The outbreak of the COVID-19 outbreak which resulted in a worldwide pandemic resulted in the learning process having to switch to a digital system. Digital learning systems can be applied by utilizing technological developments in the learning process, including the use of offline and online-based learning media at the same time. There are several software that can be used to develop learning media, one of which is articulate storyline 3. This study aims to develop interactive learning media using articulate storyline 3 on offline and online-based on the topic of algebraic forms. The method used in this research is the Research and Development (R & D) method with the ADDIE development model. The development stages consist of analysis, design, development, implementation, and evaluation. At the implementation stage, peer teaching was carried out as a small group trial with 12 Mathematics Education postgraduate students at the State University of Malang. The results showed that interactive learning media using articulate storyline 3 on offline and online-based algebraic forms had been successfully developed. The results of the validation test show a score of 3.4 which indicates that the media that has been made is valid, while the practicality test shows a score of 3.8 which implies that the media is included in the practical level. However, this research is only limited to the introduction of algebraic forms and only assesses the validity and practicality of the media. Therefore, in further research, the material should be expanded to the operation of algebraic forms and examine the effectiveness of learning media.

1.
H.
Baber
,
Int. J. Manag. Educ.
,
19
(
2
),
100503
(
2021
).
2.
B.
Williamson
,
R.
Eynon
, and
J.
Potter
,
Learn. Media Technol.
,
45
(
2
),
107
114
(
2020
).
3.
J. L.
Moore
,
C.
Dickson-Deane
, and
K.
Galyen
,
Internet High. Educ.
,
14
(
2
),
129
135
(
2011
).
4.
Y.
Pujilestari
,
Adalah
,
4
(
1
),
49
56
, (
2020
).
5.
S.
Seufert
,
J.
Guggemos
, and
M.
Sailer
,
Comput. Human Behav.
,
115
(August
2020
),
106552
(2021).
6.
A.
Ouajdouni
,
K.
Chafik
, and
O.
Boubker
,
Data Br.
,
35
, (
2021
).
7.
A.-P.
Pavel
,
A.
Fruth
, and
M.-N.
Neacsu
,
Procedia Econ. Financ.
,
23
(October
2014
),
704
711
(2015).
8.
S. F.
Shetu
,
M.
Rahman
,
A.
Ahmed
,
M. F.
Mahin
,
A. U.
Akib
, and
M.
Saifuzzaman
,
Curr. Res. Behav. Sci.
,
2
(March),
100038
, (
2021
).
9.
T.
Ando
,
K.
Yamamoto-Hanada
,
M.
Nagao
,
T.
Fujisawa
, and
Y.
Ohya
,
J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.
,
137
(
2
),
AB157
(
2016
).
10.
H.
Baber
,
J. Educ. e-Learning Res.
,
7
(
3
),
285
292
(
2020
).
11.
M.
Kang
and
T.
Im
,
J. Comput. Assist. Learn.
,
29
(
3
),
292
301
(
2013
).
12.
W.
Hartanto
,
J. Pendidik. Ekon.
,
10
(
1
),
1
18
(
2016
).
13.
Rusman
,
Pembelajaran Tematik Terpadu : Teori, Praktik dan Penilaian
. (
PT Raja Grafindo Persada
,
Jakarta
,
2015
).
14.
R. E.
Mayer
,
Contemp. Educ. Psychol.
,
60
,
101824
(
2020
).
15.
N.
Apriyanti
,
R.
Razak
,
S.
Shaharom
,
S.
Rahim
, and
S.
Halili
,
Malaysian Online J. Educ. Technol.
,
8
(
1
),
48
62
(
2020
).
16.
M.
Öztürk
,
Think. Ski. Creat.
,
39
(September 2020), (
2021
).
17.
C. A.
Barbieri
and
D.
Miller-Cotto
,
Learn. Individ. Differ.
,
87
(June
2020
),
101993
(2021).
18.
S. R.
Powell
,
J. K.
Gilbert
, and
L. S.
Fuchs
,
Learn. Individ. Differ.
,
74
(June),
101758
(
2019
).
19.
T. M.
Galanti
,
J. Math. Behav.
,
62
(June
2019
),
100860
(2021).
20.
Sugiyono
,
Metode Penelitian Pendidikan, Pendekatan Kuantitatif, Kualitatif Dan R&D
. (
Alfabeta
,
Bandung
,
2016
).
21.
R.
Likert
,
Arch. Psychol.
, (
1932
).
22.
A.
Qohar
,
S. H.
Nasution
,
S.
Wahyuningsih
, and
U. N.
Malang
,
Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol.
,
15
(
09
),
52
69
(
2021
).
23.
V.
Mitropoulou
and
N.
Argyropoulos
,
EdMedia+Innovate Learn.
,
3
(April
2017
),
171
(2020).
24.
L. Y.
Sari
and
D.
Susanti
,
J. Chem. Inf. Model.
,
53
(
9
),
1689
1699
, (
2013
).
25.
J.
Hense
and
H.
Mandl
, “
Learning in or with games? Quality criteria for digital learning games from the perspectives of learning, emotion, and motivation theory
,” (
2012
).
26.
J.
Niederriter
et al,
J. Interprofessional Educ. Pract.
,
19
(December
2019
)
100322
(2020).
27.
H.
Gaspard
et al,
Dev. Psychol.
,
51
(
9
),
1226
1240
(
2015
).
28.
H.
Piesch
,
H.
Gaspard
,
C.
Parrisius
,
E.
Wille
, and
B.
Nagengast
,
J. Appl. Dev. Psychol.
,
71
(May 20190,
101185
(
2020
).
29.
D. J. D.
Shin
et al,
Learn. Instr.
,
60
(February
2018
),
104
116
(2019).
30.
C. S.
Hulleman
,
J. J.
Kosovich
,
K. E.
Baron
, and
D. B.
Daniel
,
J. Educ. Psychol.
,
109
(
3
),
387
(
2017
).
31.
R. E.
Mayer
,
Psychol. Learn. Motiv.-Adv. Res. Theory
,
41
,
85
139
(
2002
).
32.
L.
Nutov
,
Teach. Teach. Educ.
,
97
,
103218
(
2021
).
33.
R. A.
Liono
,
N.
Amanda
,
A.
Pratiwi
, and
A. A. S.
Gunawan
,
Procedia Comput. Sci.
,
179
,
144
152
(
2021
).
34.
A.
Bikner-Ahsbahs
,
C.
Knipping
and
N.
Presmeg
,
Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education: examples of methodology and methods
, (
2015
).
35.
M.
¨Oztürk
and
I.
Sarikaya
,
Think Skil Creat
,
40
(February),
100843
(
2021
).
36.
I. N.
Sanit
,
S.
Subanji
, and
I. M.
Sulandra
, “
Profil Penalaran Aljabaris Siswa dalam Memecahkan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Adversity Quotient
,”
J. Pendidik.
, vol.
4
, no.
9
, pp.
1213
1221
2019
.
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.