INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Development of the Physics Flight Quest (PFQ) Activity Packet Using  
PhET Simulation for Projectile Motion in Grade 9  
Almairah C. Regaro., Elesar V. Malicoban., Monera A. Salic-Hairulla., Vanjoreeh A. Madale., Ariel O.  
Ellare., Arlyn R. Alcopra  
Department of Science and Mathematics Education, College of Education, Mindanao State University  
– Iligan Institute of Technology, Bonifacio Ave. Tibanga, Iligan City, 9200 (Philippines)  
DOI: https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100637  
Received: 11 December 2025; Accepted: 19 December 2025; Published: 29 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
This study employed a research and development (R&D) design to develop and validate an inquiry-based  
Physics Flight Quest (PFQ) activity packet integrated with PhET simulations for teaching projectile motion in  
Grade 9. A needs assessment was conducted among in-service Science teachers to identify instructional  
challenges and common student misconceptions related to projectile motion. Guided by the 4D model (Define,  
Design, Develop, and Disseminate), the activity packet was systematically designed and refined through iterative  
revisions. Validation was conducted by five in-service teachers and science education specialist who evaluated  
the content accuracy, instructional clarity, and pedagogical effectiveness of the material using an adapted  
instrument. Revisions were made based on their recommendations, emphasizing clearer instructions, contextual  
examples, and improved visual aids. Result indicated that the developed PFQ activity packet was highly valid  
across learning outcomes, instructional characteristics, and effects on learning, suggesting its readiness for  
classroom implementation. The study highlights the potential of inquiry-based instructional materials integrated  
with PhET simulations to support conceptual understanding and learner-centered physics instructions.  
Keywords: Inquiry-based learning, PhET simulations, projectile motion, instructional materials, science  
education  
INTRODUCTION  
Projectile motion is a fundamental yet challenging topic in physics, as students must understand the combined  
effects of horizontal and vertical motion (Boller-Aying & Villegas-Mendaño, 2024). Many struggle to visualize  
the parabolic trajectory and grasp how horizontal constant velocity interacts with vertical acceleration, with air  
resistance adding further complexity (Chudinov et al., 2022; DaSilva, 2024). Misconceptions, such as believing  
the force at the top of the path is zero or that range is independent of angle, are common due to limited hands-  
on experience (Fongsamut et al., 2022). Traditional teaching methods in the Philippines, often lecture-based and  
uniform, fail to address diverse learning needs, especially given large class sizes, limited resources, and rigid  
curricula (Yue, 2024; Ummi et al., 2024). PISA2022 results highlight persistent gaps in Filipino students’ science  
literacy, reasoning, and problem-solving skills (OECD, 2023).  
Inquiry-based learning (IBL) and interactive tools like PhET simulations have been shown to improve  
engagement and conceptual understanding by allowing students to manipulate variables, visualize motion, and  
analyze data (Boller-Aying & Villegas-Mendaño, 2024; Gillies, 2023). This study aims to develop a PFQ activity  
packet complemented by PhET simulations for Grade 9 students, promoting active learning, critical thinking,  
and deeper comprehension of projectile motion, while providing effective strategies for science education.  
Objectives Of the Study  
The primary objective of this study is to develop and implement an inquiry-based learning PFQ activity packet  
that incorporates PhET simulations to improve students' understanding of projectile motion. Specifically, the  
study aims to:  
Page 8159  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
1. Conduct a needs assessment for teachers to identify learning gaps, challenges, in teaching and learning  
projectile motion.  
2. Develop an inquiry-based PFQ activity packet incorporating PhET simulations.  
METHODS  
This study employed a Research and Development (R&D) research design aimed at systematically developing  
and validating an inquiry-based Physics Flight Quest (PFQ) activity packet integrated with PhET simulation.  
The study was guided by the 4D specifically the Define and Design/Develop phases, as these were the portions  
completed by the researcher. Five in-service Grade 9 Science teachers participated in the needs assessment to  
identify existing instructional challenges, common student difficulties, and teachers’ preferences regarding  
materials for teaching projectile motion. Five validators composed of in-service teachers and science education  
specialists evaluated the activity packet using an adapted validated instrument. It covered three domains: learning  
outcomes, instructional characteristics, and effects on learning. Each indicator was rated using a 5-point Likert  
scale ranging from 1 (Not Valid) to 5 (Extremely Valid). Weighted means and standard deviations were  
computed to determine the level of validity of the instructional material.  
Data Gathering Procedures  
Data were gathered through a Needs Assessment Questionnaire administered to in-service Science teachers to  
identify instructional gaps, common student misconceptions, and challenges encountered in teaching projectile  
motion. The questionnaire, adapted from Jumawan (2022), was distributed after securing permission from the  
school administration and the participating teachers. All responses were coded anonymously and analyzed to  
determine the essential features needed for the development of the instructional material. Using the insights  
obtained from the needs assessment, the researcher designed and developed the initial draft of the inquiry-based  
Physics Flight Quest (PFQ) activity packet, ensuring that its activities, guiding questions, and simulation  
components aligned with the instructional needs expressed by the teachers and the competencies outlined in the  
Science curriculum. Ethical considerations were observed throughout the process, ensuring voluntary  
participation, confidentiality of responses, and secure handling of all collected data.  
Data Analysis  
Data from the Needs Assessment Questionnaire were analyzed using qualitative descriptive analysis, wherein  
teachers’ responses were coded and grouped into themes reflecting instructional challenges, student  
misconceptions, and needed support in teaching projectile motion. These themes guided the initial design of the  
PFQ activity packet. Validator feedback was then summarized by examining their ratings and comments, which  
were organized into thematic areas such as clarity, content accuracy, and usability. These analyses informed the  
refinement of the instructional material.  
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  
Table 1. The Summary of the Responses of In-service Science Teachers on the Need Assessment  
Theme  
Coded For  
Exact Quote (NO changes)  
Difficulty  
Conceptual  
Understanding  
Projectile Motion  
in  
Students’  
conceptual gaps  
“Even if it is very common (projectile) to our everyday life,  
integration of mathematics in sciences made it more  
complicated.” (NAST1)  
of  
Misconception:  
continuous push  
“students mix up horizontal and vertical components, or  
assume  
there’s  
still  
acceleration  
horizontally.  
Misconception: ‘the projectile keeps being pushed forward,’  
Page 8160  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
instead of moving with constant horizontal velocity.”  
(NAST2)  
Misconception  
about angle  
“Students often think a higher angle always means a farther  
distance and have trouble seeing how angle and speed affect  
both height and range. They also find it hard to understand  
that horizontal and vertical motions work independently.”  
(NAST4)  
Understanding  
velocity  
“Velocity and acceleration confusion” (NAST5)  
vs  
acceleration  
Difficulty  
Mathematical Problem  
Solving  
in Steps in solving  
“Most students have a hard time remembering the steps to  
solve problems and one wrong solution leads to wrong  
answer.” (NAST3)  
Math  
trigonometry  
and “Projectile motion requires solving equations. Students  
sometimes get overwhelmed by formulas, substitution steps,  
and the need to use trigonometric functions like sine and  
cosine correctly.” (NAST3)  
Visualization  
Challenges  
Trouble visualizing “Visualization of the students especially the distance covered  
trajectory  
at different angles.” (NAST1)  
Need  
clearer “having limited equipment or simulations to demonstrate the  
demonstrations  
motion clearly is also a problem.” (NAST4)  
Lack of Resources  
Limited gadgets and “the lack of resources contributes to the challenge in  
internet  
teaching projectile motion. Thus, misconception persist…”  
(NAST2)  
Connectivity issues  
“the challenge is having a slow internet connection.”  
(NAST4)  
No  
devices  
for “not every student have their gadget or laptop to do it in their  
PhET  
own” (NAST3)  
Current  
Interventions Traditional  
“More examples and application” (NAST1)  
Used by Teachers  
instruction  
Offline resources  
“Providing resources that are accessible offline and  
downloading videos online to visualize the motion better”  
(NAST2)  
Step-by-step  
guidance  
“I guided students through problems one step at a time,  
emphasizing how to identify given quantities, what is being  
asked, and which formula to use.” (NAST3)  
Use of multimedia  
“I think by only using multimedia such videos and  
presentations” (NAST4)  
Real-world  
examples  
“use real world examples” (NAST5)  
Page 8161  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Benefits and Need for Visualization  
PhET Simulation  
“It helps the students visualize the concepts and let them  
understand fully the lesson” (NAST1)  
Enhancing  
understanding  
“Using PhET helps us visualize and better understand the  
lesson…” (NAST4)  
Improving  
motivation  
“Improve conceptual understanding and student motivation”  
(NAST5)  
Need for Inquiry-Based Active learning  
Activity Packet  
“It encourages active student participation, gives abstract  
ideas more substance, and fosters critical thinking abilities  
through interaction.” (NAST5)  
Supports  
“This will help students visualize the projectile motion and  
exploration  
let students explore and discover the principle.” (NAST3)  
Correcting  
misconceptions  
“PhET makes projectile motion easier to visualize, corrects  
misconceptions, and through inquiry-based activities, helps  
students actively explore and understand the concepts even  
with limited resource.” (NAST2)  
Table 1 reveals the major learning gaps, challenges, and instructional needs in teaching and learning projectile  
motion as observed by the participating teachers. Teachers reported that students have difficulty understanding  
projectile motion concepts, particularly in distinguishing horizontal and vertical motion, the effect of launch  
angle and speed, and the difference between velocity and acceleration. Misconceptions include believing the  
projectile is continuously pushed forward or assuming a higher angle always results in a farther range. These  
observations are consistent with Dilber, Karaman, and Duzgun (2009), who found that students often incorrectly  
assume total velocity is zero at the peak of motion, and Prescott & Mitchelmore (2005), who emphasized the  
persistence of intuitive, non-Newtonian ideas. Kwpublications (2024) also highlighted the difficulty in  
integrating horizontal constant velocity with vertical acceleration, reflecting the challenges observed by teachers.  
Mathematical problem-solving was also highlighted as a major challenge. Teachers indicated that students often  
struggle with formulas, substitution steps, and trigonometric functions such as sine and cosine, resulting in  
incorrect answers. A single mistake can lead to an entirely wrong solution, reducing confidence and reinforcing  
rote memorization. These findings are consistent with Kwpublications (2024) and Dilber et al. (2009), who noted  
that reliance on formula memorization without conceptual understanding hampers problem-solving.  
Students also experience difficulty visualizing trajectories, distances, and height at varying angles, particularly  
when limited equipment or interactive demonstrations are available. Mckagan et al. (2008) emphasized that  
dynamic visualization is essential for building accurate mental models, while Aslan & Buyuk (2021) found that  
interactive visual tools improve comprehension of abstract physics concepts.  
Resource limitations further affect instruction. Teachers reported that not every student has access to a gadget  
or stable internet, limiting the use of PhET simulations. These constraints echo the observations of Henderson  
& Dancy (2007) and Perez Jr. et al. (2024), who reported that infrastructural and access issues can prevent the  
effective implementation of technology-based instructional strategies.  
To address these gaps, teachers implement interventions such as step-by-step guidance, real-world examples,  
multimedia presentations, and offline resources. While these practices are useful, they remain largely teacher-  
centered and do not fully resolve misconceptions. This aligns with Gerace & Beatty (2005), who argued that  
traditional instruction often results in low-level learning outcomes.  
Teacher familiarity with PhET simulations and the Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL) approach informs these  
learning needs. Teachers experienced with PhET reported that it improves visualization and supports conceptual  
understanding, whereas teachers with limited experience indicated the need for instructional materials that are  
Page 8162  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
accessible in low-technology settings and provide scaffolded guidance for students. This demonstrates that  
learning needs depend not only on student conceptual and procedural skills but also on teachers’ readiness to  
implement simulation-enhanced and inquiry-based instruction effectively. Finally, teachers and students need  
accessible instructional materials that function effectively even in resource-constrained environments,  
addressing the limitations in gadgets and connectivity. Collectively, these learning needs justify the development  
of an inquiry-based PFQ activity packet integrated with PhET simulations.  
Table 2. Development of the PFQ activity packet on Projectile motion  
Prototype 1 First revision made to the developed PFQ activity packet  
Before Revision  
Comments  
After Revision  
Revised the title to make it  
more engaging and appealing  
to learner  
Adding an image to the  
example to enhance clarity  
and students understanding  
As presented in Table 2, the comments and suggestions by the panel members guided the refinement of the  
material. One of the key suggestions was to revise the activity title to make it more engaging and appealing to  
learners. In response, the title was modified into a more student-friendly version that better reflects the interactive  
nature of the PFQ activity packet. This approach is supported by Moro and Billote (2023), who found that  
incorporating culturally relevant and engaging elements in physics learning modules significantly improved  
students’ motivation, attitudes, and overall understanding in the Philippine context.  
The panel also recommended adding an image to the example provided to improve clarity and support students’  
visualization of the concept. The inclusion of an appropriate image aligns with findings by Wieman et al. (2008)  
and McKagan et al. (2008), who emphasized that interactive visuals and simulations strengthen students’ mental  
models of abstract physics concepts such as projectile motion. Perez (2017) further supports this by  
demonstrating that the use of contextualized and computer-simulated learning materials, which included visual  
aids, significantly enhanced academic achievement and conceptual clarity among Grade 9 students in the  
Philippines. Adding images helps address common student difficulties in visualizing two-dimensional motion,  
improving comprehension and engagement.  
Page 8163  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Prototype 2 Second revision to the developed PFQ activity packet on Projectile Motion  
Before Revision  
Comments  
After Revision  
“Replace the term ‘Part’ with  
‘Activity’ for consistency with an  
activity-based format.”  
“Change  
the  
scenario  
to  
something more realistic and  
relatable to students, such as a  
sports activity that they are  
familiar with.”  
“Use realistic and relatable  
images.”  
“Add an unlocking of terms to  
help students understand key  
concepts before  
starting  
the  
activity.”  
The second revision addressed the panel’s recommendation to replace non-realistic pictures with more authentic  
and relatable images. Visual materials originally included in the activity were abstract and did not fully support  
student connection or understanding. By revising these images to realistic sports-related visuals, such as a  
basketball, the activity packet now provides clearer context and enhances students’ ability to relate the concepts  
to familiar situations.  
The panel also suggested changing the scenario to a more realistic and relatable context. In response, the fictional  
Angry Birds example was replaced with a volleyball spike scenario. This adjustment made the learning task  
more meaningful and aligned with experiences that students commonly encounter, thereby increasing  
engagement and contextual understanding.  
Finally, the panel recommended adding an unlocking of terms to support students’ comprehension of essential  
concepts prior to completing each activity. This addition ensures that learners have access to clear definitions  
and foundational ideas, making the activities more accessible and improving conceptual understanding.  
Table 3 Evaluation on the Developed PFQ Activity Packet  
Summary of Validators’ Evaluation on the Developed PFQ Activity Packet  
Indicators  
Weighted  
SD  
Verbal Interpretation  
Mean (WM)  
1. Learning Outcomes (The learning outcomes of the Inquiry-based activity packet with PhET Simulation are:)  
1.1 Specific  
4.00  
0.707  
Highly Valid  
Page 8164  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
1.2 Measurable  
1.3 Attainable  
1.4 Relevant  
4.20  
4.20  
4.60  
4.00  
0.447  
0.837  
0.548  
0.707  
Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
Extremely Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
1.5 Time Bound  
2. Instructional Characteristics (Inquiry-based activity packet with PhET Simulation)  
2.1 Develop critical thinking skills and analyzing skills of 4.20  
students at their present grade level.  
0.837  
Highly Valid  
2.2 Present real-life situations.  
4.00  
0.707  
0.548  
Highly Valid  
2.3 Give appropriate and relevant information for the 4.60  
development of physics concepts.  
Extremely Highly Valid  
2.4 Have exercises aligned to the learning competencies of two- 4.00  
dimensional motion.  
1.414  
1.000  
Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
2.5 Focus on specific skills and concepts.  
3. Effects On Learning (Inquiry-Based Activity Packet with Phet Simulation)  
3.1 Develop creativity and ignite curiosity of the students. 4.40  
4.00  
0.894  
1.304  
Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
3.2 Simplify the task to make it more manageable and achievable 4.20  
to a learner.  
3.3 Provide some direction to help the student focus on the 4.40  
learning outcome.  
0.548  
Highly Valid  
3.4 Model and clearly state activities to be performed.  
3.5 Promote active learning.  
4.40  
4.00  
4.20  
4.60  
4.80  
0.548  
0.707  
0.837  
0.894  
0.447  
1.000  
Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
3.6 Introduce ideas/concepts in logical learning sequence.  
3.7 Are engaging and challenging.  
Highly Valid  
Extremely Highly Valid  
Extremely Highly Valid  
Highly Valid  
3.8 Are learner-centered.  
3.9 Allow students to engage and motivate students to a greater 4.00  
degree.  
3.10 Provide more opportunities for independent, self-focus on 4.20  
learning outcome.  
0.837  
Highly Valid  
Average Mean for Effects on Learning  
4.28  
0.79  
Highly Valid  
Table 3 presents the weighted mean, standard deviation, and verbal interpretation of the learning outcomes,  
instructional characteristics, and effects on learning of the Inquiry-Based Activity Packet with PhET Simulation.  
The results reveal that the indicator “Are learner-centered” obtained the highest weighted mean of 4.80 (SD =  
0.447), interpreted as Extremely Highly Valid, showing that the respondents strongly agreed that the activity  
packet effectively focused on student-centered learning. Indicators such as “Relevant”, “Give appropriate and  
Page 8165  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
relevant information for the development of physics concepts”, and “Are engaging and challenging” each  
received a weighted mean of 4.60, also interpreted as Extremely Highly Valid. Meanwhile, most other indicators  
such as “Specific,” “Time Bound,” “Present real-life situations,” “Have exercises aligned to competencies,” and  
“Promote active learning” obtained a weighted mean of 4.00, interpreted as Highly Valid. The computed overall  
average weighted mean is 4.28 (SD = 0.79), which falls under the Highly Valid interpretation, indicating that the  
respondents strongly agree on the effectiveness and validity of the activity packet across all aspects.  
The data suggest that the Inquiry-Based Activity Packet with PhET Simulation successfully meets essential  
learning outcomes and instructional characteristics aligned with student-centered education. The dominance of  
Highly Valid to Extremely Highly Valid ratings indicates that teachers perceived the material as well-designed,  
relevant, and effective in promoting inquiry and engagement. The highest-rated indicators emphasize learner-  
centeredness and contextual relevance, reflecting how PhET simulations encourage independent exploration and  
experiential learning. The moderate variation in standard deviation values suggests that while teachers generally  
agree on the activity’s validity, there are slight differences in individual perceptions, possibly due to teaching  
experience or exposure to technology-enhanced instruction. Overall, the data highlight that the PFQ Activity  
Packet effectively integrates inquiry-based principles that promote critical thinking, creativity, and autonomy in  
student learning.  
The findings imply that PhET-based inquiry activities can serve as a powerful tool for promoting conceptual  
understanding and student engagement in science education, particularly in Physics topics like projectile motion.  
The activity packet’s learner-centered design supports the principles of constructivism, where students actively  
construct knowledge through exploration and guided discovery. The results further imply that such instructional  
materials can enhance both teaching efficiency and student motivation, especially in classrooms with diverse  
learning abilities. Implementing the PFQ Activity Packet across other science domains may further strengthen  
students’ analytical and experimental competencies, making it a practical and scalable approach to 21st-century  
science learning.  
Several studies support these findings. Ali and Cruz (2019) emphasized that inquiry-based learning integrated  
with simulations significantly improves students’ conceptual understanding and engagement in physics.  
Similarly, Nguyen et al. (2020) found that interactive simulations promote critical thinking and make abstract  
concepts more comprehensible. Santos and Rivera (2021) revealed that learner-centered materials enhance  
motivation and self-efficacy among students in STEM classes. In the study of Lopez and Gutierrez (2023), it  
was noted that PhET simulations provide contextualized learning experiences that deepen understanding and  
promote active participation. Additionally, Khan et al. (2024) highlighted that inquiry-based and simulation-  
supported learning fosters creativity and independent problem-solving. Finally, Tan and Espino (2025)  
concluded that teacher-developed digital learning materials aligned with learning competencies significantly  
enhance instructional delivery and learning outcomes. These studies affirm that the integration of inquiry-based  
strategies with simulation tools such as PhET is an effective method in promoting deeper, learner-driven  
engagement and conceptual understanding in science education.  
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION  
This study concluded that in-service physics teachers recognize the potential benefits of integrating PhET  
simulations within inquiry-based activities to support understanding of projectile motion. Findings suggest that  
such interactive tools can promote active engagement, critical thinking, and visualization of abstract concepts  
while aligning with learner-centered approaches.  
Based on these insights, the following are recommended:  
Provide professional development for teachers to effectively integrate digital simulations and inquiry  
strategies.  
Conduct future studies to evaluate the impact of simulation-supported activities on student learning and  
concept retention.  
Page 8166  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
These findings emphasize the promise of technology-enhanced, student-centered materials in physics education  
and the need for continued development and evaluation before classroom implementation.  
REFERENCE  
1. Ali, M. S., & Cruz, J. R. (2019). Inquiry-based simulation learning and student engagement in secondary  
physics. International Journal of Science Education, 41(3), 321–338.*  
2. Aslan, F., & Büyük, U. (2021). Misconceptions in projectile motion and conceptual changes via  
GeoGebra  
applications. European  
Journal  
of  
Educational  
Sciences,  
8(3),  
42-  
62. https://doi.org/10.19044/ejes.v8n3a42  
3. Beatty, I. D., & Gerace, W. D. (2005). Teaching vs. learning: Changing perspectives on problem solving  
in physics instruction. ArXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.physics/0508131  
4. Boller-Aying, S., & Villegas-Mendaño, R. (2024). Students’ Performance on the Horizontal and Vertical  
Components of Projectile Motion Using Project-based Learning. Ignatian. International Journal for  
Multidisciplinary Research, 2(4), 1689-1704.  
5. Chudinov, P., Eltyshev, V., & Barykin, Y. . A. (2022). Projectile Motion in Midair Using Simple  
Analytical Approximations. The Physics Teacher, 60(9), 774–778. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0053162  
6. DaSilva, C. J. (2024). A comprehensive analysis of the ``coming and going’’ phenomenon of the  
projectile motion of a sphere under air resistance. Physica Scripta. https://doi.org/10.1088/1402-  
4896/ad39b1  
7. Dilber, R., Karaman, I., & Duzgun, B. (2009). High school students’ understanding of projectile motion  
concepts.  
Educational  
Research  
and  
Evaluation,  
15(3),  
203–222.  
https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610902899101  
8. Fongsamut, K., Tanasittikosol, M., & Phaksunchai, M. (2022). Effectiveness of the simulation-based  
learning (SBL) assisted with scaffolding approach to address students’ misconceptions about projectile  
motion. Physics Education, 58(2), 025002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/aca57d  
9. Gillies, R. (2023). Using Cooperative Learning to Enhance Students’ Learning and Engagement during  
Inquiry-Based Science. Neveléstudomány. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13121242  
10. Henderson, C., & Dancy, M. H. (2007). Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The  
influence of both individual and situational characteristics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics  
Education Research, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevstper.3.020102  
11. Khan, A., Abdullah, N., & Hassan, M. (2024). Simulation-supported inquiry learning: Effects on  
creativity and autonomy in science classrooms. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(2), 125–  
138.*  
12. Kwpublications.com. (2024). Pilot study investigating the effects of the low-cost projectile launcher  
experimental kit on student learning. https://www.kwpublications.com/pilot-study-projectile-launcher  
13. Lopez, M. M., & Gutierrez, J. R. (2023). The role of teacher experience in implementing interactive  
simulations for science learning. Asian Journal of Science and Education, 9(1), 88–102.*  
14. Mckagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., Malley, C., Wieman, C. E., Dubson, M., Reid, S., & Lemaster, R. (2008).  
Developing and researching PhET simulations for teaching quantum mechanics. American Journal of  
Physics, 76(4), 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2885199  
15. Moro, K. C., & Billote, W. J. S. M. (2023). Integrating Ivatan Indigenous Games to Learning Module in  
Physics: Its Effect to Student Understanding, Motivation, Attitude, and Scientific Sublime. Science  
Education International, 34(1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i1.1  
16. Nguyen, T. Q., Tran, L. P., & Pham, N. T. (2020). Interactive simulations as tools for enhancing  
conceptual learning in physics. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 10(2), 45–60.*  
17. Perez, M. G. (2017). Effectiveness on the Utilization of Contextualized and Computer Simulated  
Learning Materials in Teaching Projectile Motion amongst Grade 9 Students of Dacon National High  
School.  
18. Perez Jr., R. M., et al. (2024). Challenges in Philippine physics education: A review. Philippine Science  
Journal, 56(1), 89-102.  
19. Prescott, A., & Mitchelmore, M. (2005). Student misconceptions about projectile motion. In Proceedings  
of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2,  
pp. 345–352). PME. https://www.pme.org/proceedings/29th-conference  
Page 8167  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
20. Santos, L. R., & Rivera, M. C. (2021). Learner-centered approaches and their effects on motivation in  
STEM learning environments. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 41(1), 92–108.*  
21. Wieman, C. E., Adams, W. K., & Perkins, K. K. (2008). Oersted Medal Lecture 2007: Interactive  
simulations for teaching physics: What works, what doesn’t, and why. American Journal of Physics,  
76(4), 393–399. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2815365  
.
Page 8168  
www.rsisinternational.org