ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
Students frequently struggle to understand public finance and the national budgeting process because fiscal policies and institutional procedures are abstract. Traditional lecture-based techniques may reduce students' participation and practical understanding of how budgets are debated and approved in parliamentary systems. This study investigates the efficacy of role-playing parliamentary budget debates as a pedagogy tool for improving students' comprehension of public finance in the Malaysian setting. Using a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology, the study examines scholarly works on experiential learning, role-play simulations, and parliamentary education to determine how interactive pedagogies improve students' conceptual and practical comprehension. The review summarises the findings of peer-reviewed articles, conference papers, and educational research published between 2010 and 2025. The study focuses on three critical elements of experiential learning outcomes, student engagement, and knowledge retention in public finance education. The findings show that role-play simulations, particularly those that replicate parliamentary procedures like budget tabling, discussion, and approval, improve students' understanding of fiscal control, policy negotiation, and democratic accountability. Students that participate in simulated parliamentary debates exhibit increased critical thinking, policy analysis abilities, and a greater understanding of the difficulties involved in national budget planning. Furthermore, the study emphasises how role-playing promotes collaborative learning and bridges the gap between theoretical knowledge and real-world governing practices. The findings imply that introducing parliamentary simulation into public administration and political science curricula can help students improve their analytical skills and civic awareness. This study adds to the expanding body of literature on creative teaching tactics in higher education while also providing a conceptual foundation for incorporating experiential learning tools into Malaysian public finance education.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2020). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597.
Cherif, A. H., Verma, S., & Somervill, C. (2018). From the classroom to the real world: Role-playing as an effective learning tool. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 15(2), 45–52.
Ferrero, G., Bichai, F., & Rusca, M. (2018). Experiential learning through role-playing: Enhancing stakeholder collaboration in governance education. Water, 10(2), 227.
Kitchenham, B., & Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Keele University.
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2018). Experiential learning theory as a guide for experiential educators in higher education. Experiential Learning & Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 7–44.
Lantis, J. S., Kuzma, L. M., & Boehrer, J. (2020). The new international studies classroom: Active teaching, active learning. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
Prince, M. (2021). Active learning and student engagement in higher education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231.
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339.
Zakaria, Z., & Azmi, N. A. (2026). Simulating Parliamentary Budget Debates: Role-Play as a Pedagogical Tool for Enhancing Students’ Understanding of Public Finance in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 15(1), 1696–1709.
Copyright: © 2026 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode