Joko Sulianto

ABSTRACT This study examined differences in sixth-grade students’ conceptual understanding and critical thinking between Problem-Based Learning (PBL) supported by an Augmented Reality (AR)-Based Book and conventional instruction in Solar System learning. A quantitative quasi-experimental study employing a nonequivalent pretest–posttest control group design involved 35 students from two elementary schools in Blora, Indonesia, comprising 17 experimental and 18 control participants. The intervention was implemented across three instructional sessions. Data were collected using validated essay-based assessments and analyzed through analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA), controlling for pretest performance. The experimental group achieved higher posttest means in conceptual understanding (86.71 vs. 72.67) and critical thinking (85.82 vs. 70.17). ANCOVA revealed significant adjusted between-group differences in conceptual understanding (mean difference = 13.87, 95% CI [11.45, 16.29], p < .001) and critical thinking (mean difference = 15.38, 95% CI [12.19, 18.57], p < .001). MANCOVA confirmed a significant multivariate difference (Pillai’s Trace = .862, F(2, 30) = 95.34, p < .001). These findings suggest that integrating AR-supported visualization within structured problem-based inquiry may support conceptual learning and evidence-based reasoning. Nevertheless, the small sample, nonrandom allocation, and school- and teacher-level confounding preclude definitive causal conclusions. Larger multisite and factorial studies are recommended.

Achieving Sustainable Development Goal 4 (SDG 4) requires elementary science instruction that develops not only conceptual understanding but also students’ learning independence. However, previous studies have predominantly examined Outdoor Study and Problem-Based Learning as separate instructional approaches, leaving limited empirical evidence on their integrated application in elementary science education. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of integrating Outdoor Study with Problem-Based Learning in supporting conceptual understanding and learning independence. A quasi-experimental pretest–posttest control group design was conducted at SD Negeri 3 Nglengkir (n = 19) and SD Negeri 2 Nglengkir (n = 17), Blora Regency, Indonesia. Data were collected using a conceptual understanding test and a learning independence questionnaire, analyzed using paired-samples t-tests, independent-samples t-tests, and MANOVA. The experimental group demonstrated significantly higher conceptual understanding and learning independence scores than the control group (p < .001). MANOVA also revealed a significant simultaneous difference between groups, Wilks' Λ = .241, F(2; 33) = 52.061, p < .001, partial η² = .759. These findings indicate that the integration of Outdoor Study and Problem-Based Learning offers a promising approach for strengthening science learning outcomes and learner autonomy. The study contributes empirical evidence for competency-oriented elementary science instruction aligned with SDG 4.

This study aimed to develop and evaluate a Problem-Based Wordwall Edugame instructional package for sixth-grade Science and Social Studies (IPAS) and examine its association with students’ critical-thinking performance. Using a research-and-development approach guided by the ADDIE model, the study incorporated a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest comparison involving all 30 sixth-grade students at SDN 3 Sendangrejo, Indonesia, assigned by pretest scores to experimental (n = 15) and control (n = 15) groups. Data were collected through expert-validation sheets, classroom observations, teacher and student response questionnaires, and critical-thinking tests, and analyzed using descriptive statistics, assumption tests, paired- and independent-samples t-tests, and normalized gains. Expert validation yielded 87% for content, 89% for media, and 88% for learning devices; implementation reached 92.76%, and teacher and student responses each reached 93%. Mean critical-thinking scores increased from 56.80 to 89.87 in the experimental group and from 53.73 to 68.87 in the control group; normalized gains were 0.77 and 0.33, respectively. The posttest group difference was significant, t(28) = 12.73, p < .001. These findings are consistent with constructivist and problem-based learning research and suggest that pedagogically integrated gamification can support critical-thinking development. However, the single-school sample, nonrandom group allocation, and combined intervention limit causal inference and generalizability; larger controlled studies should test individual components and longer-term effects.