Teknologi Digital dalam Pendidikan Fisika: A Systematic Literature Review tentang Fungsi Pedagogis, Aktivitas Pembelajaran, dan Capaian Pembelajaran Peserta Didik (2016–2025): Digital Technology in Physics Education: A Systematic Literature Review of Pedagogical Functions, Learning Activities, and Student Learning Outcomes (2016–2025)

Nur Raudyah Musyarrafah; Heru Kuswanto; Heny Asvarinda; Herman Sinurat

Authors

Nur Raudyah Musyarrafah Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Heru Kuswanto Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
Heny Asvarinda SMAN 1 Poso Pesisir Utara, Poso, Indonesia
Herman Sinurat SMP Great Prime School, Binjai, Indonesia

Keywords:

teknologi digital, pendidikan fisika, systematic literature review, fungsi pedagogis, aktivitas pembelajaran, capaian pembelajaran

Abstract

Pembelajaran fisika menuntut pemahaman konsep abstrak melalui pengamatan, representasi, dan pengalaman belajar yang bermakna. Teknologi digital menawarkan sarana visualisasi, simulasi, dan aktivitas interaktif untuk mendukung proses pembelajaran tersebut. Namun, penerapannya dalam pendidikan fisika menunjukkan keragaman jenis teknologi, fungsi pedagogis, aktivitas, serta capaian pembelajaran yang perlu dipetakan secara sistematis. Penelitian ini bertujuan memetakan pemanfaatan teknologi digital dalam pendidikan fisika melalui Systematic Literature Review terhadap publikasi periode 2016–2025. Pencarian dilakukan melalui basis data Scopus menggunakan dua kueri dan kriteria seleksi berdasarkan pedoman PRISMA. Dari 321 rekaman awal, sebanyak 80 artikel memenuhi kriteria dan ditetapkan sebagai korpus akhir penelitian. Data diekstraksi dan dikodekan berdasarkan jenis teknologi digital, fungsi pedagogis, aktivitas pembelajaran, serta capaian pembelajaran peserta didik. Frekuensi dan persentase digunakan untuk pemetaan deskriptif, sedangkan sintesis interpretatif digunakan untuk mengidentifikasi kesenjangan penelitian. Hasil menunjukkan bahwa simulasi dan laboratorium virtual merupakan teknologi paling banyak diteliti, ditemukan dalam 20 artikel atau 25% korpus. Visualisasi dan pemodelan konsep menjadi fungsi pedagogis paling dominan, dilaporkan dalam 37 artikel atau 46,25%. Kuis, tes, dan asesmen berulang merupakan aktivitas paling sering dilaporkan, mencakup 18 artikel atau 22,5%. Eksperimen, praktikum, dan analisis data menyusul dengan 16 artikel atau 20% dari keseluruhan korpus. Motivasi, minat, keterlibatan, dan sikap menjadi kelompok capaian pembelajaran paling banyak dikaji, ditemukan dalam 24 artikel atau 30%. Sintesis mengidentifikasi empat kesenjangan, yaitu kejelasan konseptual, kedalaman integrasi pedagogis, keluasan capaian pembelajaran, dan konsistensi bukti penelitian. Kesenjangan tersebut menegaskan perlunya kejelasan konsep, integrasi pedagogis, pengukuran capaian beragam, serta pelaporan hasil transparan. Temuan ini dapat membantu pendidik memilih teknologi berdasarkan tujuan pembelajaran dan membantu peneliti merancang kajian lebih terarah. Kajian ini terbatas pada Scopus dan publikasi 2016–2025, sehingga cakupan temuannya perlu ditafsirkan secara proporsional. Penelitian mendatang perlu memperluas sumber literatur dan menguji hubungan antardimensi melalui bukti empiris beragam.

Abstract

Physics learning requires students to understand abstract concepts through observation, representation, and meaningful learning experiences. Digital technology offers visualization, simulation, and interactive activities to support these learning processes. However, its implementation in physics education demonstrates variations in technology types, pedagogical functions, learning activities, and learning outcomes that require systematic mapping. This study aims to map the utilization of digital technology in physics education through a Systematic Literature Review of publications from 2016 to 2025. The literature search was conducted using the Scopus database with two search queries and selection criteria based on PRISMA guidelines. Of the 321 initial records, 80 articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in the final corpus. Data were extracted and coded based on digital technology types, pedagogical functions, learning activities, and students' learning outcomes. Frequencies and percentages were used for descriptive mapping, while interpretive synthesis was employed to identify research gaps. The findings indicate that simulations and virtual laboratories were the most frequently studied technologies, appearing in 20 articles or 25% of the corpus. Visualization and conceptual modeling were the dominant pedagogical functions, reported in 37 articles or 46.25%. Quizzes, tests, and repeated assessments were the most frequently reported learning activities, accounting for 18 articles or 22.5%. Experiments, practical activities, and data analysis followed, appearing in 16 articles or 20% of the corpus. Motivation, interest, engagement, and attitudes represented the most frequently examined learning outcomes, identified in 24 articles or 30%. The synthesis identified four research gaps: conceptual clarity, depth of pedagogical integration, breadth of learning outcomes, and consistency of research evidence. These gaps highlight the need for clearer concepts, stronger pedagogical integration, broader outcome measurement, and more transparent reporting of research findings. These findings can help educators select technologies based on learning objectives and assist researchers in designing more focused studies. This review is limited to Scopus-indexed publications from 2016 to 2025, so its findings should be interpreted proportionally. Future research should expand literature sources and examine relationships across dimensions through more diverse empirical evidence.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdulayeva A., Zhanatbekova N., Andasbayev Y., Khaimuldanov Y., Zhiyembayev Z. (2025). THE ROLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI) IN PERSONALISED PHYSICS EDUCATION. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 14(3), 599–615. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v14i3.29752.

Abdullah H., Malago J.D., Arafah K. (2021). The implementation of physics learning through online mode during pandemic covid-19 using metacognitive knowledge-based materials. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(2), 220–227. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i2.28583.

Abdurrahman, Herlina K., Sari P.M. (2022). Online learning with multi-representation worksheets for oral and written communication skills on light reflecting material. Online Learning In Educational Research, 2(1), 49–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v2i1.122.

Agyare B., Asare J., Kraishan A., Nkrumah I., Adjekum D.K. (2025). A cross-national assessment of artificial intelligence (AI) Chatbot user perceptions in collegiate physics education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 8, Article 100365. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2025.100365.

Al-Kamzari F., Alias N. (2024). Exploring the readiness of high school physics students for project-based hybrid learning in the Sultanate of Oman. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(2), 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14241.

Alarabi K., Tairab H., Rabbani L., El Hassan Hamad S. (2022). Teachers' and Students' Attitudes Toward Online Physics Education During the COVID-19 Pandemic in UAE. International Journal of Instruction, 15(4), 293–310. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15417a.

Amaaz A., Mouradi A., Erradi M. (2024). A MODEL FOR PHYSICS PRACTICAL WORK USING MOBILE LEARNING AND LEARNING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (LMS) IN HIGHER EDUCATION: DESIGN, VALIDATION, AND EVALUATION. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(5), 809–825. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/24.23.809.

Anh T.T.N., Nhat N.D., Phuong T.T.M. (2025). Evaluating Gamified Mobile Learning with Quizalize: Engagement and Equity in Vietnamese Physics Education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies , 19(19), 122–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v19i19.56409.

Astalini, Qizi K.C.A., San M.T., Yusifov S., Byamba-Ochir N. (2023). Development of MATLAB-Based Physics Practical Media to Optimize Online Learning for Students on Sine Wave Material. Journal of Educational Technology and Learning Creativity, 1(2), 88–97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jetlc.v1i2.1396.

Astalini, Darmaji, Kurniawan D.A., Octavia S.W. (2024). ASSEMBLER EDU E-MODULES: IMPROVING ARGUMENTATION SKILLS, PERSEVERANCE, AND CURIOSITY IN PHYSICS LEARNING. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 8(2), 550–562. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v8i2.37238.

Asyhari A., Komikesari H. (2024). Investigating Factors Affecting Students’ Attitudes and Readiness Towards Collaborative Online Learning Environments in Physics. Online Learning In Educational Research, 4(2), 113–130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v4i2.509.

Ayasrah F.T.M., Alarabi K., Al Mansouri M., Fattah H.A.A., Al-Said K. (2024). Enhancing secondary school students' attitudes toward physics by using computer simulations. International Journal of Data and Network Science, 8(1), 369–380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijdns.2023.9.017.

Bakhtibaeva S.A., Grinshkun V.V., Berkimbaev K.M., Turmambekov T.A. (2016). Use of information technology in teaching semiconductors physics. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(19), Article 93892. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i19/93892.

Bessas N., Tzanaki E., Vavougios D., Plagianakos V.P. (2025). The role of ChatGPT in junior high school physics education: Insights from teachers and students and guidelines for optimal use. Social Sciences and Humanities Open, 11, Article 101610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101610.

Bouras N., Ayaichi L., Amaaz A., Mouradi A., Erradi M. (2025). Mobile Learning in Physics Education: Evaluating the Impact of Interactive Videos on Practical Work. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies , 19(13), 4–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v19i13.53617.

Büyükbayraktar F.N., Dilber R. (2022). Teaching of Magnetism Unit Topics Via Active Learning Applications. Participatory Educational Research, 9(6), 286–311. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17275/per.22.140.9.6.

Carli M. (2024). Implementing active learning in a teaching-learning sequence on rolling motion for mechanical engineers. European Journal of Physics, 45(5), Article 055701. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ad5edb.

Celestino-Salcedo R.K.M., Malayao S.O., Jr., Salic-Hairulla M.A., Castro E.J., Mordeno I.C.V. (2024). Vodcast embedded with physics education technology simulation in learning projectile motion. Journal of Education and Learning, 18(3), 1047–1055. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i3.21434.

Chekour M., Seghroucheni Y.Z., Tadlaoui M.A., Hafid M.M. (2022). Blended Learning and Simulation for Teaching Electrical Concepts to High School Pupils. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(4), 1119–1134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.165.

Coban A., Dzsotjan D., Küchemann S., Durst J., Kuhn J., Hoyer C. (2025). AI support meets AR visualization for Alice and Bob: personalized learning based on individual ChatGPT feedback in an AR quantum cryptography experiment for physics lab courses. EPJ Quantum Technology, 12(1), Article 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00310-z.

Cohen D., Sasson I. (2016). Online quizzes in a virtual learning environment as a tool for formative assessment. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(3), 188–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.217.

Cárdenas-Sainz B.A., Barrón-Estrada M.L., Zatarain-Cabada R., Chavez-Echeagaray M.E. (2023). Evaluation of eXtended reality (XR) technology on motivation for learning physics among students in mexican schools. Computers and Education: X Reality, 3, Article 100036. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cexr.2023.100036.

Darmaji, Jamlan M., Yildiz R., Boglou A.K., Baharin Z.H.Z. (2024). Utilization of Wokwi Technology as a Modern Electronics Learning Media. Journal of Educational Technology and Learning Creativity, 2(2), 256–268. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jetlc.v2i2.1392.

Dorocki M., Radulović B., Stojanović M., Gajić O. (2022). Impact of blended learning approach on students’ achievement and mental effort. Canadian Journal of Physics, 100(3), 193–199. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjp-2019-0602.

Eldy E.F., Sulaiman F., Ishak M.Z., Uden L., Netto-Shek J.-A. (2025). Gender differences in motivation and problem-solving in a physics course online problem-based learning. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 14(4), 2832–2845. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i4.31105.

Erdoğan Ş., Doç, Bozkurt E. (2022). The effect of virtual laboratory applications prepared for Geometrical Optics Lesson on students’ achievement levels and attitudes towards Physics. Pegem Egitim ve Ogretim Dergisi, 12(2), 226–234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.12.02.22.

Fan X., Geelan D., Gillies R. (2018). Evaluating a novel instructional sequence for conceptual change in physics using interactive simulations. Education Sciences, 8(1), Article 29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010029.

Fidan M., Tuncel M. (2019). Integrating augmented reality into problem based learning: The effects on learning achievement and attitude in physics education. Computers and Education, 142, Article 103635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103635.

Georgiou Y., Tsivitanidou O., Ioannou A. (2021). Learning experience design with immersive virtual reality in physics education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(6), 3051–3080. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10055-y.

Gerhátová Ž., Perichta P., Palcut M. (2020). Project-based teaching of the topic “energy sources” in physics via integrated e-learning—pedagogical research in the 9th grade at two primary schools in Slovakia. Education Sciences, 10(12), 1–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10120371.

Halim A., Mahzum E., Yacob M., Irwandi I., Halim L. (2021). The impact of narrative feedback, e-learning modules and realistic video and the reduction of misconception. Education Sciences, 11(4), Article 158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040158.

Hochberg K., Kuhn J., Müller A. (2018). Using Smartphones as Experimental Tools—Effects on Interest, Curiosity, and Learning in Physics Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(5), 385–403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9731-7.

Hochberg K., Becker S., Louis M., Klein P., Kuhn J. (2020). Using Smartphones as Experimental Tools—a Follow-up: Cognitive Effects by Video Analysis and Reduction of Cognitive Load by Multiple Representations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(2), 303–317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09816-w.

Hoshino T., Ota Y., Tomaru K., Hamamatsu Y., Komuro T. (2019). New functions and evaluation for learning effects of acceleration experiment support software. International Journal on Advanced Science, Engineering and Information Technology, 9(1), 242–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.9.1.7580.

Jufrida J., Kurniawan W., Furqon M., Anwar K., Falah H.S., Riantoni C. (2025). AI-DRIVEN ETHNOSCIENCE LEARNING: ENHANCING PHYSICS EDUCATION THROUGH MALAY CULTURAL INSIGHTS. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 24, Article 13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28945/5520.

Kannan V., Warriem J.M., Majumdar R., Ogata H. (2022). Learning dialogs orchestrated with BookRoll: effects on engagement and learning in an undergraduate physics course. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 17(1), Article 28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-022-00203-0.

Katanosaka T., Khan M.F.F., Sakamura K. (2024). PhyGame: An Interactive and Gamified Learning Support System for Secondary Physics Education. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 15(6), 84–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2024.0150611.

Kohnle A., Rizzoli A. (2017). Interactive simulations for quantum key distribution. European Journal of Physics, 38(3), Article 035403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/aa62c8.

Lakka I., Zafeiropoulos V., Leisos A. (2023). Online Virtual Reality-Based vs. Face-to-Face Physics Laboratory: A Case Study in Distance Learning Science Curriculum. Education Sciences, 13(11), Article 1083. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111083.

Laumann D., Schlummer P., Abazi A., Borkamp R., Lauströer J., Pernice W., Schuck C., Schulz-Schaeffer R., Heusler S. (2024). Analyzing the Effective Use of Augmented Reality Glasses in University Physics Laboratory Courses for the Example Topic of Optical Polarization. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(5), 668–685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10112-0.

Laumann D., Fischer J.A., Stürmer-Steinmann T.K., Welberg J., Weßnigk S., Neumann K. (2024). Designing e-learning courses for classroom and distance learning in physics: The role of learning tasks. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(1), Article 010107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.010107.

Lebedev P., Lindstrøm C., Sharma M.D. (2021). Making linear multimedia interactive: Questions, solutions and types of reflection. European Journal of Physics, 42(1), Article 015707. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/abbaaf.

Mardiana N., Maulina B., Mardiani N., Sabar S., Collantes L.M. (2025). ENHANCING CRITICAL THINKING SKILLS THROUGH ANDROID-ASSISTED VIRTUAL PHYSICS LEARNING: A FOCUS ON HOTS DEVELOPMENT. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 9(2), 513–526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22437/jiituj.v9i2.34373.

Marshman E.M., DeVore S., Singh C. (2018). Challenge of helping introductory physics students transfer their learning by engaging with a self-paced learning tutorial. Frontiers in ICT, 5(MAR), Article 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2018.00003.

Marzari A., Di Mauro M., Rosi T., Onorato P., Malgieri M. (2023). Investigating the Principle of Relativity and the Principle of Equivalence in Classical Mechanics: Design and Evaluation of a Teaching–Learning Sequence Based on Experiments and Simulations. Education Sciences, 13(7), Article 712. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070712.

Mathew A., Sagayam K.M., Immanuel J.S., Jebarani P.E. (2025). NEXT-GEN PHYSICS EDUCATION: AR/VR-POWERED SIMPLE PENDULUM LEARNING FOR OBE AND NEP 2020. Archives for Technical Sciences, 3(34), 1285–1296. DOI: https://doi.org/10.70102/afts.2025.1834.1285.

McClellan D., Chastain R.J., DeCaro M.S. (2024). Enhancing learning from online video lectures: the impact of embedded learning prompts in an undergraduate physics lesson. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 36(3), 852–874. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-023-09379-w.

Melo M. (2018). The 4C/ID-model in physics education: Instructional design of a digital learning environment to teach electrical circuits. International Journal of Instruction, 11(1), 103–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.1118a.

Mills E., Mizouri A., Peach A. (2025). Prompting Better Feedback: A Study of Custom GPT for Formative Assessment in Undergraduate Physics. Education Sciences, 15(8), Article 1058. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15081058.

Mukumba P., Shambira N. (2022). Students’ Technology Preference and Computer Technology Applications in the Teaching and Learning of Physics Modules at the University Undergraduate Level in South Africa during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Education Sciences, 12(11), Article 771. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110771.

Nazira A., Sandibaeva N., Garnaeva G. (2025). Formation of students' research skills in digital transformation of physics teaching. Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences, 13(2), 473–488. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21533/pen.v13.i2.344.

Ng M.E., Chua K.H. (2023). The Effect of Using PhET in Changing Malaysian Students’ Attitude to Learning Physics in a Full Virtual Environment. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 31(2), 545–560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.31.2.05.

Novitra F., Festiyed, Yohandri, Asrizal (2021). Development of Online-based Inquiry Learning Model to Improve 21st-Century Skills of Physics Students in Senior High School. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(9), 1–20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11152.

Onyema E.M., Khan R., Eucheria N.C., Kumar T. (2023). Impact of Mobile Technology and Use of Big Data in Physics Education During Coronavirus Lockdown. Big Data Mining and Analytics, 6(3), 381–389. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26599/BDMA.2022.9020013.

Perez-Navarro A., Garcia V., Conesa J. (2021). Students perception of videos in introductory physics courses of engineering in face-to-face and online environments. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 80(1), 1009–1028. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09665-0.

Pratidhina E., Pujianto, Sumardi Y. (2019). Developing computer program as a learning resource on gas law topics for high school students. International Journal of Instruction, 12(2), 133–146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.1229a.

Puspitaningtyas E., Putri E.F.N., Umrotul, Sutopo (2021). Analysis of high school students’ mastery in light wave theory using structured inquiry learning assisted by a virtual laboratory. Revista Mexicana de Fisica E, 18(1), 10–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31349/REVMEXFISE.18.10.

Radulović B., Dorocki M., Ninković S.O., Stojanović M., Adamov J. (2023). THE EFFECTS OF BLENDED LEARNING APPROACH ON STUDENT MOTIVATION FOR LEARNING PHYSICS. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(1), 73–82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/23.22.73.

Rahayu S., Setyosari P., Hidayat A., Kuswandi D. (2022). THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING-FLIPPED CLASSROOM FOR ENHANCING STUDENTS’ CREATIVE THINKING SKILLS IN ONLINE PHYSICS EDUCATIONAL LEARNING. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(4), 649–656. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i4.39709.

Richter K., Kickmeier-Rust M. (2025). Exploring gender dynamics in gamified physics learning–investigating gamification’s impact on engagement and learning across genders. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 33(1), 87–103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/1378.

Richter K., Kickmeier-Rust M. (2025). Gamification in Physics Education: Play Your Way to Better Learning. International Journal of Serious Games, 12(1), 59–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17083/ijsg.v12i1.858.

Rizal R., Rusdiana D., Setiawan W., Siahaan P. (2020). Students perception of learning management system supported smartphone: Satisfaction analysis in online physics learning. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 9(4), 600–610. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i4.25363.

Rizki I.A., Suprapto N., Saphira H.V., Alfarizy Y., Ramadani R., Saputri A.D., Suryani D. (2024). Cooperative model, digital game, and augmented reality-based learning to enhance students’ critical thinking skills and learning motivation. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 8(1), 339–355. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202423825.

Ropawandi D., Halim L., Husnin H. (2022). Augmented Reality (AR) Technology-Based Learning: The Effect on Physics Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(2), 132–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.2.1596.

Salas-Rueda R.-A., De-La-cruz-martínez G., Alvarado-Zamorano C., Prieto-Larios E. (2022). The Collaborative Wall: A Technological Means to Improving the Teaching-Learning Process about Physics. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12(4), 205–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1167.

Sarabando C., Cravino J.P., Soares A.A. (2016). Improving student understanding of the concepts of weight and mass with a computer simulation. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 15(1), 109–126.

Sari L., Sulisworo D., Toifur M., Abd Rahman N.H. (2020). Effects of schoology online cooperative learning to learning achievement. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(2), 99–103.

Shi W.-Z., Sun J., Xu C., Huan W. (2016). Assessing the use of smartphone in the university general physics laboratory. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(1), 125–132. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1424a.

Subali B., Rusdiana D., Firman H., Kaniawati I., Ellianawati E. (2017). Computer-based experiment of free fall movement to improve the graphical literacy. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 6(1), 41–48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v6i1.8750.

Suhirman, Prayogi S. (2023). Problem-based learning utilizing assistive virtual simulation in mobile application to improve students' critical thinking skills. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 11(3), 351–364. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v11i3.3380.

Sulisworo D., Agustin S.P., Sudarmiyati E. (2016). Cooperative-blended learning using Moodle as an open source learning platform. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 8(2), 187–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2016.078089.

Susilawati, Doyan A., Rokhmat J., Muliyadi L., Rizaldi D.R., Fatimah Z., Ikhsan M., Ardianti N.R. (2025). Integration of Smartphone-Based Learning Media and Project-Based Learning to Enhance Creativity and Scientific Literacy in Physics. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(7), 1449–1459. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.7.2346.

Suyidno S., Mastuang M., Komariyah L., Misbah M., Qamariah Q., Syarkowi A. (2025). AUGMENTED REALITY, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, AND LOCAL WISDOM-BASED RENEWABLE ENERGY LEARNING MEDIA TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ 5C SKILLS. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 20(6), 1895–1919.

Tarhi I., Hab Arrih R., Hassouni T., Al Ibrahmi E., Sadoune Z. (2025). A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF DIGITAL AND TRADITIONAL METHODS IN INTRODUCTORY PHYSICS EXPERIMENTS. International Journal on Technical and Physical Problems of Engineering, 17(3), 11–20.

Velentzas A., Dimakopoulou A., Theodonis I. (2024). Supporting laboratories in physics education with virtual experiments videos. European Journal of Physics, 45(5), Article 055702. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ad61d2.

Villada Castillo J.F., Bohorquez Santiago L., Martínez García S. (2025). Optimization of Physics Learning Through Immersive Virtual Reality: A Study on the Efficacy of Serious Games. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 15(6), Article 3405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/app15063405.

Yamaguti M.X., Cruz R.S., Neto J.T.D.C. (2023). Simulation of caliper and micrometer for teaching and assessment in virtual learning environments. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Fisica, 45, Article e20230178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9126-RBEF-2023-0178.

Yuksel T., Walsh Y., Magana A.J., Nova N., Krs V., Ngambeki I., Berger E.J., Benes B. (2019). Visuohaptic experiments: Exploring the effects of visual and haptic feedback on students’ learning of friction concepts. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 27(6), 1376–1401. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22157.

Çoban A., Erol M. (2025). Impact of Arduino Based STEM Education on Cognitive Domain Level of Mechanics and Scientific Creativity. LUMAT, 12(4), Article 16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.4.2231.