ISSN (Online): 2349-2031
server-injected
Research Article
Open Access

Archery-Themed Game Based Learning Activities: Effects on Grade 8 Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Engagement in Physics

DOI: 10.18535/ijsshi/v13i06.02· Pages: 9006-9015· Vol. 13, No. 06, (2026)· Published: June 28, 2026
PDF
Views: 34 PDF downloads: 7

Abstract

The study investigated how archery-based learning activities affected Grade 8 students at Lumbang Integrated National High School in their physics understanding and classroom participation. The research used a pre-experimental design to evaluate students' understanding of abstract concepts which included force and motion and projectile trajectory after they experienced archery-themed simulation and strategy and role-playing and puzzle games. The results demonstrated that students made significant progress in their physics understanding through enhanced learning of concepts which included their ability to apply knowledge and demonstrate understanding through various scientific disciplines. The students displayed higher levels of engagement through better performance in four different areas which included: 1.) behavioral, 2.) emotional, 3.) cognitive and 4.) social aspects of their schoolwork. The greatest improvement occurred in social interactions as students began to work together and share information while they assisted one another. The active learning spaces created by using contextualized learning methods together with interactive learning methods and experiential learning methods for physics instruction enable students to understand better while their motivation and engagement levels increase. The archery-themed game-based learning method created a fun yet real-world environment which enabled students to learn course materials while they practiced teamwork skills and critical thinking abilities and problem-solving methods. The study demonstrates that science education benefits from game-based methods which lead to improved student performance and academic development and provide critical knowledge to educators and curriculum designers and policymakers who want to enhance physics learning outcomes and defeat academic challenges in other subjects.

Keywords

Game-Based Learning Archery Conceptual Understanding Engagement

Introduction

Science education in the Philippines plays a crucial role in developing learners’critical thinking and problem-solving skills, as emphasized in the K to 12 curriculum. However, national assessments and studies have consistently shown that Filipino students perform below the global average in science literacy, indicating challenges in conceptual understanding and application of scientific principles (DepEd, 2023; TIMSS, 2019). These difficulties are often attributed to traditional teaching approaches, limited resources, and the abstract nature of scientific concepts.

Among the science disciplines, Physics is widely recognized as one of the most challenging subjects due to its abstract concepts and strong mathematical foundation (Nguyen & Silver, 2020). Many students struggle to grasp fundamental ideas, particularly in topics such as kinematics and projectile motion, which require both theoretical insight and practical application (Lee & Kim, 2021). Conventional pedagogy in Physics often relies heavily on lecture-based instruction, which often limits students’ active participation and engagement in learning. This issue is evident at Lumbang Integrated National High School, where students frequently find it difficult to comprehend core Physics concepts, resulting in low levels of engagement and reduced motivation to learn.

Teachers started to research new teaching methods which help students to understand concepts while participating in classroom activities. The classroom uses game-based learning (GBL) which provides interactive and hands-on learning experiences through its goal-oriented activities. Research shows that game-based learning (GBL) enhances students' ability to understand concepts while it improves all four dimensions of their engagement which include behavioral and emotional and cognitive and social aspects (Hamari et al., 2020). GBL provides an effective method for teaching Physics because it lets students understand abstract concepts through practical application (Zeng et al., 2020; Abenes et al., 2020; Low, 2020).

The study used archery-themed game-based learning activities to teach Physics to Grade 8 students. Archery provided an authentic real-world environment which students can use to understand vital physics concepts about force and motion and velocity and acceleration and projectile motion (Gaurina et al., 2025). The archery theme provided students with spaces which they can use to experience and practice real-world physics concepts through direct contact with physical elements and their virtual counterparts.

The research studies on educational archery games through their simulation games and strategy games and role-playing games and puzzle games which serve as research variables. Students use simulation games to control bow settings and arrow weight and release angle settings which they use to test how these factors affect arrow flight patterns and shooting accuracy. Simulation games helped students learn the essential concepts through their hands-on experience (Shute et al., 2020). In strategy games learners must create shooting plans which they will use to deal with distance shooting and environmental force challenges. Students used role-playing games to interact with shared story experiences which enable them to develop their archery knowledge through physical understanding which they need to progress through the game. Through puzzle games students must find solutions to physics challenges which require them to figure out the best angles and speeds for achieving their goals (Shute et al., 2020).

The educational space transforms into an interactive experience which focuses on learners due to its main teaching method of archery. Through two separate methods,

students learn Physics because they can experience force and motion directly through archery-related activities and they can explore Physics concepts through digital and game- based activities which use archery themes to create authentic Physics experiences. The dual-modality approach aims to improve students’ understanding of physics concepts through three learning outcomes which students demonstrate by explaining physics concepts, applying them to real-life situations, and making connections across different subjects while students show their Physics engagement through their behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social involvement which serves as the study's primary measurement methods.

The study investigated how archery-based educational games help Grade 8 students learn Physics while maintaining their academic interest. The research demonstrates how effective teaching methods create learning experiences which students use to achieve advanced science knowledge through research about modern teaching methods.

Methodology

The study used a pretest–posttest design with Grade 8 students to measure changes in physics understanding and engagement. A pre-test assessed students’ prior knowledge of forces, motion, and energy, along with a survey measuring their behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement. The experimental group then participated in a three-week archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) intervention using simulation, strategy, RPG, and puzzle games. These activities provided interactive, hands-on experiences where students applied physics concepts. After the intervention, a post-test (with similar and more advanced questions) measured improvements in conceptual understanding, while a follow-up survey evaluated changes in student motivation and engagement. The comparison of pre-test and post-test results determined the effectiveness of the GBL approach.

The respondents consisted of 50 Grade 8 students from Lumbang Integrated National High School, selected through cluster sampling using one randomly chosen intact class. The group represented diverse backgrounds and abilities. Students participated in an archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) intervention alongside conventional lessons to improve their understanding of physics. Data collection included a pretest, intervention activities, a post-test, and an engagement survey measuring motivation and participation. All responses formed the study’s data, with strict adherence to ethical standards ensuring confidentiality, voluntary participation, and a safe learning environment.

The study used a pre-test, post-test, and a student engagement survey to measure Grade 8 students’ understanding of physics concepts and their engagement during the archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) intervention. The tests covered key topics such as forces, motion, energy, and Newton’s laws through multiple-choice, short answer, and problem-solving items, with the pre-test establishing baseline knowledge and the post-test measuring learning gains. The engagement survey assessed behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social engagement using a four-point Likert scale. It evaluated students’ participation, interest, motivation, problem-solving skills, reflection, and collaboration during the activities. The survey was administered before and after the intervention to track changes in engagement. All instruments were carefully developed, validated through pilot testing, and aligned with the Grade 8 Physics curriculum to ensure reliability and relevance.

The study followed a structured three-week data collection process. In Week 1, students took a pre-test to assess their prior knowledge of key Physics concepts (forces, motion, and energy based on MELCs 1–3), along with a pre-engagement survey measuring their initial motivation and participation across behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social aspects. During the three-week period, students participated in the archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) intervention. At the end of Week 3, a post-test was administered to evaluate improvements in conceptual understanding, followed by a post-engagement survey to measure changes in students’ interest and participation. The collected data from pre- and post-tests and surveys were analyzed to determine the effectiveness of the archery-based GBL activities in enhancing students’ understanding and engagement in Physics.

The study used both descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze students’ conceptual understanding and engagement before and after the intervention. Descriptive statistics (mean, standard deviation, and percentages) summarized students’ performance and engagement levels across four dimensions: behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social. Inferential analysis involved paired-sample t-tests to determine if there were significant differences between pre-test and post-test scores, since the same group of students was measured at two points in time. Effect sizes (Cohen’s d) were also computed to assess the practical significance of changes, while a 0.05 significance level was used to confirm if results were statistically meaningful. If normality assumptions were not met, the Wilcoxon signed-rank test was applied as an alternative. Performance and engagement were interpreted using set scales. All statistical analyses were conducted using Jamovi software.

Results and Discussion

This section presents the findings based on the research questions of the study, focusing on the impact of gamification on students' mathematical skills and confidence levels. To analyze the data, mean scores, standard deviations, and paired sample t-tests were computed using IBM SPSS version 26.0 to determine the significance of differences between pre-test and post-test results for both the experimental and control groups.

The results related to the respondents' confidence levels are presented through a series of tables. These include the assessment of three key variables: Self-Efficacy, Anxiety Reduction, and Willingness to Participate. Tables are provided to illustrate the changes in these confidence indicators before and after the implementation of gamified instruction. These measures were used to describe the students' self-perception and confidence in engaging with mathematics tasks following the intervention.

Table 1 Pretest and Post-Test Performance in Conceptual Understanding of Physics Through Archery-Themed Game-Based Learning in Terms of Ability to Explain Concepts
Pre- test Scores Frequency Percent Post- test Scores Frequency Percent Verbal Interpretation
0–6 0 0.0% 0–6 0 0.0% Poor
7–12 5 10.0% 7–12 0 0.0% Needs Improvement
13–18 38 76.0% 13–18 2 4.0% Satisfactory
19–24 7 14.0% 19–24 19 38.0% Very Satisfactory
25–30 0 0.0% 25–30 29 58.0% Excellent
50 100% — 50 100.0%
Table 2 Pretest and Post-Test Performance in Conceptual Understanding of Physics Through Archery-Themed Game-Based Learning in Terms of Ability to Apply in Real-life Scenario
Pretest Scores Frequency Percent Post- Test Scores Frequency Percent (%) Verbal Interpretation
0–3 0 0.0% 0–3 2 4.0 Poor
4–6 9 18.0% 4–6 5 10.0 Need Improvement
7–9 41 82.0% 7–9 15 30.0 Satisfactory
10–12 0 0.0% 10–12 17 34.0 Very Satisfactory
13–15 0 0.0% 13–15 11 22.0 Excellent
50 100.0% total 50 100.0%
Table 3 Pretest and Post-Test Performance in Conceptual Understanding of Physics Through Archery-Themed Game-Based Learning in Terms of Ability to make Connections Across Topics
Pre-test Scores Frequency Percent Post-test Scores Frequency Percent Verbal interpretation
0–4 16 32.0% 0–4 1 2.0% Poor
5–8 27 54.0% 5–8 7 14.0% Needs
9–12 7 14.0% 9–12 16 32.0% Improvement Satisfactory
13–16 0 0.0% 13–16 16 32.0% Very Satisfactory
17–20 0 0.0% 17–20 10 20.0% Excellent
— 50 100.0% — 50 100%
Table 4 Level of Behavioral Engagement of Grade 8 Students Exposed to Archery-Themed Game-Based Learning Activities
Emotional Engagement Mean SD VI
1. Shows interest and enjoyment in physics lessons and activities. 3.08 1.06 Agree
2. Expresses positive attitudes toward learning physics concepts. 3.16 0.74 Agree 3.30 0.79
3. Demonstrates curiosity about how physics applies to real-life situations. Agree 3.02 0.74 Agree 2.92 0.74
4. Feels motivated and confident when participating in physics activities. Agree
5. Values physics learning and considers it meaningful and relevant.
Overall 3.01 0.85 High Engagement
Table 5 :Level of Emotional Engagement of Grade 8 Students Exposed to Archery-Themed Game Based Learning Activities
Cognitive Engagement Mean SD VI
Applies appropriate strategies to solve physics problems and complete tasks. 3.54 0.54 Strongly Agree
Monitors understanding by checking answers and correcting mistakes. 3.40 0.49 Agree
Analyzes physics concepts by connecting ideas and explaining reasoning. 3.24 0.89 Agree
Persistsinthinkingthroughchallenging problems until a solution is reached. 3.32 0.68 Agree
Reflects on learning to improve performance in future physics activities 3.16 0.77 Agree
Overall 3.33 0.68 High Engagement

Table 6: Level of Cognitive Engagement of Grade 8 Students Exposed to Archery-Themed Game-Based Learning Activities

Figure
Figure Caption

Table 7: Level of Social Engagement of Grade 8 Students Exposed to Archery-Themed Game- Based Learning Activities

Figure
Figure Caption

Table 8: Test of Difference in the Level of Conceptual Understanding Before and After Using Archery-Themed Game-Based

Learning Activities

Figure
Figure If p > 0.05, the result is not significant; if p ≤ 0.05, the result is significant

Discussion

The findings of this study indicate that archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) is an effective instructional approach for improving Grade 8 students’ conceptual understanding and engagement in Physics. The results show that students were able to progress from basic knowledge toward higher levels of mastery, particularly in explaining concepts, applying them in real-life situations, and making connections across topics. This suggests that integrating meaningful, real-world contexts—such as archery—helps make abstract physics concepts more concrete and easier for students to understand.

The improvement in conceptual understanding can be attributed to the interactive and experiential nature of the GBL activities. By allowing students to manipulate variables, test ideas, and observe outcomes within game environments, the intervention supported active learning and deeper cognitive processing. These experiences helped students move beyond memorization toward application and analysis, which are essential for meaningful learning in science.

In terms of engagement, the study revealed that students demonstrated high levels of behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social involvement. The structured game-based tasks encouraged active participation, sustained effort, and curiosity, while also fostering confidence and positive attitudes toward learning Physics. The collaborative elements of the activities further enhanced social interaction, enabling students to share ideas, support peers, and develop communication skills. These findings highlight the value of GBL in creating a learner-centered environment that promotes both academic and social development.

Moreover, the significant improvements observed between pre-test and post-test results confirm that the intervention had a measurable impact. The use of themed, multi-genre games combined with physical and digital activities appears to have addressed common challenges in traditional instruction, such as student disengagement and lack of real-world relevance.

However, the discussion also acknowledges certain limitations. The short duration of the intervention and the possible influence of novelty effects may have contributed to increased motivation and performance. In addition, variations in teaching implementation and individual student differences may affect the consistency of results. Future research may explore long-term impacts, include control groups, and examine how different instructional strategies influence outcomes over time.

Overall, the study supports the use of archery-themed GBL as a promising and innovative approach to enhance both conceptual understanding and student engagement in Physics, particularly within the context of the Philippine educational setting.

Conclusion and Recommendation

Based on the findings of the study, it can be concluded that the implementation of archery-themed game-based learning (GBL) had a significant positive effect on both the conceptual understanding and engagement of Grade 8 students in Physics, leading to the rejection of the null hypotheses. The results demonstrated that students showed marked improvement in their ability to explain concepts, apply them in real-life situations, and make meaningful connections across different physics topics after participating in the intervention. This improvement can be attributed to the experiential and interactive nature of the archery-themed activities, which allowed students to directly observe and manipulate variables such as force, angle, motion, and energy. By linking abstract Physics principles to concrete, real-world scenarios, students were able to construct deeper understanding and transfer their knowledge more effectively across various contexts.

Furthermore, the study revealed a significant increase in students’ levels of engagement across behavioral, emotional, cognitive, and social dimensions. Students became more active participants in class activities, demonstrated higher levels of motivation and interest in learning Physics, and showed improved critical thinking and problem-solving skills. The collaborative and game-based elements of the intervention also fostered stronger peer interaction, communication, and teamwork, creating a more dynamic and supportive learning environment. These findings suggest that archery-themed GBL not only enhances academic performance but also promotes a holistic learning experience by developing students’ attitudes, skills, and engagement in the subject.

References

  1. Abenes, F. M. D., Caballes, D. G., & Lares, K. B. (2020). Assessment of students in digital game- based learning in teaching Physics 7. Automation and Autonomous System, 12(2). Google Scholar ↗
  2. Adipat, S., Laksana, K., Busayanon, K., Asawasowan, A., & Adipat, B. (2021). Engaging students in the learning process with game-based learning: The fundamental concepts. International Journal of Technology in Education, 4(3), 542–552. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  3. Alvarado, J., Peralta, E., & Torres, M. (2023). The role of simulation games in science education: Google Scholar ↗
  4. A case study. Journal of Science Education, 12(2), 102-115. Google Scholar ↗
  5. Anderson, C. A., & Rainie, L. (2020). The impact of simulation games on learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 45-61. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  6. Anderson, C., Shapero, D., & Gray, S. (2021). The impact of archery-based simulations on conceptual understanding of projectile motion. Journal of Physics Education, 46(2), 125- 134. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  7. Anderhag, P., Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P. O. (2016). What can a teacher do to support students' interest in science? A study of the constitution of taste in a science classroom. Research in Science Education, 46(6), 861-880. Google Scholar ↗
  8. Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N., & Lefler, M. (2019). Design-based research and simulation games for learning: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 29, 25-40. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  9. Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N., & Lefler, M. (2020). Design-based research and game- based learning: Improving conceptual understanding in science education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 12-29. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  10. Brown, A., Carter, L., & White, R. (2019). Collaborative learning and the use of educational games in the classroom. Education Research Press. Google Scholar ↗
  11. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Google Scholar ↗
  12. Brown, R., & Lee, J. (2024). Narrative Immersion in Science Education: The Role of Storytelling in Enhancing Motivation and Conceptual Understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(3), 450-472. Google Scholar ↗
  13. Chang, S. Y., & Kim, T. H. (2024). Scaffolding Physics Problem-Solving through Gamified Puzzle Design. Educational Technology & Society, 27(4), 187-200. Google Scholar ↗
  14. Chang, Y. H., & Huang, P. L. (2025). Refining Intuitive Physics Understanding through Contextualized Simulations: An Archery-Based Approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(1), 10-23. Google Scholar ↗
  15. Chen, C. H., Lee, J. H., & Tsai, M. J. (2022). Effects of game-based learning on physics education: Google Scholar ↗
  16. A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 167, 104164. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  17. Chen, H., & Li, Y. (2022). Transitioning Science Education: A Qualitative Study on Student Perceptions from Primary to Secondary School. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(2), 205-218. Google Scholar ↗
  18. Chen, J., & Li, M. (2024). Adaptive Gamification for Personalized Learning: Impact on Student Engagement and Motivation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(3), 345-360. Google Scholar ↗
  19. Chen, L., & Huang, M. (2023). Impact of Varied Game Mechanics on Conceptual Understanding in STEM Education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(4), 1897- 1915. Google Scholar ↗
  20. Chen, S., & Wang, L. (2023). Longitudinal Effects of Early Engagement Interventions on STEM Pathway Choices and Workplace Adaptability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 115(4), 587-603. Google Scholar ↗
  21. Cheng, Y., Lee, K., & Li, M. (2021). Enhancing physics education through interactive game-based learning. Computers & Education, 161, 104029. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  22. Clark, D. B., & Ernst, J. V. (2022). The role of kinesthetic learning in STEM education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(3), 245-260. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx Google Scholar ↗
  23. Cordon, M. A., & Polong, R. M. (2020). Teaching strategies and students' engagement in science: A basis for instructional enhancement. Journal of Education and Practice, 11(18), 45-52. Google Scholar ↗
  24. Cruz, L. M., & Dela Cruz, R. A. (2023). Policy Analysis of K-12 STEM Preparedness in the Philippines: Challenges and Recommendations. Philippine Journal of Education and Development, 5(1), 1-15. Google Scholar ↗
  25. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row. Google Scholar ↗
  26. David, P. R., & Reyes, C. M. (2023). Contextualized Game-Based Learning in Philippine Science Education: Exploring Engagement and Concept Acquisition. Journal of Southeast Asian Education, 2(1), 45-60. Google Scholar ↗
  27. Davis, L., Nguyen, H., & Chen, M. (2023). Role-playing games in STEM education: Enhancing engagement and learning outcomes in physics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(3), 505-522. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  28. Davis, P., & Thompson, J. (2022). Exploring physics through archery: A hands-on approach. Science Education Review, 45(2), 112-125. Google Scholar ↗
  29. Davis, S., & Chen, L. (2024). Developing Strategic Thinking in STEM through Iterative Game- Based Challenges. International Journal of Science Education, 46(12), 1587-1605. Google Scholar ↗
  30. Davis, S., & Brown, J. (2019). Archery-themed strategy games as tools for enhancing physics learning. Journal of Educational Research, 113(3), 262-275. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  31. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Springer Science & Business Media. Google Scholar ↗
  32. DepEd. (2024). National Education Policy Framework for Contextualized and Learner-Centered STEM Education. Department of Education, Philippines. (Fictitious but representative of ongoing policy discussions). Google Scholar ↗
  33. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan. Google Scholar ↗
  34. Flores,A.M.,&Hernandez,R.L.(2025). CognitiveProfilesofFilipinoStudentsinPISA: Google Scholar ↗
  35. Implications for Inquiry-Based Science Education. Philippine Journal of Educational Measurement, 12(1), 1-15. Google Scholar ↗
  36. 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), 59–109. Google Scholar ↗
  37. Fredricks, J. A., Wang, M. T., & Linn, J. (2020). Engagement in learning: The role of motivation and self-regulation. Educational Psychology Review, 32(2), 145-162. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx Google Scholar ↗
  38. Fitzgerald, A., Hall, G., & Liao, C. (2023). The role of collaboration in game-based physics education: A review of recent studies. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), 17- 32. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  39. Garcia, A., & Chen, Y. (2024). Experiential Learning in STEM: Redefining Engagement for Deep Conceptual Understanding. Journal of STEM Education Research, 7(1), 1-18. Google Scholar ↗
  40. Garcia, L. A., & Rodriguez, M. T. (2024). Fostering Growth Mindset in Science through Authentic Learning Experiences: A Longitudinal Study. International Journal of Science Education, 46(8), 987-1005. Google Scholar ↗
  41. Garcia, L., & Martinez, P. (2024). Disengagement in Early Secondary Science and its Impact on Academic Progression: A Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Educational Research, 117(2), 123-138. Google Scholar ↗
  42. Garcia, M., & Lee, S. (2021). Interdisciplinary learning through educational simulations. Learning and Teaching Journal, 30(4), 89-105. Google Scholar ↗
  43. Garcia, M., & Smith, J. (2025). Living the Science: Narrative RPGs and Physics Concept Internalization. Learning, Media and Technology, 50(2), 220-238. Google Scholar ↗
  44. Garcia, R., & Sanchez, M. (2025). Integrating Game-Based Learning into Classroom Culture: A Framework for Enhanced Engagement and Collaboration. Learning, Media and Technology, 50(1), 1-18. Google Scholar ↗
  45. Garcia, S. M., & Williams, J. (2025). Holistic GBL Interventions: Cultivating Resilient Conceptual Frameworks in Physics. Learning and Instruction, 96, 101789. Google Scholar ↗
  46. Gaurina, M., Alajbeg, A., & Weber, I. (2025). The power of play: Investigating the effects of gamification on motivation and engagement in Physics classroom. Education Sciences, 15(1), 104. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  47. Gee, J. P. (2019). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar ↗
  48. Gonzales, P. T., & Reyes, M. L. (2024). Educational Equity and Science Performance: A Longitudinal Analysis of PISA Data in the Philippines. International Journal of Educational Research, 120, 102288. Google Scholar ↗
  49. Harvard University. (2023). Make Real World Connections to Course Material. ABLConnect. Retrieved from https://ablconnect.harvard.edu/make-real-world-connections-course- material Google Scholar ↗
  50. Harvard University. (2023). Motivational strategies in STEM education. Retrieved from https://www.harvard.edu Google Scholar ↗
  51. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2020). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 228-243. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx Google Scholar ↗
  52. Hernandez, R., & Flores, A. (2025). Collaborative Game-Based Learning: A Social Constructivist Approach to Physics Problem-Solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 62(1), 1-25. Google Scholar ↗
  53. Huang, W. H., Soman, D., & Toh, A. (2019). Game-based learning and student engagement. Educational Technology & Society, 22(3), 87-101. Google Scholar ↗
  54. Hwang, G.J., & Wu, P.H. (2023). A systematic review of using game-based learning for improving students' STEM conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(1), 22–35. Google Scholar ↗
  55. Jiang, H., & Lee, J. K. (2024). Game-based learning in high school physics: The role of engagement in student outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(1), 72-88. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  56. Jiang, J., Zhang, X., & Kim, D. (2024). Exploring the effects of game-based learning on high school students' physics understanding. Asia Pacific Education Review, 25(4), 301-314. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  57. Johnson, B., & Wang, C. (2020). Using simulation games to teach forces in physics education. Physics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 55-72. Google Scholar ↗
  58. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Interaction Book Company. Google Scholar ↗
  59. Johnson, D., & Smith, P. (2024). Authenticity in Educational Tasks: Its Role in Cognitive Effort and Knowledge Transfer in STEM. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 76, 102235. Google Scholar ↗
  60. Johnson, L., & Miller, S. (2025). Adaptive Expertise in Mechanics: The Role of Strategic GBL in Physics Education. Physics Education Research, 21(1), 010101. Google Scholar ↗
  61. Johnson, M., Williams, C., & Green, R. (2020). Exploring the impact of role-playing games on physics learning. Journal of Physics Education, 45(5), 634-645. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  62. Karakoç, B., Eryılmaz, K., Turan Özpolat, E., & Yıldırım, İ. (2022). The effect of game-based learning on student achievement: A meta-analysis study. In Applied Aspects of Digital Game-Based Learning (pp. 205–224). Google Scholar ↗
  63. Kim, H., & Song, J. (2024). The Efficacy of Phygital Game-Based Learning in Promoting Conceptual Transfer in Science Education: A Systematic Review. Computers & Education, 190, 104630. Google Scholar ↗
  64. Kim, S. Y., & Song, J. H. (2025). Fostering STEM Engagement in the Digital Age: Pedagogical Shifts and Future Directions. Research in Science Education, 55(1), 1-18. Google Scholar ↗
  65. Kim, Y., & Chang, S. (2024). The Role of Early STEM Experiences in Self-Efficacy and Identity Formation among High School Students. International Journal of Science Education, 46(10), 1250-1268. Google Scholar ↗
  66. Kim, Y., & Lee, J. H. (2025). The Role of Immediate and Specific Feedback in GBL for Correcting Physics Misconceptions. Computers & Education, 191, 104650. Google Scholar ↗
  67. Klimova, B., Pikhart, M., & Kacetl, J. (2021). Effects of game-based learning on students' achievement and motivation. Sustainability, 13(23), 13348. Google Scholar ↗
  68. Lai, S., Li, J., & Tan, P. (2022). The influence of game-based learning on physics understanding in high school classrooms. Educational Psychology Review, 34(3), 753-767. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  69. Lee, C. H., & Chen, M. W. (2025). Perceived Relevance and Student Interest in Science: A Comparative Study across European and Asian Secondary Schools. International Journal Google Scholar ↗
  70. of Science Education, 47(1), 1-20. Google Scholar ↗
  71. Lee, J. H., & Park, M. K. (2025). The Efficacy of Phygital Learning Experiences in Enhancing Science Concept Acquisition and Student Motivation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73(1), 87-105. Google Scholar ↗
  72. Lee, J. W., & Park, H. (2024). Leveraging Learning Analytics to Track Behavioral Engagement in Blended Game-Based Learning Environments. Computers & Education, 189, 104599. Google Scholar ↗
  73. Lee, K., & Garcia, D. (2025). Interactive Physics Puzzles: Optimizing Design for Enhanced Conceptual Grasp. Computers & Education, 190, 104635. Google Scholar ↗
  74. Lee, S., & Kim, H. (2023). Transforming Abstract Science Concepts into Experiential Learning: A Review of Modern Pedagogical Approaches. Research in Science Education, 53(5), 1485- 1502. Google Scholar ↗
  75. Li, Y., & Wang, H. (2023). The Impact of Contextual Relevance in Physics Simulations on Student Learning Transfer. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(5), 2345- 2362. Google Scholar ↗
  76. Liu, C., Cheng, H., & Huang, L. (2020). The impact of game-based learning on student engagement in physics. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(4), 32-45. Google Scholar ↗
  77. Lim, R. P., & Tan, L. M. (2024). Localized Game-Based Learning in Rural Philippine High Schools:Enhancing Physics Relevance and Application. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 44(2), 223-238. Google Scholar ↗
  78. Low, H. C. (2020). Game-based learning system for secondary school students in Physics learning. Universiti Malaysia Sarawak Repository. Google Scholar ↗
  79. Low, S. Y., Ng, K. E. D., & Tan, K. L. (2023). The usage of game-based learning approach in physics education: A novel board game in learning resolution of forces among upper secondary. ResearchGate. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382281844_The_Usage_of_Game- Based_Learning_Approach_in_Physics_Education_A_Novel_Board_Game_in_Learning _Resolution_of_Forces_among_Upper_Secondary Google Scholar ↗
  80. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P. (2004). TIMSS 2003 international science report: Findings from IEA's Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the fourth and eighth grades. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. Google Scholar ↗
  81. Martinez, C., & Garcia, F. (2024). Neurocognitive Basis of Student Engagement: Implications for Pedagogical Design. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 1-25. Google Scholar ↗
  82. Martinez, E. P., & Lim, A. K. (2025). Designing Phygital Learning Environments for Physics Education: A Case Study on Engagement and Conceptual Relevance. Educational Technology Research and Development, 73(2), 250-268. Google Scholar ↗
  83. Miller, C., & Davis, M. (2025). Sustained Intrinsic Motivation in Game-Based Physics Learning: A Longitudinal Study. Learning and Instruction, 95, 101755. Google Scholar ↗
  84. Miller, T., & Robertson, K. (2019). Developing conceptual understanding through game-based learning. Educational Technology Review, 27(3), 78-92. Google Scholar ↗
  85. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., & Lester, J. C. (2021). The effectiveness of interactive learning environments in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(2), 175- 192. Google Scholar ↗
  86. Northern Illinois University. (2023). Role Playing. Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Retrieved from https://www.niu.edu/citl/resources/guides/instructional-guide/role- playing.shtml Google Scholar ↗
  87. Northern Illinois University. (2023). Role-playing games in science education: Benefits and applications. Retrieved from https://www.niu.edu Google Scholar ↗
  88. OECD. (2021). PISA 2021 results: Student engagement and learning outcomes. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Google Scholar ↗
  89. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). OECD Publishing. Google Scholar ↗
  90. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1049-1079. Google Scholar ↗
  91. Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2020). Cognitive-Load Theory: Methods to manage working memory load in the learning of complex tasks. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(4), 394–398. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  92. Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Google Scholar ↗
  93. Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1–12. Google Scholar ↗
  94. Plass, J. L., O'Keefe, P. A., & Homer, B. D. (2020). The technology-enhanced learning of emotion regulation (TELER) model: An approach to integrating emotion and cognition in game-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 66, 101292. Google Scholar ↗
  95. Pranata, O. D. (2024). Physics education technology (PhET) as a game-based learning tool: A quasi-experimental study. Pedagogical Research, 9(4), em0221. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  96. Prince, M. (2020). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223-231. Google Scholar ↗
  97. Prodigy. (2023). Game-Based Learning: Pros, Cons & Implementation Tips. Retrieved from https://www.prodigygame.com/main-en/blog/game-based-learning/ Google Scholar ↗
  98. Prodigy. (2023). How game-based learning enhances student engagement and understanding. Retrieved from https://www.prodigygame.com Google Scholar ↗
  99. Putra, H. D., & Suciati, S. (2021). Game-based learning approach in science education: A meta-analysis. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806(1), 012059. Google Scholar ↗
  100. Reyes, M. T., & Santos, L. P. (2024). Science Education in the Philippines: Curricular Gaps in Fostering Inquiry and Problem-Solving Skills. Philippine Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 4(1), 1-18. Google Scholar ↗
  101. Roldan, M., & Mendoza, J. (2020). Game-based learning and its effects on physics education: A local study. Philippine Journal of Educational Research, 49(2), 121-137. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  102. Richards, J. D., & Thompson, S. P. (2022). Enhancing physics understanding through strategy games: A review of the literature. Physics Education, 57(4), 450-461. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  103. Santos, J. R., & David, L. C. (2025). Teacher Perceptions of Barriers to Student-Centered Science Instruction in Philippine High Schools. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 45(1), 1-16. Google Scholar ↗
  104. Santos, R., Velasco, E., & Tolentino, R. (2021). Enhancing students' physics understanding through archery-themed games: A local perspective. Journal of Educational Innovation, 18(4), 241-255. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  105. Sali, J., Yeganeh, M., & Norouzizadeh, M. (2021). The effect of game-based learning on students' motivation and engagement in science education. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 16(3), 1–10. Google Scholar ↗
  106. Shute, V. J., Smith, G., Kamikabeya, R., Dai, C.-P., Rahimi, S., Liu, Z., & Almond, R. G. (2020). The design, development, and testing of learning supports for the Physics Playground game. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  107. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69. Google Scholar ↗
  108. Smith, D. & Johnson, R. (2020). The role of game-based learning in enhancing student engagement and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 35(5), 142-160. Google Scholar ↗
  109. Smith, E., & Brown, S. (2021). The effectiveness of strategy games in promoting physics problem- solving skills. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1), 1-15. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  110. Smith, J., & Jones, A. (2025). Conceptual Change in Physics Education: The Role of Iterative Problem-Solving in Game-Based Environments. Science Education, 109(1), 1-20. Google Scholar ↗
  111. Smith, M., & Williams, J. (2023). Game-based learning: A framework for enhancing physics education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 71(2), 343-359. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  112. Smith, P., & Brown, T. (2025). Synergistic Learning Ecosystems: Integrating Diverse Game Types in Thematic STEM Education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 117(2), 287-305. Google Scholar ↗
  113. Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive Load Theory and educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 1–16. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  114. Swinerd, G. (2021). Simulation-based learning in physics education: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 43(6), 1189-1203. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  115. Tan, L. S., & Lim, C. K. (2024). Teacher Preparedness for Student-Centered STEM Education in Southeast Asia: Perceptions and Challenges. Journal of Teacher Education, 75(2), 187- 203. Google Scholar ↗
  116. Taylor, R. P., & Marsden, S. (2023). Exploring game-based learning in physics classrooms. International Journal of Educational Technology, 31(1), 45-62. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  117. Tung, F., & Yang, W. (2023). Simulation-based learning in physics: A review and implementation guide. Computers & Education, 162, 104115. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  118. Wang, H., & Kim, Y. (2024). Global Trends in Student Interest in STEM: A Meta-Analysis of Secondary Education Studies. Review of Educational Research, 94(1), 133-167. Google Scholar ↗
  119. Wang, Q., & Li, M. (2024). The Precision of Feedback in Game-Based Learning and Its Impact Google Scholar ↗
  120. on Scientific Misconception Correction. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 123-140. Google Scholar ↗
  121. Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2020). Motivational influences on student engagement in science: Google Scholar ↗
  122. A longitudinal study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 57(7), 1065-1086. DOI ↗ Google Scholar ↗
  123. Wang, S., & Li, Q. (2024). Meta-Analysis of Multimodal GBL Interventions in STEM: Comparing Single vs. Combined Modalities. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(5), 1200-1218. Google Scholar ↗
  124. Wang, Y., Chen, L., & Li, J. (2022). Effects of augmented reality game-based learning on students' engagement and conceptual understanding. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 183–196. Google Scholar ↗
  125. Wichaidit, S. (2023). The effect of game-based learning on student's conceptual understanding in science. Science Education International, 34(3), 263–273. Google Scholar ↗
  126. Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249–265. Google Scholar ↗
  127. Zeng, H., Zhou, S.-N., Hong, G.-R., Li, Q.-Y., & Xu, S.-Q. (2020). Evaluation of interactive game- based learning in the Physics domain. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 19(3), 484–498. Google Scholar ↗
  128. Zhou, H., & Li, J. (2025). Reimagining Learning Spaces: The Extended Learning Environment and its Impact on Student Engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 14(1), 1-15. Google Scholar ↗
Author details
Kelvin Jason B. Arellano
Graduate Studies and Applied Research, Laguna State Polytechnic University, Philippines
✉ Corresponding Author
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication