The main objective of the study is to describe and evaluate the use of digital and real laboratory activities on science teachers' conceptual understanding and laboratory performance skills. Digital laboratory activities involved the use of videos and online quizzes through Schoology, a learning management system. In contrast, real laboratory activities employed actual conduct of the laboratory activities, use of laboratory performance evaluation sheets, preparation of written laboratory reports, group outputs, reflective journals, and interviews. This study employed the Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) model utilizing a mixed-method approach. An intact class of in-service teachers (N=16) enrolled in the course Laboratory Teaching in Basic Science Course served as participants in this study. The impacts of the intervention on the teachers' performance skills were based on the teacher-researcher observations throughout the intervention, teachers' actual hands-on work, and the written reports, reflections, and narratives. Qualitative data showed that conceptual understanding and laboratory performance skills of the teachers were enhanced using digital and real laboratory activities. Specifically, comprehension and mastery of the content were enhanced with digital laboratory activities, additive skills, written communication skills, and critical thinking skills of the real lab. It also indicated that the teachers’ attitudes towards the activity were improved as they showed collaboration and active participation within the group. Overall findings indicate that the use of digital laboratory activities as part of the laboratory instructions provides learning and the real lab.
Ascough, R. S. (2007). Welcoming Design-hosting a hospitable online course. Teaching Theology & Religion, 10, 131-136.
Ayas, A., Cepni, S., & Akdeniz, A.R. (1994). Importance of laboratory in science education-II. Contemporary Education Journal. 205:7–11.
Brigati, J.R., & Swann, J.M. (2015). Supplemental Materials for Facilitating Improvements in Laboratory Report Writing Skills with Less Grading: A Laboratory Report Peer-Review Process. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 61-68.
Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Journal of Computer and Education, 87:218-237.
Brown, P., Concannon, J., Mary, D., Donaldson, C., & Black, A. (2016). An Examination of Middle School Students STEM: Self-Efficacy with Relation to Interest and Perceptions of STEM. Journal of STEM Education Innovations and Research, 17:3-27.
Burewicz A. & Miranowicz N. (2006). Effectiveness of multimedia laboratory instruction, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 7, 1–12.
Collis, M., Gibson, A., Hughes, I., Sayers, G. & Todd, M. (2008). The students' view of 1st-year laboratory work in the Biosciences-Score Gamma? Bioscience Education e-Journal, www.bioscience.jeacademy.ac.uk/journal/vol11/beej-11-2.pdf
Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach. SAGE Publications, Inc.
Duban, N., Aydogdu, B., & Yuksel, A. (2019). Classroom Teachers Opinions on Science Laboratory Practices. Universal Journal of Educational Research .7(3): 772-780.
Galloway K. R. & Bretz S. L., (2016), Video episodes and action cameras in the undergraduate chemistry laboratory: eliciting student perceptions of meaningful learning.Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 17:139–155.
Galloway, K. R., Malakpa, Z. & Bretz, S. L., (2016). Investigating Affective Experiences in the Undergraduate Chemistry Laboratory: Students' Perceptions of Control and Responsibility, J. Chem. Educ., 93:227–238.
Gandhi, P. R., Livezey, J. A., Zaniewski, A. M., Reinholz, D. L. & Dounas-Frazer, D. R. (2016). Attending to experimental physics practices and lifelong learning skills in an introductory laboratory course. American Journal of Physics, 84: 696-703.
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.
Hofstein, A. et al. (1982). The role of the laboratory in Science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research. 52(2): 201-217.
Jolley, D. F., Wilson S. R., Kelso C., O’Brien G. & Mason, C. E. (2016). Analytical Thinking, Analytical Action: Using Prelab Video Demonstrations and e-Quizzes to Improve Undergraduate Preparedness for Analytical Chemistry Practical Classes. J. Chem. Educ., 93, 1855–1862.
Jones J. A., D'Addario A. J., Rojec B. L., Milione G. & Galvez, E. J. (2016). The Poincaré - sphere approach to polarization: Formalism and new labs with Poincare beams. American Journal of Physics. 84: 822-835.
Jones, S. M. & Edwards, A. (2010). Online pre-laboratory exercises enhance student preparedness for first year biology practical classes, Int. J. Innov. Sci. Math. Educ.18:1–9.
Khouyibaba, S. (2010). Teaching mathematics with technology. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9: 638–643.
Lugtu, R. (2018). The Decline of Critical Thinking. Manila Times.
Mahendran, M. & Young, J. (1998). Use of advanced technology videotapes in the delivery of structural engineering courses. European Journal, 23(3):327-333.
Mendoza, G., Caranto, L., & David, J. (2015). Effectiveness of Video Presentation to Students Learning. International Journal of Nursing Science.5 (2): 81-86.
Morris, D. R., & Romero, M. J. (2018). The Flipped Aviation Maintenance Classroom: Using Video-Based Instruction as a Demonstration Tool in Metals Processing Lab Work. opensiuc.lib.siu.edu.
Nam, C.S. & Smith-Jackson, T.L. (2007). Web-Based Learning Environment: A Theory-Based Design Process for Development and Evaluation. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 6(1), 23-43. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved June 10, 2020, from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/111406/.
Odubunni. T. & Balagun, A. (1991). The effect of laboratory and lecture teaching methods on cognitive achievement in integrated science. J Res Sci Teach. 28:213–224.
Owokade, 00, (2006). Facilitating effective performance of students in mathematics, science, and technology in secondary schools. Paper presented at the FGN-UNESCO Workshop for Inspectors, University of Lagos, Lagos, Nigeria, Dec 2006.
Pogacnik L. and Cigic B., (2006), How to motivate students to study before they enter the lab. J. Chem. Educ.83:1094.
Rebolledo, P., Smith, R., & Bullock, D. (2016). London: British Council. Online: http://bit.ly/champion-teachers
Riswanto, R. & Dewi, N. A. K. (2017) Enhancing Science Process Skills Through Laboratory-Based Learning to Achieve Characteristic Learning. Research Journals and Physics Education Studies. 4:60-65.
Rovai, A., Wighting, M. & Liu, J. (2005). School climate. Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 6 (4):361-374.
Schmidt-McCormack, J., Muniz, M., Keuter, E., Shaw, S., & Cole, R. (2017) Design and implementation of instructional videos for upper-division undergraduate laboratory courses. Journal of Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4.
Sife, A., Lwoga, E. & Sanga, C. (2007). New technologies for teaching and learning: Challenges for higher learning institutions in developing countries. International Journal of Education and development using Information and Communication Technology, 3 (2), 57-67.
Suseno, N., Partono, Riswanto, Harjati, P., & Dedy HA (2019) School Laboratory Management System. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1361 (2019) 012068, DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1361/1/01/012068.
Tezcan, H. & Bilgin, E. (2004). Effects of laboratory method and other factors on student success in teaching the solvation subject at the high schools. J Gazi Educ Fac . 24:175–191.