Development of an augmented reality-based comic learning media for elementary school students' nationalism attitudes

Abstract

Background-Science and social studies (IPAS) at SDN Kampung Bulak 01 relied on textbooks and teacher-centered explanations, limiting contextual cultural engagement and the development of nationalist attitudes. Objectives-This study aimed to develop and evaluate an Augmented Reality (AR)-based comic learning media for fourth-grade elementary school students, particularly in terms of its validity, student responses, and changes in students' nationalism attitude scores. Method-This study employed a Research and Development (R&D) approach using the ADDIE development model, consisting of Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation. The participants were 31 fourth-grade students of class IV-A at SDN Kampung Bulak 01. Data were collected through expert validation sheets, student response questionnaires, and a nationalism attitude scale administered before and after the implementation of the learning media (pretest–posttest). The pretest and posttest results were analyzed descriptively by comparing the percentage scores obtained before and after implementation. Results-The validation results showed that the media expert and material expert assessments each obtained a score of 92%, while the language expert assessment obtained 83%. Student response results were 92% in the small-group trial and 96% in the large-group trial. The average nationalism attitude score increased from 72% in the pretest to 90% in the posttest following the implementation of the AR-based comic learning media. Conclusions-The developed AR-based comic learning media met the feasibility criteria and received positive responses from students. The increase in nationalism attitude scores from the pretest to the posttest provides preliminary evidence of improvement following the implementation of the media. However, because the study used a one-group pretest–posttest design without a control group, the findings should be interpreted as an indication of improvement rather than conclusive evidence of causal effectiveness.