Effects of Writing to Learn Activities in Hands-on and Virtual Laboratory Environments

Abstract

The Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach mainly developed by Hand and Keys (1999). The approach involves two sets for both teachers and students to be mindfully active in an inquiry based laboratory environments. The set for students provides scaffolds in written form in order to help metacognition about their lab experiments (Hohenshell & Hand, 2006) and the set for teachers enable them to design inquiry based science laboratories. In the current study, it was investigated that the effects of SWH approach in hands-on and virtual lab environments on pre-service science teachers’ laboratory skills and science achievements. Quasi-experimental research design was used in the current study. Participants of the study were 52 pre-service science teachers. They were assigned into two groups, one of which them used hands-on laboratory environment, coded as control group. The other group used virtual laboratory environment called as experimental group. The attitude scale towards laboratory skills and the achievement test were used in the study. Overall results indicated that SWH based lab environments are equally effective on students’ attitudes and achievements.  

Keywords

• Science writing heuristic,hands-on lab,Virtual lab,Attitude,Achievement

References

1. Alkan, F., & Erdem, E. (2012). A study on developing attitude scale towards laboratory skills. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 1, 22-31. Hand, B., & Keys, C. W. (1999). Inquiry investigation: A new approach to laboratory reports. The Science Teacher, 66, 27-29. Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E.-M. (2004). Using a science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 131-149. Hannel, S. L., & Cuevas, J. (2018). A study on science achievement and motivation using computer-based simulations compared to traditional hands-on manipulation. Georgia Educational Researcher, 15, 39-55. Hohenshell, M. L., & Hand, B. (2006). Writing-to-learn strategies in secondary school cell biology: A mixed method study. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 261-289. Kapici, H. O., & Akcay, H. (2018). Choices of pre-service science teachers laboratory environments: Hands-on or hands-off? World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 10, 41-51. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 676-690. Kingir, S., Geban, O. & Gunel, M. (2012). How does the science writing heuristic affect students’ performances of different academic achievement levels? A case for high school chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13, 428-436. McGrath, D., Wegener, M., Mclntyre, T. J., Savage, C., & Williamson, M. (2010). Student experience of virtual reality: A case study in learning special relativity. American Journal of Physics, 78, 862-868. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 474-496. Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227. 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.