Abstract
<p>Laboratory activities and constructivism are two notions that have been playing significant roles in science education. Despite common beliefs about the importance of laboratory activities, reviews reported inconsistent results about the effectiveness of laboratory activities. Since laboratory activities can be expensive and take more time, there is an effort to introduce virtual laboratory activities. This study aims at exploring the learning environment created by a virtual laboratory and a real laboratory. A quasi experimental study was conducted at two grade ten classes at a state high school in Bandung, Indonesia. Data were collected using a questionnaire called Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES) before and after the laboratory activities. The results show that both types of laboratories can create constructivist learning environments. Each type of laboratory activity, however, may be stronger in improving certain aspects compared to the other. While a virtual laboratory is stronger in improving critical voice and personal relevance, real laboratory activities promote aspects of personal relevance, uncertainty and student negotiation. This study suggests that instead of setting one type of laboratory against the other, lessons and follow up studies should focus on how to combine both types of laboratories to support better learning.</p>
Highlights
In a typical science textbook, such as Campbell Biology (Reece et al, 2011) “Plant growth and development” covers plant tissues, primary and secondary growth, morphogenesis, and cell differentiation
The main aims of this research are: First, to analyse the learning environment during virtual laboratory and real laboratory activities, and secondly, to identify the criteria of a constructivist learning environment promoted by each type of laboratory activity
A comparison between the two types of laboratories using Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES) shows that real laboratory learning environment is slightly more constructivist than virtual laboratory (Figure 1)
Summary
In a typical science textbook, such as Campbell Biology (Reece et al, 2011) “Plant growth and development” covers plant tissues, primary and secondary growth, morphogenesis, and cell differentiation. The term “growth” is limited to the growth of a whole plant and does not cover “growth” in terms of tissues culture, such as the growth of plantlet or callus (Hasanah, Suwarsi, & Sumadi, 2014; Nurchayati, Santosa, Nugroho, & Indrianto, 2016). Research on the effectiveness of laboratory activities reports variable results (Abrahams & Millar, 2008; Harlen, 1999). A study conducted by Abrahams and Millar (2008) suggested that laboratory activities help students to memorise practical aspects of the experiments related to natural phenomena. A review of the roles of laboratory activities for the Indonesian setting conducted three decades ago (Thair & Teagust, 1977) reported that laboratory activities promoted students’ achievement in cognitive, problem solving as process skills.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Biosaintifika: Journal of Biology & Biology Education
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
