International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 1554-5210

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2015, Vol. 11(3) 77-89

Effects of the Physical Laboratory versus the Virtual Laboratory in Teaching Simple Electric Circuits on Conceptual Achievement and Attitudes towards the Subject

Ahmet Tekbıyık & Orhan Ercan

pp. 77 - 89   |  Manu. Number: ijpe.2015.006

Published online: October 15, 2015  |   Number of Views: 8  |  Number of Download: 30


Abstract

Current study examined the effects of virtual and physical laboratory practices on students’ conceptual achievement in the subject of electricity and their attitudes towards simple electric circuits. Two groups (virtual and physical) selected through simple random sampling was taught with web-aided material  called “Electricity in Our Lives”. Quasi experimental research design was used in the study and “Simple Electric Circuits Achievement Test” composed of three dimensions (CCAB, FCC and RCE) and  “Attitude Scale for Simple Electric Circuits” composed of five dimensions were given to the groups are pre and posttests. It was identified that conceptual achievement significantly differed in the CCAB and RCE dimensions of the virtual laboratory implementations on the basis of total scores compared to the physical group whereas no meaningful differences were detected in the FCC dimension. It was also found that virtual laboratory implementations did not generate differences in student attitudes towards simple electric circuits.

Keywords: virtual laboratory, elementary science, achievement, electricity subject


How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Tekbiyik, A. & Ercan, O. (2015). Effects of the Physical Laboratory versus the Virtual Laboratory in Teaching Simple Electric Circuits on Conceptual Achievement and Attitudes towards the Subject . International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(3), 77-89.

Harvard
Tekbiyik, A. and Ercan, O. (2015). Effects of the Physical Laboratory versus the Virtual Laboratory in Teaching Simple Electric Circuits on Conceptual Achievement and Attitudes towards the Subject . International Journal of Progressive Education, 11(3), pp. 77-89.

Chicago 16th edition
Tekbiyik, Ahmet and Orhan Ercan (2015). "Effects of the Physical Laboratory versus the Virtual Laboratory in Teaching Simple Electric Circuits on Conceptual Achievement and Attitudes towards the Subject ". International Journal of Progressive Education 11 (3):77-89.

References
  1. Akçay, H., Durmaz, A., Tüysüz, C. & Feyzioğlu B. (2006). Effects of computer based learning on students’ attitudes and achievements towards analytical chemistry, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(1), Article 6. [Google Scholar]
  2. Akgün, A. (2009). The relation between science student teachers' misconceptions about solution, dissolution, diffusion and their attitudes toward science with their achievement. Education and Science, 34(154), 26-36. [Google Scholar]
  3. Balamuralithara, B., & Woods, P. C. (2009). Virtual laboratories in engineering education: The simulation lab and remote lab. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 17, 108-118. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bayraktar, Ş. (2001-2002). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in science education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34, 173-188. [Google Scholar]
  5. Carmichael, A., Chini, J. J., Rebello, S. N. & Puntambekar, S. (2010). Comparing Student Learning in Mechanics Using Simulations and Hands-on Activities, Proceedings of the 2010 National Association for Research in Science Teaching Annual Meeting, March 23 - 27, 2010, Philadelphia, PA. [Google Scholar]
  6. Christmann, E., & Badgett, J. (1999). A comparative analysis of the effects of computer-assisted instruction on student achievement in differing science and demographical areas. Journals of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18, 135-143. [Google Scholar]
  7. Clement, J. J., & Steinberg, M. S. (2002). Step-wise evolution of mental models of electric circuits: A" learning-aloud" case study. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(4), 389-452. [Google Scholar]
  8. Çepni, S. & Keleş, E. (2006). Turkish students' conceptions about the simple electric circuits. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(2), 269-291. [Google Scholar]
  9. Demirezen, S. (2010). The effect of 7E model to students’ achievements development of scientific process skills, conceptual achievement and retention levels in electrical circuits subject. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  10. Driver R., Leach J., Scott P. & Wood-Robinson V. (1994) Young people’s understanding of science concepts: implications of cross-age studies for curriculum planning. Studies in Science Education, 24, 75–100. [Google Scholar]
  11. Duit, R., & von Rhöneck, C. (1998). Learning and understanding key concepts of electricity. In A. Thibergien, L. Jossem & B. Jorge (Eds.), Connecting Research in Physics Education with Teacher Education: The International Commission on Physics Education. [Google Scholar]
  12. Engelhardt, P.V. & Beichner, R.J.(2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72(1), 98-115. [Google Scholar]
  13. Ergin, S. & Atasoy, Ş. (2013). Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of 4mat teaching method in removing pupils’ physics misconceptions of electricity. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(6), 730-746. [Google Scholar]
  14. Farrokhnia, M. R. & Esmailpour, A. (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, 5474–5482. [Google Scholar]
  15. Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., et al. (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, 1-8. [Google Scholar]
  16. George, R. (2006); A Cross-domain analysis of change in students’ attitudes toward science and attitudes about the utility of science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(6), 571–589. [Google Scholar]
  17. Gire, E.,Carmichael, A., Chini, J. J., Rouinfar, A., Rebello, S., Smith, G., et al. (2010). The effects of physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual learning about pulleys. In K. Gomez, [Google Scholar]
  18. L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Learning in the disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS 2010) (Vol. 1, pp. 937 – 944). Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences. [Google Scholar]
  19. Huppert, J., & Lazarowitz, R. (2002). Computer simulations in the high school: Students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 803-821. [Google Scholar]
  20. Jaakkola, T. & Nurmi, S. (2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(4), 271-283. [Google Scholar]
  21. Jabot, M., & Henry, D. (2007). Mental models of elementary and middle school students in analyzing simple battery and bulb circuits. School Science and Mathematics, 107(1), 371-381. [Google Scholar]
  22. Keser, Ö. F., & Başak, M. H. (2013). Investigate the level of students’ acquisition towards the electricity unite in our lives. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 10(2), 116-137. [Google Scholar]
  23. Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 183 – 203. [Google Scholar]
  24. Koballa T. R. (1988). Attitude and related concepts in science education. Science Education 72, 115–126. [Google Scholar]
  25. Kucukozer, H. (2004). The influence of teaching method which was designed according to constructivist learning theory for the first year high school students’ on simple electric circuit. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis, Balıkesir University, Balıkesir, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  26. Lee, Y., & Law, N. (2001). Explorations in promoting conceptual change in electrical concepts via ontological category shift. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (2), 111-149. [Google Scholar]
  27. Lee, Y. F., Guo, Y., & Ho, H. J. (2008). Explore effective use of computer simulations for physics education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27(4), 443-466. [Google Scholar]
  28. Liao, Y. C. (2007). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on students’ achievement in Taiwan: A meta- analysis. Computers & Education, 48, 216–233. [Google Scholar]
  29. Ministry of National Education, (2005). National Science Curriculum, Ankara, Turkey. Ministry of National Education, (2013). National Science Curriculum, Ankara, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mehrens, W. A. & Lehmann, I. J. (1987). Using standardized tests in education. Longman/Addison Wesley Longman. [Google Scholar]
  31. Olympiou, G. & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012) Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: an effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21-47. [Google Scholar]
  32. Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1 (1), 73-83. [Google Scholar]
  33. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (9), 1047-1049. [Google Scholar]
  34. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W. (1991). A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ), The University of Michigan, AnnArbor, MI. [Google Scholar]
  35. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D., Garcia, T., and McKeachie, W. (1993). Predictive validity and reliability of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Educ. Psychol. Meas. 53:801–813. [Google Scholar]
  36. Ronen, M., & Eliahu, M. (2000). Simulation a bridge between theory and reality: The case of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 14-26. [Google Scholar]
  37. Sencar, S. & Eryilmaz, A. (2004). Factors mediating the effect of gender on ninth-grade Turkish students’ misconceptions concerning electric circuits, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 603- 616. [Google Scholar]
  38. Shipstone, D. M., Rhöneck, C. V., Karqvist, C., Dupin, J., Johsua, S., & Licht, P. (1988). A study of student’ understanding of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 10 (3), 303-316. [Google Scholar]
  39. Sorge, C. (2007). What happens? Relationship of age and gender with science attitudes from elementary to middle school. Science Educator, 16(2), 33-37. [Google Scholar]
  40. Şengören, K. S., Tanel, R. & Kavcar, N. (2007). Development an attitude scale towards optics course. Pamukkale University Education Faculty Journal, 20, 86-94. [Google Scholar]
  41. Taşlıdere, E., & Eryılmaz, A. (2012). Development of attitude scale towards simple electric circuits and assessment of students’ attitudes. Journal of Turkish Science Education 9(1), 31-46. [Google Scholar]
  42. Tavşancıl, E. (2005). Tutumların Ölçülmesi ve SPSS ile Veri Analizi Nobel Yayınları, Ankara. [Google Scholar]
  43. Tekbıyık, A. & Akdeniz, A. R. (2010) A meta-analytical investigation of the influence of computer assisted instruction on achievement in science. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 11(2) Article 12. [Google Scholar]
  44. Tekbıyık, A. ve İpek, C. (2007). Preservice teachers’ rational thinking abilities and science attitudes, Yüzüncü Yıl Univesity Education Faculty Journal, 4(1). [Google Scholar]
  45. Tekbıyık, A. & Sağlam Arslan, A. (2008). Investigating Electric Current and Resistor Subject Regarding Theory transpozisyon Didactic. Preceeding of 8th National Congress of Science and Mathematics Education, Abant İzzet Baysal University, Bolu, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  46. Toth, E. E., Klahr, D., & Chen, Z. (2000). Bridging research and practice: A cognitively based classroom intervention for teaching experimentation skills to elementary school children. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 423 – 459 [Google Scholar]
  47. Tsai, C., Chen, H., Chou, C., & Lain, K. (2007). Current as the key concept of Taiwanese students’ understanding of electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 29 (4), 483-497. [Google Scholar]
  48. Windschitl, M. (2000). Supporting the development of science inquiry skills with special classes of software. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 81 – 95. [Google Scholar]
  49. Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 120-132. [Google Scholar]
  50. Zacharia, Z. C., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). The effects of interactive computer-based simulations prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students’ conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71, 618 – 629. [Google Scholar]
  51. Zacharia, Z. C., & Constantinou, C. P. (2008). Comparing the influence of physical and virtual manipulatives in the context of the physics by inquiry curriculum: The case of undergraduate students’ conceptual understanding of heat and temperature. American Journal of Physics, 76, 425 – 430. [Google Scholar]
  52. Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning & Instruction, 21, 317-331. [Google Scholar]
  53. Zacharia, Z. C., Olympiou, G., & Papaevripidou, M. (2008). Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1021-1035. [Google Scholar]