Abstract
This article reports on the development of a methodology that integrates virtual and hands-on inquiry in a freshman introductory biology course. Using a two time × two order-condition design, an effective combination (blend) of the two environments was evaluated with 39 freshman biology participants. The quantitative results documented no significant effect of presentation order but demonstrated a significant effect of the combined learning experience. The qualitative results showed a strong preference by students for the virtual work preceding the hands-on laboratory. The study provides practitioners an effective alternative to traditional instructional practices by combining virtual and hands-on inquiry learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bell, R., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Children’s acquisition of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70(5), 1098–1120.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Fay, A. L., & Klahr, D. (1996). Knowing about guessing and guessing about knowing: Preschoolers’ understanding of indeterminacy. Child Development, 67(2), 689–716.
Fortus, D., Hug, B., Krajcik, J., Kuhn, L., McNeill, K. L., Reiser, B., et al. (2006, April). Sequencing and supporting complex scientific inquiry practices in instructional materials for middle school students. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.
Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Sammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in higher education: Reflection and directions on course design and teaching methods. Innovative Higher Education, 31(4), 201–214.
Kerfeld, C. A., Levis, M., & Perry, L. J. (2001). Teaching and exploring the social implications of twenty-first century molecular biology in a laboratory-based general education course. Innovative Higher Education, 26(2), 87–102.
Kozlowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence: The development of scientific reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Monaghan, J. M., & Clement, J. J. (1999). Use of computer simulation to develop mental simulations for learning relative motion concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21(9), 921–944.
Morris, L. (2006). Have the devices changed the learner? Innovative Higher Education, 31(1), 1–3.
MyDNA. (2003). MyDNA discovery module 2: Sorting DNA molecules. Retrieved January 2, 2008, from http://www.biochem.umass.edu/mydna/modules/sort.html
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Retrieved January 1, 2008, from http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9596&page=R1
National Science Foundation, Division of Science Resources Statistics. (2007). Asia’s rising science and technology strength: Comparative indicators for Asia, the European Union, and the United States. (Publication No. NSF 07–319). Retrieved January 19, 2008, from http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf07319/
Olson, J. K., & Clough, M. P. (2001). A cautionary note: Technology’s tendency to undermine serious study and teaching. The Clearinghouse, 75(1), 8–13.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Golan-Duncan, R., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386.
Rezba, R. J., Auldridge, T., & Rhea, L. (1999). Teaching and learning basic science skills. Retrieved January 2, 2008, from www.doe.virginia.gov/VDOE/Instruction/TLBSSGuide.doc
Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry science laboratories. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Toth, E. E. (2009). “Virtual inquiry” in the science classroom: What is the role of technological pedagogical content knowledge? International Journal of Communication Technology in Education, (in press).
Toth, E. E., & Klahr, D. (1999, April). It’s up to the ball: Children’s difficulties in applying valid experimentation strategies in inquiry based science learning environments. Qualitative Research in Science Education. Division-C Roundtable session at the American Education Research Association Annual convention, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Toth, E. E., & Klahr, D. (2000, April). Error errors: Children’s difficulties in applying valid experimentation strategies in inquiry-based science learning environments. Paper presented at the American Educational Association’s annual meeting, New Orleans, LA.
Toth, E. E., Klahr, D., & Chen, Z. (2000). Bridging research and practice: A cognitively-based classroom intervention for teaching experimentation skills to elementary school children. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 423–459.
Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. (2002). Mapping to know: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry skills. Science Education, 86(2), 264–286.
Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2007). The impact of technology on the enactment of “inquiry” in a technology enthusiasts’ sixth grade science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 154–182.
Winn, W. D., Stahr, F., Sarason, C., Fruland, R., Oppenheimer, P., & Lee, Y-L. (2006). Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct experience at sea. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 25–42.
Zaharia, Z., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). The effects of interactive computer-based simulations prior to performing laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students’ conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71(6), 618–629.
Acknowledgements
The research reported in this paper was supported by a faculty development grant to Dr. Toth from Duquesne University—grant number G0700071. Initial funds for a related earlier project were provided by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 0219196. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Special thanks to Duquesne University graduate student Lyndsie Schantz for data coding assistance and to the anonymous reviewers who provided helpful comments on the first version of the paper.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Eva Erdosne Toth
is an Assistant Professor in the School of Education at Duquesne University. Her research interests include teachers’ development of pedagogical content knowledge, the use of inquiry learning, and the application of technology tools for teaching. She received her Ph.D. from the University of Illinois, Urbana–Champaign.
Becky L. Morrow
is an Assistant Professor in the School of Natural and Environmental Sciences at Duquesne University. Her research interests include science learning and teaching, community-based research projects, and service learning research. She received her D.V.M. from The Ohio Sate University.
Lisa R. Ludvico
is an Assistant Professor in the School of Natural and Environmental Sciences at Duquesne University. Her research interests include science learning and teaching, forensic science, and community-based research. She received her Ph.D. from The Pennsylvania State University.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Erdosne Toth, E., Morrow, B.L. & Ludvico, L.R. Designing Blended Inquiry Learning in a Laboratory Context: A Study of Incorporating Hands-On and Virtual Laboratories. Innov High Educ 33, 333–344 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-008-9087-7
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-008-9087-7