THE EFFECT OF NOTEBOOKLM-BASED PERSONALIZED LEARNING ON VISUAL PROGRAMMING SELF-EFFICACY AMONG JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS
Abstract
This study investigates the influence of NotebookLM as a pedagogical agent in supporting personalized learning for visual programming materials among junior high school students (Phase D). With the integration of the "Coding and Artificial Intelligence" (KKA) subject into the national curriculum, students often face difficulty mastering abstract logical concepts. Grounded in Bandura’s Self-Efficacy Theory and operationalized through the Computer Programming Self-Efficacy Scale (CPSES), this study employs a quantitative approach with a quasi-experimental Non-Equivalent Control Group Design. Two intact classes served as subjects: an experimental group receiving AI-assisted instructional scaffolding and a control group using conventional instruction. Data were collected via CPSES administered as pre-test and post-test. Analysis was conducted using the Paired Samples T-Test to measure within-group improvement and the Independent Samples T-Test to compare post-test scores between groups. Results indicate that the experimental group demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in programming self-efficacy (t = 9.24, p < .001; mean gain = +1.15), significantly outperforming the control group in post-test scores (t = 4.87, p < .001), with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.57). To the authors’ knowledge, this study is among the first to investigate NotebookLM as a pedagogical agent in KKA visual programming contexts within Indonesian junior high schools, contributing an empirically grounded model for NotebookLM-assisted instructional scaffolding under the Merdeka Curriculum.
Penelitian ini mengkaji pengaruh NotebookLM sebagai agen pedagogis dalam mendukung pembelajaran personal untuk materi pemrograman visual pada siswa SMP (Fase D). Seiring dengan diintegrasikannya mata pelajaran Koding dan Kecerdasan Artifisial (KKA) ke dalam kurikulum nasional, siswa kerap menghadapi kesulitan dalam memahami konsep logika abstrak. Berlandaskan Teori Efikasi Diri Bandura dan dioperasionalkan melalui Computer Programming Self-Efficacy Scale (CPSES), penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan desain kuasi-eksperimen Non-Equivalent Control Group. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa kelompok eksperimen mengalami peningkatan efikasi diri pemrograman yang signifikan, dengan rata-rata post-test yang lebih tinggi dibandingkan kelompok kontrol.
Keywords
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House, 83(2), 39–43.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). Sage.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Graesser, A. C., et al. (2005). Autotutor: A tutor with dialogue in natural language. Behavior Research Methods, 37(2), 180–192.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43.
Grover, S., Pea, R., & Cooper, S. (2015). Designing for deeper learning in computer science. Harvard Educational Review.
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Ifenthaler, D., & Yau, J. Y. K. (2020). Utilising learning analytics for personalized learning. Educational Technology Research and Development.
Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2016). Pedagogical agents as learning companions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning.
Kokotsaki, D., Menzies, V., & Wiggins, A. (2016). Project-based learning: A review of the literature. Improving Schools, 19(3), 267–277.
Kukul, V., Gökçearslan, Ş., & Günbatar, M. S. (2017). Adaptation of the computer programming self-efficacy scale. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice.
Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2016). Effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 42–78.
Lester, J. C., et al. (2014). Affective pedagogical agents and learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.
Luckin, R., et al. (2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. Pearson.
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning computational thinking. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61.
Maloney, J., et al. (2010). The Scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 10(4).
Pane, J. F., et al. (2017). Continued progress: Promising evidence on personalized learning. RAND Corporation.
Ramalingam, V., & Wiedenbeck, S. (1998). Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 19(4), 367–381.
Resnick, M., et al. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.
Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Houghton Mifflin.
Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian pendidikan. Alfabeta.
Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 37–76.
VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring and intelligent tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 82–91.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/e.v25i2.101360
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2026 EDUTECH
Ciptaan disebarluaskan di bawah Lisensi Creative Commons Atribusi-BerbagiSerupa 4.0 Internasional.