CTML-BASED INTERACTIVE LEARNING MEDIA FOR ECOSYSTEM LEARNING: FEASIBILITY AND PRACTICALITYIAL: FEASIBILITY AND PRACTICALITY

Reza Nabila Putri, Iffa Ichwani Putri, Suryanti Suryanti, Yeyendra Yeyendra

Abstract


This research is motivated by the need for learning media that is able to help students understand complex ecosystem materials through the presentation of information that is in accordance with cognitive processes. This research aims to develop interactive learning media based on Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning (CTML) and test its feasibility and practicality. This research uses the Research and Development method with the ADDIE model which is limited to the analysis, design, and development stages. The research subjects consist of 35 students in class X, while the validators include material experts, media experts, and learning experts. The data collection technique uses a questionnaire with quantitative descriptive data analysis in the form of percentages. The results of the study showed that the developed media obtained an average feasibility percentage of 97.5% with a very feasible category, consisting of media expert assessments of 99%, material experts of 97%, and learning experts of 97%. The results of the practicality test by students showed an average percentage of 86% with the category of practical to very practical. Thus, the CTML-based interactive learning media developed was declared feasible and practical to be used in ecosystem materials.


Keywords


cognitive theory of multimedia learning; ecosystem; interactive learning media

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abdulrahaman, M. D., Faruk, N., Oloyede, A. A., Surajudeen-Bakinde, N., Olawoyin, L. A., Mejabi, O. V, Imam-Fulani, Y. O.,

Fahm, A. O., & Azeez, A. L. (2020).

Multimedia tools in the teaching and learning processes: A systematic review. Heliyon, 6(11).

Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT framework for multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.le arninstruc.2006.03.001

Akbar, S. (2013). Instrumen perangkat pembelajaran. Remaja Rosdakarya.

Al-Fraihat, D., Joy, M., Masa’deh, R., & Sinclair, J. (2020). Evaluating E-learning Systems Success: An Empirical Study.

Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 67–

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.004

Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for

Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1 756-8765.2008.01005.x

Costley, J., Fanguy, M., Lange, C., & Baldwin, M. (2021). The effects of video lecture viewing strategies on cognitive load. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33, 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-020-09254-y

Costley, J., & Lange, C. (2021). The Effects of Lecture Video Length on Student Engagement and Learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 33, 436–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-

-09261-0

Darmawan, D., Suryadi, A., & Prasetyo, B. (2020). Multimedia Learning Media Development. Jurnal Pendidikan Teknologi.

Duit, R. (2012). Conceptual Change. https://doi.org/10.1007/97 8-94-007-2457-0

Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2015). Learning as a Generative Activity. Cambridge University Press.

Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2021). Principles for Reducing Extraneous Processing in Multimedia Learning: Coherence, Signaling, Redundancy, Spatial Contiguity, and Temporal Contiguity Principles. In R. E. Mayer & L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (3rd ed., pp. 185–198). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.0 19

Fitriani, N., Rahmawati, D., & Sari, L. (2025).

Interactive Multimedia in Biology Learning. International Journal of Science Education.

Gilbert, J. K. (2008). Visualization in science education. https://doi.org/10.1007/97 8-1-4020-5267-5

Griffin, P., McGaw, B., & Care, E. (2012).

Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills. https://doi.org/10.1007/97 8-94-007-2324-5

Hadi, S., & Agustina, D. (2020).

Pengembangan media pembelajaran interaktif berbasis multimedia. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.15294/jp ii.v9i3.23820

Hafzah, N. (2020). Analisis kesulitan belajar siswa pada materi ekosistem. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.22219/jp bi.v6i2.11967

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1023/B: EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

Kalyuga, S. (2021). Cognitive load theory and multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 33, 1345–1368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1 0648-021-09602-4

Khotimah, N., Rahmawati, D., & Hidayat, T. (2024). Development of Learning Media Based on Multimedia. Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan.

Leppink, J. (2013). Cognitive load measurement. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/me du.12261

Leppink, J., & Duvivier, R. (2016). Twelve Tips for Medical Curriculum Design from a Cognitive Load Theory Perspective. Medical Teacher, 38(7), 669–674.

https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2015.1 132829

Magfiroh, A., Murtini, W., & Sari, D. (2026). Analysis of Students’ Needs for Biology Learning Media. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains.

Marzuki, A., Rahmawati, F., & Hidayat, T. (2023). The Effect of Usability and Interactivity on Student Learning Outcomes in Digital Learning Media. Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2), 123–134.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811 678

Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning. https://doi.org/10.1017/CB O9781139547369.005

Mayer, R. E. (2021b). Multimedia Learning (3rd Edition). Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E., & Fiorella, L. (2021). The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. (2010). Interactive multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.le arninstruc.2009.02.008

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2007). Interactive multimodal learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 309–326.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s1 0648-007-9047-2

Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2020). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 112(3), 684–694.

https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000409

Nurfadilah, Z. (2021). Miskonsepsi siswa pada materi ekosistem. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.15294/jp ii.v10i2.27852

Nurhidayah, N. (2020). Analisis kesulitan siswa pada konsep ekosistem. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi. https://doi.org/10.21009/bi osferjpb.13-2.5

Odum, E. P., & Barrett, G. W. (2005). Fundamentals of Ecology. Brooks/Cole.

OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I):

What Students Know and Can Do. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f0 7c754-en

Özkan, G. (2004). Students misconceptions about energy flow. Journal of Biological Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/00 219266.2004.9655910

Paas, F., & van Merrienboer, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1080/00 461520.2019.1589934

Putri, I. I., Fauziah, N., Ferazona, S., Kalsum, U., & Hendrizal, A. (2025). Peran Artificial Intelligence (AI) dalam Mengelola Beban Kognitif Mahasiswa Biologi: Kajian Sistematis. Biology and Education Journal. https://doi.org/10.25299/b aej.2025.22896

Putri, I. I., Suryanti, S., & Yeyendra, Y. (2024). Interactive Learning Media in Biology Education. Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi.

Riza, M., Hidayat, T., & Pratama, R. (2023). Development of Interactive Learning Media in Biology Education. Journal of Educational Technology.

Schindler, L. A., Burkholder, G. J., Morad, O. A., & Marsh, C. (2017). Computer-Based Technology and Student Engagement: A Critical Review of the Literature. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0063-0

Sipayung, R., Sinaga, B., & Pasaribu, M. (2026). Innovation in Biology Learning Media. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan.

Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2022).

Understanding Cognitive Load in Digital and Online Learning: A New Perspective on Extraneous Cognitive Load.

Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-

-09624-7

Sugandi, A., Rasyid, M., & Hidayat, T. (2019). Learning Media Development in Biology Education. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA.

Suryanti, Ferazona, S., Yeyendra, Darmia, & Mellisa. (2025). Profil Penerapan Kurikulum Merdeka pada Pembelajaran IPA di SMP. Biology and Education Journal (BaEJ). https://doi.org/10.25299/b aej.2025.25107

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011).

Cognitive load theory. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2019).

Cognitive Load Theory. Springer.

Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas,

F. (2019). Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design: 20 Years Later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-

-09465-5

Treagust, D. F. (2008). Conceptual Change in Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/97 8-1-4020-8994-3

Treagust, D. F., & Tsui, C. Y. (2014). Multiple representations in biological education. https://doi.org/10.1007/97 8-94-007-4192-8

Urry, L. A. (2020). Campbell Biology. https://doi.org/10.1201/97 80429493915

van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Sweller, J. (2010).

Cognitive load theory. Educational Research Review. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.e durev.2010.01.003

Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences. Educational Research Review. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.e durev.2012.04.001

Zhu, Y. (2020). Effects of multimedia learning on student engagement. Computers & Education, 144, 103708. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.c ompedu.2019.103708

Zhu, Y., Chen, L., & Li, M. (2020). Effects of Multimedia Learning on Student Engagement and Understanding.

Computers & Education.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.29100/eduproxima.v8i4.11633

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.