Pembelajaran Virtual dalam Perspektif Teori Behaviorisme, Kognitivisme, dan Konstruktivisme Virtual Learning from the Perspectives of Behaviorism, Cognitivism, and Constructivism Theories

Main Article Content


Abstract

Virtual learning enables students to participate in learning activities online without face-to-face meetings with teachers in the classroom. Its implementation requires an appropriate foundation in learning theory to align instructional strategies with the intended objectives. This study aims to examine the concept and characteristics of virtual learning, analyze the application of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, and explain the implications of integrating these three theories into virtual learning. The study employed a qualitative approach through a literature review using descriptive-critical analysis and conceptual synthesis. The review findings showed that behaviorism emphasizes practice, reinforcement, and feedback; cognitivism focuses on information processing and conceptual understanding; and constructivism emphasizes experience, interaction, and problem solving. The synthesis yielded a conceptual matrix linking the three theories to learning objectives, learning activities, interaction, feedback, and assessment. The review concludes that the three theories can be used in complementary ways according to learning needs. The study contributes a conceptual framework that helps educators select and align virtual learning strategies with learning objectives and learner characteristics.

Keywords:
Download Full-Text PDF Direct PDF file • 12598.pdf

Share Article:

Citation Metrics:

Scopus

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles

Citation data unavailable from the configured source
Check Secondary Documents in Scopus
Open this article in Scopus, then check the Secondary documents tab. Use Manual Citation Fallback only for counts you have verified manually.
Open in Scopus
Similar Scopus Articles
Scopus
  1. Huo Z. (2027)
    Triboelectric E-Skin Patch Decoding Silent Speech for Advanced Human–Machine Interaction and Augmented Virtual Communication
    Nano Micro Letters, 19(1)
  2. Cocco E. (2027)
    Understanding situational fear of crime in context: a virtual reality interview approach to studying victimization avoidance strategies in nocturnal urban spaces
    Security Journal, 40(1)
  3. Azhand A. (2027)
    Teaching Persian derivational affixes to non-Persian speakers from a Cognitive Morphology Approach: A case study of nominal suffixes (kar, gar, ban, baz, -ande)
    Language Related Research, 17(4), 469-497

Article Details

How to Cite
Danial. (2026). Pembelajaran Virtual dalam Perspektif Teori Behaviorisme, Kognitivisme, dan Konstruktivisme. YASIN, 6(6), 7976-7989. https://doi.org/10.58578/yasin.v6i6.12598

References

Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed., pp. 15–44). Athabasca University Press. https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781897425084.003

Amaliah, M., Setiadi, K., & Martha, D. (2026). Integration of learning theories and technology in online learning: Empirical approaches and instructional design. Indonesian Journal of Education Technology, 3(1), 36–42. https://idjet.fkip.unila.ac.id/v2/article/view/25

Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., van Ginkel, S., Macfadyen, L. P., & Biemans, H. J. A. (2022). A systematic review of the role of learning analytics in enhancing feedback practices in higher education. Educational Research Review, 37, Article 100489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100489

Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x

Cai, Z., Gui, Y., Mao, P., Wang, Z., Hao, X., Fan, X., & Tai, R. H. (2023). The effect of feedback on academic achievement in technology-rich learning environments (TREs): A meta-analytic review. Educational Research Review, 39, Article 100521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100521

Cavalcanti, A. P., Barbosa, A., Carvalho, R., Freitas, F., Tsai, Y.-S., Gašević, D., & Mello, R. F. (2021). Automatic feedback in online learning environments: A systematic literature review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, Article 100027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100027

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Heikkinen, S., Saqr, M., Malmberg, J., & Tedre, M. (2023). Supporting self-regulated learning with learning analytics interventions – A systematic literature review. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 3059–3088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11281-4

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020, March 27). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning

Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687

Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, Article 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009

Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., & Baki, M. (2013). The effectiveness of online and blended learning: A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Teachers College Record, 115(3), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500307

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0043158

Moore, J. L., Dickson-Deane, C., & Galyen, K. (2011). E-learning, online learning, and distance learning environments: Are they the same? The Internet and Higher Education, 14(2), 129–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.10.001

Mutlu-Bayraktar, D., Cosgun, V., & Altan, T. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning environments: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 141, Article 103618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103618

Oyarzun, B., & Martin, F. (2023). A systematic review of research on online learner collaboration from 2012–21: Collaboration technologies, design, facilitation, and outcomes. Online Learning, 27(1), 71–106. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i1.3407

Pannen, P. (1999). Pengertian Sistem Pendidikan Terbuka dan Jarak Jauh. Universitas Terbuka.

Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.

Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., Guàrdia, L., & Koole, M. (2020). Online university teaching during and after the COVID-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education, 2, 923–945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y

Sadaf, A., Wu, T., & Martin, F. (2021). Cognitive presence in online learning: A systematic review of empirical research from 2000 to 2019. Computers and Education Open, 2, Article 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeo.2021.100050

Safarifard, R., Lavasani, M. G., Hejazi, E., & Narenji Thani, F. (2024). Pedagogical aspect of e-learning in higher education: A systematic literature review. Knowledge Management & E-Learning, 16(3), 521–546. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2024.16.024

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Macmillan.

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, 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7

Sweller, J., & Sweller, S. (2006). Natural information processing systems. Evolutionary Psychology, 4(1), 434–458. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470490600400135

Taghizadeh Kerman, N., Banihashem, S. K., Karami, M., Er, E., van Ginkel, S., & Noroozi, O. (2024). Online peer feedback in higher education: A synthesis of the literature. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 763–813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12273-8

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.