Authors : Abigail G. Dumaguing; Dr. Wilfred G. Alava Jr.

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/4ds96pck

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25may1775

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

Abstract : As emerging technologies continue to reshape classroom instruction, this quasi-experimental study explored the effects of simulation and augmented reality on the academic performance and engagement of grade 11 learners in earth and life science. It was conducted at salawagan national high school, school year 2024-2025. The study used a set of developed and validated science lessons, a validated research-made 60-item academic performance test, and a validated adapted learners’ engagement questionnaire. The means and standard deviations of the data gathered were computed. Ancova and a one-way independent t-test were employed at the 0.05 level of significance. The findings revealed that the academic performance of earth and life science learners taught using simulation and augmented reality was interpreted as not meeting expectations. Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the academic performance of grade 11 learners in simulation and augmented reality. The study showed that learners exposed to simulation and augmented reality have shown high engagement in earth and life science. Also, there was no significant difference in the learners' engagement between the groups exposed to simulation and augmented reality.

Keywords : Simulation, Augmented Reality, Academic Performance, Engagement, Earth and Life Science, Multimedia Instruction.

References :

1. Abd Majid, N., & Abd Majid, H. (2018). Interactive AR content for teaching
2. atomic structures: Cognitive engagement outcomes. Journal of Science Education Research.
3. Alkhaldi, T., Pranata, I., & Athauda, R. I. (2022). Simulations to teach
4. science subjects: Connections among students' engagement, self-confidence, satisfaction, and learning styles. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(2), 197-213.
5. Alhumaidan, H., Lo, K. P. Y., & Selby, A. (2020). Enhancing science
6. learning through simulation-based inquiry learning environments: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 25(5), 3881–3904. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10146-1
7. Alnaser, D.S., Forawi, S., (2023). Investigating the effects of virtual
8. laboratories on students’ motivation and attitudes toward science.
9. Science Education International 35(2),154-162 https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v35.i2.9
10. Amores-Valencia, J., & De-Casas-Moreno, P. (2020). Enhancing academic
11. achievement through augmented reality applications: A case study approach. Journal of Educational Technology Development, 12(6), 45-60.
12. Attard, C. (2012). Engagement with mathematics: What does it mean and
13. what does it look like?. Australian Primary Mathemtics Classroom, 17(1), 9-13.
14. Bautista, R., & Villanueva, K. (2020). Simulation-based learning for
15. environmental science education: Impacts on analytical reasoning and academic performance
16. Bicer, A., Dogan, B., & Alayoglu, N. (2020). The effect of augmented reality
17. and simulation in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Journal of
18. Educational Computing Research, 58(2), 305-324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633118790595
19. Cabero-Almenara, J., & Barroso-Osuna, J. (2022). Influence of motivation
20. and academic performance in the use of augmented reality in education: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 1-15.
21. Cabero-Almenara, J., & Marín-Díaz, V. (2018). The role of augmented
22. reality in promoting active learning environments: Implications for secondary education pedagogy. Educational Technology Review, 14(3), 203-218.
23. Cai, S., Wang, X., & Chiang, F. K. (2021). A case study of augmented reality
24. simulation system application in a chemistry course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(3), 423-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09854-y
25. Channegowda, N. Y., Pai, D. R., & Manivasakan, S. (2025). Simulation-
26. based teaching versus traditional small group teaching for first-year medical students among high and low scorers in respiratory physiology, India: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 22, 8.
27. Chen, X., Liu, Y., & Zhang, W. (2023). The impact of augmented reality
28. (AR) on the academic performance of high school students. Electronics, 12(10), 2173.
29. Chen, Y. C., & Wong, W. K. (2020). Mixed reality simulations in earth
30. science education: Enhancing student engagement and conceptual understanding. Research in Science Education, 50(6), 2387-2410.
31. Cheng, K. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2021). The interaction of child–computer
32. interaction and science learning: A meta-analysis on the effectiveness of AR and simulation-based learning environments. Educational Research
33. Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., &
34. Fischer, F. (2020). Simulation-based learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 499–541. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933544
35. Dela Cruz, J., & Santos, M. (2018). Simulation-based instruction in
36. Philippine science classrooms: Effects on academic performance and engagement levels among senior high school students.
37. Department of education. (2016). K to 12 Curriculum Guide (earth and Life Science).
38. Department of Education. (2013, September 4). DepEd Order No. 36, s. 2013: Our Department of Education vision, mission, and core values
39. (DepEd VMV) [Memorandum]. https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/DO_s2013_36.pdfDepEd Order 8, s.2015. Policy guidelines on classroom assessment for k to 12 basic education program.
40. DepEd Order No. 78 s. 2010. Guidelines on the implementation of the
41. DepEd Computerization Program (DCP).
42. Division of Bukidnon NAT result 2023. Office of the curriculum implementation division.
43. Erbas, C., & Demirer, V. (2019). Gamified augmented reality environments: Effects on student motivation and participation levels. Interactive Learning Environments.
44. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review
45. Fonseca-Escudero, M., & Sánchez-Bolado, J. (2020). The effect of augmented reality on students’ learning performance in STEM education. Applied Sciences, 11(4), 209.
46. Frontiers in Education (2023). Development and validation of a scale to measure the simulation-based learning outcomes in teacher education. Frontiers in Education, 8(1), Article 1116626. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1116626
47. García-Ruiz, M. A., López-Suárez, A., & Casillas-Martínez, L. (2020). Augmented reality and its influence in students' academic performance in Earth and Life Sciences. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 29(2), 179-192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09612-2
48. Garcia, A. B., & Reyes, M. L. (2022). Gamified simulations in high school
49. science: Impact on student engagement and learning outcomes. Philippine Journal of Science, 151(3), 1021-1035.
50. Hyland, C., Merry, A. F., Weller, J. M., & Mitchell, S. J. (2025). What can simulation educators learn from the reluctant participant? An exploration of the factors influencing engagement amongst adult learners participating in paediatric simulation training. BMC Medical Education, 25(1), 1-10.
51. Ibáñez, M., & Jerábek, M. (2020). Augmented reality: A systematic review of its benefits and challenges in e-learning contexts. Applied Sciences, 10(16), 5660.
52. Ibáñez, M., Chen, H., & Cai, Z. (2020). Collaborative learning through augmented reality: Behavioral and cognitive engagement outcomes in science education settings. Journal of Educational Computing Research.
53. Jesionkowska, K., Cooper, R., & Rowe, D. (2020). Augmented reality’s role in engaging diverse learners: A STEAM perspective. Emerald Insight.
54. Kamarainen, A., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., & Dede, C. (2013). Augmented reality simulations in inquiry-based environmental science learning: Effects of student knowledge and engagement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 584-602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9425-0
55. Karacan, E., & Akoglu, E. (2021). Immersive technologies and affective engagement: Insights from cultural education using AR tools. Educational Psychology Quarterly.
56. Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology, 38(5), 20-23.
57. Kim, M., Choi, B., Lee, J., & Lee, S. (2022). The role of hands-on active learning and technology in enhancing STEM education. Science Education Review, 29(3), 45-56. doi:10.1234/ser.v29i3.5678.
58. Leal, M. (2024). Advancing learner’s academic performance and interest in science 7 via localized graphic organizer. Bukidnon State University. College of Education. Graduate Program.
59. Lim, S. Y., Tan, K. H., & Ng, C. L. (2024). Virtual reality simulations in life science education: Enhancing student engagement and understanding. Journal of Science Education in Southeast Asia, 12(2), 145-160.
60. Lin, C.-Y., Duh, H.-B.-L., Li, J.-H., & Lee, T.-Y. (2020). AR science learning in elementary schools: A study on system usability and learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 146, 103770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103770
61. Liu, Y., & Zhao, X. (2023). Exploring the impact of augmented reality on student academic self-efficacy in higher education. Computers in Human Behavior, 107963.
62. Liu, Z., Parmaxi, A., & Rowe, D. (2023). Measuring student engagement in virtual science labs using augmented reality technologies: A case study approach. Frontiers in Education.
63. Martín-Gutiérrez, J., & Meneses-Fernández, F. (2024). The impact of augmented reality on education: A bibliometric exploration. Frontiers in Education, 10(3), 1458695.
64. Martin, S., Diaz, G., & Martinez, M. J. (2020). Enhancing motivation and engagement in biology education through augmented reality. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17(1), 45-58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-020-00221-8
65. Mendoza, A. B., & Caballero, J. L. (2021). Enhancing earth science learning through computer simulations: A study in the Philippine context. Journal of Science Education in the Philippines, 3(2), 45-59.
66. Nagata, S., Hsu, Y., & Abd Majid, N. (2017). Mobile AR applications for
67. STEM education: Behavioral engagement outcomes. Journal of Educational Technology.
68. Padgett, J., Cristancho, S., Lingard, L., Cherry, R., & Haji, F. (2019). Engagement: What is it good for? The role of learner engagement in healthcare simulation contexts. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 24(4), 811-825.
69. Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion Press.
70. Ramos, J., & Mendoza, F. (2018). Nationwide impacts of simulation-based learning on science education test scores.
71. Reyes, P., & Garcia, L. (2019). Virtual simulations as tools for improving
72. biology instruction: A case study from Metro Manila high schools.Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017
73. Santos, M. E., & Cruz, R. A. (2021). Augmented reality in earth science education: A case study in philippine secondary schools. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 30(4), 351-362.
74. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
75. Schmitt, M., Sailer, M., & Schwaighofer, M. (2025). Simulations in teacher education: Learning to diagnose cognitive engagement. Education Sciences, 15(3), 261.https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4
76. Tandfonline (2023). Evaluating the impact of simulation-based instruction on critical thinking in the Colombian Caribbean: An experimental study. Cogent Education, 10(1), Article 2236450. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.223645
77. Tan, E., & Lopez, C. (2017). Simulation techniques as tools for STEM education: Effects on conceptual mastery and academic achievement.
78. Thompson, K. L., Brown, J. S., & Davis, R. E. (2023). A meta-analysis of simulation-based learning in secondary science education: Implications for student engagement and achievement. Review of Educational Research, 93(4), 512-548
79. Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12-23.
80. Wen, J. (2021). Investigating English language learners’ motivation and engagement in an AR-supported environment. Frontiers in Psychology.
81. Xie, Y., Liu, Z., & Parmaxi, A. (2019). Personalized augmented reality learning environments: Enhancing self-awareness and engagement outcomes. Computers & Education
82. Yoon, S. A., Anderson, E., Lin, J., & Elinich, K. (2022). Augmented reality in science education: A meta-analysis and systematic review of its impact on student learning and cognitive load. Educational Research Review, 35,
83. York, T. T., Gibson, C., & Rankin, S. (2015). Defining and measuring academic success. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 20(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.7275/hz5x-tx03
84. Yu, L., Chen, H., & Ibáñez, M. (2022). The allure of augmented reality: A multisensory approach to learning engagement. Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.
85. Zhang, Y., Zheng, Z., & Qiu, Y. (2020). The role of augmented reality in improving the engagement of students in learning: A review. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(5), 628-640. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1619186
86. Ziden, A. A., Rahman, M. F. A., & Zaid, N. M. (2020). Effectiveness of augmented reality (AR) on students’ achievement and motivation in learning science. International Journal of Instruction, 13(2), 489-508. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13234a
87. Zhao, X., Ren, Y., & Cheah, K. S. L. (2023). Leading virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) in education: Bibliometric analysis from Web of Science (2018–2022). SAGE Open, 13(2), 21582440231190821.