The Impact of Using Learning Media Robot Transporter toward Learning Outcome and Learning Gain of Students

Chandra Ainur Rizki(1), I Gusti Putu Asto Buditjahjanto(2*), Bambang Suprianto(3),

(1) Universitas Negeri Surabaya
(2) Universitas Negeri Surabaya
(3) Universitas Negeri Surabaya
(*) Corresponding Author



This study aims 1) to determine the validity and reliability of the robot transporter learning media instrument, 2) to know the differences in the student learning outcomes between the use of robot transporter and PowerPoint as learning media, and 3) to know how much the learning gain score from the use of these two media. A pre-test-post-test comparison group design type was used. A sample of 60 vocational students participated in two groups, the experimental group (N = 30) and the control group (N = 30).  The results show that the robot transporter learning media is categorized as valid and reliable. The t-test result is 12.589 greater than the t table, namely 2.3596 with a significance of 0.05. Therefore, there is a difference in student learning outcomes. The mean of learning gain score on the robot transporter is 0.694, higher than the mean of learning gain score on the PowerPoint which is 0.289. The use of robot transporter as learning media can help students to be more interactively involved in learning. This is indicated by the students' post-test scores and the value of the gain learning in the experimental class was higher than the control class.


Robot transporter; Gain learning; Micro controller; Learning outcome; Learning media

Full Text:



Athanasiou, L., Mikropoulos, T. A., & Mavridis, D. (2019). Robotics Interventions for Improving Educational Outcomes - A Meta-analysis (pp. 91–102).

Bacca-Cortes, B., Florián-Gaviria, B., García, S., & Rueda, S. (2017). Platform development for teaching basic programming using mobile robots. Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, 26(45).

Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy—practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144.

Breuch, B., & Fislake, M. (2019). Bringing Educational Robotics into the Classroom (pp. 101–112).

Chou, P.-N. (2018). Skill Development and Knowledge Acquisition Cultivated by Maker Education: Evidence from Arduino-based Educational Robotics. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(10).

Crenshaw, T. L. A. (2013). Using Robots and Contract Learning to Teach Cyber-Physical Systems to Undergraduates. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(1), 116–120.

Gadaleta, M., Pellicciari, M., & Berselli, G. (2019). Optimization of the energy consumption of industrial robots for automatic code generation. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 57, 452–464.

Gliner, J. A., Morgan, G. A., & Harmon, R. J. (2003). Pretest-Posttest Comparison Group Designs: Analysis and Interpretation. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 42(4), 500–503.

Gorakhnath, I. (2018). Educational Robotics in Teaching Learning Process. Online International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, 7(2), 161–168.

Ha, Q. P., Yen, L., & Balaguer, C. (2019). Robotic autonomous systems for earthmoving in military applications. Automation in Construction, 107, 102934.

Hake, R. (2002). Lessons from the Physics Education Reform Effort. Conservation Ecology, 5(2), art28.

Karaahmetoğlu, K., & Korkmaz, Ö. (2019). The effect of project-based arduino educational robot applications on students’ computational thinking skills and their perception of Basic Stem skill levels. Participatory Educational Research, 6(2), 1–14.

Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14–31.

Liao, T.-K., Liao, C.-W., Shih, C.-L., & Lin, C.-F. (2016). An Experimental Study of Integrating LEGO Robots Instruction into the “Engine Principles and Practice” Curriculum at Automobile Departments in Vocational Schools. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(10), 777–781.

Noguchi, T., Kajiwara, H., Chida, K., & Inamori, S. (2017). Development of a Programming Teaching-Aid Robot with Intuitive Motion Instruction Set. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics, 29(6), 980–991.

Ohnishi, Y., Honda, K., Nishioka, R., Mori, S., & Kawada, K. (2017). Robotics Programming Learning for Elementary and Junior High School Students. Journal of Robotics and Mechatronics, 29(6), 992–998.

Patino, K. P., Diego, B. C., Rodilla, V. M., Conde, M. J. R., & Rodriguez-Aragon, J. F. (2014). Using Robotics as a Learning Tool in Latin America and Spain. IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias Del Aprendizaje, 9(4), 144–150.

Ratumanan, T., & Laurens, T. (2011). Penilaian Hasil Belajar pada. Unesa University Press.

Zhang, Y.-D., Zhang, Y., Lv, Y.-D., Hou, X.-X., Liu, F.-Y., Jia, W.-J., Yang, M.-M., Phillips, P., & Wang, S.-H. (2017). Alcoholism detection by medical robots based on Hu moment invariants and predator–prey adaptive-inertia chaotic particle swarm optimization. Computers & Electrical Engineering, 63, 126–138.

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 357 times | PDF view : 0 times


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 I Gusti Putu Asto Buditjahjanto

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Editorial Office

Journal of Educational Science and Technology
Graduate Program Universitas Negeri Makassar


address icon red

 Jl Bonto Langkasa Gunungsari Baru Makassar, 90222 Kampus PPs UNM Makassar Gedung AD Ruang 406 Lt 4, Indonesia  
  [email protected] | [email protected] 
   085299898201 (WA) 

EST Index by: