Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Virtual Laboratory in Electromagnetism: A Study of Instrumental Orchestration

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching and Education (TECH-EDU 2022)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 1720))

  • 1004 Accesses

Abstract

The integration between virtual learning environments of recognized individual success, such as the PhET project and the Moodle Platform, presents itself as a path to be explored in the context of Instrumental Orchestration (IO), due to the broad benefits that this type of junction can bring to STEM teaching and learning. In this perspective, we conducted a purely interpretive study to investigate the role of IO, in different resources, on the academic success of students in a Bioengineering course, by comparing two activities, corresponding to the extremes of their scores, in electromagnetism laboratory practices, converted to Hybrid Teaching, by means of the COVID19 pandemic. For this, an evaluative framework was built based on the bibliographic reference, which underwent refinements adapting it to the available data, to finally analyze the IO dimensions referring to PhET, Moodle, proposed activities and interactions among participants. The main contribution of the research refers to the need for a better orchestration between simulated activities and laboratory practices, naturally accompanied by more productive interactions. This kind of research also contributes to the elaboration of new pedagogical practices, anchored in facts concerning the different approaches of IO and the way students learn.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Khatri, R., Henderson, C.R., Cole, R., Froyd, J.: Over one hundred million simulations delivered: a case study of the PhET interactive simulations, pp. 205–208 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2013.pr.039

  2. McKagan, S.B., et al.: Developing and researching PhET simulations for teaching quantum mechanics. Am. J. Phys. 76(4), 406–417 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2885199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Perkins, K., Moore, E., Podolefsky, N., Lancaster, K., Denison, C.: Towards Research-Based Strategies for Using PhET Simulations in Middle School Physical Science Classes (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Çelik, B.: The effects of computer simulations on students’ science process skills? Literature review. Can. J. Educ. Soc. Stud. 2(1), 16–28 (2021). https://doi.org/10.53103/cjess.v2i1.17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barroso, F.F., Carvalho, S.A., Huguenin, J.A.O., Tort, A.C.: Formação de imagens na óptica geométrica por meio do método gráfico de Pierre Lucie. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Fisica 40(2) (2018). https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9126-RBEF-2017-0120

  6. Uwamahoro, J., Ndihokubwayo, K., Ralph, M., Ndayambaje, I.: Physics students’ conceptual understanding of geometric optics: revisited analysis. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 30(5), 706–718 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09913-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Adams, W.K., Armstrong, Z., Galovich, C.: Can students learn from PhET sims at home, alone?, pp. 23–26 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2015.pr.001

  8. Ouahi, M.B., Lamri, D., Hassouni, T., Al Ibrahmi, E.M.: Science teachers’ views on the use and effectiveness of interactive simulations in science teaching and learning. Int. J. Instruct. 15(1), 277–292 (2022). https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2022.15116a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. PhET, Creating PhET interactive simulations activities – PhET’s approach to guided inquiry. PhET Interactive Simulations PhET Professional Development Team, November 20 (2014). https://phet.colorado.edu/en/teaching-resources/activity-guide. Accessed 11 Feb 2022

  10. Moodle, “Moodle,” moodle.org (2022). https://docs.moodle.org/400/en/History. Accessed 08 May 2022

  11. Sumardi, Y., Khasanah, D.U., Marseta, T., Utami, D.: The Comparation Study of Laboratory Experiment and Computer Simulation Methods in Increasing Students’ Cognitive Achievement and Science Process Skills on the Topic of Linear Motion (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. PhET. PhET Interactive Simulations. University of Colorado Boulder (2022). https://phet.colorado.edu/. Accessed 05 Feb 2022

  13. Bernardino Lopes, J., Costa, C.: Converting digital resources into epistemic tools enhancing STEM learning. In: Reis, A., João Barroso, J., Lopes, B., Mikropoulos, T., Fan, C.-W. (eds.) Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching and Education: Second International Conference, TECH-EDU 2020, Vila Real, Portugal, December 2–4, 2020, Proceedings, pp. 3–20. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73988-1_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Tabach, M.: A mathematics teacher’s practice in a technological environment: a case study analysis using two complementary theories. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 16(3), 247–265 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-011-9186-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Drijvers, P., Grauwin, S., Trouche, L.: When bibliometrics met mathematics education research: the case of instrumental orchestration. ZDM Math. Educ. 52(7), 1455–1469 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01169-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Artigue, M.: Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: the genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn. 7(3), 245–274 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022103903080

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Trouche, L.: Managing the complexity of human/machine interactions in computerized learning environments: guiding students’ command process through instrumental orchestrations. Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn. 9(3), 281–307 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-004-3468-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Drijvers, P., Doorman, M., Boon, P., Reed, H., Gravemeijer, K.: The teacher and the tool: Instrumental orchestrations in the technology-rich mathematics classroom. Educ. Stud. Math. 75(2), 213–234 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9254-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Drijvers, P., Tacoma, S., Besamusca, A., Doorman, M., Boon, P.: Digital resources inviting changes in mid-adopting teachers’ practices and orchestrations. ZDM Int. J. Math. Educ. 45(7), 987–1001 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0535-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hollebrands, K., Okumuş, S.: Secondary mathematics teachers’ instrumental integration in technology-rich geometry classrooms. J. Math. Behav. 49, 82–94 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Lopes, J.B., Costa, C.: Digital Resources in Science, Mathematics and Technology Teaching – How to Convert Them into Tools to Learn, pp. 243–255 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20954-4_18

  22. Gamage, S.H.P.W., Ayres, J.R., Behrend, M.B.: A systematic review on trends in using Moodle for teaching and learning. Int. J. STEM Educ. 9(1) (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00323-x

  23. Altinpulluk, H., Kesim, M.: A systematic review of the tendencies in the use of learning management systems. Turk. Online J. Dist. Educ. TOJDE 22(3) (2021)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sánchez, M.: On the concept of documentational orchestration. In: Winslow, C., Evans, R. (eds.) Didactics as Design Science, pp. 11–22 (2010). www.ind.dk

  25. Ørngreen, R., Knudsen, S.P., Kolbaek, D., Hagel, R., Jensen, S.: Moodle and problem-based learning: pedagogical designs and contradictions in the activity system. Electron. J. e-Learn. 19(3), 133–146 (2021)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Adams, W., Mckagan, S.B.: A Study of Educational Simulations Part II – Interface Design (2008). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251365235

  27. Adams, W., Mckagan, S.B.: A Study of Educational Simulations Part I-Engagement and Learning Science Education Initiative View Project Perceptions of Teaching as a Profession View Project (2008). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251437248

  28. Phanphech, P., Tanitteerapan, T., Murphy, E.: Explaining and enacting for conceptual understanding in secondary school physics. Issues Educ. Res. 29(1), 180–204 (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Finkelstein, N.D., et al.: When learning about the real world is better done virtually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. Phys. Educ. Res. 1(1) (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010103

  30. Hoehn, J.R., Fox, M.F.J., Werth, A., Borish, V., Lewandowski, H.J.: Remote advanced lab course: a case study analysis of open-ended projects. Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17(2) (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020111

  31. Başer, M., Durmuş, S.: The effectiveness of computer supported versus real laboratory inquiry learning environments on the understanding of direct current electricity among pre-service elementary school teachers. Eurasia J. Math. 6(1), 47–61 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wood, B.K., Blevins, B.K.: Substituting the practical teaching of physics with simulations for the assessment of practical skills: an experimental study. Phys. Educ. 54(3), 035004 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ab0192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Rustana, C.E., Andriana, W., Serevina, V., Junia, D.: Analysis of student’s learning achievement using PhET interactive simulation and laboratory kit of gas kinetic theory. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1567(2), 022011 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1567/2/022011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ernita, N., Muin, A., Verawati, N.N.S.P., Prayogi, S.: The effect of inquiry learning model based on laboratory and achievement motivation toward students’ physics learning outcomes. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1816(1), 012090 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1816/1/012090

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Đorić, B., Lambić, D., Jovanović, Ž: The use of different simulations and different types of feedback and students’ academic performance in physics. Res. Sci. Educ. 51(5), 1437–1457 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9858-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lopes, J.B., et al.: Instrumentos de Ajuda à Mediação do Professor para Promover a aprendizagem dos alunos e o desenvolvimento Profissional dos Professores. SENSOS 2(1), 125–171 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Dougiamas, M.: Moodle (2020). https://download.moodle.org/. Accessed 08 May 2022

Download references

Acknowledgements

To the University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro – UTAD, especially to the professors who made available the analyzed data, to the Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Rio Grande do Norte – IFRN, which enabled the development of this research, and to the PhET and Moodle projects, for sharing content with the global academic community.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UTAD, Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    R. Nonato de Medeiros Jr, M. Duarte Naia & J. Bernardino Lopes

  2. IFRN, Instituto Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, João Câmara, Brazil

    R. Nonato de Medeiros Jr

Authors
  1. R. Nonato de Medeiros Jr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. Duarte Naia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Bernardino Lopes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Nonato de Medeiros Jr .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    Arsénio Reis

  2. University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    João Barroso

  3. University of Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

    Paulo Martins

  4. University of Peloponnese, Tripoli, Greece

    Athanassios Jimoyiannis

  5. National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City, Taiwan

    Ray Yueh-Min Huang

  6. Nova IMS, Lisbon, Portugal

    Roberto Henriques

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

de Medeiros, R.N., Naia, M.D., Lopes, J.B. (2022). Virtual Laboratory in Electromagnetism: A Study of Instrumental Orchestration. In: Reis, A., Barroso, J., Martins, P., Jimoyiannis, A., Huang, R.YM., Henriques, R. (eds) Technology and Innovation in Learning, Teaching and Education. TECH-EDU 2022. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1720. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22918-3_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22918-3_14

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-22917-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-22918-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation