scholarly journals Pariwisata Dalam Tinjauan Pendidikan: Studi Menuju Era Revolusi Industri

Author(s):  
Erwin Akib

Tujuan dari penulisan ini adalah untuk menjabarkan dan menjawab tantangan yang dihadapi ­edu-Tourism di era revolusi industri 4.0. Metode yang digunakan adalah dengan pendekatan kualitatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan penelitian perpustakaan, yang difokuskan pada pembuatan proses desisi dan menganalisis hubungan fenomena yang dinamis dengan logis ilmiah. Hasil dari pembahasan ini adalaha 1) dalam pengembangan pariwisata, ada beberapa aspek yang diperlukan untuk mendukung pengembangan tersebut seperti aspek fisik, aspek daya tarik pariwisata, aspek aksesibilitas, aspek aktivitas dan fasilitas, serta aspek sosial ekonomi dan budaya, 2) konsep wisata pendidikan sengaja didisain khusus untuk memenuhi kapasitas ilmu pengetahuan para pelajar untuk mengisi wawasan kebangsaan dengan kegiatan perjalanan wisata mengenal wilayah dan potensi sumber daya lokal antardaerah, kabupaten, provinsi serta antarpulau di seluruh negeri ini, 3) implementasi industri 4.0 dapat menjadi salah satu strategi untuk menciptakan Ekonomi berbasis digital terutama dalam pengembangan pendidikan pariwisata yang sesuai dengan arah peta jalan Making Indonesia 4.0 dalam upaya meningkatkan kinerja industri nasional dalam bidang pariwisata pendidikan, 4) ada lima keterampilan yang menjadi top dalam perkembangan revolusi industri 4.0. adapun skill tersebut adalah Cognitive Abilities, System Skills, Complex Problem Solving, Content Skills, dan Process Skills. Untuk merespon masa depan perkembangan revolusi industri 4.0, dibutuhkan komitmen yang kuat.

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
André Kretzschmar ◽  
Stephan Nebe

In order to investigate the nature of complex problem solving (CPS) within the nomological network of cognitive abilities, few studies have simultantiously considered working memory and intelligence, and results are inconsistent. The Brunswik symmetry principle was recently discussed as a possible explanation for the inconsistent findings because the operationalizations differed greatly between the studies. Following this assumption, 16 different combinations of operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were examined in the present study (N = 152). Based on structural equation modeling with single-indicator latent variables (i.e., corrected for measurement error), it was found that working memory incrementally explained CPS variance above and beyond fluid reasoning in only 2 of 16 conditions. However, according to the Brunswik symmetry principle, both conditions can be interpreted as an asymmetrical (unfair) comparison, in which working memory was artificially favored over fluid reasoning. We conclude that there is little evidence that working memory plays a unique role in solving complex problems independent of fluid reasoning. Furthermore, the impact of the Brunswik symmetry principle was clearly demonstrated as the explained variance in CPS varied between 4 and 31%, depending on which operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were considered. We argue that future studies investigating the interplay of cognitive abilities will benefit if the Brunswik principle is taken into account.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre Kretzschmar ◽  
Stephan Nebe

In order to investigate the nature of Complex Problem Solving (CPS) within the nomological network of cognitive abilities, few studies have simultantiously considered working memory and intelligence, and results are inconsistent. The Brunswik symmetry principle was recently discussed as a possible explanation for the inconsistent findings, because the operationalizations differed greatly between the studies. Following this assumption, 16 different combinations of operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were examined in the present study (N = 152). Based on structural equation modelling with single-indicator latent variables (i.e., corrected for measurement error), it was found that working memory incrementally explained CPS variance above and beyond fluid reasoning in only two of 16 conditions. However, according to the Brunswik symmetry principle, both conditions can be interpreted as an asymmetrical (unfair) comparison, in which working memory was artificially favored over fluid reasoning. We conclude that there is little evidence that working memory plays a unique role in solving complex problems independent of fluid reasoning. Furthermore, the impact of the Brunswik symmetry principle was clearly demonstrated as the explained variance in CPS varied between 4 and 31% depending on which operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were considered. We argue that future studies investigating the interplay of cognitive abilities will benefit if the Brunswik principle is taken into account.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Schmidt-Weigand ◽  
Martin Hänze ◽  
Rita Wodzinski

How can worked examples be enhanced to promote complex problem solving? N = 92 students of the 8th grade attended in pairs to a physics problem. Problem solving was supported by (a) a worked example given as a whole, (b) a worked example presented incrementally (i.e. only one solution step at a time), or (c) a worked example presented incrementally and accompanied by strategic prompts. In groups (b) and (c) students self-regulated when to attend to the next solution step. In group (c) each solution step was preceded by a prompt that suggested strategic learning behavior (e.g. note taking, sketching, communicating with the learning partner, etc.). Prompts and solution steps were given on separate sheets. The study revealed that incremental presentation lead to a better learning experience (higher feeling of competence, lower cognitive load) compared to a conventional presentation of the worked example. However, only if additional strategic learning behavior was prompted, students remembered the solution more correctly and reproduced more solution steps.


2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Greiff ◽  
Katarina Krkovic ◽  
Jarkko Hautamäki

Abstract. In this study, we explored the network of relations between fluid reasoning, working memory, and the two dimensions of complex problem solving, rule knowledge and rule application. In doing so, we replicated the recent study by Bühner, Kröner, and Ziegler (2008) and the structural relations investigated therein [ Bühner, Kröner, & Ziegler, (2008) . Working memory, visual-spatial intelligence and their relationship to problem-solving. Intelligence, 36, 672–680]. However, in the present study, we used different assessment instruments by employing assessments of figural, numerical, and verbal fluid reasoning, an assessment of numerical working memory, and a complex problem solving assessment using the MicroDYN approach. In a sample of N = 2,029 Finnish sixth-grade students of which 328 students took the numerical working memory assessment, the findings diverged substantially from the results reported by Bühner et al. Importantly, in the present study, fluid reasoning was the main source of variation for rule knowledge and rule application, and working memory contributed only a little added value. Albeit generally in line with previously conducted research on the relation between complex problem solving and other cognitive abilities, these findings directly contrast the results of Bühner et al. (2008) who reported that only working memory was a source of variation in complex problem solving, whereas fluid reasoning was not. Explanations for the different patterns of results are sought, and implications for the use of assessment instruments and for research on interindividual differences in complex problem solving are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document