Implementasi Pembelajaran Berbasis Kompetensi Dan Dampaknya Terhadap Hasil Belajar Bahasa Inggris Siswa SMP N Weliman: Studi Quasi-Experimental Dengan Pendekatan Mixed Method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55606/sokoguru.v5i3.6303Keywords:
: competency-based learning, English learning outcomes, quasi-experimental, , mixed method, junior high schoolAbstract
Abstract. Background: Competency-Based Learning (CBL) has become an important paradigm in modern education, but its implementation in the context of English language learning in junior high schools still requires in-depth empirical studies. Objective: This study aims to analyze the implementation of competency-based learning and its impact on English language learning outcomes of students at Weliman State Junior High School through a quasi-experimental design with a mixed method approach. Method: The study used a nonequivalent control group design with 60 eighth-grade students as samples (30 in the experimental group, 30 in the control group). Quantitative data were collected through pretest-posttest English language learning outcomes, while qualitative data were obtained through learning observations, in-depth interviews with teachers and students, and analysis of learning documents. Results: Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) showed a significant difference (F=45.23, p<0.001, η²=0.446) between the experimental and control groups after controlling for pretest scores. The experimental group showed an average score increase of 24.5 points (from 62.3 to 86.8), while the control group only increased by 8.7 points (from 61.8 to 70.5). Qualitative findings revealed that CBL implementation increased student motivation, encouraged more active and independent learning, and facilitated learning differentiation according to individual learning pace. Conclusion: Competency-based learning has been proven effective in improving junior high school students' English learning outcomes and providing a more meaningful and personalized learning experience.
Downloads
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1-12. UCLA Center for the Study of Evaluation of Instructional Programs.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Dave, R. H. (1970). Psychomotor levels. In R. J. Armstrong (Ed.), Developing and writing behavioral objectives (pp. 20-21). Tucson, AZ: Educational Innovators Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Fullan, M. (2007). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Gervais, J. (2016). The operational definition of competency-based education. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(2), 98-106. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1011
Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25(3), 167-202. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002997414652
Hapsari, W. (2018). Implementasi pembelajaran berbasis kompetensi untuk meningkatkan kemampuan speaking siswa SMA. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris Indonesia, 6(2), 145-158.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook II: Affective domain. New York: David McKay.
Kulik, C. C., Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265-299. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543060002265
Nodine, T. R. (2016). How did we get here? A brief history of competency-based higher education in the United States. The Journal of Competency-Based Education, 1(1), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.1002/cbe2.1004
Puentedura, R. R. (2006). Transformation, technology, and education. Retrieved from http://hippasus.com/resources/tte/
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schlechty, P. C. (2011). Engaging students: The next level of working on the work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Sturgis, C., Patrick, S., & Pittenger, L. (2011). It's not a matter of time: Highlights from the 2011 Competency-Based Learning Summit. Vienna, VA: International Association for K-12 Online Learning.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2014). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 SOKO GURU: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
