A Phenomenographic Study of Students’ Experiences and Understanding in Learning the Solar System through the Digital Media “Solar System Exploration”
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62710/p0bx2x18Keywords:
Conceptual understanding; Diigital exploration; Elementary education; IPAS learning; Solar system.Abstract
The integration of digital technology in elementary education has created new opportunities for supporting students’ conceptual understanding in Science and Social Studies (IPAS) learning. However, previous studies have predominantly focused on measuring the effectiveness of digital media rather than examining how conceptual understanding is formed through students’ learning experiences. This study aimed to explore the process through which conceptual understanding develops within a digital exploration space during solar system learning in elementary school. This study employed a qualitative phenomenographic design involving one classroom teacher and twelve Phase C students at an elementary school in Indonesia. Data were collected through participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis. The data were analyzed using thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s procedures, while trustworthiness was established through triangulation, member checking, and audit trails. The findings revealed that conceptual understanding was formed through four interconnected stages: digital visualization, active exploration, social negotiation, and reflective integration. Digital visualization enabled students to transform abstract astronomical concepts into concrete mental representations. Active exploration encouraged students to construct meaning independently through interaction with digital resources. Social negotiation facilitated conceptual refinement through discussion and collaborative inquiry, while reflective integration supported the development of deeper conceptual connections among scientific phenomena. These processes collectively shifted students’ understanding from rote memorization toward relational and meaningful conceptual understanding. This study contributes a conceptual model explaining how digital exploration spaces function as socio-cognitive learning environments that support conceptual understanding in elementary IPAS learning. The findings provide practical implications for designing technology-enhanced learning experiences that promote exploration, dialogue, and reflection rather than merely delivering information.
Downloads
References
Biggs, J., & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. Academic Press.
Bond, M., Bedenlier, S., Marín, V. I., & Händel, M. (2021). Emergency remote teaching in higher education: Mapping the first global online semester. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00282-x
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2009). Multiliteracies: New literacies, new learning. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(3), 164–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15544800903076044
Fawns, T. (2022). An entangled pedagogy: Looking beyond the pedagogy–technology dichotomy. Postdigital Science and Education, 4(3), 711–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7
Fiorella, L. (2023). Making sense of generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 35, Article 50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09769-7
Ferguson, J. P., Xu, L., & Tytler, R. (2023). A pragmatist semiotic analysis of secondary students’ embodied and material reasoning in astronomy. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2023.2239170
Hunter, K. H., Rodriguez, J.-M. G., & Becker, N. M. (2021). Making sense of sensemaking: Using the sensemaking epistemic game to investigate student discourse during a collaborative gas law activity. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 22(2), 395–414. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RP00290A
Hobbs, R. (2021). Media literacy in action: Questioning the media. Rowman & Littlefield.
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27, 1–12.
Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Siddiq, F., & Scherer, R. (2021). Ready, set, go! Profiling teachers’ readiness for online teaching in secondary education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(1), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1839543
Johler, M. (2022). Collaboration and communication in blended learning environments. Frontiers in Education, 7, 980445. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.980445
Kumpulainen, K., & Rajala, A. (2017). Negotiating emotionally and epistemically meaningful learning through dialogic teaching. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 15, 38–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2017.09.001
Kümmel, E., Moskaliuk, J., Cress, U., & Kimmerle, J. (2020). Digital learning environments in higher education: A literature review of the role of individual vs. social settings for measuring learning outcomes. Education Sciences, 10(3), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030078
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & Education, 159, 104009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104009
Mayer, R. E. (2021). Multimedia learning (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316941355
Miao, J., Chang, J., & Ma, L. (2022). Teacher–student interaction, student–student interaction and social presence: Their impacts on learning engagement in online learning environments. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 183(6), 514–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.2022.2094211
Putra, D. S., & Nandiyanto, A. B. D. (2022). Application of the use of digital media in learning solar system in elementary school. International Journal of Research and Applied Technology, 2(1), 108–113. https://doi.org/10.34010/injuratech.v2i1.6730
Rolfes, T., Roth, J., & Schnotz, W. (2020). Learning the concept of function with dynamic visualizations. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 693. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00693
Sinatra, G. M., & Lombardi, D. (2020). Evaluating sources of scientific evidence and claims in the post-truth era may require reappraising plausibility judgments. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 120–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1730181
Schmid, R., Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., & colleagues. (2024). Learning activities in technology-enhanced learning: A systematic review of meta-analyses and second-order meta-analysis in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 112, 102446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2024.102446
Taylor, H. A., Burte, H., & Renshaw, K. T. (2023). Connecting spatial thinking to STEM learning through visualizations. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2(10), 637–653. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00224-6
Ubben, M. S., Kremer, F. E., Heinicke, S., Marohn, A., & Heusler, S. (2023). Smartphone usage in science education: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 13(4), 345. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040345
van der Linden, S., & McKenney, S. (2020). Uniting epistemological perspectives to support contextualized knowledge development. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(2), 703–727. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09772-7
Vrieling-Teunter, E., Henderikx, M., Nadolski, R., & Kreijns, K. (2022). Facilitating peer interaction regulation in online settings: The role of social presence, social space and sociability. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 793798. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.793798
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (Expanded 2nd ed.). ASCD.
Yun, M., & Crippen, K. J. (2024). The use of educational technology in inquiry-based elementary science education: A systematic review. International Journal of Science Education, 46(12), 1256–1279. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2023.2284689
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Chai, C. S., Jong, M. S.-Y., Istenic, A., Spector, M., Liu, J.-B., Yuan, J., & Li, Y. (2021). A review of artificial intelligence (AI) in education from 2010 to 2020. Complexity, 2021, 8812542. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8812542
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Bella Merryzca Purnama, Wahono Widodo, Suryanti Suryanti, Nafi Isbadrianingtyas (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
