Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference of Engineering and Implementation on Vocational Education, ACEIVE 2022, 20 October 2022, Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia

Research Article

Validity of Destructive and Non-destructive Testing Module Based on Industrial Needs

Download176 downloads
  • @INPROCEEDINGS{10.4108/eai.20-10-2022.2328886,
        author={Banu  Nursanni and Benyamin  Situmorang and Erma  Yulia and Andi  Bahar},
        title={Validity of Destructive and Non-destructive Testing Module Based on Industrial Needs},
        proceedings={Proceedings of the 4th Annual Conference of Engineering and Implementation on Vocational Education, ACEIVE 2022, 20 October 2022, Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia},
        publisher={EAI},
        proceedings_a={ACEIVE},
        year={2023},
        month={5},
        keywords={validity module material testing destructive non-destructive},
        doi={10.4108/eai.20-10-2022.2328886}
    }
    
  • Banu Nursanni
    Benyamin Situmorang
    Erma Yulia
    Andi Bahar
    Year: 2023
    Validity of Destructive and Non-destructive Testing Module Based on Industrial Needs
    ACEIVE
    EAI
    DOI: 10.4108/eai.20-10-2022.2328886
Banu Nursanni1,*, Benyamin Situmorang1, Erma Yulia1, Andi Bahar1
  • 1: Mechanical Engineering Education, Faculty of Engineering, Medan State University, Medan, Indonesia
*Contact email: banunursanni@unimed.ac.id

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to determine the suitability of learning modules for destructive and non-destructive testing based on industry specifications. The Borg and Gall research and development method was used for this research. As a reference in the module, development used the ADDIE development form, namely (1) demand analysis; (2) design and conclusion of learning objectives; (3) development in the form of creation modules; and (4) formative assessment. Module validation is carried out by material expert, learning design expert, and learning media expert. The data collection technique was carried out by distributing questionnaires to find out the industry’s wishes and the validating of the material being tested. Benchmarks for evaluating the module expert agreement using a test questionnaire with defined scores: 5 (very good), 4 (good), 3 (good enough), 2 (less good), and 1 (very bad) which were examined by descriptive approach. The research findings validated the validity of material experts 89.6% of the time, design training experts 91.5% of the time, and equipment training experts 88.3% of the time. As a result, the modules that have been created are ideal for application.