Quasi-experimental design reveals that augmented reality did not enhance critical thinking in students, indicating the need for task alignment.
Integrating Augmented Reality (AR) into Project-Based Learning (PjBL) was evaluated for its effect on undergraduates’ critical thinking in a Digital Economics and Business course. A quasi-experimental design compared a control class (n = 40) and an AR-supported class (n = 34) over 16 meetings using the same syllabus; the experimental class used Assemblr Edu during project work. Critical thinking was measured with a 5-item test (0–100) administered pre and post-intervention and scored by external raters. Because Shapiro–Wilk tests indicated non-normality (all p < 0,05), Mann–Whitney U and Friedman tests were applied (α = 0,05). Baseline equivalence held (pretest U = 655,0 and Z = −0,276, p= 0,782). After the intervention, the between-group difference remained non-significant (U = 624,5 and Z = −0,612, p = 0,540). Within-group gains were significant for both classes: control χ²(1)= 24,641, p< 0,001 (mean ranks pre 1,11 to post 1,89); experimental χ²(1)=12,500, p< 0,001 (pre 1,21 to post 1,79). In short, PjBL improved critical thinking regardless of AR, and AR did not add a detectable short-term advantage. In this context, implementation should prioritize problem task alignment and sustained practice over technology adoption.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rusmana et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: