Led On Line
Presentazione - About us
Novita' - What's new
Lededizioni Home Page Ricerca - Search
Catalogo - Catalogue
Per contattarci - Contacts
Per gli Autori - For the Authors
Statistiche - Statistics
Cookie Policy
Privacy Policy

The Effect of Scaffolding on Assignment Quality and Procedural Learning Achievement

Hendrikus Midun, Oswaldus Bule, Widdy H.F Rorimpandey


Some problems experienced by millennial students when they learn by online include learning control, learning disorientation, and cognitive load. This study aims to examine the effect of scaffolding use on assignment quality and procedural cognitive learning achievement in the implementation of inverted or flipped (IF) classroom strategies. This study involved students of the pre-service study program of Indonesian Catholic University of Ruteng. The total research subjects were 78 students. They were divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group is assisted by scaffolding, while the control group without scaffolding. The study design used a pretest-posttest experimental control group design and data collection using questionnaires and tests. Data analysis using multivariate analysis (MANOVA). The results showed that the use of scaffolding increased the effectiveness of implementing IF classroom strategies on student assignment quality and procedural learning achievement. The implications of the research for future study and learning practices can be explained.


Assignment quality; Inverted classroom; Procedure learning achievement; Quantitative research; Scaffolding.

Full Text:



Anderson, O. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assesing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objective. New York: Logman.

Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition: Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33, 367-379.


Bannert, M. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning through prompts. Zeitschrift Fur Padagogische Psychologie, 23(2), 139-145.


Belland, R. B. (2014). Scaffolding: Defenition, current debate, and future direction. In M. J. Spector, D. M. Merrill, J. Elen, & J. M. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4h ed., pp. 505-518). New York: Springer.


Butz, N. T., Stupnisky, R. H., & Pekrun, R. (2015). Students’ emotions for achievement and technology use in synchronous hybrid graduate programmes: A control-value approach (original research article). Research in Learning Technology, 23, 1-16.


Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cruzado, I., & Román, M. E. (2015). Inverted classroom and its influence on students’ attitudes across learning styles. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2480, 38-44.


Davis, C. (2013). Flipped or inverted learning: Strategies for course design. In E. Smyth & J. Volker (Eds.), Enhancing instruction with visual media: Utilizing video and lecture capture (pp. 241-265). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.



Foster, G., & Stagl, S. (2018). Design, implementation, and evaluation of an inverted (flipped) classroom model economics for sustainable education course. Journal of Cleaner Production, 183, 1323-1336.


Gannod, G. C., Burge, J. E., & Helmick, T. M. (2008). Using the inverted classroom to teach software engineering. In ICSE 2008 Preceedings of the 30th International Conferences on Software Engineering (pp. 777-786), Leipzig (Germany), 10-18 May.


Hsieh, T.-C., Lee, M.-C., & Su, C.-Y. (2013). Designing and implementing a personalized remedial learning system for enhancing the programming learning. Educational Technology & Society, 16(4), 32-46.

Huang, K. (2019). Design and investigation of cooperative, scaffolded wiki learning activities in an online graduate-level course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1-18.


Ige, O. (2019). Using action learning, concept-mapping, and value clarification to improve students’ attainment in ict concepts in social studies: The case of rural learning ecologies. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 10(1), 301-322.

Kalyuga, S. (2009). Cognitive load theory. In S. Kalyuga (Ed.), Managing cognitive load in adaptive multimedia learning (pp. 34-57). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.


Lu, J., Lajoie, P. S., & Wiseman, J. (2010). Scaffolding problem-based learning with CSCL tools. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 283-298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-010-9092-6

Mason, G. S., Shuman, T. R., & Cook, K. E. (2013). Comparing the effectiveness of an inverted classroom to a traditional classroom in an upper-division engineering course. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(4), 430-435.


Molenaar, I., van Boxtel, C. A. M., & Sleegers, P. J. C. (2011). Metacognitive scaffolding in an innovative learning arrangement. Instructional Science, 39, 785-801.


Morris, R., Hadwin, A. F., Gress, C. L. Z., Miller, M., Fior, M., Church, H., & Winne, P. H. (2010). Designing roles, scripts, and prompts to support CSCL in study. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 815-824.


Müller, N. M., & Seufert, T. (2018). Effects of self-regulation prompts in hypermedia learning on learning performance and self-efficacy. The Journal of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), 58, 1-11.


Noteborn, G. C. M., & García, G. E. (2016). Turning MOOCs around: Increasing undergraduate academic performance by reducing test-anxiety in a flipped classroom setting. Emotions, Technology, and Learning, 3-24.


O’Reilly, M. (2015). The influence of emotions, attitudes and perceptions on learning with technology. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1), 27763. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.27763

Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

Reigeluth, C. M., Beatty, B. J., & Myers, R. D. (2017). Instructional-design theories and models, Vol. 4: Historicity the learner-centered paradigm of education. New York - London: Routledge.



Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students’ mathematics learning. Education Technology Research Development, 58(4), 399-419.


Schlingensiepen, J. (2014). Innovation in distance, e- and blended learning in education mass production using Inverted Classroom Model (ICM). Procedia – Social and Behavioral Science, 140, 393-398.


Simons, K. D., & Klein, J. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 41-72.


Strayer, J. F. (2012). How learning in an inverted classroom influences cooperation, innovation, and task orientation. Learning Environ Research, 15(2), 171-193.


Sung, Y.-T., Chang, K.-E., & Liu, T.-C. (2015). The effects of integrating mobile devices with teaching and learning on students’ learning performance: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. Computers & Education, 94, 252-275.


Thomas, J. S., & Philpot, T. A. (2012). An inverted teaching model for a mechanics of materials course. In Proceedings of the 119th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, San Antonio (TX), June. American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE).

Tuckman, B. W. (1999). Conducting educational research (5th ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Collage Publisher.

Valencia-Arias, A., Cano, L. D., & Arango-Botero, D. (2019). Trends in the m-learning subject area over a 15-year period (2002-2017) using scopus. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 77(1), 292-306.


Willingham, D. B., Nissen, M. J., & Bullemer, P. (1989). On the development of procedural knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15(6), 1047-1060.


Zimmerman, B., Bonner, S., & Kovach, R. (2002). Developing self-regulated learners: Beyond achievement to self-efficacy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Zulu, E., Haupt, T., & Tramontin, V. (2018). Cognitive loading due to self-directed learning, complex questions and tasks in the zone of proximal development of students. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(6), 864-880.


DOI: https://doi.org/10.7358/ecps-2020-022-midu

Copyright (©) 2020 Hendrikus Midun, Oswaldus Bule, Widdy H.F Rorimpandey – Editorial format and Graphical layout: copyright (©) LED Edizioni Universitarie

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.


Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies (ECPS)
Registered by Tribunale di Milano (19/05/2010 n. 278)
Online ISSN 2037-7924 - Print ISSN 2037-7932

Research Laboratory on Didactics and Evaluation - Department of Education - "Roma Tre" University

Executive Editor: Gaetano Domenici - Associate Executive Editor & Managing  Editor: Valeria Biasci
Editorial Board: Eleftheria Argyropoulou - Massimo Baldacci - Joao Barroso - Richard Bates - Christofer Bezzina - Paolo Bonaiuto - Lucia Boncori - Pietro Boscolo - Sara Bubb  - Carlo Felice Casula - Jean-Émile Charlier - Lucia Chiappetta Cajola - Carmela Covato - Jean-Louis Derouet - Peter Early - Franco Frabboni - Constance Katz - James Levin - Pietro Lucisano  - Roberto Maragliano - Romuald Normand - Michael Osborne - Donatella Palomba - Michele Pellerey - Clotilde Pontecorvo - Vitaly V. Rubtzov - Jaap Scheerens - Noah W. Sobe - Francesco Susi - Giuseppe Spadafora - Pat Thomson
Editorial Staff: Fabio Alivernini - Guido Benvenuto - Anna Maria Ciraci - Massimiliano Fiorucci - Luca Mallia - Massimo Margottini - Giovanni Moretti - Carla Roverselli 
Editorial Secretary:
Nazarena Patrizi 

Referee List

© 2001 LED Edizioni Universitarie di Lettere Economia Diritto