Edutainment Methods in the Learning Process: Quickly, Fun and Satisfying
Abstract
The spirit of edutainment learning is in the learning process that is fun, comfortable, and amazing and is in how the interaction between teachers and students is established with close, friendly, and harmonious communication like friends. That way students do not feel restricted, afraid and can interact freely and happily. The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the edutainment approach to learning. The research location is at the Tourism Middle School Academy in Makassar, Indonesia with a sample size of 31 students. The research process through Classroom Action Research (CAR) was carried out for one semester. The results of the evaluation show that through the edutainment approach, students prefer to learn more, and student achievement in learning has increased as seen from the percentage of success achieved reaching 57 percent, previously only 23 percent for learning to write and learning to read, the percentage of success was up to 62 percent previously 25 percent. The Edutainment approach is a variation in learning strategies that convey subject matter by combining question and answer methods with fun and creativity. The assessment of students must be more flexible, there must be variations in the assessment, for example, with written evaluations, singing and speaking.
References
L. G. Katz and J. D. Raths, “Dispositions as goals for teacher education,” Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 301–307, 1985.
Y. Zhao and G. A. Cziko, “Teacher adoption of technology: A perceptual control theory perspective,” J. Technol. Teach. Educ., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 5–30, 2001.
K. Zeichner and K. Y. Liu, “A critical analysis of reflection as a goal for teacher education,” in Handbook of reflection and reflective inquiry, Springer, 2010, pp. 67–84.
J. Susilowibowo and H. T. Hardini, “Effectiveness of project-based learning models to improve learning outcomes and learning activities of students in innovative learning,” KnE Soc. Sci., pp. 82–95, 2019.
I. B. N. Mantra, I. N. Astawa, and N. D. Handayani, “Usability of innovative learning models in higher education,” Int. J. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 38–43, 2019.
L. E. Parker and M. R. Lepper, “Effects of fantasy contexts on children’s learning and motivation: Making learning more fun.,” J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., vol. 62, no. 4, p. 625, 1992.
M. A. Perifanou, “Language micro-gaming: Fun and informal microblogging activities for language learning,” in World Summit on Knowledge Society, 2009, pp. 1–14.
S. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Beyond edutainment: Exploring the educational potential of computer games. Lulu. com, 2011.
N. Aksakal, “Theoretical view to the approach of the edutainment,” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol. 186, pp. 1232–1239, 2015.
A. Sadat, A. Nazar, L. O. A. Suherman, W. O. D. Alzarliani, and A. B. Birawida, “Environmental care behavior through e-jas model with science edutainment approach,” in IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 2019, vol. 343, no. 1, p. 12126.
E. T. Berman, A. Wiyono, A. Zakaria, and S. Supriatno, “Enhancing of Student Competency in Psychrometric Subjects Using the Edutainment Method,” in 2nd International Conference on Educational Sciences (ICES 2018), 2019, pp. 54–58.
D. Charsky, “From edutainment to serious games: A change in the use of game characteristics,” Games Cult., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 177–198, 2010.
O. V Anikina and E. V Yakimenko, “Edutainment as a modern technology of education,” Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol. 166, pp. 475–479, 2015.
A. Paivio, “Dual coding theory and the mental lexicon,” Ment. Lex., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 205–230, 2010.
A. Paivio, “Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status.,” Can. J. Psychol. Can. Psychol., vol. 45, no. 3, p. 255, 1991.
R. B. Kozma, “Learning with media,” Rev. Educ. Res., vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 179–211, 1991.
J. M. Clark and A. Paivio, “Dual coding theory and education,” Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 149–210, 1991.
P. Baggett, “6 Understanding Visual and Verbal Messages,” in Advances in psychology, vol. 58, Elsevier, 1989, pp. 101–124.
P. Baggett, “Role of temporal overlap of visual and auditory material in forming dual media associations.,” J. Educ. Psychol., vol. 76, no. 3, p. 408, 1984.
E. Jensen, Teaching with the brain in mind. ASCD, 2005.
B. Kumaravadivelu, Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Routledge, 2006.
M. Gillespie, “Student–teacher connection: a place of possibility,” J. Adv. Nurs., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 211–219, 2005.
G. Crosling, M. Heagney, and L. Thomas, “Improving student retention in higher education: Improving teaching and learning,” Aust. Univ. Rev., vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 9–18, 2009.
L. C. Ragan, “Good teaching is good teaching: An emerging set of guiding principles and practices for the design and development of distance education,” Cause Eff., vol. 22, pp. 20–24, 1999.
J. S. Bruner, Actual minds, possible worlds. Harvard University Press, 2009.
E. Dale, “Audiovisual methods in teaching,” 1969.
R. W. Wagner, “Edgar Dale: Professional,” Theory Pract., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 89–95, 1970.
V. Koshy, Action research for improving educational practice: A step-by-step guide. Sage, 2009.
D. Ebbutt, “Educational action research: Some general concerns and specific quibbles,” Issues Educ. Res. Qual. methods, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 152–174, 1985.
J. Rudduck and D. Hopkins, Research as a Basis for Teaching. London, 1985.
W. Carr and S. Kemmis, “Educational action research: A critical approach,” Sage Handb. Educ. action Res., pp. 74–84, 2009.
M. Huberman and M. B. Miles, The qualitative researcher’s companion. Sage, 2002.
R. Light, “The social nature of games: Australian preservice primary teachersÍ first experiences of teaching games for understanding,” Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 286–304, 2002.
R. Hromek and S. Roffey, “Promoting Social and Emotional Learning With Games: ‘It’s Fun and We Learn Things,’” Simul. Gaming, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 626–644, 2009.
R. D. Whisonant, “The effects of humor on cognitive learning in a computer-based environment.” Virginia Tech, 1998.
R. K. Cooper and A. Sawaf, Executive EQ: Emotional intelligence in leadership and organizations. Penguin, 1998.
A. Q. Staton‐Spicer and D. H. Wulff, “Research in communication and instruction: Categorization and synthesis,” Commun. Educ., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 377–391, 1984.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Copyright of the published article belongs to the authors and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY SA) International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access).
