Abstract
Given the importance of laboratory experimentation for science education, many researchers have attempted to investigate and document the value of using Physical Manipulatives (PM; real-world physical/concrete material and apparatus) and Virtual Manipulatives (VM; virtual apparatus and material, which exist in computer-based simulations) in science laboratory experimentation (Finkelstein et al. 2005; Hofstein and Lunetta 2004; Jaakkola et al. 2010; Toth et al. 2009; Triona and Klahr 2003; Winn et al. 2006; Zacharia 2007; Zacharia and Anderson 2003; Zacharia and Constantinou 2008; Zacharia and Olympiou 2011; Zacharia et al. 2008). Comparative studies have also been undertaken in order to identify which of these two modes of experimentation (PM or VM) is the most preferable across several science subject domains (Finkelstein et al. 2005; Klahr et al. 2007; Toth et al. 2009; Triona and Klahr 2003; Zacharia 2007; Zacharia et al. 2008, 2012; Zacharia and Constantinou 2008; Zacharia and Olympiou 2011).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
de Jong, T., & Njoo, M. (1992). Learning and instruction with computer simulation: Learning processes involved. In E. de Corte, M. C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (pp. 411–427). Berlin: Springer.
de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68, 179–202.
Doerr, H. (1997). Experiment, simulation and analysis: An integrated instructional approach to the concept of force. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 265–282.
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science – from behaviorism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser & K. J. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3–25). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., et al. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physical Review Special Topics – Physics Education Research, 1, 1–8.
Han, I., & Black, J. B. (2011). Incorporating haptic feedback in simulation for learning physics. Computers in Education, 57, 2281–2290.
Hatzikraniotis, E., Bisdikian, G., Barbas, A., & Psillos, D. (2007). Optilab: Design and development of an integrated virtual laboratory for teaching optics. In C. P. Constantinou, Z. C. Zacharia, & M. Papaevripidou (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Based Learning in Science. Crete: Technological Educational Institute of Crete.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 28–54.
Hsu, Y.-S., & Thomas, R. A. (2002). The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation on science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 955–979.
Huppert, J., & Lazarowitz, R. (2002). Computer simulations in the high school: Students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 803–821.
Jaakkola, T., Nurmi, S., & Veermans, K. (2010). A comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits in simulation only and simulation-laboratory contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 71–93.
Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 183–203.
Marshall, J. A., & Young, E. S. (2006). Preservice teachers’ theory development in physical and simulated environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 907–937.
McDermott, L. C., & The Physics Education Group. (1996). Physics by inquiry. New York: Wiley.
Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96, 21–47.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Toth, E. E., Morrow, B. L., & Ludvico, L. R. (2009). Designing blended inquiry learning in a laboratory context: A study of incorporating hands-on and virtual laboratories. Innovative Higher Education, 33(5), 333–344.
Triona, L., & Klahr, D. (2003). Point and click or grab and heft: Comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students’ ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 149–173.
Windschitl, M. (2000). Supporting the development of science inquiry skills with special classes of software. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48, 81–95.
Winn, W., Stahr, F., Sarason, C., Fruland, R., Oppenheimer, P., & Lee, Y.-L. (2006). Learning oceanography from a computer simulation compared with direct experience at sea. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 25–42.
Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 120–132.
Zacharia, Z. C., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). The effects of an interactive computer-based simulations prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiments on students’ conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics, 71, 618–629.
Zacharia, Z. C., & Constantinou, C. P. (2008). Comparing the influence of physical and virtual manipulatives in the context of the physics by inquiry curriculum: The case of undergraduate students’ conceptual understanding of heat and temperature. American Journal of Physics, 76, 425–430.
Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21, 317–331.
Zacharia, Z. C., Olympiou, G., & Papaevripidou, M. (2008). Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1021–1035.
Zacharia, Z., Loizou, E., & Papaevripidou, M. (2012). Is physicality an important aspect of learning through science experimentation among kindergarten students? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(3), 447–457.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Olympiou, G., Zacharia, Z.C. (2014). Blending Physical and Virtual Manipulatives in Physics Laboratory Experimentation. In: Bruguière, C., Tiberghien, A., Clément, P. (eds) Topics and Trends in Current Science Education. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7281-6_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7281-6_26
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-7280-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-7281-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)