Augmented Reality Media and Teacher Teaching Skills on Early Childhood Learning Outcomes: The Mediating Role of Motivation

Angri Lismayani; Muh. Isbar Pratama

doi:10.61255/itej.v4i1.1012

Authors

Angri Lismayani Universitas Negeri Makassar https://orcid.org/0009-0009-4494-4867
Muh. Isbar Pratama Universitas Negeri Makassar https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3176-1481

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61255/itej.v4i1.1012

Keywords:

Augmented reality, Early childhood education , Learning outcomes, PLS-SEM, Teacher teaching skills

Abstract

The motivational mechanisms through which Augmented Reality (AR) media and teacher teaching skills jointly influence early childhood learning outcomes remain empirically underspecified, particularly within the PAUD Indonesian context where contextually grounded evidence is scarce. This study examines the direct and indirect effects of AR media and teacher teaching skills on learning outcomes, with motivation specified as a formal mediating construct. A quantitative cross-sectional design was employed with 205 certified PAUD teachers drawn from various regions in South Sulawesi, Indonesia, recruited through purposive sampling. Data were analysed using PLS-SEM in SmartPLS 4.0, with significance assessed via bootstrapping across 5,000 subsamples. The measurement model demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach's α: 0.815–0.836), convergent validity (AVE: 0.576–0.604), and discriminant validity confirmed through HTMT ratios ranging from 0.723 to 0.822, each below the 0.90 threshold. AR media was significantly associated with both motivation (β = 0.438, p < 0.001) and learning outcomes (β = 0.329, p = 0.001). Teacher teaching skills significantly predicted motivation (β = 0.483, p < 0.001) and learning outcomes (β = 0.440, p < 0.001). Motivation was the strongest direct predictor of learning outcomes (β = 0.539, p < 0.001), partially mediating both the AR learning outcomes and teacher skills–learning outcomes relationships. These findings suggest that instructional quality whether technological or human must first activate motivational engagement to produce measurable learning outcomes. PAUD institutions are encouraged to develop teacher competency and AR infrastructure concurrently, with motivational quality as a key process indicator of instructional effectiveness.

Abstract views: 5 ,

PDF downloads: 3

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Akçayır, M., & Akçayır, G., 2017, Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Research Review, Vol 20, pp. 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.11.002

Azuma, R. T., 1997, A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, Vol 6, No 4, pp. 355–385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355

Barak, M., Ashkar, T., & Dori, Y. J., 2011, Learning science via animated movies: Its effect on students’ thinking and motivation. Computers & Education, Vol 56, No. 3, pp. 839–846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.025

Billinghurst, M., & Duenser, A, 2012, Augmented Reality in the Classroom. Computer, Vol 45, No. 7, pp. 56–63. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2012.111

Cai, S., Liu, E., Shen, Y., Liu, C., Li, S., & Shen, Y., 2020, Probability learning in mathematics using augmented reality: impact on student’s learning gains and attitudes. Interactive Learning Environments, Vol 28, No. 5, pp. 560–573. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1696839

Creswell, J. W., 2009, Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methode Approaches (Third Edition). SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific.

Davis, F. D., 1989, Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, Vol 13, No. 3, pp. 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008

Dijkstra, T. K., & Henseler, J., 2015, Consistent Partial Least Squares Path Modeling1. MIS Quarterly, Vol 39, No. 2, pp. 297–316. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2015/39.2.02

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A., 2007, G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, Vol 39, No. 2, pp. 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F., 1981, Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol 18, No. 1, pp. 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104

Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M., 2019, When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, Vol 31, No 1, pp 2–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203

Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., DeCoster, J., Mashburn, A. J., Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., Cappella, E., Atkins, M., Rivers, S. E., Brackett, M. A., & Hamagami, A., 2013, Teaching through Interactions. The Elementary School Journal, Vol 113, No 4, pp. 461–487. https://doi.org/10.1086/669616

Hattie, John., 2012, Visible Learning : A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement. Taylor & Francis.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M., 2016, Testing measurement invariance of composites using partial least squares. International Marketing Review, Vol 33, No 3, pp. 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304

Huang, K.-T., Ball, C., Francis, J., Ratan, R., Boumis, J., & Fordham, J., 2019, Augmented Versus Virtual Reality in Education: An Exploratory Study Examining Science Knowledge Retention When Using Augmented Reality/Virtual Reality Mobile Applications. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol 22, No. 2, pp. 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0150

Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M., 2003, A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1086/376806

Kock, N., 2015, Common Method Bias in PLS-SEM. International Journal of E-Collaboration, Vol. 11, No. 4, pp. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101

Mayer, R. E., 2009, Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811678

Patton, M. Q., 2002, Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, 4th Ed., Sage Publication.

Piaget, J., 1952, The origins of intelligence in children. W W Norton & Co. https://doi.org/10.1037/11494-000

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F., 2008, Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.879

Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., & Straub, D. W., 2012, Editor’s Comments. MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. iii–xvi. https://doi.org/10.2307/41410402

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L., 2000, Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

Schunk, D. H., & DiBenedetto, M. K., 2020, Motivation and social cognitive theory. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 60, 101832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101832

Stronge, J. H., 2018, Qualities of effective teachers. ASCD.

Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., Blais, M. R., Briere, N. M., Senecal, C., & Vallieres, E. F., 1992, The Academic Motivation Scale: A Measure of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education. Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 1003–1017. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164492052004025

VYGOTSKY, L. S., 1980, Mind in Society (M. Cole, V. Jolm-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjf9vz4

Yilmaz, R. M., 2016, Educational magic toys developed with augmented reality technology for early childhood education. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 54, pp. 240–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.040