The Effectiveness of Learning Simulations for Electronic Laboratories

This work investigates the efficacy of software simulations of electronic circuits laboratories to support beginning electrical engineering students. Experiment 1 was a formative evaluation of an Electronic Laboratory Simulator (ELS), as an optional add-on to physical labs for 120 subjects at four universities. All subjects received the same treatment: their normal classes and physical labs, with optional use of simulated labs. Subjects took written tests specific to the lab’s content, before and after using each simulated lab. Only subjects who took both pre- and post-tests were included. Pre- and post-test comparisons indicated significant improvement in both theory and lab knowledge when scores for all labs were combined, but inconsistent performance on individual labs. As the treatment included other learning opportunities in addition to simulated labs, the results were not attributed to the simulations, but provided initial indications and qualitative data on subjects’ experiences. These helped to improve the labs and the implementation strategies. Experiment 2 used 40 college sophomores in a beginning electronic circuits lab. Physical lab subjects received seven physical labs. Combined lab subjects received a combination of seven simulated labs and two physical labs. The latter repeated two of the simulated labs to provide physical lab practice. Both treatments used the same assignments. Learner outcome measures were: (a) time required to complete a new criterion physical lab; (b) score on written lab and theory tests over all the labs; and (c) comments on the lab experience. The group that used combined simulated and physical labs performed significantly better on the written tests than the group using entirely physical labs. Both groups were equivalent in time to complete the criterion physical lab. Comments about the simulated labs were generally positive, and also provided specific suggestions for changes.

[1]  Richard Horn,et al.  Electronic performance support systems , 1997, CACM.

[2]  J. Olin Campbell.  Interactive Distance Learning: Issues and Current Work. , 1995 .

[3]  M. David Merrill,et al.  Instructional Transaction Theory: Instructional Design Based on Knowledge Objects. , 1996 .

[4]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  When researchers swim upstream: reflections on an unpopular argument about learning from media , 1991 .

[5]  Terry K. Borsook,et al.  Using Computer and Video Technologies to Develop Interpersonal Skills , 1995 .

[6]  Andrew S. Gibbons,et al.  Progressively Challenging Evaluative Simulations That Provide Assessment, Learning, and Performance Support. , 1994 .

[7]  Jack J. Phillips,et al.  Handbook of Training Evaluation and Measurement Methods , 1987 .

[8]  John R. Bourne,et al.  Virtual Engineering Laboratories: Design and Experiments , 1994 .

[9]  Pieter J. Mosterman,et al.  Design and implementation of an electronics laboratory simulator , 1996 .

[10]  D. Schwartz,et al.  Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional design , 1999 .

[11]  J. D. Fletcher.  Effectiveness and Cost of Interactive Videodisc Instruction in Defense Training and Education , 1990 .

[12]  Michael W. Cronin,et al.  Recent empirical studies of the pedagogical effects of interactive video instruction in “soft skill” areas , 1992, J. Comput. High. Educ..

[13]  J. Olin Campbell.  Interactive Distance Learning and Job Support Strategies for Soft Skills , 1996 .

[14]  Chen-Lin C. Kulik,et al.  Computer-Based Instruction: What 200 Evaluations Say. , 1987 .