• Tara Mustikaning Palupi Universitas Negeri Jakarta
  • Ilza Mayuni Universitas Negeri Jakarta
Keywords: designing LMS and CMS, Moodle, Google Sites, SAM, Critical Literacy course


This second-year study which took place in 2022 aims to investigate, determine and design a learning management system (LMS) design through Moodle and Content Management System (CMS) through Google Sites for Critical Literacy course in Prodi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris UNJ. Critical Literacy course aims to prepare the students to have the ability to interpret text critically and communicate actively in the multimodal context in a hybrid learning process. The study was conducted with the qualitative approach with The Successive Approximation Model (SAM) iterative phase research design. Throughout the Savvy Start and Iterative Design Phase, the phase rotated through design, prototype, and review to make sure students and lecturers can contribute and support the design direction. Forty-four students and one lecturer generates as participants in this study. Two kinds of modules were developed during the study, namely: (1) LMS on and (2) CMS on Google Sites. LMS and CMS modules for the Critical Literacy course were: (1) Defining Critical Literacy, (2) Literacy, Critical Literacy, Multi-literacy, Multimodal, (3) Data Literacy, Fact, and Hoax (4) Analyzing Multimodal Text (5) Reflective Notes (6) Mid-term Test (7) Analyzing Various Texts (8) Wrap Up (9) Final Semester Individual Project. These nine headings were categorized into four topics namely: Theories, Tests, Reflection, and Projects. The theories can be used to deliver learning materials and examples in the form of text, video, slides, QR codes, and websites. Meanwhile, the test could be used to provide assignments, exercises, and learning evaluations. Reflection was used to provide the students with opportunities to do both self- and peer-reflection on the learning processes. Finally, the projects were used to involve the students with problem-solving skills and self-regulated learning. The study’s findings showed that LMS and CMS could handle the complexity of teaching Critical Literacy in the digital environment. The Critical Literacy course should have attracted interest or participation from the students to familiarize, encourage, fulfill, assess, and comprehend the various texts. This LMS and CMS also provided students with class discussion, credible references, project-based activities, and criticism on literacy topics. 


Akkoyunlu, B., & Soylu, M. Y. (2008). A study of students' perceptions in a blended learning environment based on different learning styles. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 183–193
Allen, M. W., & Sites, R. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences. Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training and Development
Alier, M. F., Guerrero, M. J. C., Gonzalez, M. A. C., Penalvo, F. J. G., & Severance, C. (2010). Interoperability for LMS: the missing piece to become the commonplace for e-learning innovation. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 6(2-3), 130-141.
Allen, M. W., Sites, R. H., & American Society for Training and Development. (2012). Leaving ADDIE for SAM: An agile model for developing the best learning experiences. United States: American Society for Training & Development.
Bader Al Bataineh, K., Abdullah Ahmed Banikalef, A., & H. Albashtawi, A. (2019). The Effect of Blended Learning on EFL Students’ Grammar Performance and Attitudes: An Investigation of Moodle. Arab World English Journal.
Caner, M. (2012). The Definition of Blended Learning in Higher Education. In Panagiotes, A. (ed). Blended Learning Environments for Adults: Evaluation and Frameworks, (pp 19 -34). IGI Global. -1-4666-0939-6.ch002
Clark, Ruth Colvin & Richard E. Mayer. (2011). E-learning and the Science of Instruction. Third Edition. San Francisco: Pfeiffer
Dabbagh, N. & Ritland, B. B. (2005). Online Learning: Concepts, Strategies, and Application. New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.
Galy, E., Downey, C., & Johnson, J. (2011). The effect of using e-learning tools in online and campus-based classrooms on student performance. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 10(1), 209-230.
Genova M.M. (2019). Designing an effective digital learning environment for teaching English through literature: the learning experience of Bulgarian students, Journal of eLearning and Knowledge Society, 15 (2) DOI: 8829/1592
Ghirardini, B. (2011). E-learning methodologies: A guide for designing and developing e-learning courses. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Graham, C. R. (2004). Blended Learning Systems: Definitions, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In Bonk, C. J. & Graham, C. R. (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global Perspectives, local designs. (pp. 19 -34). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
Horton, W., & Horton, K. (2003). E-learning Tools and Technologies: A consumer's guide for trainers, teachers, educators, and instructional designers. John Wiley & Sons.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1991). English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-Centred Approach. The Modern Language Journal, 72(1), 73.
Jung, H., Kim, Y., Lee, H. & Shin, Y. (2019). Advanced Instructional Design for Successive E-learning: based on the Successive Approximation Model (SAM). In G. Marks (Ed.), Proceedings of EdMedia + Innovate Learning Online 2022 2019 (pp. 191-204). Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Krasnova, T.I., & Vanushin, I.S. (2016). Blended Learning Perception among Undergraduate Engineering Students, iJET, 11(1), 54 -56.
Lee, LT., & Hung, J.C. (2015). Effects of blended e-Learning: a case study in higher education tax learning setting. Hum. Cent. Comput. Inf. Sci. 5, 13.
Martin, F., Parker, M. A., & Deale, D. F. (2012). Examining interactivity in synchronous virtual classrooms. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 13(3), 227-261.
Martín-Blas, T., & Serrano-Fernández, A. (2009). The role of new technologies in the learning process: Moodle as a teaching tool in Physics. Computers & Education, 52(1), 35-44.
Mayuni, I., Leiliyanti, E., Palupi, T.M, Sitorus, M., & Chen, Y. (2022). DESIGNING LITERACY E-COACHING MODEL FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHERS OF JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS IN INDONESIA. TEFLIN Journal, 33(2), 310-329. doi:
Noirid, Surachet; Srisa-ard, B. (2007). E-learning Models: A Review of Literature. The 1st International Conference on Educational Reform.
Oproiu, G. C. (2015). A study about using e-learning platform (Moodle) in university teaching process. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 180, 426- 432.
Panyajamorn, T., Suanmali, S., Kohda, Y., Chongphaisal, P., & Supnithi, T. (2018). Effectiveness of E-Learning Design in Thai Public Schools. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 15(1), 1-34
Sejzi, A.A., & Aris, B. (2013). Learning Management System (LMS) and Learning Content Management System (LCMS) at virtual university.
Stanford, J. (2009). Moodle 1.9 for second language teaching: Engaging online language-learning activities using the Moodle platform. In Language Teaching.
Thapliyal, U. (2014). Perceived quality dimensions in distance education: Excerpts from student experiences. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 15(3), 60-67
Tomlinson, B. (2011). Materials Development in Language Teaching. US: Cambridge University Press.
Tosh, K., Doan, S., Woo, A., & Henry, D. (2020). Digital Instructional Materials What Are Teachers Using and What Barriers Exist? RAND Corporation
Wade, J. C. (2018). Towards Autonomy in Language Learning: Theoretical Implications
Zwart, D. P., Goei, S. L., Van Luit, J. E. H., & Noroozi, O. (2022). Nursing students’ satisfaction with the instructional design of a computer-based virtual learning environment for mathematical medication learning. Interactive Learning Environments pages 1-16.