The Effectiveness of Digital-Based Marketing Science Teaching Innovation

B.M.A.S. Anaconda  Bangkara; Eka Hendrayani; Cahyani Pratisti; Rudianto; Hermiyetti

doi:10.23887/ijssb.v7i4.68188

Authors

B.M.A.S. Anaconda Bangkara President University, Bekasi, Indonesia
Eka Hendrayani Haji Agus Salim Bukittinggi Institute of Technology and Business, Bukittinggi, Indonesia
Cahyani Pratisti Darmajaya Institute of Informatics and Business, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia
Rudianto Andi Djemma University, Palopo, Indonesia
Hermiyetti Bakrie University, Jakarta, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23887/ijssb.v7i4.68188

Keywords:

digital-based, marketing, teaching innovation, multimedia

Abstract

This research emerged in response to the challenge of improving students' academic success in marketing science. With the development of digital technology, digital-based teaching methods are considered as potential innovations to enrich the learning experience. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of digital-based teaching innovations. It includes understanding whether the use of digital tools and interactive methods enhances students' understanding of marketing science concepts and academic performance. This study is a case study that focuses on the implementation of digital-based teaching methods in a marketing science education environment. The research subjects involved students participating in digital-based marketing science classes at the Sultan Muhammad Syafiuddin Islamic Institute in Sambas. This research applies a combined approach between qualitative and quantitative through digital-based teaching using various digital tools such as multimedia presentations, interactive online platforms, and virtual simulations. The results of this case study show that digital-based marketing science teaching innovation has a positive impact. Students show high interest, active participation, increased understanding of concepts, and improved academic performance. Overall, this research supports the effectiveness of digital-based teaching in marketing science. The integration of digital tools and interactive methods can improve the quality of education and provide a more engaging learning environment for students.

References

Adhikari, J., Mathrani, A., & Scogings, C. (2016). Bring Your Own Devices classroom: Exploring the issue of digital divide in the teaching and learning contexts. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 13(4), 323–343. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2016-0007. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-04-2016-0007

Alenezi, M. (2021). Deep dive into digital transformation in higher education institutions. Education Sciences, 11(12), 770. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11120770. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11120770

Alenezi, M., & Akour, M. (2023). Digital Transformation Blueprint in Higher Education: A Case Study of PSU. Sustainability, 15(10), 8204. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108204. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su15108204

Almeida, F. (2018). Strategies to perform a mixed methods study. European Journal of Education Studies, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1902.

Azevedo, A., & Almeida, A. H. (2021). Grasp the Challenge of Digital Transition in SMEs—A Training Course Geared towards Decision-Makers. Education Sciences, 11(4), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040151. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040151

Barak, M. (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47, 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9501-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9501-y

Bean, J. C., & Melzer, D. (2021). Engaging ideas: The professor’s guide to integrating writing, critical thinking, and active learning in the classroom. John Wiley & Sons.

Becker, W., & Schmid, O. (2020). The right digital strategy for your business: an empirical analysis of the design and implementation of digital strategies in SMEs and LSEs. Business Research, 13(3), 985–1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-020-00124-y. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40685-020-00124-y

Behnamnia, N., Kamsin, A., Ismail, M. A. B., & Hayati, A. (2020). The effective components of creativity in digital game-based learning among young children: A case study. Children and Youth Services Review, 116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105227

Blau, I., Shamir-Inbal, T., & Avdiel, O. (2020). How does the pedagogical design of a technology-enhanced collaborative academic course promote digital literacies, self-regulation, and perceived learning of students? The Internet and Higher Education, 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100722

Borzea, D., & Goodboy, A. K. (2016). When Instructors Self-Disclose but Misbehave: Conditional Effects on Student Engagement and Interest. Communication Studies, 67(5), 548–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2016.1212912. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2016.1212912

Bower, M., Dalgarno, B., Kennedy, G. E., Lee, M. J., & Kenney, J. (2015). Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 86, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.006. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.006

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). (Mis) conceptualising themes, thematic analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts’(2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(6), 739–743. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588

Braun, V., Clarke, V., & Hayfield, N. (2022). ‘A starting point for your journey, not a map’: Nikki Hayfield in conversation with Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke about thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 19(2), 424–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2019.1670765. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2019.1670765

Campbell, M., Detres, M., & Lucio, R. (2019). Can a digital whiteboard foster student engagement? Social Work Education, 38(6), 735–752. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2018.1556631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2018.1556631

Chaaban, Y., Du, X., & Qadhi, S. (2021). Student teachers’ perceptions of factors influencing learner agency working in teams in a STEAM-based course. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(7). https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/10978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/10978

Comi, A., & Whyte, J. (2018). Future making and visual artefacts: An ethnographic study of a design project. Organization Studies, 39(8), 1055–1083. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617717094. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840617717094

Creswell, A., White, T., Dumoulin, V., Arulkumaran, K., Sengupta, B., & Bharath, A. A. (2018). Generative adversarial networks: An overview. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 35(1), 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2017.2765202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/MSP.2017.2765202

Cuban, L., & Jandrić, P. (2015). The dubious promise of educational technologies: Historical patterns and future challenges. E-Learning and Digital Media, 12(3–4), 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753015579978. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753015579978

Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791

De Freitas, S. I., Morgan, J., & Gibson, D. (2015). Will MOOCs transform learning and teaching in higher education? Engagement and course retention in online learning provision. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(3), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12268

Di Biase, R. (2019). Moving beyond the teacher-centred/learner-centred dichotomy: implementing a structured model of active learning in the Maldives. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 49(4), 565–583. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1435261. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2018.1435261

Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method. John Wiley & Sons.

Drugova, E., Zhuravleva, I., Aiusheeva, M., & Grits, D. (2021). Toward a model of learning innovation integration: TPACK-SAMR based analysis of the introduction of a digital learning environment in three Russian universities. Education and Information Technologies, 26(4), 4925–4942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10514-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10514-2

Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2020). Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Opportunities and challenges in emergency situations. Societies, 10(4), 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10040086

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6pt2), 2134–2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Gabriel, F., Marrone, R., Van Sebille, Y., Kovanovic, V., & de Laat, M. (2022). Digital education strategies around the world: practices and policies. Irish Educational Studies, 41(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.2022513. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.2022513

Gärtner, C. (2013). Cognition, knowing and learning in the flesh: Six views on embodied knowing in organization studies. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 29(4), 338–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2013.07.005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2013.07.005

Gong, C., & Ribiere, V. (2021). Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation, 102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217

Goodboy, A. K., Carton, S. T., Goldman, Z. W., Gozanski, T. A., Tyler, W. J., & Johnson, N. R. (2014). Discouraging Instructional Dissent and Facilitating Students’ Learning Experiences Through Instructor Self-Disclosure. Southern Communication Journal, 79(2), 114–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794X.2013.865256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794X.2013.865256

Granić, A. (2022). Educational technology adoption: a systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 9725–9744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10951-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10951-7

Granić, A., & Marangunić, N. (2019). Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2572–2593. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12864

Guest, G., Namey, E. E., & Mitchell, M. L. (2013). Collecting qualitative data: A field manual for applied research. Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506374680

Guillén-Gámez, F. D., & Mayorga-Fernández, M. J. (2020). Identification of variables that predict teachers’ attitudes toward ICT in higher education for teaching and research: A study with regression. Sustainability, 12(4), 1312. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041312

Gupta, V., & Jain, N. (2017). Harnessing information and communication technologies for effective knowledge creation: Shaping the future of education. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30(5), 831–855. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-10-2016-0173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-10-2016-0173

Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004

Hattie, J., & Larsen, S. N. (2020). The purposes of education: A conversation between John Hattie and Steen Nepper Larsen. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367815561

Hernández-Ramos, J. P., Martínez-Abad, F., Peñalvo, F. J. G., García, M. E. H., & Rodríguez-Conde, M. J. (2014). Teachers’ attitude regarding the use of ICT. A factor reliability and validity study. Computers in Human Behavior, 31, 509–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.039. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.039

Howard, S. K., Chan, A., Mozejko, A., & Caputi, P. (2015). Technology practices: Confirmatory factor analysis and exploration of teachers’ technology integration in subject areas. Computers & Education, 90, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.09.008

Hsu, L. (2016). Examining EFL teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and the adoption of mobile-assisted language learning: a partial least square approach. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(8), 1287–1297. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1278024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2016.1278024

Judd, T. (2018). The rise and fall (?) of the digital natives. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(5). https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3821. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3821

Kreijns, K., Van Acker, F., Vermeulen, M., & Van Buuren, H. (2014). Community of inquiry: Social presence revisited. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.1.5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2014.11.1.5

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2015). Focus group interviewing. In Handbook of practical program evaluation (pp. 506–534). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119171386.ch20

Lah, U., Lewis, J. R., & Šumak, B. (2020). Perceived usability and the modified technology acceptance model. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 36(13), 1216–1230. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1727262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1727262

Lai, C., Hu, X., & Lyu, B. (2018). Understanding the nature of learners’ out-of-class language learning experience with technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(1–2), 114–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1391293. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1391293

Laurillard, D. (2013). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.

Martin, F., Wang, C., Jokiaho, A., May, B., & Grübmeyer, S. (2019). Examining faculty readiness to teach online: A comparison of US and German educators. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 22(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2019-0004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/eurodl-2019-0004

Mohamed Hashim, M. A., Tlemsani, I., & Matthews, R. (2022). Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 3171–3195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1

Msweli, N. T., Mawela, T., & Twinomurinzi, H. (2023). Transdisciplinary teaching practices for data science education: A comprehensive framework for integrating disciplines. Social Sciences & Humanities Open, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100628. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2023.100628

Nkomo, L. M., Daniel, B. K., & Butson, R. J. (2021). Synthesis of student engagement with digital technologies: a systematic review of the literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00270-1.

Oke, A., & Fernandes, F. A. P. (2020). Innovations in Teaching and Learning: Exploring the Perceptions of the Education Sector on the 4th Industrial Revolution (4IR). Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 6(2), 31. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6020031. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc6020031

Parwata, I. W., Hariyadi, A., & Chakim, M. H. R. (2023). The Development of Digital Teaching to Improve the Quality of Student Learning in the Revolution 4.0 Era at Warmadewa University. Jurnal Iqra’: Kajian Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(1), 254–269. https://doi.org/10.25217/ji.v8i1.3199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25217/ji.v8i1.3199

Popescu, E., & Badea, G. (2020). Exploring a community of inquiry supported by a social media-based learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 23(2), 61–76. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26921134.

Salmon, G. (2019). May the Fourth Be with you: Creating Education 4.0. Journal of Learning for Development, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v6i2.352. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56059/jl4d.v6i2.352

Sarker, M. N. I., Wu, M., Cao, Q., Alam, G. M., & Li, D. (2019). Leveraging Digital Technology for Better Learning and Education: A Systematic Literature Review. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 9(7), 453–461. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.7.1246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.7.1246

Sasson, I., Yehuda, I., & Malkinson, N. (2018). Fostering the skills of critical thinking and question-posing in a project-based learning environment. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.08.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.08.001

Scully, D., Lehane, P., & Scully, C. (2021). ‘It is no longer scary’: digital learning before and during the Covid-19 pandemic in Irish secondary schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(1), 159–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1854844. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1854844

Selwyn, N. (2016). Minding our language: why education and technology is full of bullshit… and what might be done about it. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(3), 437–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1012523. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1012523

Spais, G., & Paul, P. (2021). A crisis management model for marketing education: Reflections on marketing education system’s transformation in view of the COVID-19 crisis. Marketing Education Review, 31(4), 322–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2021.1951120. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10528008.2021.1951120

Tarrayo, V. N., & Anudin, A. G. (2023). Materials development in flexible learning amid the pandemic: perspectives from English language teachers in a Philippine state university. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17(1), 102–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2021.1939703. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2021.1939703

Tarrayo, V. N., Paz, R. M. O., & Gepila Jr, E. C. (2023). The shift to flexible learning amidst the pandemic: the case of English language teachers in a Philippine state university. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17(1), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2021.1944163. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2021.1944163

Ting, Y. L. (2015). Tapping into students’ digital literacy and designing negotiated learning to promote learner autonomy. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.004

Turnbull, D., Chugh, R., & Luck, J. (2021). Transitioning to E-Learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: How have Higher Education Institutions responded to the challenge? Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 6401–6419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10633-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10633-w

Wannapiroon, N., & Pimdee, P. (2022). Thai undergraduate science, technology, engineering, arts, and math (STEAM) creative thinking and innovation skill development: a conceptual model using a digital virtual classroom learning environment. Education and Information Technologies, 27(4), 5689–5716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10849-w. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10849-w

Winter, E., Costello, A., O’Brien, M., & Hickey, G. (2021). Teachers’ use of technology and the impact of Covid-19. Irish Educational Studies, 40(2), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1916559. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1916559

Zen, Z., & Ariani, F. (2022). Academic achievement: the effect of project-based online learning method and student engagement. Heliyon, 8(11). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e11509