Learner performance and attitudes in traditional versus simulated laboratory experiences

Abstract

Evidence suggests that the physical, expository laboratory, as used in both high-school and college-level science courses, has lost its instructional value while emerging technologies such as simulations can serve as robust replacements. However, certain accreditation processes do not recognise the simulated laboratory as a legitimate alternative to expository high-school and college-level laboratories. This study therefore investigated whether simulated laboratories can achieve the goals of contemporary laboratory instruction as successfully as the expository laboratory paradigm. Using an experimental and quantitative methodology, two experiments were carried out, each of which comprised the completion of a laboratory activity by participants who were assigned to either a control (expository laboratory) or an experimental (simulated laboratory) group. The results revealed significant higher assessment means for the simulated groups. The simulated laboratories were also perceived to be more open-ended, easier to use, and easier to generate usable data, than expository laboratories. The time to complete simulated laboratory activities was significantly less than the time to complete expository laboratory activities. The results suggest that the simulated laboratory can serve as a legitimate alternative to the expository, “hands-on” laboratory and those current accreditation practices requiring online science courses to have “hands-on” laboratories need to be reevaluated.