Development of an Integrated PhET and Augmented Reality Package in a Flipped Classroom to Improve Conceptual Understanding of Renewable Energy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17977/um065.v6.i12.2026.1Keywords:
Augmented reality, Conceptual understanding, Flipped classroom, PhET simulation, Renewable energyAbstract
Renewable energy is an abstract topic in junior high school science: its systems and energy conversions are difficult to visualize, and teacher-centered instruction often leaves students with fragile, fragmented conceptual understanding. This study developed and evaluated a learning package that integrates PhET virtual-laboratory simulations with augmented reality (AR) 3D visualizations, delivered through a flipped-classroom approach, and examined its feasibility, practicality, and effectiveness for Grade IX students' conceptual understanding of renewable energy. Following the ADDIE Research and Development model, PhET simulations and AR scenes (authored in Assemblr Edu) were integrated into a flipped lesson in which first exposure occurred before class and class time was used for manipulation and discussion. Feasibility was assessed by media, content, and language experts using the Gregory index; practicality by teacher and student response questionnaires; and effectiveness by a 25-item conceptual-understanding test (pretest–posttest, n = 34) analyzed with the Hake normalized gain (N-gain) after confirming item construct validity. The package was very valid (media Gregory index 0.89; content and language 1.00), highly practical (student 91% and 81%; teacher 93%), and, in a single-group pretest–posttest design, associated with a medium gain (mean N-gain 0.50; scores rose from 81.18 to 91.53). Pairing manipulable simulation and spatial AR within a flipped structure was designed to shift learning toward a student-centered, inquiry-oriented process. The package offers a feasible, smartphone-deliverable route to visualizing abstract renewable-energy concepts.References
Abeysekera, L., & Dawson, P. (2014). Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: Definition, rationale, and a call for research. Higher Education Research & Development, 34(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.934336
Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G. (2017). Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, 20, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002
Alalwan, N., Cheng, L. K., Al-Samarraie, H., Yousef, R., Alzahrani, A. I., & Sarsam, S. M. (2020). Challenges and prospects of virtual reality and augmented reality utilization among primary school teachers: A developing country perspective. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 66, 100876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2020.100876
AlJarrah, A., Thomas, M. K., & Shehab, M. (2018). Investigating temporal access in a flipped classroom: Procrastination persists. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0083-9
Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2021). Effect of integrating physics education technology simulations on students’ conceptual understanding in physics: A review of literature. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 023108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108
Bhattacharya, S. C. (2001). Renewable energy education at the university level. Renewable Energy, 22(1–3), 91–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-1481(00)00011-2
Bishop, J. L., & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition: Conference proceedings. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22585
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Çakirlar Altuntaş, E., & Turan, S. L. (2018). Awareness of secondary school students about renewable energy sources. Renewable Energy, 116, 741–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.09.034
Cholily, Y. M., In’am, A., Inganah, S., & Effendi, M. M. (2019). The learning of solar cell electricity among students in junior high school. Energy Economics Letters, 6(1), 17–22. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.82.2019.61.17.22
de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543068002179
Doyan, A., Hadi, D. F., & ’Ardhuha, J. (2023). Effect of PhET simulation-assisted project-based learning model on students’ creative thinking skills in elasticity materials. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(5), 3856–3861. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i5.3695
Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1
Faour, M. A., & Ayoubi, Z. (2018). The effect of using virtual laboratory on grade 10 students’ conceptual understanding and their attitudes towards physics. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 4(1), 54–68. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.387482
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Furqon, M. (2024). The impact of utilizing interactive conceptual instruction assisted by PhET simulations on students’ understanding ability in physics. SPEKTRA: Jurnal Kajian Pendidikan Sains, 10(2), 244–258. https://doi.org/10.32699/spektra.v10i2.7740
Garzón, J. (2021). An overview of twenty-five years of augmented reality in education. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 5(7), 37. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti5070037
Hadiprayitno, G., Jufri, A. W., & Nufus, S. S. (2020). Mapping of students’ scientific literacy skills at Mataram. SEJ (Science Education Journal), 4(2), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.21070/sej.v4i2.969
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Huda, C., Hudha, M. N., Ain, N., Nandiyanto, A. B. D., Abdullah, A. G., & Widiaty, I. (2018). The implementation of blended learning using Android-based tutorial video in computer programming course II. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 288, 012163. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/288/1/012163
Hudha, M. N., Batlolona, J. R., & Wartono. (2019). Science literacy ability and physics concept understanding in the topic of work and energy with inquiry-STEM. AIP Conference Proceedings, 2202, 020063. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5141676
Jufriansah, A., Lering, L., & Donuata, P. B. (2022). Utilization of PhET simulation in flipped classroom to improve students’ critical thinking skills. Jurnal Riset dan Kajian Pendidikan Fisika, 9(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.12928/jrkpf.v9i1.26
Kamila, A. U., Rahmawati, R. G., & Jumadi. (2021). Development of worksheet based on STEM-PBL with PhET simulation to improve students’ problem solving during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Proceedings of the 6th International Seminar on Science Education (ISSE 2020) (Vol. 541, pp. 557–562). https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210326.080
Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A. (2006). “Making it real”: Exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality, 10(3–4), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-006-0036-4
Kriek, J., & Stols, G. (2010). Teachers’ beliefs and their intention to use interactive simulations in their classrooms. South African Journal of Education, 30(3), 439–456. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v30n3a284
Papakostas, C., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2021). Measuring user experience, usability, and interactivity of a personalized mobile augmented reality training system. Sensors, 21(11), 3888. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21113888
Pranata, O. D. (2023). Enhancing conceptual understanding and concept acquisition of gravitational force through guided inquiry utilizing PhET simulation. Sainstek: Jurnal Sains dan Teknologi, 15(1), 44–53. https://doi.org/10.31958/js.v15i1.9191
Rachma, A., Iriani, T., & Handoyo, S. S. (2023). Penerapan model ADDIE dalam pengembangan media pembelajaran berbasis video simulasi mengajar keterampilan memberikan reinforcement. Jurnal Pendidikan West Science, 1(8), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.58812/jpdws.v1i08.554
Rahmawati, Y., Zulhipri, Hartanto, O., Falani, I., & Iriyadi, D. (2022). Students’ conceptual understanding in chemistry learning using PhET interactive simulations. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 12(2), 303–326. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.1597
Salame, I. I., & Makki, J. (2021). Examining the use of PhET simulations on students’ attitudes and learning in general chemistry II. Interdisciplinary Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 17(4), e2247. https://doi.org/10.21601/ijese/10966
Santos, M. E. C., Chen, A., Taketomi, T., Yamamoto, G., Miyazaki, J., & Kato, H. (2014). Augmented reality learning experiences: Survey of prototype design and evaluation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(1), 38–56. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2013.37
Saputra, A., Wilujeng, I., Wiyarsi, A., & Niyamae, A. N. (2026). Augmented reality in science education: Bibliometric and systematic literature review of trends and outcomes. Research and Development in Education (RaDEn), 6(1), 105–137. https://doi.org/10.22219/raden.v6i1.43412
Suherman, W., Kariadinata, R., & Chusni, M. M. (2025). Effectiveness of PhET interactive simulation-based learning on grade XI students’ conceptual understanding of projectile motion. CAHAYA: Journal of Research on Science Education, 3(2), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.70115/cahaya.v3i2.331
Suryani, E., Rusilowati, A., & Wardono. (2016). Analisis pemahaman konsep IPA siswa SD menggunakan two-tier test melalui pembelajaran konflik kognitif. Journal of Primary Education, 5(1), 56–65. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/jpe/article/download/12893/7031
Thees, M., Kapp, S., Strzys, M. P., Beil, F., Lukowicz, P., & Kuhn, J. (2020). Effects of augmented reality on learning and cognitive load in university physics laboratory courses. Computers in Human Behavior, 108, 106316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106316
van Alten, D. C. D., Phielix, C., Janssen, J., & Kester, L. (2019). Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 28, 100281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.05.003
Yani, L. P., & Widiyatmoko, A. (2023). The effectiveness of the PhET-assisted creative problem-solving model on students’ creative thinking abilities and cognitive learning outcomes. Jurnal Inovasi Pendidikan IPA, 9(2), 146–156. https://doi.org/10.21831/jipi.v9i2.45902
Yilmaz, O. (2021). Augmented reality in science education: An application in higher education. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9(3), 136–148. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v9i3.3907
Yu, Q., & Yu, K. (2023). The effects of gamified flipped classroom on student learning: Evidence from a meta-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(9), 5126–5141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209791
Zainuddin, Z., Haruna, H., Li, X., Zhang, Y., & Chu, S. K. W. (2019). A systematic review of flipped classroom empirical evidence from different fields: What are the gaps and future trends? On the Horizon, 27(2), 72–86. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-09-2018-0027
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Nada Dhenia Febriyanti, Muhammad Nur Hudha, Riezky Maya Probosari, Annisa Nur Khasanah, Supurwoko Supurwoko
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Funding data
-
Universitas Sebelas Maret
Grant numbers 462/UN27.22/PT.01.03/2026
