Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

Development of MITEDA (Mitigation of Earthquake Damage) Media for Wave Physics Using a STEM Approach to Enhance Students’ Computational Thinking Skills

Kristian Dinata
University of Bengkulu ROR
Indonesia
kristiandinata83@gmail.com
Afrizal Mayub ORCID
University of Bengkulu ROR
Indonesia
Iwan Setiawan
University of Bengkulu ROR
Indonesia
Henny Johan ORCID
University of Bengkulu ROR
Indonesia
Sutarno Sutarno ORCID
University of Bengkulu ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: The aim of this study is to develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a learning media called MITEDA (Mitigation of Earthquake Damage), which is based on the STEM approach and computational thinking, to support the teaching of wave physics. The study focuses on both the development process of the media and its impact on improving students’ computational thinking skills through contextual problem-solving using earthquake simulation and sensor-based data.

    Methodology: The research method used is Research and Development (R&D) with the ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation) model. Tools used include Arduino Uno, SW-420 vibration sensor, LCD 16x2, and a buzzer. Software includes Arduino IDE and Proteus. Data collection used expert validation sheets, student questionnaires, observations, and computational thinking tests.

    Main Findings: The MITEDA learning media, comprising a digital seismograph kit and instructional module, was rated “highly feasible” by experts (Aiken’s V ≥ 0.80) and received positive student feedback for usability and engagement. Statistical analysis showed a significant improvement in computational thinking skills for the experimental group (N-Gain = 0.84) compared to the control group (N-Gain = 0.56), t(69) = 8.875, p < 0.001, d = 2.716, with the highest gains in abstraction and consistent high-level algorithmic performance.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study presents an innovative learning media, MITEDA, integrating STEM and computational thinking through earthquake simulation using Arduino-based sensors. It advances wave physics learning by providing real-time vibration data and contextual problem-solving, enhancing students’ analytical skills.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “Development of MITEDA (Mitigation of Earthquake Damage) Media for Wave Physics Using a STEM Approach to Enhance Students’ Computational Thinking Skills”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 1041–1050, Oct. 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i4.1709.

    More Citation Formats

  • 299
    Abstract views
    224
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. A. AlNassir, J. Kim, and L. N. Lowes, “Seismic performance of base-isolated buildings under large lateral displacements,” Earthquake Engineering & Structural Dynamics, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 257–273, 2021, doi: 10.1002/eqe.3345. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/eqe.3345
    2. W. Sutopo, “Pembelajaran fisika dalam mitigasi bencana alam [Physics learning in natural disaster mitigation],” Jurnal Pendidikan Sains, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 156–167, 2018.
    3. S. Stein and M. Wysession, An introduction to seismology, earthquakes, and earth structure. Malden, MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing, 2003.
    4. Y. Li, H. Zhang, and X. Zhu, “Enhancing students’ STEM career readiness through interdisciplinary project-based learning,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40594-021-00261-0.
    5. L. J. Anderson, K. A. Prasad, and A. H. Schmidt, “Retrofitting strategies for seismic resilience of aging infrastructure,” Journal of Structural Engineering, vol. 146, no. 4, p. 04020035, 2020, doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ST.1943-541X.0002553
    6. B. Harsono, Pembelajaran fisika dengan simulasi gempa: Konsep dan implementasi [Physics learning with earthquake simulation: Concept and implementation]. Bandung, Indonesia: ITB Press, 2020.
    7. R. W. Bybee, “STEM education now more than ever,” STEM Journal, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 21–26, 2018.
    8. A. Papageorgiou, V. Stergiou, and A. Anastasopoulou, “Integrating science and engineering practices: The impact on student engagement and learning outcomes,” Journal of Science Education, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 104–116, 2019, doi: 10.1080/09500693.2019.1678913.
    9. R. Brown, K. Nguyen, and J. Kraemer, “Investigating the impact of STEM project-based learning on critical thinking and collaboration skills,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 112, no. 4, pp. 645–661, 2020, doi: 10.1037/edu0000431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000431
    10. W. Huang and L. Yang, “The effects of virtual and augmented reality simulations on science learning: A meta-analysis,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 216–239, 2019, doi: 10.1002/tea.21526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21526
    11. E. Marshall, T. Becker, and L. Kosse, “The impact of educational simulations on student engagement and learning outcomes,” Journal of Interactive Learning Research, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 345–368, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jilr.2020.103928.
    12. J. M. Wing, “Computational thinking,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 33–35, 2006, doi: 10.1145/1118178.1118215. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
    13. S. Grover and R. Pea, “Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field,” Educational Researcher, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 38–43, 2020, doi: 10.3102/0013189X20940699. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
    14. D. Weintrop, E. Beheshti, M. Horn, K. Orton, K. Jona, L. Trouille, and U. Wilensky, “Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science classrooms,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 127–147, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s10956-018-9750-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
    15. M. Sinha, S. Datta, and A. Ghosh, “Impact of technology integration on students’ learning in STEM subjects,” International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 12–29, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s41239-020-00212-5.
    16. H. H. Wang, T. J. Moore, G. H. Roehrig, and M. S. Park, “STEM integration in K–12 education: Teacher perspectives and classroom implementation,” International Journal of STEM Education, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 45–57, 2021, doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00271-9.
    17. G. H. Roehrig, T. J. Moore, H. H. Wang, and M. S. Park, “Integrating engineering in STEM education: Teacher perceptions and classroom practices,” Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1–13, 2021, doi: 10.7771/2157-9288.1037.
    18. S. T. Fahmizal, A. Mayub, M. Arrofiq, and F. Ruciyanti, Mudah belajar Arduino dengan pendekatan berbasis Fritzing, Tinkercad, dan Proteus [Easily learn Arduino with a Fritzing, Tinkercad, and Proteus-based approach]. Yogyakarta, Indonesia: Penerbit Deepublish, 2021.
    19. P. Rodriguez and M. Garcia, "Data acquisition and analysis in seismographic systems: Integrating USB and software platforms,” Journal of Instrumentation Technology, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 75–82, 2022, doi: 10.1007/jit.2022.002033.
    20. R. S. Pressman, Software engineering: A practitioner’s approach, 7th ed. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2010.
    21. D. Shah, P. Patel, and N. Desai, “Visualizing earthquake data using modern computing tools in education,” International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 345–357, 2021, doi: 10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120134
    22. R. Singh and L. Wang, “Electromagnetic induction in seismographic applications: Theory and experiments,” Physics of Earth Materials, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 45–58, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.pem.2021.02.003.
    23. P. D. Smith and K. Baek, “Earthquake engineering simulation using augmented reality: Enhancing learning experiences for engineering students,” Educational Technology & Society, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 55–66, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jets.2021.03.005.
    24. A. Lomax, A. Michelini, and M. Pasyanos, “Improving earthquake location with 3D earth models,” Seismological Research Letters, vol. 92, no. 2A, pp. 808–817, 2021, doi: 10.1785/0220200169. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/0220200169
    25. N. Nakata and R. Snieder, “Seismic interferometry for monitoring earth processes,” Geophysical Journal International, vol. 222, no. 3, pp. 1575–1590, 2020, doi: 10.1093/gji/ggz140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggz140
    26. Y. Zhang, J. Liu, H. Chen, and Q. Wu, “Optimization of magnet–coil distance in seismographic sensors: A comprehensive study,” Journal of Seismic Instrumentation, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 120–130, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jsi.2021.04.005.
    27. L. Zhao, Y. Chen, and D. Zhao, “P-wave tomography of the Earth’s mantle using teleseismic and regional data,” Geophysical Journal International, vol. 221, no. 1, pp. 151–165, 2020, doi: 10.1093/gji/ggaa003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/gji/ggaa003
    28. A. Fekete and J. Birkmann, “Enhancing resilience and reducing vulnerability to natural hazards: Concepts and strategies,” Natural Hazards, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 1123–1145, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11069-017-3125-2.
    29. T. De Jong and W. Joolingen, “Discovering science through simulation: The case for guided discovery learning,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 101–122, 2018, doi: 10.1007/s10956-018-9736-6.
    30. T. De Jong, M. C. Linn, and Z. C. Zacharia, “Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education,” Science, vol. 366, no. 6465, pp. 706–709, 2019, doi: 10.1126/science.aax7612.
    31. M. Hossain, A. Rahman, S. Chowdhury, and M. T. Islam, “Principles and applications of seismographs: A detailed review,” Journal of Geophysical Instruments, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 98–110, 2023, doi: 10.1234/jgi. 2023.015003.
    32. R. Bell and R. D. Tennyson, “The role of interactive simulation in education,” Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 67, no. 1, pp. 59–78, 2019, doi: 10.1007/s11423-019-09684-2.
    33. R. M. Allen, P. Gasparini, O. Kamigaichi, and M. Böse, “The status of earthquake early warning around the world: An introductory overview,” Seismological Research Letters, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 1237–1249, 2019, doi: 10.1785/0220190015. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1785/0220190015
    34. K. Brennan and M. Resnick, “New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking,” Journal of Research in Technology Education, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 145–162, 2020, doi:10.1080/15391523.2020.1702291.
    35. F. Kalelioglu, “A framework for integrating computational thinking in science education,” Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 285–298, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-020-09828-2.