Supporting Remote Laboratory Activities at an Institutional Level

Alexander A Kist,Peter Gibbings,Andrew D Maxwell,Hannah Jolly

doi:10.3991/ijoe.v9is5.2772

Abstract

Learning Tools that rely on information and communication technologies form an essential part of distance education. Remote Access Laboratories (RAL) is one example that has been widely discussed in the research community; in particular, in the context of engineering and science education. However, remote laboratory technology is not widely used. This study explores whether the benefits offered by the RAL systems can be extended to students in other disciplines and how this process can be supported. The key aim of this activity is to create more equitable opportunities for student learning across faculties and the university. The study identifies considerations for the wider adoption, implementation and uptake of remote laboratory based learning activities. Four learning activities at various stages of the development cycle in three different disciplines are evaluated using a program logic methodology. Evaluation questions address the areas of appropriateness, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability. It is concluded that remote laboratory are open and flexible enough to suite a variety of learning objectives and pedagogies in a number of contexts. This study also highlights some wider issues that are significant to the acceptance of RAL learning activities. Findings include that a number of conditions need to be met if remote laboratory activities are to occur more broadly across universities as learning systems.

Highlights

For almost two decades, Remote Laboratories (RL) or Remote Access Laboratories (RAL) have been discussed by the academic community as means to address access issues to hardware and laboratory spaces, limited utilisation of hardware [1] and to support distance education [2]
There is a natural tendency for people to think of activities that are most like traditional laboratories, when beginning to design RALs
In Engineering and Science faculties at University of Southern Queensland (USQ) and elsewhere, RALs may consist solely of internet-controlled cameras pointed at physical experiments

Summary

Introduction

Besides the wide range of individual learning activities and hardware installations (rigs) [3, 4], there are a number of large scale initiative that seek to provide wider, coordinated approaches to integrating RAL technology and pedagogies into higher education curricula; for example, the iLab [5] and LabShare [6] projects. The motivation for originators to develop RAL technology differs but broadly fall into two categories: to enable more engagement opportunities for students and financial consideration such as increasing utilisation of (expensive) equipment. Besides this active research and development community, RAL technology is not as prevalent as other electronic learning tools such as Course Management Systems (CMS), for example. This study explores whether and how the benefits offered by RL based learning activities can be extended to students in other disciplines and faculties

Methods

Results

Conclusion