• Deshinta Puspa Ayu Dwi Argaswari (Sinta ID: 6643765), Sampoerna University



LMS, Geometry, Google Classroom


The aims of this research to know and describe the process, result, and quality of the LMS Google Classroom in geometry course for the blended learning model which is appropriate for mathematics teacher candidates’ needs. To answer the process and result of LMS, the research and development followed the R &D steps of Plomp. After that, the quality of the LMS is evaluated using the MTebe & Raisamo standard which consists of these aspects: course quality, system quality, learner satisfaction, LMS use, and perceived benefits. The R&D methods consist of these steps: initial investigation, design, realization, test-evaluation-revision, and implementation. The result of this R&D is a complete form of LMS Google Classroom for Geometry Course. The content is validated by experts and is tested into teaching and learning geometry for non-sample or non-participants. After that, the LMS is implemented in the Geometry course and the quality is being evaluated. The evaluation result shows that the course quality got a score of 3.66 out of 4, system quality scored 3.72 out of 4, user satisfaction scored 3.16 out of 4, user quality scored 3.28 out of 4, and benefit quality scored 3 out of 4.

Author Biography

Deshinta Puspa Ayu Dwi Argaswari, (Sinta ID: 6643765), Sampoerna University

Academic Profile :

Google Scholar Profile : Link

Sinta Author Profile : Link


Afrianti, W. E. (2018). Penerapan Google Classroom Dalam Pembelajaran Akuntansi ( Studi Pada Program Studi Akuntansi Universitas Islam Indonesia ) SKRIPSI Oleh : Nama : Wahyuni Eka Afrianti Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Islam Indonesia Yogyakarta. 1–122.

Argaswari, D. P. A. . (2018). Integrasi Sejarah Matematika untuk Meningkatkan Atensi Siswa. Indonesian Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 59.

Bersin. (2003). Blended Learning: What Works?: An Industry Study of the Strategy, Implementation, and Impact of Blended Learning: Bersin & Associates. Open Journal of Social Sciences.

Coates, H., James, R., & Baldwin, G. (2005). A critical examination of the effects of learning management systems on university teaching and learning. Tertiary Education and Management, 11(1), 19–36.

Darmawan, D. (2012). Inovasi Pendidikan.

DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2003). The DeLone and McLean model of information systems success: A ten-year update. Journal of Management Information Systems, 19(4), 9–30.

Driscoll, M. (2002). Blended learning: Let’s get beyond the hype. E-Learning, 54.

Graham, C. (2009). The Handbook of Blended Learning. In John Wiley & Sons.

Heryaningsih, N. Y., & Usodo, B. (2015). Pengembangan Model Intuition Based Learning ( Ibl ) Dengan Scientific Approach Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Matematika. 3(9), 959–969.

Lin, H. F. (2007). Measuring online learning systems success: Applying the updated DeLone and McLean model. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 10(6), 817–820.

Mayes, T. (2004). Review of E-learning Theories, Frameworks and Models. In JISC E-learning Models Study Report (Vol. 02, Issue 04).

Mtebe, J. S., & Raisamo, R. (2014). A model for assessing learning management system success in higher education in sub-saharan Countries. Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 61(1), 1–17.

Nasrulloh, I., & Ismail, A. (2018). Analisis Kebutuhan Pembelajaran Berbasis Ict. Jurnal Petik, 3(1), 28.

QMRS. (2012). Quality Matters Rubric Standards 2011-2013 edition.

Retnani, E. (2011). Learning Management System (LMS) sebagai Bahan Pembelajaran Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Kognitif Siswa.

Sukmadinata, N. S. (2005). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan.

Ventayen, R. J. M., Estira, K. L. A., Guzman, M. J. De, Cabaluna, C. M., & Espinosa, N. N. (2018). Usability Evaluation of Google Classroom: Basis for the Adaptation of GSuite E-Learning Platform Software Management View project Data Analysis View project. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, Arts and Sciences, 5(1), 47–51.

Zhang, D., Zhao, J. L., Zhou, L., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2004). Can e-learning replace classroom learning? Communications of the ACM, 47(5), 75–79.