Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education
Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education

Advancing Physics and Physics Education Through Research and Innovation

SINTA

2.396

Impact

Gscholar

11

H-Index

Schrödinger: Journal of Physics Education

Advancing Physics and Physics Education Through Research and Innovation

3D-Printed Projectile Demonstrator and Its Implications on Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Attitudes toward Physics

Marienne Sophia C. Cabal
Central Bicol State University of Agriculture ROR
Philippines
mariennesophia.cabal@cbsua.edu.ph
Rey-Mark G. Basagre
Central Bicol State University of Agriculture ROR
Philippines
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aimed to develop, evaluate, and implement a 3D-printed Projectile Demonstrator (3D-PPD) as an instructional tool for projectile motion, and analyze its implications on students’ conceptual understanding of projectile motion (CUPM) and attitudes toward physics (ATP).

    Methodology: The study employed a developmental and quasi-experimental research design. The 3D-PPD was designed using AutoCAD for 3D modeling and printed using a Bambu Lab X1 Carbon with AMS multicolor 3D printer. Research tools included survey and test questionnaires, an evaluation rating sheet, and a weekly learning plan. Statistical tests such as inferential statistics were performed using Jamovi software.

    Main Findings: The 3D-PPD received “very satisfactory” ratings in design (M = 3.62, SD = 0.27), instructional quality (M = 3.53, SD = 0.36), and cost-benefit (M = 3.40, SD = 0.38). It significantly improved students’ CUPM (p < 0.05, d = 0.90) but showed no significant improvement in ATP (p = 0.294, d = 0.43). Furthermore, the correlation analysis between CUPM and ATP after exposure to the 3D-PPD yielded a p-value of 0.818, indicating a statistically insignificant relationship.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study pioneers the development of an instructional tool through 3D printing, recognizing how modern fabrication technologies can concretize abstract physics concepts and offer scalable solutions to instructional material gaps in physics education. It also offers a significant insight into distinct students’ learning dimensions which emphasizes the need for contextualized support to inform future instructional design and research.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    M. S. C. Cabal and R.-M. G. Basagre, “3D-Printed Projectile Demonstrator and Its Implications on Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Attitudes toward Physics ”, Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 161–174, Sep. 2025, doi: 10.37251/sjpe.v6i3.2036.

    More Citation Formats

  • 561
    Abstract views
    260
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. R. J. D. De La Cruz, “Science education in the Philippines,” Science Education in Countries Along the Belt & Road, pp. 331–345, 2022, doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6955-2_20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-6955-2_20
    2. K. Dirks, M. Sharma, K. Podolak, and H. Smith, Two-Dimensional Kinematics, in College Physics, 2nd ed. Houston, TX, USA: Rice Univ., 2024, openstax.org/books/college-physics-2e/pages/1-1-physics-anintroduction.
    3. C. Sundaygara, L. Gusi, H. Pratiwi, H. Ayu, A. Jufriadi, and M. N. Hudha, “Identification students’ misconception using four-tier diagnostic test on Newton Law subject,” J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., vol. 1869, no. 1, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1869/1/012157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1869/1/012157
    4. M. Fidan and M. Tuncel, “Integrating augmented reality into problem-based learning: The effects on learning achievement and attitude in physics education,” Comput. Educ., vol. 142, 2019, doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103635
    5. T. Djudin, “Transferring of mathematics knowledge into the physics learning to promote students’ problem-solving skills,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 231–246, 2023, e-iji.net/ats/index.php/pub/article/view/16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16414a
    6. National Research Council, “Physics is amazing and practical and must be taught better,” Adapting to a Changing World: Challenges and Opportunities in Undergraduate Physics Education, pp. 8–22, 2019, doi:10.17226/18312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17226/18312
    7. D. B. Navos, M. B. Ordoña, J. M. Llorente, and M. K. G. Camarao, “Teachers' difficulty and coping strategies in physics,” Int. J. Multidiscip.: Appl. Bus. Educ. Res., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1384–1389, 2024, doi:10.11594/ijmaber.05.04.22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11594/ijmaber.05.04.22
    8. D. Wangchuk, D. Wangdi, S. Tshomo, and J. Zangmo, “Exploring students’ perceived difficulties of learning physics,” Educ. Innov. Pract., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2023, doi:10.17102/eip.6.2023.03 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17102/eip.6.2023.03
    9. O. T. Setianita, W. Liliawati, and Muslim, “Identification of high school students' misconceptions on the topic of global warming using a four-tier diagnostic test with confidence discrimination quotient (CDQ) analysis,” in Proc. Nat. Phys. Semin., vol. 1, pp. 186–192, 2019, proceedings.upi.edu/index.php/sinafi/article/download/585/504.
    10. A. Mbonyiryivuze, L. L. Yadav, and M. M. Amadalo, “Students’ attitudes towards physics in Nine Years Basic Education in Rwanda,” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 648–659, 2021, doi:10.11591/ijere.v10i2.21173. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i2.21173
    11. D. R. Chetri, “The attitude of 10th-grade students in learning physics,” J. Res. Soc. Sci. Lang., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 58–70, 2022, doi:10.20375/0000-000f-3242-e.
    12. A. Defianti and P. Rohmi, “Undergraduate students’ misconception about projectile motion after learning physics during the Covid-19 pandemic era,” J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., vol. 2098, no. 1, 2021, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/2098/1/012026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2098/1/012026
    13. B. M. R. Abatayo, N. M. Campos, and M. T. Sabasales, "Improving Grade 9 Lesson Plan in Projectile Motion through a Lesson Study Cycle," E-Saliksik: The DepEd Research Portal, Department of Education, 2022, depedesaliksik.deped.gov.ph.
    14. W. Malabana-Paredes, "Development and Validation of Strategic Intervention Materials (SIMs) in Projectile Motion for Science 9," J. Interdiscip. Perspect., vol. 2, no. 12, pp. 520–528, 2024, doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0466 DOI: https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2024.0466
    15. R. M. G. Basagre, J. M. Alpaño, J. Barquilla, J. Bongalos, A. C. De La Torre, and J. C. Nares, “Projectile horizontal and vertical motion independence demonstrator,” SEAQIS J. Sci. Educ., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 12–17, 2022, qitepinscience.org DOI: https://doi.org/10.58249/sjse.v2i02.68
    16. [16] G. Pelobillo, "Conceptions of Learning Physics among University of Mindanao Students: A Validation Study," Int. J. Instr., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 921–938, 2023, doi:10.29333/iji.2023.16451a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16451a
    17. D. T. K. Ng, M. F. Tsui, and M. Yuen, “Exploring the use of 3D printing in mathematics education: A scoping review,” Asian J. Math. Educ., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 338–358, 2022, doi:10.1177/27527263221129357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263221129357
    18. P. Paredes-Baan, Development of instructional material for Practical Research 1, Sapienza: Int. J. of Interdiscip. Stud., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 101–118, 2021, doi.org/10.51798/sijis.v2i4.146. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51798/sijis.v2i4.146
    19. M. Gopalan, K. Rosinger, and J. Ahn, Use of quasi-experimental research designs in education research: Growth, promise, and challenges, Review of Research in Education, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 218–243, 2020, doi:10.3102/0091732X20903302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20903302
    20. S. Meng, "Enhancing Teaching and Learning: Aligning Instructional Practices with Education Quality Standards," Res. and Adv. in Educ., vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 17–24, 2023, doi:10.56397/RAE.2023.07.04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2023.07.04
    21. J. M. C. Gainsan, “Locally made apparatus in teaching law of acceleration and projectile motion,” M.S. thesis, Grad. Sch., Foundation Univ., Dumaguete City, Philippines, 2019, https://www.researchgate.net/profile/SheenaMaeComighud/publication/343558170_Locally_Made_Apparatus_in_Teaching_Law_of_Acceleration_and_Projectile_Motion/
    22. R. M. G. Basagre, J. D. Guarnes, J. P. F. Nares, J. R. Mirando, R. R. Rosco, and R. C. Barcelona, “Physics Multifunctional Instrument (PMI): An authentic instructional tool in teaching electricity concepts,” in Proc. Samahang Pisika ng Pilipinas, vol. 40, 2022, proceedings.spp-online.org/article/view/SPP-2022-3D-03.
    23. C. M. Reigeluth, Y. An, and P. C. Honebein, "The Holistic 4D Model: A holistic approach to designing learning experiences," J. Appl. Instr. Des., vol. 13, no. 3, 2024, doi.org/10.59668/1058.16329 DOI: https://doi.org/10.59668/1058.16329
    24. M. Kraft, "Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions," Educ. Res., vol. 49, 2020, doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912798. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X20912798
    25. A. Sutradhar, A. Adhikari, S. Sutradhar, and S. Sen, "Use of correlation analysis in educational research," Int. Res. J., vol. 5, pp. 731–737, 2023, https://www.irjweb.com/viewarticle.php?aid=Use-of-Correlation-Analysis-in-Educational-Research
    26. F. Popovski, S. Mijakovska, H. Popovska, and G. Popovska Nalevska, "Creating 3D models with 3D printing process," Int. J. of Com. Sci. and Info. Tech., vol. 13, pp. 59–68, 2021, doi:10.5121/ijcsit.2021.13605. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5121/ijcsit.2021.13605
    27. C. Kefalis, C. Skordoulis, and A. Drigas, “The Role of 3D Printing in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S.T.E.M.) Education in General and Special Schools,” Int. J. Online Eng., vol. 20, no. 12, pp. 4–18, 2024, doi:10.3991/ijoe.v20i12.48931. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v20i12.48931
    28. R. A. N. Acosta, “Development and validation of grade 10 science learning materials in selected secondary schools in District III, Division of Puerto Princesa City, Philippines,” J. Educ. Res. Dev. Areas, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 248–264, 2020, doi:10.47434/JEREDA.eISSN:2735-9107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47434/JEREDA.1.3.2020.248
    29. C. I. S. Pineda, “Development and effectiveness of teaching-learning package in projectile motion for Grade 9 Science,” J. Sci. Sci. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 26–29, 2020, https://www.academia.edu/108375570/Effectiveness_of_Validated_Teaching_Learning_Package_in_Projectile_Motion_for_Grade_9_Science DOI: https://doi.org/10.29303/jossed.v1i1.454
    30. R. M. G. Basagre, “Inquiry-based formative assessment in Grade 10 electricity and magnetism,” Int. J. Sci. Eng. Res., vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1276–1281, 2020, https://www.ijser.org/researchpaper/Inquiry-Based-Formative-Assessment-in-Grade-10-Electricity-and-Magnetism.pdf
    31. M. A. Rau and T. Herder, “Under which conditions are physical vs. virtual representations effective? Contrasting conceptual and embodied mechanisms of learning,” J. Educ. Psychol., 2021, https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/index DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000689
    32. J. Okit, J. Miñoza, and J. Bentuan, “Electronic learning activity sheets (e-LAS): Its effect on the academic performance and attitude of Grade 10 science students,” Psychol. Educ., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 1043–1052, 2023, doi:10.5281/zenodo.10056335.
    33. [33] M. Efgivia, R. Y. Rinanda, Suriyani, A. Hidayat, I. Maulana, and A. Budiarjo, “Analysis of Constructivism Learning Theory,” Proc. 4th Int. Conf. Educ. Social Sci. Humanities (ICESSHum 2021), vol. 592, pp. 154–158, 2021, doi:10.2991/assehr.k.211020.032. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211020.032
    34. O. Oymak and F. Ogan-Bekiroglu, “Comparison of students’ learning and attitudes in physical versus virtual manipulatives using inquiry-based instruction,” IAFOR J. Educ., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 23–42, 2021, doi:10.22492/ije.9.4.02. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22492/ije.9.4.02
    35. C. B. Bonifacio and V. M. Mistades, “Development and validation of manipulatives for home-based physics experiments,” KnE Social Sciences, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 651–659, 2024, doi:10.18502/kss.v9i8.15629 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i8.15629
    36. J. L. Spott, “Expectancy-Value Theory,” Accelerating Systemic Change Network (ASCN), 2022, https://ascnhighered.org/ASCN/change_theories/collection/evt.html
    37. [37] L. Z. Jaber, L. Atkins, A. Elby, and E. Suárez, “Chapter 14: Affect in physics learning: Entanglement with cognition and learning goals,” Towards Inclusion of All Learners Through Science Teacher Education, 2023, doi:10.1063/9780735425477_014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063/9780735425477_014
    38. R. Robledo, “Students' attitudes toward science in relation to science achievement,” Int. J. Sci. Res., vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1209–1219, 2020, doi:10.21275/ART2019804.
    39. R. Mutya, C. Terana, M. Presbitero, G. Alcantara, A. M. Sala, and I. Carascal, “Student’s attitudes, study habits, and academic performance in science using self-learning modules,” J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 460–469, 2023, doi:10.15294/jpii.v12i3.43957. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v12i3.43957
    40. D. Masniari. S, B. T. Turaqulov, and J. Kigo, “Attitude of Students’ Interest in Learning Physics ”, Sch. Jo. Phs. Ed, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 59-63, 2023, doi:10.37251/sjpe.v4i3.697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/sjpe.v4i3.697
    41. D. Doucette, R. Clark, and C. Singh, "Students' attitudes toward experimental physics in a conceptual inquiry-based introductory physics lab”, Physics Education, 2021, doi:10.48550/arXiv.2111.10697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1139/cjp-2021-0121
    42. P. Mao, Z. Cai, J. He, X. Chen, and X. Fan, "The relationship between attitude toward science and academic achievement in science: A three-level meta-analysis," Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 12, 2021, doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.784068. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.784068