Technological and Pedagogical Models: Analysis of Factors and Measurement of Learning Outcomes in Education

Abstract views: 1953 / PDF downloads: 1007


  • Ratnawati Susanto Universitas Esa Unggul
  • Reza Rachmadtullah Universitas PGRI Adi Buana, Surabaya
  • Widarto Rachbini Graduate School Universitas Pancasila, Jakarta, Indonesia



Technological, Pedagogical, Learning Outcome.


The era of the industrial revolution 4.0 emphasizes the importance of the digital literacy elaboration that links the full technological and pedagogical capabilities to enhance learning outcomes in all three domains that include knowledge, skills and attitudes. Much is needed of factor analysis and measurement studies that touch on aspects of pedagogy and technology as an indicator analysis of pedagogical competency development models. The method used is a quantitative approach, data analysis technique is done through the Goodness of-Fit criteria. The stages of modeling and analysis of structural equations in the analysis of first and second measurement models are performed with CFA and using SEM as a tool. Data analysis was also carried out to analyze indicators that predominantly influenced learning outcomes. The results of the study concluded that the Technological and Pedagogical Model was a factor and measurement of learning achievements in education.


Download data is not yet available.


Alamri, A., and Tyler-Wood, T. (2017). Factors Affecting Learners With Disabilities–Instructor Interaction in Online Learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(2), 59–69. DOI:

Alluhaidan, A., Chatterjee, S., Drew, D., & Stibe, A. (2018). Sustaining Health Behaviors Through Empowerment: A Deductive Theoretical Model of Behavior Change Based on Information and Communication Technology (ICT). DOI:

Andrew, M., Taylorson, J., Langille, D. J., Grange, A., & Williams, N. (2018). Student attitudes towards technology and their preferences for learning tools/devices at two universities in the UAE. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 17, 309–344. DOI:

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers : an instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292–302. DOI:

Applewhite, S. R., Kao, D., & Pritzker, S. (2018). Educator and practitioner views of professional competencies for macro social work practice. International Social Work, 61(6), 1169–1186. DOI:

Asri Humaira, M., Rasmitadila, Widyasari, Rachmadtullah, R., & Kardaya, D. (2019). Using blended learning model (BLM) in the instructional process: teacher student perception’s. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1175, 012213. DOI:

Barak, M. (2017). Science Teacher Education in the Twenty-First Century: a Pedagogical Framework for Technology-Integrated Social Constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47(2), 283–303. DOI:

Beckman, K., Apps, T., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2018). Conceptualising technology practice in education using Bourdieu’s sociology. Learning, Media and Technology, 43(2), 197–210. DOI:

Cahyana, U., Sumantri, M. S., & Hasanah, U. (2017, May). Influence model of learning and critical-thinking ability of learning science of primary school students. Proceedings of the 29th International Business Information Management Association Conference - Education Excellence and Innovation Management through Vision 2020: From Regional Development Sustainability to Global Economic Growth. Vienna, Austuria

Chen, J., Wang, M., Kirschner, P. A., & Tsai, C.-C. (2018). The Role of Collaboration, Computer Use, Learning Environments, and Supporting Strategies in CSCL: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 88(6), 799–843. DOI:

Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP Framework : Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes. Educational Psychology, 49(4), 219–243. DOI:

Computers, J. (2013). Developing a typology of teacher beliefs and practices concerning classroom use of ICT. Journal Computers and Education, 68, 380–387. DOI:

Cundill, G., & Rodela, R. (2012). A review of assertions about the processes and outcomes of social learning in natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 113(September), 7–14. DOI:

Daane, A. R., Haglund, J., Robertson, A. D., Close, H. G., & Scherr, R. E. (2018). The pedagogical value of conceptual metaphor for secondary science teachers. Science Education, 102(5), 1051–1076. DOI:

Devine, M., Houssemand, C., & Meyers, R. (2013). Instructional coaching for teachers : A strategy to implement new practices in the classrooms. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93(1), 1126–1130. DOI:

Gess-Newsome, J., Taylor, J. A., Carlson, J., Gardner, A. L., Wilson, C. D., & Stuhlsatz, M. A. M. (2019). Teacher pedagogical content knowledge, practice, and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 944–963. DOI:

Hadar, L. L., & Ergas, O. (2019). Cultivating mindfulness through technology in higher education: a Buberian perspective. AI and SOCIETY, 34(1), 99–107. DOI:

Halpern, C. (2017). Book Review: In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms (2nd ed.). American Journal of Qualitative Research, 1(1), 32-36. DOI:

He, Y., Lundgren, K., & Pynes, P. (2017). Impact of short-term study abroad program: Inservice teachers’ development of intercultural competence and pedagogical beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 147–157. DOI:

Iasha, V., Rachmadtullah, R., Sudrajat, A., & Hartanti, D. (2019). The Impact Interactive Learning Media on The Learning Outcomes of Fifth Grade Social Science Knowledge in Elementary Schools. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Technology and Educational Science. DOI:

Jaleel, S., & Verghis, A. M. (2015). Knowledge Creation in Constructivist Learning. 3(1), 8–12. DOI:

Jandrić, P., Knox, J., Besley, T., Ryberg, T., Suoranta, J., & Hayes, S. (2018). Postdigital science and education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 50(10), 893–899. DOI:

Jin, B. (2019). Country-level technological disparities, market feedback, and scientists’ choice of technologies. Research Policy, 48(1), 385–400. DOI:

Karakus, M. (2018). The Moderating Effect of Gender on the Relationships between Age, Ethical Leadership, and Organizational Commitment. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 5(1), 74-84. DOI:

Khanagha, S., Ramezan Zadeh, M. T., Mihalache, O. R., & Volberda, H. W. (2018). Embracing Bewilderment: Responding to Technological Disruption in Heterogeneous Market Environments. Journal of Management Studies, 55(7), 1079–1121. DOI:

Koh, J. H. L., & Chai, C. S. (2016). Seven design frames that teachers use when considering technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK). Computers and Education, 102, 244–257. DOI:

Lawrence, J. E., & Tar, U. A. (2018). Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integration of ICT in teaching/learning process. Educational Media International, 55(1), 79–105. DOI:

Liu, S., Tsai, H., & Huang, Y. (2015). Collaborative Professional Development of Mentor Teachers and Pre-Service Teachers in Relation to Technology Integration. Educational Technology and Society, 18(3), 161–172.

Livingstone, S. (2007). How student teachers develop their understanding of teaching using ICT People also read Critical reflections on the benefits of ICT in education.

Lucke, T., Dunn, P. K., & Christie, M. (2017). Activating learning in engineering education using ICT and the concept of ‘Flipping the classroom.’ European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(1), 45–57. DOI:

Malik, S., Rohendi, D., & Widiaty, I. (2019). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) with Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Integration: A Literature Review. Proceedings of the 5th UPI International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (ICTVET 2018). DOI:

Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Fabiani, P., Benesova, W., Meneses, M. D., & Mora, C. E. (2015). Augmented reality to promote collaborative and autonomous learning in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 752–761. DOI:

McFarlane, A. E. (2019). Devices and desires: Competing visions of a good education in the digital age. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(3), 1125–1136. DOI:

McKenney, S., & Visscher, A. J. (2019). Technology for teacher learning and performance. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(2), 129–132. DOI:

Mei, J., Lin, C., Wang, P. Y., & Lin, I. C. (2010). Pedagogy - technology : A two ‐ dimensional model for teachers ’ ICT integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 97–108. DOI:

Ollila, J., & Macy, M. (2018). Social studies curriculum integration in elementary classrooms: A case study on a Pennsylvania Rural School. The Journal of Social Studies Research. DOI:

Peterson, R. A. (1994). Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article : A Meta-analysis of Cronbach ’ s Coefficient Alpha. Oxford Journals, 21(2), 381–391. DOI:

Piquero, A. R. (Ed.). (2015). The Handbook of Criminological Theory. DOI:

Rachmadtullah, R., Ms, Z., & Sumantri, M. S. (2018). Development of computer - based interactive multimedia : study on learning in elementary education. International Journal of Engineering and Technology(UAE), 7(4), 2035–2038. DOI:

Redecker, C. (2013). Changing Assessment — Towards a New Assessment Paradigm Using ICT. (February). DOI:

Reed, M. S., Evely, A. C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I., Glass, J., Laing, A., … Stringer, L. C. (2010). What is social learning? Ecology and Society, 15(4). DOI:

Rienties, B., Brouwer, N., Bohle Carbonell, K., Townsend, D., Rozendal, A. P., van der Loo, J., Lygo-Baker, S. (2013). Online training of TPACK skills of higher education scholars: A cross-institutional impact study. European Journal of Teacher Education, 36(4), 480–495. DOI:

Rosenberg, J. M., & Koehler, M. J. (2015). Context and Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): A Systematic Review. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 47(3), 186–210. DOI:

Sergis, S. E. (2014). From Teachers’ to Schools’ ICT Competence Profiles. Digital Systems for Open Access to Formal and Informal Learning, (July), 307–327. DOI:

Sumantri, M. S., Prayuningtyas, A. W., Rachmadtullah, R., & Magdalena, I. (2018). The Roles of Teacher-Training Programs and Student Teachers’ Self-Regulation in Developing Competence in Teaching Science. Advanced Science Letters, 24(10), 7077–7081. DOI:

Susanto, R., & Rachmadtullah, R. (2019). Model of pedagogic competence development: Emotional intelligence and instructional communication patterns. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 8(10), 2358–2361.

Susanto, R., Rozali, Y. A., & Agustina, N. (2019). Development of pedagogical competency models for elementary school teachers: Pedagogical knowledge, reflective ability, emotional intelligence and instructional communication pattern. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(10), 2124–2132. DOI:

Tamte, C., Enochsson, A. B., Buskqvist, U., & Kårstein, A. (2015). Educating online student teachers to master professional digital competence: The TPACK-framework goes online. Computers and Education, 84(1), 26–35. DOI:

Turgut, G., Tunga, Y., & Kisla, T. (2016). Technology Education in Preschool : An Applied Sample Lesson. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 7(1), 81–91.

Uerz, D., Volman, M., & Kral, M. (2018). Teacher educators’ competences in fostering student teachers’ proficiency in teaching and learning with technology: An overview of relevant research literature. Teaching and Teacher Education, 70, 12–23. DOI:

Wahyudin, D. (2016). A View on Teaching Philosophy in Curriculum Implementation at the Indonesia University of Education. SOSIOHUMANIKA, 9(2), 235–248.

Wang, F., Li, W., Mayer, R. E., & Liu, H. (2018). Animated pedagogical agents as aids in multimedia learning: Effects on eye-fixations during learning and learning outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(2), 250–268. DOI:

Wegerif, R., & Major, L. (2019). Buber, educational technology, and the expansion of dialogic space. AI and SOCIETY, 34(1), 109–119. DOI:

Wheelan, S. (2004). The Handbook of Group Research and Practice. New York, NY: Sage. DOI:

Widyasari, Rasmitadila, Asri Humaira, M., Rusmiati Aliyyah, R., Abdul Gaffar, A., & Rachmadtullah, R. (2019). Preliminary study on the development of blended learning (BLM) model: based on needs analysis and learning independence. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1175, 012207. DOI:

Woofter, S. (2019). [Book Review]: Building Equity: Policies and Practices to Empower All Learners. American Journal of Qualitative Research, 3(1), 136-139. DOI:

Yong, S. T., Gates, P., & Chan, A. T.-Y. (2019). Similarities and Differences in Learning of Metacognitive Skills. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 9(1), 1–14. DOI:

Yousafzai, A., Chang, V., Gani, A., & Noor, R. M. (2016). Multimedia augmented m-learning: Issues, trends and open challenges. International Journal of Information Management, 36(5). DOI:

Zare, S. (2018). Virtual Coexistence in a Persian Diasporic Weblog Community. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 5(2), 77-88. DOI:




How to Cite

Susanto, R., Rachmadtullah, R., & Rachbini, W. (2020). Technological and Pedagogical Models: Analysis of Factors and Measurement of Learning Outcomes in Education. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, 7(2), 1–14.



Original Manuscript
Received 2019-11-29
Accepted 2020-05-03
Published 2020-07-11

Most read articles by the same author(s)