## 5 Conclusions  
Our study presents valuable insights into the complex interplay between digital interventions and educational outcomes in science teaching. It emphasizes the need for a nuanced understanding of how different technologies impact different aspects of learning and calls for further research to explore these relationships in various educational contexts. In line with previous research evaluating AR learning environments in terms of knowledge acquisition and self-efficacy in a control group design, our results show no statistical difference between the AR intervention and the control groups. The findings indicate that all intervention groups successfully imparted knowledge and strengthened computer self-efficacy. Our research design differentiates the frequently blended features of AR learning environments: AR technology and game-based approaches. Contrasting them in four intervention groups, we aimed to reveal any effect each feature has/or rather has not. This type of group setting or even just control group setting (AR versus traditional learning material) is pivotable to distinguish the actual benefit integrating AR into teaching may have. The present study affirms suggestions of previous research that exposure to digital media and technologies may strengthen pre-service teachers' CSE. We conclude that combining AR and game-based learning can ease the transition to technology-enhanced education. All intervention setups under investigation led to K and CSE gains, proving that playful technology integration did not hinder the learning process. The lack of research for game-based AR learning environments in science education calls for further research to investigate the complex interactions between additional variables, such as motivational or behavioral aspects associated with learning. Our findings add to the current state of research, yet more research and insight into game-based AR for science is needed. In this context, it is worth noting that future developments combining AR and game-based learning may integrate both features to different extents. While this setup implemented game-based learning with a total of eight game elements and AR technology in three sections, it would be plausible to apply only a selection or single game element or expand the use of AR technology in such learning environments. For instance, given the current development of AI-assisted learning, this feature may support AR learning scenarios in composing AR with high adaptivity and situational feedback mechanisms.  
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: [[https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15052844/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15052844/s1)]([https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15052844/s1](https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/app15052844/s1)), Supplementary Data.  
Conceptualization, V.C. and H.W.; methodology, V.C. and H.W.; software, V.C.; validation, H.W.; formal analysis, V.C.; investigation, V.C.; resources, H.W.; data curation, V.C.; writing--original draft preparation, V.C.; writing--review and editing, H.W.; visualization, V.C.; supervision, H.W.; project administration, H.W.; funding acquisition, H.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was funded by German Ministry of Science, \"ARiste-Augmented Reality Teaching in Science Technology Education\", grant number reference 34-7811.533-4/3/5. The APC was funded by the University of Education Weingarten.  
This study was granted exemption by the Ethics Committee of PH Weingarten. The committee concluded that only anonymized quantitative data were collected. The project team's intended procedure complies with the DFG's principles of good scientific practice. A further statement by the ethics committee is not required.  
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.