Authors : Yvonne Catherine D. De Asis; Dr. Wilfred G. Alava Jr.

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 10 - October

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/bdz3zfp6

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/ptfeeyne

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25oct1280

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : The study examined the effects of computer simulations and interactive activities on the academic performance and engagement of second-year Bachelor of Secondary Education Science students in Cell and Molecular Biology at Don Carlos Polytechnic College. A pretest-posttest research design was employed. Data were gathered using a 60-item validated researcher-made academic performance test in Cell and Molecular Biology and a 27-item engagement questionnaire. Findings were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, and ANCOVA. Findings revealed that computer simulations affect academic performance and promote student engagement across behavioral, affective, and cognitive domains. This enables students to achieve a reasonably satisfactory grasp with the ability to apply the essential knowledge acquired. A significant difference in academic performance was found between the computer simulation and interactive activity groups, indicating that the type of treatment had a substantial effect on learning outcomes. ANCOVA results for all engagement domains also indicated a significant effect of the treatment. Furthermore, students in the computer simulation group demonstrated more consistent responses across engagement domains, compared to those in the interactive activity.

Keywords : Computer Simulation, Interactive Activities, Academic Performance, Engagement, Cell and Molecular Biology.

References :

1. Abdullah, R. (2017). The influence of the jigsaw type cooperative learning model application on chemistry subjects in Madrasah Aliyah. Lantanida Journal, 5(1), 13-28.
2. Adebayo, A. O. & Oladele. O. (2016). Effects of computer simulation instructional strategy on biology students’ academic achievement in DNA replication and transcription. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 16-24
3. Akhigbe, J. N., & Ogufere, J. A. (2019). Effect of computer simulation instructional strategy on students' attitude and academic achievement in genetics. KIU Journal of Social Sciences, University of Lagos, Nigeria.
4. Almasri, F. (2022). Simulations to teach science subjects: Connections among students’ engagement, self-confidence, satisfaction, and learning styles. Education and Information Technologies, 27(5), 7161–7181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10940-w
5. Almasri, F., Hewapathirana, G. I., Ghaddar, F., Lee, N., & Ibrahim, B. J. P. (2021). Measuring attitudes towards biology major and non-major: Effect of students’ gender, group composition, and learning environment. PLOS One, 16(5), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251453
6. Alrashidi, O., Phan, H. P., & Ngu, B. H. (2016). Academic Engagement: An overview of its definitions, dimensions, and major conceptualisations. International Education Studies, 9(12), 41. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n12p41
7. Altun, M. (2015). Using Role Play Activities to Develop Speaking Skills : A Case Study in the Language Classroom. Paper given at a conference, held on April 26-27, 2015 in Ishik University, Erbil, Iraq, in Book of Proceedings.
8. Alvarez, R. M., Wirtz, D., & Bian, H. (2017). Identifying keys to success in innovative teaching: Student engagement and instructional practices as predictors of students learning in a course using a team-based learning approach. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2),
9. Asmara, A. R. R. A. O., Tamah, S. M., Prijambodo, V. L., Pramono, Y. H., & Budiono, D. (2024). Implementation of jigsaw technique to improve student engagement in writing class. Beyond Words, 12(1), 35-53.
10. Asogwa, U.D., Muhammed, A., Asogwa, E.N., & Ofoegbu, T.O. (2016). Effect of interactive computer simulation package on senior secondary school students’ achievement and retention in genetics concepts. Asian Journal of Information Technology, 15(14), 2313–2321.
11. Astalini, A., Kurniawan, D., Darmaji, D., Erika, E., Hoyi, R., & Sukarni, W. (2021). Description of student response on the implementation of cooperative learning models of jigsaw and role playing on the physics learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.15294/JPFI.V17I1.24315.
12. Bajis, D., Chaar, B., Basheti, I., & Moles, R. (2021). Teaching asthma first aid to pharmacy students: A comparative study between an online course and simulation by role-play. Pharmacy Education, 21, 92-104.
13. Cano, J. S., Olvis, P. R., Disca, B. Y., & Docena, A. F. (2021). Simulation-based instructional materials on central dogma of molecular biology: Basis in studying genetics for Grade 12 learners. International Journal of Technology in Education (IJTE), 5(2), 249-268. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.219
14. Cezar, Lloyd. (2024). THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COMPUTER SIMULATION IN THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND ENGAGEMENT OF GRADE 10 PHYSICS STUDENTS: A 21 st Century Skill Approach. 10.6084/m9.figshare.25215962.
15. Chen, Y., Zhang, X., Shi, L., Yang, X., Liu, X., Ye, F., Lin, S. (2021). Role-playing: An effective method for clinical novitiate teaching of infectious diseases. Medical Science  Educator. 31, 53-57.https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01031-x
16. Chernikova, O., Heitzmann, N., Stadler, M., Holzberger, D., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020). Simulation-based learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 499–541. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933544
17. Cheung, A., Slavin, R.E., Kim, E., & Lake, C.  (2016). Effective Secondary Science Programs: A Best-Evidence Synthesis. Research and Reform in Education. 53(1): 86-107.
18. Chinenye, A.L., Abraham, O., & Williams, C. (2019). Investigating impact of computer simulation on secondary education of biology students. National Journal of Advanced Research, 5(2), 1-5.
19. Church, F. C. (2021). Active learning: Basic science workshops, clinical science cases, and medical role-playing in an undergraduate biology course. Education Sciences, 11(8), 370. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080370
20. DeCaporale-Ryan, L., Dadiz, R., & Peyre, S. E. (2016). Simulation-based learning: From theory to practice. Families, Systems & Health, 34(2), 159. https://search.proquest.com/scholarlyjournals/simulation-based-learning-theory-practice/docview/1799223712/se-2?accountid=33511.
21. De Torres, M. C., Garcia, F. R., Mendoza, L. J., & Ramos, A. B. (2024). Interactive simulations as an instructional tool: Effects on science performance of Grade 8 students in Occidental Mindoro. Philippine Journal of Science and Education, 15(1), 45-60. [Link – if available online]
22. Dnyanesh, S., Pattanshetti, S.V., Bhimalli, S.M., & Dixit, D. (2022). Jigsaw technique: An innovative teaching strategy in anatomy. Journal of the Scientific Society, 49(3), 322-325.
23. Drouet, O. C., Lentillon-Kaestner, V., & Margas, N. (2023). Effects of the Jigsaw method on student educational outcomes: systematic review and meta-analyses. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1216437
24. Eun, K., & Hye Young, K. (2017). Effects of simulation-based education combined team-based learning on self-directed learning, communication skills, nursing performance confidence and team efficacy in nursing students. Journal of Korean Academy of Fundamentals of Nursing. Korean Association of Fundamentals of Nursing. https://doi.org/10.7739/jkafn.2017.24.1.39
25. Edwards, R. L., Davis, S. K., Hadwin, A. F., & Milford, T. M. (2020). Exploring student engagement factors in a blended undergraduate course. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(3) https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2020.3.8293
26. Golwitzer, B. (2018). Role-play. Retrieved from http://www.teachingtoolbox.us/role-play/
27. Guy, R. S., & Lownes-Jackson, M. (2015). The use of computer simulation to compare student performance in traditional versus distance learning environment. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 12, 95–109.
28. Isiaq, S. O., & Jamil, M. G. (2017a). Enhancing student engagement through simulation in programming sessions. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(2), 105–117. https://doi.org/10.1108/ijilt-09-2017-0091
29. Juweto, G. A. (2015). Effects of jigsaw co-operative teaching/learning strategy and school location on students achievement and attitude towards biology in secondary school in Delta State. International Journal of Education and Research, 3(8), 31-40.
30. Kaovere, N. & Mbaukua, D. (2018). The Role of Role Play as a Teaching Method on Social Skills Through the Development of English Language of Children at Junior Primary School Level: A Study of The Perception of the Namibian English Language Teachers, University of Eastern Finland. Retrieved from https://epublications.uef.fi/pub/ urn_nbn_fi_uef20181262/urn_nbn_fi_ uef-20181262.pdf
31. Kebede, Y., Zema, F., Geletu, G., & Zinabu, S. (2025). Cooperative learning instructional approach and student’s biology achievement: A quasi-experimental evaluation of jigsaw cooperative learning model in secondary schools in Gedeo Zone, South Ethiopia. Sage Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251318883
32. Kearsley, G., & Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. http://home.sprynet.com/~gkearsley/engage.htm
33. Kew, S. N., & Tasir, Z. (2021). Analysing students’ cognitive engagement in e-learning discussion forums through content analysis. Knowledge Management & E-Learning an International Journal, 39–57. https://doi.org/10.34105/j.kmel.2021.13.003
34. Klau, V. (2023). The implementation of cooperative learning jigsaw to improve students’ English learning achievement at a state senior high school in Western Malaka. Haumeni: Journal of Education, 3, 77‒86. https://doi.org/10.35508/haumeni.v3i1.11074.
35. Langbeheim, E., & Levy, S. T. (2019). Diving into the particle model: Examining the affordances of a single user participatory simulation. Computers & Education, 139, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.006
36. Lasisi, A. R., Oti, E., Arowolo, J. G., Agbeyenku, P., & Ojoko, A. N. (2021). The effect of innovative computer simulation instruction on students’ academic performance in abstract concepts in science. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3799962_code4552984.pdf?abstractid=3799962&mirid=1
37. Lee, W. C., Neo, W. L., Chen, D. T., & Lin, T. B. (2021). Fostering changes in teacher attitudes toward the use of computer simulations: Flexibility, pedagogy, usability, and needs. Education and Information Technologies, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10506-2
38. Lin, C., Han, C., Huang, Y., & Chen, L. (2024). Constructing learning confidence through jigsaw, concept maps and group cooperative learning: A qualitative study.. Nurse education in practice, 82, 104239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2024.104239.
39. Liu, H. L., Wang, T. H., Lin, H. C. K., Lai, C. F., & Huang, Y. M. (2022). The influence of affective feedback adaptive learning system on learning engagement and self-directed learning. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 858411.
40. Lindgren, R., Tscholl, M., Wang, S., & Johnson, E. (2016). Enhancing learning and engagement through embodied interaction within a mixed reality simulation. Computers & Education, 95, 174–187. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.001
41. Manunure, K., Delserieys, A., & Castéra, J. (2019). The effects of combining simulations and laboratory experiments on Zimbabwean students‟ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2019.1629407
42. Nazamud-Din, A., Zaini, M. H., & Jamil, N. H. M. (2020). The relationship of affective, behavioral and cognitive engagements in ESL higher learning classroom. English Language Teaching and Linguistics Studies, 2(4), 48. https://doi.org/10.22158/eltls.v2n4p4
43. Nkemakolam, O. E., Chinelo, O. F., & Jane, M. C. (2018). Effect of computer simulations on secondary school students’ academic achievement in chemistry in Anambra State. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 4(4), 284–289. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.522.2018.44.284.289
44. Noskova T., Pavlova T., Yakovleva O. (2021) ‘A study of students’ preferences in the information resources of the digital learning environment’. Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, 14(1), 53-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2021.140105
45. Ojekwu, I. N., & Ogunleye, B. O. (2020). Effects of jigsaw learning strategy on science students’ performance and interest in biology in selected schools in Rivers State, Nigeria. Sapientia Foundation Journal of Education, Sciences and Gender Studies, 2(3).
46. Okwuduba, E. N., Offiah, F. C., & Madichie, C. J. (2018). Effect of computer simulations on senior secondary students’ achievement in chemistry in Anambra State. Asian Journal of Education and Training, 4(4), 284-289.
47. Olalekan, A. A., & Oludipe, O. (2016). Effects of computer simulation instructional strategy on biology students’ academic achievement in DNA replication and transcription. Asian Journal of Educational Research, 4(2).
48. Olga, C., Heitzmann, N., Matthias, S., Doris, H., Seidel, T., & Fischer, F. (2020). Simulation-based learning in higher education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 499–541. https://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933544
49. Olorukooba, S., Sanda, & Suleiman. (2016). The impact of computer simulations on performance and retention of students in qualitative analysis at senior secondary schools in Zaria, Kaduna state. ATBU Journal of Science Technology and Education, 4(2), 167–179.
50. Pohl, A. J. (2020). Strategies and interventions for promoting cognitive engagement. In A. L. Reschly, A. J. Pohl, & S. L. Christenson (Eds.), Student engagement: Effective academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective interventions at school (pp. 253–280). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37285-9_14
51. Rajan, R., Devi, M.R., Koshy, J.M., & Johnson, W.M.S. (2023). Jigsaw method of interactive teaching to unpuzzle neuroanatomy. International Journal of Anatomy and Research, 11(1),8564-69. https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2022.288
52. Reedy, G. (2015). Using cognitive load theory to inform simulation design and practice. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 11, 355-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECNS.2015.05.004.
53. Salubayba, P. J. C., Serrano, E. P., Baconguis, R. D. T., & Dicolen, E. D. (2018). The effectiveness of using the Jigsaw technique in teaching cellular structure among selected Grade 7 students of the Laguna College, San Pablo City, Philippines. Journal of Human Ecology, 7(1), 89-99. https://www.ukdr.uplb.edu.ph/journal-articles/5856/
54. Sayed, S. H., Aldailami, D. A., Abd El Aziz, M. M., & Elsayed, E. A. (2023). Perceived telehealth usability for personalized healthcare among the adult population in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study in the post-COVID-19 era. Healthcare, 11(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare11020123
55. She, Hsiao-Ching & Lin, Huann‐shyang & Huang, Li-yu. (2019). Reflections on and implications of the programme for international student assessment 2015 performance of students in Taiwan: The role of epistemic beliefs about science in scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 56. 10.1002/tea.21553.
56. Sharma, S., Singh, J. P., & Devi, P. (2024). Beyond traditional boundaries: Exploring the jigsaw method to strengthen academic achievement in biology. Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 7(3), 2025133. https://doi.org/10.31893/multiscience.2025133
57. Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The Challenges of Defining and Measuring Student Engagement in Science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
58. Smith, M. K., & Wood, W. B. (2016). Teaching genetics: Past, present, and future. Genetics, 204(1), 5–10. https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.116.187138
59. Southard, K., Wince, T., Meddleton, S., & Bolger, M. S. (2016). Features of Knowledge Building in Biology: Understanding Undergraduate Students’ Ideas about Molecular Mechanisms. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 15(1), ar7. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.15-05-0114
60. Srisawasdi, N., & Panjaburee, P. Exploring effectiveness of simulation-based inquiry learning in science with integration of formative assessment. J. Comput. Educ. 2, 323–352 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0037-y
61. Stevens, R. (2015). Role-play and student engagement: Reflections from the classroom. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(5), 481-492. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2015.1020778
62. Sweller, J., Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285 (1988).
63. Talan, Tarik. (2021). The Effect of simulation technique on academic achievement: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 5, 17-36. 10.46328/ijtes.141.
64. Teke, H., Dogan, B., & Duran, A. (2015). Influence of the simulations method on 7th grade student's achievement in science and technology. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 1(2), 11-118.
65. Varthana, (2025). "Benefits of role-playing and scenario-based learning in the classroom," https://varthana.com/school/benefits-of-role-playing-and
66. Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2017). The effect of games and simulations on higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0062-1
67. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In Gauvain& Cole (Eds.), Readings on the Development of Children (pp. 34–40). Scientific American Books.
68. Wara, E., Aloka, P. J., & Odongo, B. C. (2018). Relationship between cognitive engagement and academic achievement among Kenyan secondary school students. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 9(2), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.2478/mjss-2018-0026
69. Winslow, M. P. (2020). The jigsaw classroom: Engaging students with cooperative learning. Encompass. https://encompass.eku.edu/swps_facultygallery/60
70. Wu, T.-T., Sari, N. A. R. M., & Huang, Y.-M. (2024). Integrating extended formative assessment in flipped jigsaw learning: Promoting learning engagement and higher-order thinking skills in international business education context. The International Journal of Management Education, 22(1), 100930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2024.100930
71. Yelton, B., Del Mundo, R., Santos, M., & Villanueva, J. (2022). Implementation of a Manila-based simulation curriculum on pediatric shock: Enhancing performance and confidence in resource-limited settings. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 10, 867530. https://doi.org/10.3389/fped.2022.867530
72. Yuhananik. (2018). Using jigsaw model to improve reading comprehension of the ninth graders of smpn 1 Karangploso. IJOLTL: Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistics, 3(1), 51-65. doi:10.30957/ijoltl.v3i1.404