87 blended learning and practice more from one semester to the next semester, so
every community member of ELESP could operate it well. Third, ELESP lecturers should be able to operate the technology. For
example, ELESP provided a workshop for the lecturers to learn more about the technology, or the lecturers could learn more about the computer. Therefore, the
lecturers had already had the skills which were needed to implement the blended learning approach in the future.
Those suggestions were from the participants which had been categorized into three categories. All of these suggestions could be used for two parties. First,
it could be used by the lecturers who had implemented the blended learning and they wanted to improve this approach. Second, it could be used by the lecturers
who had not implemented the blended learning yet. Therefore these suggestions would be their guidelines to implement the blended learning in the future. All of
these suggestions were from the participants‟ answers in their open-ended
questionnaire.
88
CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This chapter consists of two subchapters, namely the conclusions and recommendations. The first section, the researcher summarizes the result of the
findings. In the second section, the researcher gives some recommendations which can be useful to some parties, such as ELESP, lecturers, and also future
researchers.
A. Conclusions
In the last chapter of this research, the researcher presented some conclusions based on the result of this research. There were two research
questions in this research: 1 What is the ELESP co mmunity members’
perception of blended learning in Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta? 2 What are the ELESP community mem
bers’ suggestions to improve this approach in Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta? There were also two research
objectives here. First, the researcher wanted to discover the ELESP community members’ perception of blended learning in Sanata Dharma University
Yogyakarta. Second, the researcher provided the suggestions from ELESP community members to improve the approach in Sanata Dharma University
Yogyakarta. In the first research question, the researcher found that ELESP community
members had a positive perception. The data showed the mean for the first
89 category was 3.9 and the second category was 3.5. These data were gotten by
calculating the questionnaire results on these categories and these means were 3.4. The researcher used the mean of each category to show the readers that the
participants had already had the positive perception. The researcher also explained the statements from the questionnaire results
to support the positive perception which were already gotten in these two categories. Th
e participants’ answers showed that they had good responses. From these good responses, the researcher knew that the participants had the positive
perception. First, the researcher tried to discover the participants’ answer to the first
category, the further information about blended learning. In this category, the participants had good response to the computer and internet literacy. Then they
also had the good background knowledge of blended learning, the advantages, and the disadvantages of blended learning. When the statements about the
disadvantage of blended learning were given to the participants, there were two statements which they did not know, i.e., blended learning made the confusion
and frustration. Second, the researcher also tried to discover the
participants’ answer to the second category, the blended learning implementation in ELESP. In this category,
they had a good experience of blended learning. Next, the researcher also re-used the advantages and disadvantages which had been used in the first category. The
results, the participants experienced all these advantages, i.e., the blended learning made the learning easier, blended learning gave independence to them, blended
90 learning gave the participants the advanced learning, and the participants got the
flexibility. From the four disadvantages, the participants experienced one disadvantage, namely blended learning was related to the limited Internet access.
The other disadvantages which were posted in the questionnaire i.e., blended learning created the confusion, blended learning reduced the social interaction,
and blended learning had more assignments were not faced by the participants in ELESP.
When the statements about the higher education blended learning models were given to the participants, they only agreed to do the online quizzes and got
the learning materials resources everywhere. They disagreed if blended learning reduced the face-to-face meetings. It meant that the participants did not want if the
online learning would be the main resource in ELESP. For the personal evaluation on blended learning, the participants were happy and interested in learning with
the blended learning approach. They also thought that blended learning in ELESP was useful. Therefore, blended learning could be applied in all courses or it could
be improved to be better in the future. For the second research question, the researcher knew that the face-to-face
interaction was still important for the participants this time. Yet, they gave some suggestions to help improving a better blended learning in the future. There were
three categories of suggestion namely, facilities, innovation, and human resources.
91
B. Recommendations
There are some recommendations for ELESP, lecturers, and future
researchers. 1.
ELESP
If blended learning is important in supporting the learning and teaching approach, it should be implemented in all courses because the participants are not
familiar to the term of blended learning. Improving the blended learning facilities can be done right now i.e., making the fast Internet connection, and providing
more computers. Then improving the innovation of blended learning also important in attracting the students’ attention, i.e., designing a better blended
learning, updating the materials, and maintaining the blended learning. 2.
ELESP Lecturers
As ELESP lecturers, they need to improve some aspects, i.e., giving the clear instruction in blended learning, implementing the blended learning, and
learning more about the technology. These recommendations are also gotten by the participants’ suggestions. Hopefully, these suggestions are beneficial to the
lecturers in improving and developing a better blended learning in the future.
3. Future Researchers
The future researcher can expand more on it in other areas. They can also use the triangulation data to get the deeper research on blended learning.
Hopefully, this thesis gives the future researcher enough information that is
needed to conduct the next research.
92
REFERENCES
Anderson, P., Morgan, G. 2008. Developing tests and questionnaires for a
national assessment of educational achievement. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C., Razavieh, A. 2010. Introduction to research in education 8
th
ed.. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Bailey, J., Ellis, S., Schneider, C., Ark, T. V. 2013. Blended learning implementation guide. Retrieved on March 27
th
, 2014, from http:digitallearningnow.comsiteuploads201302DLNSmartSeries-
BL-paper_2012-02-05a.pdf
Djaali Muljono, P. 2007. Pengkuran dalam bidang pendidikan. Jakarta: PT. Grasindo.
Elfurqaan, Z. 2014. Blended language learning untuk optimalisasi pembelajaran bahasa Inggris tingkat perguruan tinggi di universitas indonesia.
Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pengajaran Bahasa dalam Perspektif Lintas Budaya.
Retrieved on
April 1
st
, 2015,
from https:www.academia.edu7920605Blended_Language_Learning_untuk
_Optimalisasi_Pembelajaran_Bahasa_Inggris_Tingkat_Perguruan_Tingg i_di_Universitas_Indonesia
Gillham, B. 2007. Developing a questionnaire 2
nd
ed. New York: AC Black. Jeffrey, L. M., Milne, J., Suddaby, G. 2014. Blended learning: How teachers
balance the blend of online and classroom components. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13, 121-140. Retrieved on
April 19
th
, 2015,
from http:www.jite.orgdocumentsVol13JITEv13ResearchP121-
140Jeffrey0460.pdf
Johnson, B., Christensen, L. 2012. Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches 4
th
ed.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Johnson, B., Christensen, L. 2014. Educational research: Quantitative,
qualitative, and mixed approaches 5
th
ed.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
