Static fluid material often poses challenges in the physics learning process, as it involves complex abstract concepts for students to grasp. To address this issue, the VAK (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic) approach is considered a viable pedagogical alternative, allowing for teaching methods to be adapted based on students' learning styles. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the VAK approach in enhancing the understanding of physics concepts, particularly in static fluid mechanics, using the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) method. Nineteen scientific articles published between 2016 and 2025 were analyzed in depth. The study focused on the application of visual strategies (through images and animations), auditory strategies (group discussions and verbal explanations), and kinesthetic strategies (practical experiments and interactive simulations). These articles were selected based on criteria such as full access to the manuscripts, clear relevance to the VAK approach in the context of physics education—particularly on static fluids—and having undergone peer review. The approach's effectiveness was evaluated by examining its contribution to enhancing students' conceptual understanding, reducing misconceptions, and fostering active engagement during learning activities. The analysis results indicate that the application of the VAK approach plays a significant role in helping students understand core concepts, such as hydrostatic pressure, Pascal's Law, and Archimedes' Principle, more comprehensively. This approach also enhances learning motivation and strengthens the connection between physics material and phenomena in everyday life. Therefore, the VAK approach can serve as a foundation for designing learning strategies responsive to students' learning styles. Furthermore, this approach has the potential to contribute to the development of more inclusive and contextual educational policies, as well as fostering physics learning experiences that are not only meaningful but also enjoyable.
Cristina et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: