AR Interactivity for Environmental Learning: A Cross-Case Study of Eco-Visualization
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v6i3.1436Keywords:
Augmented reality, Eco-visualization, Education for sustainable development, ICAP framework , InteractivityAbstract
Environmental concepts such as pollutant dispersal and renewable-energy systems are difficult to observe directly, creating challenges for conceptual understanding and ecological awareness in secondary science. Although augmented reality (AR) can visualize these phenomena, limited guidance exists on how its interactivity should be aligned with different learning goals. Drawing on the ICAP framework and cognitive theory of multimedia learning, this study examined interactivity–outcome alignment through a multiple-case Research and Development design using ADDIE. Two contrasting media were developed and evaluated: low-interactivity AR flashcards for pollution targeting ecological awareness and a higher-interactivity PhET–AR flipped simulation for renewable energy targeting conceptual understanding. Cross-case analysis showed that both media were considered valid and practical and produced meaningful improvements in their targeted learning outcomes. Ecological-awareness gains were more evident in knowledge than in pro-environmental behavioral intention, while the simulation-supported case improved conceptual understanding. Rather than establishing a causal advantage of one interactivity level over another, the findings suggest that AR effectiveness depends on aligning learner interaction with the intended outcome and appropriate instructional scaffolding. The cross-case synthesis generates six testable design propositions for developing goal-aligned AR eco-visualization and provides a foundation for further comparative research in technology-enhanced science learning.
References
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., 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
AlGerafi, M. A. M., Zhou, Y., Oubibi, M., & Wijaya, T. T. (2023). Unlocking the potential: A comprehensive evaluation of augmented reality and virtual reality in education. Electronics, 12(18), 3953. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12183953
Anesha, P., Irwandani, & Solviana, M. D. (2026). Systematic literature review: Efektivitas penggunaan media pembelajaran berbasis augmented reality pada pembelajaran biologi. Spizaetus: Jurnal Biologi Dan Pendidikan Biologi, 7(2), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.55241/spibio.v7i2.713
Annan-Diab, F., & Molinari, C. (2017). Interdisciplinarity: Practical approach to advancing education for sustainability and for the Sustainable Development Goals. The International Journal of Management Education, 15(2), 73–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.03.006
Attanasi, G., Buljat Raymond, B., Festré, A., & Guido, A. (2025). Raising environmental awareness with augmented reality. Ecological Economics, 233, 108563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108563
Aviyanti, L., Fratiwi, N. J., Nurdini, N., Salam, A., & Nawas, A. (2025). Can multiple-choice items measure critical thinking in socio-scientific environmental issues ? Evidence from a global warming assessment of grade 10 students using rasch analysis. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 14(2), 33–53. https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v14i2.28194
Barcenas, S. M., & Prudente, M. (2026). The effect of integrating augmented reality on students’ cognitive learning outcomes in science education: A meta-analysis of recent literature. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 22, 018. https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2027.22018
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Castillo-Gonzalez, W., Lepez, C. O., & Bonardi, M. C. (2023). Augmented reality and environmental education: Strategy for greater awareness. Gamification and Augmented Reality, 1, 10. https://doi.org/10.56294/gr202310
Chi, M. T. H., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
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
Debrah, J. K., Vidal, D. G., & Dinis, M. A. P. (2021). Raising awareness on solid waste management through formal education for sustainability: A developing countries evidence review. Recycling, 6(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling6010006
Febriyanti, N. D., Hudha, M. N., Probosari, R. M., Khasanah, A. N., & Supurwoko, S. (2026). Development of an integrated PhET and augmented reality package in a flipped classroom to improve conceptual understanding of renewable energy. Jurnal Pembelajaran, Bimbingan, dan Pengelolaan Pendidikan, 6(12), 1. https://doi.org/10.17977/um065.v6.i12.2026.1
Fujii, S. (2006). Environmental concern, attitude toward frugality, and ease of behavior as determinants of pro-environmental behavior intentions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 26(4), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2006.09.003
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., Pavón, J., & Baldiris, S. (2019). Systematic review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in educational settings. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 447–459. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00379-9
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
Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E., & Wilson, C. (2020). Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: A systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2
Handayani, J. A., & Widodo, A. (2024). The impact of student participation in environmental education programs on pro-environmental behavior. Jurnal Cakrawala Pendas, 10(2), 215–223. https://doi.org/10.31949/jcp.v10i2.8475
Handhika, J., Alvarez, J. I., Pramono, N. A., & Mayasari, T. (2025). Profile of Student Conceptions on the Direct Current Circuits with multiple-activity-representation. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 14(2), 167–186. https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v14i2.29152
Harding, D., Kadiyono, A. L., Hafiar, H., & Wibowo, H. (2018). Mind the gap: What are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior among students? Journal of Business and Social Review in Emerging Economies, 4(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.26710/jbsee.v4i1.351
Hu, B., Jia, W., Mi, S., & Bi, H. (2026). The impact of computer simulation on students’ conceptual understanding in K-12 science education: A meta-analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 35(2), 534–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-025-10264-7
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 literation ability and physics concept understanding in the topic of work and energy with inquiry-STEM. 2202, 020063. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5141676
Hudha, M. N., Hamidah, I., Permanasari, A., & Abdullah, A. G. (2021). How low-carbon issues are addressed in primary school textbooks. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 10(2), 260–269. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v10i2.26628
Kalemkuş, J., & Kalemkuş, F. (2022). Effect of the use of augmented reality applications on academic achievement of student in science education: Meta-analysis review. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 6017–6034. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2027458
Keller, S., Rumann, S., & Habig, S. (2021). Cognitive load implications for augmented reality supported chemistry learning. Information, 12(3), 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/info12030096
Khan, E. D., Khan, D. M., & Malik, H. W. (2026). Harnessing artificial intelligence for sustainable education: Integrating environmental awareness and SDG alignment in learning systems. Journal of Environment and Sustainability Education, 4(1), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.62672/joease.v4i1.239
Khofifah, K., Yuliani, H., & Santiani, S. (2024). Meta-analysis: The effect of PhET simulation media on enhancing conceptual understanding in physics learning. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika, 7(3), 532–542. https://doi.org/10.20527/jipf.v7i3.9046
Kioupi, V., & Voulvoulis, N. (2019). Education for sustainable development: A systemic framework for connecting the SDGs to educational outcomes. Sustainability, 11(21), 6104. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216104
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620220145401
Küçük Avcı, Ş., Çoklar, A., & İstanbullu, A. (2019). The effect of three-dimensional virtual environments and augmented reality applications on the learning achievement: A meta-analysis study. Education and Science, 44(198), 149–182. https://doi.org/10.15390/eb.2019.7969
Laaloua, H. (2026). Environmental literacy in Morocco: Uncovering the knowledge/attitude gap in environmental education. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 09(06). https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v9-i6-56
Li, F., Wang, X., He, X., Cheng, L., & Wang, Y. (2021). How augmented reality affected academic achievement in K-12 education – A meta-analysis and thematic-analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(9), 5582–5600. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2012810
Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2023). Virtual reality in education: A review of learning theories, approaches and methodologies for the last decade. Electronics, 12(13), 2832. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics12132832
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.005
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Nugroho, D. A., Wahyu, W., & Casmana, A. R. (2025). Engaging learning for environmental awareness: Integrating virtual reality in ecological citizenship education. Journal of Moral and Civic Education, 9(1), 36–47. https://doi.org/10.24036/8851412912025865
Ozturk, E., & Akcay, G. (2023). Can environmental education supported by augmented reality (AR) applications improve the environmental awareness of primary school students? The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 31, 216–229. https://doi.org/10.55549/epess.1381983
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
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
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
Suo, X., Yin, B., & Feng, X. (2026). Augmented reality and embodied learning: Effects of embodiment degrees on students’ learning achievement, cognitive load, and technology acceptance. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1712261. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1712261
Suyidno, S., Misbah, M., Mastuang, M., Komariyah, L., Qamariah, Q., Amiruddin, M. Z. Bin, & Rahman, N. F. A. (2025). Evolution of simulation-driven science education: Three decades of scholarly patterns and research dynamics (1996–2025). Online LearninginEducational Research, 6(1), 29–47. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v6i1.1000
Suzuki, Y., Wild, F., & Scanlon, E. (2023). Measuring cognitive load in augmented reality with physiological methods: A systematic review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(2), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12882
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31(2), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
Taufik, L. M., Widodo, A., Surtikanti, H. K., & Rahman, T. (2026). Development of a systems-thinking-based assessment instrument for environmental literacy and problem-solving skills in SDG 6 contexts. Journal of Environment and Sustainability Education, 4(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.62672/joease.v4i1.173
Tsai, Y.-L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2020). A meta-analysis of research on digital game-based science learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 36(3), 280–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12430
Tzima, S., Styliaras, G., & Bassounas, A. (2019). Augmented reality applications in education: Teacher’s point of view. Education Sciences, 9(2), 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020099
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
Wang, Q., & Li, Y. (2024). How virtual reality, augmented reality and mixed reality facilitate teacher education: A systematic review. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(3), 1276–1294. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12949
Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Yu, Q., & Yu, K. (2024). 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
Zhu, X., Peng, K., Yu, S., & Wang, G. (2026). Can augmented reality technology reduce learners’ cognitive load? A meta-analysis. Smart Learning Environments, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-025-00429-7
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Nur Hudha, Riezky Maya Probosari, Kadek Dwi Hendratma Gunawan, Nada Dhenia Febriyanti, Dwi Nursanti, Firmanul Catur Wibowo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Online Learning in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Online Learning in Educational Research agree to the following terms:
Copyright Retention: Authors retain the copyright of their work without any restrictions.
Publishing Rights: Authors retain the right to publish and distribute their work without any restrictions.
License Agreement: By publishing with Online Learning in Educational Research, authors agree that their work will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA). This license allows others to share and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given, any changes are indicated, and the new creations are licensed under the same terms.
