MOBILE SPATIAL LEARNING DEVELOPMENT AND ITS EFFECT
TO CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS
Budi Handoyo1, Hadi Soekamto2, I Komang Astina3
Social Faculty, Universitas Negeri Malang, Indonesia
INTRODUCTION
Nowadays geography learning enter the
new era of paradigm. In the era, learning needs to
be presented more inspirative, interactive,
challenging, fun and motivational, beside being
active, constructive, and collaborative. Spatial
Basesd learning (SBL) and mobile learning (ML)
is the two of learning model which gives an
opportunity of student to be active and
collaborative in developing their abilities and skills
by using steps of scientific approach and also
using digital devices in order to develope student’
knowledge, skills, and attitude.
SBL is a learning model has been
developing since the 1980s. In 1984 Breuker began
to develop a spatial learning model. On the
Breuker model there are six steps of learning,
namely the selection of key concepts; writing key
concepts; make a list of attributes; linking key
concepts into spatial order; rearrange spatial
representations; and compare the spatial
representation with text. Siler[1] has developed a
spatial learning that consist of a classroom floor
models and papier mache models. The model is
used to facilitate students in understanding spatial
phenomena. Geresmelh[2] also has developed
three steps on the spatial learning, namely teaching
location, circumstances, and relevance; describe
location conditions; and trace the relationship with
other locations. Handoyo[3] also completed a
spatial learning model with seven learning steps,
namely communicate learning objectives,
observation, communication and confirmation,
elaboration and Integration, discussion,
conclusions, and reflections and follow-up.
For the 21st century requiring high level of
skills, learning models need to be developed.
Because, it tends to be oriented towards
understanding facts, concepts and theories, while
the 21st century has demand to build knowledges
and skills more independently. Therefore, it is
necessary to develop a spatial learning model that
provides opportunities for students to develop their
knowledge and geographical skills. In answering
this problem, Handoyo and Purwanto
[4]developed a model of Spatial Based Learning.
The model consists of eight steps, namely spatial
orientation and mapping, problem statement and
formulation, data collection, organization of data,
data analysis, conclusions, communication, and
reflection.
Mobile learning is a learning based on
mobility often through mobile devices such as
smartphones, iPads, other tablets, and wearable
technology[5]. Heick[5] stated that mobile
learning has several principles, namely: access,
transparency, self-actuation, and metric. Mobile
learning makes it easy for students to access and
share information. By this convenience students
can be mutual share information and discuss not
only with one teacher or classmates in a
conventional class, but also can do it with a wider
range, while remaining in place through mobile
equipment.
The main characteristic of mobile device
being used for mobile learning is digital, easily
portable, usually owned and controlled by an
individual rather than institution, can access
internet, has multimedia capabilities, and can
facilitate a large number of tasks particularly those
related to communication. Hence Bob Little[6]
creates ten parts proving a mobile learning can be
used as a platform, including: (1) expands the
reach of education, (2) facilitates personalized
learning, (3) helps learners with disabilities, (4)
provides immediate feedback and assessment, (5)
enabling anywhere learning, (6) bridging a formal
and informal learning, (7) ensuring productive
classroom time, (8) supporting available learning,
(9) enhancing seamless learning, (10) minimizing
education disruption in disaster areas.
Researchs of mobile learning using a
variety of applications has been widely conducted
by experts in diverse field. Hooper[7] has initiated
to study it with the title "the use of computer-
controlled video discs in the study of spatial
learning". The research needs to be appreciated as
the work of integration between spatial learning
and mobile learning, even though it is only limited
to using computers. Around the year 2000s, the
study of mobile learning was intensified. The
works of Quinn (2000) [8] originating from
electronic learning became the main starting point
of the development of mobile learning at that time.
Along with the development of the
information technology, e-learning has developed
with smartphones which have various applications,
such as Whatsapp or Telegram, GPS Essential,
Office, Zoom, Email, Google Earth. Welsh,
Katharine E., Mauchline, Alice L., Park, Julian R.,
Whalley, W. Brian., France, Derek [9] conducted
a study related to the use of mobile equipment for
geography learning in conducting field work.
Dennouni [10] with the title “towards a
geographical orchestration of mobile learning
activities which aims to collaborate mobile
learning with geographic orchestration of
resources”. France, Derek., Whalley, W. Brian.,
Mauchline, Alice., Powell, Victoria., Welsh,
Katharine., Lerczak, Alex., Park, Julian., Bednarz,
Robert [11] also conducted a research on students”
ability to use mobile applications on smartphones
to support their fieldwork”. Then Chatel[12]
conducted a research on mobile learning in
geography education known as smartgeo. The
latest research was conducted by Turan[13] with
the title "the impact of mobile augmented reality in
geography education: achievements, cognitive
loads and views of university students".
Based on the research works above, can be
stated that the works of SBL and ML has been
developing inline with the computers technology
and informatics development in the era of 21th
century. Therefore, the SBL is able to be developed
as a platform of ML. SBL is able to be a systematic
learning framework with its steps to construct
students' knowledges and skills. Meanwhile, ML
can operationalize the SBL steps with diverse
applications in Smartphones, iPads, other tablets,
and wearable technology. So, learning can broaden
students' access to aquire resources, open for
everyone, and provide opportunities for each
individual to develop it, and make students easy to
access and exchange information. Learning will
make students happier and happier in learning to
build their competencies to be better.
Before developing SBL as a platform of
mobile learning, there is a Spatial Digital Learning
(DLS) that was develoed by Bayne on the era of
2000s. DLS is the result of combining multiple
learning. DLS is a mobile tool in conventional
learning to study space. Accordance with Sarrab
(2012)[14] “For working online as teachers and
learners, we are working in ‘destabilized’
classrooms, engaging in practices that are
disquieting, disorienting, strange, anxiety-
inducing, uncanny”. Whereas Bora & Dhumane
(2012)[15] argues that DLS is a hidden curriculum
of software. He argues that “where the knowledge
infrastructures and software required to enact
digital education have a built-in set of rules that
govern and enact particular educational practices”.
So, it can be concluded that the difference between
DLS and MSL is a using tools. DLS uses digital
tools such as wordpress, edmodo, google
document, etc to facilitate spatial learning,
whereas MSL is a learning model resulting an
integration between spatial based learning and
mobile learning.
The main idea of SBL as a platform of ML
is student’ activities physically and mentally when
learning takes place. Basically, the purpose of this
learning development is to facilitate students in
constructing their own knowledge. There are
several theories as a basic of this learning
development, namely constructivistic theory
(1999), active learning theory (2000), and
collaborative learning theory (2003). In the view of
constructivistic theory that knowledge is
constructed by its own students . Students build
their knowledge based on their experienced, so
their knowledge can stand longer than it is gained
only by reading only. Technological advances are
also influential in building student knowledge. The
development of technology makes it easier for
students to record, write, obtain and store
information that appears suddenly[16].
The active learning theory has a connection
with constructive one. Active learning theory
focuses on the activeness of students in learning
and building knowledge and responding to
information provided by teachers in class.
Cambridge argues that "active learning means that
learners take responsibility for their learning, and
teachers are enablers and activators of learning
rather than lecturers or deliverers of ideas". The
relationship between mobile learning and active
learning lies in the use of mobile devices such as
PDAs, smartphones, iPhones, and the applications
supporting as a tools for classroom learning.
Ozdamli[16] "Research on teaching and learning
center described active learning is a process that
students engage in higher-order thinking tasks,
such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Mobile
learning devices have to enrich the learning
process for learners. They are versatile and active
learning tools".
In addition to the two theories, mobile
learning is also related to the collaborative
learning. Collaborative learning is used to
construct a broader abstract knowledge by
negotiating and discussing. Thus, it is able to be
said that the role of collaborative learning theory
is ... "as well as the management of individuals
engaged in common assignments using
METHOD
This study uses two designs, namely
development research design and experiments.
The development design used a modification of
Gall Borg (2006) [17] with eight steps, namely:
Need
Planning
Analysis
Final Product Field Trial
Revision Testing
Fig.1 Reasearch Design to get Product of Mobile Spatial Learning
The development research subjects were students
of the Geography Education Lecturers and
Geography Education Study Program. Data was
collected by in-depth interviews with lecturers as
geography learning experts. Questionnaires are
given to students to give their opinions on the
learning model that they have followed. The
analysis was carried out descriptively with
percentages.
The experimental design used was the pre test
post test group design. The design of the study is
described as follows.
01 X 02
The subjects of this study were students of the
FIS Geography Education Study Program, State
University of Malang. as many as 39 students.
Data of the critical thinking skills was collected
by tests. Analysis of the data were carried out by
different tests t test.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
1. Developing a Spatial Based Learning as a
Platform Mobile Learning integratedly
In this study the Spatial Based Learning
(SBL) model was developed with Mobile Learning
(ML) integratedly. The SBL has eight steps,
namely spatial orientation and mapping, problem
statement and formulation, data collection, data
technologies, such as mobile tools, Internet etc.
The tools enable pre-service teachers to complete
working projects together even though they are not
physically in the same environment".
need analysis, planning, develop preliminary form
of product, preliminary field testing, main product
revision, playing field testing, product revision,
and the final product revision. The design of the
study is illustrated as follows.
Developing
Learning Model
Product Product
Revision Validation
organization, data analysis, conclusions,
communication, and reflection. Meanwhile, ML is
a learning based on mobility often through mobile
devices such as smartphones, iPads, other tablets,
and wearable technology[5]. Heick[5] stated that
mobile learning has several principles, namely:
access, transparency, self-actuation, and metric.
Mobile learning makes easier for students to access
and share information. By this convenience
students can be mutual share information and
discuss not only with one teacher or classmates in
a conventional class, but also can do it with a wider
range, while remaining in place through mobile
equipment. Operationally the latest applications
that is able to support the mobile learning are
Whatsapp, GPS Essential, Email, Zoom, and
Google Earth. Integrating SBL with ML produce a
new models is called Mobile Spatial Learning
(MSL). This model produces a new learning syntax
with the following description.
Digital devices
Spatial Learning
Learning Sintax Activities
sintax
 Mobile Learning
Platform
Fig.2 Conceptual Model Mobile Spatial Learning
Firstly, Spatial Orientation. This step aims
to produce data/information about
objects/phenomena that are the topic. Information
on the location of the phenomenon and its
characteristics and related factors is the center of
attention. The implementation of this step can use
digital devices, such as GPS and digital maps,
google earth, and BMKG which are features in
Smartphones, Androit, and perhaps other digital
devices that are developing in the future.
Secondly, Spatial Problem Statement. This
step aims to produce spatial problem formulations.
Thinking skills to formulate the problem is a
process to associate ideal concepts with spatial
reality become a basic framework for students in
formulating spatial problems. The implementation
of the step can use digital devices which is
evailable in Smartphones, Androit, and perhaps
other digital devices that are developing in the
future. The result of the formulation can be writen
on WPS, document, etc.
Third, Spatial Data Collection. This step
aims to produce data and or information based on
the problems formulated. Data collection can be
done by official application anywhere and
anytime. Students collect spatial data in
accordance with the results of identification and
formulation of spatial problems that have been
done. Collecting data can be obtained by
Table 1 Score of Trial of the Mobile Spatial Learning
No Steps of Learning
1 Spatial Orientation
2 Spatial Problem Statement
3 Spatial Data Collection
4 Spatial Data Organitation
5 Spatial Data Analyze
6 Conclusion
7 Communication
8 Reflection
Based on the result of the trial, the highest
score is 87,10, and the lowest score is 79,4. The
highest score of learning steps are spatial
orientation, spatial problem statement, conclusion,
conducting observations, interviews, documents,
questionnaires, tests, and others.
Forth, Spatial Data Organitation. This step
aims to produce quantitative or qualitative data
descriptions, such as tables, graphs and diagrams.
Implementation of this step can use digital tools,
such as office office at Smartphone aplication.
Fifth, Spatial Data Analyze. This step aims
to produce analysis data using certain spatial
analysis techniques, such as analysis of spatial
patterns, spatial planning, spatial processes, spatial
interactions, spatial associations, spatial
organizations, spatial trends, spatial comparisons,
and spatial synergies. For the analysis can use
several application of Smartphone or other
devices, such as WPS Office.
Sixth,Conclusion. This step aims to produce
conclusions based on spatial data analysis. The
application of this step can use digital tools, such
as office for writing the conclusion. Seventh,
Mobile Communication. This step aims to produce
presentation material and present the results of the
analysis, discussion and conclusions The
application of this step can use digital tools, such
as: zoom, google document, google reader, blogger
and demo via their smartphone.
Eighth, Reflection. This step aims to
generate feedback to improve learning practices in
achieving goals through the steps of learning that
have been implemented. Implementation of this
step can use digital tools, such as WPS Office. The
trial of the Mobile Spatial Learning (MSL) with
eight learning steps are presented in the following
table.
Frequently
Score Regard
1 2
5 34 87,10 Feasible
5 34 87,10 feasible
6 33 84,60 feasible
8 31 79,42 Feasible
8 31 79,42 feasible
5 34 87,10 feasible
5 34 87,10 feasible
5 34 87,10 feasible
comunication, and reflection. The lower score of
the learning steps are spatial data organization and
spatial data analyze. The result of the trial shows
that the overall steps of the MSL have score more
than score of the predetermined criteria. Therefore,
the all steps of MSL can be revealed feasible as a
step of learning model in geography learning.
The advantages of the eight steps of the
MSL model include: (1) Spatial Orientation can be
done quickly at the several different observation
points; (2 the problem statement that is made is
more complex because it compares several
observation locations at the same time; (3) students
can collect relevant data from various sources
without being limited, (4) organized data can be
from various file formats, (5) data analysis using
nine spatial analysis methods, (6) communication
conclusion student must not in the conventional
class. On the other hand the implications of the
MSL model on geography learning are more
interesting, efficient, broad reach, and basic
learning or bottom up. This is in line with the
findings of Boehm, Richard., Solem Michael.,
Zadrozny, Joann [18] that the geographic learning
content framework has led to a new paradigm
called Powerful Geography, which offers easy
understanding of subject matter that is quite
complex and changes the teaching and learning
process.
2. The Effect of Mobile Spatial Learning in
Increasing Critical Thinking Skill
Critical thinking skills is abilities that is
expressed by student in formulating problem,
provide argument to problems that are
formulated, doing deduction and induction, and
make alternative actions, taking decesion making,
and propose an action. The score of critical
thinking skills as a result of the pre test as
follows.
Table 2 Score Pre Test of Critical Thinking Skills
Number and %
Grade /Score
Number % A (≥85)
A (≥ 85) 0 0
A- (80-84) 0 0
B+ (75-79) 1 3
B (70-74) 0 0
B- (65-79) 6 15
C+ (60-64) 8 21
C (55-59) 8 21
C- (50-54) 4 10
D (45-49) 12 31
Sum 39 100
Table 2 shows the students critical
thinking skills before implementing MSL. The
lowest score is 45-49 or grade D as many as 31%,
and be followed by students who have score are
55-59 or grade C and score are 60-64 or grade C+
as many as 21%. The highest score is 75-79 or
grade B+ as many as 3%. The results of the pre test
showed that none of the students had a critical
thinking ability score in grade A- or A.
These results illustrate that student
critical thinking skills are still low. The low level
of critical thinking skills can occur due to several
factors. First, learning that takes place in schools
still does not teach students to think higher.
Learning is still oriented towards understanding
concepts, facts and theories, rather than training
students to think critically about facts, concepts
and theories learned. For example learning to
recognize problems and formulate them, argue
against problems that occur and formulate, learn to
do deduction and induction, and learn to develop
alternative solutions to problems and also make
decisions. Critical thinking learning is still not an
integral part of a learning system that is effectively
applied. Second, the questions in the exam have
not used high-level questions. There are several
types of examinations in schools, such as daily
exams, mid-semester tests, semester final exams,
and national examinations. The questions in the
exam are not enough to test critical thinking skills.
Meanwhile the score post test of the
students critical thinking skills after implementing
MSL as follows.
Table 3 Score Post Test of Critical Thinking
Skills
Number and %
Grade
Number %
11 28
A-(80-84) 10 26
B+(75-89) 14 36
B (70-74) 1 2
B-(65-69) 1 2
C+(60-64) 1 2
C (55-59) 1 2
C-(50-54) 0 0
D (45-49) 0 0
Sum 39 100
Table 3 shows the critical thinking skills of
students after implementing MSL. Most of the
students have score more than 75. Students who
get score is 85 (A) as many as 28%, scores between
80-84 (A-) as many as 26%, and scores between
75-79 (B+) as many as 36%. Only very litle of
students (2%) have score less than 74 or grade B.
The results of the post test indicate that the Mobile
Spatial Learning (MSL) can improve student
learning outcomes. The average score of pre test is
53 and tehe average score of post tes is 79.
The result of the different test analysis
shows that Sig = 0,000. It illustrate a significant
difference between the average pre-test score and
the average post-test score. Thus, it can be stated
that the Mobile Spatial Learning (MSL) model has
a significant effect on critical thinking. The
increase in the form of the score is presented at the
following graph.
Comparation Pre Test and Post
Test
100
Value
50
79
53
0 learning model or inqury based learning (Birgili,
Pre-test post-test
Fig.3 Comparation Score of Critical Thinking Skills Pre
test dan Post test
Figure 3 shows that the average pre-test
score is 53, and the post-test average score is 79.
Based on the result can be stated that MSL is able
to improve student critical thinking skills up to 26
points. The results of this study indicate that MSL
is worthy of being used as a learning model and its
application can improve critical thinking skills.
Improving critical thinking skills can occur
because of two reasons. First, in the
implementation of MSL, students are involved in
recognizing problems, formulating problems, and
giving arguments to the problems they formulate.
The activity is carried out by observing natural or
social phenomena as the object of study in the
field. In this observation use GPS applications and
Google Earth. The involvement of students in this
activities make them more skilled in formulating
problems and giving their arguments as indicators
of critical thinking. Second, MSL involves
students to collect data, process data, analyze data
to make a conclusion. The activity was carried out
with group discussions guided by the teacher to
process, analyze, and conclude data from the
analysis. In processing data and analyzing the data,
the WPS Office application is used Word. Student
involvement in activities makes students more
skilled in inductive and deductive thinking as
indicators of critical thinking.
Beside that, the presence of the MSL model
makes students easier to learn, because its syntax
is equipped with mobile tools. So that makes it
easier for students to understand the concepts
learned to build new knowledge. This shows that
MLS models are in accordance with contructivistic
theories. Which student knowledge is built from
his own experience. While the use of Smartphones
or tabs and supporting applications as a tool in
facilitating learning and communication refers to
collaborative theories.
Students' critical thinking skills can
increase due to observing and comparing
phenomena. Then students formulate problems
based on the results of the observation. Students
also collect information and conclude based on the
results of their analysis. That’s help students to
think critically. So that students' critical thinking
skills can increase. Commonly, critical thinking
skills can increase when using a problem-based
2015. Friedel et.al, 2008). Because the two models
have steps to observe, make problems statement,
analyze and create conclusion (Pedaste, 2015),
whereas the MSL model includes these steps.
CONCLUSION
Based on the development results and
discussion, it can be concluded that the Mobile
Spatial Learning (MSL) is feasible to be
implemented as a model of learning geography and
it can increase students critical thinking skills. The
Spatial based learning model as a platform mobile
learning produces the Mobile Spatial Learning
(MSL). Mobile Spatial Learning models have eight
models, namely: mobile spatial orientation, spatial
problem statement, mobile spatial data collection,
spatial data organitation, spatial data analyze,
conclusion, mobile communication, dan reflection.
Each step of the model can be integrated with
certain available application of the smartphone
according to its goals and characteristics. The
application of the MSL can improve the students
critical thinking skills as part of the 21st century
skills. The pre-test average score of 53 increased to
79 or increased with around 26 points. The results
of the different tests also showed that there was
significant differences between the scores before
and after MSL was used. The use of MSL has
several advantages, namey (1) students can make
observations in several locations at the same time
without having to go to the location directly, (2)
can do the learning process anywhere and anytime,
(3) not limited to where the teacher or student is in
learning, (4) the use of mobile devices and mobile
tools to facilitate learning.

REFERENCES
[1] Siler. C.R. 1998. Spatial Dynamics: An Alternative Teaching Tool in the Social Studies. ERIC Digest.
[2] Gersmehl, Phil. 2008. Teaching Geografi. New York: Gulford Press
[3] Handoyo, Budi. 2011. Pembelajaran Spasial. Jurnal Penelitian. Lembaga Penelitian Universitas Negeri
Malang.
[4] Handoyo, Budi., & Purwanto. 2017. Pembelajaran Berbasis Spasial dan Implementasinya: Inovasi
Pembelajaran. Malang: UM Press
[5] Heick, Terry. 2018. The Definition Of Mobile Learning: A Mobile Learning Triangle.Online, available at
https://www.teachthought.com/the-future-of-learning/a-definition-for-mobile-learning/
[6] Little, Bob. 2018. Ten Values of Mobile Learning. Online, available at https://www.speexx.com/speexx-
blog/ten-values-mobile-learning/
[7] Hopper, Kristina. 1981. The Use Of Computer-Controlled Video Disks In The Study Of Spatial Learning.
Journal of Behavior Research Methods &Instrumentation 1981, Vol. 13 (2),77-84
[8] Quinn, C. (2000). mLearning. Mobile, Wireless, In-Your-Pocket Learning. Linezine. Fall 2000. Available
at http://www.linezine.com/2.1/features/cqmmwiyp.html
[9] Welsh, Katharine E., Mauchline, Alice L., Park, Julian R., Whalley, W. Brian., France, Derek. 2013.
Enhancing Fieldwork Learning With Technology: Practitioner's Perspectives, Journal of Geography in
Higher Education, 37:3, 399-415, DOI: 10.1080/03098265.2013.792042
[10] Dennouni, Nassim. Peter, Yvan. Lancieri, Luigi. & Slama, Zohra. 2014. Towards a Geographical
Orchestration of Mobile Learning Activities. http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v8i2.3627
[11] France, Derek., Whalley, W. Brian., Mauchline, Alice., Powell, Victoria., Welsh, Katharine., Lerczak,
Alex., Park, Julian., Bednarz, Robert. 2015. Enchancing Fieldwork Learning Using Mobile Technologies.
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-20967-8. Springer
[12] Chatel, Anna. & Falk, Gregor C. 2017. Smartgeo – Mobile Learning In Geography Education. European
Journal of Geography Volume 8, Number 2:153 - 165, February 2017. Association of European
Geographers
[13] Turan, Zeynep., Meral, Elif., Sahin, Ibrahim Fevzi. 2018. The Impact Of Mobile Augmented Reality In
Geography Education: Achievements, Cognitive Loads And Views Of University Students, Journal of
Geography in Higher Education, DOI: 10.1080/03098265.2018.1455174
[14] Sarrab, Mohamed. 2012. Mobile Learning (M-L Earning ) And Educational Environments.
International Journal Of Distributed And Parallel Systems (Ijdps) Vol.3, No.4, July 2012 Doi:
10.5121/Ijdps.2012.3404 31
[15] Bora. PS., Dhumane. P.B. 2012. Mobile Learning: In’s Implication in Education and Training.
International Interdisciplinary Research Journal, {Bi-Monthly}, ISSN2249-9598, Volume-II, Issue-II,
Mar-Apr 2012
[16] Ozdamli, Fezile. 2012. Pedagogical Framework of M-Learning. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences
31 (2012) 927-931. Available online at www.sciencedirect.com, accessed September 18, 2018.
[17] Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2006). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Boston:
Allyn and Bacon
[18] Boehm, Richard., Solem Michael., Zadrozny, Joann, 2018. The Rise of Powerful Geography. The Social
Studies, 109:2, 125-135, DOI: 10.1080/00377996.2018.1460570