Research Article
Development of Museology Textbook based on Case Method and Project in Historical Education Department of Medan State University
@INPROCEEDINGS{10.4108/eai.11-10-2022.2325364, author={Apriani Harahap and Mhd. Ihsan Syahaf Nasution and Pidia Amelia and Muhammad Rivai}, title={Development of Museology Textbook based on Case Method and Project in Historical Education Department of Medan State University}, proceedings={Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Innovation in Education, Science and Culture, ICIESC 2022, 11 October 2022, Medan, Indonesia}, publisher={EAI}, proceedings_a={ICIESC}, year={2022}, month={12}, keywords={teaching materials museology case method project}, doi={10.4108/eai.11-10-2022.2325364} }- Apriani Harahap
Mhd. Ihsan Syahaf Nasution
Pidia Amelia
Muhammad Rivai
Year: 2022
Development of Museology Textbook based on Case Method and Project in Historical Education Department of Medan State University
ICIESC
EAI
DOI: 10.4108/eai.11-10-2022.2325364
Abstract
The development of case method and project-based museology books at the Department of History Education, State University of Medan is based on the problem of limited references in museology courses taught at the Department of History Education, State University of Medan. This research belongs to the type of research and development (research and development) with reference to the model developed by Borg & Gall. Textbooks compiled by researchers were validated by material experts and media experts before being tested on students. The results of the validation of material and media experts indicate that the case method and project-based museology textbooks are "very feasible" to be used as learning books in the Department of History Education, State University of Medan. Even the responses from students also stated that case method and project-based museology textbooks were very suitable to be used as learning books. This is indicated by the high average score for each trial, namely 4.42 (Very Good) in the first trial, 4.35 (Very Good) in the second trial and 4.45 (Very Good) in the third trial