Digital and Simulation-Based Learning in Biology Education: A Systematic Review Using the PRISMA 2020 Framework
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32332/al-jahiz.v7i2.14090Keywords:
Biology education, Digital simulations, Virtual reality, Augmented reality, Virtual laboratoriesAbstract
This systematic literature review examined digital and simulation-based learning in biology education in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 reporting guidelines. Forty-eight studies published between 2017 and 2026 were included in the final synthesis. The review focused on virtual reality, augmented reality, virtual laboratories, digital simulations, and related interactive tools used in secondary and higher education biology contexts. Findings revealed four major themes: enhanced visualization of abstract biological concepts; improved engagement and motivation; support for laboratory learning and flexible instruction; and emerging value for scientific reasoning, collaboration, and inclusion. The strongest evidence showed that simulation-based technologies were useful for topics involving microscopic, molecular, dynamic, and three-dimensional biological processes, including genetics, cell biology, osmosis, microbiology, molecular biology, and biomolecular structures. However, the effectiveness of these technologies depended on instructional design, teacher guidance, accessibility, curriculum alignment, and integration with hands-on learning. Although most studies reported positive outcomes, the evidence varied in methodological rigor, sample size, intervention duration, and outcome measures. This review concludes that digital and simulation-based learning can meaningfully support biology education when used as part of a pedagogically guided and blended instructional approach.
References
Archibald, A., Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Thompson, R., & Heap, T. (2026). Genes in 3D: The impact of virtual reality on biology students’ performance and perceptions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 57(2), 559–578. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.70034
Ayer Miller, V., Marks, T., & Thompson, D. K. (2025). Student performance and perceptions in a hybrid laboratory model: An exploratory study of interactive virtual simulations and in-person integration in a foundational microbiology course. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 26(1), e00203-24. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00203-24
Cai, S., Li, H., & Wu, S. (2026). The impact of AR tools on collaborative inquiry in secondary biology education: An embodied cognition perspective. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2026.2644978
Christopoulos, A., Pellas, N., Bin Qushem, U., & Laakso, M.-J. (2023). Comparing the effectiveness of video and stereoscopic 360° virtual reality-supported instruction in high school biology courses. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54(4), 987–1005. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13306
Chuang, T.-F., Chou, Y.-H., Pai, J.-Y., Huang, C.-N., Bair, H., Pai, A., & Yu, N.-C. (2023). Using virtual reality technology in biology education: Satisfaction & learning outcomes of high school students. The American Biology Teacher, 85(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2023.85.1.23
Costabile, M. (2020). Using online simulations to teach biochemistry laboratory content during COVID-19. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 48(5), 509–510. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21427
Havlíčková, V., Šorgo, A., & Bílek, M. (2023). Predictive power of biology teacher’s self-efficacy on acceptability and application of virtual and hands-on dissections. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 81(2), 188–205. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/23.81.188
Husna, N., Nida, S., & Putri, F. A. (2026). The effect of gizmos virtual laboratory on scientific reasoning in biology education. Biosfer: Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi, 19(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.21009/biosferjpb.55423
Jiang, X., & Ning, Q. (2026). An idea to explore—Construction and application of virtual simulation experiments in molecular biology practical teaching for international medical undergraduates. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 54(2), 125–131. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.70037
Kohnke, S. (2026). The effect of browser-based 360°VR on the science achievement gap between students with and without disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 41(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/01626434251318007
Majewska, A. A., & Vereen, E. (2023). Using immersive virtual reality in an online biology course. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6(3), 480–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00095-9
Navarro, C., Arias-Calderón, M., Henríquez, C. A., & Riquelme, P. (2024). Assessment of student and teacher perceptions on the use of virtual simulation in cell biology laboratory education. Education Sciences, 14(3), 243. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14030243
Neiroukh, N. M. I., & Ayyoub, A. (2025). Beyond traditional biology instruction: A mixed-methods comparative study on virtual reality’s impact on high school students’ habits of mind. Frontiers in Education, 10, Article 1626181. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1626181
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Panzera-Gonçalves, J., & Oliveira, C. A. (2025). Development, application, and evaluation of tools based on virtual and augmented realities for inclusive teaching and learning of cell membranes. Anatomical Sciences Education, 18(5), 462–484. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.70024
Rannastu-Avalos, M., Siiman, L. A., & Mäeots, M. (2025). Understanding collaborative problem-solving with smartphone-based asymmetric simulations in an authentic inquiry science lesson. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 24(4), 684–705. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/25.24.684
Reinke, N. B., Kynn, M., & Parkinson, A. L. (2021). Immersive 3D experience of osmosis improves learning outcomes of first-year cell biology students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 20(1), ar1. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-11-0254
Stanič, K., & Špernjak, A. (2025). Augmented reality in biology education: A literature review. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 9(12), 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti9120117
Sulisetijono, S., Sunarmi, S., & Rochmah, A. N. (2023). The effectiveness of AR e-module of flower structure material on biology students’ science literacy. JPBI (Jurnal Pendidikan Biologi Indonesia), 9(2), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.22219/jpbi.v9i2.25747
Sun, H., Wang, P., & Li, Y. (2023). An integrated microbiome project for charactering microbial diversity in classroom based on virtual simulation experiments. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 51(2), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21706
Vardar-Ulu, D., Ragab, S. E., Agrawal, S., & Dutta, S. (2024). Using augmented reality in molecular case studies to enhance biomolecular structure-function explorations in undergraduate classrooms. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 25(2), e00019-24. https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.00019-24
Yap, W. H., Teoh, M. L., Tang, Y. Q., & Goh, B.-H. (2021). Exploring the use of virtual laboratory simulations before, during, and post COVID-19 recovery phase: An animal biotechnology case study. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 49(5), 685–691. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21562
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 CESARIO JR LABAJO, Merry Nicole V. Nacianceno
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
