model called
face-to-face. This is an ideal model that has many advantages according to Nengrum, Solong,
and Iman (2021: 6) namely the interaction of teachers with students can run effectively so that
they become more enthusiastic in participating in the ongoing learning and providing
comprehensive material.
This face-to-face model is also applied to students with special needs, one of which is
students with autism. The reason for using the face-to-face model for students with special
needs is based on the cone of experience learning theory proposed by Dale (1969 in
Nabiulana, 2019: 25) namely that students in general will know more about learning materials
that can be simulated rather than listening explanation from the teacher.
This face-to-face model was used until the COVID-19 pandemic that have caused the
face-to-face model to be replaced with an online learning model based on the Joint Decree of
the Minister of Education, Culture, Research and Technology, Minister of Religion, Minister
of Health, and Minister of Home Affairs Number 05/KB/2021, 1347,
HK.01.08/MENKES/6678/2021, 443-5847 2021 about the Guidelines for the Implementation
of Learning during the Pandemic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) to reduce the spread
of the COVID-19 virus.
The online learning model is a less effective model for students with autism. This is
indicated by the decrease in learning outcomes of multiplication operations by students with
autism. Theoretically based on the theory of Dale (1969, in Nabiulana, 2019: 25), the right
learning for students with autism is to use a learning model that can be simulated and observed
http://issn.pdii.lipi.go.id/issn.cgi?daftar&&&&&2548-8600
http://dx.doi.org/10.17977/um005v6i22022p216
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 217
directly compared to being listened by the teacher. The online learning model is less able to
simulate and observe teaching and learning activities directly in accordance with the ideal
conditions of the theory above.
The results of previous research from Krisnawati & Putri (2022: 1331) also revealed the
weaknesses of the online learning model for students with autism including the difficulty of
the teacher in delivering material so that the students could understand, difficulties in
communicating online and the busyness of parents to accompany the students with autism
during online learning.
The problem regarding online learning was then further investigated by the researchers by
examining facts in the field with the research site at the State Special School of Pembina East
Kalimantan. The facts in the field are based on the results of observations and interviews in
the field during the educational practice period. Observations were carried out in class VII
SMPLB Autism with online and visiting schools outside the online system during the
Educational Practice activities from July 14 to December 12 2021. The targets of observation
were focused on students, parents and teachers who teach in the class. The observations made
were focused on online learning carried out by schools. During the observation, the teacher
used the whatsapp video call and google meet platforms depending on the situation and the
students’ needs. First, the teacher explains the material to the students, then the stude nts were
asked to do the exercises given by the teacher. The results of observations showed that
students rarely answered or responded to questions from the teacher, then when the teacher
asked students to do the exercises they looked confused and had to be guided by the teacher.
When the teacher corrects the student's work, the student does not focus on their attention
when responding to a signal from the teacher. The teacher finally continued to correct the
students' multiplication results even though the students rarely paid attention. Therefore,
during the online learning’s activities, there appears to be a lack of participation from students
paying attention to the materials that were presented by the teacher.
Interviews were conducted online and at schools (offline) from 14 to 16 July 2021 with
school principals and seventh grade autism teachers from the Pembina State Junior High
School in East Kalimantan Province with interview topics covering the implementation of
online learning that being conducted by schools. The results of interviews on the topic of
online learning shows that students with autism often have signal disturbances and spend
quota assistance from the Ministry of Education and Culture during online learning
excessively. Especially in learning multiplication operations, the teacher uses google meet
during learning and whatsapp video calls for individual communication through the media if
one of the students does not understand the learning material that were being taught. The
teacher also received complaints from the boredom of students with autism participating in
online learning so that it was difficult in terms of class management. The teacher then argues
that conditions like this caused students’ learning outcomes to decline.
The results of observations and interviews that are supported by theory and the results of
previous studies show that the online learning model used at the Pembina State Special School
of East Kalimantan Province is less effective, thus reducing the learning outcomes of
multiplication operations for students with autism. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic,
it is not possible to return using the face-to-face learning model. Therefore, it is necessary to
apply the latest alternative learning model solutions apart from face-to-face and online models
that can overcome these problems. One of them is by using blended learning.
Hrastinski (2019: 566) explains that Blended Learning is a concept used to describe
learning that combines conventional models with face to face or face to face with online
learning. The advantages that can be found from the blended learning model according to
Fathurrahman & Nuthapaturahman (2015: 5) are time-saving, cost-effective, learning is more
effective and efficient, students are easy to access learning materials, students can study
218 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
subject matter independently, utilize learning materials available online, students can have
discussions with teachers outside of the face-to-face learning hours, teachers don't spend too
much energy teaching, add enrichment material through internet facilities, expand the range of
learning/training, optimal results and increase the attractiveness of learning .
This learning solution with blended learning had hopes to be achieved, namely as an
alternative model of the online model to improve learning outcomes of multiplication
operations for students with autism, especially after seeing the concept of blended learning and
its advantages.
The reason for using the blended learning model compared to other learning models is
that there are restrictions on face-to-face learning models as instructed by the Ministry of
Education and Culture in a Joint Decree of the Minister of Education and Culture, Minister of
Religion, Minister of Health, and Minister of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia.
Number 05/KB 2021, Number 1347 of 2021, Number HK.01.08/Menkes/6678/2021, Number
443-5847 of 2021 concerning Guidelines for the Implementation of Learning During the
Pandemic Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) to reduce the spread of the COVID-19 virus
so that full face-to-face cannot be carried out and based on the results of previous observations
which suggest the ineffectiveness of online learning.
METHOD
This study uses a quantitative approach. Quantitative research according to Sukmadinata
(2017: 53) is research based on the philosophy of positivism which is centered on objective
phenomena and analyzed quantitatively. This quantitative research uses the type of Single
Subject Research (SSR) which according to Prahmana (2021: 9) is an experimental study
conducted on a single subject to observe and assess a particular intervention on changes that
occur in the subject with repeated observations on a single subject for a certain time. The final
result to be achieved with this type of research is to reveal the results of testing the
effectiveness of the implementation of the blended learning model that will be carried out on
the learning outcomes of integer multiplication operations for students with autism. During
this research, the condition of the research subjects will be observed before being given
treatment (baseline condition 1), then at the time of being given treatment (intervention
condition), and after being given treatment (baseline condition 2).
The place where this research was carried out was at the Pembina State Special School of
East Kalimantan Province. The basic considerations of the researchers in choosing a research
location at that location are: a) There is no blended learning model in multiplication operations
learning for students with autism at school and b) Have the capacity to carry out blended
learning models with students with autism in learning multiplication operations. students with
autism .
This research was carried out within 4 weeks while the learning took place in April of the
2022/2023 academic year. This is because researchers need to observe and test the
development of learning outcomes in the early and final phases. The research subjects were
three individual students with autism class VII at the Pembina State Special School, East
Kalimantan Province.
The research design used in this study was A-B-A'. According to Prahmana (2021: 15),
the A-B-A' design is a research development design in SSR from a simple AB design where
there is a return to the baseline condition after the intervention session was carried out. A is
another term for Baseline 1 session and B is another term for intervention session and A' is
another term for Baseline 2.
The implementation of Baseline 1 in this study was in the form of conducting
observations and pretests on the results of learning mathematics with integer multiplication
operations before the intervention was implemented in 3 sessions. The intervention phase was
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 219
held for 6 sessions in the blended learning model where three times to be taught using the
online learning model and three times to be taught using the face-to-face model. The
implementation of Baseline 2 is a repetition of baseline 1 where the researcher will observe
and give a final test without intervention three times to evaluate the effectiveness of the
blended learning learning model on the learning outcomes of students with autism
multiplication operations.
Data collection techniques used in this study were observation and tests. The test
according to Sukmadinata (2017: 223) is a technique of collecting data by measuring the
achievement of both mathematics and non-mathematical students. The test used is a short
answer test. The purpose of this type of test according to Gronlund (1985 in Faradillah, Hadi
& Soro, 2020: 20) is to test low thinking skills, namely: 1) understanding of terms, 2)
understanding of facts, 3) understanding of principles, 4) understanding of procedures, and 5)
interpreting data simply. Multiplication operation which is measured based on the time range.
The time span in question is before the intervention ( baseline 1), at the time of the
intervention (intervention) and after the intervention ( baseline 2) to find out the final learning
outcomes of students after undergoing learning with the blended learning model during the
time of the study.
Sugiyono (2017: 203) explains that observation is a data collection technique with
specific characteristics, namely observing directly the conditions in the field which are not
limited to individuals, but also other natural objects. Observations made in this study are
participatory so that researchers are directly involved in manipulating the behavior of students
when observed.
Moelong (2017: 280-281) explains that data analysis techniques are techniques for
organizing and sorting data into a category so that hypotheses can be formulated according to
the data results. The analysis that were used in this study are under conditions and between
conditions. The steps in conducting analysis under conditions and between conditions
according to Prahmana (2021: 32-39). The analysis technique under conditions and between
conditions were data analysis technique used in this study. Under conditions analysis will
cover several aspects including: 1) Condition length, 2) directional trend, 3) stability trend, 4)
trail trend, 5) stability level or range, and 6) level change. The analysis between conditions
will discuss aspects including: 1) the number of variables that are changed, 2) changes in the
direction of the trend, 3) changes in the stability trend, 4) changes in level, and 5) the
percentage of overlap.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Result(s)
The results obtained from the acquisition of scores are then converted as speed levels
expressed in the form of a percentage which will then be tested for hypotheses to determine
the effectiveness of the blended learning model for students with autism.
The first subject in the baseline phase 1 of session 1 obtained a presentation score of 40%.
Then, at the end of baseline session 1 session 3 obtained a percentage score of 40% with an
average score acquisition of 40% thus being included in the low category. The second subject
in the baseline phase 1 of session 1 obtained a presentation score of 30%. Then, at the end of
baseline session 1 session 3 obtained a percentage score of 30% with an average score
acquisition of 30% thus being included in the low category. The third subject in the baseline
phase 1 of session 1 obtained a presentation score of 30%. Then, at the end of baseline session
1 session 3 obtained a percentage score of 30% with an average score acquisition of 30%
overall thus being included in the low category.
220 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
Table 1. Scores of the Three Subjects in the Baseline Phase 1
Phase sessions First Subject Score Second Subject
Score
Third Subject
Score
Baseline 1 1 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%)
Baseline 1 2 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%)
Baseline 1 3 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%)
Average 4 (40%) 3 (30%) 3 (30%)
The first subject in the intervention phase of session 1 obtained a percentage score of
60%. Then, at the end of the intervention session, the subject obtained a percentage score of
60% with an average score of 60% so that it was included in the sufficient category. The
second subject in the intervention phase of session 1 obtained a percentage score of 40%.
Then, at the end of the intervention session, the subject obtained a percentage score of 40%
with an average score of 40% so that it was included in the low category. The third subject in
the intervention phase of session 1 obtained a percentage score of 50%. Then, at the end of the
intervention session, the third subject obtained a percentage score of 50% with an average
score of 50% so that it was included in the sufficient category.
Table 2. Scores of the Three Subjects in the Intervention Phase
Phase Sessions First Subject
Score
Second Subject Score Third Subject
Score
Intervention 1 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
Intervention 2 5 (50%) 3 (50%) 4 (40%)
Intervention 3 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
Intervention 4 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
Intervention 5 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
Intervention 6 6 (60%) 4 (40%) 5 (50%)
Average 5,833 (58.3%) 3,833 (38.3%) 4,833 (48.3%)
The first subject in the baseline phase 2 session 1 obtained a percentage score of 80%.
Then, at the end of the baseline session 2, the first subject obtained a percentage score of 80%
with an average score of 80% so that it was included in the good category. The second subject
in the baseline phase 2 session 1 obtained a percentage score of 50%. Then, at the end of the
baseline session 2, the second subject obtained a percentage score of 50% with an average
score of 50% so that it was included in the sufficient category. The third subject in the baseline
phase 2 session 1 obtained a percentage score of 70%. Then, at the end of the baseline session
2, the third subject obtained a percentage score of 70% with an average score of 70% so that it
was included in the good category.
Table 3. Scores of the Three Subjects in the Baseline Phase 2
Phase Sessions First Subject Score Second Subject
Score
Third Subject
Score
Baseline 2 1 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%)
Baseline 2 2 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%)
Baseline 2 3 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%)
Average 8 (80%) 5 (50%) 7 (70%)
The results of the accumulated test scores on these three subjects were then converted into a
polygon graph.
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 221
Figure 1. Graph of the Accumulated Score of First Subjects
Figure 2. Graph of Accumulated Scores for Second Subjects
Figure 3. Graph of the Accumulated Score of the Third Subject
222 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
The overall test results showed that there was an increase in the percentage score for the
three subjects. The percentage score for the first subject in the baseline phase 1 is 40%, and
then increased to 80% in the baseline phase 2. Meanwhile, the percentage score for the second
subject in the baseline phase 1 is 30%, and then increased to 50% in the baseline phase 2.
Finally, the score percentage of the third subject in the baseline phase 1 which is 30%, and
then increased to 70% in the baseline phase 2.
The results of observations on the behavior of the three research subjects during the study
showed that there was a significant increase in the accumulation of observation scores for each
subject. The test results obtained from these three subjects were then analyzed to test the
hypothesis by using under conditions analysis and between conditions analysis.
Table 4. Accumulated Observation Scores of the three Subjects in the Baseline 1, Intervention, and
Baseline 2 Phases
Phase Sessions First Subject’s
Observation Score
Second subject’s
observation score
The third subject’s
observation score
Baseline 1 1 5 5 5
Baseline 1 2 6 5 6
Baseline 1 3 6 6 7
Intervention 1 8 7 7
Intervention 2 6 5 10
Intervention 3 10 8 11
Intervention 4 12 8 11
Intervention 5 14 11 12
Intervention 6 14 12 13
Baseline 2 1 13 11 12
Baseline 2 2 14 12 13
Baseline 2 3 14 14 14
The results of the analysis calculation in the condition of the first subject in the aspect of
stability level showed stable (83.33% in the intervention phase & 100% in the baseline phase 1
and 2) in the three phases. Changes in baseline level 1 are 40-40 (0), then the intervention
phase is 50-60 (+10), then baseline phase 2 is 80-80 (0).
Table 5. Analysis Results in the First Subject Condition
The results of the analysis calculation in the condition of the second subject in the aspect
of stability level showed stable (83.33% in the intervention phase & 100% in the baseline
phase 1 and 2) in the three phases. Changes in baseline level 1 are 30-30 (0), then the
intervention phase is 30-40 (+10), then baseline phase 2 is 50-50 (0).
No. Condition or Phase A1 B A2
1. Condition Length 3 6 3
2. Directional Tendency
3. Stability tendency 100% (Stable) 83.33% (Stable) 100% (Stable)
4. Trace Tendency
(=)
(+)
(=)
5. Stability Level and Range Stable
40-40
Stable
60-50
Stable
80-80
6. Level Change 40-40
(0)
60-50
(+10)
80-80
(0)
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 223
Table 6. Analysis Results in the Second Subject Condition
No. Condition or Phase A1 B A2
1. Condition Length 3 6 3
2. Directional Tendency
3. Stability tendency 100% (Stable) 83.33% (Stable) 100% (Stable)
4. Trace Tendency
(=)
(+)
(=)
5. Stability Level and Range Stable
30-30
Stable
30-40
Stable
50-50
6. Level Change 30-30
(0)
40-30
(+10)
50-50
(0)
The results of the analysis calculation in the condition of the third subject in the aspect of
stability level showed stable (83.33% in the intervention phase & 100% in the baseline phase 1
and 2) in the three phases. Changes in the baseline level 1 are 30-30 (0), then the intervention
phase is 40-50 (+10), then the baseline phase 2 is 70-70 (0).
Table 7. Analysis Results in the Third Subject Condition
No. Condition or Phase A1 B A2
1. Condition Length 3 6 3
2. Directional Tendency
3. Stability tendency 100% (Stable) 83.33% (Stable) 100% (Stable)
4. Trace Tendency
(=)
(=)
(=)
5. Stability Level and Range Stable
30-30
Stable
40-50
Stable
70-70
6. Level Change 30-30
(0)
50-40
(+10)
70-70
(0)
The results of the analysis between conditions in the first subject showed that the change
in stability from the baseline 1 to the intervention phase and the intervention phase to the
baseline 2 was stable to stable. The percentage of overlap from the baseline phase 1 to the
intervention and the intervention phase to the baseline 2 was 0%.
Table 8. Results of the Analysis of the First Subject Conditions
No. Condition Comparison Results (A1-B) Results (B-A2)
1. Number of variables changed 1, namely the results of
learning multiplication
operations for students with
autism
1, namely the results of learning
multiplication operations for
students with autism
2. Changes in trend direction and their
effects
(=) (+)
(+) (=)
Stability trend change Stable to Stable Stable to Stable
No. Condition Comparison Results (A1-B) Results (B-A2)
3. Level Change (40-60)
+20
(60-80)
+20
4. Overlap Percentage 0% 0%
224 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
The results of the analysis between conditions in the second subject showed that the
change in stability from the baseline 1 to the intervention phase and the intervention phase to
the baseline 2 was stable to stable. the percentage of overlap from the baseline phase 1 to the
intervention was 0%. While the percentage of overlap from the intervention phase to the
baseline phase 2 is 16.67%.
Table 9. Results of Analysis Between Third Subject Conditions
No. Condition Comparison Results (A1-B) Results (B-A2)
1. Number of variables changed 1, namely the results of
learning multiplication
operations for students with
autism
1, namely the results of
learning multiplication
operations for students with
autism
2. Changes in trend direction and
their effects
(=) (+)
(+) (=)
3. Stability trend change Stable to Stable Stable to Stable
4. Level Change ( 30-40)
+10
(50-60)
+10
5. Overlap Percentage 16.67% 0%
The results of the analysis between conditions in the third subject showed that the change
in stability from the baseline 1 to the intervention phase and the intervention phase to the
baseline 2 was stable to stable. the percentage of overlap from the baseline 1 to the
intervention phase and the intervention phase to the baseline 2 was 0%.
Table 10. Results of the Analysis in the Third Subject Conditions
No. Condition Comparison Results (A1-B) Results (B-A2)
1. Number of variables changed 1, namely the results of
learning multiplication
operations for students with
autism
1, namely the results of
learning multiplication
operations for students with
autism
2. Changes in trend direction and
their effects
(=) (=)
(=) (=)
3. Stability trend change Stable to Stable Stable to Stable
4. Level Change (30-40)
+10
(50-70)
+20
5. Overlap Percentage 0% 0%
The explanation that can be described based on the analysis within and between
conditions is that there is an increase in the score and level of achievement of the
multiplication operation learning outcome test in the baseline 2 phase against the baseline 1
phase for each subject. This explanation is also supported by the percentage of overlap where
in the baseline 1 condition to the intervention, 0% for the first subject, 16.67% for the second
subject, and 0% for the third subject. Meanwhile, the percentage of overlap in the intervention
condition to baseline 2 was 0% for the first subjects, 0% for the second subjects, and 0% for
third subjects. Based on the theory of data analysis of Single Subject Research according to
Prahmana (2021: 39) where the smaller the percentage of overlap, the better the effectiveness
of the intervention on target behavior, it can be concluded from the results of data analysis
from the three research subjects that the blended learning learning model is effective on
operating learning outcomes. Multiplication of students with autism.
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 225
Discussion(s)
The research titled "The Effectiveness of the Blended Learning Model on Learning Outcomes
of Multiplication Operations for Students with Autism" had the aim of testing the
effectiveness of the blended learning learning model on the learning outcomes of
multiplication operations of students with autism. Based on the results of hypothesis testing on
research conducted on 3 students at the Pembina State Special School in East Kalimantan
Province, it was found that the use of the blended learning model was effective on the
students' learning outcomes of multiplication operations.
The three autistic students who are currently in class VII of the Autistic Junior High
School previously had obstacles in improving the learning outcomes of multiplication
operations material during the online learning model. This is then resolved with a blended
learning model that allows face-to-face meetings so that students can directly observe concrete
learning. This finding is supported by the theory of cone of experience, according to Dale (in
Nabiulana, 2019: 25) explaining that students in general will know more about material that
can be simulated than what is heard by the teacher's explanation. This also applies to students
with autism where students know better if the material being taught can be simulated in a
palpable and visualized context so that learning must be concrete or at least semi-concrete.
This kind of learning certainly cannot be applied when using the model in the network.
The urgency behind the importance of this learning material is that the subject's learning
outcomes are decreasing with the online learning model, so it is necessary to implement a
more effective alternative learning model. As for other urgency, where arithmetic operations
are always implemented in daily life, such as when shopping and managing finances. Based on
these thoughts, it can be concluded that mastery of arithmetic operations is very important for
every individual with autism. The focus of this research is focused on improving learning
outcomes of multiplication operations of students with autism.
This research is an effort to innovate learning models to improve learning outcomes of
multiplication operations for students with autism using a blended learning model. The
implementation of Blended learning model conducted by researchers was successfully
implemented because the learning was still carried out by holding face-to-face meetings even
though it was interspersed with online learning. Then, when learning takes place, students tend
to be able to follow the directions of the researcher independently so as to create practical
collaboration between the subject and the researcher. Researchers also use learning resources
that can be accessed by students outside the network by meeting directly with researchers and
online using soft files uploaded by researchers. The researcher also assessed the test results
and observed the three students in two different conditions, namely in the network using the
google meet platform and outside the network face-to-face. The successful implementation of
blended learning is in accordance with the theory from Carman (2005 in Nasution, Jalinus,
Syahril, 2019: 37-39) explaining that there are five key designs so that blended learning can be
carried out effectively, namely: 1) Live events, 2) self-paced learning, 3) collaboration, 4)
assessment, and 5) performance support materials .
The increase in scores that occurred gradually in the intervention phase which were
carried out for 6 meeting sessions for approximately 2 weeks for students with autism proved
the effectiveness of the blended learning learning model to improve learning outcomes of
multiplication operations of students with autism. This is supported by the theory from
Abdullah (2018: 859) explaining that blended learning is a learning model that combines face-
to-face learning models and learning models using computer technology that are carried out
both within the network and outside the network at different times. Having the opportunity to
meet face-to-face while still learning online due to the COVID-19 pandemic shows the
advantages of the blended learning model in providing learning opportunities with more
intensive social interaction than the online model.
226 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
The results of the study also revealed that the increase in scores between the three
research subjects was different from each other. The percentage score of achievement at the
end of baseline 2 from each subject was 80% in the first subject, 50% in the second subject,
and 70% in the third subject. As for the background of the difference in the achievement of
these scores, namely the difficulties faced by each research subject in the multiplication
operation between two digits being taught. The first subject had difficulty in placing the
numbers in units, tens, and hundreds as well as in multiplication between two digits using
borrowing techniques. The third subject had more difficulties than the first subject, namely
apart from the difficulties already mentioned in the first subject, the third subject also had
difficulties in multiplying with pairs of numbers correctly. The second subject had more
difficulties than the first and third subjects, namely apart from the difficulties mentioned in the
first and third subjects, the second subject also experienced difficulties in adapting to using the
arithmetic abacus so that sometimes it was still wrong to produce multiplication correctly even
though the way of working was already done. appropriate. The unique and different
difficulties between the three subjects of students with autism in learning multiplication
operations are not uncommon. Utari, Kurniawan & Fathurrochman (2020: 75) explained that
each individual with autism has different levels of disorders and barriers. This difference in
barriers occurs due to age, intelligence level, the effect of treatment and therapy on each
individual as well as several other habits. These differences in barriers then affect several
areas of children's lives, including differences in learning outcomes of multiplication
operations between students with autism at school.
Learning that is applied to students pays attention to the structure, scheduled, and
programmed patterns. This scheduled pattern is to carry out learning every school day from
Monday to Friday by adjusting the concept of blended learning, namely three times face-to-
face and three times online. The material for the two-digit multiplication operation that is
taught starts from the easy one, namely the two-digit multiplication operation in descending
order without the technique of storing, then proceeds to the difficult stage, namely the
technique of storing. The implementation of the learning in this research has been planned as
outlined in the Lesson Plan (RPP) so that the objectives to be achieved are to improve learning
outcomes of multiplication operations for students with autism. The aforementioned aspects
are implemented in the context of this blended learning learning and the results strongly
support the increase in the test scores obtained by the three subjects above. The above aspects
of course follow and adapt to the theory of Hermansyah & Purnomo (2016: 13-15) namely the
success of learning students with autism when using patterned, structured, and programmed
principles.
The Blended Learning model that is applied to students with autism based on the results
of ongoing research shows differences with blended learning for regular students. Blended
learning for regular students only needs to pay attention to five key aspects as stated by
Carman (2005 in Nasution, Jalinus, Syahril, 2019: 37-39), namely: 1) Live events, 2) self-
paced learning, 3) collaboration, 4) assessment, and 5) performance support materials. For
blended learning with students with autism, apart from the five aspects mentioned above, it is
also necessary to pay attention to the characteristics and needs of students with autism. In
blended learning for students with autism, it is necessary to pay attention that the
characteristics of students with autism will affect the success of blended learning . The
characteristics of students with autism based on the DSM V book written by the American
Psychiatric Association (2013: 236) are limited and repetitive social interaction,
communication, and behavior. Social interaction and communication as well as limited and
repetitive behavior in the context of blended learning focuses on how teachers adapt in
interacting and communicating and increasing the motivation of students with autism to
actively learn, adapt, and present learning materials and media in two different classes, namely
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 227
the outdoor class. network and classes within the network. In addition, aspects that need to be
considered are the needs of students with autism. Sofyan and Yuwono (2014: 19) explain that
the needs of students with autism can be found by conducting an assessment of these students.
The conclusion of this opinion is that before carrying out learning with blended learning for
students with autism, an assessment should be carried out to find the learning needs of
students for the smooth learning.
Another finding from this blended learning model is that during learning with this model,
it will show less effectiveness if it is not supported by adequate learning media in overcoming
parts that are difficult for students with autism to understand . This is in accordance with the
conclusion of the research by Nurmantara, Indrawati, & Suganda (2020: 129) that the
consideration of choosing the right media and learning model adapted to the material and
characteristics of students will help each other so that the implementation of learning for
students is better.
The factors that support the success of the intervention in this study are: 1) The first
factor, namely the blended learning model, can provide opportunities for the three research
subjects to learn face-to-face so as to create intensive and fun social interactions. 2) The
second factor, namely the three research subjects had the motivation to increase the short
answer test scores through exploration of different ways and results of answers in each
meeting. 3) The third factor, namely the research subject can adapt to the varied learning
environment of blended learning . 4) The fourth factor, namely cooperation or cooperation
from the school, especially from homeroom teachers who teach and parents in creating a
conducive learning environment. The supporting factors as described above are in accordance
with the theory of Ramadani, Sulthoni & Wedi (2018: 205) where the success factors for
implementing the blended learning model, apart from educational guidelines, are human
resources both from teachers and students. and an adequate learning environment.
The effectiveness of the blended learning learning model on the multiplication operation
learning outcomes of students with autism is evidenced by the increase in the short answer test
scores from the baseline 1 session to the intervention and to the baseline 2 session and the low
percentage of data overlap. Based on the theory of Prahmana (2021: 39) explains that the
smaller the percentage of overlap, the better the influence of the intervention on target
behavior. There is other evidence from the results of previous research by Hardiansyah (2017:
214) which found that the Blended Learning learning model implemented was more effective
than conventional Arabic learning in improving learning outcomes in the listening ability of
students with autism. Based on the results of hypothesis testing which is supported by expert
opinion and from the results of previous studies, it can be concluded that the blended learning
model has an effective influence in improving learning outcomes of multiplication operations
of students with autism.
CONCLUSSION
Conclusion(s)
The conclusion that can be drawn based on the results of the research that has been presented
and discussed is that the blended learning model is effective on the learning outcomes of
multiplication operations for students with autism. This is indicated by the increase in the
scores of the three subjects after being given intervention in the baseline phase 2 when
compared to the initial ability of the subjects in the baseline phase 1. The first subject in the
baseline phase 1 got an average level of achievement of 40%. Then in the intervention phase
the average level of achievement rose to 58.33% and at baseline 2 it rose again to 80%. The
second subject in the baseline phase 1 got an average level of achievement of 30%. Then in
the intervention phase the average level of achievement rose to 38.33% and at baseline 2 it
rose again to 50%. The third subject in the baseline phase 1 got an average level of
228 Journal of ICSAR; Volume 6, Number 2, July 2022, 216 - 229
achievement of 30%. Then in the intervention phase the average level of achievement rose to
48.33% and at baseline 2 it rose again to 70%. This finding is also supported by the
overlapping percentage of the three subjects. The first subject score has data overlap between
conditions at baseline 1 and intervention and intervention and baseline 2 by 0%. The second
subject score has data overlap between conditions at baseline 1 and intervention by 16.67%
and at intervention and baseline 2 by 0%. The third subject score has data overlap between
conditions at baseline 1 and intervention and intervention and baseline 2 by 0%. The increase
in scores in the baseline 1, intervention, and baseline 2 phases is supported by the low
percentage of overlapping data between conditions in the three subjects, indicating that the
blended learning model is effective in improving learning outcomes of multiplication
operations students with autism.
Implication(s)
The implications that can be conveyed based on the results of the research and the conclusions
that have been made are as follows: 1) For students, the use of the blended learning model is
effective in improving learning outcomes of multiplication operations. Therefore, it is
necessary to develop a blended learning model in other areas of learning material. 2) For
teachers, the blended learning model can be used as a model choice to improve the learning
outcomes of students with autism in other subjects. 3) For the school, the blended learning
model can be taken into account in the agreement of implementing the curriculum using
alternative learning models other than the online model on the learning outcomes of students
with autism in various fields of learning.
Suggestion(s)
Researchers can provide suggestions based on research findings as follows: 1) Teachers are
expected to understand and examine more deeply and implement the application of the
blended learning model according to the needs of students with autism as an alternative
learning model in schools. 2) The school is expected to consider the blended learning model in
determining alternative learning model policies from the online learning model currently
implemented in schools. 3) Future researchers are expected to be able to further examine the
effectiveness of the blended learning learning model on learning outcomes of multiplication
operations at the class and other school levels so that there are generalizations about the results
of the study and use other types of assessment such as performance appraisals.
REFERENCES
Abdullah, W. (2018). Model blended learning Dalam Meningkatkan efektifitas pembelajaran.
FIKROTUNA, 7(1), 855-866.
Depdikbud. (2021). Keputusan Bersama Menteri Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, Dan Teknologi,
Menteri Agama, Menteri Kesehatan, Dan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 05/KB/2021, 1347,
HK.01.08/MENKES/6678/2021, 443-5847 Tahun 2021 Panduan Penyelenggaraan Pembelajaran di
Masa Pandemi Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19).
Faradillah, A., Hadi, W. & Soro, S. (2020). Evaluasi proses & hasil belajar matematika dengan diskusi
dan simulasi. Jakarta: Uhamka Press.
Fathurrahman & Nuthpaturahman. (2015). Blended Learning. Banjarmasin: Institut Agama Islam
Negeri (IAIN) Antasari.
Hardiansyah, M.H. (2017) Efektivitas model pembelajaran blended learning untuk meningkatkan
prestasi belajar siswa pada kemahiran menyimak di MAN 1 Tulungangung. Prosiding Konferensi
Nasional Bahasa Arab, Malang, 3, 207-215.
Hermansyah & Purnomo, S.H. (2016). Modul guru pembelajar PLB autis kelompok kompetensi E..
Bandung: PPPPTK TK dan PLB Bandung.
Hrastinski, S. (2019). What do we mean by blended learning? TechTrends, 63(5), 564–569.
Sukinah & Triadi, The Effectiveness of Blended Learning Model towards… 229
Krisnawati, R.D. & Putri, Z.F. (2022). Strategi pembelajaran siswa autis pada masa pandemi di SLB
Dharma Bakti Patianrowo. Khazanah Intelektual, 6(1), 1313-1334.
Moelong, R.J. (2017). Metode penelitian kualitatif (36th edition), Bandung : PT. Remaja Rosdakarya
Offset.
Nabiulana, L. (2019). Innovative technologies in education and using them for information
technology teaching. International Journal of Academic.Research and Reflection, 7(6), 24-29.
Nasution, N., Jalinus, N. & Syahril (2019). Buku model blended learning. Pekanbaru: Unilak Press.
Nengrum, T.A., Solong, N.P. & Iman, M.N. (2021). Kelebihan dan kekurangan pembelajaran luring
dan daring dalam pencapaian kompetensi dasar kurikulum bahasa arab di Madrasah Ibtidaiyah 2
Kabupaten Gorontalo. Jurnal Pendidikan, 30(1), 1-12
Nurmantara, L., Inderawati, R. & Suganda, L.A. (2020). Learning models and media employed by 7th
grade english teachers. English Community Journal, 4(2), 122–132.
Prahmana, R.C.I. (2021). Single subject research teori dan implementasinya: Suatu pengantar.
Yogyakarta: UAD Press.
Ramadani, A.D., Sulthoni & Wedi, A. (2019). Faktor-faktor yang berpengaruh terhadap
implementasi blended learning di jurusan teknologi pendidikan Universitas Negeri Malang. Jurnal
Kajian Teknologi Pendidikan, 2(1), 62-67.
Sugiyono. (2017). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung : CV. Alfabeta.
Sukmadinata, N.S. (2017), Metode penelitian pendidikan. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.