Virtual Laboratory Applications in Science Education: A Systematic Synthesis of National Postgraduate Theses

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to examine the postgraduate thesis studies related to virtual laboratory applications in science education. Based on the purpose of the study, 54 national postgraduate thesis studies within the scope of virtual laboratory applications in science education between 2010-2024 were analyzed based on the determined criteria. The study was carried out as a systematic synthesis study, and the thesis studies evaluated within the framework of the study were examined objectively. As a result of the study, it was revealed that the theses examined aimed to investigate the effects of virtual laboratories on academic achievement, scientific pro-cess skills, 21st-century skills, behaviour, and attitude. It has been determined that the studies are generally based on quantitative design, the study group is aimed at secondary school students, data analyses are carried out with statistical analyses, and achievement tests and scales are used as data collection tools. In addition, it was mentioned that the studies mostly focused on electricity and force-motion units and the positive effect of virtual laboratory applications on many variables. In the context of the results of the study, considering the positive impact of virtual laboratory applications in science education on student achievement, concept learning, and attitudes, the use of virtual laboratories in science education is recommended.

Keywords

• Technology
• science education
• virtual laboratory applications
• graduate theses
• synthesis study

Fen Eğitiminde Sanal Laboratuvar Uygulamaları: Ulusal Lisansüstü Tezlere Dayalı Sistematik Bir Sentez

Abstract

Bu çalışmada, fen eğitiminde sanal laboratuvar uygulamaları ile ilgili yüksek lisans tez çalışmalarını incelemek amaçlanmıştır. Çalışmanın amacına uygun olarak, 2010-2024 yılları arasında fen eğitiminde sanal laboratuvar uygulamaları kapsamında yapılan 54 ulusal yüksek lisans tez çalışması belirlenen kriterlere göre analiz edilmiştir. Çalışma sistematik bir sentez çalışması olarak gerçekleştirilmiş ve çalışma kapsamında değerlendirilen tez çalışmaları objektif bir şekilde incelenmiştir. Çalışma sonucunda, incelenen tezlerin sanal laboratuvarların akademik başarı, bilimsel süreç becerileri, 21. yüzyıl becerileri, davranış ve tutum üzerindeki etkilerini araştırmayı amaçladığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Çalışmaların genel olarak nicel tasarıma dayandığı, çalışma grubunun ortaokul öğrencilerini hedeflediği, veri analizlerinin istatistiksel analizlerle yapıldığı ve veri toplama aracı olarak başarı testleri ve ölçeklerin kullanıldığı belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, çalışmaların çoğunlukla elektrik ve kuvvet-hareket üniteleri ile sanal laboratuvar uygulamalarının birçok değişken üzerinde olumlu etkisine odaklandığı belirtilmiştir. Çalışmanın sonuçları bağlamında, fen eğitiminde sanal laboratuvar uygulamalarının öğrenci başarısı, kavram öğrenimi ve tutumlar üzerindeki olumlu etkisi göz önüne alındığında, fen eğitiminde sanal laboratuvarların kullanılması önerilmektedir.

Keywords

• Teknoloji
• fen eğitimi
• sanal laboratuvar uygulamaları
• yüksek lisans tezleri
• sentez çalışması

References

1. Açıksoy, G., & İşlek, D. (2017). The impact of the virtual laboratory on students' attitudes in a general physics laboratory. Int J Online Eng, 13(4), 20–28.
2. Ahuja, G., Gupta, A., Wardhan, H., & Choppella, V. (2015). Assessing the impact of virtual labs: A case study with the lab on advanced VLSI. 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Taiwan, 290–292.
3. Akgül, G. D., Gecikli, E., Konan, F., & Konan, E. (2018). Pre-service teachers' opinions about the use of virtual laboratories in science education. Kesit Academy Journal, 4(14), 61–74.
4. Akkağıt, S. F., & Tekin, A. (2012). The effect of simulation-based learning on the success of secondary school students in basic electronics and measurement course. EFEEFD, 13(2), 1–12.
5. Arslan, G. B., Kızılay, E., & Hamalosmanoğlu, M. (2022). Investigation of studies in Turkey on technology integration in education. AUJEF, 6(1), 39–55.
6. Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educ Res, 36, 258–267.
7. Aydın, S. Z. N. (2018). Use and evaluation of virtual laboratory application in science teaching (Publication No. 519879) [Master’s thesis, Istanbul University]. Ulusal Tez Merkezi.
8. Bacanak, A., Değirmenci, S., Karamustafaoğlu, S., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2011). Science education articles published in e-journals: Method analysis. J Turk Sci Educ, 8(1), 119–132.

9. Bağ, H., & Çalık, M. (2017). Thematic content analysis for argumentation studies at primary education level. Educ Sci, 42(190), 281–303.
10. Bozkurt, E. (2008). The effect of a virtual laboratory application prepared in physics education on student success. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Selçuk University.
11. Bozkurt, E., & Sarıkoç, A. (2008). Can the virtual laboratory replace the traditional laboratory in physics education? AKEF J, 25, 89–100.
12. Brown, J. C. (2017). A metasynthesis of the complementarity of culturally responsive and inquiry‐based science education in K‐12 settings: Implications for advancing equitable science teaching and learning. JRST, 54(9), 1143–1173.
13. Büyükkara, S. (2011). The effect of teaching the 8th grade science and technology sound unit with computer simulations and animations on student achievement and attitude [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Selçuk University.
14. Büyüköztürk, S., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, O. E., Karadeniz, S., & Demirel, F. (2012). Scientific research methods. Pegem Academy. https://depo.pegem.net/9789944919289.pdf
15. Chan, C., & Fok, W. (2009). Evaluating learning experiences in virtual laboratory training through student perceptions: A case study in electrical and electronic engineering. Engineering Education, 4(2), 70–75.
16. Chan, P., Van Gerven, T., Dubois, J. L., & Bernaerts, K. (2021). Virtual chemical laboratories: A systematic literature review of research, technologies and instructional design. CAEO, 2, 100053.
17. Çalık, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Educ Sci, 39(174), 33–38.
18. Çalık, M., & Wiyarsi, A. (2021). A systematic review of the research papers on chemistry-focused socio-scientific issues. J Balt Sci Educ, 20(3), 360–372.
19. Çalık, M., Ayas, A., & Ebenezer, J. V. (2005). A review of solution chemistry studies: Insights into students’ conceptions. J Sci Educ Tech, 14(1), 29–50.
20. Çinici, A., Özden, M., Akgün, A., Ekici, M., & Yalçın, H. (2013). Comparison of the effects of virtual and traditional laboratory practices on the achievement of 5th grade students in light and sound unit. BJEF, 8(2), 92–106.
21. De Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308.
22. Deepika, N. M., Bala, M. M., & Kumar, R. (2021). Design and implementation of intelligent virtual laboratory using RASA framework. Materials Today: Proceedings.
23. Dinçer, S. (2018). Content analysis in scientific research: Meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, and descriptive content analysis. BUEFAD, 7(1), 176–190.
24. Duman, M. S., & Avcı, G. (2016). The effect of virtual laboratory applications on student success and permanence of what has been learned. EUJEF, 18(1), 13–33. Earley, M. A. (2014). A synthesis of the literature on research methods education. Teach High Educ, 19(3), 242–253.
25. Ekici, M. (2015). Science teachers' opinions about virtual laboratory and their level of use from this method [Master’s thesis, Adıyaman University].
26. El Kharki, K., Berrada, K., & Burgos, D. (2021). Design and implementation of a virtual laboratory for physics subjects in Moroccan universities. Sustainability, 13(7), 3711.
27. Erdan, S. (2014). The effect of virtual laboratory on learners' academic achievement and perceived learning [Master’s thesis, Eskişehir Osmangazi University]
28. Erwin, E. J., Brotherson, M. J., & Summers, J. A. (2011). Understanding qualitative metasynthesis: Issues and opportunities in early childhood intervention research. J Early Interv, 33(3), 186–200.
29. Faour, M. A., & Ayoubi, Z. (2018). The effect of using virtual laboratory on grade 10 students’ conceptual understanding and their attitudes towards physics J Educ Sci Environ Health, 4(1), 54–68.
30. Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Hermansyah, H., & Herayanti, L. (2019). Guided inquiry model through virtual laboratory to enhance students’ science process skills on heat concept. Cakrawala Pendidikan, 38(2), 259–268.
31. Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Sahidu, H., & Herayanti, L. (2017). Virtual laboratory to improve students’ problem-solving skills on electricity concept. IPA Indones, 6(2), 257–264.
32. Günlü, E. (2020). Secondary school science teachers' views on the applicability of using virtual labs in science learning [Unpublished master’s thesis, Mersin University].
33. Hannes, K., & Macaitis, K. (2012). A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Res J 12(4), 402–442.
34. Hawkins, I., & Phelps, A. J. (2013). Virtual laboratory vs. traditional laboratory: Which is more effective for teaching electrochemistry? Chem Educ Res Pract, 14(4), 516–523.
35. Herga, N. R., Čagran, B., & Dinevski, D. (2016). Virtual laboratory in the role of dynamic visualisation for better understanding of chemistry in primary school. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 12(3), 593–608.
36. Herga, N. R., Grmek, M. I., & Dinevski, D. (2014). Virtual laboratory as an element of visualization when teaching chemical contents in science class. TOJET, 13(4), 157–165.
37. Hsu, Y. S., & Thomas, R. A. (2002). The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation on science learning. Int J Sci Educ, 24(9), 955–979.
38. İnce, E., Kirbaslar, F. G., Yolcu, E., Aslan, A. E., Kayacan, Z. C., Alkan Olsson, J., & Yolcu, O. (2014). 3-dimensional and interactive Istanbul University virtual laboratory based on active learning methods. TOJET, 13(1), 1–20.
39. Jensen, N., Von Voigt, G., Nejdl, W., & Olbrich, S. (2004). Development of a virtual laboratory system for science education. IMEJ, 2(3), 1–6.
40. Jeschke, S., Richter, T., & Zorn, E. (2010). Virtual labs in mathematics and natural sciences. Online Educa Berlin Conference Proceedings.
41. Kaba, U. A. (2012). The effectiveness of virtual laboratory applications as support material in distance science education [Master’s thesis, Anadolu University].
42. Kapıcı, H. O., Akçay, H., & De Jong, T. (2019). Using hands-on and virtual laboratories alone or together: Which works better for acquiring knowledge and skills? J Sci Educ Tech, 28(3), 231–250.
43. Kapıcı, H. O., Akçay, H., & Çakır, H. (2022). Investigating the effects of different levels of guidance in inquiry- based hands-on and virtual science laboratories. Int J Sci Educ, 1–22.
44. Kapıcı, H. O., Koca, E. E., & Akçay, H. (2018). Effects of writing to learn activities in hands-on and virtual laboratory environments. The Eurasia Proceedings of Educational and Social Sciences, 9, 48–51.
45. Kapıcı, H., & Akçay, H. (2020). Enhancing pre-service science teachers’ inquiry skills in hands-on and virtual laboratory environments. Themes in e-Learning, 13, 21–32.
46. Kapıcı, H. O., Akçay, H., & De Jong, T. (2020). How do different laboratory environments influence students’ attitudes toward science courses and laboratories? J Res Technol Educ, 52(4), 534–549.
47. Karagöz Mircik, O. (2018). The effects of virtual lab aided 7E teaching model on students' mental models in teaching concepts related to simple electric circuits [Doctoral dissertation, Karadeniz Technical University].
48. Karagöz-Mırçık, Ö., & Saka, A. Z. (2016). Evaluation of virtual laboratory supported applications in physics teaching. J Res Educ Teach, 5(43), 388–395.
49. Kıranlı Güngör, S., & Dertli, G. (2021). Analysis of studies on educational technology in higher education institutions. JCER, 9(18), 795–830.
50. Koç Ünal, İ., & Şeker, R. (2020). Investigation of the effect of virtual laboratory applications on student academic achievement: Electric unit. KEFAD, 21(1), 504–543.
51. Kollöffel, B., & De Jong, T. (2013). Conceptual understanding of electrical circuits in secondary vocational engineering education. JEE, 102(3), 375–393.
52. Liao, H., & Hitchcock, J. (2018). Reported credibility techniques in higher education evaluation studies that use qualitative methods. Eval Program Plan, 68, 157–165.
53. Maulidah, S. S., & Prima, E. C. (2018). Using physics education technology as virtual laboratory in learning waves and sounds. J Sci Learn, 1(3), 116–121.
54. Mesutoğlu, C., & Baran, E. (2021). Integration of engineering into K–12 education. Res Sci Technol, 39(3), 328–346.
55. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (2016). Qualitative data analysis (S. Akbaba Altun & A. Ersoy, Trans.). Pegem Academy.
56. Moshell, J. M., & Hughes, C. E. (2002). Virtual environments as a tool for academic learning. In Handbook of virtual environments (pp. 933–950). CRC Press.
57. Mutlu, A. (2015). The effect of guided inquiry based activities in real and virtual laboratory environments on the learning process at the general chemistry level [Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul University].
58. Namdar, B., & Küçük, A. (2018). Descriptive content analysis of technology integration studies in science education. MAKU Eğt, (48), 355–383.
59. Nivalainen, V., Asikainen, M. A., Sormunen, K., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2010). Preservice and inservice teachers’ challenges in the planning of the practical work. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(4), 393–409.
60. Pınar, M. A., & Dönel Akgül, G. (2021). Comparison of the effects of virtual and traditional laboratory practices. AKUNED, 4(2), 13–25.
61. Polat, S., & Ay, O. (2016). Meta-synthesis: A conceptual analysis. J Qual Res Educ, 4(2), 52–64.
62. Pramono, S. E., Prajanti, S. D. W., & Wibawanto, W. (2019). Virtual laboratory for elementary students. J Phys Conf Ser, 1387(1), 012113.
63. Sapriadil, S., Setiawan, A., Suhandi, A., Malik, A., Safitri, D., Lisdiani, S. A. S., & Hermita, N. (2019). Effect of higher order thinking virtual laboratory in electric circuit on students’ creative thinking skills. J Phys Conf Ser, 1204(1), 012025.
64. Sarı Ay, Ö., & Yılmaz, S. (2015). Effects of virtual experiments oriented science instruction on students’ achievement and attitude. EEO, 14(2), 609–620.
65. Suri, H., & Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research synthesis methods. Rev Educ Res, 79(1), 395–430.
66. Tatlı, Z., & Ayas, A. (2010). Virtual laboratory applications in chemistry education. Procedia Soc Behav Sci, 9, 938–942.
67. Tatlı, Z., & Ayas, A. (2011). Virtual chemistry laboratory development process. In 5th International Computer & Instructional Technologies Symposium.
68. Tekbıyık, A., & Ercan, O. (2015). Effects of the physical laboratory versus the virtual laboratory. IJPE, 11(3), 77–89.
69. Triejunita, C. N., Putri, A., & Rosmansyah, Y. (2021). A systematic literature review on virtual laboratory for learning. 2021 International Conference on Data and Software Engineering. Bandung, Indonesia.
70. Tüysüz, C. (2010). The effect of the virtual laboratory on students' achievement and attitude in chemistry. Int Online J Educ Sci, 2(1), 37–53.
71. Ültay, N., & Çalık, M. (2012). A thematic review of studies into the effectiveness of context-based chemistry curricula. J Scie Educ Tech, 21(6), 686–701.
72. Wang, T. L., & Tseng, Y. K. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of physical, virtual, and virtual-physical manipulatives. IJSME, 16(2), 203–219.
73. Widowati, A., Nurohman, S., & Setyowarno, D. (2017). Development of inquiry-based science virtual laboratory. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Sains, 4(2), 82–89.
74. Wolf, T. (2009). Assessing student learning in a virtual laboratory environment. IEEE Transactions on Education, 53(2), 216–222.
75. Zacharia, Z. C., & Michael, M. (2016). Using physical and virtual manipulatives to improve primary school students’ understanding of electric circuits. In M. Riopel & Z. Smyrnaiou (Eds.), New developments in science and technology education (pp. 125–140). Springer.