Middle school students’ learning of mechanics concepts through engagement in different sequences of physical and virtual experiments

ABSTRACT Physical and virtual experimentation are thought to have different affordances for supporting students’ learning. Research investigating the use of physical and virtual experiments to support students’ learning has identified a variety of, sometimes conflicting, outcomes. Unanswered questions remain about how physical and virtual experiments may impact students’ learning and for which contexts and content areas they may be most effective. Using a quasi-experimental design, we examined eighth grade students’ (N = 100) learning of physics concepts related to pulleys depending on the sequence of physical and virtual labs they engaged in. Five classes of students were assigned to either the: physical first condition (PF) (n = 55), where students performed a physical pulley experiment and then performed the same experiment virtually, or virtual first condition (VF) (n = 45), with the opposite sequence. Repeated measures ANOVA’s were conducted to examine how physical and virtual labs impacted students’ learning of specific physics concepts. While we did not find clear-cut support that one sequence was better, we did find evidence that participating in virtual experiments may be more beneficial for learning certain physics concepts, such as work and mechanical advantage. Our findings support the idea that if time or physical materials are limited, using virtual experiments may help students understand work and mechanical advantage.

[1]  S. Ainsworth DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[2]  Philip M. Sadler,et al.  Visualization and Representation of Physical Systems: Wavemaker as an Aid to Conceptualizing Wave Phenomena , 1999 .

[3]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live by , 1982 .

[4]  Rod Sims,et al.  Virtual and Physical Experimentation in Inquiry-Based Science Labs: Attitudes, Performance and Access , 2011, Journal of Science Education and Technology.

[5]  Marios Papaevripidou,et al.  Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students' conceptual understanding in heat and temperature , 2008 .

[6]  C. Chinn,et al.  Epistemologically Authentic Inquiry in Schools: A Theoretical Framework for Evaluating Inquiry Tasks , 2002 .

[7]  W. Pouw,et al.  An Embedded and Embodied Cognition Review of Instructional Manipulatives , 2014 .

[8]  Z. Zacharia,et al.  Physical and Virtual Laboratories in Science and Engineering Education , 2013, Science.

[9]  Sadhana Puntambekar,et al.  The effects of physical and virtual manipulatives on students' conceptual learning about pulleys , 2010, ICLS.

[10]  Sadhana Puntambekar,et al.  Exploration of Factors that Affect the Comparative Effectiveness of Physical and Virtual Manipulatives in an Undergraduate Laboratory , 2012 .

[11]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Enhancing comprehension in small reading groups using a manipulation strategy , 2007 .

[12]  G. Olympiou,et al.  Blending Physical and Virtual Manipulatives: An Effort to Improve Students' Conceptual Understanding through Science Laboratory Experimentation , 2012 .

[13]  Michael P. Kaschak,et al.  Grounding language in action , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  G. Hommel A stagewise rejective multiple test procedure based on a modified Bonferroni test , 1988 .

[15]  Zeynep Tatli,et al.  Effect of a Virtual Chemistry Laboratory on Students' Achievement , 2013, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[16]  P. Benner The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition: Book Review , 2010 .

[17]  Vincent N. Lunetta,et al.  The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century , 2004 .

[18]  E. Soloway,et al.  A Collaborative Model for Helping Middle Grade Science Teachers Learn Project-Based Instruction , 1994, The Elementary School Journal.

[19]  Jill A. Marshall,et al.  Preservice teachers' theory development in physical and simulated environments , 2006 .

[20]  Lara M. Triona,et al.  Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students' Ability to Design Experiments , 2003 .

[21]  Margaret Wilson,et al.  Six views of embodied cognition , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[22]  Noah S. Podolefsky,et al.  When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment , 2005 .

[23]  D. Klahr,et al.  Bridging Research and Practice: A Cognitively Based Classroom Intervention for Teaching Experimentation Skills to Elementary School Children , 2000 .

[24]  William Winn,et al.  Learning Oceanography from a Computer Simulation Compared with Direct Experience at Sea. , 2006 .

[25]  Tomi Jaakkola,et al.  Fostering elementary school students' understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities , 2008, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[26]  Constantinos P. Constantinou,et al.  Comparing the influence of physical and virtual manipulatives in the context of the Physics by Inquiry curriculum: The case of undergraduate students’ conceptual understanding of heat and temperature , 2008 .

[27]  B. White ThinkerTools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education , 1993 .

[28]  Zacharias C. Zacharia,et al.  Blending Physical and Virtual Manipulatives in Physics Laboratory Experimentation , 2014 .

[29]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  Physical Experience Enhances Science Learning , 2015, Psychological science.

[30]  Ngss Lead States Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

[31]  Z. Zacharia,et al.  The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on science teachers' conceptual understanding of physics , 2002 .

[32]  Jeffrey V. Nickerson,et al.  Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review , 2006, CSUR.

[33]  S. Holm A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[34]  Zacharias C. Zacharia,et al.  The Effects on Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Electric Circuits of Introducing Virtual Manipulatives Within a Physical Manipulatives-Oriented Curriculum , 2014 .

[35]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  An Interactive and Intelligent Learning System for Physics Education , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies.

[36]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Grounding language in bodily states: The case for emotion , 2005 .

[37]  Z. C. Zacharia,et al.  Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: an effort to enhance students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[38]  William J. McKinney The Educational Use of Computer Based Science Simulations: Some Lessons from the Philosophy of Science , 1997 .

[39]  G. Olympiou,et al.  Physical versus Virtual Manipulative Experimentation in Physics Learning. , 2011 .

[40]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The functions of multiple representations , 1999, Comput. Educ..

[41]  Jerry Wellington,et al.  America's lab report: Investigations in high school science , 2007 .

[42]  Ji Yeon Son,et al.  A well-grounded education: the role of perception in science and mathematics , 2008 .

[43]  Richard Lehrer,et al.  Exploring Children's Data Modeling , 1996 .