Abstract
The overall goal of this study was to evaluate student experiences in online laboratory courses in order to inform the design and improvement of lab activities in a distance education program. Students were surveyed about their satisfaction and perceptions of usability and learning in both hands-on (at home) and computer-based simulation (virtual) labs in a variety of natural science courses. We also attempted to evaluate the effectiveness of several online chemistry courses taught with either hands-on kits or virtual laboratory activities, and examined the performance of students concurrently enrolled in lecture and laboratory chemistry courses versus those enrolled in a lecture only courses. The majority of survey respondents felt their online laboratory experience was the same as or better than their prior experiences in the traditional setting. Survey data also show that students believe their laboratory experiences reinforced and improved their understanding of concepts presented in lectures and the textbook, and thus may have helped them perform better on course assessments. Our data on performance suggest that students enrolled in online science courses do as well or better than their peers enrolled in traditional courses. The data also suggest that students who take lecture and laboratory concurrently outperform their lecture-only peers, independent of course (i.e., general or organic chemistry) or delivery method (i.e., online or traditional).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allen, I. E., Seaman, J. (2010). Class difference$: online education in the United States. Sloan Consortium. https://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/class-differences.pdf. Accessed June 2006.
American Association of Physics Teachers. (1998). The goal of introductory laboratories. College Park. Retrieved from http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/goaloflabs.cfm. Accessed April 2016.
American Chemical Society. (2011). Importance of hands-on laboratory activities. Retrieved from https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/policy/publicpolicies/education/computersimulations.html. Accessed September 2017.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded ed). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Computers and Education, 87, 218–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.003.
Bruck, A. D., & Towns, M. (2013). Development, implementation, and analysis of a national survey of faculty goals for undergraduate chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(6), 685–693. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed300371n.
Casanova, R. S., Civelli, J. L., Kimbrough, D. R., Heath, B. P., & Reeves, J. H. (2006). Distance learning: A viable alternative to the conventional lecture-lab format in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 83(3), 501.
Chen, P.-S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Gudiry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education, 54, 1222–1232.
Conway-Klaassen, J. M., Wiesner, S. M., Desens, C., Trcka, P., & Swinehart, C. (2012). Using online instruction and virtual laboratories to teach hemostasis in a medical laboratory science program. Clinical Laboratory Science, 25(4), 224–229.
Dalgarno, B., Bishop, A. G., Adlong, W., & Bedgood Jr., D. R. (2009). Effectiveness of a virtual laboratory as a preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students. Computers & Education, 53(3), 853–865.
Dikmenli, M. (2007). Biology student teachers’ ideas about purpose of laboratory work. Asia-Pacific Forumon Science Learning and Teaching, 10(2), 1–14 Article 9. https://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v10_issue2/dikmenli/dikmenli7.htm.
Dobson, J. (2009). Evaluation of the virtual physiology of exercise laboratory program. Advances in Physiology Education, 33, 335–342.
Feig, A. (2010). An online introductory physical geology laboratory: From concept to outcome. Geosphere, 6(6), 1–10.
Hands-On Lab Website. (n.d.). http://holscience.com/.
Honey, M. A., & Hilton, M. L. (2011). Learning science through computer games and simulations. Washington, D.C.: National Academic Press.
Johnstone, A. H. (1982). Macro-and micro-chemistry. School Science Review, 64(227), 377–379.
Josephsen, J., & Kristensen, A. K. (2006). Simulation of laboratory assignments to support students’ learning of introductory inorganic chemistry. Chemical Education Research and Practice, 7(4), 266–279.
Liu, X. (2006). Effects of combined hands-on laboratory and computer modeling on student learning of gas laws: A quasi-experimental study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 15(1), 89–100.
Ma, J., & Nickerson, J. V. (2006). Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 38(3), 7.
Makransky, G., Thisgaard, M. W., & Gadegaard, H. (2016). Virtual simulations as preparation for lab exercises: Assessing learning of key laboratory skills in microbiology and improvement of essential non-cognitive skills. PLoS One, 1-11, e0155895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.prone.0155895.
Matz, R. L., Rothman, E. D., Krajcik, J. S., & Banaszak, M. M. (2012). Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(5), 659–682.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., and Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington DC: US Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development. https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf. Accessed September 2017.
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Kwok, O., Cifuentes, L., & Davis, T. J. (2012). The learner characteristics, features of desktop 3D virtual reality environments, and college chemistry instruction: A structural equation modeling analysis. Computers & Education, 59, 551–568.
National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (n.d.). https://nces.ed.gov/.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Science Teachers Association. (2007). NSTA position statement: the integral role of laboratory investigations in science instruction. http://www.nsta.org/about/positions/laboratory.aspx. Accessed September 2017.
Rivera, C. (2014). For some students, virtual labs replace hands-on science experiments. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-college-labs-20141115-story.html. Accessed September 2017.
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (n.d.). Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs/web/97578e.asp.
Waldrop, M. M. (2013). Education online: The virtual lab. Nature, 499, 268–270 http://www.nature.com/news/education-online-the-virtual-lab-1.13383.
Welsch, D. (2015). The effectiveness of online labs. Online Learning Tips, American Public University System. https://onlinelearningtips.com/2015/06/the-effectiveness-of-online-science-labs/. Accessed September 2017.
Woodfield, B. F., & Catlin, H. R. (2004). The virtual ChemLab project: A realistic and sophisticated simulation of inorganic qualitative analysis. Journal of Chemical Education, 81(11), 1672–1678.
Woodfield, B. F., Andrus, M. B., Anderson, T., Miller, J., Simmons, B., & Stanger, R. (2005). The virtual ChemLab project: A realistic and sophisticated simulation of organic synthesis and organic qualitative analysis. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(11), 1728–1735.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mary L. Schwanke, Ph.D. for her expert editing and advice during the writing of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Electronic supplementary material
ESM 1
Included in the Supplemental Material file are Appendices A through E. Appendix A contains the Survey Questions, Appendix B contains Results for Demographics and Computer Use Questions, Appendix C contains Other Challenges Experienced Accessing the Laboratory Component and Appendix D contains Additional Students Comments to the open response question Appendix E contains Table 4 General Chemistry Students Perceptions of Usability and Learning and Table 5 Organic Chemistry Students Perceptions of Usability and Learning. (DOCX 117 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rowe, R.J., Koban, L., Davidoff, A.J. et al. Efficacy of Online Laboratory Science Courses. J Form Des Learn 2, 56–67 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-017-0014-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-017-0014-0