Main Article Content

Abstract

This study aims to determine the effect of Augmented Reality on student learning outcomes. This study consists of two variables: Augmented Reality as the independent variable and student learning outcomes as the dependent variable using quantitative meta-analysis research. The instrument used is an article coding sheet containing the data needed for meta-analysis in the form of mean data, the number of samples, and the standard deviation of control and experimental groups from articles that have passed the selection based on inclusion and exclusion criteria obtained through Google Scholar search. The results of the meta-analysis on 13 research articles obtained a summary effect (average effect size) of 0.541 which means that augmented Reality has a significant positive effect on student learning outcomes based on the effect size category set by Cohen. The results of the publication bias test show that the conclusion of the meta-analysis is not indicated by publication bias, as evidenced by the results of the funnel plot, egger test, and fail-safe N results. This study concludes that there is an effect of Augmented Reality on student learning outcomes.

Keywords

augmented reality learning outcomes meta-analysis

Article Details

How to Cite
Fajari, L. E. W., Dayurni, P., & Rahayu, A. (2023). Meta-Analysis Study: The Effect of Augmented Reality on Student Learning Outcomes. International Journal of Asian Education, 4(1), 49–57. https://doi.org/10.46966/ijae.v4i1.301

References

  1. Ahn, E., & Kang, H. (2018). Introduction to Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: A Health Care Perspective. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 71(2), 103–112. https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103
  2. Alzahrani, N. M. (2020). Augmented Reality: A Systematic Review of Its Benefits and Challenges in E‐Learning Contexts. Applied Sciences, 10(6), 56-60. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10165660
  3. Aqib, Z. (2013). Model-Model, Media dan Strategi Pembelajaran Konlekstual (Inovatif). Bandung: Yrama Widya. https://onesearch.id/Record/IOS2863.JATEN000000000211016
  4. Basu, A. (2017). How to Conduct Meta-Analysis: A Basic Tutorial. New York: Springer PeerJPreprints. https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2978v1
  5. Bujokas, A., & Rothberg, D. (2014). Media Education and Brazillian Educational Policies for the Enhancement of Learning. Media Education Research Journal, 43(22), 115-122. http://dx.doi.org/1-.3916/C43-2014-11
  6. Chamdani, M., Yusuf, F. A., Salimi, M., & Fajari, L. E. W. (2022). Meta-Analysis Study: the Relationship Between Reflective Thinking and Learning Achievement. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 15(3), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2022.150305
  7. Fajari, L. E. W. & Meilisa, R. (2022). The Development of Augmented Reality to Improve Critical Thinking and Digital Literacy Skills of Elementary School Students. Dwija Cendekia: Jurnal Riset Pedagogik, 6(3), 688-702. https://doi.org/10.20961/jdc.v6i3.65687
  8. Fajari, L. E. W., Sarwanto & Chumdari. (2020). Improving Elementary School’s Critical Thinking Skills through Three Different PBL-Assisted Learning Media Viewed from Learning Styles. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 16(1), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-829/1135193
  9. Furh, B. (2011). Hand Book of Augmented Reality. Florida: Springer Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0064-6
  10. Goel, S., & Bhardawaj, A. (2021). A Critical Analysis of Augmented Reality by Applicability of IT Tools. International and information and Computation Technology, 4(4), 425-430.
  11. Halidi, H. M., Husain, S., & Saehana, S. (2015). Pengaruh Media Pembelajaran
  12. Berbasis Augmented Reality Terhadap Motivasi Dan Hasil Belajar Ipa Siswa Kelas V Sdn Model Terpandu Madani Palu. Jurnal Mitra Sains, 3(1), 53-60.
  13. http://www.jurnal.unsyiah.ac.id/JIPI/article/download/9691/7671
  14. Halimovna, K. S., Nurilloevna, M. O., Radzhabovna, K. D., Shavkatovna, R. G., & Hamidovna, R. I. (2021). The Role of Modern Pedagogical Technologies in the Formation of Students’ Communicative Competence. Religacion, 4, 261-265. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8274031
  15. Higgins, J. P. T., Lopez-Lopez, J. A., Becker, B. J., Davies, S. R., Dawson. S., Grimshaw, J. M., McGuinnes, L. A., Moore, T. H. M., Rehfuess, E. A., Thomas, J., & Caldwell, D. M. (2019). Synthesizing quantitative evidence in systematic reviews of complex health interventions. BMJ Global Health, 4, 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000858
  16. Kyndt E., Raes, E., Lismont, B., Timmers, F., Cascallar, E., & Dochy, F. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Face-to-Face Cooperative Learning. Do Recent Studies Falsify or Verify Earlier Findings? Educational Research Review, 10(1), 133-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002
  17. Ma, X., & Liu, H. (2016). The reformation and restruction of traditional manufacturing industry study in industry 4.0 times. International Journal of Science, 3(7), 88-93. http://www.ijscience.org/download/IJS-3-7-88-93.pdf
  18. Malicki, M., Jeroncic, A., Aalbersberg, L. J., Bouter, L., & Riet, G. (2021).
  19. Systematic review and meta-analyses of studies analyzing instructions to authors from 1987 to 2017. Nature Communications, 12(5840), 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-26027-y
  20. Mueller, M., D’Addario, M, Egger, M., Cevallos, M., Dekkers, O., Mugglin, C., & Scott, P. (2018). Methods to systematically review and meta-analyze observational studies: A systematic scoping review of recommendations. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(44), 1-18. http://doi.org/10.1186/s12874018-0494-9
  21. Pereira, R. S., Santos, I. C., Oliveira, K. D. S., & Leao, N. C. A. (2019). Meta-
  22. Analysis As A Research Tool: A Systematic Review Of Bibliometric Studi In Administration. Human and Social Management, 20(5), 175-189. http://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6971/Eramg190186
  23. Riyana, C. (2012). Media Pembelajaran. Jakarta: Direktorat Jendral Pendidikan Islam Kementrian Agama Republik Indonesia. https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ku0_DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA4&dq=info:Hfyz4jHh4pEJ:scholar.google.com&ots=cg8Sbx1qXI&sig=JqhjWAF464zELtsd1hQX9f7GoGI&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
  24. Rosenthal, M. (2008). The File-Drawer Problem Revisited: A General WeigMethodnthod for Calculating Fail-Safe Numbers in Meta-Analysis. Evolution, 59(2), 464-505. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2005.tb01004.x
  25. Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment, and adjustments. Psychometrika, 72(2), 269–271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11336-006-1450-y
  26. Rusman, Kurniawan, D., & Riyana, C. (2015). Pembelajaran Berbasis Teknologi
  27. Informasi dan Komunikasi: Mengembangkan Profesioalitas Guru. Jakarta: Rajagrafindo. https://opac.perpusnas.go.id/DetailOpac.aspx?id=860054
  28. Tawfik, G. M. Dila, K. A. S., Mohamed, M. Y. F., Tam, D. N. H. T., Kien, N. D.,
  29. Ahmad, A. M., Huy, N. T. (2019). A step-by-step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Tropical Medicine Health, 47(46), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41182-019-0165-6
  30. Tulodziecki, G. (2012). Approaches to Learning with Media and Media Literacy Education Trends and Current Situation in Germany. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 3(4), 44-60. https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/jmle/vol4/iss1/5/
  31. Yusuf, F. A., & Fajari, L. E. W. (2022). Key Success Factors of Various Quality Assessment Institutions and Quality of Higher Education Services: A Meta-Analysis Study. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 2022(98), 184–202. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2022.98.012