Article Sidebar

Download
Full text PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 223 Download : 120

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to determine the factors that influence learning effectiveness in the SAP-based Enterprise Resource Planning courses at Universitas Islam Indonesia (UII). Based on the Theory of Embodied Learning, this study hypothesizes that activeness, level of suitability, perceived immersion, motivation, and technology support positively affect learning effectiveness in the SAP-based ERP courses. A quantitative method with a survey method was used to collect data from 371 students across six study programs who had taken the SAP-based ERP courses. The results of multiple regression analysis showed that physical involvement, level of suitability, motivation, and technology support had a significant positive effect on the learning effectiveness of SAP-based ERP courses. However, perceived immersion had a significant and negative effect on learning effectiveness in the SAP-based ERP courses, which is contrary to the formulated hypothesis. These findings contribute to ERP curriculum design by emphasizing the importance of active participation, aligning course materials with software features, fostering motivation, and ensuring adequate technology infrastructure to improve learning effectiveness in the SAP-based ERP courses.

Keywords

Enterprise Resource Planning Learning Effectiveness Level of Suitability Technology Support

Article Details

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Marfuah Marfuah, Richza Ariyo Ditama, Adinda Khansa Khairunissa

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access). 
How to Cite
Marfuah, M., Ditama, R. A. ., & Khairunissa, A. K. (2025). Determinants of learning effectiveness in SAP-based Enterprise Resource Planning courses. Journal of Contemporary Accounting, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.20885/jca.vol7.iss1.art1
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Barsalou, L. W., Niedenthal, P. M., Barbey, A. K., & Ruppert, J. A. (2003). Social embodiment. Psychology of learning and motivation, 43, 43-92.
  2. Biggs, J. B. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education, 32(3), 347-364.
  3. Chao, C. J., Huang, H. W., Fang, W. C., & Chen, N. S. (2013). Embodied play to learn: Exploring Kinect-facilitated memory performance. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(5), E151-E155.
  4. Corcoran, R. P. (2018). An embodied cognition approach to enhancing reading achievement in New York City public schools: Promising evidence. Teaching and teacher education, 71, 78-85.
  5. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2008). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
  6. Dorothy, E. L., & Sirkka, L. J. (1995). Qualitative methods in information systems research: an introduction. Research methods for information systems, 2, 48-66.
  7. El-Zanfaly, D. (2015). [I3] imitation, iteration and improvisation: Embodied interaction in making and learning. Design Studies, 41, 79-109.
  8. Fatimah, S., & Wardani, I. G. (2017). Pengaruh keaktifan siswa, motivasi belajar dan peran guru terhadap hasil belajar siswa kelas IV pada pembelajaran matematika. Jurnal Ilmiah Sekolah Dasar, 1(3), 278-287.
  9. Graham, G. (2012). Brandom on social practices, understanding, and objectivity. Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective, 1(1), 6-12.
  10. Hariyanto, D. (2021). A firm’s strategic strengths, distributor satisfaction, and dedication: some insights of the direct selling business. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(3), 151-163.
  11. Hawking, P., Ramp, A., & Shackleton, P. (2001). IS’97 model curriculum and enterprise resource planning systems. Business Process Management Journal, 7(3), 225-233.
  12. Helm, A. S., Chaparro, B. S., & Farmer, S. M. (2005). Using the end-user computing satisfaction (EUCS) instrument to measure satisfaction with a web site. Decision Sciences, 36(2), 341-364.
  13. Jacobs, F. R., & Weston Jr, F. C. (2007). Enterprise resource planning (ERP)—A brief history. Journal of Operations Management, 25(2), 357-363.
  14. Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 86.
  15. Keshavarz, M. (2011). Measuring course learning outcomes. Journal of learning design, 4(4), 1-9.
  16. Li, P., & Liang, H. (2020). Factors influencing learning effectiveness of educational travel: A case study in China. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 42, 141-152.
  17. Lindgren, R. (2013). Getting into the cue: Embracing technology in humanities teaching and research. In Digital Humanities Pedagogy (pp. 365-389). Open Book Publishers.
  18. Maheshwari, G. (2021). Factors affecting students' intentions to undertake online learning: an empirical study in Vietnam. Education and Information Technologies, 1-21.
  19. Montessori, M. (1912). The montessori method: scientific pedagogy as applied to child education in "The Children's Houses" (A.E. George, Trans.). London: Heinemann.
  20. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ).
  21. Rold, D. F. (2018). Defining embodied cognition: The problem of situatedness. New Ideas in Psychology, 51, 9-14.
  22. Rohmawati, L. (2012). The relationship between school supervisors competence and headmasters performance. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 6(3), 223-230.
  23. Shelly, G. B., Cashman, T. J., Gunter, G. A., & Gunter, R. E. (2002). Integrating technology in the classroom. Boston, MA: Course Technology.
  24. Smith, R. (2010). Rethinking teacher education: Collaborative responses to uncertainty. New York: Routledge.
  25. Soemanto, W. (2006). Psikologi pendidikan: Landasan kerja pemimpin pendidikan. Jakarta: Rineka Cipta.
  26. Weiskopf, D. A. (2010). Embodied cognition and linguistic comprehension. Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 41(3), 294-304.
  27. Wu, Y. T., Chang, M. H., & Guo, C. J. (2020). Impacts of embodied learning recognition in a role-playing simulation game. Computers & Education, 156, 103941.
  28. Ziemke, T. (2016). The body of knowledge: On the role of the living body in grounding embodied cognition. Biosystems, 148, 4-11.