Authors : Kath Leen S. Tidalgo; Candy D. Plaza; Zyra Jade B. Malong

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 1 - January

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/2m39v23f

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/4s7m3c7j

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26jan506

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This literature review synthesizes current empirical research to explore the relationship between the use of gamified and mobile learning applications and the development of scientific inquiry skills among senior high school students. The review first establishes that these technologies offer a significant positive advantage over traditional, lecture-based instruction by shifting learning from passive reception to active investigation. It then examines the crucial role of student engagement as a causal mediator, linking the use of technology-enhanced platforms to improved academic performance. Finally, the paper investigates how socio-demographic factors, such as age, academic track, and gender, and, most importantly, access to technology and the internet, act as critical moderators that shape the effectiveness of these educational interventions. Findings from a range of studies and meta-analyses suggest that while gamified and mobile learning are powerful tools, their full potential can only be realized when implemented with careful consideration of these moderating variables.

Keywords : Gamification, Mobile Learning, Scientific Inquiry, Student Engagement, Academic Performance, Socio-Demographic Factors, Technology Access, Digital Divide, STEM Education.

References :

1. Agbo, E. J., Ude, A. C., & Ejike, R. C. (2021). Engagement in mobile learning as a correlate of academic performance among science education students in public universities in Enugu State, Nigeria. European Journal of Training and Development Studies, 8(2), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.37745/ejtds.2014
2. Estrañero, J. G. (2024). Unequal access in the Philippine education system. ResearchGate.
3. Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing, 24(4), 230–235. https://doi.org/10.1179/2047480615Z.000000000329
4. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59109.
5. Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6
6. Husnaini, S. J., & Chen, S. (2019). Effects of guided inquiry virtual and physical laboratories on conceptual understanding, inquiry performance, scientific inquiry self-efficacy, and enjoyment. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 010119.
7. Hyacinth, E. (2019). Effect of STEM vs non-STEM curricula on student achievement (Publication No. 13861599) [Doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University]. ScholarWorks.
8. Icenogle, G. et al. (2019). Adolescent cognitive capacity reaches adult levels around age 16; psychosocial maturity later. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(43), 21489–21494.
9. Jia, C. (2020). Gender differences in science achievement and interest: A national sample. ERIC.
10. Kuş, M. (2025). Meta-analysis: Impact of technology factors on academic performance. PMC.
11. Li, Y. et al. (2024). Impact of digital educational games on student motivation and engagement (meta-analytic evidence). PMC.
12. Liu, C.-C., et al. (2021). Inquiry-based mobile learning in secondary science: A systematic review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(4), 1011–1026.
13. Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. J. (2007). Graduated access: The development of Internet use among teenage students. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1240–1262.
14. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. National Academies Press.
15. Nguyen, L. (2025). Digital Divide in Science Education: The Role of Technology Access and Skills in Supporting Underserved Students. Data and Metadata, 4(865), 10.56294/dm2025865. https://doi.org/10.56294/dm2025865
16. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. McGraw-Hill.
17. Rizk, J., & Davies, S. (2021). Can Digital Technology Bridge the Classroom Engagement Gap? Findings from a Qualitative Study of K-8 Classrooms in 10 Ontario School Boards. Social Sciences, 10(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10010012
18. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
19. Siddiq, F., et al. (2019). Meta-analysis: Is there a gender gap in ICT literacy? ScienceDirect.
20. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
21. So, H.-J., et al. (2020). Digital divide: Urban vs. rural effects on access and outcomes. In ICCE proceedings.
22. Suárez, Á., et al. (2018). A review of the types of mobile activities in mobile inquiry-based learning. Computers & Education, 118, 38–55.
23. Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples.
24. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305278283
25. Towner, E. (2023). Age patterns and cognitive training/learning differences in adolescence. ScienceDirect.
26. Wang, J. C., et al. (2022). Impact of smartphone use on learning effectiveness. PMC.
27. Wang, L. H., Chen, B., Hwang, G. J., et al. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: A meta-analysis. IJ STEM Ed, 9(26). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0
28. Wikipedia (2024). Stanford Mobile Inquiry-based Learning Environment. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_Mobile_Inquirybased_Learning_Environment?utm_source=chatgpt.com
29. Zhang, F., et al. (2024). Where inquiry-based science learning meets gamification: A design case of Experiverse. Behaviour & Information Technology, 44(5), 1099– 1121. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2024.2433058
30. Zhang, F., et al. (2025). Where inquiry-based science learning meets gamification (highschool lab simulations; quasi-experimental). Behaviour & Information Technology.