2. i
DAFTAR ISI
DAFTAR ISI..............................................................................................................i
KATA PENGANTAR...............................................................................................ii
BAB I........................................................................................................................1
JURNAL...................................................................................................................1
1. Introduction.........................................................................................1
2. Case Study ..........................................................................................2
3. Method................................................................................................4
4. Results.................................................................................................5
6. Conclusion and recommendations.....................................................................6
References ...............................................................................................................6
BAB II.......................................................................................................................8
REVIEW JURNAL...................................................................................................8
BAB III................................................................................................................... 10
PENUTUP............................................................................................................... 10
3. ii
KATA PENGANTAR
Puji syukur kehadirat Allah SWT yang telah memberikan rahmat dan
hidayah-Nya sehingga saya dapat menyelesaikan tugas makalah yang berjudul
“Review Jurnal Internasional” ini tepat pada waktunya.
Adapun tujuan dari penulisan dari makalah ini adalah untuk memenuhi
tugas dari Bapak Dr. Made Pramono, M.Hum pada mata kuliah Filsafat dan Sejarah
Olahraga. Selain itu, makalah ini juga bertujuan untuk menambah wawasan tentang
review jurnal internasional bagi para pembaca dan penulis.
Saya mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Bapak Dr. Made Pramono, M.Hum
selaku dosen mata kuliah Filsafat dan Sejarah Olahraga yang telah memberikan
tugas ini sehingga dapat menambah pengetahuan dan wawasan sesuai dengan
bidang studi yang saya tekuni.
Saya juga mengucapkan terima kasih kepada semua pihak yang telah
membagi sebagian pengetahuannya sehingga saya dapat menyelesaikan makalah
ini.
Saya menyadari makalah yang saya tulis ini masih jauh dari kata sempurna.
Oleh karena itu, kritik dan saran yang membangun akan saya harapkan demi
kesempurnaan makalah ini.
Tuban, 22 Februari 2021
M Khoirul Fuad Ubaidillah
5. 2
complementing face-to-face education is becoming popular, for example, in order to create
virtual spaces where teachers can be in an immediate and direct contact with students by
uploading documents, hyperlinks, online material and the like (Moreno & Bailly-Baillière,
2002; Stacey & Wiesenberg, 2007) . However, the next challenge for pedagogy raised by
computer-mediated communication is its use as a sole means of education (Salmon, 2011;
Cabero, & Román, 2006; Goodyear, 2001).
As we are accustomed to face-to-face teaching, we find it difficult to imagine a new
pedagogical paradigm. Skepticismis arguably the most extended position regarding novel
proposals like online teaching. These are some arguments provided against online teaching
(Haber & Mills, 2008; McLaughlin, 2003): a) faceless teaching is not as effective as the
traditionalone; b)the materials foronline teaching cost more; c)the will to introduce online
learning respondsmore to otherconsiderations and less to educative purposes; d)there is no
way to intervene in people’sformation as bothstudents andhuman beings.However,we will
argue for online communication as a means to achieve the main objectives of teaching
philosophy of sport.
By drawing on Garth Kemerling (1980; 1998), we identify three main goals in the teaching of
sport philosophy:
a) to acquaint studentswith the philosophy ofsport literature througha guided reading ofits
classical texts; b) to develop effective skills in reasoning; and c) to develop a personal
positions in an argumentative way. The acquisition of these three goals is important for
students, especially, for those in technical schools, universities, faculties, and departments
where this subject is not common. The teaching of philosophy in departments and faculties
with different curricula from those of the humanities and social sciences is particularly
important. Philosophy provides students in these areas with critical-reflexive attitudes that
allow themto develop a deeperandless superficialway ofthinking towards the problems of
everyday life as well as of the problems to be solvedin theirspecialization areas.This is the
reason why teaching philosophy is strongly recommended by organizations such as
UNESCO. Several internationaldocuments published by this organisation aimat promoting
educational policies focused on developing critical-reflexive skills (Goucha, 2007).
UNESCO has also repeatedly underlined the importance of using open source and open
content toolsfordistance teaching,e-learning,and the so-called m- learning,which refers to
technologiesthat usemobile devices as multiple learning contexts forteaching(Kraut,2013).
UNESCO’s promotion ofpersonaldevices,suchas mobile phones,smart-phones,tablets,
notebooks, MP3 players for listening to podcasts, notebooks, devices for reading e-books,
and the like,does not respond tocommercialinterests,butratherto thefact that these devices
are low-cost tools forsharingknowledge contents.So theyare a widespread means todevelop
interpersonal communication and create learning communities based on people’s shared
interestsandfocusedon the developmentofa lifelong,situated,personalized,and continuous
learning (Meskill, 2013).
2. Case Study
Althoughphilosophy is not included in sport sciences students’curricula,teaching them
this human science is crucial. The discipline called “sports philosophy”, a recent science in
the field ofsport science,plays a discrete role in departments ofsport and movement sciences
(Hyland,1990; Reid, 2013). This means,firstly, that this discipline is still unknown in most
universities and schools which train and educate sport professionals (physical education
teachers, sport educators, athletes, sport managers, coaches), and, secondly, that the
contribution of this discipline to the development of sport sciences is still occasional. For
instance,sport sciencescurricula ofItalian faculties anddepartments tend tofocus mainly on
the development of technical, physical, and motor skills. Therefore, Italian sport sciences
focus on disciplinesaimed at studyingand developing bio-physiological,biomechanical,and
physicalskills.The empiricalcharacterofthese disciplines generates a positivistparadigmin
the studyofsport.Even when courses in humanities exist,human disciplines like pedagogy,
psychologyorsociology focus ontheiraspects as experimentaland descriptivesciences.This
is also the case of the curricula taught in the departments of sport sciences in Italy.
The pre-eminence of the positivist paradigmdownplays Italian sport sciences students’
capacity to developa criticaland personalviewofsport bothas a human phenomenonandas
a social system. Comprehensive and holistic understandings of sport would be impossible,
since sport studentsspend most oftheirtime eitherstudyingthe positivistic subjects oftheir
curricula or practising sports. Therefore, humanities studies have to be included in the
6. 3
curricula since the University is the only place where they can develop the critical skills to
produce such
comprehensive understandings ofsport.With this aimin mind,ourgroupofsportpedagogues
from the University of Rome “Foro Italico” (URFI), an institution entirely devoted to the
study ofsport and human movement,decided to offerto their bachelor’s degree students in
sport sciencesa 4credits (CFU) course on sport philosophy.This coursewas entirely online,
except for some face-to-face sessions (meetings or lectures by invited lecturers) whose aim
was to help students with little experience in distance and e-learning.
AlthoughtheURFIhad a Moodle platformforteaching online,we decidedto use another
free e-learning platform, namely, Chamilo Campus. Although this is a free platform with
limited potentialregardingspace andrepository,we chose it fortwo reasons:firstly,because
of the dialogic and interactive nature of the course; and, secondly, in line with many
contemporary theories of learning online, to stress the importance of social networks for
human learning froma constructivist,communitarian,and situated perspective (Royo,2010;
Ko & Rossen,2004). According to this,we decided to structure the online course using the
following free teaching tools:
a
h)
am
Th
ile
o C ampus platform was used to host the main contents of the course (less ons
and materials), as well as a toolfor monitoring students’activities,and as a platformto send
the most important messages related to the course.
b) The Wordpress blog was a platformto share information. Its main goal was to show a
general presentation of the course and some announcements with a general explanation of
both the teaching method andhowattendance was recorded.The blog also containeda short
description of the syllabus and some links related to videos about philosophy and its main
issues.
c) We used a Facebookgroupto make a real-time group chat more attractive andeasy to use than
Chamilo Campus
platform’s chat and forum.
d) Youtube and Vimeo channels were used as ways to record the lessons bythe instructors
of the course andby otherinvitedspeakers in seminars and conferences held in the
framework ofthe course.
e) A radio channeland Spreakerplatform(which allowed broadcasting,recordingand
downloadingup to 10hours ofrecording)were usedto record orbroadcastthe teachers’
lessonsin podcasts.
f) A platformfor making ebooks was used to create andmanage ebooks in ePub,PDFand
SCORM formats.
g) Dropboxwas used as a folderforsharing course materials and documents.
h) Skype was used as a way ofvideoconferencingas wellas a video chat forinterviews and final
examinations.
i) Twitterwas used forsendingannouncements ormessages aboutevents,seminars orevents.
After having chosen the teaching tools, we wrote a specific syllabus. This syllabus was
inspired by Isidoriand Reid’s (2011) handbookentitled Filosofia dellosport,and conceived
of as an introduction to the study of sport philosophy and its main topics. This way, we
provided the studentswith the possibility ofgetting acquainted with the philosophyofsport
literature and its basic texts. Moreover, we also aimed at developing and enhancing critical
and reflective thinking in sport sciences students by focusing on the following topics: a)
generalissuesof philosophyas a science and as a human activity; b)ethics;c)therelationship
between values and sport; the research methodology and the reflective methods to promote
values through sport movies; d) and the relationship between globalization, sport, and
Olympism. This last topic was included due to the importance of,especially,de Coubertin’s
thought,aswellas to his contributionto the developmentofthe philosophyofOlympismand
today’s sport culture.As we regarded these last topic as the most relevant oneofourcourse,
we entitled it as “Philosophy of sport and Olympic education.”
The main issues of the course, taught both in Italian and English, covered the following
topics (summed up in ten lessons): introduction to philosophy; the origins of sport
philosophy; sport andits philosophicalissues; sport and values:a philosophicalperspective;
research methodologies in sport philosophy; sport ethics in practice; philosophy and sport
movies: an introduction; philosophical analysis of a sport movie; introduction to the
philosophy of Olympism; main agencies promoting Olympic education.
At the beginning,during theacademic year2011/2012, we agreed on offering this online
7. 4
course on sport philosophy to 40 students. However, in the first two weeks the number of
applications for enrolment was so high that we decided to increase the number of accepted
up to 70 students. Between the academic years 2011/2012, 2012/2013 and 2013/2014, 223
sport sciences students enrolled in the course of sports philosophy. Among these students,
only 34, that is a percentage of 15.2%, had studied philosophy during their high school
education. During the three academic years mentioned above, 94% of the students took the
final exam within the first two terms ofthe academic year(there are officially three terms per
academic year in the URFI).
The final exams showed a very low number of failures: only 16 students, that is 7.2%,
with an average of 5.3 per year, did not succeed in passing the exam within the first two
sessionsallowed.Allofthe students,except three (who dropped-outin theirfirst three years
of studies in sport sciences),completed the course in sport philosophy,and were considered
qualified to pass the final exam, marked on a pass or fail basis.
3. Method
We had decidedfromthe beginningofthe course to use it also as a research environment
to get some important feedbackaimed at improving the course itselfand its methodologyin
the future.For this reason,we used a research methodology based on a simplified model of
the case study, and focused on the evaluation of teaching activities related to the online
course. This evaluation was carried out through methods of collecting qualitative and
quantitative data, such as interviews, open and closed-ended questionnaires, and focus
groups.Forthe evaluation ofthe results ofthese data,the point ofviewof both students and
instructors was considered and compared between each other. The data were obtained:
1) Through a specific questionnaire administeredto the students who attended theonline
course.
2) Through a self-assessment carried outby the threeteachers who hadtaught in the course
(that is,two instructorsanda tutor).
3) Through a focusgroup composed bythe main instructor/teacherresponsible forthe
course,by an externalobserver,and by fourstudents volunteers in each academic year
(4x3=12).
The questionnaire forstudents was based ona Likert scale which ranged from1 to 5 (1 =
Unacceptable, 2 = Needs Improvement 3 = Average, 4 = Good, 5 = Excellent). The
questionnaire included also4open categoricalquestions (items 6,7,9, 10, 11, 12), and it was
composed of two main parts:
a) a first one concerningthe content,mode ofdelivery ofthe course,and the quality of
teaching andmentoring;
b) a secondone concerningthe liking and satisfaction with the teachingtools usedin the online
course.
These are some ofthe questions regardingthe contentand quality ofthe online course:
1) the clarity of online materials was
2) the usefulnessofonline materials was
3) the usefulnessofonline discussions was
4) the critical competenciesaimed at understanding contemporary sport and providedby the
course were
5) compared to othercourses at URFI,yourinvolvement (doing
assignments,interactingwith students andthe instructor)in this
course was
6) please describe the course activities thatmost enhancedyourlearning in this course
7) please describe the course activities thatwere least helpfulto yourlearning in this course
8) overall, I would rate this course as
9) please provide anyadditionalsuggestions,comments,orideas forimproving this course
10) consideringyourreason forenrolling in this course,did it satisfy yourneeds? (yes, no)
11) would you recommend online courses to otherstudents? (yes,no)
12) please,provideany othersuggestions,comments,orideas for
8. 5
improving the online experience Among the questions relatingto
teachers andtutors, we included these:
13) The instructors’and tutor’s preparation,quality,and helpfulness oftheirfeedbacks forthis
class were
14) Timely response by the instructorforassignments was
15) The instructoras a discussionmoderator was
Questionsregarding the teachingtools were summed up in a question that asked
studentswhich oneofthe following tools (thatis:Chamilo Campus,Wordpress blog,
Facebook,Youtubeand Vimeo channel,radio channel,platformfor creating and
managing e-books,Dropbox,Skype,Twitter) had to be consideredas the most usefulone
in the course, and why.
The self-assessment by teachers was based on a written answer t
e
o fo
th
llowing open
question: “A re you generally satisfied, as a teacher, with the course you have taught
online,and with the results achievedby yourstudents?Write “yes” or“not”,and explain the
reasons for your answer.”
The focus group, lasting two hours, consisted of a restricted discussion group to reflect
on the main feedbacks from the questionnaire administered to the students, and from the
report written by the instructors ofthe course.This discussion was assistedand mediatedby
an external observer/researcherwho acted as a moderatorforthe dialogue/discussion taking
notes ofthedialogic interactions ofthe participants.Thediscussionwas intendedto ascertain
the veracity of the students’opinions and answers,taking themas guidelines fordiscussion
and critical reflection.
4. Results
The self-evaluation by teachers and tutors of the course was fully positive;
they affirmed to feel fully satisfied with the results achieved by their students
and gratified by the experience of teaching sports philosophy online. The same
thing can be said about the focus groups built during the three academic years,
which actually confirmed the results from both teachers’ self-assessments and
satisfaction, and data emerging from the questionnaires administered to the
students. Students’ questionnaires data must be considered as the most
interesting because they have provided a valuable feedback for the further
development of the course. Out of 223 students who attended the sport
philosophy online course, 212 answered the questionnaire
5. Discussion
The data collected fromquestionnaires,discussions and interviews have actually provedthe
full achievement oflearning and educationalgoals aimed by the online course.In the focus
groups,some criticalissues andvery small
problems emerged.Theseproblems referred to some technicaldifficulties regardingboththe
use ofthe online platform(consideredby some students as much complicated),and theneed
for more intensive technicalmentoring.Forinstance,not allstudents have the same technical
skills and ability to use an online platform.
Specific consideration should be given to the percentages related to the liking and
usefulnessofthe teachingtools.The tools students mostappreciatedand liked were,as shown
in the table above,the Facebookdiscussion group,Vimeo and the Youtubechannel,the radio
channeland the podcasts.The reasons why theypreferredthesetools was thatthey were easy
to use (to watch and to listen to). Students liked Facebook because it allowed them to be
involved in continuous dialogue and in an ongoing communication with teachers and
classmates. Students also affirmed that they liked these tools because they were easily
available on both tablets and mobile phones.
The students gave an overall very positive evaluation to the content of the course by
stating that the studyofphilosophy,even in its online mode,made themaware ofthe hidden
9. 6
ethical and educational problems concerning physical activity and sport. From the focus
groups,we found that the course developed a criticalattitude towards contemporary sport in
the students, and provided themwith philosophical alternative views, such as, the so-called
theory o
ea
f k
wsport (Isidori, Maulini, & López Frías, 2013).
6. Conclusion and recommendations
Our case study represents,in all aspects,an example of an on-line teaching practice that
should encourage otherItalian and European universities to develop and enhance these kind
of courses on sportsphilosophy.Sport is a powerfultoolto promote philosophicalreflection
about contemporary issues such as new technologies and globalization. For this reason, on-
line teaching andlearningsports philosophy not only enhances the potentialofthis discipline
as a critical and reflective science, but it also makes it available to a wider audience that
otherwise would not know about it. For instance, to athletes who have completed their
sporting careersand need to be retrained in the context ofa dualcareerand lifelong learning.
The newtools providedby Web 2.0allow people to share knowledge andopencontents,
and to develop abilities and skills to create learning communities that foster interpersonal
communication.This fits perfectly with the dialogic function and essence ofphilosophyas a
science and as a human activity (King,2012). Through these resources,also young students
who are not from departments and faculties of humanities or philosophy can develop
philosophical skills. This is especially necessary, as shown in this study, for sport sciences
students unaccustomed to the development of critical thinking because the sporting
professions,as they are conceivedofin contemporary society,continue to be seenmerely in
terms of acquisition of technical skills. Therefore, teaching philosophy of sport on-line can
be a means forsport sciences students to developcriticalskills that are usefulfortheirfuture
work. Our study providesa simple and effective model of education and teaching. We only
need a limited amount of materials to achieve the aimof a course in philosophy. This way,
we avoid the riskofdispersionand disorientation,which some scholars regards as oneofthe
difficulties related to on-line teaching methods (Ruffaldi, 2000).
The data from our study have shown that the easy accessibility frommobile phones and
tablets explains the successofonline teachingtools.This raises the question ofthe necessity
to rethinkthe teaching ofphilosophy online in accordance with the newforms ofmobile and
by tablets learning, transforming the social network in online learning environments
(Wiesenberg & Stacey, 2013). In line with this idea, our study also shows the necessity to
adapt the coursesin philosophy ofsport taught now.This is the challenge that thephilosophy
of sport, rethought in terms of specialized e-philosophy, together with its community of
researchers, teachers and students, has to address today in order to understand sport and its
meanings, and to make it a real human practice.
Authors’ contributions.This study is the result of a collaboration between the three e
aua
th
uo
th
ro
s.
rsT
’ h
contribu
tion can be summed up as
follows: Emanuele Isidori: conception and design of the study, manuscript writing. Francisco Javier López Frías:
acquisition of data, manuscript revision. Ramos Echazarreta: analysis and interpretation of data; obtaining funding.
References
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing for 21st century learning. London:
Routledge.
Cabero, J., & Román, P. (2006). E-actividades. Un referente básico para la formación en internet. Sevilla: Editorial MAD.
Goodyear, P. (2001). Competences for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 49(1), 65-72. Goucha, M. (2007). Philosophy a School of Freedom: Teaching Philosophy and Learning
to Philosophize: Status and Prospects. Paris: UNESCO
Publications.
10. 7
Haber, J., & Mills, M. (2008). Perceptions ofBarriers Concerning Effective Online Teaching and Policies: Florida
Community College Faculty
Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 32 (4), 266-283. Hyland, D.A. (1990).
Philosophy of sport. St. Paul, MN: Paragon.
Isidori E., & Reid, H.L. (2011). Filosofia dello sport. Milano: B. Mondadori.
Isidori, E., Maulini, C., & Javier López Frías, F. (2013). Sport and Ethics of Weak Thought: A New Manifesto for
Sport Education. Physical Culture and Sport. Studies and Research, 60 (1), 22-29.
Kemerling G. (1998). Teaching Philosophy on the Internet. XXth World Congress of Philosophy, Boston, USA. Available
at: https://www.bu.edu/wcp/Papers/Teac/TeacKeme.htm
Kemerling, G. (1980). Philosophy and Footlights. Teaching Philosophy, 3(3), 315-323.
King, P.C. (2012). Technology and Teaching Philosophy. Journal of Educational
Technology Systems, 40(2), 161-168. Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2004). Teaching online: a
practical guide. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Kraut, R. (2013).UNESCO Policy Guidelines for Mobile Learning. Paris: UNESCO Publications.
McLaughlin, T. H. (2003). Teaching as a practice and a community of practice: The limits of commonality and the
demands of diversity. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 3
),7
3
(3
29 -352.
Meskill, C. (2013). Online teaching and learning: sociocultural perspectives. London:
Bloomsbury Publishing. Moreno, F., & Bailly-Baillière, M. (2002). Diseño instructivo
de la formación online. Barcelona: Ariel.
Reid, H. L. (2012). Introduction to the Philosophy of Sport. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Royo, S. (2010). Aplicación de las tecnologías de la información y la comunicación en la enseñanza de la filosofía. In L.
M. Cifuentes & J. M.
Gutiérrez (
ilE
od
so
s.f)
í,aF
, investigación, innovación y buenas prácticas (pp. 55-68). Barcelona: Graò.
Ruffaldi, E. (2000). Insegnare filosofia. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
Salmon, G. (2011). E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. New York: Routledge.
Stacey, E., & Wiesenberg, F. (2007). A Study of Face-to-Face and Online Teaching Philosophies in Canada and Australia.
Journal of Distance
Education, )
2
,21
(9
1 -40.
Wiesenberg, F.P., & Stacey, E. (2013). Teaching philosophy: Moving from face-to-face to online classrooms. Canadian
Journal of University
continuing education, 3
),46
(3
1 -79.
12. 9
keberhasilan alat pengajaran online. Hal ini menimbulkan
pertanyaan tentang perlunya memikirkan kembali
pengajaran filsafat online sesuai dengan bentuk baru
pembelajaran seluler dan tablet, mentransformasikan
jaringan sosial dalam lingkungan pembelajaran online
(Wiesenberg & Stacey, 2013).
Keunggulan penelitian berupa data lapangan yang diperoleh langsung
oleh dari sampel
Kekurangan Menggunakan durasi waktu yang terlalu lama
Memerlukan banyak analisis
13. 10
BAB III
PENUTUP
Kesimpulan
Jurnal diatas membahas serta mendekripsikan bahwa olahraga berfokus
pada disiplin ilmu yang bertujuan mempelajari dan mengembangkan
keterampilan bio-fisiologis, biomekanik, dan fisik
Saran
Sebagai penulis saya menyadari bahwa masih banyakkekurangan di
dalammakalah ini. Untuk kedepannya penulis akan menjelaskan secara
detail dari sumber yang lebih banyak.
