TPACK and HOTS Preparation for Engineering Education Students with Integrated Project-based Learning Live MOOCs

Mahfudi Sahly Subandi1, a) Dwi Agus Sudjimat1, b) Tuwoso1, c)
Author Affiliations 
1Universitas Negeri Malang
(Indonesia)

Author Emails
a) mahfudisahly@gmail.com
b) dwi.agus.ft@um.ac.id
c) tuwoso.ft@um.ac.id
a)Corresponding author: mahfudisahly@gmail.com

Abstract. Engineering education students have a responsibility to become qualified teachers according to industry demands. However, in developing nations, challenges with vocational education include a large number of unemployed graduates and poor teacher quality. The quality of teachers affects the quality of students required by the industry. The core problem that arises is related to the competence of technical education students as prospective vocational teachers. Engineering education students should be prepared to be able to master technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS). Project-based learning integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs) is one of the innovative models. The design of the innovative learning model in this study was developed using the literature review method. This design objectives to improve the quality of student education in the context of preparing a productive workforce.
Keywords:  TPACK, HOTS, Engineering Education Students, Project-based Learning, MOOCs 
INTRODUCTION
Currently,  technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) is a challenge for the preparation of engineering education students [1], [2]. This competency is related to teaching ability in the era of education 4.0. Technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  is a framework that contains various knowledge about technology, pedagogy, and learning content [3], [4]. So it can be understood that technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  is an integration of various knowledge about technology, pedagogy, and learning content that can form new knowledge. In the 21st-century learning era, technical education students as prospective vocational education teachers must understand various knowledge integrations. Vocational education teachers must be able to equip students with competencies to succeed in their careers [5]. The 21st-century learning paradigm with an approach to student-centered learning makes the teacher's role as a facilitator of student learning. As a result, technical education students who master technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) as prospective vocational education teachers would be able to enhance the quality of student learning in the future.
The quality of engineering education students has a vital role in supporting the country's economic development [6]. This role is related to their readiness to face the demands of professional teacher competence. The technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  framework is a critical component in preparing engineering education students. Engineering education students must understand technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) to develop their competencies in the era of education 4.0[7]−[9]. Engineering education at the undergraduate level focuses on providing graduates to become professional teachers with the ability to work according to industry standards [10], [11]. The integration of technology is a critical component in increasing the quality of learning in the 21st century learning age [12], [13]. One of them is a virtual laboratory that has the potential to improve student skills.
However, currently, the preparation of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  has not been carried out properly by educational institutions, especially education that focuses on producing prospective teachers [14]. The impact of unprepared development of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in students causes engineering education graduates to have a quality that is incompatible with educational goals. In addition, this also has an impact on the quality of the students they teach, who are unable to meet the needs of the industrial world. Graduates of vocational education at the secondary level are the highest contributor to the unemployment rate in Indonesia [15]. Unemployment of vocational education graduates is evidence of not achieving the goals of vocational education.
Increasing the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  of engineering education students is the main solution for preparing a country's superior human being. Some experts state that the establishment of vocational education is intended to prepare professionals in certain areas of expertise [10],[16]. This preparation becomes a supporting component for developing a country in terms of industrial progress and education. The relationship between the quality of vocational teachers, vocational high school graduates, industrial development, and the progress of a country's development into a single linear entity.
In the 21st-century learning era, apart from technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK), the component of higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) is an important focus to be developed. The development of the higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) component is crucial for the progress of the learning process. Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) are the abilities of students to analyze, evaluate, and create [17]−[19]. This ability plays an important role in making decisions, solving problems, and creating something new. This is important for the preparation of engineering education students in the 21st-century learning era [20]. In the 21st-century learning era, engineering education students must have creative thinking skills, critical thinking skills, communication skills, and collaboration skills. The development of higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) in vocational education can be done by changing the curriculum, pedagogy, and evaluating the learning process [21]. 
Changes in traditional learning models towards innovative learning must be carried out to prepare student competencies. The learning model determines the success of students in improving their higher-order thinking skills (HOTS)  abilities. However,  Indonesia's PISA results are still low compared to other countries in the world [22]. This is because the learning process has not been maximized. Innovative learning models are a solution to improve student's abilities in mastering higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) questions [23]. One of the innovative learning models is blended learning. This learning model has high effectiveness in learning. This is because innovative learning can develop students' creativity, problem-solving, and critical thinking.
Based on several studies, the way to increase the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) of engineering education students can be done through the application of a project-based learning model [21], [24]−[26]. The implementation of this learning model is integrated with 21st-century learning technology in the form of live massive open online courses (MOOCs) technology. The design of this research consists of four discussions, namely the basis of learning philosophy, the syntax of the project-based learning model integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs), the effect of using this model to increase the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) of engineering education students.
The project-based learning model integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs) technology is used to improve the quality of the engineering education student learning process. This will have an impact on increasing the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) abilities of engineering education students. Therefore, this study has four objectives. The first objective is to explain the foundation of learning technology. The second objective is to explain the syntax of the project-based learning model integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs) according to preparing technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) for engineering education students. The third objective is to discuss increasing the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of engineering education students using a project-based learning model integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs). The fourth objective is to discuss improving the higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) of engineering education students using the project-based learning model integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs).
method
The research method in this article uses a literature study. The literature used consists of various books, articles, and documents related to technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) topics. The literature totals 53 references consisting of international journal articles and books that have been reviewed to design the syntax of an integrated project-based learning model of live massive open online courses (MOOCs). This literature review is also the basis for increasing the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) of engineering education students. Based on the literature review, the authors analyze and design a technology-integrated learning model to improve the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) of engineering education students according to the demands of 21st-century competencies that can succeed in the global pulpit.
Results and discussion
The preparation of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) for engineering education students with project-based learning integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs) can be explained through a discussion of 4 components including 1) the basis of learning philosophy, 2) learning model syntax, 3) the effect of the project-based learning model integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs)  on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK), and 4 ) the effect of the project-based learning model integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs) on higher-order thinking skills (HOTS). More details are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Development of innovative learning models to improve TPACK and HOTS

The design of the learning model in Figure 1 above shows that the development of innovative learning models to develop the professionalism of engineering education students related to technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) abilities can be defined into 4 components. More details are described in the discussion below.
The Foundation of the Philosophy of Learning in the 21st-century Era 
Online learning technology is an important component in enhancing student learning experiences in the 21st century [26]. The student learning experience in this era is identical to the digitalization of learning. The essence of learning technology is to increase the role of students as subjects in the learning process [16]. Improving the learning experience will improve the quality of student learning. The students' perceptions of online learning technology have an impact on the quality of their learning. As a result, when using learning technologies, you must employ appropriate design. Learning design is very influential on the achievement of learning objectives. The main objectives of 21st-century learning focus on collaboration, creativity, communication, and self-management [27]. This goal aligns with the desired skills in the digital age. In this era, providing vocational education is to prepare superior and productive human beings to play a role in the industrial world. This role can be realized by improving the quality of teachers who teach in vocational schools.
The characteristics of 21st-century learning are marked by the emergence of virtual classrooms based on digital technology. The development of learning technology has resulted in a change in the learning paradigm so far. The learning paradigm has shifted from face-to-face learning in the classroom to online learning. Online learning is not to replace the current learning model, but to complement it. The integration of these two learning models gives rise to a blended learning model. This model combines face-to-face learning in the classroom with online learning. So that learning innovations involving the role of technology can be realized through blended learning [28]. The application of this model is widely adopted in universities. Universities providing technical education should apply this learning model.
Learning in the network (online learning) in principle is divided into direct learning (synchronous) and indirect (asynchronous). Synchronous online learning provides a richer learning experience. This is because the interaction between students and learning media, students and lecturers, and between students is more intense. However, the flexibility of student learning time becomes an obstacle. Meanwhile, the asynchronous online model provides flexibility in learning time for students. However, this model has weaknesses in the process of student learning interactions. Learning attitudes and online learning readiness of students have a significant correlation. Therefore, equipping students with appropriate abilities requires learning readiness by creating a positive online learning attitude [29].
Learning technology affects student characteristics in 21st-century learning. This influence makes student learning styles in the education 4.0 era very skilled in using learning technologies such as mobile applications or web applications. Students get various information through this digital technology. This information, both structured and unstructured information, can be used by students to improve their learning experience. However, when students get unstructured information, it is difficult for them to construct the knowledge gained. The importance of the design and management of information from the internet concern to all education experts. Presenters of information have been known to use learning media. Learning media are divided into learning media by design and by utilization. Digital-based learning media is a challenge and opportunity in the 21st-century learning era [30].
The phenomenon of 21st-century learning disruption is known as the emergence of the education 4.0 era. In this era, the concept of learning changed from the limitations of providing structured knowledge packages to learning without boundaries. Shifting learning patterns from formal to informal learning. In addition, this era is marked by the emergence of unlimited learning along with the growth of Massive Open Online Courses or MOOCs. The emergence of massive open online courses (MOOCs) is a challenge for implementing distance learning systems. The application of this learning model can be done through a mixed learning design based on a massive open online course[31]. However, the most important thing in 21st-century learning focuses on developing student learning skills.
The development of student learning skills by facilitating students to become more familiar with the real environment later. In engineering education, it is known as a project-based learning model [32], [33]. This model affects the content knowledge of engineering education students [34]. The project-based learning model affects the content knowledge of engineering education students. The project-based learning model is following the development of student skills. The project-based learning model emphasizes more on product-producing skills. If it is associated with 21st-century skills, of course, the ability to create is the top skill.
In conclusion, facing these various phenomena and challenges, a framework is needed to realize this. Technology-based innovative learning models are needed to develop student skills. The skills of technical education students in higher education can be realized by integrating the live massive open online courses (MOOCs)  integrated project-based learning model. The project-based learning model embodies the role of learning technology. In addition, various face-to-face and online learning concepts can be accommodated. The project-based learning model uses a distance learning system combined with the characteristics of the vocational learning model, namely learning by doing.
Syntax Project-based Learning Integrated Live MOOCs 
The syntax of the project-based learning model integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs) is designed using a blended learning model. This learning model allows synchronous and asynchronous online integration. However, this model focuses on an online synchronous approach. The full syntax of this learning model is shown in Table 1 below.
TABLE 1. Project-based learning model syntax integrated live MOOCs	
Phase	Lecturer Activities	Student Activities	
Face-to-face Class	
Stage 1 (introduction) is carried out at the 1st, 4th, 7th, 10th, and 13th meetings	1. The lecturer explains the lesson plan
2. The lecturer conducts an initial assessment/pretest to measure students' initial abilities
3. The lecturer explains to students how to form groups	1. Students understand the lesson plan
2. Students work on pretest questions and fill out the questionnaire given by the lecturer
3. Students form groups for project assignments	
Phase 2 (PjBL core activities and presentations) is carried out at the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. The lecturer facilitates 6 steps of Project-based Learning and guides the group when presenting the project	1. Students carry out 6 steps of Project-based Learning and each group presents the project to be implemented	
Stage 3 (Tune Up Exercises) is carried out at the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. The lecturer guides the students to determine the treatment steps with each group	1. Each group discusses how to treat according to the standard operating procedures (SOP)	
Stage 4 (Damage Diagnosis Exercise) is carried out at the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. Lecturers guide students to determine repair steps and diagnose damage to vehicle systems	1. Each group performs a diagnosis and finds disturbances in the vehicle system	
Stage 5 (Reflection) is carried out at the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. Lecturers monitor whether students are successful in carrying out project assignments well	1. Each group provides feedback to each individual and other groups	
	Online classes (MOOCs)		
Stage 6 (Independent Learning and Quiz Practice) is carried out at the 1-14 meeting	1. Lecturers evaluate student learning outcomes about the material studied with the MOOCs website
2. Lecturers prepare materials and quizzes on the MOOCs website	1. Students take quizzes on the material studied with the MOOCs website within the specified time	
Stage 7 (Discussion and Review) is carried out at the 1-14th meeting	1. Lecturers facilitate live or synchronous discussions and student questions in MOOCs	1. Students discuss material online by posting comments on MOOCs and asking questions about problems that arise	
Stage 8 (Upload Work) is carried out at the 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. Lecturers upload student work on MOOCs	1. Students present their work uploaded on the MOOCs website	
Face-to-face Class	
Stage 9 (Learning Evaluation of each CPMK / formative evaluation and presentation of student work) is carried out at the 3rd, 6th, 9th, 12th, and 14th meetings	1. Lecturers evaluate learning outcomes about the material being studied
2. Lecturer conveys the evaluation of learning outcomes	1. Students present their work and work on test questions to evaluate their learning outcomes	
Stage 10 (Summative and Closing Evaluation) was carried out at the 16th meeting	1. Lecturer gives final exams questions
2. The lecturer gives a KBM evaluation questionnaire (Teaching and Learning Activities)	1. Students work on final exams questions
2. Students fill out the KBM evaluation questionnaire	

The syntax in Table 1 shows that the integration of online learning and face-to-face learning models in the classroom can be realized with an integrated project-based learning model of live massive open online courses (MOOCs). This syntax adopts the syntax of a project-based learning model that is integrated with massive open online courses (MOOCs) [35]. The combination of these learning models can be called a blended learning model. This syntax was developed to follow a series and sequence of lecture meetings that apply in sixteen meetings. This design is suitable for developing technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) and higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) engineering education students. The advantages of project-based learning models and MOOCs can be integrated with this syntax.
This syntax combines the steps of project-based learning and massive open online courses (MOOCs). The learning steps for project-based learning include five main steps, namely 1) start with essential questions, design a plan for the project, create a schedule, monitor the students and the progress of the project, assess the outcome, and evaluate the experience [36]. The learning steps based on massive open online courses (MOOCs), have three main steps, namely 1) seeking information with massive open online courses (MOOCs), 2) acquisition of information with massive open online courses (MOOCs), and 3) synthesizing knowledge with massive open online courses (MOOCs) [37]−[39]. So that the integration of these two models can be accommodated in an integrated project-based learning model of live massive open online courses (MOOCs).
In conclusion, the use of the integrated project-based learning model syntax of live massive open online courses (MOOCs) will undoubtedly benefit from face-to-face learning models and online learning. The effectiveness of learning can be increased by student involvement. Student involvement in learning is indicated by good interaction between students, students and learning media, and students and lecturers. This learning model focuses on the principle of the classroom as a learning center, not as a teaching center. This model is in line with the student-centered learning approach.
TPACK Preparation for Engineering Education Students with Integrated Project-based Learning Live MOOCs 
Engineering education students must have technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) skills. This competency focuses on knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content [9]. Technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) can be understood as a technology integration framework. The technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  framework is now the focus of competency development for engineering education students. The development of this competence is because the new learning era does not only focus on content. In the current era, learning apart from content also focuses on pedagogical knowledge and learning technology. So that innovative learning models are needed for the preparation and skill development program for engineering education students.
Learning model project-based learning integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs) is an innovative learning model based on blended learning. The blended learning model can increase the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of engineering education students [40]. This is because the experience and interaction of students in learning can be improved through an interactive learning model. An interactive learning model is a form of using learning technology effectively. The utilization of facilitated technology in a learning model provides more motivation for students.
The project-based learning model integrated live massive open online courses (MOOCs) can increase technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK). Technology-based learning models can improve the technological literacy of engineering education students [2]. So that the application of technology-based innovative learning models has a significant impact on improving the understanding of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) for engineering education students. Improved understanding of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  of engineering education students can be identified into three types of knowledge that can be put together by lecturers using learning technology. technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) improvement strategies can be carried out by reflecting on the role of technology in learning and the design of technology use [41].
Technology-based pedagogical strategies can increase the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of engineering education students. The application of this can be made by using a blended learning model. The flipped learning model is effective for increasing technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK)  [42]. This type of blended learning model can accommodate student collaboration in the learning class. A good learning class can be formed using technology. The project-based learning model integrated live The learning steps based on massive open online courses (MOOCs) have three main steps, namely provides another alternative from the traditional learning model. This model also facilitates engineering education students to practice virtually. Virtual learning exercises represent increasing the effectiveness of learning to increase the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of engineering education students [43].
In conclusion, the development of technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) is critical and should be undertaken as soon as possible by technical education providers. This development can be done by using the right learning model. Blended learning is one of the successful alternative learning approaches for developing the technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) of engineering education students. The blended learning model in engineering education student learning can be facilitated using a project-based learning model that is integrated with live MOOCs. This integration is a solution to the problems and needs of student competence in the era of 21st-century learning in vocational education.
HOTS Preparation for Engineering Education Students with Integrated Project-based Learning Live MOOCs
Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) is one of the critical competencies for preparing engineering education students in the era of education 4.0 [44]−[46]. Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) abilities emphasize the importance of learning, not just knowing. However, this ability requires students to create something based on the concepts that have been studied or the knowledge gained. Higher-order thinking skills (HOTS)  can be improved by implementing effective learning. The effectiveness of learning can be increased by using a blended learning approach [47].
Lecturers in the era 21st-century must be able to create and innovate to advance education. Good education is realized through a quality learning process. The learning model determines the quality of learning. The learning model in the 21st-century era adapts to the needs and characteristics of students. The characteristics of students in this era are closely related to the existence of learning technology. Learning technology supports the concept of digital learning. The use of this technology in addition to requiring knowledge and practical skills also requires creativity in its use [48]. So higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) which focus on developing creativity by developing creative abilities are very important. The development of creativity can be facilitated by using innovative learning models.
The integration of learning technology in a learning process must be harmonized. The important role of technology in learning can be implemented with the use of innovative learning models. Innovative learning models are a manifestation of the role of technology in learning. A mixed learning model (blended learning) can increase the effectiveness of learning. The effectiveness of learning to increase higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) can be done through personalized learning [49]. The blended learning model facilitates the different learning needs of students. This need is related to the characteristics of engineering education students.
The effectiveness of the blended learning model occurs because of the activity student. This model supports student-centered learning. Students can interact with various learning resources more easily. In addition, the interaction between students and learning media, students and lecturers, and between students can be improved. Strategies to increase students' higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) can be achieved using verbal and nonverbal interaction methods [50]. It aims to influence students' minds to improve their thinking skills quickly and effectively.
The blended learning model is a learning model that integrates face-to-face learning in the classroom and online learning [51], [52]. The face-to-face learning model has the advantage of delivering more meaningful messages. While the learning model in the network allows students to learn more flexibly and personally (personalized learning). So that the blended learning model becomes the most up-to-date learning design today. Utilization of learning technology for collaborative learning to develop students' higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) [53]. 
In conclusion, project-based learning integrated with live massive open online courses (MOOCs) has learning effectiveness that is very much in line with the characteristics of vocational education students. This model integrates a project-based learning model in online learning massive open online courses (MOOCs). The application of the project-based learning model encourages students to be more active in learning. This activity has an impact on learning outcomes. High-order learning outcomes or higher-order thinking skills (HOTS)  can be improved with this model. This model facilitates students to develop skills in creating based on previously acquired knowledge. The demands of 21st-century teacher competence related to higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) can be prepared by technical education providers by using innovative learning models based on digital technology.
CONCLUSION
The integration of live massive open online courses (MOOCs)  into the project-based learning model should be carried out by considering the characteristics of students, the availability of resources, and the characteristics of the subject matter. This learning model is suitable for use in engineering education students. The application of innovative models to improve the quality of engineering education students as prospective vocational teachers must be the concern of various parties. Technical education providers have a strategic role. This role is critical in developing a productive workforce by implementing technical education programs that prepare outstanding vocational teacher candidates.
References
1.	K. Açıkgül and R. Aslaner, “Effects of Geogebra supported micro teaching applications and technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) game practices on the TPACK levels of prospective teachers,” Educ. inf. Technol., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 2023–2047, 2020, doi:10.1007/s10639-019-10044-y.
2.	Irdalisa, Paidi, and Djukri, “Implementation of technology-based guided inquiry to improve tpack among prospective biology teachers,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 33–44, 2020, doi:10.29333/iji.2020.1323a.
3.	JHL Koh, “TPACK design scaffolds for supporting teacher pedagogical change,” Educ. Technol. res. Dev., 2019, doi:10.1007/s11423-018-9627-5.
4.	A. Kaplon-Schilis and I. Lyublinskaya, “Analysis of Relationship Between Five Domains of TPACK Framework: TK, PK, CK Math, CK Science, and TPACK of Pre-service Special Education Teachers,” Technol. knowl. Learn., 2020, doi:10.1007/s10758-019-09404-x.
5.	A. Tapani and AO Salonen, “Identifying teachers' competencies in Finnish vocational education,” Int. J. Res. Vocat. Educ. Train., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 243–260, 2019, doi:10.13152/IJRVET.6.3.3.
6.	N.-M. Nurhadi, Didik, Lyau, “Cultivating Responsibilities of Vocational Teachers: A Framework for Preparing Education to Work,” J. Pendidik. Technol. and SMK, 2018, doi: 10.21831/jptk.v24i2.19347.
7.	W. Wang, D. Schmidt-Crawford, and Y. Jin, “Preservice Teachers' TPACK Development: A Review of Literature,” J. Digit. Learn. Teach. Educ., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 234–258, 2018, doi:10.1080/21532974.2018.1498039.
8.	S. Ammade, M. Mahmud, B. Jabu, and S. Tahmir, “TPACK Model Based Instruction in Teaching Writing: An Analysis on TPACK Literacy,” Int. J. Lang. Educ., vol. 4, no. 2, p. 129, 2020, doi:10.26858/ijole.v4i2.12441.
9.	T. Valtonen, U. Leppänen, M. Hyypiä, E. Sointu, A. Smits, and J. Tondelur, “Fresh perspectives on TPACK: pre-service teachers' own appraisal of their challenging and confident TPACK areas,” Educ. inf. Technol., vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2823–2842, 2020, doi:10.1007/s10639-019-10092-4.
10.	X. Fan, “Policy-Driven Development and the Strategic Initiative of One-Million Enrollment Expansion in China's Higher Vocational Education,” ECNU Rev. Educ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 179–186, 2020, doi:10.1177/2096531120903879.
11.	A. Mukhadis, ABN Rahma Putra, AM Nidhom, A. Dardiri, and H. Suswanto, “The Relevance of Vocational High School Program with Regional Potency Priority in Indonesia,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2018, vol. 1028, no. 1, pp. 1–8, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1028/1/012079.
12.	A. GÖÇEN, HS ERAL, and MH BÜCÜK, “Teacher Perceptions of a 21st-century Classroom,” Int. J. Contem. Educ. Res., 2020, doi: 10.33200/ijcer.638110.
13.	H. Keser and A. Semerci, “Technology trends, Education 4.0 and beyond,” Contemp. Educ. res. J., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 39–49, 2019, doi:10.18844/cerj.v9i3.4269.
14.	U. Furqon Arbianto, W. Widiyanti, and D. Nurhadi, “Technological Readiness, Pedagogical And Content Knowledge (Tpack) Prospective Engineering Teachers at the State University of Malang,” J. Tek. Machines and Learning, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 1, 2019, doi:10.17977/um054v1i2p1-9.
15.	Central Bureau of Statistics, "Statistics official news August 5, 2020," Bps.Go.Id, 2020.
16.	TN Bochkareva et al., “The analysis of using active learning technology in institutions of secondary vocational education,” Int. J. Instr., 2020, doi: 10.29333/iji.2020.13326a.
17.	A. Ghanizadeh, AH Al-Hoorie, and S. Jahedizadeh, “Higher order thinking skills,” in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2020.
18.	HJ Kim, P. Yi, and JI Hong, “Students' academic use of mobile technology and higher-order thinking skills: The role of active engagement,” Educ. Sci., vol. 10, no. 3, p. 47, 2020, doi:10.3390/educsci10030047.
19.	CKS Singh, RKA Singh, TSM Singh, NA Mostafa, and TMT Mohtar, “Developing a Higher Order Thinking Skills Module for Weak ESL Learners,” English Lang. Teach., vol. 11, no. 7, p. 86, 2018, doi:10.5539/elt.v11n7p86.
20.	DM Wilson and S. Narasuman, “Investigating teachers' implementation and strategies on higher order thinking skills in school based assessment instruments,” Asian J. Univ. Educ., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 70–84, 2020, doi:10.24191/ajue.v16i1.8991.
21.	Suherman, MR Prananda, DI Proboningrum, ER Pratama, P. Laksono, and Amiruddin, “Improving Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) with Project-based Learning (PjBL) Model Assisted by Geogebra,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2020, vol. 1467, no. 1, p. 12027, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1467/1/012027.
22.	OECD, PISA 2018 Results. 2019.
23.	SC Cheng, GJ Hwang, and CL Lai, “Effects of the group leadership promotion approach on students' higher order thinking awareness and online interactive behavioral patterns in a blended learning environment,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 246–263, 2020, doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1636075.
24.	R. Eliyasni, AK Kenedi, and IM Sayer, “Blended Learning and Project-based Learning: The Method to Improve Students' Higher Order Thinking Skill (HOTS),” J. Iqra' Kaji. Educational Sciences., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 231–248, 2019, doi:10.25217/ji.v4i2.549.
25.	D. Muliyati et al., “The implementation of project-based learning to enhance the technological-content-knowledge for pre-service physics teacher in ICT courses,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2020, vol. 1521, no. 2, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1521/2/022023.
26.	RA Ellis and AM Bliuc, “Exploring new elements of the student approaches to learning framework: The role of online learning technologies in student learning,” Act. Learn. High. Educ., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 11–24, 2019, doi: 10.1177/14697877417721384.
27.	X. Wu, JS de Haan-Topolscak, MJ de Vries, and B. Ding, “Exploring mainland chinese and dutch high school students' conceptions of learning technology: A phenomenographic analysis,” Eurasia J. Math. science. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, no. 9, p. em1878, 2020, doi:10.29333/EJMSTE/8389.
28.	JA Kastner, “Blended learning: Moving beyond the thread quality of blended learning and instructor experiences,” J. Educ. Online, 2020.
29.	G. Hergüner, S. Buğra SON, S. Hergüner Son, and A. Dönmez, “The Effect of Online Learning Attitudes of University Students on their Online Learning Readiness,” TOJET Turkish Online J. Educ. Technol., vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 102–111, 2020.
30.	G. Lang-Wojtasik, RM Erichsen-Morgenstern, and J. Stratmann, “Online course: 'Global Medial' – Global learning through media competence and vice versa,” Int. J. Dev. Educ. Glob. Learn., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 52–68, 2020, doi:10.14324/ijdegl.12.1.05.
31.	L. Albó and D. Hernández-Leo, “Conceptualising a visual representation model for MOOC-based blended learning designs,” Australas. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1–26, 2020, doi:10.14742/ajet.5178.
32.	DA Sudjimat, A. Nyoto, and M. Romlie, “Implementation of Project-Based Learning Model and Workforce Character Development for the 21st-century in Vocational High School,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 181–198, 2020, doi: 10.29333/IJI.2021.14111A.
33.	DA Sudjimat, A. Nyoto, and M. Romlie, “Project Planning Characteristics In Project-Based Learning On Mechanical Engineering Study Program,” 2019, doi: 10.2991/icovet-18.2019.5.
34.	P. Eckardt, M. Craig, and L. Kraemer, “The Impact of Project-Based Learning on Student Content Knowledge in an Undergraduate , Teacher Preparation , Foundations of Education Course,” J. Leadersh. Instr., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 38–42, 2020.
35.	MS Subandi, ABNR Putra, S. Suhartadi, P. Partono, and P. Puspitasari, “PJBL-MOOCs Innovation to Improve Student Learning Outcomes in Middle Vocational Schools,” in the 4th International Conference on Vocational Education and Training, ICOVET 2020, 2020, pp. 170–174, doi:10.1109/ICOVET50258.2020.9230094.
36.	Edutopia, “How Does Project-Based Learning Work?,” Georg. Lucas Educ. Found., 2007.
37.	KF Hollebrands and HS Lee, “Effective design of massive open online courses for mathematics teachers to support their professional learning,” ZDM - Math. Educ., vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 859–875, 2020, doi:10.1007/s11858-020-01142-0.
38.	AS Sunar, RA Abbasi, HC Davis, S. White, and NR Aljohani, “Modelling MOOC learners' social behaviours,” Comput. Human Behavior, vol. 107, 2020, doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.013.
39.	T. Zhou, S. Huang, J. Cheng, and Y. Xiao, “The distance teaching practice of combined mode of massive open online course micro-video for interns in emergency department during the COVID-19 epidemic period,” Telemed. e-Health, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 584–588, 2020, doi:10.1089/tmj.2020.0079.
40.	AAA Qasem and G. Viswanathappa, “Blended Learning Approach to Develop the Teachers' TPACK,” Contemp. Educ. Technol., 2020, doi: 10.30935/cedtech/6176.
41.	J. Tondelur, R. Scherer, F. Siddiq, and E. Baran, “Enhancing pre-service teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): a mixed-method study,” Educ. Technol. res. Dev., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 319–343, 2020, doi:10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1.
42.	Y. Jin and C. Harp, “Examining preservice teachers' TPACK, attitudes, self-efficacy, and perceptions of teamwork in a stand-alone educational technology course using flipped classroom or flipped team-based learning pedagogies,” J. Digit. Learn. Teach. Educ., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 166–184, 2020, doi: 10.1080/21532974.2020.1752335.
43.	D. Oner, “A virtual internship for developing technological pedagogical content knowledge,” Australas. J. Educ. Technol., 2020, doi: 10.14742/ajet.5192.
44.	A. Hilton and G. Hilton, “Higher order thinking,” in Teaching Middle Years, 2020.
45.	MA Jarvis and OB Baloyi, “Scaffolding in reflective journaling: A means to develop higher order thinking skills in undergraduate learners,” Int. J. Africa Nurs. Sci., 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.ijans.2020.100195.
46.	A. Mukherjee, “Promoting Higher Order Thinking In MIS/CIS Students Using Class Exercises,” J. Inf. syst. Educ., vol. 15, no. 2, p. 8, 2020.
47.	A. Antwi-Boampong, “Towards a faculty blended learning adoption model for higher education,” Educ. inf. Technol., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 1639–1662, 2020, doi:10.1007/s10639-019-10019-z.
48.	A. Cropley, “Creativity-focused Technology Education in the Age of Industry 4.0,” Create. res. J., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 184–191, 2020, doi:10.1080/10400419.2020.1751546.
49.	AIM Elfeky, “The effect of personal learning environments on participants' higher order thinking skills and satisfaction,” Innov. Educ. Teach. Int., vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 505–516, 2019, doi:10.1080/14703297.2018.1534601.
50.	MT Mohamad Amirnudin and S. Saleh, “Effectiveness of disney's NLP-based strategy to improve student's higher order thinking skills,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 293–306, 2020, doi:10.29333/iji.2020.13320a.
51.	CJ Asarta and JR Schmidt, “The effects of online and blended experience on outcomes in a blended learning environment,” Internet High. Educ., vol. 44, no. November 2019, p. 100708, 2020, doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100708.
52.	J. Stein, CR Graham, J. Stein, and CR Graham, “Blended Teaching and Learning,” in Essentials for Blended Learning, 2020.
53.	AP Poudel, “Computer Supported Collaborative Learning for Developing Higher Order Thinking Skills in ELT,” Int. J. Multidiscipline. perspective. High. Educ., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 34–51, 2020.