nach oben

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Erschienen in:

01.02.2012

Virtual and Physical Experimentation in Inquiry-Based Science Labs: Attitudes, Performance and Access

verfasst von: Kevin Pyatt, Rod Sims

Erschienen in: Journal of Science Education and Technology | Ausgabe 1/2012

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

This study investigated the learning dimensions that occur in physical and virtual inquiry-based lab investigations, in first-year secondary chemistry classes. This study took place over a 2 year period and utilized an experimental crossover design which consisted of two separate trials of laboratory investigation. Assessment data and attitudinal data were gathered and analyzed to measure the instructional value of physical and virtual lab experiences in terms of student performance and attitudes. Test statistics were conducted for differences of means for assessment data. Student attitudes towards virtual experiences in comparison to physical lab experiences were measured using a newly created Virtual and Physical Experimentation Questionnaire (VPEQ). VPEQ was specifically developed for this study, and included new scales of Usefulness of Lab, and Equipment Usability which measured attitudinal dimensions in virtual and physical lab experiences. A factor analysis was conducted for questionnaire data, and reliability of the scales and internal consistency of items within scales were calculated. The new scales were statistically valid and reliable. The instructional value of physical and virtual lab experiences was comparable in terms of student performance. Students showed preference towards the virtual medium in their lab experiences. Students showed positive attitudes towards physical and virtual experiences, and demonstrated a preference towards inquiry-based experiences, physical or virtual. Students found virtual experiences to have higher equipment usability as well as a higher degree of open-endedness. In regards to student access to inquiry-based lab experiences, virtual and online alternatives were viewed favorably by students.

Vorheriger Artikel Collaborative Action Research on Technology Integration for Science Learning

Nächster Artikel Hierarchical Mentoring: A Transformative Strategy for Improving Diversity and Retention in Undergraduate STEM Disciplines

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Akilli GK (2009) Games and simulations: a new approach in education? In: Ferdig RE (ed) Handbook of research on effective electronic gaming in education (3 volumes), vol 3. Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA, pp 1–1759

Akpan J (2001) Using a computer simulation before dissection to help students’ learn anatomy. In: Price J, Willis DA, Davis N, Willis J (eds) Society for information technology & teacher education international conference 2001. AACE, Norfolk, VA, pp 2467–2472

Akpan J, Strayer J (2010) Which comes first the use of computer simulation of frog dissection or conventional dissection as academic exercise? J Comput Math Sci Teach 29(2):113–138

Aladejana F, Aderibigbe O (2007) Science laboratory environment and academic performance. J Sci Educ Technol 16(6):500–506. doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9072-4 CrossRef

Baltzis K, Koukias K (2009) Using laboratory experiments and circuit simulation it tools in an undergraduate course in analog electronics. J Sci Educ Technol 18(6):546–555. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9169-z CrossRef

Barnea N, Dori YJ (1999) High-school chemistry students’ performance and gender differences in a computerized molecular modeling learning environment. J Sci Educ Technol 8(4):257–271. doi:10.1023/a:1009436509753 CrossRef

Baxter G (1995) Using computer simulations to assesss hands-on science learning. J Sci Educ Technol 4(1):21–27. doi:10.1007/bf02211578 CrossRef

Bayraktar S (2002) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in science education. J Res Technol Educ 34(2):173–188

Bell RL, Trundle KC (2008) The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific conceptions of moon phases. J Res Sci Teach 45(3):346–372. doi:10.1002/tea.20227 CrossRef

Bhargava P, Antonakakis J, Cunningham C, Zehnder AT (2006) Web-based virtual torsion laboratory. Comput Appl Eng Educ 14(1):1–8. doi:10.1002/cae.20061 CrossRef

Bourque DR, Carlson GR (1987) Hands-on versus computer simulation methods in chemistry. J Chem Educ 64(3):232–234CrossRef

Burkholder PR, Purser GH, Cole RS (2008) Using molecular dynamics simulation to reinforce student understanding of intermolecular forces. J Chem Educ 85(8): 1071-null. doi:10.1021/ed085p1071

Clariana RB (1989) Computer simulations of laboratory experiences. J Comput Math Sci Teach 8(2):14–19

Clark R (1994) Media will never influence learning. Educ Technol Res Dev 42(2):21–29. doi:10.1007/bf02299088

College Board (2010). http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap-chemistry-course-description.pdf (volume: May 2009, May 2010)

de Jong T (2006) Computer simulations: technological advances in inquiry learning. Science 312(5773):532–533. doi:10.1126/science.1127750 CrossRef

de Jong T, van Joolingen WR (1998) Scientific discovery learning with a computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev Educ Res 68(2):179–201

Demmin P, Herron P, Miller G, Mullins J, Zipp A (2010) Guide for the recommended laboratory program, pp 29–39

Demonstration of Restructuring in Public Education (2000). California Code—Division 4: Instruction and services [4600.-64100.] (vol. EDC). State of California, USA

Derting TL, Cox JR (2008) Using a tablet PC to enhance student engagement and learning in an introductory organic chemistry course. J Chem Educ 85(12), 1638-null. doi:10.1021/ed085p1638

Dewey J (1938) Logic, the theory of inquiry. H. Holt and Company, New York

Dissection Alternatives Act (2000) 105 ILCS 112 (vol. 105). ILL COMP STAT, Illinois

Donovan W, Nakhleh M (2007) Student use of web-based tutorial materials and understanding of chemistry concepts. J Comput Math Sci Teach 26(4):291–327

Dori YJ, Barak M (2001) Virtual and physical molecular modeling: fostering model perception and spatial understanding. J Educ Technol Soc 4(1):61–74

Dori YJ, Barnea N (1997) In-service chemistry teachersâ€™ training: the impact of introducing computer technology on teachersâ€™ attitudes and classroom implementation. Int J Sci Educ 19(5):577–592CrossRef

Eylon BS, Linn MC (1988) Learning and instruction: an examination of four research perspectives in science education. Rev Educ Res 58:251–301

Finkelstein ND, Adams WK, Keller CJ, Kohl PB, Perkins KK, Podolefsky NS, et al (2005) When learning about the real world is better done virtually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Phy Rev Special Top Phy Educ Res 1(1), 010103-010101–010103-010108

Finkelstein ND, Perkins KK, Adams W, Kohl P, Podolefsky N (2005b) Can computer simulations replace real equipment in undergraduate laboratories? AIP Conf Proc 790(1):101–104CrossRef

Flick L (1993) The meanings of hands-on science. J Sci Teacher Educ 4(1):1–8. doi:10.1007/bf02628851 CrossRef

Foti S, Ring G (2008) Using a simulation-based learning environment to enhance learning and instruction in a middle school science classroom. J Comput Math Sci Teach 27(1):103–120

Fraser BJ, McRobbie CJ, Giddings GJ (1993a) Development and cross-national validation of a laboratory classroom environment instrument for senior high school science. Sci Educ 77(1):1CrossRef

Fraser BJ, McRobbie CJ, Giddings GJ (1993b) Development and cross-national validation of a laboratory classroom environment instrument for senior high school science. Sci Educ 77(1):1–24. doi:10.1002/sce.3730770102 CrossRef

Frederiksen JR, White BY, Gutwill J (1999) Dynamic mental models in learning science: the importance of constructing derivational linkages among models. J Res Sci Teach 36(7):808–836CrossRef

Hsu YS (2008) Learning about seasons in a technologically enhanced environment: the impact of teacher-guided and student-centered instructional approaches on the process of students’ conceptual change. Sci Educ 92(2):320–344. doi:10.1002/sce.20242 CrossRef

Huppert J, Lomask SM, Lazarowitz R (2002) Computer simulations in the high school: students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. Int J Sci Educ 24(8):803–821CrossRef

Jaakkola T, Nurmi S (2008) Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. J Comput Assist Learn 24(4):271–283. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00259.x CrossRef

Jaakkola T, Nurmi S, Veermans K (2010) A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. J Res Sci Teach n/a-n/a. doi:10.1002/tea.20386

Jensen WB (2003) The origin of stoichiometry problems. J Chem Educ 80(11), 1248-null. doi:10.1021/ed080p1248

Kennepohl D (2001) Using computer simulations to supplement teaching laboratories in chemistry for distance delivery. J Distance Educ 16:58–65

Kenward MG (2005) Crossover design (encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science). Wiley, NY

Kinzie M, Jean Foss M, Powers S (1993) Use of dissection-related courseware by low-ability high school students: a qualitative inquiry. Educ Tech Res Dev 41(3):87–101. doi:10.1007/bf02297359 CrossRef

Kirschner P, Huisman W (1998) ‘Dry laboratories’ in science education; computer-based practical work. Int J Sci Educ 20(6):665CrossRef

Klahr D, Nigam M (2004) The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction. Psychol Sci 15(10):661–667CrossRef

Klahr D, Triona LM, Williams C (2007) Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. J Res Sci Teach 44(1):183–203. doi:10.1002/tea.20152 CrossRef

Kumar D, Sherwood R (2007) Effect of a problem based simulation on the conceptual understanding of undergraduate science education students. J Sci Educ Technol 16(3):239–246. doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9049-3 CrossRef

Lagowski JJ (2002) The role of the laboratory in chemical education. Retrieved 9 July 2004 from http://www.utexas.edu/research/chemed/lagowski/jjl_beijing_02.pdf

Late Nite Labs (2008). http://www.latenitelabs.com/. Accessed Aug 2007

Marshall JA, Young ES (2006) Preservice teachers’ theory development in physical and simulated environments. J Res Sci Teach 43(9):907–937. doi:10.1002/tea.20124 CrossRef

Moore JL, Thomas FH (1983) Computer simulation of experiments: a valuable alternative to traditional laboratory work for secondary school science teaching. Sch Sci Rev 64(229):641–655

Nakhleh MB (1994) A review of microcomputer-based labs: how have they affected science learning? J Comput Math Sci Teach 13(4):368–381

Newby M, Fisher D (1997) An instrument for assessing the learning environment of a computer laboratory. J Educ Comput Res 16(2):179CrossRef

NSTA (2007) NSTA position statement: the use of computers in science education

Pyatt KA (2009) Case for simulations. In: I Gibson, R Weber, K McFerrin, R Carlsen, DA Willis (eds) Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference (SITE), Charleston, South Carolina, USA, (pp 1541–1544). AACE, Chesapeake, VA. doi:http://www.editlib.org/p/30832

Pyatt K, Sims R (2007). Learner performance and attitudes in traditional versus simulated laboratory experiences. In: Atkinson RJ, McBeath C, Soong SKA, Cheers C (eds) ICT: providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings of ASCILITE Singapore 2007, Singapore, 2007 (pp 870–879). Nanyang Technological University, Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798: The Center for Educational Development. doi:http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/

RC N (2006) America’s lab report: investigations in high school science. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

Rivers RH, Vockell E (1987) Computer simulations to stimulate scientific problem solving. J Res Sci Teach 24(5):403–415. doi:10.1002/tea.3660240504 CrossRef

Stieff M, Wilensky U (2003) Connected chemistry—incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. J Sci Educ Technol 12(3):285–302. doi:10.1023/a:1025085023936 CrossRef

Stone DC (2007) Teaching chromatography using virtual laboratory exercises. J Chem Educ 84(9), 1488-null. doi:10.1021/ed084p1488

Tao PK, Gunstone RF (1999) The process of conceptual change in force and motion during computer-supported physics instruction. J Res Sci Teach 36(7):859–882. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199909)36:7<859:aid-tea7>3.0.co;2-j CrossRef

Triona LM, Klahr D (2003) Point and click or grab and heft: comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students’ ability to design experiments. Cogn Instr 21(2):149–173CrossRef

Watson JF, Evergreen Consulting Associates (2007) A national primer on K-12 online learning. North American Council for Online Learning. www.inacol.org/docs/national_report.pdf

Wieman CE, Adams WK, Perkins KK (2008) Physics: PhET: simulations that enhance learning. Science 322(5902):682–683. doi:10.1126/science.1161948 CrossRef

Williamson VM, Abraham MR (1995) The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. J Res Sci Teach 32(5):521–534. doi:10.1002/tea.3660320508 CrossRef

Winn W, Stahr F, Sarason C, Fruland R, Oppenheimer P, Lee YL (2006) Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct experience at sea. J Res Sci Teach 43(1):25–42. doi:10.1002/tea.20097 CrossRef

Woodrow JEJ (1994) The development of computer-related attitudes of secondary students. J Educ Comput Res 11(4):307–338CrossRef

Zacharia Z (2003) Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquiry-based experiments in physics. J Res Sci Teach 40(8):792–823. doi:10.1002/tea.10112 CrossRef

Zacharia Z (2005) The impact of interactive computer simulations on the nature and quality of postgraduate science teachers’ explanations in physics. Int J Sci Educ 27(14):1741–1767CrossRef

Zacharia Z (2007) Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: an effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. J Computer Assist Learn 23(2):120–132CrossRef

Zacharia Z, Olympiou G, Papaevripidou M (2008) Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. J Res Sci Teach 45(9):1021–1035. doi:10.1002/tea.20260 CrossRef

Titel: Virtual and Physical Experimentation in Inquiry-Based Science Labs: Attitudes, Performance and Access
verfasst von: Kevin Pyatt
Rod Sims
Publikationsdatum: 01.02.2012
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Journal of Science Education and Technology / Ausgabe 1/2012
Print ISSN: 1059-0145
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1839
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9291-6

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten

Die im Laufe eines Jahres in der „adhäsion“ veröffentlichten Marktübersichten helfen Anwendern verschiedenster Branchen, sich einen gezielten Überblick über Lieferantenangebote zu verschaffen.

Zur Marktübersicht

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2012

Customization of Curriculum Materials in Science: Motives, Challenges, and Opportunities

Making On-line Science Course Materials Easily Translatable and Accessible Worldwide: Challenges and Solutions

Transforming Biology Assessment with Machine Learning: Automated Scoring of Written Evolutionary Explanations

Human vs. Computer Diagnosis of Students’ Natural Selection Knowledge: Testing the Efficacy of Text Analytic Software

The Effects of a Model-Based Physics Curriculum Program with a Physics First Approach: a Causal-Comparative Study

Learning Together While Designing: Does Group Size Make a Difference?

Premium Partner

Marktübersichten