Constructing reality: A study of remote, hands-on, and simulated laboratories

Laboratories play a crucial role in the education of future scientists and engineers, yet there is disagreement among science and engineering educators about whether and which types of technology-enabled labs should be used. This debate could be advanced by large-scale randomized studies addressing the critical issue of whether remotely operated or simulation-based labs are as effective as the traditional hands-on lab format. The present article describes the results of a large-scale (N = 306) study comparing learning outcomes and student preferences for several different lab formats in an undergraduate engineering course. The lab formats that were evaluated included traditional hands-on labs, remotely operated labs, and simulations. Learning outcomes were assessed by a test of the specific concepts taught in each lab. These knowledge scores were as high or higher (depending on topic) after performing remote and simulated laboratories versus performing hands-on laboratories. In their responses to survey items, many students saw advantages to technology-enabled lab formats in terms of such attributes as convenience and reliability, but still expressed preference for hands-on labs. Also, differences in lab formats led to changes in group functions across the plan-experiment-analyze process: For example, students did less face-to-face work when engaged in remote or simulated laboratories, as opposed to hands-on laboratories.

[1]  Alan Kay,et al.  Microelectronics and the Personal Computer , 1977 .

[2]  Mary C. Whitton,et al.  Evaluating a scientific collaboratory: Results of a controlled experiment , 2003, TCHI.

[3]  Pasquale Daponte,et al.  A measurement laboratory on geographic network for remote test experiments , 2000, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas..

[4]  Madara Ogot,et al.  An Assessment of In‐Person and Remotely Operated Laboratories , 2003 .

[5]  Michael P. Freedman.  Relationship among Laboratory Instruction, Attitude toward Science, and Achievement in Science Knowledge. , 1997 .

[6]  Dimitrios Stamovlasis,et al.  A Study of Group Interaction Processes in Learning Lower Secondary Physics. , 2006 .

[7]  Tim Kerns,et al.  Should We Use Cooperative Learning in College Chemistry , 1996 .

[8]  T. Andre,et al.  Using computer simulations to enhance conceptual change: the roles of constructivist instruction and student epistemological beliefs , 1996 .

[9]  Jeffrey V. Nickerson,et al.  A model for evaluating the effectiveness of remote engineering laboratories and simulations in education , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[10]  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 .

[11]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Seeing What We Build Together: Distributed Multimedia Learning Environments for Transformative Communications , 1994 .

[12]  Ajay S. Vinze,et al.  Information technology support for collaborative decision making in auditing: An experimental investigation , 1996, Decis. Support Syst..

[13]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning Through Technology and Curriculum Design , 1999 .

[14]  Adele Goldberg,et al.  Personal Dynamic Media , 1977, Computer.

[15]  Andreas Bischoff,et al.  A multiuser virtual-reality environment for a tele-operated laboratory , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[16]  J. Elashoff,et al.  Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research. , 1975 .

[17]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone. Cooperative, Competitive, and Individualistic Learning. Fourth Edition. , 1991 .

[18]  Gregor von Laszewski,et al.  Distance Visualization: Data Exploration on the Grid , 1999, Computer.

[19]  Daniel L. Schwartz,et al.  Shuttling Between Depictive Models and Abstract Rules: Induction and Fallback , 1996, Cogn. Sci..

[20]  Ruth B. Ekstrom,et al.  Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests , 1976 .

[21]  Elizabeth H. Hegarty,et al.  Levels of scientific enquiry in university science laboratory classes: Implications for curriculum deliberations , 1978 .

[22]  K.E. Holbert,et al.  Embedding remote experimentation in power engineering education , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems.

[23]  Avi Hofstein,et al.  The Role of the Laboratory in Science Teaching: Neglected Aspects of Research , 1982 .

[24]  David Kirshner,et al.  Situated cognition : social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives , 2009 .

[25]  Claudio A. Canizares,et al.  Advantages and disadvantages of using various computer tools in electrical engineering courses , 1997 .

[26]  E. McDonough,et al.  An investigation of the use of global, virtual, and colocated new product development teams , 2001 .

[27]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[28]  R. Slavin.  Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. , 1996 .

[29]  A. Ortony,et al.  Similarity and Analogical Reasoning , 1991 .

[30]  Bhargab B. Bhattacharya,et al.  Isomorph-Redundancy in Sequential Circuits , 2000, IEEE Trans. Computers.

[31]  Brigitte Servatius,et al.  Assessing the quality of web-enabled laboratories in undergraduate education , 2002, 32nd Annual Frontiers in Education.

[32]  W. Hays.  Statistics for the social sciences , 1973 .

[33]  Adele Goldberg,et al.  Smalltalk-80 - the interactive programming environment , 1984 .

[34]  Mike Calver,et al.  Why does experimentation matter in teaching ecology? , 2002 .

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

[36]  Gloria Mark,et al.  Why distance matters: effects on cooperation, persuasion and deception , 2002, CSCW '02.

[37]  Campbell J. McRobbie,et al.  Role of the Microcomputer-Based Laboratory Display in Supporting the Construction of New Understandings in Thermal Physics , 2004 .

[38]  William Winn,et al.  A Constructivist Critique of the Assumptions of Instructional Design , 1993 .

[39]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  Remote experiments, re-versioning and re-thinking science learning , 2004, Comput. Educ..

[40]  Sven K. Esche.  On the Integration of Remote Experimentation into Undergraduate Laboratories-Technical Implementation , 2006 .

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

[42]  Denis Gillet,et al.  Recent advances in remote experimentation , 2000, Proceedings of the 2000 American Control Conference. ACC (IEEE Cat. No.00CH36334).

[43]  R. Pea,et al.  Seeing What We Build Together: Distributed Multimedia Learning Environments for Transformative Communications , 2004 .

[44]  Gillian Smith,et al.  Affordances and Constraints of Computers in Science Education , 1996 .

[45]  D.C. Sicker,et al.  Assessing the Effectiveness of Remote Networking Laboratories , 2005, Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference.

[46]  Tor A. Fjeldly.  Lab on the Web: Running Real Electronics Experiments via the Internet , 2003 .

[47]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Impact of simulator-based instruction on diagramming in geometrical optics by introductory physics students , 1995 .

[48]  Judith S. Olson,et al.  Distance Matters , 2000, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[49]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Collaborative Research Across Disciplinary and Organizational Boundaries , 2005 .

[50]  R. Pea.  Learning scientific concepts through material and social activities: Conversational analysis meets conceptual change. , 1993 .

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

[52]  Rockford J. Ross,et al.  WebLab! A universal and interactive teaching, learning, and laboratory environment for the World Wide Web , 1997, SIGCSE '97.

[53]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Learning Together and Alone , 1999 .

[54]  Andrew Nafalski,et al.  Remote laboratories versus virtual and real laboratories , 2003, 33rd Annual Frontiers in Education, 2003. FIE 2003..

[55]  Gail D. Heyman,et al.  Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: Their relation and their role in adaptive motivation , 1992 .

[56]  Michael S. Shur,et al.  MIT Microelectronics WebLab , 2003 .

[57]  Anne P. Massey,et al.  New Product Development Decision-Making Effectiveness: Comparing Individuals, Face-To-Face Teams, and Virtual Teams , 2001, Decis. Sci..