The Effect of Virtual Laboratories on the Academic Achievement of Undergraduate Chemistry Students: Quasi-Experimental Study.

Abstract

Experimentation is crucial in chemistry education as it links practical experience with theoretical concepts. However, practical chemistry courses typically rely on real laboratory experiments and often face challenges such as limited resources, equipment shortages, and logistical constraints in university settings. To address these challenges, computer-based laboratories have been introduced as a potential solution, offering electronic simulations that replicate real laboratory experiences. This study examines the effect of virtual laboratories on the academic achievement of undergraduate chemistry students and evaluates their potential as a viable alternative or complement to traditional laboratory-based instruction. A quasi-experimental design was implemented to examine the cause-and-effect relationship between instructional methods and student outcomes. The study involved 60 fourth-year BSc chemistry students from Dilla University, divided into 3 groups: a real laboratory group (n=20), which performed real laboratory experiments; a virtual group (n=20), which used virtual laboratory simulations; and a lecture group (n=20), which received lecture-based instruction. Quantitative data were collected through tests administered before and after the intervention to assess academic performance. The data analysis used descriptive and inferential statistics, such as means and SDs, 1-way ANOVA, the Tukey honestly significant difference test, and independent-sample t tests (2-tailed), with a P value of .05 set for determining statistical significance. Before the intervention, the results indicated no significant differences in academic achievement among the 3 groups (P=.99). However, after the intervention, notable differences were observed in student performance across the methods. The real laboratory group had the highest mean posttest score (mean 62.6, SD 10.7), followed by the virtual laboratory group (mean 55.5, SD 6.8) and the lecture-only group, which had the lowest mean score (mean 43.7, SD 11.5). ANOVA results confirmed significant differences between the groups (F2,57=18.429; P<.001). The Tukey post hoc test further revealed that the real laboratory group significantly outperformed the lecture-only group (mean difference 18.88; P<.001), while the virtual laboratory group also performed significantly better than the lecture-only group (mean difference 11.7; P=.001). However, no statistically significant difference was found between the real laboratory and virtual laboratory groups (mean difference 7.12; P=.07). In addition, gender did not significantly influence performance in the virtual laboratory group (P=.21), with no substantial difference in posttest scores between male and female students. These findings suggest that computer-based laboratories are a viable and effective alternative when real laboratories are unavailable, enhancing learning outcomes when compared with traditional lecture-based methods. Therefore, universities should consider integrating computer-based laboratories into their practical chemistry curricula to provide students with interactive and engaging learning experiences, especially when physical laboratories are inaccessible.