Issues on School E-Laboratories in Science Teaching

Virtuality, reality and gender
  • Kalle Juuti
  • Jari Lavonen
  • Veijo Meisalo
Conference paper
Part of the IFIP International Federation for Information Processing book series (IFIPAICT, volume 171)


Gender issues and severe related problems have been discussed in the context of using modern technologies over a long period of time. Similar discussions have concerned science teaching, especially the problems of physics education and female students. Finland has been one of the most advanced countries in the implementation of modern technologies, but even here there are several open problems. We have collected data on the use of different pedagogical approaches in modern learning environments in the context of science teaching. We have national survey data from Finland (3,626 lower secondary school students and 184 teachers, and 2,661 upper secondary school students and 81 teachers). These data show that both teachers and students have rather similar ideas about the need to develop versatile pedagogical approaches including the more active use of e-learning tools and tools available for modern science classrooms like Microcomputer Based Laboratory. This means also that a balance is needed in the roles of virtual and real components of learning environments. Male students were dissatisfied with the present situation of e-learning in science. Both genders wished for more frequent e-learning with more variety. We even performed a case study actively engaging in developing science teaching in a modern learning environment yielding more detailed and qualitative data in the context of a virtual school project. We discuss the benefits of such a research-and-development project even for inservice training of teachers.

Key words

ICT use self-evaluation science teaching gender 


  1. Cohen, V.L. (1997) Implications for Learning in a Technology-Rich School. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 8(2), 153–74.Google Scholar
  2. Davies, N. (1998) Developing Telecommunications within European Teacher Education: Progress, Plans, and Policy. In the Proceedings SITE 98: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (9th, Washington, DC, March 10–14, 1998). ERIC ED421160.Google Scholar
  3. Directorate-General for Education and Culture (2001). European Report on the Quality of School Education. Sixteen Quality Indicators. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  4. Fairbrother, R. (2000). Strategies for learning. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (eds.) Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say. Buckingham: Open University Press, 7–22.Google Scholar
  5. Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12, 447–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ilomäki, L. & Rahikainen, M. (2001). Teachers, students and ICT: Different cultures of use. The Finnish Journal of Education, Kasvatus 32, 24–35.Google Scholar
  7. Jonassen, D., Mayes, T., McAleese, R. (1992). A manifesto for a constractivist approach to technology in higher education. In T. Duffy, D. Jonassen, & J. Lowyck (eds.) Designing constructivist learning environments. Heidelberg, FRG: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Kallunki, V. and Meisalo, V. (2003). Studying Newtonian mechanics in a virtual and real learning environment in an elementary school. Proceedings of the ESERA 2003 Conference: Research and Quality of Science Education, August 19.-23.2003, Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands. Paper available in the Internet: (retrieved 11.2.2004).Google Scholar
  9. Juuti, K, Lavonen, J. & Meisalo V. (2003). Phenomenographical Approach to Design for a Hypertext Teachers Guide to MBL. In D. Psillos, P. Kariotoglou, V. Tselfes, E. Hatzikraniotis G. Fassoulopoulos, & M. Kallery (eds.) Science Education in the Knowledge-Based Society. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 333–341Google Scholar
  10. Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., Uitto, A., Byman, R., & Meisalo, V. (2004). Boys’ and Girls’ Interests in Physics in Different Contexts: A Finnish Survey. Accepted for publication in A. Laine, J. Lavonen & V. Meisalo (Eds.). Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Finnish Mathematics and Science Education Research Association. Helsinki: Department of Applied Sciences of Education, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
  11. Juuti, K., Lavonen, J., and Meisalo, V. (2004). Learning Newtonian Mechanics in Virtual and Real Learning Environments in Grade 6 in a Finnish Primary School. In V. Uskov (ed.), Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Web-Based Education February 16–18, 2004, Innsbruck, Austria. Anaheim: ACTA Press, 567–572.Google Scholar
  12. Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., Byman, R., Meisalo, V. Koponen, I. & Saloranta, S. (2003). Teaching and Studying Physics and Chemistry in Upper Secondary Schools: A Survey of the Students’ Perspective in Finland. In L. Haapasalo & K. Sormunen (eds.). Towards Meaningful Mathematics and Science Education. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Finnish Mathematics and Science Education Research Association in Joensuu 27.–28.9.2002. Bulletins of the faculty of education N:o 86. University of Joensuu, 162–180.Google Scholar
  13. Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., Byman, R., Uitto, A. & Meisalo, V. (2004). Teaching Methods in Ninth Grade Finnish Comprehensive School: A Survey of Student Expectations. In R.M. Janiuk & E. Samonek-Miciuk (eds.). Proceedings of the International Organization for Science and Technology Education (IOSTE) XI Symposium (Science and Technology Education for a Diverse World-Dilemmas, needs and parthnership), 25.–30. July, Lublin, Poland. Lublin: Maria Curie-Sklodowska University Press, 157–158.Google Scholar
  14. Lorsbach, A. and Tobin, K., 1995, Toward a Critical Approaches to the Study of Learning Environments in Science Classrooms. Research in Science Education, 25(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Maor, D. & Taylor, P.C. (1995) Teacher Epistemology and Scientific Inquiry in Computerized Classroom Environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 52(8), 839–854.Google Scholar
  16. Masui, C. & De Corte, E. (1999) Enhancing learning and problem solving skills: orienting and self-judging, two powerful and trainable learning tools, Learning and Instruction 9, 517–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. McFarlane, A. & Sakellariou, S. (2002). The Role of ICT in Science Education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 221–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meisalo, V. & Lavonen, J. (1997). The Luonti project and Network to promote teaching of Experimental Science. In N. Ephraty & R. Lidor (eds.). The Second International Conference on Teacher education: Stability, evolution and revolution. 1.–4.7.1996. Israel: Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport, Department of Teacher Education Mofet Institute, 1155–1161.Google Scholar
  19. Meisalo, V. & Lavonen, J. (1999). The LUONTI+ Project. In K. Nielsen & A. Ch. Paulsen (eds.): Practical Work in Science Education — the Face of Science in Schools. Copenhagen: Royal Danish School of Educational Studies, 174–186.Google Scholar
  20. Millar, R. (1996). Towards a science curriculum for public understanding. School Science Review, 77(280), 7–18.Google Scholar
  21. Moursund, D. & Bielefeldt, T. (1999) Will New Teachers Be Prepared To Teach in a Digital Age? A National Survey on Information Technology in Teacher Education, International Society for Technology in Education. ERIC ED428072.Google Scholar
  22. NBE. (1994). Framework curriculum for the senior secondary school. Helsinki: State Printing Press and National Board of Education.Google Scholar
  23. Novak, J. D. (1998) Theoretical and Empirical Foundations of Human Constructivism. In J.J Mintzes, J.H Wandersee & J.D. Novak (eds), Teaching Science for Understanding: A Human Constructivistic View. San Diego: Academic Press, 5–27.Google Scholar
  24. Osborne, J. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. SETRIS. (2000). Education, Training and Research in the Information Society: A National Strategy for 2000–2004. Helsinki: Ministry of Education. [] (retrieved 11.2.2004).Google Scholar
  26. Sinko, M. and Lehtinen, E. (1999). The Challenges of ICT in Finnish Education. Helsinki: Atena.Google Scholar
  27. Webb, M. (2002). Pedagogical reasoning: Issues and solutions for the Teaching and learning of ICT in Secondary School. Education and Information Technologies 7(3), 237–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wiesenmayer, R. & Koul, R. (1998). Integrating Internet Resources into the Science Classroom: Teachers’ perspectives. Journal of Science Education and Technology 7(3), 271–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Federation for Information Processing 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kalle Juuti
    • 1
  • Jari Lavonen
    • 1
  • Veijo Meisalo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Sciences of EducationUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinki

Personalised recommendations