Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Although hands-on laboratory experiments are traditionally used in schools, virtual laboratories have entered today’s classrooms, due to their specific affordances. In this study, we compared the effect of using hands-on and virtual laboratories in isolation to two different combinations on middle school (7th grade) students’ acquisition of conceptual knowledge and inquiry skills. Our findings indicate that using hands-on and virtual laboratories sequentially instead of in isolation gives better results for students’ acquisition of knowledge and inquiry skills. This result, together with similar findings from other studies, suggests that virtual and hands-on laboratories may have complementary affordances. In the current study, no advantage was seen for either of the two different combinations used.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Aydoğdu, B. (2009). Fen ve teknoloji dersinde kullanılan farklı deney tekniklerinin öğrencilerin bilimsel süreç becerilerine, bilimin doğasına yönelik görüşlerine, laboratuvara yönelik tutumlarına ve öğrenme yaklaşımlarına etkileri [The effects of different laboratory techniques used in science courses on students’ science process skills, views toward nature of science, attitudes toward laboratory and learning approaches in science and technology course; unpublished doctoral thesis]. Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey.
Chini, J. J., Madsen, A., Gire, E., Rebello, N. S., & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Exploration of factors that affect the comparative effectiveness of physical and virtual manipulatives in an undergraduate laboratory. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 8, 1–12.
Crawford, B. A., Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., & Friedrichsen, P. (2005). Confronting prospective teachers’ ideas of evaluation and scientific inquiry using technology and inquiry-based tasks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 613–637. CrossRef
de Jong, T. (2006). Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312(5773), 532–533. CrossRef
de Jong, T., & Lazonder, A. W. (2014). The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer, J. J. G. van Merriënboer, W. Schnotz, & J. Elen (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 371–390). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308. CrossRef
de Jong, T., Sotiriou, S., & Gillet, D. (2014). Innovations in STEM education: the Go-Lab federation of online labs. Smart Learning Environments, 1, 1–16. CrossRef
de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179–202. CrossRef
Go-Lab Sharing and Authoring Platform. (2015). https://www.golabz.eu/ Accessed 6 April 2018.
Gunstone, R. F. (1991). Reconstructing theory from practical experience. In B. E. Woolnough (Ed.), Practical science (pp. 67–77). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
Gunstone, R. F., & Champagne, A. B. (1990). Promoting conceptual change in the laboratory. In E. Hegarthy-Hazel (Ed.), The student laboratory and science curriculum (pp. 159–182). London: Routledge.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. CrossRef
Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2007). The laboratory in science education: the state of the art. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(2), 105–107. CrossRef
Hovardas, T., Xenofontos, N. A., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2017). Using virtual labs in an inquiry context: the effect of a hypothesis formulation tool and an experiment design tool on students’ learning. In I. Levin & D. Tsybulsky (Eds.), Optimizing STEM education with advanced ICTs and simulations (pp. 58–83). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. CrossRef
Hsu, Y. S., & Thomas, R. A. (2002). The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation on science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 24(9), 955–979. CrossRef
Jaakkola, T., & Nurmi, S. (2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(4), 271–283. CrossRef
Kollöffel, B., & de Jong, T. (2013). Conceptual understanding about electrical circuits in secondary vocational engineering education: combining traditional instruction with inquiry learning in a virtual lab. Journal of Engineering Education, 102(3), 375–393. CrossRef
Kontra, C., Lyons, D. J., Fischer, S. M., & Beilock, S. L. (2015). Physical experience enhances science learning. Psychological Science, 26(6), 737–749. CrossRef
Lazonder, A. W., & Ehrenhard, S. (2014). Relative effectiveness of physical and virtual manipulatives for conceptual change in science: how falling objects fall. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30(2), 110–120. CrossRef
Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning. Review of Educational Research, 86, 681–718. CrossRef
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction–what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. CrossRef
Mustafa, M. I., & Trudel, L. (2013). The impact of cognitive tools on the development of the inquiry skills of high school students in physics. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4, 124–129. CrossRef
Nivalainen, V., Asikainen, M. A., Sormunen, K., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2010). Preservice and inservice teachers’ challenges in the planning of the practical work. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(4), 393–409. CrossRef
Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: an effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21–47. CrossRef
Olympiou, G., Zacharia, Z. C., & de Jong, T. (2013). Making the invisible visible: enhancing students’ conceptual understanding by introducing representations of abstract objects in a simulation. Instructional Science, 41(3), 575–596. CrossRef
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. CrossRef
Perry, J., Meir, E., Herron, J. C., Maruca, S., & Stal, D. (2008). Evaluating two approaches to helping college students understand evolutionary trees through diagramming tasks. CBE-Life Science Education , 7, 193–201.
Piaget, J. (1936). The origin of intelligence in the child. London: Routledge.
Polman, J. L. (1999). Designing project-based science: connecting learners through guided inquiry. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Scalise, K., Timms, M., Moorjani, A., Clark, L., Holtermann, K., & Irvin, P. S. (2011). Student learning in science simulations: design features that promote learning gains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(9), 1050–1078. CrossRef
Sencar Tokgöz, S. (2007). The effect of peer instruction on sixth grade students’ science achievement and attitudes (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
Smith, G. W., & Puntambekar, S. (2010). Examining the combination of physical and virtual experiments in an inquiry science classroom. Paper presented at the Conference on Computer Based Learning in Science, Warsaw, Poland.
Sullivan, S., Gnesdilow, D., Puntambekar, S., & Kim, J.-S. (2017). Middle school students’ learning of mechanics concepts through engagement in different sequences of physical and virtual experiments. International Journal of Science Education, 39(12), 1573–1600. CrossRef
Taş, U. E., Arıcı, Ö., Ozarkan, H. B., & Özgürlük, B. (2016). PISA 2015 ulusal raporu [National report of PISA 2015]. Ankara, Turkey: Ministry of National Education.
Tobin, K. (1990). Research on science laboratory activities: in pursuit of better questions and answers to improve learning. School Science and Mathematics, 90(5), 403–418. CrossRef
Toth, E. E., Ludvico, L. R., & Morrow, B. L. (2014). Blended inquiry with hands-on and virtual laboratories: the role of perceptual features during knowledge construction. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(5), 614–630. CrossRef
Toth, E. E., Morrow, B. L., & Ludvico, L. R. (2009). Designing blended inquiry learning in a laboratory context: a study of incorporating hands-on and virtual laboratories. Innovative Higher Education, 33(5), 333–344. CrossRef
Trundle, K. C., & Bell, R. L. (2010). The use of a computer simulation to promote conceptual change: a quasi-experimental study. Computers in Education, 54(4), 1078–1088. CrossRef
Wang, T.-L., & Tseng, Y.-K. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of physical, virtual, and virtual-physical manipulatives on third-grade students’ science achievement and conceptual understanding of evaporation and condensation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 203–219. CrossRef
Yıldırım, A., Özgürlük, B., Parlak, B., Gönen, E., & Polat, M. (2016). TIMMS 2015 ulusal matematik ve fen bilimleri ön raporu 4. ve 8.sınıflar [Pre-report of TIMMS 2015 national mathematics and science 4 th and 8 th grades]. Ankara, Turkey: Ministry of National Education.
Zacharia, Z. C. (2015). Examining whether touch sensory feedback is necessary for science learning through experimentation: a literature review of two different lines of research across K-16. Educational Research Review, 16, 116–137. CrossRef
Zacharia, Z. C., & de Jong, T. (2014). The effects on students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits of introducing virtual manipulatives within a physical manipulatives-oriented curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 32(2), 101–158. CrossRef
Zacharia, Z. C., Loizou, E., & Papaevripidou, M. (2012). Is physicality an important aspect of learning through science experimentation among kindergarten students? Early Child Research Quarterly, 27(3), 447–457. CrossRef
Zacharia, Z. C., & Michael, M. (2016). Using physical and virtual manipulatives to improve primary school students’ understanding of concepts of electric circuits. In M. Riopel & Z. Smyrnaiou (Eds.), New developments in science and technology education (pp. 125–140). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. CrossRef
Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317–331. CrossRef
- Using Hands-On and Virtual Laboratories Alone or Together―Which Works Better for Acquiring Knowledge and Skills?
Hasan Ozgur Kapici
Ton de Jong
- Springer Netherlands
Journal of Science Education and Technology
Print ISSN: 1059-0145
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-1839
in-adhesives, MKVS, Hellmich GmbH/© Hellmich GmbH, Zühlke/© Zühlke, Neuer Inhalt/© momius | stock.adobe.com