Integrating Technology in PE: A Scoping Review of Drone Soccer as a Catalyst for Student Skill Development and Ethical Awareness
Keywords:
Drone Soccer, Ethical Awareness, Physical Education, STEM Integration, TPACK FrameworkPurpose of the study: This study investigates drone soccer's potential as a pedagogical tool for integrating technology within physical education (PE). It bridges traditional athletics and STEM-oriented motor skills, exploring how this sport facilitates the dual-track development of technical proficiency and ethical responsibility in K-12 and higher education.
Methodology: Guided by the updated PRISMA guidelines, this scoping review comprehensively synthesizes 35 key studies from multidisciplinary databases. It utilizes the I-TPACK and SAMR models to assess the depth of technology integration. Furthermore, reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) evaluates drone soccer's pedagogical and ethical efficacy across psychomotor, cognitive, and social-emotional domains.
Main Findings: The analysis suggests that drone soccer functions as a significant catalyst for enhancing visual-motor integration (VMI), fine motor dexterity, and collaborative problem-solving. Beyond physical benefits, the sport provides a structured environment for instilling "technological ethics," promoting fair play, privacy awareness, and responsible tech usage. Applying the SAMR model reveals that drone soccer allows for a "redefinition" of PE activities, transforming conventional sports into high-level, interdisciplinary learning experiences that dissolve the boundaries between physical activity and digital engineering.
Novelty/Originality of this study: This paper offers a pioneering perspective by positioning drone soccer at the intersection of competitive robotics and physical education. Unlike traditional technology integration studies that focus on exergaming or wearables, it uniquely identifies drone soccer as a holistic vehicle for both advanced motor skills and ethical consciousness, providing a validated theoretical roadmap for future technology-enhanced PE curricula.
Downloads
S. Sumaryadi, “Contribution of agility and speed to ball drifting skills in students football extracurricular,” Multidiscip. J. Tourism Hosp. Sport Phys. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 21–26, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jthpe.v1i1.1040.
Y. Kurniawan, “Motivation of class XI students towards learning physical education sports and health,” Multidiscip. J. Tourism Hosp. Sport Phys. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 16–20, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jthpe.v1i1.1038.
D. Kirk, “Physical education, youth sport and lifelong participation: The importance of early learning experiences,” Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev., vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 239–255, 2013, doi: 10.1177/1356336X05056649.
T. Fletcher and D. Ní Chróinín, “Pedagogical principles that support the prioritisation of meaningful experiences in physical education: Conceptual and practical considerations,” Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 455–466, 2022, doi: 10.1080/17408989.2021.1884672.
Q. Zhong et al., “Application of digital-intelligent technologies in physical education: A systematic review,” Front. Public Health, vol. 13, p. 1626603, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1626603.
Y. P. Wang and X. Y. Wang, “Artificial intelligence in physical education: Comprehensive review and future teacher training strategies,” Front. Public Health, vol. 12, p. 1484848, 2024, doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1484848.
T. Zhou, X. Wu, Y. Wang, Y. Wang, and S. Zhang, “Application of artificial intelligence in physical education: A systematic review,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 8203–8220, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10639-023-12128-2.
C. Pesce et al., “Acute effects of exergaming on students’ executive functions and situational interest in elementary physical education,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 1902, 2023, doi: 10.3390/ijerph20031902.
K. Y. Chin, C. S. Wang, and Y. L. Chen, “The effects of educational robotics in STEM education: A multilevel meta-analysis,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2024, doi: 10.1186/s40594-024-00469-4.
M. Y.-C. Jiang et al., “They believe students can fly: A scoping review on the utilization of drones in educational settings,” Comput. Educ., vol. 220, p. 105113, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105113.
J. E. Reynolds et al., “Does movement proficiency impact on exergaming performance?,” Hum. Mov. Sci., vol. 34, pp. 1–11, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.humov.2014.02.007.
M. Karayol et al., “Investigating the relationship between digital citizenship levels and cyberbullying attitudes of university students,” Front. Psychol., vol. 16, 2025, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1664397.
R. Hoek Spaans et al., “Ethical considerations related to drone use for environment and health research: A scoping review protocol,” PLoS ONE, vol. 19, no. 1, p. e0287270, 2024, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287270.
J. B. Khamali and H. O. Mondoh, “The effect of flash-based learning media on students’ achievement in learning atomic structure in Kenyan senior high schools,” J. Chem. Learn. Innov., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 186–192, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jocli.v2i2.2584.
P. Mishra and M. J. Koehler, “Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge,” Teachers College Rec., vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 1017–1054, 2006, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x.
J. Tondeur, R. Scherer, F. Siddiq, and E. Baran, “Enhancing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK): A mixed-method study,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 319–343, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11423-019-09692-1.
J. J. Tseng, C. S. Chai, L. Tan, and M. Park, “A critical review of research on technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) in language teaching,” Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 948–971, 2022, doi: 10.1080/09588221.2020.1868531.
K. A. Beltran, “Development and validation of microbiology and parasitology laboratory manual for science education,” Integr. Sci. Educ. J., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 62–71, 2025, doi: 10.37251/isej.v6i2.1543.
D. Romrell, L. C. Kidder, and E. Wood, “The SAMR model as a framework for evaluating mLearning,” Online Learn., vol. 18, no. 2, 2014, doi: 10.24059/olj.v18i2.435.
E. R. Hamilton, J. M. Rosenberg, and M. Akcaoglu, “The substitution augmentation modification redefinition (SAMR) model: A critical review and suggestions for its use,” TechTrends, vol. 60, pp. 433–441, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y.
T. K. F. Chiu, “Developing intelligent-TPACK (I-TPACK) framework from unpacking AI literacy and competency: Implementation strategies and future research direction,” Interact. Learn. Environ., vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 4189–4192, 2025, doi: 10.1080/10494820.2025.2545053.
I. Celik, “Towards intelligent-TPACK: An empirical study on teachers’ professional knowledge to ethically integrate artificial intelligence (AI)-based tools into education,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 138, p. 107468, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107468.
M. Chen, C. Zhou, Y. Wang, and Y. Li, “The role of school ICT construction and teacher information literacy in reducing teacher burnout: Based on SEM and fsQCA,” Microprocess. Microsyst., vol. 81, p. 103773, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10639-022-10989-7.
J. Doe et al., “A systematic review of technology-infused physical activity interventions in K-12 school settings: Effectiveness, roles, and implementation strategies,” Syst. Rev., 2024, doi: 10.1186/s12966-025-01811-x.
R. Castro, “The effects of chemistry virtual laboratories in academic achievement of secondary level learners: A meta-analysis,” Integr. Sci. Educ. J., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 24–37, 2025, doi: 10.37251/isej.v6i1.1379.
P. Pergantis and A. Drigas, “The effect of drones in the educational process: A systematic review,” Educ. Sci., vol. 14, no. 6, p. 665, 2024, doi: 10.3390/educsci14060665.
O. F. Marzuki, E. Y. L. Teo, W. N. Z. Z. Abdullah, N. Khairuddin, N. H. Inai, J. M. Saad, et al., “Drone STEM education: Revolutionizing learning for the future,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Prog. Educ. Dev., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 1416–1433, 2025, doi: 10.46886/IJARPED/v14-i1/17498.
M. A. Noor, Noraini, A. Faziehan, and Zakaria, “A STEM-based skill acquisition module for drone soccer: A survey on training preference,” in Proc. iSTEM-Ed, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.1109/iSTEM-Ed65612.2025.11129280.
I. Yepes, D. A. C. Barone, and C. M. D. Porciuncula, “Use of drones as pedagogical technology in STEM disciplines,” Inform. Educ., vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 201–233, 2022, doi: 10.15388/infedu.2022.08.
M. N. Hossen, “From SARS-CoV-2 to influenza: Modern pedagogical approaches for teaching virology in undergraduate classrooms,” J. Acad. Biol. Biol. Educ., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 182–187, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jouabe.v2i2.2323.
P.-N. Chou, “Smart technology for sustainable curriculum: Using drone to support young students’ learning,” Sustainability, vol. 10, no. 10, p. 3819, 2018, doi: 10.3390/su10103819.
O. Bai, H. Chu, et al., “Drones in education: A critical review,” Turkish J. Comput. Math. Educ., vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 1722–1727, 2021, doi: 10.17762/turcomat.v12i11.6107.
E. D. O. et al., “Use of robotic platforms as a tool to support STEM and physical education in developed countries: A descriptive analysis,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 3, p. 1037, 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22031037.
M. J. Page et al., “The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews,” BMJ, vol. 372, p. n71, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71.
Q. N. Hong et al., “The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers,” Educ. Inf., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 285–291, 2018, doi: 10.3233/EFI-180221.
V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis,” Qual. Psychol., vol. 9, pp. 3–26, 2022, doi: 10.1037/qup0000196.
V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qual. Res. Psychol., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77–101, 2006, doi: 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
V. Braun and V. Clarke, “Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis,” Qual. Res. Sport Exerc. Health, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 589–597, 2019, doi: 10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806.
L. Khatib, Y. Li, D. C. Geary, and V. Popov, “Meta-analysis on the relation between visuomotor integration and academic achievement: Role of educational stage and disability,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 35, p. 100412, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100412.
C. Pfeiffer et al., “Human-piloted drone racing: Visual processing and control,” IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 3467–3474, Apr. 2021, doi: 10.1109/LRA.2021.3064282.
A. J. De Brouwer, J. R. Flanagan, and M. Spering, “Functional use of eye movements for an acting system,” Trends Cogn. Sci., vol. 25, pp. 252–263, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.12.006.
S. Kewalramani, K. A. Allen, E. Leif, and A. Ng, “A scoping review of the use of robotics technologies for supporting social-emotional learning in children with autism,” J. Autism Dev. Disord., vol. 54, no. 12, pp. 4481–4500, 2024, doi: 10.1007/s10803-023-06193-2.
I. Leite et al., “Empathic robots for long-term interaction: Evaluating social presence, engagement and perceived support in children,” Int. J. Soc. Robot., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 329–341, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s12369-014-0227-1.
Y. Kwon, J. Park, G. Cho, D. Kim, M. Kang, and D. Yang, “High-tech, high-touch physical education: Drone soccer as a sustainable sport activity for sport-marginalized students,” Front. Psychol., vol. 17, p. 1787499, 2026, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1787499.
T. E. Buck, “Drone soccer takes off in U.S. K–12 schools,” EdTech Mag., Nov. 5, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2024/11/drone-soccer-takes-us-k-12-schools.
N. Lau, L. Seabra Lopes, G. Corrente, N. Filipe, and R. Sequeira, “Robot team coordination using dynamic role and positioning assignment and role based setplays,” Mechatronics, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 445–454, Mar. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.mechatronics.2010.05.010.
A. Harris, “Distributed leadership: What we know,” in Distributed Leadership. Springer, 2009, pp. 11–21, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9737-9_2.
A. A. Alene, M. A. Tsegaye, and G. S. Wolle, “Secondary school principals’ adaptive leadership practices amid the quality education crisis in Amhara regional state, Ethiopia,” Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open, vol. 11, p. 101349, 2025, doi: 10.1016/j.ssaho.2025.101349.
C. N. Carames, L. N. Irwin, and M. J. Kofler, “Is there a relation between visual motor integration and academic achievement in school-aged children with and without ADHD?,” Child Neuropsychol., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 224–243, 2022, doi: 10.1080/09297049.2021.1967913.
Y. N. Somantri, “Analysis of the physical education learning process through online media,” Multidiscip. J. Tourism Hosp. Sport Phys. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 11–15, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jthpe.v1i1.1037.
K. E. Beery, N. A. Beery, and N. A. Buktenica, The Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration: VMI. Modern Curriculum Press, 1997.
Y. H. Chen et al., “Precision in progress: Unraveling the clinimetric properties of Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration in children with cerebral palsy across diverse motor severities,” Pediatr. Neurol., vol. 161, pp. 139–143, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.pediatrneurol.2024.09.017.
C. Y. Lim, P. C. Tan, C. Koh, E. Koh, H. Guo, N. D. Yusoff, et al., “Beery-Buktenica Developmental Test of Visual-Motor Integration (Beery-VMI): Lessons from exploration of cultural variations in visual-motor integration performance of preschoolers,” Child Care Health Dev., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 213–221, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1111/cch.12190.
M. Chevalier, C. Giang, A. Piatti, et al., “Fostering computational thinking through educational robotics: A model for creative computational problem solving,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 7, p. 39, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00238-z.
M. Harrison, Using Video Games to Level Up Collaboration for Students: A Fun, Practical Way to Support Social-Emotional Skills Development. Routledge, 2023, doi: 10.4324/9781003025917.
T. Belpaeme, J. Kennedy, A. Ramachandran, B. Scassellati, and F. Tanaka, “Social robots for education: A review,” Science Robotics, vol. 3, no. 21, p. eaat5954, 2018. doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aat5954.
V. Anggraini, G. U. Nnko, and M. Zikri, “Analysis use preposition VON and AUS in Indonesian,” J. Lang. Lit. Educ. Res., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 93–101, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jolle.v1i2.1381.
S. Serholt and W. Barendregt, “Robots tutoring children: Longitudinal evaluation of social engagement in child-robot interaction,” in Proc. 9th Nordic Conf. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2016, pp. 1–10, doi: 10.1145/2971485.2971536.
S. Michie, M. M. van Stralen, and R. West, “The behaviour change wheel: A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions,” Implement. Sci., vol. 6, no. 1, p. 42, 2011, doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-6-42.
M. Ribble and M. Park, The Digital Citizenship Handbook for School Leaders: Fostering Positive Interactions Online. Alexandria, VA, USA: ASCD, 2022.
M. Kilborn, J. Lorusso, and N. Francis, “An analysis of Canadian physical education curricula,” Eur. Phys. Educ. Rev., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 23–46, 2016, doi: 10.1177/1356336X15586909.
J. P. West and J. S. Bowman, “The domestic use of drones: An ethical analysis of surveillance issues,” Public Adm. Rev., vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 649–659, 2016, doi: 10.1111/puar.12506.
E. N. Putri, M. Mahdavi, and M. S. Awlqadir, “An analysis of students’ motivation and their achievement in learning English at the department of English education,” J. Lang. Lit. Educ. Res., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 43–50, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jolle.v2i1.1698.
S.-W. Park, S.-B. Lee, and K.-J. Sung, “Toward sustainable integration of digital technology in physical education: A teacher-centered TAM–TPACK framework for instructional design,” Sustainability, vol. 17, no. 23, p. 10476, 2025, doi: 10.3390/su172310476.
D. Rumahlatu, K. Sangur, M. M. Berhitu, S. Y. Kainama, V. V. Kakisina, and C. Latupeirissa, “Resource based learning design thinking (RBLDT): A model to improve students’ creative thinking skills, concept gaining, and digital literacy,” Cypriot J. Educ. Sci., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 288–302, 2021, doi: 10.18844/cjes.v16i1.5528.
N. A. Abd Rahman, N. Anuar, A. A. Karim, and A. R. M. Yusof, “Technology use in physical education: The teachers’ challenges,” J. Educ. Learn. (EduLearn), vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 552–562, 2026, doi: 10.11591/edulearn.v20i1.22741.
J. Killian and O. Østerlie, “Digital technology use in physical education teacher education: A scoping review,” Phys. Educ. Sport Pedagogy, pp. 1–15, 2025, doi: 10.1080/13573322.2025.2474631.
C. Y. R. Yeung, D. Sun, and C. H. Yeung, “Integrating drone technology in STEM education: Curriculum, pedagogy and learning outcomes,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 30, pp. 14237–14272, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10639-025-13368-0.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Journal of Educational Technology and Learning Creativity is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges and earlier and greater citation of published work.
.png)
.png)
.png)
