Practical Work or Simulations? Voices of Millennial Digital Natives

Abstract

Students nowadays grow up with electronic devices and are adept at navigating the virtual world. Practical activities may be more of a novelty for them than simulations. Using the topic of electric circuits as a context, we examined the ways in which Grade 11 students perceived and learned from practical work and simulations, respectively. In this quasi-experiment study, a group of 19 students used a free online simulations package “Circuit Construction Kit,” while another group of 17 students learnt through practical work. We administered a validated instrument to both groups and found that practical work and simulations supported students’ learning in similar ways. The interventions were then reversed so that all participants experienced both practical work and simulations. Finally, seven students from each group were selected for a group interview. Through the interviews, we identified features of simulations and practical work respectively that students believed contributed to their learning.

Keywords

practical work simulations electric circuit DIRECT Circuit Construction Kit

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abrahams

Millar

(2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945–1969. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305

Barko

Sadler

T. D.

(2013). Practicality in virtuality: Finding student meaning in video game education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(2), 124–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9381-0

Baser

(2006). Effects of conceptual change and traditional confirmatory simulations on pre-service teachers' understanding of direct current circuits. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(5), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9025-3

Blake

Scanlon

(2007). Reconsidering simulations in science education at a distance: Features of effective use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(6), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00239.x

Bumbacher

Salehi

Wieman

Blikstein

(2018). Tools for science inquiry learning: Tool affordances, experimentation strategies, and conceptual understanding. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27(3), 215–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-017-9719-8

Campbell

D. T.

Stanley

(1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on teaching. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (Vol. 5, pp. 171–246). New York: Macmillan.

Develaki

(2017). Using computer simulations for promoting model-based reasoning. Science & Education, 26(7), 1001–1027. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11191-017-9944-9

Duit

Rhoeneck

C. V.

(1998). Learning and understanding key concepts in electricity. In Tiberghien

Jossem

Barojas

(Eds.), Connecting research in physics education (pp. 1–10). ICPE Books.

Duit

Schecker

Höttecke

Niedderer

(2014). Teaching physics. In Lederman

N. G.

Abell

S. K.

(Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 434–456). Routledge.

10.

Engelhardt

P. V.

Beichner

R. J.

(2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72(1), 98–115. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1614813

11.

Evangelou

Kotsis

(2019). Real vs virtual physics experiments: Comparison of learning outcomes among fifth grade primary school students. A case on the concept of frictional force. International Journal of Science Education, 41(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1549760

12.

Farrokhnia

M. R.

Esmailpour

(2010). A study on the impact of real, virtual and comprehensive experimenting on students’ conceptual understanding of dc electric circuits and their skills in undergraduate electricity laboratory. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5474–5482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.893

13.

Freedman

M. P.

(1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science, and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 343–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199704)34:4<343::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-R

14.

Finkelstein

N. D.

Adams

W. K.

Keller

C. J.

Kohl

P. B.

Perkins

K. K.

Podolefsky

N. S.

Reid

LeMaster

(2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010103

15.

Gee

Clackson

S. G.

(1992). The origin of practical work in the English school science curriculum. School Science Review, 73(265), 79–83. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ453504

16.

Greene

J. C.

Caracelli

V. J.

Graham

W. F.

(1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255

17.

Hart

(2008). Models in physics, models for physics learning, and why the distinction may matter in the case of electric circuits. Research in Science Education, 38(5), 529–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9060-y

18.

Hodson

(1991). Practical work in science: Time for a reappraisal. Studies in Science Education, 19(1), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269108559998

19.

Hodson

(1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22(1), 85–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560022

20.

Jaakkola

Nurmi

(2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(4), 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00259.x

21.

Jaakkola

Nurmi

Veermans

(2011). A comparison of students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(1), 71–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20386

22.

Jean Justice

Ritzhaupt

A. D.

(2015). Identifying the barriers to games and simulations in education: Creating a valid and reliable survey. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 44(1), 86–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239515588161

23.

Jenkins

E. W.

(1980). From Armstrong to Nuffield: Studies in twentieth-century science education in England and wales. British Journal of Educational Studies, 28(1), 72–73. https://doi.org/10.2307/3120372

24.

Johsua

(1984). Students’ interpretation of simple electrical diagrams. European Journal of Science Education, 6(3), 271–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528840060308

25.

Kapici

H. O.

Akcay

de Jong

(2019). Using hands-on and virtual laboratories alone or together—which works better for acquiring knowledge and skills? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9762-0

26.

Kirschner

Huisman

(1998). ‘Dry laboratories’ in science education: Computer-based practical work. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 665–682. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200605

27.

Koh

Kin

Y. G.

Wadhwa

Lim

(2012). Teacher perceptions of games in Singapore schools. Simulation & Gaming, 43(1), 51–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878111401839

28.

Linn

(1998). The impact of technology on science instruction: Historical trends and current opportunities. In Fraser

Tobin

(Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 265–293). Kluwer Academic.

29.

Mayer

Warmelink

Bekebrede

(2013). Learning in a game-based virtual environment: A comparative evaluation in higher education. European Journal of Engineering Education, 38(1), 85–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2012.742872

30.

McDermott

L. C.

Shaffer

P. S.

(1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60(11), 994–1003. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.17003

31.

McFarlane

Sakellariou

(2002). The role of ict in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 219–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640220147568

32.

Myneni

L. S.

Narayanan

N. H.

Rebello

Rouinfar

Pumtambekar

(2013). An interactive and intelligent learning system for physics education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 6(3), 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2013.26

33.

NRC. (2012). A framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academy Press.

34.

Oon

P. T.

Cheng

M. M. W.

Wong

A. S. L.

(2020). Gender differences in attitude towards science: Methodology for prioritising contributing factors. International Journal of Science Education, 42(1), 89–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1701217

35.

Osborne

(2015). Practical work in science: Misunderstood and badly used? School Science Review, 96(357), 16–24.

36.

Podolefsky

N. S.

Perkins

K. K.

Adams

W. K.

(2010). Factors promoting engaged exploration with computer simulations. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 6(2), 020117. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020117

37.

Puntambekar

Gnesdilow

Dornfeld Tissenbaum

Narayanan

N. H.

Rebello

N. S.

(2021). Supporting middle school students’ science talk: A comparison of physical and virtual labs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(3), 392–419. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21664

38.

Reiner

Slotta

J. D.

Chi

M. T.

Resnick

L. B.

(2000). Naive physics reasoning: A commitment to substance-based conceptions. Cognition and Instruction, 18(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1801_01

39.

Ritzhaupt

A. D.

Gunter

Jones

(2010). Survey of commercial off-the-shelf video games: Benefits and barriers in formal educational settings. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 7(5), 45–55.

40.

Ronen

Eliahu

(2000). Simulation — a bridge between theory and reality: The case of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 16, 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2729.2000.00112.x

41.

Ryan

R. M.

Deci

E. L.

(2003). On assimilating identities to the self: A self-determination theory perspective on internalization and integrity within cultures. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 253–272). The Guilford Press.

42.

Scaife

(1993). Information technology in science and technology education. Open University Press.

43.

Shipstone

D. M.

(1984). A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple dc circuits. European Journal of Science Education, 6(2), 185–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528840060208

44.

Smetana

L. K.

Bell

R. L.

(2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34(9), 1337–1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182

45.

Solomonidou

Kakana

D.-M.

(2000). Preschool children’s conceptions about the electric current and the functioning of electric appliances. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 8(1), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930085208511

46.

Tao

P. K.

Gunstone

R. F.

(1999). The process of conceptual change in force and motion during computer-supported physics instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 859. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199909)36:7<859::AID-TEA7>3.0.CO;2-J

47.

Tarekegn

(2009). Can computer simulations substitute real laboratory apparatus? Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 3(3), 506–517.

48.

Triona

L. M.

Klahr

(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. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 149–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_02

49.

Unlu

Z. K.

Dokme

(2011). The effect of combining analogy-based simulation and laboratory activities on turkish elementary school students’ understanding of simple electric circuits. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(4), 320.

50.

von Rhöneck

Grob

Schnaitmann

G. W.

Völker

(1998). Learning in basic electricity: How do motivation, cognitive and classroom climate factors influence achievement in physics? International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), 551–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069980200504

51.

Wang

C.-Y.

H.-K.

Lee

S. W.-Y.

Hwang

F.-K.

Chang

H.-Y.

Y.-T.

Chiou

G,-L.

Chen

Liang

J.-C.

Lin

J.-W.

H. C.

Tsai

C.-C.

(2014). A review of research on technology-assisted school science laboratories. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(2), 307–320. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/jeductechsoci.17.2.307

52.

Wellington

J. J.

(1998). Practical work in school science: Which way now? Routledge.

53.

Zacharia

(2003). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquiry-based experiments in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 792–823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10112

54.

Zacharia

(2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(2), 120–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00215.x

55.

Zacharia

Z. C.

De Jong

(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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.887083