Evaluating Augmented Reality Modules to Enhance Technical Drawing Skills in Indonesian Vocational High Schools

Authors

  • Zuhdi Mizian SMKN 14 Merangin, Jambi, Indonesia
  • Sofyan Sofyan Universitas Jambi, Indonesia
  • Saharudin Saharudin Universitas Jambi, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i3.7663

Keywords:

augmented reality, technical drawing, vocational education, spatial visualization, educational technology

Abstract

Technical drawing is a core skill in vocational education, particularly in engineering fields where spatial visualization is essential. However, traditional instructional methods often fall short in developing these spatial skills. This study investigates the effectiveness of augmented reality (AR)-based modules in improving engineering drawing comprehension among vocational high school students in Indonesia. A quasi-experimental design was employed with 60 students from two vocational high school classes, divided into an experimental group (AR-based instruction) and a control group (traditional methods). Both groups completed a pre-test and post-test using a validated technical drawing comprehension assessment. The intervention lasted several weeks and included interactive 3D AR content aligned with curriculum standards. The experimental group demonstrated a significant improvement in post-test scores (M = 81.50) compared to their pre-test scores (M = 62.30), representing a 30.8% increase. The control group showed a more modest improvement of 12.2% (M = 61.87 to M = 69.42). Statistical analysis confirmed the effectiveness of the AR modules, with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.78) and significant between-group differences (p < 0.001). The findings suggest that AR-based modules substantially enhance spatial understanding and learning outcomes in engineering drawing. These results support the integration of AR technology into vocational education to provide more engaging, effective, and skill-aligned training. Investment in AR infrastructure and teacher training is recommended to maximize educational benefits across similar technical domains.

References

Alias, M., Black, T. R., & Gray, D. E. (2020). The relationship between spatial ability and the comprehension of technical drawing. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30880/jtet.2020.12.01.001

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2019). Introduction to research in education (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Azuma, R. T., Baillot, Y., Behringer, R., Feiner, S., Julier, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2022). Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 42(4), 32-44. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2022.3176563

Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., & Graf, S. (2022). Augmented Reality trends in education: A systematic review of research and applications. Educational Technology & Society, 25(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.2022.25.1.1

Branoff, T. J., & Dobelis, M. (2012). The relationship between spatial visualization ability and students’ ability to model 3D objects from engineering assembly drawings. The Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 76(3).

Chen, C. H., Su, C. Y., & Lin, Y. L. (2021). Augmented reality-based spatial ability training for engineering students: A study of learning effectiveness and attitude. Computers & Education, 166, 104144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104144

Cheng, K. H., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 449-462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9405-0

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Dünser, A., Grasset, R., & Latoschik, M. E. (2012). 3D user interfaces: Theory and practice. Morgan Kaufmann.

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS Statistics (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Garzón, J., & Acevedo, J. (2019). Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students' learning gains. Educational Research Review, 27, 244-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001

Ibáñez, M. B., & Delgado-Kloos, C. (2020). Augmented reality for STEM learning: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 159, 104023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104023

Johnson, L., Becker, S. A., & Cummins, M. (2016). NMC horizon report: 2016 higher education edition. The New Media Consortium.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2

Liu, T. Y., Lin, Y. H., & Chang, Y. S. (2023). Effects of AR on engineering education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 39(1), 120-132. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijoe.v19i01.28107

Mayer, R. E. (2013). Multimedia instruction. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 385-399). New York, NY: Springer New York.

Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press.

Radu, I., Joy, T., Bowman, Y., Bott, I., & Schneider, B. (2021). A survey of needs and features for augmented reality collaborations in collocated spaces. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5(CSCW1), 1-21.

Santos, M. E. C., Chen, A., Taketomi, T., Yamamoto, G., Miyazaki, J., & Kato, H. (2022). Augmented reality learning experiences: Survey and research agenda. Virtual Reality, 26(2), 509-536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-021-00535-9

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2

Wu, H. K., Lee, S. W. Y., Chang, H. Y., & Liang, J. C. (2021). Current status, opportunities, and challenges of AR in education. Computers & Education, 166, 104139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104139

Yuen, S. C. Y., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2020). Augmented Reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 13(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.1301.01

Zhao, Y., & Xu, H. (2021). Application of AR technology in mechanical engineering teaching. Procedia Computer Science, 183, 292-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.03.051

Downloads

Published

2025-10-02

How to Cite

Mizian, Z., Sofyan, S., & Saharudin, S. (2025). Evaluating Augmented Reality Modules to Enhance Technical Drawing Skills in Indonesian Vocational High Schools. AL-ISHLAH: Jurnal Pendidikan, 17(3), 5605–5614. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v17i3.7663

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 3 (2025): SEPTEMBER 2025

Section

Articles

Citation Check

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. 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 acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. 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, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.