Digital Transformation in Physics Education: A Systematic Review of Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53905/ChildDev.v2i02.11Keywords:
physics education, digital transformation, technology-enhanced learning, virtual laboratories, adaptive learning, gamificationAbstract
Purpose of the Study: This systematic review investigates the integration of digital technologies into physics education across secondary and tertiary institutions globally, identifying patterns, outcomes, and evidence-based best practices within technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs) from 2015 to 2024.
Materials and Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive electronic search was conducted across six major databases—Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, ERIC, IEEE Xplore, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar—using systematically constructed Boolean search strings. Inclusion criteria comprised peer-reviewed empirical studies published in English between January 2015 and December 2024, focusing on digital technology interventions in physics education contexts. After full screening, 87 studies met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to qualitative synthesis and descriptive meta-analysis.
Results: Analysis revealed five dominant technology clusters: virtual laboratories and simulations (34.5%), augmented and virtual reality environments (21.8%), adaptive learning systems and AI-assisted instruction (18.4%), gamification platforms (14.9%), and collaborative online environments (10.3%). Studies consistently reported positive effects on conceptual understanding (mean effect size d = 0.67, 95% CI [0.54, 0.80]), student engagement (d = 0.72), and laboratory skill acquisition (d = 0.58). Emerging technologies such as immersive VR and AI-driven personalization demonstrated the highest effect sizes, particularly in abstract concept visualization and formative assessment.
Conclusions: Digital transformation presents substantial pedagogical opportunities for physics education, provided that implementation is theoretically grounded, teacher-mediated, and contextually tailored. Critical barriers including digital inequity, teacher preparedness, and evidence gaps in long-term retention require urgent targeted policy and research attention.
References
A., V., Movre, Š., I., V., M., & V., G. (2023). Augmented Reality Technology in Teaching about Physics: A systematic review of opportunities and challenges. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2311.18392
Andriani, W., Kaniawati, I., Suhyani, N. O., Afandi, A., & Wati, E. K. (2025). Exploring the Potential of Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality in Physics Education: A Systematic Review of Innovations and Educational Impact. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 46, 150. https://doi.org/10.55549/epess.975
Antonio, R. P., & Castro, R. (2023). Effectiveness of Virtual Simulations in Improving Secondary Students’ Achievement in Physics: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Instruction, 16(2), 533. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16229a
Bach, K. M., Reinhold, F., & Hofer, S. (2025). Unlocking math potential in students from lower SES backgrounds – using instructional scaffolds to improve performance. Npj Science of Learning, 10(1), 66. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00358-7
Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2021). Effect of integrating physics education technology simulations on students’ conceptual understanding in physics: A review of literature. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.17.023108
Becker, S., Klein, P., Gößling, A., & Kühn, J. (2020). Investigating Dynamic Visualizations of Multiple Representations Using Mobile Video Analysis in Physics Lessons. Zeitschrift Für Didaktik Der Naturwissenschaften, 26(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40573-020-00116-9
Bruillard, É., & Mochizuki, Y. (2019). Rethinking pedagogy: exploring the potential of digital technology in achieving quality education. HAL (Le Centre Pour La Communication Scientifique Directe). https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03838251
Chen, S., Li, Y., & Zhang, H. (2020). Virtual laboratory integration in undergraduate physics: A randomized controlled evaluation of PhET simulation efficacy. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(2), 20135. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.020135
Cohen, E., Ogu, E. C., & Ogu, C. (2019). Cybersecurity, IT-aided Education, and TeLEs: Nexus, Vistas & Realities. Informing Science and IT Education Conference, 3. https://doi.org/10.28945/4153
Deterding, S., Nacke, L., Sicart, M., & Fullerton, T. (2019). Game mechanics and learning: A systematic evaluation in secondary physics contexts. Computers & Education, 138, 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.009
Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The Evolution of Research on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (p. 3). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1
Docktor, J. L., & Mestre, J. P. (2014). Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevstper.10.020119
Guyatt, G., Oxman, A. D., Akl, E. A., Kunz, R., Vist, G. E., Brożek, J., Norris, S. L., Falck–Ytter, Y., Glasziou, P., & deBeer, H. (2011). GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 64(4), 383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.026
Halder, A., & Banerjee, S. (2025). Bridging the Gap Between Virtual and Physical Laboratories: A Web-Based Interactive Platform for Undergraduate Physics Practicals. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2507.10286
Hamilton, D. E., 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2
Hanus, M., & Fox, J. (2014). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
Kulik, J. A., & Fletcher, J. D. (2015). Effectiveness of Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315581420
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Journal of the American Statistical Association, 84(408), 1096. https://doi.org/10.2307/2290095
Lubis, H., Harling, V. N. V., & Panunggul, V. B. (2025). Enhancing Critical Thinking in Physics Education through AI: A Systematic Literature Review of Trends and Pedagogical Implications. JURNAL Pendidikan Dan Ilmu Fisika, 5(2), 343. https://doi.org/10.52434/jpif.v5i2.43353
Makransky, G., Terkildsen, T., & Mayer, R. E. (2017). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction, 60, 225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. Second Edition. In Cambridge University Press eBooks. Cambridge University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED530802
Menchafou, Y., Aaboud, M., & Chekour, M. (2023). Effectiveness of Real and Computer-Assisted Experimental Activities in Moroccan Secondary School Physics Education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 17(16), 16. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v17i16.39267
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cıfuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2013). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E., Mayo‐Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Parong, J., & Mayer, R. E. (2018). Learning science in immersive virtual reality. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(6), 785. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000241
Patar, M. N. A. A., Nazri, N. A. A., Razlan, R., Embong, Z., Ahmad, S., & Mahmud, J. (2024). Gamification and its Impact on Learning Fundamental Physics: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(9). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarbss/v14-i9/22701
Radianti, J., Majchrzak, T. A., Fromm, J., & Wohlgenannt, I. (2019). A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. Computers & Education, 147, 103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778
Ruan, S., Nie, A., Steenbergen, W., He, J., Zhang, J. Q., Guo, M., Liu, Y., Nguyen, K. D., Wang, C. Y., Ying, R., Landay, J. A., & Brunskill, E. (2024). Reinforcement learning tutor better supported lower performers in a math task. Machine Learning, 113(5), 3023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10994-023-06423-9
Rutten, N., Joolingen, W. van, & Veen, J. van der. (2011). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017
Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2019). The Gamification of Learning: a Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H., Corbett, M., Eldridge, S., Emberson, J., Hernán, M. A., Hopewell, S., Hróbjartsson, A., Junqueira, D. R., Jüni, P., Kirkham, J. J., Lasserson, T. J., Li, T., … Higgins, J. P. T. (2019, August 28). RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. In BMJ (Vol. 366). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898
Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive Load Theory (p. 1). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_446
VanLehn, K. (2016). Regulative loops, step loops and task loops. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0075-9
Wang, L.-H., Chen, B., Hwang, G., Guan, J., & Wang, Y. (2022). Effects of digital game-based STEM education on students’ learning achievement: a meta-analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00344-0
Wang, X.-M., Yu, X.-H., Yu, D., Hwang, G., & Lan, M. (2024). Does combining real and virtual experiments improve learning achievement in physics? Evidence from a meta-analysis (2001–2021). Educational Research Review, 46, 100661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100661
Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322
Zacharia, Z. C., & Jong, T. de. (2014). The Effects on Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Electric Circuits of Introducing Virtual Manipulatives Within a Physical Manipulatives-Oriented Curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 32(2), 101. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.887083
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Yesi Yusmita, Lailatul Syifa Tanjung, Raffly Henjilito (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
