Improving Students’ Cognitive Abilities and Motivation in Kinematics Material Through Egamerasi Media
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20251429Keywords:
educational games, multiple representations, cognitive abilities, ARCS motivationAbstract
Introduction: Kinematics is considered as difficult material. Learning media greatly supports the achievement of learning objectives. Educational games have been proven to be an attraction for students to learn, easy to use in learning. However, in a preliminary study, the use of educational games, students' conceptual understanding was still in the moderate category. While the presentation of material with a multiple representations approach has been proven to make it easier for students to understand science concepts. The purpose of this study was to test the results of the development of Educational Game Based Multiple Representations (EGAMERASI) as a science learning media to improve students’ understanding and motivation in learning.
Methods: This study is an experimental study in the testing activity of using EGAMERASI media on a limited scale. The research instruments include cognitive ability tests and student learning motivation questionnaires. Data analysis used descriptive quantitative to determine the effectiveness of increasing EGAMERASI, and students’ ARCS motivation levels.
Results: The results of this study are 1) EGAMERASI has been proven to increase the average cognitive ability in the high category and is effective in the domains of knowledge, understanding, application, and analysis. Moreover, at the cognitive level of evaluation and synthesis are included in the category of quite effective, and 3) the increasing of ARCS motivation scores are attention 89%, relevance 90%, confidence 85%, and satisfaction 88%, including overall 87%.
Conclusions: All of indicators were responded by students and included in the category of making students very motivated in learning.
References
1. Ministry of Education and Culture. Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 68 of 2013 Junior High School Curriculum. Indonesia; 2013.
2. Kirom A. Peran guru dan peserta didik dalam proses pembelajaran berbasis multikultural. J Al-Murabbi [Internet]. 2017;3(1):69–80. Available from: https://jurnal.yudharta.ac.id/v2/index.php/pai/article/view/893/762
3. Shermukhammadov B. Creativity of a Teacher in an Innovative Educational Environment. J High Educ Theory Pract [Internet]. 2022;22(12):126–32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v22i12.5468
4. Handoyo E, Ariyatun A, Syaifuddin S, Winarto W, Saputro SD, Anwar ED, et al. Integration of the global attitudes of prospective teachers in encouraging a culture of environmental conservation for sustainable development in higher education. Multidiscip Rev [Internet]. 2025;8(4):2025114–2025114. Available from: https://10.0.124.149/multirev.2025114
5. Firdaus T, Sinesis AR. Video Analisis untuk Kemampuan Menganalisis dan Memecahkan Masalah Materi Kinematika pada Calon Guru Fisika. J Penelit Pembelajaran Fis [Internet]. 2017;8(2):135–42. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26877/jp2f.v8i2.1721
6. Lichtenberger A, Wagner C, Hofer SI, Stern E, Vaterlaus A. Validation and structural analysis of the kinematics concept test. Phys Rev Phys Educ Res [Internet]. 2017;13(1):1–13. Available from: https://journals.aps.org/prper/pdf/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010115
7. Anisah S, Subiki S, Supriadi B. Analisis Keterampilan Proses Sains Siswa SMA Pada Materi Kinematika Gerak Lurus. J Edukasi [Internet]. 2018;5(1):5. Available from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/295720672.pdf
8. Inafah DM, Saputro SD. Analisis Hasil Belajar Siswa Pada Pembelajaran IPA Fisika Kelas VII Sekolah Menengah Pertama. KAPPA J Phys Phys Educ [Internet]. 2024;8(2):221–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.29408/kpj.v8i2.24483
9. Maharani N, Kartini KS. Penggunaan google classroom sebagai pengembangan kelas virtual dalam keterampilan pemecahan masalah topik kinematika pada mahasiswa jurusan sistem komputer. PENDIPA J Sci Educ [Internet]. 2019;3(3):167–73. Available from: https://ejournal.unib.ac.id/pendipa/article/view/9432/4666
10. Mufit F, Asrizal, Puspitasari R, Annisa. Cognitive Conflict-Based E-Book With Real Experiment Video Analysis Integration To Enhance Conceptual Understanding of Motion Kinematics. J Pendidik IPA Indones [Internet]. 2022;11(4):626–39. Available from: https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/jpii/article/view/39333/13911
11. Osman K, Bakar N. Implementation of Educational Computer Games in Malaysian Chemistry Classroom: Challenges for Game Designer. Recent Res Educ [Internet]. 2015;8(11):156-162. Available from: http://wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2011/Penang/EDU/EDU-18.pdf
12. Smaldino SE, Lowther DL, Russell JD, Mims C. Instructional technology and media for learning. [Internet]. London: Pearson Education; 2019. Available from: https://www.pearsonhighered.com/assets/preface/0/1/3/4/0134287525.pdf
13. Kuo MS, Chuang T. How gamification motivates visits and engagement for online academic dissemination–An empirical study. Comput Human Behav [Internet]. 2016;55(1):16–27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.08.025
14. Saputro SD, Arfi I. Efektivitas Game edukasi pada Materi Suhu sebagai Media Belajar Siswa SMA. J Educ Informatics Res [Internet]. 2023;4(1):66–72. Available from: https://journal.trunojoyo.ac.id/jedumatic/article/view/25239/9479
15. Hiğde E, Aktamış H. The effects of STEM activities on students’ STEM career interests, motivation, science process skills, science achievement and views. Think Ski Creat [Internet]. 2022;43(101000):1–13. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101000
16. Lutfi A, Hidayah R, Sukarmin, Dwiningsih K. Chemical bonding successful learning using the “chebo collect game”: a case study. J Technol Sci Educ [Internet]. 2021;11(2):474–85. Available from: http://hdl.handle.net/2117/357473
17. Choo SY, Taha H. Embracing gen-z’s learning styles with a mobile enthalpy game application (MEGA) for thermochemical equation. Cakrawala Pendidik [Internet]. 2023;42(1):64–76. Available from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4659/1c425379d1214f8ee5a6fe7daec1029aef8f.pdf
18. Sánchez-Mena A, Martí-Parreño J. Drivers and barriers to adopting gamification: Teachers’ perspectives. Electron J e-Learning [Internet]. 2017;15(5):434–43. Available from: https://academic-publishing.org/index.php/ejel/article/view/1850/1813
19. Carless D, Boud D. The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assess Eval High Educ [Internet]. 2018;43(8):1315–25. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354?needAccess=true
20. Petko D. Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their use of digital media in classrooms: Sharpening the focus of the “will, skill, tool” model and integrating teachers’ constructivist orientations. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2012;58(4):1351–9. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.013
21. Susiani TS, Salimi M, Ngatman, Hidayah R, Suhartono. STEAM in Art Education Course: Students Perception. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Learning Innovation and Quality Education [Internet]. 2021. p. 1–4. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1145/3452144.3452266
22. Rahimi S, Shute VJ, Fulwider C, Bainbridge K, Kuba R, Yang X, et al. Timing of learning supports in educational games can impact students’ outcomes. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2022;190(104600):1–19. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104600
23. Fredricks JA, Wang M Te, Schall Linn J, Hofkens TL, Sung H, Parr A, et al. Using qualitative methods to develop a survey measure of math and science engagement. Learn Instr [Internet]. 2016;43:5–15. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.01.009
24. Su CH. The effects of students’ motivation, cognitive load and learning anxiety in gamification software engineering education: a structural equation modeling study. Multimed Tools Appl [Internet]. 2016;75(16):10013–36. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-015-2799-7
25. Crocco F, Offenholley K, Hernandez C. A Proof-of-Concept Study of Game-Based Learning in Higher Education. Simul Gaming [Internet]. 2016;47(4):403–22. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1046878116632484
26. Clark D, Hernández-Zavaleta J, Becker S. Academically meaningful play: Designing digital games for the classroom to support meaningful gameplay, meaningful learning, and meaningful access. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2022;194(104704):1–15. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104704
27. Cheng MT, She HC, Annetta LA. Game immersion experience: its hierarchical structure and impact on game‐based science learning. J Comput Assist Learn [Internet]. 2015;31(3):232–53. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jcal.12066
28. Bellotti F, Berta R, De Gloria A. Designing effective serious games: Opportunities and challenges for research. Int J Emerg Technol Learn [Internet]. 2010;5(SPECIAL ISSUE 2):22–35. Available from: http://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v5s3.1500
29. Saputro SD, Dellia P, Admoko S, Andreani ADP. Analisis Penggunaan E-Modul berbasis Multiple Representation terhadap Minat dan Kemandirian Belajar Peserta Didik. DWIJA CENDEKIA J Ris Pedagog [Internet]. 2023;7(3):1117–25. Available from: https://doi.org/10.20961/jdc.v7i3.80187
30. Syahri W, Yusnaidar Y, Epinur E, Muhaimin M, Habibi A. Effectiveness of multimedia based on multiple representation of Hess’ law: Concept and skills of pre-service science teachers. Int J Instr [Internet]. 2021;14(3):451–62. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1304595.pdf
31. Clark DB, Hernandez-zavaleta JE, Becker S. Academically Meaningful Play: Designing Digital Games for the Classroom to Support Meaningful Gameplay, Meaningful Learning, and Meaningful Access. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2022;194(104704):1–44. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104704
32. Lourenco V, A. Paes. Learning attention-based representations from multiple patterns for relation prediction in knowledge graphs. In: Knowledge-Based Syst, vol 251, no 109232 [Internet]. 2022. p. 1–12. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2022.109232
33. Fraenkel J, Wallen NE. How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education 8th Edition. 8th ed. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2012.
34. Olowoyeye AO, Musa KO, Aribaba OT. Outcome of training of maternal and child health workers in Ifo Local Government Area, Ogun State, Nigeria, on common childhood blinding diseases: A pre-test, post-test, one-group quasi-experimental study. BMC Health Serv Res [Internet]. 2019;19(1):1–11. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12913-019-4272-1
35. Wang Y, Chen A, Schweighardt R, Zhang T, Wells S, Ennis C. The Nature of Learning Tasks and Knowledge Acquisition: The Role of Cognitive Engagement in Physical Education. Eur Phys Educ Rev [Internet]. 2019;25(2):293–310. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1356336X17724173
36. Manurung S, Mihardi S. Improving the conceptual understanding in kinematics subject matter with hypertext media learning and formal thinking ability. J Educ Pract [Internet]. 2016;7(9):91–8. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1095813.pdf
37. Nurlailiyah A, Deta UA, Ain TN, Haq MS, Lestari NA, Yantidewi M. Analysis of High School Physics National Examination questions based on Bloom Taxonomy and National Examination Question Standard in 2017/2018. J Phys Conf Ser [Internet]. 2019;1171(1). Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1171/1/012041/pdf
38. Reynolds KM, Roberts LM, Hauck J. Exploring motivation: integrating the ARCS model with instruction. Concordia Univ Libr CU Common [Internet]. 2017;45(2):149–65. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-10-2016-0057
39. Hake RR. Analyzing Change/Gain Scores [Internet]. 1999. Available from: https://web.physics.indiana.edu/sdi/AnalyzingChange-Gain.pdf
40. Akhdinirwanto RW, Agustini R, Jatmiko B. Problem-based learning with argumentation as a hypothetical model to increase the critical thinking skills for junior high school students. J Pendidik IPA Indones [Internet]. 2020;9(3):340–50. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v9i3.19282
41. Bloom BS. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain [Internet]. New York: Longmans, Green and Company; 1956. 270 p. Available from: https://ia903005.us.archive.org/15/items/bloometaltaxonomyofeducationalobjectives/Bloom et al -Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.pdf
42. Anam RS, Gumilar S, Handayani M. The effects of teaching with real, virtual, and real-virtual experimentation modes on conceptual knowledge and science process skills among sixth-grade primary school students: a case study on concepts of electricity. Educ 3-13 [Internet]. 2023;53(3):393–407. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03004279.2023.2192224
43. Saputro SD, Supardi ZAI. Effectiveness of Clarity Learning Model to Improve Students’ Advanced Clarification Critical Thinking Ability in Physics Courses. Pegem J Educ Instr [Internet]. 2022;12(3):49–58. Available from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1362635.pdf
44. Saputro SD, Tukiran T, Supardi ZAI. Practicality and problem analysis application of clarity learning model in physics course. AIP Conf Proc [Internet]. 2023;2727(1):020057. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0151605
45. Vlachopoulos D, Makri A. The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. Int J Educ Technol High Educ [Internet]. 2017;14(1):1–33. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/S41239-017-0062-1
46. Ravyse WS, Seugnet Blignaut A, Leendertz V, Woolner A. Success factors for serious games to enhance learning: a systematic review. Virtual Real [Internet]. 2017;21(1):31–58. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10055-016-0298-4
47. Sunyono S, Meristin A. The effect of multiple representation-based learning (MRL) to increase students’ understanding of chemical bonding concepts. J Pendidik IPA Indones [Internet]. 2018;7(4):399–406. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v7i4.16219
48. Hamid A, Hikmah N, Sholahuddin A. Problem-Based Learning with Multilevel Representation: A Strategy to Master the Ionic Equilibrium in Solution Concepts. JTK (Jurnal Tadris Kim [Internet]. 2022;7(1):78–90. Available from: https://journal.uinsgd.ac.id/index.php/tadris-kimiya/article/view/10746
49. Chang JY, Cheng MF, Lin SY, Lin JL. Exploring students’ translation performance and use of intermediary representations among multiple representations: Example from torque and rotation. Teach Teach Educ [Internet]. 2021;97:103209. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103209
50. Wade-Jaimes K, Demir K, Qureshi A. Modeling strategies enhanced by metacognitive tools in high school physics to support student conceptual trajectories and understanding of electricity. Sci Educ [Internet]. 2018;102(4):711–43. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sce.21444
51. Sapriati A, Rahayu U, Sausan I, Sekarwinahyu M. The Impact of Inquiry-Based Learning on Students’ Critical Thinking in Biology Education Programs within Open and Distance Learning Systems. J Pendidik IPA Indones [Internet]. 2024;13(3):367–76. Available from: https://journal.unnes.ac.id/journals/jpii/article/view/5789/1315
52. Anam RS, Widodo A, Sopandi W. Teachers, pre-service teachers, and students understanding about the heat conduction. In: Journal of Physics: Conference Series [Internet]. IOP Publishing; 2019. p. 022012. Available from: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/2/022012/pdf
53. Harackiewicz JM, Smith JL, Priniski SJ. Interest Matters: The Importance of Promoting Interest in Education. Policy Insights from Behav Brain Sci [Internet]. 2016;3(2):220–7. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/2372732216655542
54. Cárdenas-Moncada C, Véliz-Campos M, Véliz L. Game-based student response systems: The impact of Kahoot in a chilean vocational higher education EFL classroom. Call-Ej [Internet]. 2020;21(1):64–78. Available from: http://callej.org/journal/21-1/Cardenas-Veliz-Veliz2020.pdf
55. Sarifah I, Rohmaniar A, Marini A, Sagita J, Nuraini S, Safitri D, et al. Development of Android Based Educational Games to Enhance Elementary School Student Interests in Learning Mathematics. Int J Interact Mob Technol [Internet]. 2022;16(18):149–61. Available from: http://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i18.32949
56. Chen M Bin, Wang SG, Chen YN, Chen XF, Lin YZ. A preliminary study of the influence of game types on the learning interests of primary school students in digital games. Educ Sci [Internet]. 2020;10(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10040096
57. Manero B, Torrente J, Serrano Á, Martínez-Ortiz I, Fernández-Manjón B. Can educational video games increase high school students’ interest in theatre? Comput Educ [Internet]. 2015;87:182–91. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.006
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Sigit Dwi Saputro , Badrud Tamam, Naelur Rohmah, Adi Kurniawan Saputro, Ahmad Jami’ul Amil, Moh Salimi (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
