Pedagogical Agent in High School Physics: Does it Improve Graph Interpretation?

PDF (ελληνικά)
Published: Apr 19, 2026
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12681/codiste.9902
Keywords:
pedagogical agent graphs physics high school TUG-K
Silvestra Sakellariou
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0319-7462
Evripidis Hatzikraniotis
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9516-4037
Abstract

This pilot study investigates the impact of a Pedagogical Agent (PA) on students’ understanding of motion graphs in a flipped classroom environment. The PA provided personalized guidance during the preparation phase at-home through instructional videos embedded in a branching scenario. PA explained the content, offered immediate feedback, and enhanced student engagement by applying key principles of multimedia learning. Twenty-six tenth-grade students participated and were assessed with a modified version of the TUG-K before and after the intervention. The results showed a statistically significant improvement following instruction. Although female students scored slightly lower than their male peers, the difference was not statistically significant. The findings are compared with related studies, supporting the view that PAs, with the use of multiple representations, can offer additional benefits to students’ conceptual understanding.


Article Details
  • Section
  • Προφορικές Ανακοινώσεις
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
ΦΕΚ Β’ 2913/2023. Υπουργική Απόφαση 48632/Δ2/2023. Πρόγραμμα Σπουδών του μαθήματος της Φυσικής των Α’, Β’ και Γ’ τάξεων Γενικού Λυκείου.
ΦΕΚ B’ 4545/2024. Υπουργική Απόφαση 89004/Δ2/2024. Καθορισμός εξεταστέας ύλης για τα μαθήματα των Α’, Β’ και Γ’ τάξεων Γενικού Λυκείου που εξετάζονται γραπτώς στις προαγωγικές και απολυτήριες εξετάσεις για το σχολικό έτος 2024-2025.
Σακελλαρίου, Σ., Μολοχίδης, Α., & Χατζηκρανιώτης, Ε. (2023). Αξιοποίηση εργαλείων H5P σε Σύστημα Διαχείρισης Μάθησης για την ανάπτυξη και αποτίμηση μίας Ψηφιακής Παιδαγωγικής Βοηθού που υποστηρίζει τους φοιτητές στη σύνταξη εργασίας. Στα Πρακτικά Εργασιών 9ου Συνεδρίου για την Προώθηση της Εκπαιδευτικής Καινοτομίας (Τόμος Α’, σσ. 253-261). ΕΕΠΕΚ. ISBN 978-618-5562-15-1, ISSN: 2529‐1580.
Armando, M., Ochs, M., & Régner, I. (2022). The Impact of Pedagogical Agents' Gender on Academic Learning: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 5, 862997. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2022.862997
Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. American Journal of Physics, 62(8), 750–762. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17449
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International society for technology in education. ISBN: 978-1-56484-315-9.
Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2011). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119239086
Glazer, N. (2011). Challenges with graph interpretation: A review of the literature. Studies in Science Education, 47(2), 183–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2011.605307
Kramarsky, B. (2004). Making sense of graphs: Does metacognitive instruction make a difference on students' mathematical conceptions and alternative conceptions? Learning and Instruction, 14(6), 593–619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.09.003
Lundy, A. D., & Stephens, A. E. (2015). Beyond the literal: Teaching visual literacy in the 21st century classroom. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 1057-1060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.794
Madsen, A., McKagan, S. B., & Sayre, E. C. (2013). Gender gap on concept inventories in physics: What is consistent, what is inconsistent, and what factors influence the gap?. Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020121
Maries, A., Li, Y., & Singh, C. (2024). Challenges faced by women and persons excluded because of their ethnicity and race in physics learning environments: Review of the literature and recommendations for departments and instructors. Reports on Progress in Physics, 88, 015901. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/ad91c4
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2023). PISA 2025 science framework (second draft). Aνακτήθηκε από https://pisa-framework.oecd.org/science-2025/assets/docs/PISA_2025_Science_Framework.pdf
Sakellariou, S., Molohidis, A. & Hatzikraniotis, E. (2024) On the Effectiveness of Pedagogical Agents. International Journal of Teaching and Learning Sciences, 15. https://doi.org/10.47991/2024/IJTLS-102
Sofianidis, A., Sakellariou, S., Zoupidis, A., & Hatzikraniotis, E. (2024). Introducing the Control of Variables Strategy to Early Childhood Student Teachers With the Assistance of an Augmented Pedagogical Agent. Στο M. Sardag, G. Kaya, & M. Sogut (Επιμ.) Proceedings Book Series-I of the ESERA 2023 Conference. Connecting Science Education with Cultural Heritage, σ. 212-222, Cappadocia, Türkiye. Nobel Bilimsel Eserler.
Susac, A., Bubic, A., Kazotti, E., Planinic, M., & Palmovic, M. (2018). Student understanding of graph slope and area under a graph: A comparison of physics and nonphysics students. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14(2), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.020109
Vaara, R. L., & Sasaki, D. G. G. (2019). Teaching kinematic graphs in an undergraduate course using an active methodology mediated by video analysis. LUMAT: International Journal on math, science and technology education, 7(1), 1-26. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0087-6809
Woolnough, J. (2000). How do students learn to apply their mathematical knowledge to interpret graphs in physics? Research in Science Education, 30(3), 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461633