Literature Review: ​Can Virtual Labs Replace Hands-On?

Sarah Hatfield

National University

TED 690-Capstone Course

Professor Darryl Wyatt

 Abstract

Within Domain C of the CTC, educators must meet four Teacher Performance

Expectations. ​ Educators must make content accessible, engage students through multiple

mediums, develop age appropriate curriculum, and support learning in English learners. The

​ the article, ​Can Virtual Labs Replace Hands-on? by Harry Keller.

following is a review of
 As every science educator knows, making sure science curriculum incorporates hands-on

labs and activities is vital for students to engage and apply real-world science content. Without

labs, science educators would be blathering on about difficult concepts without any basis or

application to the real-world. With that being said, the availability of technology in the 21st

century has contributed different ideas for educators to provide these real-world applications.

Education paradigms have shifted dramatically in the last century, but educators do not all agree

​ with the shift in lab oriented options. Within ​Can Virtual Labs Replace Hands-on?, the Harry

Keller presents a biased approach to three options science educators can choose from, when

deciding lab curriculum. Keller explores the pros and cons of traditional lab experiments (TLE),

online simulations (SIM), and pre-recorded real experiments (PRE). Although his opinion is

skewed, it is an interesting and applicable read to those of us still developing our curriculum.

Throughout his article, Keller describes the pros and cons of the three choices for science

labs by giving real examples of specific lab experiences. Based on his analysis, he broke down

the three approaches by, “their advantages and disadvantages depending on the pedagogical

goals.” (Keller, 2009). The author uses a chart to show how the traditional experiments (my

preference) create an environment where students explore experimental design, the nature of

science, and explore a range of experiments. On the other hand, they pose high costs, low data

precision, and cannot be used in a large variety of instances. In the contrary, Keller examines

online simulations which are much cheaper, but do not provide students with experimental

design or nature of science experiences. Keller furthers his comparison with the addition of

pre-recorded real experiments, which he emphasizes, “are able to investigate a range of materials

and obtain much more real-world data than they could with the TLE approach. As a result, they
achieve a full science experience.” (Keller, 2009). I appreciate that he asserts the need to

combine PRE and TLE approaches, so students can experience the most rounded lab activities.

While Keller presented the comparison of these three approaches through four

experiments, the most profound experiment example was plant identification through

chromatography. He initially displays how teachers use “phony” plant extracts to simulate

chromatography because it is cheap and easy to complete in a high school environment.

Although this experiment engages students because of the manner of lab settings, it does not

truly apply to real-world and, “has no nuances, no ambiguities, no opportunity for error except

the most extreme. It’s just pretend and play.” (Kelly, 2009). Because it has no opportunity for

error, it does not truly display the nature of science or the experimental design. The author

suggests the PRE as an alternate because it allows students to engage with a real lab, with real

leaves. They are able to design their own experiment through enzyme choice and

chromatography band choice, which allows for error and provides them with more applicable

experimental design practice. The author further extrapolates that teachers can provide simple

paper chromatography before the PRE, to set the students up with basis knowledge of the

experiment. “By combining real virtual experiments with some hands-on activities, the students

end up with the best possible learning opportunity.” (Keller, 2009). By combining the PRE and

TLE, educators can meet all of the TPEs for Domain C.

According to TPE 4, educators must, “provide opportunities and adequate time for

students to practice and apply what they have learned to real-world applications. They provide

students the opportunity to use and evaluate strengths and limitations of media and technology as
integral tools in the classroom.” (CTC, 2013). By providing students with PRE and TLE

experiences, they are able to see how chromatography is done in a real lab setting and apply this

knowledge to an experiment in the classroom. Educators will also be able to engage students

through technology and real-world applications. Educators reinforce student knowledge through

multiple mediums and continual practice in the field of study. In addition, students who are

struggling with language can benefit from online translators and subtitles during PRE

experiences.
 Citations

Commission on Teacher Credentialing. (2013, March). California Teaching Performance

Expectations. Retrieved from:

https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/educator-prep/standards/adopted-tpes-2013.

pdf

Keller, H. (2009, June 03). Can Virtual Labs Replace Hands-On? Retrieved from

https://etcjournal.com/2009/06/02/can-virtual-labs-replace-hands-on/