Physics Education Technology (PhET) Simulation Assisted Instruction towards Students' Academic Achievement and Motivation in Electromagnetism

This study examined the effectiveness of Physics Education Technology (PhET) simulation-assisted instruction on students’ academic achievement and motivation in electromagnetism. A quasi-experimental quantitative design was employed involving second-year Bachelor of Secondary Education major in Science students, with one group exposed to PhET-integrated instruction and another taught using traditional methods. Academic achievement was measured through pretests and posttests, while motivation was assessed using a validated questionnaire covering intrinsic motivation, amotivation, extrinsic–career motivation, and social–extrinsic motivation. Results revealed that both groups initially demonstrated very low academic achievement, with most students classified under the failure category during the pretest. After the intervention, the PhET group exhibited a marked improvement, with all students attaining good to very good performance levels and no failures recorded. In contrast, although the non-PhET group showed some improvement, the majority of students remained at a satisfactory level. ANCOVA results indicated a statistically significant difference in posttest academic achievement between the two groups when pretest scores were controlled (p < 0.01), favoring the PhET simulation-assisted instruction. In terms of motivation, students in the PhET group demonstrated higher levels across all motivational dimensions compared to those in the non-PhET group. Overall motivation for the PhET group was interpreted as motivated, while the non-PhET group displayed lower motivational levels. Independent samples t-test results confirmed a statistically significant difference in overall motivation between the groups (p < 0.001). These findings suggest that integrating PhET simulations into physics instruction significantly enhances both conceptual understanding and student motivation in electromagnetism.

PhET simulations, electromagnetism, academic achievement, student motivation, physics education

1. Adie, J. W., Waldeck, D., Hughes, D. J., Mulvenna, M., Holliman, A. J., Bartholomew, K. J., & Higton, C. (2024). Peer climate matters for academic motivation and student functioning in higher education. International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 9(3), 1685–1702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-024-00187-w [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alahmari, A. (2024). Exploring graduate students’ intrinsic motivation in fully online courses: a Qualitative study. British Journal of Education, 12(7), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.37745/bje.2013/vol12n785104 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Alonso, R. K., Vélez, A., & Martínez-Monteagudo, M. C. (2023). Interventions for the Development of Intrinsic Motivation in University Online Education: Systematic Review—Enhancing the 4th Sustainable Development Goal. Sustainability, 15(13), 9862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15139862 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2022). The impact of Physics Education Technology (PHET) Interactive Simulation-Based Learning on motivation and academic achievement among Malawian physics students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 32(1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-10010-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bandura, A.S., “Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change,” Psychological Review, 64: 359 372(1997) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Caruth, G. D. (2018). Student Engagement, Retention, and Motivation: Assessing [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Academic Success in Today’s College Students. Participatory Educational [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Research, 5(1), 17-30. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.18.4.5.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chi, C. (2023, December 9). Philippines still lags behind world in math, reading and science — PISA 2022. Philstar.com. https://www.philstar.com/headlines/2023/12/06/2316732/philippines-still-lags-behind-world-math-reading-and-science-pisa-2022 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dessie, E., Gebeyehu, D., & Eshetu, F. (2023). Enhancing critical thinking, metacognition, and conceptual understanding in introductory physics: The impact of direct and experiential instructional models. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2287. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13273 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fadillah, M. A., Alawyah, K., Syafrijon, S., & Usmeldi, U. (2026). Meta-Analysis of the effectiveness of PHET simulations in Physics Education. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering (iJOE), 22(02). https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v22i02.59007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Filgona, J. et al. (2020). “Motivation in Learning”. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies 10 (4):16-37. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v10i430273. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Floris, M., Paganin, G., Guglielmi, D., & Mazzetti, G. (2023). Motivation is not enough: how career planning and effort regulation predict academic achievement. Current Psychology, 43(10), 9280–9289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-05070-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gogus, A. (2012). Constructivist Learning. In: Seel, N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_142 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gusho, L., Muçaj, A., Petro, M., & Vampa, M. (2023). Use of educational technology to improve the quality of learning and teaching: A systematic research review and new Perspectives. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 18(15), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i15.39641 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Ishida, A., & Sekiyama, T. (2024). Variables influencing students’ learning motivation: critical literature review. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1445011 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lager, A., & Lavonen, J. (2023). Engaging students in scientific practices in a remote setting. Education Sciences, 13(5), 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050431 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Masliyenko, T., & De Sousa Reis, C. F. (2024). Academic Motivation and Career Decidedness of STEM and HASS Students during Higher Education. Proceedings of the Global [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Mutende, R. A. (2025). Enhancing STEM Competency and Educational Equity in Rural Schools Through PhET Simulations and Teacher Development. IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education, 15(3), 32–39. https://www.iosrjournals.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ng, M. E., & Chua, K. H. (2023). The effect of using PHET in changing Malaysian students’ attitude to learning physics in a full virtual environment. Pertanika Journal of Social Science & Humanities, 31(2), 545–560. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.31.2.05 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Nguyen, L. Q., Trinh, Q. H., & Nguyen, P. T. (2024). ENHANCING SCIENCE EDUCATION IN REMOTE REGIONS: THE IMPACT OF PHET SIMULATIONS ON TEACHING ELECTRICITY IN NORTHERN VIETNAM. Journal of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10815027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Nuraysha, A. D., Winarno, N., Fadly, W., Hakim, L., & Emiliannur, E. (2024). Analyzing student’s motivation towards science learning in junior high school. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 10(7), 4139–4148. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v10i7.7297 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. PHET Interactive Simulations. (2026). PhET. https://phet.colorado.edu/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Prado, P. J. S. (2025). PRECIOUS (PHET SIMULATION FOR REAL-WORLD ENGAGEMENT THROUGH CONCEPTUAL INTERACTIVE OUTCOMES FOR UNDERSTANDING IN SCIENCE). Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15812812 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Pranata, O. D. (2024). Physics education technology (PhET) as a game-based learning tool: A quasi-experimental study. Pedagogical Research, 9(4), em0221. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/15154 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Pratiwi, A. N., Aisyah, N., Somakim, S., & Kamran, M. (2023). STEM-based approach: A learning design to improve critical thinking skills. Al-Jabar Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 14(1), 225–237. https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v14i1.18054 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Psychreg News Team. (2024). Motivation Shapes Learning Outcomes in Students. Psychreg Journal of Psychology. [psychreg.org] [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Salih, M., Mai, M. Y., & Shibli, A. (2016). Students’ motivation toward science learning in secondary schools in Oman and Malaysia: A comparative study. Journal of Research, Policy & Practice of Teachers and Teacher Education, 6(1), 16–24. https://ejournal.upsi.edu.my/index.php/JRPPTTE/article/view/209 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Simply Psychology. (2025, March 19). Kolb's Learning Styles & Experiential Learning Cycle. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Sunu, S., & Baidoo-Anu, D. (2023). Relationship between students’ academic self-concept, intrinsic motivation, and academic performance. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology, 12(1), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/21683603.2023.2292033 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Teppo, M., Soobard, R., & Rannikmäe, M. (2021). A Study Comparing Intrinsic Motivation and Opinions on Learning Science (Grades 6) and Taking the International PISA Test (Grade 9). Education Sciences, 11(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Urhahne, D., & Wijnia, L. (2023). Theories of Motivation in Education: an Integrative Framework. Educational Psychology Review, 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09767-9 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Vedder-Weiss, D., & Fortus, D. (2018). Teachers’ mastery goals: Using a self-report survey to study the relations between teaching practices and students’ motivation for science learning. Research in Science Education, 48, 181–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9565-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Wentzel, K. R. (2023). Identifying the role of social relationships in motivating students to learn. In Motivation Science (pp. 387–393). https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197662359.003.0063 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study