Utilizing "Interactive Labs" Technology Resources in Science Learning: A Literature Review
Downloads
How to Cite
Science education is widely recognized as crucial for equipping students with the necessary skills to navigate the complexities of the modern world. In response to the changing educational landscape, the integration of Interactive Labs technology resources has emerged as a promising strategy to enhance science learning experiences. This literature review aims to provide insights into the benefits, challenges, and emerging trends associated with the use of Interactive Labs in science education. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology, this review systematically identified 35 relevant studies from the SCOPUS database. The findings highlight the transformative potential of Interactive Labs in promoting active learning, addressing accessibility issues, and catering to diverse learning styles and paces. Specifically, Interactive Labs have been found to improve students' understanding of complex scientific concepts, increase their engagement in the learning process, and provide personalized learning experiences tailored to individual needs. However, despite these advantages, challenges persist, including concerns about the authenticity of the learning experience, technical issues, and the need for sufficient teacher training. To advance the field of technology-enhanced science education, future research should consider expanding search criteria, utilizing mixed-methods approaches for comprehensive analysis, conducting longitudinal studies to track long-term impacts, and ensuring equal access to Interactive Labs for all students. By addressing these recommendations, stakeholders can collaborate to maximize the benefits of Interactive Labs, ultimately advancing science education to be more engaging, accessible, and effective for all students.
Abouhashem, A., Abdou, R. M., Bhadra, J., Santhosh, M., Ahmad, Z., & Al-Thani, N. J. (2021). A Distinctive Method of Online Interactive Learning in STEM Education. Sustainability, 13(24), Article 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132413909
Aleman, R., Vaughan, K., Summerfield, K., & Seeley, J. (2023). Immersive, interactive virtual learning environments increase accessibility in soil science. Natural Sciences Education, 52(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/nse2.20131
Ali, N., & Ullah, S. (2020). Review to Analyze and Compare Virtual Chemistry Laboratories for Their Use in Education. Journal of Chemical Education, 97(10), 3563–3574. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00185
Ali, N., Ullah, S., & Khan, D. (2022). Interactive Laboratories for Science Education: A Subjective Study and Systematic Literature Review. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 6(10), 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6100085
Alvarez, K. S. (2021). Using virtual simulations in online laboratory instruction and active learning exercises as a response to instructional challenges during COVID-19. Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1128/JMBE.V22I1.2503
Asudhani, J., Chahar, R., Gaur, S., Maurya, A., Mazumdar, P., & Nath, A. (2023). Aug-Labs: Redefining Scientific Education with Smartphone-Integrated Augmented Laboratories. 2023 IEEE 11th Region 10 Humanitarian Technology Conference (R10-HTC), 352–358. https://doi.org/10.1109/R10-HTC57504.2023.10461897
Bose, L. S., & Humphreys, S. (2022). The 5I’s of Virtual Technologies in Laboratory Teaching for Faculties of Higher Education in Kerala. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(6), 795–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09995-8
Brown, V., Collins, T., & Braithwaite, N. S. J. (2023). Teaching roles and communication strategies in interactive web broadcasts for practical lab and field work at a distance. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1198169
Broyer, R. M., Miller, K., Ramachandran, S., Fu, S., Howell, K., & Cutchin, S. (2021). Using Virtual Reality to Demonstrate Glove Hygiene in Introductory Chemistry Laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(1), 224–229. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00137
Byukusenge, C., Nsanganwimana, F., & Tarmo, A. P. (2022). Effectiveness of Virtual Laboratories in Teaching and Learning Biology: A Review of Literature. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 21(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.21.6.1
Chan, C., Kozhin, A., Liang, Q., Salter, G., Tang, R., Ye, C., & Zhao, C. (2022). DIVE: Make Online Learning Diversified, Interactive, Versatile, and Engaging. 2022 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE), 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE54877.2022.00085
Chiu, J. L., Dejaegher, C. J., & Chao, J. (2015). The effects of augmented virtual science laboratories on middle school students’ understanding of gas properties. Computers and Education, 85, 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.02.007
Correia, A.-P., Koehler, N., Thompson, A., & Phye, G. (2019). The application of PhET simulation to teach gas behavior on the submicroscopic level: Secondary school students’ perceptions. Research in Science & Technological Education, 37(2), 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1487834
de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and Virtual Laboratories in Science and Engineering Education. Science, 340(6130), Article 6130. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230579
Diwakar, S., Kumar, D., Radhamani, R., Nizar, N., Nair, B., Sasidharakurup, H., & Achuthan, K. (2015). Role of ICT-enabled virtual laboratories in biotechnology education: Case studies on blended and remote learning. 2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 915–921. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICL.2015.7318149
Elmoazen, R., Saqr, M., Khalil, M., & Wasson, B. (2023). Learning analytics in virtual laboratories: A systematic literature review of empirical research. Smart Learning Environments, 10(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00244-y
Francis, N. J., Ruckley, D., & Wilkinson, T. S. (2022). The virtual flow cytometer: A new learning experience and environment for undergraduate teaching. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.903732
Ghergulescu, I., Moldovan, A.-N., Muntean, C. H., & Muntean, G.-M. (2020). Evaluation of an Interactive Personalised Virtual Lab in Secondary Schools. In H. C. Lane, S. Zvacek, & J. Uhomoibhi (Eds.), Computer Supported Education (Vol. 1220, pp. 538–556). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-58459-7_26
Gryczka, P., Klementowicz, E., Sharrock, C., & Montclare, J. K. (2016). Interactive online physics labs increase high school students’ interest. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 6(3), 166–187. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.191
Gunawan, G., Nisrina, N., Y Suranti, N. M., Herayanti, L., & Rahmatiah, R. (2018). Virtual Laboratory to Improve Students’ Conceptual Understanding in Physics Learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1108, 012049. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1108/1/012049
Gupta, A., & Sharma, A. (2017). An assessment of the chemistry laboratory learning environments and teacher student interactions at the higher secondary level. International Journal of Research Studies in Education, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2017.1713
Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Qadri, M. A., & Suman, R. (2022). Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review. Sustainable Operations and Computers, 3, 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susoc.2022.05.004
Hamed, G., & Aljanazrah, A. (2020). The Effectiveness of Using Virtual Experiments on Students’ Learning in the General Physics Lab. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 977–996. https://doi.org/10.28945/4668
Harman, G., Cokelez, A., Dal, B., & Alper, U. (2016). Pre-service Science Teachers’ Views on Laboratory Applications in Science Education: The Effect of a Two-semester Course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 12–25. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2016.040103
Hofstein, A. (2004). The Laboratory in Chemistry Education: Thirty Years of Experience with Developments, Implementation, and Research. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 5(3), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1039/B4RP90027H
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty?first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2007). The laboratory in science education: The state of the art. Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 8(2), 105–107. https://doi.org/10.1039/B7RP90003A
Hossain, Z., Bumbacher, E., Brauneis, A., Diaz, M., Saltarelli, A., Blikstein, P., & Riedel-Kruse, I. H. (2018). Design Guidelines and Empirical Case Study for Scaling Authentic Inquiry-based Science Learning via Open Online Courses and Interactive Biology Cloud Labs. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 28(4), 478–507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0150-3
Hughes, C., Isaacson, J., Turner, J., Perry, A., & Sun, R. (2022). Teaching Quantum Computing to High School Students. The Physics Teacher, 60(3), 187–189. https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0009686
Iordache, D. D. (2021). Educational Value of A Virtual Reality Laboratory - Focus Group with Students. 182–187. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-026X-21-024
Kadir, W. N. H. W. A., Mustapha, I. R., & Abdullah, N. S. Y. (2021). The Effectiveness of a STEM-Based Physics Interactive Laboratory (I-LAB) Module for Form Four Physics Students. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(4), 1042–1049. https://doi.org/10.33403/rigeo.8006818
Lavidas, K., Apostolou, Z., & Papadakis, S. (2022). Challenges and Opportunities of Mathematics in Digital Times: Preschool Teachers’ Views. Education Sciences, 12(7), 459. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12070459
Lee, S., Guthery, C., Kim, D., & Calkins, A. (2022). Open-Source Virtual Labs with Failure-Mode-Inspired Physics and Optics Experiments. Physics Teacher, 60(6), 453–456. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0056462
Lestari, D. P., Supahar, Paidi, Suwarjo, & Herianto. (2023). Effect of science virtual laboratory combination with demonstration methods on lower-secondary school students’ scientific literacy ability in a science course. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11857-8
Loddo, J.-V., & Kanawati, R. (2022). Mariotel: A web-based virtual remote computer science lab. 2022 20th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training, ITHET 2022. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET56107.2022.10031755
Mamani, N. M., Garcia-Penalvo, F. J., Conde, M. A., & Goncalves, J. (2021). A systematic mapping about simulators and remote laboratories using hardware in the loop and robotic: Developing STEM/STEAM skills in pre-university education. SIIE 2021 - 2021 International Symposium on Computers in Education. https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE53363.2021.9583622
Moher, D. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135
Moore, E. B., Chamberlain, J. M., Parson, R., & Perkins, K. K. (2014). PhET interactive simulations: Transformative tools for teaching chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(8), 1191–1197. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed4005084
Mrani, C. A., El Hajjami, A., & El Khattabi, K. (2020). Effects of the integration of PhET simulations in the teaching and learning of the physical sciences of common core (Morocco). Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(7), 3014–3025. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080730
Nicol, C. B., Gakuba, E., & Habinshuti, G. (2022). Students’ Opinions, Views, and Perceptions of Science Laboratory Learning: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(3), em2087. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11793
Osman, K., & Lee, T. T. (2014). Impact of Interactive Multimedia Module with Pedagogical Agents on Students’ Understanding and Motivation in the Learning of Electrochemistry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12(2), 395–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9407-y
Oveissi, F., & Ebrahimi Ghadi, A. (2022). Preparing Chemical Engineers for Industry 4.0: An Interactive Education Approach. 9th Research in Engineering Education Symposium (REES 2021) and 32nd Australasian Association for Engineering Education Conference (REES AAEE 2021), 65–73. https://doi.org/10.52202/066488-0008
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4
Paxinou, E., Mitropoulos, K., Tsalapatas, H., & Kalles, D. (2022). A Distance Learning VR Technology Tool for Science Labs. 13th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications, IISA 2022. https://doi.org/10.1109/IISA56318.2022.9904341
Pedersen, M. K., Skyum, B., Heck, R., Müller, R., Bason, M., Lieberoth, A., & Sherson, J. F. (2016). Virtual learning environment for interactive engagement with advanced quantum mechanics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.013102
Potkonjak, V., Gardner, M., Callaghan, V., Mattila, P., Guetl, C., Petrovi?, V. M., & Jovanovi?, K. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education, 95, 309–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002
Roman, C., Delgado, M. A., & García?Morales, M. (2021). Socrative, a powerful digital tool for enriching the teaching–learning process and promoting interactive learning in Chemistry and Chemical Engineering studies. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(6), 1542–1553. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22408
Sánchez-Zurano, A., Fernández Sevilla, J. M., Esteban García, A. B., Pinna-Hernández, M. G., & Casas López, J. L. (2023). Virtual labs for the study of enzymatic stirred tank bioreactors. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 31(3), 457–468. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22510
Sarkingobir, Y., Egbebi, L. F., & Awofala, A. O. A. (2023). Bibliometric Analysis of the Thinking Styles in Math and Its’ Implication on Science Learning. International Journal of Essential Competencies in Education, 2(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.36312/ijece.v2i1.1391
Scalise, K., Timms, M., Moorjani, A., Clark, L., Holtermann, K., & Irvin, P. S. (2011). Student learning in science simulations: Design features that promote learning gains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(9), 1050–1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20437
Schuman, C., Stofer, K. A., Anthony, L., Neff, H., Chang, P., Soni, N., Darrow, A., Luc, A., Morales, A., Alexandre, J., & Kirkland, B. (2022). Ocean Data Visualization on a Touchtable Demonstrates Group Content Learning, Science Practices Use, and Potential Embodied Cognition. Research in Science Education, 52(2), 445–457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09951-9
Seibert, J., Heuser, K., Lang, V., Perels, F., Huwer, J., & Kay, C. W. M. (2021). Multitouch experiment instructions to promote self-regulation in inquiry-based learning in school laboratories. Journal of Chemical Education, 98(5), 1602–1609. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c01177
Senapati, S. (2022). Peeking into the Sophisticated World of Interactive Science Simulations. Resonance, 27(11), 1971–1983. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12045-022-1493-0
Stahre Wästberg, B., Eriksson, T., Karlsson, G., Sunnerstam, M., Axelsson, M., & Billger, M. (2019). Design considerations for virtual laboratories: A comparative study of two virtual laboratories for learning about gas solubility and colour appearance. Education and Information Technologies, 24(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-09857-0
Sung, S. H., Li, C., Huang, X., & Xie, C. (2021). Enhancing distance learning of science—Impacts of remote labs 2.0 on students’ behavioural and cognitive engagement. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 37(6), 1606–1621. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12600
Susanti, Ani Widyawati, Laily Rochmawati Listiyani, Tri Astuti Arigiyati, & Ernawati, T. (2023). Digitalization of the laboratory management module for strengthening the laboratory skills of prospective science teachers. Jurnal Pijar Mipa, 18(1), 6–12. https://doi.org/10.29303/jpm.v18i1.4267
Sypsas, A., Paxinou, E., & Kalles, D. (2020). Reviewing inquiry-based learning approaches in virtual laboratory environment for science education. ??????? ???????? ??? ??? ??????? & ?? ?????????? ??????????, 10(2?), 74. https://doi.org/10.12681/icodl.2288
Thompson, B. (2021). Work-in-progress-LIVE: Model for learning in interactive and immersive virtual environments. Proceedings of 2021 7th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network, iLRN 2021. https://doi.org/10.23919/iLRN52045.2021.9459362
Toth, E. E., Ludvico, L. R., & Morrow, B. L. (2014). Blended inquiry with hands-on and virtual laboratories: The role of perceptual features during knowledge construction. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(5), 614–630. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.693102
Tülüba?, T., Karakose, T., & Papadakis, S. (2023). A Holistic Investigation of the Relationship between Digital Addiction and Academic Achievement among Students. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 13(10), 2006–2034. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe13100143
Udin, W. N., Ramli, M., & Muzzazinah. (2020). Virtual laboratory for enhancing students’ understanding on abstract biology concepts and laboratory skills: A systematic review. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521(4), 042025. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1521/4/042025
Uysalel, C., Jain, A., Copeland, A., Fox, Z., Khoshnoud, F., & Ghazinejad, M. (2023). Developing Virtual Laboratory Modules for Broadening Experiential Learning in Engineering Education. Proceedings - Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343521
Verawati, N. N. S. P., Rijal, K., & Grendis, N. W. B. (2023). Examining STEM Students’ Computational Thinking Skills through Interactive Practicum Utilizing Technology. International Journal of Essential Competencies in Education, 2(1), 54–65. https://doi.org/10.36312/ijece.v2i1.1360
Wan, T., Geraets, A. A., Doty, C. M., Saitta, E. K. H., & Chini, J. J. (2020). Characterizing science graduate teaching assistants’ instructional practices in reformed laboratories and tutorials. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00229-0
Wirzal, M. D. H., Nordin, N. A. H. M., Bustam, M. A., & Joselevich, M. (2022). Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Scientific Literacy between 2018 and 2022: Science Education Subject. International Journal of Essential Competencies in Education, 1(2), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.36312/ijece.v1i2.1070
Copyright (c) 2024 Ni Nyoman Sri Putu Verawati, Joni Rokhmat, AA Sukarso, Ahmad Harjono, Muh Makhrus
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
