Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation: Mwansa, G.; Ngandu, M.R.;
Dasi, Z.S. Enhancing Practical Skills in
Computer Networking: Evaluating
the Unique Impact of Simulation
Tools, Particularly Cisco Packet Tracer,
in Resource-Constrained Higher
Education Settings. Educ. Sci. 2024,14,
1099. https://doi.org/10.3390/
educsci14101099
Academic Editor: Mike Joy
Received: 6 August 2024
Revised: 4 October 2024
Accepted: 7 October 2024
Published: 9 October 2024
Copyright: © 2024 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
education
sciences
Article
Enhancing Practical Skills in Computer Networking: Evaluating
the Unique Impact of Simulation Tools, Particularly Cisco Packet
Tracer, in Resource-Constrained Higher Education Settings
Gardner Mwansa 1, * , Matipa Ricky Ngandu 1and Zola Sydney Dasi 2
1Department of Networking and IT Support, Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and Information
Technology, Walter Sisulu University, Buffalo City Campus, East London 5200, South Africa;
rngandu@wsu.ac.za
2Department of Business and Applications Development, Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and
Information Technology, Walter Sisulu University, Buffalo City Campus, East London 5200, South Africa;
zdasi@wsu.ac.za
*Correspondence: gmwansa@wsu.ac.za
Abstract: This study examines the effectiveness of networking simulation tools, particularly Cisco
Packet Tracer, in enhancing the learning experiences of exit-level students at a higher education insti-
tution based in the Eastern Cape of South Africa. Utilizing the Context, Input, Process, and Product
(CIPP) evaluation model, the research assesses these tools’ impact, effectiveness, and sustainability in
a resource-constrained, rural-based higher education context. The findings indicate that simulation
tools significantly improve students’ practical skills, understanding of theoretical concepts, and pre-
paredness for professional work in computer networking. Despite challenges such as software crashes
and compatibility issues, the benefits of using simulation tools, including cost-effectiveness and con-
venience, are evident. The study concludes that, while simulation tools are valuable, continuous
improvements and support are necessary to maximize their educational potential.
Keywords: networking simulation tools; Cisco Packet Tracer; CIPP evaluation model; higher
education; practical skills; computer networking; educational technology; rural-based university;
student learning outcomes; resource-constrained education
1. Introduction
The Eastern Cape Province in South Africa, known for its economic challenges, hosts
a university that is a pivotal higher educational institution, especially for learners from
underprivileged backgrounds. This institution, categorized as a historically disadvantaged
institution (HDI), primarily admits learners with significant learning obstacles, including
inadequate learning resources and considerable travel distances to and from rural schools.
These challenges necessitate an educational approach that not only addresses these gaps
but also ensures the successful incorporation of these learners into higher education.
The number of South African learners who qualify for higher education is growing [
1
].
This is attributed to demographic expansion, an increased need for highly skilled workers,
and financial aid availability for historically disadvantaged individuals [
2
]. The immediate
solution to this situation has been to increase the enrolment of learners [
3
]. The agenda for
transformational change in higher education enables inclusivity, promotes lifelong learning,
and creates a state of readiness for the 21st century, which is already underway [
4
]. The
university has four campuses located in different towns. However, this study focused on
one campus based in East London. Like many other rural-based universities, this campus
also has challenges, such as infrastructure, lack of laboratories for training, and a shortage
of equipment for practical use [
5
]. This study seeks to contribute to the university’s
developmental efforts by analyzing the effectiveness of using networking simulation
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14101099 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/education
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 2 of 32
tools to enhance teaching and learning within a resource-constrained, rural-based higher
education context.
The strategies in the teaching and learning arena are fast evolving and require in-
novative teaching styles that enable learners to engage in the subject matter through a
delivery system that is best suited for them [
6
]. The future human resource needs in the
workplace also require 21st century skills, which are different from the skills requirements
of centuries gone by. Using impactful and relevant pedagogies motivates learners to de-
velop higher-order thinking skills by prompting them to relate new knowledge to prior
understanding, apply specific strategies in new tasks, and understand their own thinking
and learning strategies [
7
]. Digital learning is not just a trend, it is an essential part of the
future of education, and, as technology advances, it is becoming increasingly clear that
digital learning offers unparalleled opportunities to enhance the educational experience [
8
].
The purpose of using educational technologies such as computer simulation software is to
increase information retention and deepen the understanding of complex subject matter
among learners [9].
Computer network courses are not easy to understand by theoretical means only,
and they need visual comprehension to supplement the existing knowledge [
10
]. Over
the years, the university has tried to make practice sessions for computer networking
courses more feasible for easy comprehension. These practice sessions are implemented
through the use of simulations. It has been found that simulation tools in computer
networks have a more significant positive impact on learners’ understanding of computer
networking [
11
]. However, students also encounter challenges using these simulation
tools [
12
]. For instance, learners may just be accustomed to following steps in the lab
sheet without correctly conceptualizing the practical skills acquired and linking them to
the theoretical frameworks [
13
]. This results in not acquiring the hands-on skills required
when working on real machines and associated networking devices and components.
In a computer network course, network simulation is a technique whereby a software
program models the behavior of a network by calculating the interactions between the
different network entities such as routers, switches, nodes, access points, and links [
14
].
Their use in the computer network classroom has the potential to generate higher learning
outcomes in ways that were not previously possible. Possible reasons instigating teachers
to use computer simulations include saving time and allowing them to devote more time to
the learners instead of focusing on setup and supervision of experimental equipment [
15
].
Hence, virtual labs have been suggested to alleviate the laboratory capacity problem by
allowing learners to practice critical networking skills in a virtual environment when
actual physical equipment is unavailable [
16
]. For instance, in China, it was found that
learners could understand network protocols with traditional protocol tools but could not
understand how these protocols are applied in real networks [
17
]. The literature points out
that the debate over the effectiveness of simulation tools in training practical skills remains
unrelieved and unresolved. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of network simulation
tools in teaching computer networks so that learners could improve their understanding of
the simulation despite the unavailability of the actual equipment. More specifically, the
effectiveness of using a simulation tool, such as a Cisco Packet Tracker, to teach learners
the acquisition of computer network configuration and troubleshooting skills. This was
achieved by determining the benefits and drawbacks of using network simulation tools for
learners, establishing the possibility of learners acquiring practical skills in their residences
outside the lab, identifying common issues learners encounter when using simulation
tools, detecting improvements in the learning processes and outcomes linked to simulation
tools use, as well as reflecting on the extent of concept understanding due to simulation
tool-use and explaining how the application of computer simulators enhances traditional
computer skills.
The paper is structured as follows: Section 2discusses the literature on ICT incorpora-
tion in education, including simulation tools for teaching computer networking courses.
Section 3presents the methodology used in the study, and Section 4follows with an analysis
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 3 of 32
of the findings. Section 5presents an overall study discussion, and Section 6concludes
the study.
2. Literature Review
In this literature review section, we explore ICT incorporation in education, assessment
in education and challenges, ICT and educational assessment, technology adaptation
challenges in Africa, and the usefulness of technology in assessment practices in faculties.
The rationale is to learn from other scholars in regard to how they have theorized and
conceptualized the use and impact of simulation tools. Furthermore, in order to identify any
gaps in theory on the subject thus far, the study should be used to bridge the identified gaps.
2.1. ICT in Education
Countries worldwide have identified the significant role of information and com-
munication technology (ICT) in improving education [
18
] and have invested heavily in
increasing the number of computers in colleges and within networking lecture rooms. ICT
can significantly transform teaching methods [
19
]. Nonetheless, this ability may not be
understood easily; the question occurs when teachers are forced to make adjustments under
adverse circumstances.
In the current higher education space, it is crucial to enable students to learn how to
navigate the information age, as several studies indicate that ICT will play a significant
role in education in the future [
20
,
21
]. According to [
22
], the possibility of creating smart
ICT learning experiences in schools is affected by five factors: ICT resourcing, ICT teaching,
school leadership, and general education. It has also been noted that the effectiveness of
incorporating state-of-the-art technology into education varies from program to program,
place to place, and class to class, depending on how it is implemented [23].
Barriers to ICT incorporation in education include a lack of confidence in the teaching
to realize the intended goals [
24
]. Another obstacle that directly involves the trust of the
teachers is a lack of ability [25]. According to [26], time limits and difficulty in scheduling
sufficient computer time for classes hinder teachers from using ICT in their teachings. Other
ICT obstacles include a lack of effective instruction, connectivity, and technical support,
such as waiting for websites to be accessed, non-connection to the internet, non-printing
printers, malfunctioning computers, and teachers working on old computers.
2.2. Rationale for Reflective Learning
For reflective learning to be effective, the role of a teacher needs to change to that of
a coach or facilitator of learning, and a student’s attitude needs to change to that of an
owner in the learning process [
27
]. Reflection in learning is necessary because it prompts
learners to revisit what they have learned to self-evaluate their understanding to improve
and achieve in-depth learning. There are two types of reflection, namely, reflection-in-
action and reflection-on-action. Reflection-in-action involves how an individual thinks and
theorizes about practice while doing it. In contrast, reflection-on-action is how an individual
consciously explores an experience and thinks about the practice after it has occurred to
discover the knowledge used in the situation [28]. Learners who adopt reflective learning
become aware of the continuous process of learning and skill development [
29
]. Ref. [
30
]
considers reflective learning to be a process through which students learn from experiences,
increase awareness of their thoughts and actions, and increase their perceived recall of
experiences. Therefore, when learners engage in reflective learning, they actively retrieve
information from memory, consolidating knowledge retention through experience and
finding deeper meaning in what is being taught [29].
Some core exit-level outcomes in a diploma qualification in computer networks are
developed based on need assessments, solving communication network problems for a
given scenario, and using programming skills to address networking issues. The associated
assessment criteria for these outcomes include demonstrating the ability to develop and
apply network problem-solving skills, develop basic practical networking skills, and pro-
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 4 of 32
gram network servers. The learning approach adopted applies the Experience, Reflection
and Action (ERA) cycle [
31
]. This model represents the interaction of things that happen
to an individual (experiences), the reflective process that enables the individual to learn
from experiences (reflection), and the action that results from the new perspectives that are
taken [28]. Figure 1illustrates the application of the ERA model in teaching practice.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW4of33
activelyretrieveinformationfrommemory,consolidatingknowledgeretentionthrough
experienceandfindingdeepermeaninginwhatisbeingtaught[29].
Somecoreexit-leveloutcomesinadiplomaqualificationincomputernetworksare
developedbasedonneedassessments,solvingcommunicationnetworkproblemsfora
givenscenario,andusingprogrammingskillstoaddressnetworkingissues.Theassoci-
atedassessmentcriteriafortheseoutcomesincludedemonstratingtheabilitytodevelop
andapplynetworkproblem-solvingskills,developbasicpracticalnetworkingskills,and
programnetworkservers.ThelearningapproachadoptedappliestheExperience,Reflec-
tionandAction(ERA)cycle[31].Thismodelrepresentstheinteractionofthingsthathap-
pentoanindividual(experiences),thereflectiveprocessthatenablestheindividualto
learnfromexperiences(reflection),andtheactionthatresultsfromthenewperspectives
thataretaken[28].Figure1illustratestheapplicationoftheERAmodelinteachingprac-
tice.
Figure1.AppliedERAmodelforteachingacomputernetworkcourse.
Inpractice,theERAreflectivelearningmodelisappliedtoimproveknowledgeand
skillsretentionandtoallowlearnerstodeveloplinkagesbetweentheoryandpractice.A
criticalpartofthisprocessisidentifyingahelpfultoolthatsupportsthisapproachtopre-
sentalearnerwithanopportunitytoevaluatetheirknowledgeandskillsandallowlearn-
erstoreflectandimprove.Therationaleforusingareflectiveprocessisthedesirefor
learnerstocometoadeeperunderstandingofsomethingthathashappenedtothem[31].
2.3.ComputerSoftwareSimulation
Accordingto[32],computersoftwaresimulationcanimplyoneoftwothings:first,
itcanmeanthecomputersoftwareprogramiswrientofacilitatethesimulationprocess
(simulationsoftware).Secondly,itcanalsomeanthatthesimulationsoftwareprogramor
applicationiswrientoexplain(simulate)theworkofotherpackagesandothersoftware
programfunctions.
Thisstudyfocusesonatoolthatassistsundergraduatelearnersinlearningintroduc-
torycomputernetworksubjects,particularlysoftwaretoolsthatactasnetworkdevice
simulators.Asatechnicalsubject,thecomputernetworkcurriculumneedsanabstract
understandingofideas,whichisalsoaskill-buildingpractice[33].Traditionalinstruc-
tionallecturesaloneareinsufficienttomeetthisdemand[34].Thus,learnersneedatool
thatmayfacilitatetheminbothunderstandingthatsubjectandcarryingoutpracticalex-
ercises.
Thecomputernetworksfieldofspecializationneedsprofessionalswithsolidnet-
workingtheoryandhands-onpracticalexpertise.Alongsidethefasttechnological
Figure 1. Applied ERA model for teaching a computer network course.
In practice, the ERA reflective learning model is applied to improve knowledge and
skills retention and to allow learners to develop linkages between theory and practice.
A critical part of this process is identifying a helpful tool that supports this approach to
present a learner with an opportunity to evaluate their knowledge and skills and allow
learners to reflect and improve. The rationale for using a reflective process is the desire for
learners to come to a deeper understanding of something that has happened to them [31].
2.3. Computer Software Simulation
According to [
32
], computer software simulation can imply one of two things: first,
it can mean the computer software program is written to facilitate the simulation process
(simulation software). Secondly, it can also mean that the simulation software program or
application is written to explain (simulate) the work of other packages and other software
program functions.
This study focuses on a tool that assists undergraduate learners in learning introduc-
tory computer network subjects, particularly software tools that act as network device
simulators. As a technical subject, the computer network curriculum needs an abstract
understanding of ideas, which is also a skill-building practice [
33
]. Traditional instructional
lectures alone are insufficient to meet this demand [
34
]. Thus, learners need a tool that may
facilitate them in both understanding that subject and carrying out practical exercises.
The computer networks field of specialization needs professionals with solid network-
ing theory and hands-on practical expertise. Alongside the fast technological advancement
within computer networks and the Information Technology industry, the need for many
skilled network experts has also increased [
35
]. Therefore, the simulation software package
should allow a learner networking topic to have an active learning experience. Learners
can bring the actual network architecture into the classroom to build a more interactive and
successful learning experience. Though the simulation tools package cannot offer learners
practical skills such as cabling and physical connectivity, the software package is beneficial
and cost-effective.
Simulation tools help to model and test network protocols and traffic [
36
]. Such tools
are essential since experiments on a live network are often impractical. Fortunately, several
simulators are primarily analytical tools, and their use in an overly educational context
might also be problematic. One of the critical problems is that these devices are complicated
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 5 of 32
and may be hard to use. Ideally, learners, especially novices, would like to use tools that
help them develop straightforward cognitive models. There are a few simulation resources
for networking, and these were developed by entirely different companies, such as Cisco
Systems, which created Cisco Packet Tracer; Boson NetSim, which Boson created; and
GNS3, which Jeremy Grossmann created. Cisco Packet Tracer is currently widely used in
academies worldwide.
Simulation refers to emulating real-world exercises and forms in a secure environment.
Simulation points to supplying an encounter as near to the ‘real thing’ as conceivable;
in any case, a simulated movement permits learners to ‘reset’ the situation and attempt
elective methodologies and approaches. This permits learners to create experiences of
specific situations by applying their more extensive learning and knowledge. Raki´c et al.
(2020) [
37
] characterized simulation tools as follows: 1. Responsive by giving an opening
to see the impacts of one’s actions. 2. Provides some feedback and may develop some
intuitive understanding. 3. Provides choices and control for students.
Numerous simulation tools have been developed to assist learners, instructors, and,
to a vast extent, computer experts in diverse areas such as software engineering, software
project management, computer hardware and architecture, networking, telecommunica-
tions, and others.
2.4. Simulation Software in Teaching and Learning
This section explains the use of simulation software in teaching and learning. The
significance of simulation tools in computer network courses enhances two different educa-
tion headings. First, educating students on computer network concepts is barely possible
without having specialized network laboratories or other tools that are suitable for such
courses. These laboratories are very costly in universities, especially those that operate in
heavily constrained settings. Secondly, they are adaptable enough to be suitable for various
network topologies. Also, the quick advancement of computer network concepts makes
instructing and learning more difficult. So, it is fundamental for universities and colleges
with such laboratories to invest more in arranging to update these laboratories. Finally,
it will be imperative for learners to experiment with different scenarios within different
environments when designing a network. Simulation tools that can be utilized in this area
include Cisco Packet Tracer, OPNET, ns, GTNets and Cnet.
ICTs provide highly effective virtual platform software and educational tools to sup-
port the learning process [
38
]. Simulations benefit e-learning by providing learners with
valuable resources when they carry out practical tasks. A simulator is a remote collabora-
tive and experimental workspace aimed at conducting research activities, reporting and
disseminating results through ICT skills. Lefkos et al. (2022) [
39
] pointed out that “through
coordination experimentation things to do with simulation, the latter can serve as a cognitive bridge
between theory and practice”. For others, simulation is a virtual learning experience that takes
advantage of the capabilities offered by ICTs to create an educational environment free of
time and space constraints in the education system that is capable of ensuring continuous
virtual contact between learners and teachers.
The question is: how can colleges and universities unravel these issues and give
better solutions to improve the practical skills of their learners? Fortunately, these days,
there are numerous emerging technologies; one specific technology that has proven to
be exceptionally useful in regard to improving teaching practical computer networks is
network modeling and simulation (NMS) technology, which is very appealing in terms of
making virtual laboratories for computer network courses. This approach may be beneficial
since it is a productive way to simulate small and large networks with diverse technologies
and topologies.
Utilizing simulation tools in virtual laboratories provides models for a detailed un-
derstanding and in-depth analysis of things such as building complex networks from
fundamental building blocks with an assortment of nodes and links, packet flows, buffer
overflow, and operating system compromises. Their capabilities have been developing,
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 6 of 32
permitting the creation of hypothetical scenarios down to the bit level. They might also be
utilized for an assortment of tasks.
A few simulation software programs provide a graphic interface and library tools,
such as a graphic presentation of the network node and a match of arrows going in and
out of each node. Network simulators serve an assortment of needs, and they can be
cost- and time-effective in setting up an entire test bed containing multiple networked
computers, routers, and data links compared to the actual machine setups [
40
]. They create
an environment for students to test scenarios that might be particularly difficult or costly
to emulate using actual equipment.
Making the student perceive the theoretical ideas of digital logic style ideas is one of
the main problems faced by the instructors. Therefore, the academics have tried different
techniques to link the theoretical data to the practical knowledge. Simulation software is a
learning and practice technique that can be extended to multiple disciplines. Experimen-
tation using the simulators of different computer components enhances student learning.
The simulators may be simple or quite advanced. Although simulation software may
have disadvantages, its advantages outweigh the disadvantages [
41
]. The most popular
simulation software for teaching computer networking is classified in Table 1:
Table 1. Popular Simulation Software and Their Characteristics.
Name of the Simulation Software Characteristics
Cisco Packet Tracer
Packet Tracer software is one of the most popular on the
market. Packet Tracer software has a user-friendly graphic
user interface and intuitive controls, making it easy to
use [42]. However, the complete functionality of the
network and end devices is not available.
Boson NetSim
Boson NetSim is a Packet Tracer-like simulation software.
This software focuses on network device operation and
serves learners interested in CCNA certification and
CCNP certification. Like Packet Tracer, however, Netsim
does not provide the network equipment with complete
functionality (Fakhar, 2019). It is also expensive and is
therefore not as common as Packet Tracer.
GNS3
GNS3 is an open-source instrument for running the router
using Cisco IOS images. Dynagen operates Dynamips, the
key program that makes it possible to emulate Cisco
IOS [43]. GNS3 is Dynagen’s graphic front end. This
provides the software with a graphical environment that
makes it user-friendly, like Packet Tracer. Its most
significant benefit is that virtualization provides precision.
A disadvantage is that the system on which the emulator
works requires comparatively high computing energy.
The objective behind using simulation is to create a powerful alternative to CSU
Sydney’s physical networking equipment. GNS3 was used with complete network device
operating systems (IOSs) to create a virtual network. The end devices were linked via a
VMware Workstation to virtual machines running complete operating systems [
44
]. One of
the main benefits of having a laboratory in a virtual environment is that it is easy to replicate
resources [
45
]. For example, it is easy to replicate and deploy a single virtual image of a
router of a desktop computer across the network. Kosice University of Technology created
an Academy Support Center to train lecturers as NetAcad instructors who eventually teach
Cisco courses that heavily depend on Cisco Packet Tracer simulations.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 7 of 32
2.5. The CIPP Evaluation Model
The Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) model was selected for this study be-
cause it provides a comprehensive evaluation framework that considers the context, input,
process, and product and offers a holistic perspective that is well suited for educational
institutions, especially in resource-constrained environments [
46
,
47
]. Compared to other
models, such as the Kirkpatrick Model, the Logic Model, and Goal-Based Evaluation, the
CIPP model emphasizes formative and summative evaluation [48]. While the Kirkpatrick
Model is appropriate for evaluating training outcomes in organizations, it focuses primarily
on outcomes. It does not adequately assess contextual needs or resources critical to under-
standing interventions in educational settings [
49
]. The Logic Model is useful for mapping
resources, activities, and expected outcomes. However, it lacks the iterative evaluation
aspect of the CIPP model, which continually assesses the implementation process and
outcomes to guide improvement [
50
]. Similarly, Goal-Based Evaluation focuses on whether
predefined goals are achieved but does not adequately address how and why these goals
are achieved. It also lacks the more comprehensive evaluation of context and inputs that the
CIPP model provides [
51
]. By focusing on context, inputs, processes and products, the CIPP
model provides a deeper understanding of the impact, effectiveness, and sustainability of
using a Cisco Packet Tracer, making it the ideal choice for evaluating this intervention in a
complex educational environment.
The CIPP model approach was developed by [
51
]. It offers a systematic way to look
at many distinct parts of the curriculum growth process. Although initially advocated
for curriculum growth, it can be used efficiently to assess the faculty education process.
The knowledge, skills, attitudes, and practices students pick up throughout their educa-
tional journey are the actual output of higher education. The context may refer to where
education occurs, such as in rural or urban areas. This CIPP model can be applied to
evaluate different elements of faculty education. This requires asking questions about four
elements, i.e., model background, input, process, and product. Figure 2shows the CIPP
evaluation model components and elements, which are discussed in more detail in the
following sections.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW8of33
Figure2.CIPPevaluationmodel([51],p.3).
2.5.1.ContextEvaluation
Accordingto[46],contextevaluationis“anevaluationoftheneeds,challenges,opportu‐
nitiesandissuesthatcanbesolvedinaspecificenvironment”.Otherreferences[47,48,52,53]
furtherstatethatcontextevaluationtacklesimportantissues,resultinginmanyacademics
consideringusingcontextevaluationforfacultycurriculaandtextbookevaluations.Con-
texthelpstodeterminetheneedsandopportunitiesinaspecificcontextandenvironment.
Contextinvolvesanalyzingandexplainingthefacultycontextinwhichtheyevaluateand
definethefacultypriorities,purpose,andobjectives.Thecontextevaluationgoalsareto
describe,recognize,andaddresstheneedsofthetargetpopulation,identifytheproblems,
anddeterminewhetherornottheobjectivesaresensitivetotherequiredneeds[51,54].
Thevariouscontextevaluationapproachesincludesurveys,studyingrecords,dataanal-
ysis,andinterviews.
2.5.2.InputEvaluation
Accordingto[46,50],inputevaluationincludesaccessibleandcurrenttoolstoachieve
goalsandmeetneeds.Thisevaluationmethodisintendedtoprovideinformationtode-
terminethetoolsusedtoachievetheprogram’sgoals.Thetoolsforassessingthequality
ofeducationinafacultyincludetimecapital,humanresources,physicalresources,facili-
ties,curriculum,andmaterial.Inputinvolvestaskssuchasinput,assetdescription,and
howthefacultyorganizesitsresources.Foraninstitution,therearedifferenttypesofre-
sources,suchasclassrooms,furniture,andaudio.However,afacultyshouldalsohave
humanresources,suchasacademicsandnon-academics.Therefore,thefacultymustfo-
cusonthelearner’sprogress,includingelementssuchassocialandemotionaldevelop-
mentinputs.
2.5.3.ProcessEvaluation
Thebasicpurposeoftheevaluationprocessistoprovideasummaryofallprogram
activities.Evaluationoftheprocessfocusesonrunningtheprogramandteaching–learn-
ingmethods[54].Implementationisaprocessinwhichtheoutputsareusedsuccessfully
tomeettheproduct’sdesiredgoalsandtargets.Theevaluatorreviewstheprocessesto
recognizehowthefacultyworksandwhichprocessesareresponsibleforworkingbeer
andimprovingeducationalquality.Animplementationdecisionismadeduringthispro-
cess.Facultyprocessesincludesystematicapproaches,teaching–learningactivities,par-
ent–teachermeetings,annualfunctions,co-curricularandextracurricularactivities,and
learnerboardexaminationsbasedonsummativeandformativeevaluations.Theprocess
involveshowtheinstitutionmanagesthecourses.Implementationisacriticalstepin
whichtheoutputsareusedtoachievethedesiredproductappropriately[47].Evaluators
cangaininformationaboutwhatishappeningintheclassroomwhileassessingfaculty
processes.Itcanbeteachingthelearningprocess,planningactivitiessuchasstudent
Figure 2. CIPP evaluation model ([51], p. 3).
2.5.1. Context Evaluation
According to [
46
], context evaluation is “an evaluation of the needs, challenges, opportu-
nities and issues that can be solved in a specific environment”. Other references [
47
,
48
,
52
,
53
]
further state that context evaluation tackles important issues, resulting in many academics
considering using context evaluation for faculty curricula and textbook evaluations. Con-
text helps to determine the needs and opportunities in a specific context and environment.
Context involves analyzing and explaining the faculty context in which they evaluate and
define the faculty priorities, purpose, and objectives. The context evaluation goals are to
describe, recognize, and address the needs of the target population, identify the problems,
and determine whether or not the objectives are sensitive to the required needs [
51
,
54
]. The
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 8 of 32
various context evaluation approaches include surveys, studying records, data analysis,
and interviews.
2.5.2. Input Evaluation
According to [
46
,
50
], input evaluation includes accessible and current tools to achieve
goals and meet needs. This evaluation method is intended to provide information to
determine the tools used to achieve the program’s goals. The tools for assessing the quality
of education in a faculty include time capital, human resources, physical resources, facilities,
curriculum, and material. Input involves tasks such as input, asset description, and how
the faculty organizes its resources. For an institution, there are different types of resources,
such as classrooms, furniture, and audio. However, a faculty should also have human
resources, such as academics and non-academics. Therefore, the faculty must focus on the
learner’s progress, including elements such as social and emotional development inputs.
2.5.3. Process Evaluation
The basic purpose of the evaluation process is to provide a summary of all program
activities. Evaluation of the process focuses on running the program and teaching–learning
methods [
54
]. Implementation is a process in which the outputs are used successfully
to meet the product’s desired goals and targets. The evaluator reviews the processes to
recognize how the faculty works and which processes are responsible for working better
and improving educational quality. An implementation decision is made during this
process. Faculty processes include systematic approaches, teaching–learning activities,
parent–teacher meetings, annual functions, co-curricular and extracurricular activities, and
learner board examinations based on summative and formative evaluations. The process
involves how the institution manages the courses. Implementation is a critical step in
which the outputs are used to achieve the desired product appropriately [
47
]. Evaluators
can gain information about what is happening in the classroom while assessing faculty
processes. It can be teaching the learning process, planning activities such as student
seminars, preparing learners for competitive and public exams, or providing a systematic
approach to each process the faculty must take.
2.5.4. Product Evaluation
A product evaluation assesses short- and long-term, intended and unintended out-
comes and outputs that track and focus on achieving (or not) goals [
48
]. This study included
the faculty’s product evaluation to assess whether or not goals meet the goals. The product’s
emphasis is not on the achievement of grades by the student but on the talents, behaviors,
awareness, training, and abilities that the student will use to benefit society in life. The
faculty’s goal is to make learners successful in order to be able to survive in society on their
feet. The product involves assessing and analyzing the faculty’s policy and ultimate result.
Quite clearly, the faculty’s most important result involves the faculty–student relationship.
The student is not the product, but the product obtained by the student is the experience,
skills, beliefs, behavior, etc. The faculty’s performance should be measured in terms of the
passing percentage and how the learners perform in different walks of life in society.
2.5.5. Impact Evaluation
According to [
46
], impact evaluation assesses the impact of ICT infrastructures for
teaching and learning on learners and lecturers. It examines the implications and whether
other system elements have changed due to this deployment. Impact evaluation also
assesses and judges to what extent the individuals and groups served are compatible with
the programs’s intended beneficiaries. It assesses the extent to which the program inap-
propriately provides services to a non-targeted group, helping other learners in the faculty.
In this study, the impact evaluation is used to obtain students’ perspectives on how the
network simulation tool impacts learning and the degree to which the tool affects learners’
ability to learn the principles of computer networking and configuration commands.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 9 of 32
2.5.6. Effectiveness Evaluation
Effectiveness assessment tests whether the system achieves expected and unexpected
results or successfully improves the teaching and learning it supports. According to [
46
],
effectiveness evaluation tracks and measures the consistency and relevance of the results. It
also engages in goal-free evaluation to determine what the program was doing and define
the full range of effects—positive and negative, intended and unintended. In line with the
study’s intent, this portion is used from the student’s perspective to assess the positive and
negative impact of the network simulation tool.
2.5.7. Transportability Evaluation
Transportability evaluation tests whether or not the teaching and learning improve-
ments and their enhanced results are directly attributed or corrected with ICT facility
readiness. According to [
55
], transportability evaluation determines whether the training
program can be transferred, adapted, or used in another setting.
2.5.8. Transportability
The evaluation of transportability does not apply to this study. According to [
51
], p. 10,
this is an optional CIPP evaluation model component and should be used to assess how
the network simulation tool worked elsewhere. This study focuses only on the final-year
diploma students [55].
2.5.9. Sustainability Evaluation
Sustainability evaluation assesses and reports the effects of ICT-ready results on
learners and seminars and how much they use it to instruct and understand functions.
Sustainability is another aspect that needs to be measured, accounting for how long the
benefits have been. This study evaluates whether the learners support the continuation
of the simulation tool, as well as whether there is a need for continuity or demand and a
compelling case for the sustainability of the network simulation tool services.
Packet Tracer is an extensive teaching and learning technology-networking software
with innovative characteristics that assists learners and educators in working together,
solving issues, and learning ideas in an engaging and vibrant social environment. With a
multi-user network simulation environment, it makes teaching and learning networking
technology more accessible and more enjoyable. It expands the teaching experience with a
setting of realistic simulation and visualization used for exploration, experimentation, and
explanation. Instructors and learners can develop virtual “networking islands” to teach
and learn network concepts and techniques.
Packet Tracer also solves situations where the learners have insufficient equipment in
a laboratory setting. Even on their home computers, learners can use Packet Tracer to do
practical homework and obtain hands-on experience without visiting the laboratory. Packet
Tracer presents an opportunity for teaching and learning anywhere, anytime. Students
with Packet Tracer can more readily comprehend computer network subjects by visualizing
procedures within the network. Visualizing these procedures facilitates understanding
their positions in the computer network environment. Packet Tracer is accessible free of
charge to all learners and teachers at the Cisco Networking Academy.
2.6. Summary
The literature review has shown that ICT, particularly simulation tools, plays an es-
sential role in enhancing the teaching and learning of complex topics such as computer
networks. It has highlighted the benefits of using simulations, such as improving infor-
mation retention, enhancing practical skills, and overcoming the limitations of physical
laboratory resources. However, the research also highlighted several challenges, including
accessibility issues, compatibility limitations, and the need for integrated approaches that
balance practical and theoretical learning.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 10 of 32
Identified gaps in the literature include the lack of comprehensive studies focusing on
resource-constrained environments, particularly in historically disadvantaged institutions
with limited access to physical network equipment. In addition, there is limited research
on the long-term sustainability of using simulation tools and their impact on students’
preparation for professional life.
This study aims to address these gaps by evaluating the effectiveness of Cisco Packet
Tracer as a simulation tool in a resource-constrained higher education context. The study
will explore the impact, effectiveness, and sustainability of the use of simulation tools,
thereby providing insights into their applicability in environments with a lack of physical
resources. The research design is based on the need to understand how digital simulations
can bridge educational gaps and improve outcomes for students facing infrastructural
challenges.
Based on the conceptual framework of the CIPP model, the objectives are formulated
as follows: (1) Impact: To evaluate the extent to which the use of simulation tools improves
students’ ability to configure and troubleshoot computer network devices and to determine
their perceived learning gains. (2) Effectiveness: To evaluate the effectiveness of simulation
tools as a replacement or supplement to traditional laboratory practices, particularly in
environments where access to physical devices is limited. (3) Sustainability: To determine
whether students continue to benefit from simulation tools over time and to identify factors
that support or hinder the long-term use of such tools in teaching and learning.
3. Research Methodology
This study used a quantitative approach to collect and analyze data focused on a
particular diploma final-year group of learners involved in Information Technology at one
institution campus. The selection criteria were based on several factors. Only learners about
to complete the core computer networking courses, including theoretical and practical com-
ponents, were considered. This ensured that participants had the foundational knowledge
required to engage with the simulation tool meaningfully. The identified sample was 50,
but only 30 positively responded to the questionnaire; the study aimed to include learners
with varying academic performances to obtain a diverse set of responses, and learners
with access to a laptop or desktop computer were prioritized, as using Cisco Packet Tracer
required such devices. This criterion was necessary to ensure that participants could use
the simulation tool outside of the computer lab, thereby reflecting the resource-constrained
nature of the study environment.
A questionnaire with structured questions was developed and finalized, targeting the
same group of learners as respondents [
56
,
57
]. The overall number of respondents was
30 learners through a self-administered questionnaire with a 60% response rate (
n = 50
). A
questionnaire was chosen as the sole data collection tool in order to provide uniformity
in the responses. A structured questionnaire ensured that all participants responded
to the same questions, allowing for consistency in data collection. This was crucial for
comparing responses and performing a quantitative analysis. Other reasons for choosing
the questionnaire were because of time and budgetary constraints, easy access to learners
who had a busy schedule in the final years of academic activities, as well as the fact that
they were more familiar with the tool and that it was easy for the administrators of the tool
to administer.
The questions were informed by concepts discussed in the literature review and struc-
tured around three themes: impact, effectiveness, and sustainability. Questions around
the impact were designed to assess the learners’ perceptions of how Cisco Packet Tracer
affected their practical skills and understanding of theoretical concepts. This was linked
to the literature on the importance of simulation tools in enhancing learning outcomes,
particularly in practical subjects like computer networking. Effectiveness questions were
focused on the effectiveness of the simulation tool in providing an alternative to phys-
ical lab equipment. The rationale was to understand whether students could achieve
comparable learning outcomes using simulations, as highlighted in the literature review.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 11 of 32
Lastly, sustainability questions were used to assess whether the students believed using the
simulation tool was sustainable in terms of long-term learning benefits. This aligned with
the literature on the challenges and benefits of continued use of educational technologies in
resource-constrained environments.
The questions were validated through an expert review process to ensure their rel-
evance and clarity, following the best practices for questionnaire validation [
54
]. Addi-
tionally, a pilot study was conducted with a small group of respondents to further refine
the questions and ensure they were consistently understood and effectively captured the
intended constructs [
58
]. The questionnaire consisted of a combination of Likert scale items,
multiple-choice questions, and open-ended questions that allowed for quantitative analysis
and qualitative insights into students’ experiences. This mixed approach increased the
validity and reliability of the results as it allowed for a comprehensive understanding of
the data and ensured consistent and reliable results through multiple forms of response
collection [59,60].
4. Analysis of Findings
The collected data were analyzed to identify the impact of using network simulation
tools to enhance learning in Developmental University. As indicated in the previous section,
there were 30 respondents based on the single institution campus of learners engaging with
the Information Technology programs. Most respondents were male, 67%, and 33% female.
It is also important to note that the same respondents were of African origin, preferred
English for teaching, and were fully proficient in using laptops. The analysis was carried
out using the statistical tools of Microsoft Excel. Descriptive statistics were employed
to summarize data meaningfully, allowing for a more straightforward interpretation of
study outcomes through charts and graphs. The findings are discussed according to the
questionnaire sections, and then the three elements of the CIPP evaluation model are
considered: general questions, impact, effectiveness, and sustainability.
4.1. Impact
This section presents the findings and analyses of the data obtained from the individual
questionnaire on the impact of using network simulation tools to enhance learning at the
institution campus. The data were extracted and analyzed according to the objective of
the study.
4.1.1. Does the Simulation Tool Help You Learn the Practical Skills to Configure and
Troubleshoot Computer Network Devices?
Figure 3reveals that 53.3% of the respondents agree that the simulation tool helps them
learn practical skills and troubleshoot computer network devices, while 43.3% strongly
agree and 3.3% are neutral. The simulation software package is suggested for assisting
students in a computer network course in regard to having an active learning experience,
and students can bring the natural networking surroundings into the classroom to create
a lot of interactions and effectiveness, consistent with [
12
]. Utilizing simulation tools
in virtual laboratories gives models for detailed understanding and in-depth analyses
of things such as building a complex network from fundamental building blocks with
an assortment of nodes and links, packet flow, buffer overflow, and operating system
compromise [11].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 12 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW12of33
interpretationofstudyoutcomesthroughchartsandgraphs.Thefindingsarediscussed
accordingtothequestionnairesections,andthenthethreeelementsoftheCIPPevalua-
tionmodelareconsidered:generalquestions,impact,effectiveness,andsustainability.
4.1.Impact
Thissectionpresentsthefindingsandanalysesofthedataobtainedfromtheindi-
vidualquestionnaireontheimpactofusingnetworksimulationtoolstoenhancelearning
attheinstitutioncampus.Thedatawereextractedandanalyzedaccordingtotheobjective
ofthestudy.
4.1.1.DoestheSimulationToolHelpYouLearnthePracticalSkillstoConfigureand
TroubleshootComputerNetworkDevices?
Figure3revealsthat53.3%oftherespondentsagreethatthesimulationtoolhelps
themlearnpracticalskillsandtroubleshootcomputernetworkdevices,while43.3%
stronglyagreeand3.3%areneutral.Thesimulationsoftwarepackageissuggestedfor
assistingstudentsinacomputernetworkcourseinregardtohavinganactivelearning
experience,andstudentscanbringthenaturalnetworkingsurroundingsintotheclass-
roomtocreatealotofinteractionsandeffectiveness,consistentwith[12].Utilizingsimu-
lationtoolsinvirtuallaboratoriesgivesmodelsfordetailedunderstandingandin-depth
analysesofthingssuchasbuildingacomplexnetworkfromfundamentalbuildingblocks
withanassortmentofnodesandlinks,packetflow,bufferoverflow,andoperatingsystem
compromise[11].
Figure3.Usingthesimulationtooltolearnpracticalskills.
4.1.2.DoestheSimulationToolProvideMulti-User,Real-TimeLaboratoryTraining?
Figure4showsthatmostrespondents(63.3%)agreethatthesimulationtoolprovides
multi-user,real-timelaboratorytraining,while16.7%areneutral,10%stronglyagree,and
10%disagree.Packettracerhasbothreal-timeandmulti-userfeatures.Inreal-timemode,
thenetworkdevicebehavesthesamewayitwouldhavewithrealdevices.Themulti-user
optionallowsstudentsatdifferentlocationstoworktogetheronthesameprojectorinthe
samelab[61].
Figure 3. Using the simulation tool to learn practical skills.
4.1.2. Does the Simulation Tool Provide Multi-User, Real-Time Laboratory Training?
Figure 4shows that most respondents (63.3%) agree that the simulation tool provides
multi-user, real-time laboratory training, while 16.7% are neutral, 10% strongly agree, and
10% disagree. Packet tracer has both real-time and multi-user features. In real-time mode,
the network device behaves the same way it would have with real devices. The multi-user
option allows students at different locations to work together on the same project or in the
same lab [61].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW13of33
Figure4.Multi-userandreal-timelaboratorytraining.
4.1.3.DoestheSimulationToolAllowfortheApplicationoftheConceptsandIdeas
DiscussedduringTheoreticalClasses?
Figure5revealsthatmostrespondents(66.7%)agreethattheycanapplytheconcepts
andideasdiscussedinclassusingthesimulationtool;additionally,26.7%stronglyagree,
while6.7%areneutral.Thisisconsistentwith[56],whichfoundthat“Packettracergives
simulation,visualization,writing,evaluation,andcollaborationcapabilitiesandfacilitatesthe
teachingandlearningofcomplextechnologyconcepts”.
Figure5.Useofthesimulationtooltoapplytheconceptsandideasdiscussedduringclass.
4.1.4.WhichConfigurationCommandsDoYou FindEasytoUseWhenUsingthe
SimulationTooltoConfigureaCiscoSwitch?
Figure6revealsthat35%oftherespondentsfinditeasytousethebasicconfigura-
tions;additionally,17%founduseofVLANstobeeasy,17%foundsecuritytobeeasy,
13%believedthatthedisplaycommandswereeasy,and9%thoughtthetestingcom-
mandswereeasy.Lastly,9%foundroutingprotocolstobeeasy.Thishelpsstudentsbuild
networktopologiesafterconfiguringtheassociateddevices[62].Ref.[58]revealedthat
PacketTracerissufficientforstudents’needswhenconfiguringnetworkdevices[61].This
66.7%
6.7%
26.7%
0
5
10
15
20
25
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 4. Multi-user and real-time laboratory training.
4.1.3. Does the Simulation Tool Allow for the Application of the Concepts and Ideas
Discussed during Theoretical Classes?
Figure 5reveals that most respondents (66.7%) agree that they can apply the concepts
and ideas discussed in class using the simulation tool; additionally, 26.7% strongly agree,
while 6.7% are neutral. This is consistent with [
56
], which found that “Packet tracer gives
simulation, visualization, writing, evaluation, and collaboration capabilities and facilitates the
teaching and learning of complex technology concepts”.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 13 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW13of33
Figure4.Multi-userandreal-timelaboratorytraining.
4.1.3.DoestheSimulationToolAllowfortheApplicationoftheConceptsandIdeas
DiscussedduringTheoreticalClasses?
Figure5revealsthatmostrespondents(66.7%)agreethattheycanapplytheconcepts
andideasdiscussedinclassusingthesimulationtool;additionally,26.7%stronglyagree,
while6.7%areneutral.Thisisconsistentwith[56],whichfoundthat“Packettracergives
simulation,visualization,writing,evaluation,andcollaborationcapabilitiesandfacilitatesthe
teachingandlearningofcomplextechnologyconcepts”.
Figure5.Useofthesimulationtooltoapplytheconceptsandideasdiscussedduringclass.
4.1.4.WhichConfigurationCommandsDoYou FindEasytoUseWhenUsingthe
SimulationTooltoConfigureaCiscoSwitch?
Figure6revealsthat35%oftherespondentsfinditeasytousethebasicconfigura-
tions;additionally,17%founduseofVLANstobeeasy,17%foundsecuritytobeeasy,
13%believedthatthedisplaycommandswereeasy,and9%thoughtthetestingcom-
mandswereeasy.Lastly,9%foundroutingprotocolstobeeasy.Thishelpsstudentsbuild
networktopologiesafterconfiguringtheassociateddevices[62].Ref.[58]revealedthat
PacketTracerissufficientforstudents’needswhenconfiguringnetworkdevices[61].This
66.7%
6.7%
26.7%
0
5
10
15
20
25
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 5. Use of the simulation tool to apply the concepts and ideas discussed during class.
4.1.4. Which Configuration Commands Do You Find Easy to Use When Using the
Simulation Tool to Configure a Cisco Switch?
Figure 6reveals that 35% of the respondents find it easy to use the basic configurations;
additionally, 17% found use of VLANs to be easy, 17% found security to be easy, 13%
believed that the display commands were easy, and 9% thought the testing commands
were easy. Lastly, 9% found routing protocols to be easy. This helps students build network
topologies after configuring the associated devices [
62
]. Ref. [
58
] revealed that Packet
Tracer is sufficient for students’ needs when configuring network devices [
61
]. This implies
that the difference between real devices and simulation tool configurations is insignificant.
However, it is essential to note that some features are available on devices that Packet
Tracer does not yet support.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW14of33
impliesthatthedifferencebetweenrealdevicesandsimulationtoolconfigurationsisin-
significant.However,itisessentialtonotethatsomefeaturesareavailableondevicesthat
PacketTracerdoesnotyetsupport.
Figure6.Showseasyconfigurationcommands.
4.1.5.RefertoQuestion4.WhichConfigurationCommandsDoYouFindMore
ChallengingWhenUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure7revealsthat25%oftherespondentsarechallengedwhenseingpasswords,
25%arechallengedwhendoingnetworkconfigurations,and19%arechallengedwhen
configuringVLANs.Incomparison,6%arechallengedbyroutingprotocolsandtrouble-
shootingACLs.Insupport,astudyby[63]revealedthatthefollowinglistofconfigura-
tionsisgenerallychallengingtounderstandroutingprotocols,ACLs,andtroubleshoot-
ing.
Figure7.Showschallengingconfigurationcommands.
4.1.6.WhatAretheGeneralIssuesRegardingtheUseoftheSimulationTool?
Figure8showsthat43.3%oftherespondentshaveanissuewiththecomputerfre-
quentlycrashingwhentheyusingthesimulationtool,20%ofthemrevealedthattheir
fileswerenotcompatiblewiththeversionofthesimulationtool,16.7%ofthemhavean
Figure 6. Shows easy configuration commands.
4.1.5. Refer to Question 4: Which Configuration Commands Do You Find More
Challenging When Using the Simulation Tool?
Figure 7reveals that 25% of the respondents are challenged when setting passwords,
25% are challenged when doing network configurations, and 19% are challenged when con-
figuring VLANs. In comparison, 6% are challenged by routing protocols and troubleshoot-
ing ACLs. In support, a study by [
63
] revealed that the following list of configurations is
generally challenging to understand routing protocols, ACLs, and troubleshooting.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 14 of 32
Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/education
Figure 7. Shows challenging configuration commands.
4.1.6. What Are the General Issues Regarding the Use of the Simulation Tool?
Figure 8shows that 43.3% of the respondents have an issue with the computer fre-
quently crashing when they using the simulation tool, 20% of them revealed that their files
were not compatible with the version of the simulation tool, 16.7% of them have an issue
with the simulation tool supporting a small subset of features from Cisco devices, 13.3%
of them have an issue with the limited number of saves when using a guest account, and
6.7% of the respondents had an issue with their screens being cluttered with too many win-
dows. Computer networking courses faced several issues, particularly associated with the
requirement of practical works, large class sizes, plagiarism, and module franchising [64].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW15of33
issuewiththesimulationtoolsupportingasmallsubsetoffeaturesfromCiscodevices,
13.3%ofthemhaveanissuewiththelimitednumberofsaveswhenusingaguestaccount,
and6.7%oftherespondentshadanissuewiththeirscreensbeingclueredwithtoomany
windows.Computernetworkingcoursesfacedseveralissues,particularlyassociatedwith
therequirementofpracticalworks,largeclasssizes,plagiarism,andmodulefranchising
[64].
Figure8.Generalissuesidentifiedbytherespondents.
4.1.7.DoestheCurrentStatusoftheInfrastructure(ComputerLabs)MakeItEasytoRun
ThisSoftware?
Figure9showsthat56.7%agreethattheinfrastructuremakesiteasytorunthesim-
ulationtool,while26.7%areneutral,13.3%stronglyagree,and3.3%disagree.Ithasalso
beenfoundthatmoststudentsusetheirlaptopsordesktopstoaccessthesimulationtool,
whileafewusesmartphonesortablets.Thiscouldbeinfluencedbypersonalcomputers’
displaycapabilities,memorycapacity,andhand-helddevices(smartphonesandtablets)
[14].
Figure9.Labstatusaccordingtotherespondents.
4.2.Effectiveness
56.7%
3.3%
26.7%
13.3%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Agree Disagree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 8. General issues identified by the respondents.
4.1.7. Does the Current Status of the Infrastructure (Computer Labs) Make It Easy to Run
This Software?
Figure 9shows that 56.7% agree that the infrastructure makes it easy to run the simula-
tion tool, while 26.7% are neutral, 13.3% strongly agree, and 3.3% disagree. It has also been
found that most students use their laptops or desktops to access the simulation tool, while
a few use smartphones or tablets. This could be influenced by personal computers’ display
capabilities, memory capacity, and hand-held devices (smartphones and tablets) [14].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 15 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW15of33
issuewiththesimulationtoolsupportingasmallsubsetoffeaturesfromCiscodevices,
13.3%ofthemhaveanissuewiththelimitednumberofsaveswhenusingaguestaccount,
and6.7%oftherespondentshadanissuewiththeirscreensbeingclueredwithtoomany
windows.Computernetworkingcoursesfacedseveralissues,particularlyassociatedwith
therequirementofpracticalworks,largeclasssizes,plagiarism,andmodulefranchising
[64].
Figure8.Generalissuesidentifiedbytherespondents.
4.1.7.DoestheCurrentStatusoftheInfrastructure(ComputerLabs)MakeItEasytoRun
ThisSoftware?
Figure9showsthat56.7%agreethattheinfrastructuremakesiteasytorunthesim-
ulationtool,while26.7%areneutral,13.3%stronglyagree,and3.3%disagree.Ithasalso
beenfoundthatmoststudentsusetheirlaptopsordesktopstoaccessthesimulationtool,
whileafewusesmartphonesortablets.Thiscouldbeinfluencedbypersonalcomputers’
displaycapabilities,memorycapacity,andhand-helddevices(smartphonesandtablets)
[14].
Figure9.Labstatusaccordingtotherespondents.
4.2.Effectiveness
56.7%
3.3%
26.7%
13.3%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Agree Disagree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 9. Lab status according to the respondents.
4.2. Effectiveness
This portion of the questionnaire consisted of seven questions about the simulation
tool to enhance learning and benefit the students.
4.2.1. Using the Simulation Tool, Do You Find That This Software Improves Learning and
Benefits You?
Figure 10 shows that most respondents (60%) agree that this software improves
learning and benefits them, while 33.3% strongly agree and 6.7% are neutral about the
software. This is consistent with [
61
], which indicated that technology is exceptionally
reasonable for teaching practical computer networks. Allison et al. (2022) and Dobrilovic
et al. (2006) [61,65] support this finding.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW16of33
Thisportionofthequestionnaireconsistedofsevenquestionsaboutthesimulation
tooltoenhancelearningandbenefitthestudents.
4.2.1.UsingtheSimulationTool,DoYouFindThatThisSoftwareImprovesLearning
andBenefitsYou?
Figure10showsthatmostrespondents(60%)agreethatthissoftwareimproveslearn-
ingandbenefitsthem,while33.3%stronglyagreeand6.7%areneutralaboutthesoftware.
Thisisconsistentwith[61],whichindicatedthattechnologyisexceptionallyreasonable
forteachingpracticalcomputernetworks.Allisonetal.(2022)andDobrilovicetal.
(2006)[61,65]supportthisfinding.
Figure10.Simulationtoolimprovelearningandbenefittherespondents.
4.2.2.SimulationToolIncreasedMyLearningintheComputerNetworkCourse
Figure11showsthat56.7%oftherespondentsagreethatthesimulationtoolincreases
theirlearningwhenengagedinthecomputernetworkcourse,while40%stronglyagree
and3.3%areneutral.The“simulationsoftwarepackageissuggestedtoassistastudentof
acomputernetworkcoursetohaveanactivelearningexperience,andstudentscanbring
therealnetworkingsurroundingsintotheclassroomtocreatealotofinteractiveandef-
fective.Learnerstacklehands-onandwonderingskills,includingknowledge-in-action,
procedures,decision-making,andsuperbcommunication”[64].The3.3%neutralcould
bebecausestudentscannotapplythetheorylearnedinclasstoparticularsituations.
Figure 10. Simulation tool improve learning and benefit the respondents.
4.2.2. Simulation Tool Increased My Learning in the Computer Network Course
Figure 11 shows that 56.7% of the respondents agree that the simulation tool increases
their learning when engaged in the computer network course, while 40% strongly agree
and 3.3% are neutral. The “simulation software package is suggested to assist a student
of a computer network course to have an active learning experience, and students can
bring the real networking surroundings into the classroom to create a lot of interactive and
effective. Learners tackle hands-on and wondering skills, including knowledge-in-action,
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 16 of 32
procedures, decision-making, and superb communication” [
64
]. The 3.3% neutral could be
because students cannot apply the theory learned in class to particular situations.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW17of33
Figure11.Usingsimulationtoolsinthelearningcomputernetworkcourse.
4.2.3.IWillBeMoreProfessionallyPreparedtoWorkwithComputerNetworksafter
UsingtheSimulationTool
Figure12showsthat60%oftherespondentsagreethattheywillbemoreprofession-
allypreparedforworkingwithcomputernetworksafterusingthesimulationtool,23.3%
stronglyagree,13.3%areneutral,and3.3%disagree.Accordingto[59,60,65],simulation
devicescannotincludeessentialfunctionalknowledgeforpupils,suchascablingand
physicalconnectivity,andtheyareavaluableandcost-effectivecomplementtoteaching
programs.
Figure12.Usingthesimulationtooltobemoreprofessionalwhenworkingwithcomputernet-
works.
4.2.4.WhatArethePositiveEffectsofUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure13revealsthatmostrespondents(59%)thinkpracticalskillshavepositiveef-
fectswhenusingsimulationtools,while19%thinkthelowcostofthesoftwarehasposi-
tiveeffects,15%thinktheinformationconveniencehaspositiveeffects,and7%thinkthe
graphicuserinterfacehaspositiveeffects.PacketTracerisanopen-sourcenetwork
56.7%
3.3%
40.0%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
60.0%
3.3%
13.3%
23.3%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Agree Disagree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 11. Using simulation tools in the learning computer network course.
4.2.3. I Will Be More Professionally Prepared to Work with Computer Networks after
Using the Simulation Tool
Figure 12 shows that 60% of the respondents agree that they will be more profession-
ally prepared for working with computer networks after using the simulation tool, 23.3%
strongly agree, 13.3% are neutral, and 3.3% disagree. According to [
59
,
60
,
65
], simulation de-
vices can not include essential functional knowledge for pupils, such as cabling and physical
connectivity, and they are a valuable and cost-effective complement to teaching programs.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW17of33
Figure11.Usingsimulationtoolsinthelearningcomputernetworkcourse.
4.2.3.IWillBeMoreProfessionallyPreparedtoWorkwithComputerNetworksafter
UsingtheSimulationTool
Figure12showsthat60%oftherespondentsagreethattheywillbemoreprofession-
allypreparedforworkingwithcomputernetworksafterusingthesimulationtool,23.3%
stronglyagree,13.3%areneutral,and3.3%disagree.Accordingto[59,60,65],simulation
devicescannotincludeessentialfunctionalknowledgeforpupils,suchascablingand
physicalconnectivity,andtheyareavaluableandcost-effectivecomplementtoteaching
programs.
Figure12.Usingthesimulationtooltobemoreprofessionalwhenworkingwithcomputernet-
works.
4.2.4.WhatArethePositiveEffectsofUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure13revealsthatmostrespondents(59%)thinkpracticalskillshavepositiveef-
fectswhenusingsimulationtools,while19%thinkthelowcostofthesoftwarehasposi-
tiveeffects,15%thinktheinformationconveniencehaspositiveeffects,and7%thinkthe
graphicuserinterfacehaspositiveeffects.PacketTracerisanopen-sourcenetwork
56.7%
3.3%
40.0%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
60.0%
3.3%
13.3%
23.3%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Agree Disagree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 12. Using the simulation tool to be more professional when working with computer networks.
4.2.4. What Are the Positive Effects of Using the Simulation Tool?
Figure 13 reveals that most respondents (59%) think practical skills have positive
effects when using simulation tools, while 19% think the low cost of the software has
positive effects, 15% think the information convenience has positive effects, and 7% think
the graphic user interface has positive effects. Packet Tracer is an open-source network
simulation tool that can be downloaded from the Cisco Network Academy website for free.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 17 of 32
Packet tracer has a friendly graphical user interface and command line interface which are
easy to work with [
66
]. Simulated learning can be setup at suitable times and locations and
repeated regularly. Moreover, it can help improve students’ skills and enable them to learn
from errors [64].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW18of33
simulationtoolthatcanbedownloadedfromtheCiscoNetworkAcademywebsitefor
free.Packettracerhasafriendlygraphicaluserinterfaceandcommandlineinterface
whichareeasytoworkwith[66].Simulatedlearningcanbesetupatsuitabletimesand
locationsandrepeatedregularly.Moreover,itcanhelpimprovestudents’skillsandena-
blethemtolearnfromerrors[64].
Figure13.Thepositiveeffectsofusingthesimulationtool.
4.2.5.WhatAretheNegativeEffectsofUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure14revealsthat52%oftherespondentsthoughtthatthenegativeeffectsofthe
simulationtoolincludeditbeinglessefficient,23%feltthatthesimulationtoolwascon-
fusing,16%saidthatitresultedinerrors,and10%saidthatitwasinaccessible.Thefind-
ingsfromthestudyby[62,67]indicatethatstudentshavedifficultyapplyingthetheories
theyhavelearnedwiththeactualsimulationsandfinditdifficulttodetecterrorsand
troubleshoot.Bolarinwa(2015)[58]reportedthatCiscoPacketTracerdoesnotyetsupport
allprotocolsandfeaturesavailableinanenterpriseCiscoIOS[61].
Figure14.Showsnegativeeffectsofusingthesimulationtool.
4.2.6.WhatShouldBeImprovedtoMaketheSimulationToolMoreEffective?
Figure15showsthat29%oftherespondentsthinkthattheuserinterfacecanbe
changedandwouldimprovethesimulationtool,19%thinkthatthephysicalequipment
andIOSfeaturesdonotrequirechanges,10%wantaspeed-increasechange,and5%said
Figure 13. The positive effects of using the simulation tool.
4.2.5. What Are the Negative Effects of Using the Simulation Tool?
Figure 14 reveals that 52% of the respondents thought that the negative effects of
the simulation tool included it being less efficient, 23% felt that the simulation tool was
confusing, 16% said that it resulted in errors, and 10% said that it was inaccessible. The
findings from the study by [
62
,
67
] indicate that students have difficulty applying the
theories they have learned with the actual simulations and find it difficult to detect errors
and troubleshoot. Bolarinwa (2015) [
58
] reported that Cisco Packet Tracer does not yet
support all protocols and features available in an enterprise Cisco IOS [61].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW18of33
simulationtoolthatcanbedownloadedfromtheCiscoNetworkAcademywebsitefor
free.Packettracerhasafriendlygraphicaluserinterfaceandcommandlineinterface
whichareeasytoworkwith[66].Simulatedlearningcanbesetupatsuitabletimesand
locationsandrepeatedregularly.Moreover,itcanhelpimprovestudents’skillsandena-
blethemtolearnfromerrors[64].
Figure13.Thepositiveeffectsofusingthesimulationtool.
4.2.5.WhatAretheNegativeEffectsofUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure14revealsthat52%oftherespondentsthoughtthatthenegativeeffectsofthe
simulationtoolincludeditbeinglessefficient,23%feltthatthesimulationtoolwascon-
fusing,16%saidthatitresultedinerrors,and10%saidthatitwasinaccessible.Thefind-
ingsfromthestudyby[62,67]indicatethatstudentshavedifficultyapplyingthetheories
theyhavelearnedwiththeactualsimulationsandfinditdifficulttodetecterrorsand
troubleshoot.Bolarinwa(2015)[58]reportedthatCiscoPacketTracerdoesnotyetsupport
allprotocolsandfeaturesavailableinanenterpriseCiscoIOS[61].
Figure14.Showsnegativeeffectsofusingthesimulationtool.
4.2.6.WhatShouldBeImprovedtoMaketheSimulationToolMoreEffective?
Figure15showsthat29%oftherespondentsthinkthattheuserinterfacecanbe
changedandwouldimprovethesimulationtool,19%thinkthatthephysicalequipment
andIOSfeaturesdonotrequirechanges,10%wantaspeed-increasechange,and5%said
Figure 14. Shows negative effects of using the simulation tool.
4.2.6. What Should Be Improved to Make the Simulation Tool More Effective?
Figure 15 shows that 29% of the respondents think that the user interface can be
changed and would improve the simulation tool, 19% think that the physical equipment and
IOS features do not require changes, 10% want a speed-increase change, and 5% said that
compatibility should be changed. According to [
55
,
60
], barriers to simulators cannot offer
essential technological capabilities for pupils, such as cabling and physical connectivity.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 18 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW19of33
thatcompatibilityshouldbechanged.Accordingto[55,60],barrierstosimulatorscannot
offeressentialtechnologicalcapabilitiesforpupils,suchascablingandphysicalconnec-
tivity.
Figure15.Showsimprovementstomakethesimulationtoolmoreeffective.
4.2.7.DoYou FindThattheSimulationToolEffectivelyEnhancesYour Understandingof
ComputerNetworkingConcepts?
Figure16showsthat65.5%oftherespondentsagreethatthesimulationtooleffec-
tivelyenhancestheirunderstandingofcomputernetworkingconcepts,while27.6%
stronglyagreeand6.9%areneutral.Softwaresimulationsareatechniqueforlearningand
practicethatcanbeappliedtoseveraldisciplines.Experimentationwithdifferentcom-
putercomponentsusingsimulatorsenhancesstudentlearning[64,66].
Figure16.Simulationtooleffectivenessenhancingcomputernetworkingconcepts.
4.3.Sustainability
Thissectionconsistedofelevenquestionsonsimulationtoolsustainability,features,
recommendations,andoverallskillslearnedusingthissimulationtool.
65.5%
6.9%
27.6%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 15. Shows improvements to make the simulation tool more effective.
4.2.7. Do You Find That the Simulation Tool Effectively Enhances Your Understanding of
Computer Networking Concepts?
Figure 16 shows that 65.5% of the respondents agree that the simulation tool effectively
enhances their understanding of computer networking concepts, while 27.6% strongly agree
and 6.9% are neutral. Software simulations are a technique for learning and practice that
can be applied to several disciplines. Experimentation with different computer components
using simulators enhances student learning [64,66].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW19of33
thatcompatibilityshouldbechanged.Accordingto[55,60],barrierstosimulatorscannot
offeressentialtechnologicalcapabilitiesforpupils,suchascablingandphysicalconnec-
tivity.
Figure15.Showsimprovementstomakethesimulationtoolmoreeffective.
4.2.7.DoYou FindThattheSimulationToolEffectivelyEnhancesYour Understandingof
ComputerNetworkingConcepts?
Figure16showsthat65.5%oftherespondentsagreethatthesimulationtooleffec-
tivelyenhancestheirunderstandingofcomputernetworkingconcepts,while27.6%
stronglyagreeand6.9%areneutral.Softwaresimulationsareatechniqueforlearningand
practicethatcanbeappliedtoseveraldisciplines.Experimentationwithdifferentcom-
putercomponentsusingsimulatorsenhancesstudentlearning[64,66].
Figure16.Simulationtooleffectivenessenhancingcomputernetworkingconcepts.
4.3.Sustainability
Thissectionconsistedofelevenquestionsonsimulationtoolsustainability,features,
recommendations,andoverallskillslearnedusingthissimulationtool.
65.5%
6.9%
27.6%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 16. Simulation tool effectiveness enhancing computer networking concepts.
4.3. Sustainability
This section consisted of eleven questions on simulation tool sustainability, features,
recommendations, and overall skills learned using this simulation tool.
4.3.1. The Experiences Gained in the Simulation Tool Will Be Useful in the Future
Figure 17 shows that 60% of the respondents agree that the experiences they gained
using the simulation tool will be useful in the future. In comparison, 36.7% strongly
agree, and 3.3% are neutral about this statement. Simulated learning offers students
workplace technical experience, which helps improve students’ prospects in terms of future
employment [63,64,66].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 19 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW20of33
4.3.1.TheExperiencesGainedintheSimulationToolWillBeUsefulintheFuture
Figure17showsthat60%oftherespondentsagreethattheexperiencestheygained
usingthesimulationtoolwillbeusefulinthefuture.Incomparison,36.7%stronglyagree,
and3.3%areneutralaboutthisstatement.Simulatedlearningoffersstudentsworkplace
technicalexperience,whichhelpsimprovestudents’prospectsintermsoffutureemploy-
ment[63,64,66].
Figure17.Experiencesgainedbytherespondentsusingthesimulationtool.
4.3.2.WhatAretheNumerousTime-SavingFeaturesoftheSimulationToolThatShould
ContinueforanExtendedPeriodorwithoutInterruption?
Figure18revealsthat40%thinkthatthequicklaunchismostbeneficialtime-saving
featureofthesimulationtool,while20%wereunsure,15%saidthatitistheshortcuts,
10%thinkitisthenetworkdesign,10%thinkallthefeatures,and5%saidtheinspecttool.
“Comparedtothecostandtimeincludedinseingupanentiretestbedcontainingmul-
tiplenetworkedcomputers,routers,anddatalinks,networksimulatorsarerelatively
quickandcheap”[61,63,64].
60.0%
3.3%
36.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Agree Neutral StronglyAgree
Figure 17. Experiences gained by the respondents using the simulation tool.
4.3.2. What Are the Numerous Time-Saving Features of the Simulation Tool That Should
Continue for an Extended Period or without Interruption?
Figure 18 reveals that 40% think that the quick launch is most beneficial time-saving
feature of the simulation tool, while 20% were unsure, 15% said that it is the shortcuts,
10% think it is the network design, 10% think all the features, and 5% said the inspect
tool. “Compared to the cost and time included in setting up an entire test bed containing
multiple networked computers, routers, and data links, network simulators are relatively
quick and cheap” [61,63,64].
Figure 18. Time-saving features of the simulation tool.
4.3.3. What Features of the Simulation Tool Should Be Discontinued?
Figure 19 reveals that 56% of the respondents think that none of the features of
the simulation tool must be discontinued, while 19% think that the logon screen should
be discontinued, 13% think old devices must be removed, and 13% think that a new
user interface should be implemented. The user requirements should drive the choice of
simulation tool. Developers should consider the advantages and disadvantages of each
simulation tool, the level of complexity of the simulation tool, features to include or not
include, and other design choices [43].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 20 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW21of33
Figure18.Time-savingfeaturesofthesimulationtool.
4.3.3.WhatFeaturesoftheSimulationToolShouldBeDiscontinued?
Figure19revealsthat56%oftherespondentsthinkthatnoneofthefeaturesofthe
simulationtoolmustbediscontinued,while19%thinkthatthelogonscreenshouldbe
discontinued,13%thinkolddevicesmustberemoved,and13%thinkthatanewuser
interfaceshouldbeimplemented.Theuserrequirementsshoulddrivethechoiceofsim-
ulationtool.Developersshouldconsidertheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofeachsim-
ulationtool,thelevelofcomplexityofthesimulationtool,featurestoincludeornotin-
clude,andotherdesignchoices[43].
Figure19.Showsfeaturesofthesimulationtoolneedtobediscontinued.
4.3.4.WhatIstheLikelihoodofYouRecommendingtheSimulationTooltoOthers?
ThegraphinFigure20illustratestherespondentresponsestothelikelihoodthatthey
recommendthesimulationtooltoothers:30%ratedeight,20%ratednine,10%rated
seven,10%ratedsix,and,lastly,10%ratedfive.Thisfindingagreeswith[40],showing
thelikelihoodofrecommendingasimulationtool.
Figure20.Recommendationofthesimulationtoolbytherespondents.
Figure 19. Shows features of the simulation tool need to be discontinued.
4.3.4. What Is the Likelihood of You Recommending the Simulation Tool to Others?
The graph in Figure 20 illustrates the respondent responses to the likelihood that
they recommend the simulation tool to others: 30% rated eight, 20% rated nine, 10% rated
seven, 10% rated six, and, lastly, 10% rated five. This finding agrees with [
40
], showing the
likelihood of recommending a simulation tool.
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW21of33
Figure18.Time-savingfeaturesofthesimulationtool.
4.3.3.WhatFeaturesoftheSimulationToolShouldBeDiscontinued?
Figure19revealsthat56%oftherespondentsthinkthatnoneofthefeaturesofthe
simulationtoolmustbediscontinued,while19%thinkthatthelogonscreenshouldbe
discontinued,13%thinkolddevicesmustberemoved,and13%thinkthatanewuser
interfaceshouldbeimplemented.Theuserrequirementsshoulddrivethechoiceofsim-
ulationtool.Developersshouldconsidertheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofeachsim-
ulationtool,thelevelofcomplexityofthesimulationtool,featurestoincludeornotin-
clude,andotherdesignchoices[43].
Figure19.Showsfeaturesofthesimulationtoolneedtobediscontinued.
4.3.4.WhatIstheLikelihoodofYouRecommendingtheSimulationTooltoOthers?
ThegraphinFigure20illustratestherespondentresponsestothelikelihoodthatthey
recommendthesimulationtooltoothers:30%ratedeight,20%ratednine,10%rated
seven,10%ratedsix,and,lastly,10%ratedfive.Thisfindingagreeswith[40],showing
thelikelihoodofrecommendingasimulationtool.
Figure20.Recommendationofthesimulationtoolbytherespondents.
Figure 20. Recommendation of the simulation tool by the respondents.
4.3.5. How Confident Are You with the Skills You Learned Using the Simulation Tool?
Figure 21 shows that 56.7% of the respondents were confident and 23.3% very confident
about the skills learned using the simulation tool, while 10% were completely confident,
and 10% were a little confident too. Janitor et al. (2010) [
68
] reported that students showed
self-confidence after the simulation experience. The simulation tools allow students to
repeatedly practice technical skills until they develop a sense of confidence and they are
freely allowed to make mistakes [63].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 21 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW22of33
4.3.5.HowConfidentAreYouwiththeSkillsYouLearnedUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure21showsthat56.7%oftherespondentswereconfidentand23.3%veryconfi-
dentabouttheskillslearnedusingthesimulationtool,while10%werecompletelyconfi-
dent,and10%werealileconfidenttoo.Janitoretal.(2010)[68]reportedthatstudents
showedself-confidenceafterthesimulationexperience.Thesimulationtoolsallowstu-
dentstorepeatedlypracticetechnicalskillsuntiltheydevelopasenseofconfidenceand
theyarefreelyallowedtomakemistakes[63].
Figure21.Confidenceandskillslearnedusingthesimulationtool.
4.3.6.PleaseRateYou rConfidenceinYourAbilitytoDotheFollowing:[UsetheInterface
MenustoCreateMyNetwork]
Figure22showsthat40%oftherespondentswereconfidentand30%werealile
confidentaboutusingtheinterfacemenustocreatetheirnetwork.Incomparison,13.3%
wereveryconfident,13.3%werecompletelyconfident,and3.3%werenotconfident,con-
sistentwithobservationsof[68].
Figure22.Confidenceratingonusingmenustocreateanetwork.
4.3.7.PleaseRateHowConfidentYouFeelinYou rAbilitytoDoEachoftheFollowing:
[AddDevicesandConnectThemviaCablesorWireless]
10.0%
10.0%
56.7%
23.3%
0 2 4 6 8 1012141618
Alittleconfident
Completely
Confident
Veryconfident
30.0%
13.3%
40.0%
3.3%
13.3%
02468101214
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
Figure 21. Confidence and skills learned using the simulation tool.
4.3.6. Please Rate Your Confidence in Your Ability to Do the Following: [Use the Interface
Menus to Create My Network]
Figure 22 shows that 40% of the respondents were confident and 30% were a little
confident about using the interface menus to create their network. In comparison, 13.3%
were very confident, 13.3% were completely confident, and 3.3% were not confident,
consistent with observations of [68].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW22of33
4.3.5.HowConfidentAreYouwiththeSkillsYouLearnedUsingtheSimulationTool?
Figure21showsthat56.7%oftherespondentswereconfidentand23.3%veryconfi-
dentabouttheskillslearnedusingthesimulationtool,while10%werecompletelyconfi-
dent,and10%werealileconfidenttoo.Janitoretal.(2010)[68]reportedthatstudents
showedself-confidenceafterthesimulationexperience.Thesimulationtoolsallowstu-
dentstorepeatedlypracticetechnicalskillsuntiltheydevelopasenseofconfidenceand
theyarefreelyallowedtomakemistakes[63].
Figure21.Confidenceandskillslearnedusingthesimulationtool.
4.3.6.PleaseRateYou rConfidenceinYourAbilitytoDotheFollowing:[UsetheInterface
MenustoCreateMyNetwork]
Figure22showsthat40%oftherespondentswereconfidentand30%werealile
confidentaboutusingtheinterfacemenustocreatetheirnetwork.Incomparison,13.3%
wereveryconfident,13.3%werecompletelyconfident,and3.3%werenotconfident,con-
sistentwithobservationsof[68].
Figure22.Confidenceratingonusingmenustocreateanetwork.
4.3.7.PleaseRateHowConfidentYouFeelinYou rAbilitytoDoEachoftheFollowing:
[AddDevicesandConnectThemviaCablesorWireless]
10.0%
10.0%
56.7%
23.3%
0 2 4 6 8 1012141618
Alittleconfident
Completely
Confident
Veryconfident
30.0%
13.3%
40.0%
3.3%
13.3%
02468101214
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
Figure 22. Confidence rating on using menus to create a network.
4.3.7. Please Rate How Confident You Feel in Your Ability to Do Each of the Following:
[Add Devices and Connect Them via Cables or Wireless]
Figure 23 shows that 40% of the respondents were confident and 26.6% were very
confident about adding devices and connecting them via cable or wireless, whereas 16.7%
were completely confident, 13.3% were a little confident, and 3.3% were not confident at all.
The findings agree with the observations of [63].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 22 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW23of33
Figure23showsthat40%oftherespondentswereconfidentand26.6%werevery
confidentaboutaddingdevicesandconnectingthemviacableorwireless,whereas16.7%
werecompletelyconfident,13.3%werealileconfident,and3.3%werenotconfidentat
all.Thefindingsagreewiththeobservationsof[63].
Figure23.Confidenceratingonaddingdevicesandconnectingthemviacableorwireless.
4.3.8.PleaseRateHowConfidentYouFeelinYou rAbilitytoDoEachoftheFollowing:
[Select,Delete,Inspect,Label,andGroupComponentsinMyNetwork]
Figure24showsthat43.3%oftherespondentswereconfidentand23.3%werevery
confidentaboutselecting,deleting,inspecting,labelingandgroupingcomponentsonthe
network.Incomparison,20%werealileconfident,theother10%werecompletelycon-
fident,and3.3%werenotconfident.Thisagreeswiththeobservationsof[62].
Figure24.Confidenceratingonselecting,deleting,inspecting,labeling,andgroupingcomponents
onthenetwork.
4.3.9.PleaseRateYou rConfidenceinYourAbilitytoDotheFollowing:[Configurethe
DifferentDevicesinMyNetwork]
13.3%
16.7%
40.0%
3.3%
26.6%
02468101214
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
20.0%
10.0%
43.3
3.3%
23.3%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Alittleconfident
Completely
confident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
Figure 23. Confidence rating on adding devices and connecting them via cable or wireless.
4.3.8. Please Rate How Confident You Feel in Your Ability to Do Each of the Following:
[Select, Delete, Inspect, Label, and Group Components in My Network]
Figure 24 shows that 43.3% of the respondents were confident and 23.3% were very
confident about selecting, deleting, inspecting, labeling and grouping components on
the network. In comparison, 20% were a little confident, the other 10% were completely
confident, and 3.3% were not confident. This agrees with the observations of [62].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW23of33
Figure23showsthat40%oftherespondentswereconfidentand26.6%werevery
confidentaboutaddingdevicesandconnectingthemviacableorwireless,whereas16.7%
werecompletelyconfident,13.3%werealileconfident,and3.3%werenotconfidentat
all.Thefindingsagreewiththeobservationsof[63].
Figure23.Confidenceratingonaddingdevicesandconnectingthemviacableorwireless.
4.3.8.PleaseRateHowConfidentYouFeelinYou rAbilitytoDoEachoftheFollowing:
[Select,Delete,Inspect,Label,andGroupComponentsinMyNetwork]
Figure24showsthat43.3%oftherespondentswereconfidentand23.3%werevery
confidentaboutselecting,deleting,inspecting,labelingandgroupingcomponentsonthe
network.Incomparison,20%werealileconfident,theother10%werecompletelycon-
fident,and3.3%werenotconfident.Thisagreeswiththeobservationsof[62].
Figure24.Confidenceratingonselecting,deleting,inspecting,labeling,andgroupingcomponents
onthenetwork.
4.3.9.PleaseRateYou rConfidenceinYourAbilitytoDotheFollowing:[Configurethe
DifferentDevicesinMyNetwork]
13.3%
16.7%
40.0%
3.3%
26.6%
02468101214
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
20.0%
10.0%
43.3
3.3%
23.3%
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Alittleconfident
Completely
confident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
Figure 24. Confidence rating on selecting, deleting, inspecting, labeling, and grouping components
on the network.
4.3.9. Please Rate Your Confidence in Your Ability to Do the Following: [Configure the
Different Devices in My Network]
Figure 25 shows that 56.7% of the respondents were confident and 20% were very
confident about configuring the different devices on the network. In comparison, 10% were
completely confident, 6.7% were somewhat confident, and 6.7% were not confident. This
confirms the observation made by [38].
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 23 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW24of33
Figure25showsthat56.7%oftherespondentswereconfidentand20%werevery
confidentaboutconfiguringthedifferentdevicesonthenetwork.Incomparison,10%
werecompletelyconfident,6.7%weresomewhatconfident,and6.7%werenotconfident.
Thisconfirmstheobservationmadeby[38].
Figure25.Confidenceratingonconfiguringthedifferentdevicesonthenetwork.
4.3.10.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[LearningSkillsThatCanBe
UsedinYou r FutureJob]
Figure26showstherespondent’sratingsonlearnedskillsthatcanbeusedintheir
futurejobs:44.8%veryuseful,24.1%useful,20.7%quiteabituseful,6.9%alileuseful,
and3.4%notuseful.Thisratingisconsistentwith[36].
Figure26.Theextentofhowhelpfulthesimulationisinregardtolearnedskillstobeusedinfu-
ture.
4.3.11.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[IncreaseYourVa l ueinthe
JobMarket]
6.7%
10.0%
56.7%
6.7%
20.0%
024681012141618
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
6.9%
3.4%
20.7%
24.1%
44.8%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
Figure 25. Confidence rating on configuring the different devices on the network.
4.3.10. To What Extent Did This Simulation Tool Help You? [Learning Skills That Can Be
Used in Your Future Job]
Figure 26 shows the respondent’s ratings on learned skills that can be used in their
future jobs: 44.8% very useful, 24.1% useful, 20.7% quite a bit useful, 6.9% a little useful,
and 3.4% not useful. This rating is consistent with [36].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW24of33
Figure25showsthat56.7%oftherespondentswereconfidentand20%werevery
confidentaboutconfiguringthedifferentdevicesonthenetwork.Incomparison,10%
werecompletelyconfident,6.7%weresomewhatconfident,and6.7%werenotconfident.
Thisconfirmstheobservationmadeby[38].
Figure25.Confidenceratingonconfiguringthedifferentdevicesonthenetwork.
4.3.10.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[LearningSkillsThatCanBe
UsedinYou r FutureJob]
Figure26showstherespondent’sratingsonlearnedskillsthatcanbeusedintheir
futurejobs:44.8%veryuseful,24.1%useful,20.7%quiteabituseful,6.9%alileuseful,
and3.4%notuseful.Thisratingisconsistentwith[36].
Figure26.Theextentofhowhelpfulthesimulationisinregardtolearnedskillstobeusedinfu-
ture.
4.3.11.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[IncreaseYourVa l ueinthe
JobMarket]
6.7%
10.0%
56.7%
6.7%
20.0%
024681012141618
Alittleconfident
Completelyconfident
Confident
Notatallconfident
Veryconfident
6.9%
3.4%
20.7%
24.1%
44.8%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
Figure 26. The extent of how helpful the simulation is in regard to learned skills to be used in future.
4.3.11. To What Extent Did This Simulation Tool Help You? [Increase Your Value in the
Job Market]
Figure 27 shows the respondents’ ratings on how helpful the simulation tool is in the
job market: 35.7% very helpful, 32.1% quite a bit helpful, 17.9% helpful, 7.1% a little helpful,
and 7.1% not helpful at all. A study conducted by [
69
] reported that the simulation tool
helps enhance students with skills that they are likely to encounter on the job and better
prepares them for the transition to the world of work.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 24 of 32
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW25of33
Figure27showstherespondents’ratingsonhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisinthe
jobmarket:35.7%veryhelpful,32.1%quiteabithelpful,17.9%helpful,7.1%alilehelp-
ful,and7.1%nothelpfulatall.Astudyconductedby[69]reportedthatthesimulation
toolhelpsenhancestudentswithskillsthattheyarelikelytoencounteronthejoband
beerpreparesthemforthetransitiontotheworldofwork.
Figure27.Theextenttowhichthesimulationtoolishelpfulinthejobmarket.
4.3.12.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[FurtherYourEducation]
Figure28showstherespondent’sratingsonhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisin
furtheringtheirstudies:51.7%veryhelpful,20.7%helpful,17.2%quiteabithelpful,6.9%
alilehelpful,and3.4%nothelpful.Thisisconsistentwiththeobservationmadein[45].
Figure28.Theextentofhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisinfurtheringthestudents’studies.
5.Discussion
5.1.ContextEvaluation
Thecontextevaluationhighlightedstudents’significantchallengesatahistorically
disadvantagedinstitution.Thelackofphysicalinfrastructure,suchasadequatecomputer
labsandnetworkingequipment,necessitatesinnovativesolutionstoprovidepractical
learningexperiences.Theintroductionofnetworkingsimulationtoolsaddressestheneed
foraccessible,practicaltrainingincomputernetworking.Thisisparticularlycrucialina
7.1% 7.1%
32.1%
17.9%
35.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
6.9%
3.4%
17.2%
20.7%
51.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
Figure 27. The extent to which the simulation tool is helpful in the job market.
4.3.12. To What Extent Did This Simulation Tool Help You? [Further Your Education]
Figure 28 shows the respondent’s ratings on how helpful the simulation tool is in
furthering their studies: 51.7% very helpful, 20.7% helpful, 17.2% quite a bit helpful, 6.9% a
little helpful, and 3.4% not helpful. This is consistent with the observation made in [45].
Educ.Sci.2024,14,xFORPEERREVIEW25of33
Figure27showstherespondents’ratingsonhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisinthe
jobmarket:35.7%veryhelpful,32.1%quiteabithelpful,17.9%helpful,7.1%alilehelp-
ful,and7.1%nothelpfulatall.Astudyconductedby[69]reportedthatthesimulation
toolhelpsenhancestudentswithskillsthattheyarelikelytoencounteronthejoband
beerpreparesthemforthetransitiontotheworldofwork.
Figure27.Theextenttowhichthesimulationtoolishelpfulinthejobmarket.
4.3.12.ToWhatExtentDidThisSimulationToolHelpYou ?[FurtherYourEducation]
Figure28showstherespondent’sratingsonhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisin
furtheringtheirstudies:51.7%veryhelpful,20.7%helpful,17.2%quiteabithelpful,6.9%
alilehelpful,and3.4%nothelpful.Thisisconsistentwiththeobservationmadein[45].
Figure28.Theextentofhowhelpfulthesimulationtoolisinfurtheringthestudents’studies.
5.Discussion
5.1.ContextEvaluation
Thecontextevaluationhighlightedstudents’significantchallengesatahistorically
disadvantagedinstitution.Thelackofphysicalinfrastructure,suchasadequatecomputer
labsandnetworkingequipment,necessitatesinnovativesolutionstoprovidepractical
learningexperiences.Theintroductionofnetworkingsimulationtoolsaddressestheneed
foraccessible,practicaltrainingincomputernetworking.Thisisparticularlycrucialina
7.1% 7.1%
32.1%
17.9%
35.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
6.9%
3.4%
17.2%
20.7%
51.7%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Alittle Notatall Quiteabit Somewhat Verymuch (blank)
Figure 28. The extent of how helpful the simulation tool is in furthering the students’ studies.
5. Discussion
5.1. Context Evaluation
The context evaluation highlighted students’ significant challenges at a historically
disadvantaged institution. The lack of physical infrastructure, such as adequate computer
labs and networking equipment, necessitates innovative solutions to provide practical
learning experiences. The introduction of networking simulation tools addresses the need
for accessible, practical training in computer networking. This is particularly crucial in a
rural-based higher education context with limited resources. The students’ demographic
data indicate a predominantly male African cohort with proficiency in English and comfort
with using laptops, underscoring the importance of accessible and user-friendly simulation
tools [40].
5.2. Input Evaluation
The input evaluation focused on the resources available to achieve the program’s goals.
The primary tool assessed was Cisco Packet Tracer, chosen for its extensive capabilities
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 25 of 32
in simulating real-world networking environments. The tool’s features, such as multi-
user real-time laboratory training and the ability to practice critical networking skills,
align with the educational objectives [
47
,
48
,
55
]. However, limitations such as software
crashes, compatibility issues, and restricted functionalities were noted. These drawbacks
highlight the need for continuous improvement and support for the simulation tool to meet
educational demands fully.
5.3. Process Evaluation
The process evaluation examined the implementation of the simulation tools in the
curriculum. The study revealed that most students found the simulation tool to be ben-
eficial in learning practical skills for configuring and troubleshooting network devices.
The tool’s ability to provide a realistic, interactive learning environment was positively
received. However, challenges, such as following step-by-step instructions without fully
understanding the underlying concepts, were identified. This indicates a need for more
integrated instructional approaches that effectively combine theoretical and practical learn-
ing. The process evaluation assessed how effectively Cisco Packet Tracer was integrated
into the curriculum and used by students. The results indicated that most students found
the tool to be user-friendly and beneficial in regard to understanding complex networking
concepts [48].
5.4. Product Evaluation
The product evaluation assessed the outcomes of using the simulation tool. The
findings indicated that most students agreed that the tool enhanced their practical skills,
improved their understanding of theoretical concepts, and prepared them for professional
work in computer networking. The tool’s effectiveness in providing a cost-effective and
accessible alternative to physical lab equipment was also noted. Despite some negative
feedback regarding its efficiency and occasional confusion, the overall impact on students’
learning outcomes was positive [
48
]. The product evaluation focused on the outcomes of
using the simulation tool. The data showed that students’ understanding of computer net-
working concepts significantly improved and that they felt more prepared for professional
work [70].
5.5. Impact Evaluation
Impact evaluation assesses and judges to what extent the individuals and groups
served are compatible with the intended beneficiaries of the program [
47
,
71
]. In this
study, the impact evaluation is used to obtain students’ perspectives on how the network
simulation tool impacts learning and the degree to which the tool affects students’ ability
to learn the principles of computer networking and configuration commands. The results
indicate that most respondents agree that the simulation tool helps them learn practical
skills required to configure network devices, and they also acknowledge that they can
apply the concepts discussed in class using the simulation tool. Furthermore, most learners
understand the importance of simulation tools in learning practical skills. Still, some of
them cannot perform their configurations without the assistance of a lecturer or peers. As a
result, they cannot resolve issues when they become stuck.
5.6. Effectiveness Evaluation
According to [
46
], effectiveness evaluation tracks and measures the consistency and
relevance of the results [
48
]. It also engages in goal-free evaluation to determine what the
program was doing and define the full range of positive and negative effects, intended
and unintended. In line with the study’s intent, this portion is used from the student’s
perspective to assess the positive and negative impact of the network simulation tool.
Based on the findings, the students responded to questions on effectiveness. Generally,
students found Cisco Packet Tracer to be a useful tool in regard to enhancing their learning
of computer networking skills [
63
,
72
]. In addition, most students felt that they would
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 26 of 32
be more professionally prepared to work with computer network devices after using the
simulation tools [
61
,
63
]. However, some students thought the simulation tool could be
more effective if the user interface could be changed to align with what the students would
experience with physical equipment. This suggests that simulation tools should not be used
as a replacement for physical equipment; instead, they should be used as a supplementary
mechanism. The findings in this section indicate that the simulation tool does improve
learning in the computer network course.
5.7. Sustainability Evaluation
Sustainability is another aspect that needs to be measured, accounting for how
long/durable the benefits have been [
55
]. This study evaluates whether the students
support the continuation of the simulation tool, as well as whether there is a need for conti-
nuity or demand and a compelling case for the sustainability of the network simulation
tool services. Most students agree that the experiences they gained using the simulation
tool will be useful in the future [
36
]. The study also found that students easily use and
navigate simulation tools. Forty percent (40.0%) think the quick launch is a time-saving
feature of the simulation tool. Fifty-six percent (56.0%) think none of the features of the
simulation tool must be discontinued. Ninety percent (90.0%) are confident about the
skills learned using the simulation tool [
14
]. Sixty-seven percent (66.6%) are confident
about using the interface menus to create their network. Eighty-three percent (83.3%) are
confident about adding devices and connecting them via cable or wireless. Seventy-seven
percent (76.6%) are confident about selecting, deleting, inspecting, labeling, and grouping
components on the network. Eighty-seven percent (86.7%) are confident about configuring
the different devices on the network. Ninety-six (96.5%) of respondents believe that the
learned skills they have obtained could be used in their future jobs. Ninety-three (92.8%) of
respondents rated the simulation tool as being helpful in increasing their value in the job
market. Additionally, 96.5% of the respondents rated how helpful the simulation tool is in
furthering their studies [
12
]. The findings in this section indicate that the simulation tool
will be useful in future.
5.8. Wider Implications of the Use of ICT and Simulations in Higher Education
The findings of this study, which highlight the effectiveness of Cisco Packet Tracer in
enhancing practical skills and understanding of computer networking concepts, contribute
to a wider discussion about the role of information and communication technology (ICT)
and simulations in higher education. The use of ICT, particularly in resource-constrained
settings such as rural or historically disadvantaged institutions, is critical to bridging the
gap between theory and practice. This study shows that simulation tools can mitigate some
of the challenges faced by these institutions, such as limited access to physical network
equipment, by providing an accessible and scalable solution for hands-on learning.
In the context of higher education transformation, the use of ICT has been recognized
as a key driver for improving learning outcomes and promoting inclusivity. The use of
simulations such as Cisco Packet Tracer enables students to access learning resources
outside of traditional laboratory settings and provides them with the opportunity for in-
dependent, self-directed learning. This is particularly beneficial in environments where
physical infrastructure is inadequate, as it allows students to acquire the necessary skills
without having to rely on expensive equipment. The literature suggests that ICT in edu-
cation also plays a role in developing 21st century skills such as problem solving, critical
thinking and adaptability—skills that are essential for learners to succeed in an increasingly
digital economy.
However, this study also highlights the limitations of using ICT in resource-constrained
environments, such as issues with software compatibility, the limited features of simulation
tools compared to real-world devices, and challenges related to infrastructure, such as
access to reliable devices and internet connectivity. These findings are consistent with the
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 27 of 32
problems described in the literature and suggest that the effective use of ICT in education
requires continuous support, adequate infrastructure and training for learners and teachers.
5.9. Comparison and Contrast with Previous Studies
5.9.1. Effects
The results of the study indicate that Cisco Packet Tracer has a positive impact on
students’ practical skills and their understanding of theoretical concepts in computer
networking. These results are consistent with previous studies that have shown that
simulations can significantly improve students’ ability to apply theoretical knowledge
in practice. Previous research, such as the studies conducted by [
10
], have shown that
simulation tools such as Cisco Packet Tracer are effective in helping students to understand
complex networking protocols and processes, which is consistent with the findings of this
study. However, the lack of qualitative data in this study limits a deeper investigation into
how students conceptualize and apply these skills in different contexts.
5.9.2. Effectiveness
In terms of effectiveness, the study found that the use of Cisco Packet Tracer is a viable
alternative to physical lab equipment that allows students to practice networking skills in
a virtual environment. This finding is consistent with the literature discussing the role of
virtual labs in solving infrastructure problems, particularly in resource-constrained settings.
Studies, such as those by [
14
,
33
], have highlighted how simulations provide cost-effective,
flexible learning opportunities that can enhance practical skills when physical resources
are unavailable. However, the current study also identified issues such as limited software
capacity and occasional technical challenges, which contrasts with some previous studies
that only emphasized the benefits without acknowledging the limitations of these tools.
These findings suggest that, while simulations are effective, they are not yet a complete
substitute for physical lab experiences, especially when it comes to acquiring practical skills
such as connecting hardware.
5.9.3. Sustainability
The results regarding the sustainability of the use of simulation tools show that most
students believe that the skills acquired through the use of Cisco Packet Tracer will be
useful in their future careers. This supports previous research findings that suggest that
simulation tools not only facilitate immediate learning but also help build skills that are
transferable to real work settings. Studies by [
12
,
63
] emphasize that simulations help to
bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application and improve the
employability of learners. However, this study also points to the challenges associated with
maintaining learner engagement with the tool over time, as some learners find it difficult
to fully grasp complex network tasks using a simulation. This is in contrast to some
previous findings which suggest that simulations are inherently engaging and sufficient for
skill development.
To summarize, while the findings of this study are consistent with much of the lit-
erature in terms of the positive impact and effectiveness of simulation tools, they also
highlight some limitations and challenges that have not always been considered in previ-
ous studies. This emphasizes the need for a balanced approach that recognizes both the
benefits and limitations of using ICT and simulations in higher education, particularly in
resource-constrained environments. Future research should explore these aspects further
and include more qualitative data to gain a deeper understanding of how simulation tools
can be optimized for different learning contexts.
6. Conclusions
The study’s objective was to assess the efficacy of network simulation tools in teaching
computer networks so that students could improve their understanding of the simulation
with the unavailability of the actual equipment. This study can conclude that using a
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 28 of 32
simulation method to learn basic and essential computer network principles, which can be
complicated to understand technically, has numerous advantages and benefits. However,
the simulation tools effectively enhanced the learning of computer networking skills and
concepts. Furthermore, the study revealed that simulation tools are useful in learning
computer networks courses for several reasons, including the low cost of the software and
convenience to students, as simulation tools can be setup at suitable times and locations.
In addition, most students think that the knowledge and experience gained from the
simulation tool will help improve future employment prospects.
However, despite the benefits that come with the use of simulation tools in teaching,
some challenges were identified by this study, such as computers frequently crashing,
files not being compatible with the version of a simulation tool, IOSs only supporting a
small subset of features from Cisco devices, the limited number of saves when using a
guest account, and screens being cluttered with too many windows. This calls for constant
software version updates and considering the use of alternative tools rather than depending
on one.
This study has certain methodological limitations that should be considered when
interpreting the results. Although the sample size of 30 learners is appropriate for an
exploratory study, it limits the generalizability of the results. A larger sample size across
multiple institutions would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the impact
of simulation tools in different educational settings. In addition, the use of a single data
collection tool, a questionnaire, limits the depth of analysis and the possibility of triangula-
tion. The inclusion of qualitative data through interviews or focus groups would allow for
a deeper insight into learners’ experiences and improve the validity of the results. Future
research should consider a mixed methods approach to address these limitations and gain
a more nuanced understanding of the effectiveness of simulation tools.
To overcome some of the limitations identified in this study, several practical recom-
mendations can be made regarding the use of Cisco Packet Tracer:
•
Improve access to physical devices: While Cisco Packet Tracer is an effective tool
for simulating network scenarios, it should be supplemented with access to physical
network devices where possible. This can help learners bridge the gap between virtual
simulations and real-world applications, particularly when developing practical skills
such as cabling and configuring physical devices.
•
Ongoing training for instructors: To maximize the benefits of Cisco Packet Tracer,
ongoing instructor training is essential. Instructors should be equipped with both
technical knowledge and pedagogical skills to effectively integrate the simulation
tools into their classes. This would help to design engaging lab activities that balance
theoretical knowledge with practical applications.
•
Incorporate blended learning approaches: Cisco Packet Tracer could be better utilized
in a blended learning model where theoretical lessons are immediately followed by
practical activities using the simulation tool. This sequential approach can help to
reinforce learning and provide context for practical exercises, improving overall skill
acquisition.
Future research could explore different ways to address the gaps identified in this
study and further contribute to the literature on the use of simulation tools in education:
•
Longitudinal studies: Conducting longitudinal studies would be valuable to assess the
long-term impact of Cisco Packet Tracer on learners’ skills and their ability to apply
these skills in real-world scenarios. This would provide insight into the sustainability
of learning gains over time and help determine whether simulation-based training can
be effectively transferred to the professional world.
•
Mixed methods: Future studies should consider a mixed methods approach that
combines both quantitative and qualitative data.
•
Comparative studies: Comparative studies with different simulation tools or a com-
parison of simulation-based learning with traditional laboratory-based learning would
provide deeper insights into the relative effectiveness of the different teaching methods.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 29 of 32
This could help to identify the specific strengths and weaknesses of each approach
and provide recommendations for integrating these methods to optimize learning
outcomes.
It is hoped that the pedagogical potential of simulation tools such as Cisco Packet
Tracer can be further optimized to improve computer networking learning outcomes,
particularly in resource-limited environments. If these limitations are addressed, the
practical recommendations can be implemented and future research opportunities can
be explored.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, G.M., M.R.N. and Z.S.D.; formal analysis, Z.S.D.; investi-
gation, M.R.N.; methodology, G.M.; project administration, G.M.; validation, G.M.; writing—original
draft, G.M. and Z.S.D.; writing—review and editing, M.R.N. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Ethical review and approval were waived for this study
due to the initial understanding being that the research study was not intended for publication in
a peer-reviewed journal, to be presented at a conference, or to be made publicly available in an
institutional repository; therefore, the supervisor informed the position of ethical review. However,
as the study has now been significantly refined for public peer review and publication, we affirm
that the research adhered to ethical standards. Precautions were taken throughout the study to
ensure that participants were not exposed to any risk of harm, discomfort, or inconvenience. This is
intended to contribute to the scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education, supporting
pedagogical practices.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.
Data Availability Statement: The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made
available by the authors on request.
Acknowledgments: The authors are thankful to colleagues and students who participated in this
research study until its completion.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1. Makhoba, B.P. Teaching Large Classes In Historically Disadvantaged Universities. Empir. Rev. Multicult. Educ. 2024,10, 31–35.
2.
Herbaut, E.; Geven, K. What works to reduce inequalities in higher education? A systematic review of the (quasi-)experimental
literature on outreach and financial aid. Res. Soc. Stratif. Mobil. 2020,65, 100442. [CrossRef]
3.
Council on Higher Education. Access and Throughput in South African Higher Education: Three Case Studies; CHE: Pretoria, South
Africa, 2010.
4.
Council on Higher Education. Dimensions of Transformation of Higher Education in South Africa; CHE: Pretoria, South Africa, 2022.
5.
Dlamini, M.P. Experiences of Pedagogical and Institutional Support of Students with Disabilities in Laboratory Related Courses
at Walter Sisulu University: A Case of Butterworth Campus. Ph.D. Thesis, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Glenwood, Durban,
South Africa, 2018.
6.
Peña-Ayala, A. A learning design cooperative framework to instill 21st century education. Telemat. Inform. 2021,62, 101632.
[CrossRef]
7.
Odina, I. MAX for Enhancing Students’ Analytical Skills. In Edureform Handbook for Innovative Pedagogy; Stampato per conto della
Casa Editrice La Scuola S.p.A; CHITKARA: Chandigarh, India, 2020; p. 145.
8. Akour, M.; Alenezi, M. Higher Education Future in the Era of Digital Transformation. Educ. Sci. 2022,12, 784. [CrossRef]
9.
Oladejo, A.I.; Akinola, V.O.; Nwaboku, N.C. Teaching chemistry with computer simulation: Would senior school students
perform better? Crawford J. Multidiscip. Res. 2021,2, 16–32.
10.
Almnfe, A.; Lamien, A. Cisco Packet Tracer Simulation as an Effective Teaching Tool in Computer Networking Classes for
Undergraduate Students at Tobruk University. Int. Sci. Technol. J. 2023,33, 1–14. [CrossRef]
11.
Lu, H.-K.; Lin, P.-C. A Study of the Impact of Collaborative Problem-Solving Strategies on Students’ Performance of Simulation-
Based Learning—A Case of Network Basic Concepts Course. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2017,7, 361–366. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 30 of 32
12.
Demeter, R.; Kovari, A.; Katona, J.; Heldal, I.; Costescu, C.; Rosan, A.; Hathazi, A.; Thill, S. A quantitative study of using Cisco
Packet Tracer simulation software to improve IT students’ creativity and outcomes. In Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International
Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications, Naples, Italy, 23–25 October 2019; pp. 23–25.
13.
Fallon, G. Using Simulations to Teach Young Students Science Concepts: An Experiential Learning Theoretical Analysis; Computers &
Education: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2019.
14.
Wu, B.; Xu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, B.; Gong, Y.; Huang, J. Integration of Computer Networks and Artificial Neural Networks for an
AI-based Network Operator. Appl. Comput. Eng. 2024,64, 115–120. [CrossRef]
15.
Doerner, R.; Horst, R. Overcoming challenges when teaching hands-on courses about Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality:
Methods, techniques and best practice. Graph. Vis. Comput. 2022,6, 200037. [CrossRef]
16. Wolf, P.; Hill, A.; Evers, F. Handbook for Curriculum Assessment; University of Guelph: Guelph, ON, Canada, 2006.
17.
Zhao, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, X.; Geng, G.; Zhang, W.; Sun, Y. A Survey of Networking Applications Applying the Software Defined
Networking Concept Based on Machine Learning. IEEE Access 2019,7, 95397–95417. [CrossRef]
18.
Vesi´c, D.; Lakovi´c, D.; Vesi´c, S.L. Use of Information Technologies in Higher Education From The Aspect of Management. Int. J.
Cogn. Res.Sci. Eng. Educ. 2023,11, 143–151. [CrossRef]
19.
Aditya, R.Q.; Suranto, S. The role of educational transformation in the digital era in improving student quality. Al Qalam J. Ilm.
Keagamaan Dan Kemasyarakatan 2024,18, 1756–1772. [CrossRef]
20. Saradha, A. The Effectiveness of ICT Enabled Teaching and Learning in Knowledge Transformation in Higher Education. Int. J.
Commer. Manag. 2023,3, 296–300. [CrossRef]
21.
Zulu, J.; Nachiyunde, K.; Nalube, P.; Mwansa, G. The Effect of GeoGebra Classic 6 Software on First-Year Students’ Graphing
Skills of Hyperbola Functions and Confidence in Lusaka District. Int. J. Curr. Sci. Res. Rev. 2022,5, 406–417. [CrossRef]
22.
Lawrence, J.E.; Tar, U.A. Factors that influence teachers’ adoption and integrationof ICT in teaching/learning process. EMI Educ.
Media Int. 2018,55, 79–105. [CrossRef]
23.
Zahra, G.C.F.; Safa, B. The Future of E-Learning: The Use of Technology in Transforming EFL Students Education in the 21st Century;
Kasdi Merbah Ouargla University: Ouargla, Algeria, 2024.
24.
Kennedy, G.M. Challenges of ICT Integration in Teachers’ Education: A Case Study of the College of Education, University of
Liberia. Int. J. Soc. Sci. Educ. Res. Stud. 2023,3, 860–870. [CrossRef]
25.
Abedi, E.A. Tensions between technology integration practices of teachers and ICT in education policy expectations: Implications
for change in teacher knowledge, beliefs and teaching practices. J. Comput. Educ. 2023, 1–20. [CrossRef]
26. Kaur, K. Teaching and learning with ict tools: Issues and challenges. Int. J. Cybern. Inform. 2023,12, 15–22. [CrossRef]
27.
Silva, R.; Farias, C.; Mesquita, I. Cooperative Learning Contribution to Student Social Learning and Active Role in the Class.
Sustainability 2021,13, 8644. [CrossRef]
28. Schön, D.A. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action; Routledge: London, UK, 2017. [CrossRef]
29. Chang, B. Reflection in Learning. Online Learn. J. 2019,23, 95–110. [CrossRef]
30.
Orakcı, ¸S. Teachers’ Reflection and Level of Reflective Thinking on the Different Dimensions of their teaching practice. Int. J. Mod.
Educ. Stud. 2021,5, 117. [CrossRef]
31.
Akhtar, R.N. Exploring Experiential Learning Models and developing an EL based ERE cycle in teaching at higher education in
Pakistan. Int. J. Exp. Learn. Case Stud. 2020,5, 250–264. [CrossRef]
32.
Ali, A.; Wibowo, K. Using Office Simulation Software in Teaching Computer Literacy Using Three Sets of Teaching/Learning
Activities. Issues Informing Sci. Inf. Technol. 2016,13, 079–088. [CrossRef]
33. Ciuffoletti, A. Teaching Networks to Digital Humanists. IEEE Trans. Educ. 2021,64, 253. [CrossRef]
34. French, S.; Kennedy, G. Reassessing the value of university lectures. Teach. High. Educ. 2017,22, 639–654. [CrossRef]
35.
Kianpour, M. Knowledge and Skills Needed to Craft Successful Cybersecurity Strategies. 2020. Available online:
https://hdl.handle.net/11250/2822952 (accessed on 31 July 2024).
36. Campanile, L. Computer Network Simulation with ns-3: A Systematic Literature Review. Electronics 2020,9, 272. [CrossRef]
37.
Raki´c, K.; Rosi´c, M.; Boljat, I. A survey of agent-based modelling and simulation tools for educational purpose. Teh. Vjesn.-Tech.
Gaz. 2020,27, 1014–1020. [CrossRef]
38.
Nwabude, A.A.R.; Ogwueleka, F.N.; Irhebhude, M. The Use of Virtual Learning Environment and the Development of a
Customised Framework/Model for Teaching and Learning Process in Developing Countries. Education 2020,10, 1–12.
39.
Lefkos, I.; Psillos, D.; Hatzikraniotis, E. Linking Theory to Practice in Inquiry-Based Virtual Laboratory Activities. Part 4/Strand 4
Digital Resources for Science Teaching and Learning. 2022. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Panagiotis-
Lazos/publication/366548947_Physics_experiments_at_home_A_case_study_in_the_era_of_COVID-19_quarantine/links/
63a6436b03aad5368e3712c7/Physics-experiments-at-home-A-case-study-in-the-era-of-COVID-19-quarantine.pdf#page=20
(accessed on 31 July 2024).
40.
Prakash, J. A vehicular network based intelligent transport system for smart cities using machine learning algorithms. Sci. Rep.
2024,14, 468. [CrossRef]
41.
Cevikbas, M.; Greefrath, G.; Siller, H.S. Advantages and challenges of using digital technologies in mathematical modelling
education—A descriptive systematic literature review. Front. Educ. 2023,8, 1142556. [CrossRef]
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 31 of 32
42.
Mohtasin, R.; Prasad, P.W.; Alsadoon, A.; Zajko, G.; Elchouemi, A.; Singh, A.K. Development of a Virtualized Networking Lab Using
GNS3 and VMware Workstation; IEEE: Chennai, India, 2016.
43. Fakhar, F. Comparative study of computer simulation software’s. J. Artif. Intell. Electr. Eng. 2019,7, 1–19.
44. Fomin, M. GNS3 for Network Emulation; South-Eastern Finland University of Applied Sciences: Kouvola, Finland, 2017.
45.
Gomez, J.; Kfoury, E.F.; Crichigno, J.; Srivastava, G. A survey on network simulators, emulators, and testbeds used for research
and education. Comput. Netw. 2023,237, 110054. [CrossRef]
46.
Stufflebeam, D.L. The Cipp Evaluation Model: How to Evaluate for Improvement and Accountability; Guilford Press: New York, NY,
USA, 2015; Volume 5.
47.
Alvianita, C.; Tanti, T.; Hariyadi, B. Construction and Validation of Evaluation Instruments for Science Learning Programs Based
on Context, Input, Process, And Product (CIPP) Models. J. Penelit. Pendidik. IPA 2022,8, 1089–1095. [CrossRef]
48.
Gunung, I.N.; Darma, I.K. Implementing the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) Evaluation Model to Measure the Effective-
ness of the Implementation of Teaching at Politeknik Negeri Bali (PNB). 2019. Available online: http://www.ijese.com (accessed
on 31 July 2024).
49.
Cahapay, M. Kirkpatrick Model: Its Limitations as Used in Higher Education Evaluation. Int. J. Assess. Tools Educ. 2021,8,
135–144. [CrossRef]
50.
Knowlton, L.W.; Phillips, C.C. The Logic Model Guidebook: Better Strategies for Great Results; SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks
CA, USA, 2008.
51.
Stufflebeam, D.L. Cipp Evaluation Model Checklist [Second Edition]. A Tool for Applying the CIPP Model to Assess Long-Term
Enterprises Intended for Use by Evaluators and Evaluation Clients/Stakeholders. 2007. Available online: https://files.wmich.
edu/s3fs-public/attachments/u350/2014/cippchecklist_mar07.pdf (accessed on 31 July 2024).
52.
Kui, H. Education Quality Evaluation Method Based on CIPP Theory; Springer Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1200–1207.
[CrossRef]
53.
Shahzadi, A.; Khan, M.I.; Ijaz, M.M. Curriculum Evaluation of Education Subject Using Cipp Model: Higher Secondary Level in
Pakistan. 2024. Available online: https://ijciss.org/index.php/ijciss/article/view/507 (accessed on 2 August 2024).
54.
Darma, I.K. The effectiveness of teaching program of CIPP evaluation model. Int. Res. J. Eng. IT Sci. Res. 2019,5, 1–13. [CrossRef]
55.
Khaksar, M.; Kiany, G.R.; ShayesteFar, P. Using a CIPP-Based Model for Evaluation of Teacher Training Programs in a Private-
sector EFL Institutes. Lang. Teach. Res. Q. 2023,38, 65–91. [CrossRef]
56.
Taherdoost, H. Designing a Questionnaire for a Research Paper: A Comprehensive Guide to Design and Develop an Effective
Questionnaire. Asian J. Manag. Sci. 2022,11, 8–16. [CrossRef]
57.
Harris, L.R. Mixing interview and questionnaire methods: Practical problems in aligning data. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 2010,15, 1.
58.
Bolarinwa, O. Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of questionnaires used in social and health science
researches. Niger. Postgrad. Med. J. 2015,22, 195–201. [CrossRef]
59.
Artino, A.R.; La Rochelle, J.S.; Dezee, K.J.; Gehlbach, H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE Guide No. 87.
Med. Teach. 2014,36, 463–474. [CrossRef]
60.
Creswell, J.W.; David, C.J. Fifth Edition Research Design Qualitative, Quantitave, and Mixed Methods Approaches; SAGE Publications:
Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2018; Volume 5.
61.
Allison, J. Simulation-Based Learning via Cisco Packet Tracer to Enhance the Teaching of Computer Networks. In Proceedings of
the Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, ITiCSE ‘22, Dublin, Ireland, 8–13 July
2022; Association for Computing Machinery, Taylor and Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2022; pp. 68–74. [CrossRef]
62. Cisco. Cisco Packet Tracer. 2012. Available online: https://www.netacad.com/cisco-packet-tracer (accessed on 31 July 2024).
63.
Rashid, N.A.; bin Othman, Z.; bin Johan, R.; Sidek, S.b.H. Cisco packet tracer simulation as effective pedagogy in Computer
Networking course. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2019,13, 4–18. [CrossRef]
64.
Noor, N.M.M.; Yayao, N.; Sulaiman, S. Effectiveness of Using Cisco Packet Tracer as a Learning Tool: A Case Study of Routing
Protocol. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2018,8, 11–16. [CrossRef]
65.
Dobrilovic, D.; Odadzic, B. Virtualization Technology as a Tool for Teaching Computer Networks. Proceeding of World Academy
of Science. Eng. Technol. 2006,13, 126–130.
66.
Janal, M.A.B.; Jalil, Z.B.A.; Ahmad, Z.B. The effectiveness in using packet tracer simulation software in improving the skills
among computer system and networks programme students. Int. J. Tech. Vocat. Eng. Technol. 2020,2, 38–49.
67.
Elias, M.S.; Ali, A.A. Survey on the challenges faced by the lecturers in using packet tracer simulation in computer networking
course. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013,15, 11–15. [CrossRef]
68.
Janitor, J.; Jakab, F.; Kniewald, K. Virtual learning tools for teaching/learning computer networks. In Cisco Networking Academy
and Packet Tracer; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 351–355.
69.
Moyer, R.; Snodgrass, J.; Klein, S.; Tebben, C. Simulated Work-Based Learning Intructional Approaches and Networking Practices; Office
of Career, Technical, and Adult Education, US Department of Education: Washington, DC, USA, 2017.
70.
Iqbal, M.A.; Hussain, S.; Xing, H.; Imran, M.A. Enabling the Internet of Things: Fundamentals, Design and Applications; Wiley-IEEE
Press: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021.
Educ. Sci. 2024,14, 1099 32 of 32
71.
Manan, A.; Fadhilah, M.A.; Kamarullah; Habiburrahim. Evaluating paper-based toefl preparation program using the context,
input, process, and product (Cipp) model. Stud. Engl. Lang. Educ. Banda Aceh Indones. 2020,7, 457–471. [CrossRef]
72.
Kazbekova, G.N.; Amirtayev, K.B.; Sadybekov, R. Cisco Packet Tracer modeling in the course of computer networks. Q A Iasaýı
Atynda´
gy Halyqaralyq Qazaq-Túrik Ýnıversıtetini´n Habar. (Fızıka Mat. ınformatıka Serııasy) 2023,27, 65–77. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
