Augmented reality simulations in science education for questioning and explaining geoscience phenomena

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.13.3.3009

Keywords:

AR, Earthquakes, Volcanoes, Earth layers, Explanations

Abstract

One of the purposes of science education is to progress from students’ initial ideas about daily phenomena to explanatory scientific models. However, explaining concepts in scientific language is not always easy for children, as many accepted scientific models involve non-visible structures. Augmented reality (AR) superimposes virtual objects onto the physical environment in real time, enabling learners to engage with representations of phenomena that would otherwise be unobservable. A significant challenge in Chile is that nearly 70% of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds fail to explain everyday phenomena using scientific concepts. Furthermore, there is a research gap in analysing the pedagogical interactions that mediate AR-supported learning in primary education for constructing explanations. We provided tablet-based AR simulations of the Earth’s layers, earthquakes, and volcanoes, and used mixed methods to analyze interactions in three classrooms located in seismic zones vulnerable to these geological phenomena. The participants were 69 fourth graders and three teachers. Special attention was given to the teachers’ guiding questions and their role in facilitating the construction of explanatory models. The study aimed to characterize teacher and student questions posed during AR-enhanced geoscience lessons and to identify which teacher question types promote scientific explanations in primary students. The results indicate that classroom interactions primarily included clarifications, prompted questions, and nonverbal actions such as pointing at the tablet screen. The questions that successfully mediated the explanations aimed to foster a conceptual understanding of the underlying causes and connections between the phenomena, rather than the device’s operation. Metacognitive pedagogical questions played a key role in evaluating the learning gains and promoting deeper reasoning. We discuss these practices in the context of primary school science to inform further research on the use of immersive technology to learn about real-world phenomena. We conclude that the potential of AR resides not solely in its visual fidelity, but in its capacity to evoke pedagogical interactions for sense-making, and that a personal connection with the phenomena complements the technology’s use.

References

Abualrob, M. M. (2019). The affordances of augmented reality in delivering the science curriculum to elementary grades. The New Educational Review, 58, 36-53. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.2019.58.4.03

Acuña, S. R., García, R. H., & Sánchez, E. (2011). Fostering active processing of instructional explanations of learners with high and low prior knowledge. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 26(4), 435–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-010-0049-y

Adnan, M., Md Ibharim, L. F., Wong, Y. S., Yee, I.- van, & Sukirman. (2025). Development and usability of a traditional game simulation module with augmented reality technology (AR-SiGaSTEM) in online learning to strengthen STEM skills among students. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 12(4), 12. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.4.2226

Ahmad, S., & Samah, N. A. (2024). Systematic Literature Review: The Trend Of Augmented Reality (AR) in Science Teaching and Learning in Primary School/Sorotan Literatur Bersistematik: Trend Realiti Terimbuh (AR) dalam Pembelajaran dan Pemudahcaraan Mata Pelajaran Sains sekolah Rendah. Sains Humanika, 16(2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v16n2.2138

Aivelo, T., & Uitto, A. (2016). Digital gaming for evolutionary biology learning: The case study of parasite race, an augmented reality location-based game. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 4(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.4.1.3

Amin, T., Smith, C., & Wiser, M. (2014). Student conceptions and conceptual change: Three overlapping phases of research. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 57–81). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267

Author, 2021.

Aranguiz, R., Ramos, M., Sepúlveda, I., & Villagra, P. (2024). A new generation of tsunami inundation maps of Chilean cities: tsunami source database and probabilistic hazard analysis. Coastal Engineering Journal, 66(2), 361–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/21664250.2024.2326269

Aydin-Ceran, S. (2021). Contextual learning and teaching approach in 21st century science education. Current Studies in Social Sciences, 160–173.

Andrade, A. M., Rios, L. M., & Ortega, D. L. L. (2005). Ideas de los niños y niñas sobre la naturaleza: estudio comparado. Centro de investigaciones y desarrollo científico (pp.41-62).

Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2014). Augmented Reality Trends in Education: A Systematic Review of Research and Applications. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 133–149. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.17.4.133

Bach, J., y Márquez, C. (2017). El estudio de los fenómenos geológicos desde una perspectiva sistémica. Enseñanza de las Ciencias de la Tierra, 25(3), 302. https://raco.cat/index.php/ECT/article/view/330135

Basumatary, D., & Maity, R. (2023). Effects of augmented reality in primary education: A literature review. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, (1), 4695759. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4695759

Bencze, L., Pouliot, C., Pedretti, E., Simonneaux, L., Simonneaux, J., & Zeidler, D. (2020). SAQ, SSI and STSE education: Defending and extending “science-in-context”. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 15(3), 825–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09962-7

Birks, M., & Mills, J. (2023). Grounded theory: A practical guide. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Booyoesen, T. (2023). Exploring the impact of augmented reality on student engagement and learning outcomes in science education. Journal Educational Verkenning, 4(4), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.48173/jev.v4i4.183

Brown, B. A. (2021). Science in the city: Culturally relevant STEM education. Harvard Education Press.

Cai, S., Jiao, X., Li, J., Jin, P., Zhou, H., & Wang, T. (2022). Conceptions of learning science among elementary school students in AR learning environment: A case study of “The Magic Sound”. Sustainability, 14(11), 6783. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116783

Çalik, M., & Wiyarsi, A. (2024). The effect of socio-scientific issues-based intervention studies on scientific literacy: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Science Education, 47(3), 399–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2024.2325382

Chang, S. C., & Hwang, G. J. (2018). Impacts of an augmented reality-based flipped learning guiding approach on students’ scientific project performance and perceptions. Computers & Education, 125, 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.007

Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20171

Conejera, A. R., Joglar, C., & Jara, R. (2020). Promoviendo la formulación de buenas preguntas en la clase de biología en secundaria: una propuesta didáctica a partir de situaciones problema. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 26, e20034.

Deehan, J., MacDonald, A., & Morris, C. (2024). A scoping review of interventions in primary science education. Studies in Science Education, 60(1), 1-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2022.2154997

Díaz, A. A. (2023). Constructing Scientific Knowledge through the Teacher´s Questions in a Guided-Inquiry Primary Lesson of the Water Cycle. Acta Scientiae, 25(4), 256–283. https://doi.org/10.37261/27_alea/6

Dood, A. J., & Watts, F. M. (2022). Mechanistic reasoning in organic chemistry: A scoping review of how students describe and explain mechanisms in the chemistry education research literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 99(8), 2864-2876. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.2c00313

Douglas, H. (2022). Sampling Techniques for Qualitative Research. In: Islam, M.R., Khan, N.A., Baikady, R. (eds) Principles of Social Research Methodology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-5441-2_29

Dufty, N. (2020). Disaster education, communication and engagement. John Wiley & Sons.

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 7–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1

Eliasson, N., Karlsson, K. G., & Sørensen, H. (2017). The role of questions in the science classroom–how girls and boys respond to teachers’ questions. International Journal of Science Education, 39(4), 433–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2017.1289420

Fan, X., Geelan, D., & Gillies, R. (2018). Evaluating a Novel Instructional Sequence for Conceptual Change in Physics Using Interactive Simulations. Education Sciences, 8(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010029

García Gaitán, C. C., Ramírez Díaz, M. H., & Arriaga Santos, C. A. (2022). ¿Cómo viaja la luz? La actividad experimental para desarrollar competencias científicas en la infancia. Revista Iberoamericana para la Investigación y el Desarrollo Educativo, 13(25). https://doi.org/10.23913/ride.v13i25.1252

Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J., & Rutherford, M. (2000). Explanations with models in science education. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 193-208). Dordrecht: Springer

Gobert, J. D. (2005). The effects of different learning tasks on model-building in plate tectonics: Diagramming versus explaining. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 444–455. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.4.444

Goldhagen, G., Ford, H., & Atit, K. (2024). Examining perspective-taking skills in introductory geoscience students. Journal of Geoscience Education, 72(2), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2023.2251818

Golondrina Dev. (2018). Argeo Realidad Aumentada (Version 2.3.1) [Mobile app]. https://golondrinadev.webnode.page/argeo/

Hernández-Torres, C., & Hernández-Abenza, L. M. (2014). La competencia lingüística como eje clave para el aprendizaje de las ciencias en educación primaria: aplicación al caso de mezclas cotidianas. Educación Química, 25, 176–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0187-893X(14)70556-7

Hiltunen, M., Kärkkäinen, S., & Keinonen, T. (2021). Identifying student teachers’ inquiry-related questions in biology lessons. Education Sciences, 11(2), 87. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020087

Herman, B. C., Owens, D. C., Oertli, R. T., Zangori, L. A., & Newton, M. H. (2019). Exploring the complexity of students’ scientific explanations and associated nature of science views within a placebased socioscientific issue context. Science & Education, 28(3), 329–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-019-00034-4

Hessler, A. M. (2024) Flexible thinking in geoscience, Journal of Geoscience Education, 72(3), 199-200. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2024.2368421

Holbrook, J., Rannikmäe, M., & Soobard, R. (2025). STEAM-ED—A Transdisciplinary Teaching and Learning Approach. In Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory (pp. 441-460). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland.

Hussain, E., Elliott, J. R., Silva, V., Vilar-Vega, M., and Kane, D. (2020). Contrasting seismic risk for Santiago, Chile, from near-field and distant earthquake sources. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(5), 1533–1555. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-20-1533-2020

Jara-Muñoz, J., Melnick, D., Li, S., Socquet, A., Cortés-Aranda, J., Brill, D., & Strecker, M. R. (2022). The cryptic seismic potential of the Pichilemu blind fault in Chile revealed by off-fault geomorphology. Nature Communications, 13(1), 3371. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30754-1

Joglar, C. (2015) Elaboración de preguntas científicas escolares en clases de biología. Aportes a la discusión sobre las competencias de pensamiento científico desde un estudio de caso. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 33(3), 205–206. https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/ensciencias.1838

Kallery, M., & Psillos, D. (2001). Pre-school teachers’ content knowledge in science: Their understanding of elementary science concepts and of issues raised by children’s questions. International Journal of Early Years Education, 9(3), 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760120086929

Kastens, K. A., & Ishikawa, T. (2006). Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cognitive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields. In Manduca, C. & Mogk, D. (Eds). Earth and Mind: How Geologists Think and Learn about the Earth. Geological Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1130/2006.2413(05)

Kaya, İ., & Memiş, E. K. (2024). Artırılmış Gerçeklik Uygulamalarıyla Desteklenmiş Argümantasyon Tabanlı Bilim Öğrenme Yaklaşımının Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarılarına ve Eleştirel Düşünmelerine Etkisi. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24(4), 2255-2282.

Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A. (2006). “Making it real”: exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual reality, 10(3), 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-006-0036-4

Kilag, O. K., Lisao, C., Lastimoso, J., Villa, F. L., & Miñoza, C. A. (2023). Bildung-oriented science education: A critical review of different visions of scientific literacy. Excellencia: International Multi-disciplinary Journal of Education, 1(4), 115–127

Kim, P. (2006). Effects of 3D virtual reality of plate tectonics on fifth grade students’ achievement and attitude toward science. Interactive Learning Environments, 14(1), 25–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820600697687

King, R. (2023). The Significance of Pragmatism in Educational Research: A Current Perspective. Research Highlights in Language, Literature and Education, 3, 19-27. https://doi.org/10.9734/bpi/rhlle/v3/4794E

King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching Children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368 https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312031002338

LaDue, N. D., & Shipley, T. F. (2018). Click-on-diagram questions: A new tool to study conceptions using classroom response systems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(6), 492–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9738-0

Lampropoulos, G. (2024). Teaching and learning natural sciences using augmented reality in preschool and primary education: A literature review. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 4(1), 1021–1037. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2024.01.013

Legare, C. H. (2012). Exploring explanation: Explaining inconsistent evidence informs exploratory, hypothesis-testing behavior in young children. Child Development, 83(1), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01691.x

Legare, C. H. (2014). The contributions of explanation and exploration to children’s scientific reasoning. Child Development Perspectives, 8(2), 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12070

León, J., Gubler, A., and Ogueda, A. (2022). Modelling geographical and built-environment attributes as predictors of human vulnerability during tsunami evacuations: a multi-case-study and paths to improvement. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 22(9), 2857–2878. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-22-2857-2022

Leuchter, M., Saalbach, H., & Hardy, I. (2014). Designing science learning in the first years of schooling. An intervention study with sequenced learning material on the topic of ‘floating and sinking’. International Journal of Science Education, 36(10), 1751–1771. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.878482

Lin, X. F., Hwang, G. J., Wang, J., Zhou, Y., Li, W., Liu, J., & Liang, Z. M. (2023). Effects of a contextualized reflective mechanism-based augmented reality learning model on students’ scientific inquiry learning performances, behavioural patterns, and higher order thinking. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(10), 6931–6951. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2057546

Liquin, E. G., & Lombrozo, T. (2020). Explanation-seeking curiosity in childhood. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 35, 14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.012

Liu, R., Wang, L., Koszalka, T. A., & Wan, K. (2022). Effects of immersive virtual reality classrooms on students’ academic achievement, motivation and cognitive load in science lessons. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(5), 1422–1433. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12688

López Takegami, J. J. K., Cabello González , V., Guevara Guerrero , M., & Montes González , J. A. (2025). Exploring Students’ Scientific Reasoning During Virtual Game in STEAM Problem Solving. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 13(3), 1. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.13.3.2795

Loxley, P., Dawes, L., Nicholls, L., & Dore, B. (2017). Teaching primary science: Promoting enjoyment and developing understanding. Routledge

Magic Software. (2017). Earth – Augmented Reality (Version 5.0) [Mobile app]. Google Play Store. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.magicsw.earthar

Makransky, G., & Petersen, G. B. (2019). Investigating the process of learning with desktop virtual reality: A structural equation modeling approach. Computers & Education, 134, 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.02.002

Makransky, G., & Lilleholt, L. (2018). A structural equation modeling investigation of the emotional value of immersive virtual reality in education. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1141–1164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9581-2

Mansour, N., Aras, C., Staarman, J. K., Bader, S., & Alotaibi, M. (2025). Embodied learning of science concepts through augmented reality technology. Education and Information Technologies, 30, 8245–8275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13120-0

Márquez, C., & Roca, M. (2009). Plantear preguntas: un punto de partida para aprender ciencias. Revista Educación y Pedagogía, 18(45).

Márquez, C., Roca, M., Gómez, A., Sardá, A., & Pujol, R. M. (2004). La construcción de modelos explicativos complejos mediante preguntas mediadoras. Revista Investigación en la Escuela, 53, 71–81.

Márquez, C., & Artés, M. (2016). Propuesta de análisis de representaciones sobre el modelo cambio geológico del alumnado del grado de educación primaria. Enseñanza de las Ciencias de la Tierra, 24(2), 169–181. https://raco.cat/index.php/ECT/article/view/312551

Martínez, L. V., Pérez, M. E. D. M., & Piñeiro, M. R. N. (2019). Percepción docente sobre la realidad aumentada en la enseñanza de ciencias en primaria. Análisis dafo. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 16(3), 3301–3301. https://doi.org/RevEurekaensendivulgcienc.2019.v16.i3.3301

McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2012). Supporting grade 5–8 students in constructing explanations in science: The claim, evidence, and reasoning framework for talk and writing. Pearson Allyn & Bacon

Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033

MINEDUC-Ministerio de Educación (2012). Bases Curriculares 2012 Ciencias Naturales Educación Básica. Santiago: Gobierno de Chile Ministerio de Educación.

Mondro, C. A., Benner, J. S., Thomson, B. J., & Lang, N. (2024). Implementation of an augmented reality sandbox as a topographic map learning tool in 100-level geology classes increases long-term knowledge retention and classroom engagement. Journal of Geoscience Education, 74(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10899995.2024.2436331

Morote, Á. F., Olcina, J., & Hernández, M. (2023). How is flood risk explained in the subject of Geography in Spanish schools? An approach based on Social Science textbooks (Primary Education). International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 32(2), 124–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2022.2133955

Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press, Maidenhead, England.

National Research Council, Board on Science Education, & Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.

Nersessian, N. (2008). Model-based reasoning in scientific practice. In R. A. Duschl & R. E. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementationiry (pp. 57-79). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789460911453_005

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I and II) - Country Notes: Chile. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2022-results-volume-i-and-ii-country-notes_ed6fbcc5-en/chile_d038b73d-en.html

Omodan, B.I. (2024). Research Paradigms and Their Methodological Alignment in Social Sciences: A Practical Guide for Researchers (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003484066

Ortiz, I. R. (2024). El impacto de la Realidad Aumentada en la etapa de Educación Primaria: Una revisión sistemática. Edmetic, 13(1), 4.

Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching critical thinking? New directions in science education. School Science Review, 352, 53-62.

Osborne, J. F., & Patterson, A. (2011). Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction?. Science Education, 95(4), 627–638. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20438

Parma Dewi, I. Hidayat, H., Irfan D., Asrifan, A., Dhanil, M., Abu Bakar, S. & Bengueddach, A. (2026). Augmented Reality in Computer Network Learning: How to Improve Students’ Self-Efficacy? International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 16(1), 91–101. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2026.16.1.2486

Patton, M. (2001). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd Ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Pérez, A. G., & Cortijo, I. C. (2020). Implicaciones pedagógicas de la realidad aumentada para la mejora de la enseñanza de las ciencias en primaria. Revista interuniversitaria de investigación en Tecnología Educativa, 9, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.6018/RIITE.444961.

Phipps, R., & Merisotis, J. (1999). What’s the difference? A review of contemporary research on the effectiveness of distance learning in higher education. The Institute for Higher Education Policy. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED429524.pdf

Prain, V. & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: A framework of representational construction affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.626462

Rappa, N. A., & Tang, K. S. (2018). Integrating disciplinary-specific genre structure in discourse strategies to support disciplinary literacy. Linguistics and Education, 43, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.12.003

Rodríguez, M., & Occelli, M. (2021). Secuencia didáctica para la enseñanza del modelo célula en estudiantes de octavo básico (Chile). In Memorias de las Jornadas Nacionales y Congreso Internacional en Enseñanza de la Biología (Vol. 3, No. Extraordinario, pp. 453-455).

Rutten, N., van Joolingen, W. R., & van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017

Sanmartí, N. (2007). Hablar, leer y escribir para aprender ciencia. In P. Fernández (Ed.). La competencia en comunicación lingüística en las áreas del currículo. Madrid: MEC.

Saure, H. I., Bomark, N. E., & Svendsen, M. L. (2021). Modeller i kjemiundervisning-et eksempel på hvordan de kan bidra til læring og feillæring: Models in chemistry education-an example of how they can contribute to learning and mislearning. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 17(2), 181–205. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.8363

Seeratan, K. L., McElhaney, K. W., Mislevy, J., McGhee Jr, R., Conger, D., & Long, M. C. (2020). Measuring students’ ability to engage in scientific inquiry: A new instrument to assess data analysis, explanation, and argumentation. Educational Assessment, 25(2), 112–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627197.2020.1756253

Selby, D., & Kagawa, F. (2012). Disaster risk reduction in school curricula: case studies from thirty countries. Avaliable at https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12799/4189

Senisum, M., & Edu, A. L. (2023). Enhancing Observation and Questioning Skills in Rural Science Education. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(12), 11855–11861. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i12.5796

Sökmen, Y., Sarikaya, İ., & Nalçacı, A. (2023). The effect of augmented reality technology on primary school students’ achievement, attitudes towards the course, attitudes towards technology, and participation in classroom activities. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(15), 3936–3951. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2204270

Squire, K. D., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad city mystery: Developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9037-z

Srivastava, A., Vaidya, V., Murthy, S., & Dasgupta, C. (2024). GeoSolvAR: Scaffolding spatial perspective‐taking ability of middle‐school students using AR‐enhanced inquiry learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(6), 2617–2638. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13456

Sun, H., Xie, Y., & Lavonen, J. (2022). Exploring the structure of students’ scientific higher order thinking in science education. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 43, 100999. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.100999

Tang, K. S. (2015). The PRO instructional strategy in the construction of scientific explanations. Teaching Science, 61(4), 14–21.

Tang, K. S. (2016). Constructing scientific explanations through premise–reasoning–outcome (PRO): an exploratory study to scaffold students in structuring written explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 38(9), 1415–1440. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1192309

Thagard, P. (2012). The cognitive science of science: Explanation, discovery, and conceptual change. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Timonen V., Foley G., & Conlon, C. (2024) Quality in qualitative research: a relational process. Qualitative Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-07-2024-0153

United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction UNDRR (2015). Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wellman, H. M. (2011). Reinvigorating explanations for the study of early cognitive development. Child Development Perspectives, 5(1), 33–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2010.00154.x

Wen, Y., Wu, L., He, S., Ng, N. H. E., Teo, B. C., Looi, C. K., & Cai, Y. (2023). Integrating augmented reality into inquiry-based learning approach in primary science classrooms. Educational technology research and development, 71(4), 1631–1651. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10235-y

Wisner, B., & Wisner, B. (2004). At risk: Natural hazards, people’s vulnerability and disasters. Psychology Press.

Wu, L., Liu, Y., How, M. L., & He, S. (2023). Investigating student-generated questioning in a technology-enabled elementary science classroom: A case study. Education Sciences, 13(2), 158. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020158

Downloads

Published

2026-06-09

How to Cite

Cabello, V., Albarrán, M. J., & Çetin Dindar, A. (2026). Augmented reality simulations in science education for questioning and explaining geoscience phenomena. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 13(3), 2. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.13.3.3009