Effects of guided inquiry virtual and physical laboratories on conceptual understanding, inquiry performance, scientific inquiry self-efficacy, and enjoyment

Abstract

Indonesia and many other developing countries have a vast youth population, yet limited facilities for physics learning. The major purposes of this study are to develop low-cost, technology-enhanced physical and virtual laboratories and to investigate their effects on various learning objectives, including conceptual understanding, inquiry performance, scientific inquiry self-efficacy, and enjoyment. The virtual laboratory (VL) used the physics education technology to simulate a pendulum, while the physical laboratory (PL) was a technology-enhanced physical laboratory utilizing the Camera Stopwatch and Smart Tools applications. In this quasiexperimental design, a total of 68 secondary school students in Indonesia were randomly assigned to the PL and VL settings. The participants conducted the pendulum experiment guided by an inquiry worksheet along with pre-and postconceptual tests, scientific inquiry self-efficacy, and enjoyment questionnaires. The result revealed that the guided inquiry-based VL was as effective as the PL for simple concepts, but was more effective for improving difficult concepts and scientific inquiry selfefficacy. Nevertheless, the PL group performed better on crucial inquiry activities, that is, planning, experimenting, and further improvement of the experiment. Moreover, both the PL and VL significantly promoted enjoyment. It was concluded that the PL and VL were successful for achieving different learning objectives.

Effects of games on students’ emotions of learning science and achievement in chemistry

“…Future research may investigate these skills in more depth. Lastly, board and card games allow teachers to design and deliver creative instruction using minimum resources, which may benefit education systems that have limited resources (Husnaini & Chen, 2019).…”

The use of augmented reality to foster conceptual knowledge acquisition in STEM laboratory courses—Theoretical background and empirical results

“…In general, laboratories allow for unique learning experiences. However, positive learning outcomes are not guaranteed per se (Finkelstein et al ., ; Hofstein & Lunetta, ; Holmes & Bonn, ; Husnaini & Chen, ; Kapici, Akcay, & de Jong, ; Volkwyn, Allie, Buffler, & Lubben, ; Wieman & Holmes, ; Wilcox & Lewandowski, ). Especially in the context of STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) education, laboratory experiences, which combine virtual and physical components are claimed to promote learning processes (Jones, ; de Jong, Linn, & Zacharia, ).…”

The Effects of a Virtual Laboratory and Meta-Cognitive Scaffolding on Students' Data Modeling Competences

“…However, Durand et al (2019) and Quinn et al (2009) compared the students' learning in biological laboratories in the two kinds of laboratories and found that students' learning outcome was better in traditional laboratories than in virtual laboratories. The research of Husnaini and Chen (2019) presented more in-depth findings. They found that students demonstrated better exploration skills in traditional laboratories while virtual laboratories were more effective than traditional laboratories in terms of understanding difficult concepts and improving students' self-efficacy (Husnaini & Chen, 2019).…”

“…In addition, the virtual laboratory can also make abstract concepts in science easier to understand (Dori & Kaberman, 2012;Wolski & Jagodzinski, 2019). Students in the physics department may encounter problems related to the development process of conceptual models, and the virtual laboratory can provide concrete models for understanding (Husnaini & Chen, 2019). Furthermore, learning science through experimentation allows students to develop different laboratory and process skills (Dori & Kaberman, 2012;Durand et al, 2019;Wolski & Jagodzinski, 2019).…”