The Efficiency of Online Laboratory Simulations for eLearning in Biology 02

of the Grade 12 Students in the University of San Carlos- Talamban Campus

A Research Project
Presented to
the Science and Mathematics Education Faculty of the
School of Education
University of San Carlos
Talamban, Mandaue City, Cebu, Philippines

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Course

SCED 3206

RESEARCH IN TEACHING SCIENCE 1

By

Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena

B SED- Science 3

June 2021
Table of Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 2
Rationale...................................................................................................................................... 3
Review of Related Literature .......................................................................................................... 6
Laboratory Skills ......................................................................................................................... 8
Theoretical Framework: The Research for Learning Environment .......................................... 10
Utilization of Different Scales for Research Questionnaires .................................................... 12
Constructivist-Oriented Learning Environment Survey (COLES) ........................................ 12
Science Laboratory Environment Inventory (SLEI) .............................................................. 13
Evaluation on Innovations Concerning Educational Learning Environment Scales ............ 15
Virtual Laboratories in Science Education................................................................................ 16
Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................. 19
Statement of the Problem .......................................................................................................... 20
Significance of the Study .......................................................................................................... 21
Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................... 22
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.................................................................................................. 23
Research Design ........................................................................................................................ 23
Research Environment .............................................................................................................. 24
Research Participants ................................................................................................................ 25
Research Instruments ................................................................................................................ 25
Data Collection Procedure ........................................................................................................ 26
Treatment of Data...................................................................................................................... 26
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 27
APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 30
Appendix I. Formal Letter to the Teacher for the Information of the Students ........................ 30
Appendix II. Formal Letter to the Author of the Survey .......................................................... 31
Appendix III. Constructivist Learning Environment Survey Questionnaire............................. 32
Appendix IV. Constructivist Learning Environment Survey Scale Grouping .......................... 35
Appendix V. Constructivist-Oriented Learning Environment Survey ...................................... 36
Appendix VI. Figures ................................................................................................................ 41

1
 INTRODUCTION

Students need a solid base of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to

succeed internationally (STEM). The implementation and assessment of educational advances in

science classrooms has been particularly important in this regard. In my research, I looked at one

such educational innovation: interactive labs.

Through the year of 2020, the pandemic namely COVID 19 struck the Philippines. And it

has greatly affected the socio-economic status of the Philippines. Education is also affected

because it must undergo different approaches and strategies in order to pursue the learning of the

students. There are problems that have yet to be uncovered and discovered throughout the year.

There are so many adversity and difficulties of connecting the students to the institution. The

CHED and DEPED hand in hand planned and strategize the entire layout for the continuous

education of the students. The distance online learning and modular learning has been an aide to

all the institutions present in the Philippines. This has greatly helped all the students to pursue

their learning. Education is one of the most important factors in making and maintaining the

balance of the country. Because it can support the socio-economic status of a country. Education

is described as a deliberate effort to inspire others to study.

Digital labs, which are accessible over the Internet and are designed to replicate actual

experiments, can save time in the classroom, minimize dependency on complicated, dangerous,

and expensive equipment, and enable students to participate in high-level investigations that

would not otherwise be feasible in a high school classroom environment. In reaction to calls for

more educational technologies in science schools, interactive labs will provide an immersive

learning platform that many students of the modern age are familiar with. Data is needed,

2
however, to determine if this teaching method is useful and whether virtual labs can be built and

used in classrooms.

To summarize this all the aim of this thesis is to look at how lessons incorporating a

virtual laboratory enhances students’ laboratory skills through the interactive software utilized.

In connection to all the mentioned main problem the researcher will utilize the curriculum guide

for the reference of the lesson and topics of Grade 12 students in the University of San Carlos.

Rationale

Traditionally, the focus of study of this effort has been on teachers’ direct instruction.

The word edutainment was invented as the words education and entertainment were merged.

Edutainment, also known as “e-learning,” refers to modern technologies and approaches that

make learning more efficient, effective, and enjoyable (Brinson, 2015). Typically, games are

paired with instruction through the use of apps or immersive classes. Amidst the pandemic,

educational classes still continue as of today. This unforeseen pandemic took no one off guard

anywhere in the world. Education, on the other hand, is a fundamental right that should be made

open to all Filipinos under whatever situation. There are many forms of learning classroom has

been utilized in order to acquire knowledge. One of these is blended learning, flipped classroom

and etc. In some universities, online learning or eLearning is a method used to aid the needs and

support for the students. Science is one of the major subjects that have an experimental value and

results. Though, experiments are done virtually and effectively in order to acquire the results and

discussed it to the class. Teachers are tasked to assist and guide the students in every form of

learning. In nearly any learning scenario, the teacher is a key influence in student success.

Furthermore, teachers’ presence is usually sensed outside of the classroom. Effective teachers

3
have a significant impact on their students’ cognitive progress as well as their lifelong search for

personal growth and development.

This pandemic has caused so many casualties to the education of the students because the

experiments are done virtually which has a controlled results and diagnostics. In the University

of San Carlos, the Biology Department has utilized PraxiLabs as one of their virtual laboratory

simulations which contains experiments that are done online. Virtual laboratory is a computer

laboratory which is an on-screen simulator or calculator that assists in the research and

observation of concepts. Learners use cutting-edge technologies to execute a series of tests that

generate real-world results (Dekmenli, 2007). This is a simulation of an experiment, in which a

student communicates with programmed-in activities, and a remote-controlled experiment, in

which a student interacts with actual apparatus through a computer connection while being

remote from the apparatus, are two examples that come to mind (Matz and Rothman et al, 2012).

Hands-on laboratories that can be experienced at home have been used in distance education.

These labs are famous for teaching manipulative skills and introducing students to open-ended

scenarios that inspire inquiry and design skills (Ma and Nickerson, 2006). Digital laboratories

have a lot of educational potential because they encourage students to “learn by doing.” They

often allow access to systems that would otherwise be unavailable due to factors such as

protection, expense, or scale (Chen, Lambert and Gudiry, 2010). By modifying the input and

observing the effect on the result, users will consider a number of what-if scenarios. The

advantages of virtual laboratories are to allow students to conduct a number of experiments that

are difficult to conduct in actual laboratories due to safety issues, save time and money for

teachers and students when they do not have to reach the lab at particular hours or switch from

4
one site to another. As a result, virtual laboratories provide various benefits. The study’s purpose

is to decide how successful these interactive laboratories are in an E-learning environment.

The National Science Foundation's Task Force on Cyberlearning has recommended that

digital technologies be used to improve the status of STEM education, with virtual labs being

one example (Borgman et al., 2008). While the introduction of technology into science

laboratories has begun, many scholars have noted a paucity of scientific data regarding its

efficacy in general (Russell, 1999), and the effectiveness of virtual laboratories in particular

(Harms, 2000; Hofstein & Lunetta, 2004; Javidi & Sheybani, 2006). Ma and Nickerson (2006)

recognize the importance of performing controlled trials to better assess the instructional efficacy

of laboratory simulations. Although a variety of studies have evaluated such educational

advances from the area of information technology. From an instructional standpoint, there is very

little evaluative literature on interactive labs. The aim of this research was to determine the

feasibility of using interactive laboratories in science classrooms. Virtual labs are basically

simulated tests carried out using computer software (often over the Internet) that have various

benefits for both student learning and instructional logistics.

5
Review of Related Literature

This chapter examines the literature that backs up the different facets of the research. The

aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of virtual laboratory through assessing the

acquisition of the basic laboratory skills of the Grade 12 students in the University of San Carlos.

Several studies aiming to evaluate the differences between physical and virtual

laboratories found no difference between them. For example, physical and virtual laboratories

were compared for measurement of heat exchange and mass transfer rates by Wiesner and Lan

(2004). Authors found no differences in the performance of engineering students on a test that

underlying principles were measured. No differences between virtual and hands on experiments

for undergraduates learning about heat and temperature were also reported by Zacharia et al.

(2008). In the other hand, many experiments have shown that virtual laboratories have benefits

over real laboratories when it comes to unobservable processes like thermodynamics, chemical

reactions, and electricity. Students who studied artificial electric circuits of traveling electrons,

for example, gained more theoretical experience than those who did physical laboratory work

(Finkelstein et al., 2005).

The interactive virtual reality lab may also be used as part of a flipped classroom learning

approach, in which technology and constructive learning are important components for better

learning outcomes. Zhang et al. discovered that a hybrid mix of synthetic and physical labs was

the most effective way to educate students about light and color (Olympiou and Zacharia, 2012).

Students will also be able to improve their functional laboratory abilities by using visual input to

help them grow their intellectual understanding. Digital labs, on the other hand, have the

advantage of simplifying the learning experience by presenting pertinent information and

6
eliminating ambiguous data (Trundle and Bell, 2010). The use of a virtual platform also

facilitates the understanding of such phenomena (Ford and McCormack, 2000). Students can

conduct experiments on a variety of unobservable phenomena, and they can conduct more

experiments and gather more data in less time than it would take to conduct a real experiment

(Zhang and Linn, 2011).

Many engineering curricula can be transformed into immersive worlds where learners

can actively engage, solve problems, and communicate in a realistic world using simulation-

based learning laboratories (Hansen, 2008; Makransky et al., 2016). Learners can engage with

content more easily in a secure and simulated atmosphere in virtual laboratories when they take

place in a meaningful, simulated context (Hansen, 2008). Furthermore, 3D immersive worlds

allow for immersion and realistic interaction inside a virtual universe that is controlled by

science principles (Fischer et al., 2007). These features will shift the emphasis of learning from

passive teaching to constructive exploration, repetition, and rapid feedback (Gance-Cleveland et

al., 2016). Learners may be able to discover, connect, and learn more easily as a result of this

process (Parong and Mayer, 2018).

Courses in virtual biology labs have had differing degrees of popularity. Though Leonard

claimed that video distribution was comparable to in-class courses in terms of traditional

learning results and that video learning was more time sensitive, Stuckey-Mickell and Stuckey-

Danner claimed that students thought face-to-face lab courses were more successful than virtual

laboratories. Few, if any, trials have been conducted to determine the feasibility of using digital

to train students for a face-to-face biology laboratory lesson. We created videos of laboratory

techniques in this study to provide students with pre-laboratory training and to serve as an

instructional aid for teaching assistants (TAs). A Participant Perception Indicators (PPI) survey,

7
which gauges students' views of each procedure, was used to measure the performance of pre-

class video teaching.

Laboratory Skills

The basic laboratory skills that a student could acquire in Biology 02 class are lab safety,

micro pipetting, macro pipetting, light microscope, and centrifugation. Creating a theory,

maintaining records, dissection, pipetting, weighing, lab hygiene, molecular cloning, and the

ability to sterilize equipment are all examples of lab skills.

• Lab safety- it is important to keep yourself safe in the lab. Chemicals, other toxic

materials, or lab instruments can be used depending on the profession. All these things

may be dangerous not only to you, but also to your coworkers in the lab. It is critical that

you are educated in lab safety and that you take the requisite measures to keep yourself

safe at work in your scientific job.

• Pipetting- how to correctly use a pipette — the slender tube used to weigh or move small

volumes of liquid — is one of the most basic lab skills. The experimenter will need to

learn proper technique, maintain a calm gaze, and stay focused on the job at hand. Since

this is such a common skill in a lab, it is a prerequisite for this type of job.

• Attention to detail- it is important for a scientist or experimenter to pay close attention to

detail at all times. The student and experimenter must be very precise and meticulous in

the observations and estimates while working in a lab. Otherwise, the findings can be

inaccurate or misleading.

• Utilization of light microscope- the light microscope is a device that allows to see fine

details of an object. It accomplishes this by enlarging an image created by a set of glass

lenses that concentrate a beam of light onto or around an object before enlarging it with

8
 convex objective lenses. The student will show and exhibits the techniques for the correct

usage of the microscope.

• Centrifugation- one of the skills that a student must acquire in the subject is to centrifuge

a tube in the machine.

• Creating a theory- this is one of the most important skill that is needed to be acquired in

the lab in order to make hypotheses and have precise conclusion about the experiment.

• Maintaining records- the record in every experiment is useful to every student because it

can track the progress of the experiment. This can be observed thoroughly by the teacher

on how the students handle the follow up questions.

• Weighing and measuring- in a laboratory experiment it is important to have accurate

measurements to avoid errors in the workplace. Knowing how to measure is another

useful experience to have in the lab, as it will most certainly need it in your career. The

student will need to strike the correct balance on the weight itself to accurately weigh. It

is also important that the weighing and measurements are accurate.

• Laboratory hygiene and sterilization- cleaning and sterilizing the workplace is significant

because it can provide a non-contaminated experiment and less exposure to errors. It is

important not to contaminate any solutions because the student will most likely be

dealing with a variety of chemicals and materials. To work in a lab, the student must be

able to sterilize all the instruments that you use. This would also guarantee the accuracy

of your lab tests and findings.

• Molecular cloning- molecular cloning is a technique for inserting recombinant DNA from

a prokaryotic or eukaryotic source into a replicating vehicle like plasmids or viral vectors.

9
 Cloning is the process of creating several copies of a certain DNA fragment, such as a

chromosome.

Theoretical Framework: The Research for Learning Environment

This research was conducted in an area of educational research that has progressed from

infancy to prominence in the previous 40 years. How can the impacts of educational reform be

measured? Traditionally, educational research has concentrated on the learning outcomes of

students who have received an educational intervention, particularly accomplishment scores. The

learning environments framework focuses on this; ‘learning environments' is a field of study that

encompasses not just the learning result of accomplishment, but also a complex network of

psychosocial elements that influence students, classrooms, and schools. It focuses on intangible

characteristics that give the classroom a distinct tone (Fraser, 2001).

In fact, Fraser (2001, 2012) asserts that students, rather than external observers, are the best

appraisers of the classroom setting since they have spent their whole lives observing in a variety

of classes. He claims that by the time a student graduates from university, he or she will have

spent over 20,000 hours in classrooms! As a result, in the subject of learning environments, the

student's perspective is considered. That is, the discipline uses quantitative surveys to examine

students' views of the classroom environment as criteria for efficacy and predictors of students'

cognitive and affective results (Fraser, Giddings, & McRobbie, 1995). (Walberg & Anderson,

1968). Even while the real focus is on the students' perceptions of the classroom environment,

the subject of learning environments indirectly incorporates learning outcomes because these

perceptions may have an impact on their attitudes and achievement.

10
 The foundations of the field of learning environments can be traced back to Kurt Lewin's

seminal research in a business setting in 1936, which resulted in the formula Behavior = f

(Individual, Environment), in which behavior is described as a function of the person and the

environment; this concept was then extended to human behavior in any setting. Murray (1938)

built on his thesis, advocating a need–press paradigm in which the environmental press either

supports or frustrates personal needs. Murray coined the words "alpha press" and "beta press" to

describe the perspectives of an impartial spectator and a participant in the environment,

respectively, in accordance with this model. Furthermore, Stern, Stein, and Bloom (1956)

distinguished between the person's perception of the environment (private beta press) and the

joint community's perception of the environment (consensual beta press), a distinction that is

essential to researchers when deciding on the individual, party, or external observer's perception

scores. Stern (1970), who built on the concept of person–environment match, furthered work in

learning environments.

Shavelson et al. (1991) created a computer-assisted alternate success assessment instrument

for fifth and sixth grade students. While the hands-on evaluation is desirable, both researchers

concluded that it is costly and time consuming to perform. Furthermore, Moni et al. (2007)

developed and applied a technique for assessing students' individual 5 core laboratory skills in

first-year laboratories for the Human Biology course. They created a form for tutors to report

each student's ability level. There are three stages of skill attainment: not proficient, approaching

proficiency, and proficient. However, unlike Slater and Ryan, the levels used to test the abilities

were more arbitrary (1993).

Hunt et al. (2012) conducted an action research experiment to measure laboratory skills in a

molecular biology course by replacing a single test with direct observation of student

11
involvement and understanding over a span of several weeks in the lab. They concluded that

rather than evaluating written laboratory notes or test responses, realistic laboratory abilities

should be tested in the lab by watching what the students are currently doing.

“Few disciplines of educational research offer such a rich range of valid, affordable, and

widely applicable assessment instruments as the subject of learning environments,” Fraser writes

in his evaluation of classroom environment instruments (Fraser, 1998a, p. 7). The use of

quantitative questionnaires to collect data has various advantages. In general, collecting data

through questionnaire administration provides a snapshot of the classroom environment (Fraser,

1998a, 1998b). Because of the nature of these quantitative instruments, data may be collected

from numerous large groups at once, and comparisons may be conducted across groups and

subgroups (Fraser, Fisher, & McRobbie, 1996). In comparison to the time necessary to collect,

record, transcribe, and organize qualitative data, it is an efficient way for acquiring a huge data

set in a short amount of time. This is especially true in schools, where adjustments based on

research must be applied quickly before the environment changes.

Utilization of Different Scales for Research Questionnaires

Constructivist-Oriented Learning Environment Survey (COLES)

The Constructivist-Orientated Learning Environment Survey (COLES) was created lately

to provide input as a foundation for teacher action research reflection. It varies from previous

instruments in that it addresses crucial areas of student learning assessment, which is something

that all other classroom environment surveys lack. As a result, Aldridge, Fraser, Bell, and

Dorman (2012) developed two new COLES scales for assessment: Formative Assessment (the

amount to which students believe the assessment tasks they are given contribute positively to

their learning) and Assessment Criteria (the extent to which assessment criteria are explicit so

12
that the basis for judgments is clear and public). Furthermore, the COLES in its original form

was capable of distinguishing between students' impressions in different courses. Results from

the COLES were supplemented by students' reflective journals, written comments, debate at a

forum, and teacher interviews in order to provide feedback as a basis for reflection in teacher

action. As part of their action study targeted at improving their teaching environments, these

teachers' experiences with incorporating feedback from the COLES were reviewed (Aldridge et

al., 2012).

Science Laboratory Environment Inventory (SLEI)

The Science Laboratory Environment Inventory (SLEI) was created to evaluate the

laboratory's distinctive role in a high school or university science class, which is also an

important aspect in the learning environment's psychological makeup. This tool can be used to

determine the efficiency of scientific laboratory classes as well as if the accompanying costs are

justified (Fraser, Giddings, & McRobbie, 1992). Relevant literature was studied to identify

aspects crucial in the specific setting of a science laboratory class, and these characteristics were

compared to dimensions in current instruments in the development of the SLEI. In addition,

students and instructors were contacted for feedback to help drive survey changes at various

stages.

Additionally, item and factor analysis were performed on student data obtained using the

SLEI, resulting in a final version with 7 items per scale (Student Cohesiveness, Open-Endedness,

Integration, Rule Clarity, Material Environment) and responses on a 5-point frequency scale

(Newby & Fisher, 1997). The instrument's advantages include its cost-effective administration

(because to its short length) and simple hand scoring, as well as the availability of personal and

class versions, as well as real and preferred forms, all of which have been proved to be equally

13
valid and trustworthy (Fraser, Giddings, & McRobbie, 1992). One flaw with this instrument is

that it contains some negative elements in its original form, though the language may simply be

changed to exclusively feature positive comments.

The SLEI was field tested and validated using a sample of over 5,447 students from 269

courses in the United States, Canada, England, Israel, Australia, and Nigeria (Fraser &

McRobbie, 1995). When used with 1,594 students in 92 classrooms, simultaneous testing

indicated consistent scores on internal consistency reliability and discriminant validity, as well as

predictive validity when used with attitude scales to predict the effect on student results (Fraser,

Giddings, & McRobbie, 1995). (Fraser, Giddings, & McRobbie, 1992). Fisher, Henderson, and

Fraser conducted a study of 489 senior high-school biology students in Australia to further

validate their findings (1997).

Adaptations to the SLEI for use in courses where computing technology is a fundamental

tool were produced around the same time. The Computer Laboratory Environment Inventory

(CLEI) was created to evaluate the learning environment of a computer lab in higher education,

and it was evaluated with 80 college students (Newby & Fisher, 1997). The survey has five

scales (Student Cohesiveness, Open-Endedness, Integration, Technology Adequacy, Material

Environment), each with a 5-point frequency scale.

Overall, the SLEI appeared to be an appropriate instrument for use in the current study of

the effectiveness of an alternate laboratory, given its focus on laboratory classroom contexts.

Most of the scales, however, are designed for hands-on experimentation in a whole-class context

involving social characteristics of the classroom (i.e. Student Cohesiveness, Open-Endedness,

Rule Clarity) and are thus relevant to the study's context, which concentrated on the individual

14
student. Therefore, SLEI is most suited in this study because it focuses on the effectiveness of

virtual and real-life laboratory set ups. Also, it is most appropriate because through this the

student could provide their own perspective comparing to the class perspectives. Through this,

the researcher will be able to comprise the result of the study and get accurately precise results

from the questionnaire.

Evaluation on Innovations Concerning Educational Learning Environment Scales

More recently, educational technologies have altered the dynamics of traditional

classrooms, prompting the creation of a new subtype of the learning environment framework to

assess them. In the various previous research described below, learning environment scales were

valuable in giving criteria of efficacy for evaluating educational innovations. Therefore, in my

study it discussed the advantages and skills that can be acquired in virtual laboratory comparing

to real-life laboratory. Thus, the efficacy of virtual laboratory and laboratory skills are to be

examined on how the students are able to acquired it through online learning. Educational

innovations have an impact on learning settings, which in turn has an impact on attitudes and

achievement. Because the usage of virtual laboratories is regarded an educational innovation that

requires evaluation, this is the specific research strategy for my study.

15
Virtual Laboratories in Science Education

Virtual laboratories, which are interactive venues for doing simulated experiments, are

the specific approach to integrate technology into science classes that was evaluated in this

study. According to the International Institute of Theoretical and Applied Physics at the Expert

Meeting on Virtual Laboratories in Iowa, USA in 1999, a virtual laboratory is defined as "an

electronic workspace for distance collaboration and experimentation in research or other creative

activity, to generate and deliver results using distributed information and communication

technologies." (Rauwerda, Roos, Hertzberger et al., 2006, p. 230). In essence, these modalities

leverage networked content to create a rich immersive learning environment that includes

visualizations, visuals, and interactive applications.

Software manufacturers who want to attract schools to utilize their products use the

phrase "virtual laboratories" loosely. According to Harms (2000), the notion comprises five

distinct categories, only three of which are now relevant to this research (Borgman et al., 2008;

Nedic, Machotka, & Nafalski, 2003) and whose boundaries are becoming increasingly blurred

(Ma & Nickerson, 2006):

➢ Simulations that include parts of laboratory experiments, but are mostly used for

visuals and are available on the internet. Classic simulations and ‘CyberLabs' are two

terms used to describe these types of simulations.

➢ Virtual Labs are simulations that seek to simulate laboratory investigations as

accurately as possible by using inquiry skills.

➢ Experiments that are managed over a network and whose settings and output are

available over the Internet. Remote labs are what they're called.

16
 In this study, the common used for experiments during online learning are the Virtual

Labs and Remote Labs. During the pandemic, online classes are conducted to aid the learning of

the students. Through this, the laboratory experiments were also done online. The University of

San Carlos- Talamban Campus, Department of Biology make use of Remote and Virtual Labs to

cater the needs of the students. The commonly used website is PraxiLabs which caters the need

for learning and experience of the students virtually. There is an experiment which will be

performed virtually for extracting the RNA of an organism, DNA extraction and isolation and

other Biology related experiments. Virtual laboratories have been developed by educational

companies and institutions of higher learning through software or websites over the past four

decades. They are utilized at every level of education from primary school through secondary

school, at institutions of higher education, and for job training in medicine, security, and the

military (Felder & Silverman, 1988; Gallagher, Ritter, Champion et al., 2005; Marchevsky,

Relan, & Baillie, 2003; Nedic, Machotka, & Nafalski, 2003; Psotka, 1995; Rogers, 2000; Yasar

& Landau, 2003). Recently, virtual laboratories have even emerged in the scientific workplace as

extensions of common meeting places, fostering collaboration around certain topics of research

(Rauwerda et al., 2006).

Figure 1. PraxiLabs Virtual Laboratory

17
 While the notion of virtual laboratories (which includes remote laboratories and

simulations) dates back to the 1970s, the creation of true virtual laboratories specifically for the

life sciences is more relevant to the current study. The Genetics Construction Kit (GCK), which

simulates fruit fly mutations to illustrate conventional Mendelian genetics, was one of the first

such attempts in the 1980s. In the 1990s, simulations of genetic transmission of traits in cats,

known as CATLAB (http://www.emescience.com/sci-genetics-catlab.html), fruit flies, known as

the Virtual FlyLab (http://biologylab.awlonline.com/), and pea plants and dragons, known as

Biologica (http://biologica.concord.org/), were developed and widely used in science classrooms.

Later, in 2001, ViBE: Virtual Biology Experiments

(http://www.ece.rutgers.edu/marsic/books/SE/projects/ViBE/) was developed to allow students

to learn about biological processes while also practicing laboratory skills. All of these algorithms

inspired the Virtual Genetics Lab, which was created in 2007 to test genetic cross predictions for

several attributes in a fictitious insect (http://vgl.umb.edu/). It allowed students to "practice the

logic of genetic analysis without the distractions of wet labs," but it wasn't meant to "replace a

wet lab" (White, Bolker, Koolar et al., 2007, p. 30).

Overall, the virtual laboratory has existed for many years and it is continuously

developing to cater the needs for education of the student. The virtual laboratory will be

considered as an alternative learning strategy with subjects dealing experiments such as Biology,

Chemistry, Physics and Life Sciences. Through this, the students can learn in their own preferred

time.

18
Conceptual Framework

INPUT PROCESS
OUTPUT
• The Research for
• Developing and Learning • The
Acquiring Environment
• Constructivist- Laboratory
Laboratory
Skills Through
Oriented Learning Skills
Environment Survey
Virtual Acquired by
• Science Laboratory
Laboratory Environment the Students
Inventory • Efficiency of
• Perceptions
• Constructivist
and Learning Virtual
Experiences Environment Survey Laboratory

19
Statement of the Problem

This study aims to assess students’ acquisition of laboratory skills through Praxilabs or

other interactive software utilized for online laboratory simulation of the Grade 12 students in

Biology 02 in the University of San Carlos.

1. What are the laboratory skills that are intended to be developed?

2. How are these laboratory skills developed in the lesson using virtual laboratory?

3. What are the student’s experiences in acquiring laboratory skills through virtual

laboratory?

20
Significance of the Study

Students. Through this study, the students will be able to garner and gather data about the

efficiency of virtual laboratories. This study can help the students realize their own laboratory

skills.

Teachers. The teachers will benefit from this study because they can adjust and make new

approaches in order for the students to acquire the laboratory skills presented in the review of

related literature. This will be the guide for the teachers to further improve the teaching strategies

and approaches to learning.

School of Science Education Administration. The study is beneficial to the science education

administration because it can help admin to process out their lessons which will be beneficial

also to the students taking up the virtual lessons. This can help the administration to improvised a

great learning approach and improve the teaching strategies of the teachers. This will aide and

guide the administration for further utilizing the use of virtual laboratories.

Department of Education. This study is beneficial to the department of education for developing

new approaches and strategies towards online distance learning. This can aid and help the

department to further improve the strategies and studies about virtual laboratories.

Future Researchers. The future researchers will benefit this study through inferencing and out

sourcing the data and information that the study acquired about the laboratory skills of the

students and participants of the study.

21
Definition of Terms

CLES- Constructivists Learning Environment Survey is used for measuring and assessing the

students experiences in the virtual laboratory.

COLES- It is also called Constructivist-Oriented Learning Environment Survey. It is a survey

form created to provide inputs.

eLearning- It is a kind of learning which utilizes electronic technology to access educational

curriculum and websites outside of traditional classroom.

Experiences- It is what the students have undergo in their virtual laboratory during their online

classes

Experiments- It is an activity that can be done and access through the utilization of electronic

devices to gained knowledge about certain activities.

Interactive Software- It is a software where the experiments are done. One example of this is the

PraxiLabs, and Labster.

Laboratory Skills- It is a kind of skill which can be acquired through experimentation that is

done traditionally and virtually.

Simulation- It is the imitation of how the experiments are done in real life however, in this

process it is done online and virtually.

Virtual Laboratory- It is a computer-based activity where students can interact with an

experimental apparatus via computer interface.

22
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design

The research design that the study will utilize is the mixed methods design particularly in

sequential explanatory. This research design was chosen mainly because it coincides with the

study perfectly. The mixed method design is fit for this study because it is both qualitative and at

the same time quantitative in nature. The researcher chooses mixed methods because helps to

improve the study's credibility and validity by including multiple quantitative and qualitative

data sources. Mixed methods research aids in the transferability of research findings to different

contexts and settings. Also, the sequential explanatory of mixed methods research design will be

utilized by the researcher because the qualitative data that the research gathered will be the

support and build the initial results of the quantitative data (Creswell, Plano Clark, et al., 2003).

This design can also be used when a researcher wants to use quantitative participant

characteristics to guide purposeful sampling for a qualitative phase (Morgan, 1998; Tashakkori

& Teddlie, 1998) or when a researcher wants to form groups based on quantitative results and

follow up with the groups through subsequent qualitative research (Morgan, 1998; Tashakkori &

Teddlie, 1998) (Creswell, Plano Clark, et al., 2003). Therefore, the researcher has decided to use

the mixed methods design specifically sequential explanatory.

23
Research Environment

Figure 2. The Map of the Research Environment

The University of San Carlos- Talamban Campus is located in Sitio Nasipit, Barangay

Talamban, Cebu City. The research environment is located on a 78-hectare university, about 100

meters from the H. Heekeren Avenue and 1000 kilometers away from the Banilad Road. The

other building surrounding the research environment are the SAS Canteen, Arnoldus Science

Building, Taas Café, and Robert Hoeppener Building.

24
Research Participants

The participants of this research are studying in the University of San Carlos and are the

students who completed the course Biology 02 Laboratory during their senior high school years.

The first requirement is that the participant have already took Biology 02 and studying in the

University of San Carlos. In addition, the participant must have an experience of online

simulation or virtual experiments about Biology. The individuals of this study are from diverse

sections in the Grade 12 whose age are 17 to 19 years old. The participants can be either male or

female. Also, for reliable and accurate data the researcher decided to have 50 participants.

Research Instruments

One instrument is utilized for the study to measure and assess the perceptions of the

students regarding the virtual laboratory used for experimentation in Biology 02 Laboratory

Class. The Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES) is a 42-item survey that

employs a 5-point Likert scale to assess students' perceptions of science and math instruction.

Personal Relevance, Critical Voice, Shared Control, Uncertainty, Student Negotiation,

Commitment, and Teacher Support are some of the questions that students are asked. The sample

of the questionnaire can be found in the appendix.

25
Data Collection Procedure

First, the researcher gathered the data needed for the study and concluded a title which is

relevant and prevalent in the trying times of COVID-19 pandemic. The perceptions of the online

class have been examined through browsing the internet and gathering resources about the study.

Through consultations and approval of the professor, the researcher was able to proceed to

further analyze the study. The discussion of the main and sub problems is discussed thoroughly

to induced a reliable problem that can be utilized and improve assessing the skills of the students.

Second, the researcher gathered the data for the review of related literature to have a compatible

and converge the studies that the researcher conducted. The participants and environment of the

study were identified. Then, the researcher gathered data for the appropriate questionnaire to be

used in the study. Finally, the researcher selected the students which participated in the study by

filling out the questionnaire and sending it back to the researcher.

Treatment of Data

The 7 variables of the questionnaire were rated accordingly on the scale. The

Constructivist Learning Environment Survey is a 5 Likert Scale. The percentage of each

response per item was calculated. Then, the numbers that were gathered and tallied are observed

carefully to arrive at a certain conclusion about the experiences and perceptions of the Grade 12

students in their virtual laboratory.

26
REFERENCES

Borgman, C. L., Abelson, H., Dirks, L., Johnson, R., Koedinger, K., Linn, M. C., et al. (2008).

Fostering learning in the networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge.

Office of Cyberinfrastructure and Directorate for Education and Human Resources of the

National Science Foundation. Retrieved from

http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp.

Bredderman, T. (1982). What research says: Activity science--The evidence shows it matters.

Science and Children, 20, 39-41.

Brinson, J. R. (2015). Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and remote)

versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: A review of the empirical research. Computers
and Education, 87, 218–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.003.

Chen, P.-S. D., Lambert, A. D., & Gudiry, K. R. (2010). Engaging online learners: The impact of
web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Computers & Education,
54,1222–1232.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M., & Hanson, W. (2003). Advanced mixed
methods research designs. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed
methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 209–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Dikmenli, M. (2007). Biology student teachers’ideas about purpose of laboratory work. Asia-
Pacific Forumon Science Learning and Teaching, 1 0(2), 1–14 Article
9.https://www.ied.edu.hk/apfslt/v10_issue2/dikmenli/dikmenli7.html

Ebrahimi, N. A. (2013). Constructivist Translation Classroom Environment Survey (CTLES):

development, validation and application. Translation & Interpreting, 5(2), 163+.

Harms, U. (2000, June). Virtual and remote labs in physics education. Paper presented at the

Second European Conference on Physics Teaching in Engineering Education, Budapest.

27
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the

twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 27-54.

Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the

twenty-first century. Science Education, 88, 27-54.

Hunt, L., Koender, A. & Gynnild, V. (2012). Assessing Practical Laboratory Skills in

Undergraduate Molecular Biology Courses. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher

Education, 37(7), 861–874.

Johnson, D. M., Wardlow, G. W., & Franklin, T. D. (1997). Hands-on activities versus

worksheets in reinforcing physical science principles: Effects on student achievement and

attitude. Journal of Agricultural Education, 38, 9- 17.

Ma, J., & Nickerson, J. V. (2006). Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative
literature review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 38(3), 7

Matz, R. L., Rothman, E. D., Krajcik, J. S., & Banaszak, M. M. (2012). Concurrent enrolment in
lecture and laboratory enhances student performance and retention. Jourrnal of Research
in Science Teaching, 49(5), 659–682.

Moni, R.W., Hryciw, D.H., Poronnik, P., Lluka, L.J. & Moni,K.B.(2007). Assessing Core

Manipulative Skills in a Large, First-Year Laboratory. Advances in Physiology

Education, 31, 266-269.

Morgan, D. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and

quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health

Research, 8(3), 362–376.

28
Shavelson R.J., Baxter, G.P. & Pine J. (1991). Performance assessment in science. Applied

Measurement in Education, 4(4): 347-362.

Slater, T.F. & Ryan, J.M. (1993). Laboratory performance assessment, The Physics Teacher 31,

306 -308.

Taylor, P., Dawson, V., & Fraser, B. (1995, April). A constructivist perspective on monitoring

classroom learning environments under transformation. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.

Taylor, P., Fraser, B., & Fisher, D. (1993, April). Monitoring the development of constructivist

learning environments. Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Science

Teachers Association, Kansas City, MO.

P. Taylor, B. Fraser, and D. Fisher (1997). Observing constructivist learning environments in the

classroom. 293–302 in International Journal of Educational Research.

29
APPENDICES

Appendix I. Formal Letter to the Teacher for the Information of the Students

Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena

Fatima, Liloy, Zamboanga del Norte
Dipolog City, 7115
ellengracedp@gmail.com

June 11, 2021

Elsie Calabroso
Registrar
University of San Carlos- Talamban Campus
Sittio Nasipit, Barangay Talamban
Cebu City, 6000

Dear Mr/Mrs Calabroso

RE: Request for Permission to Access the Student’s Information

My name is Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena. I am a student in Bachelors Degree of Education

Majoring in General Sciences. A third-year student in the University of San Carlos who is
conducting a research about the efficiency of virtual laboratories in distance learning.

I take this opportunity to seek for permission from you about accessing the Grade 12 student’s
information who completed the course Biology 02.

I eagerly await your feedback as I have to use it in my research. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena

30
Appendix II. Formal Letter to the Author of the Survey

Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena

Fatima, Liloy, Zamboanga del Norte
Dipolog City, 7115
ellengracedp@gmail.com

June 11, 2021

Rebekah K. Nix
Department of Science/ Mathematics Education
The University of Texas at Dallas
Richardson, TX 75083- 0688
rnix@dallas.edu

Dear Mr/Ms Nix

RE: Request for Permission to Use the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey

My name is Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena, a 3rd year college student in the University of San Carlos-
Talamban Campus. I am a student under the course Bachelors of Science Education. I am
conducting a research about the efficiency of the virtual laboratory that is utilized for online
learning.

I take this opportunity to seek permission to use the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey
for data collection in my study.

Thank you for taking time to read my email. I shall eagerly await the feedback.

Sincerely,
Ellen Grace T. Dela Pena

31
Appendix III. Constructivist Learning Environment Survey Questionnaire

Purpose of the Questionnaire

This questionnaire asks you to describe important aspects of your science classroom. There are

no right or wrong answers. This is not a test and your answers will not affect your assessment.

Your opinion is what is wanted. Your answers will enable us to improve future science classes.

How to Answer Each Question

On the next few pages, you will find 42 sentences. For each sentence, circle only one number

corresponding to your answer.

1 I learn about the world outside of 5 4 3 2 1

school.
2 My learning starts with problems 5 4 3 2 1
about the world outside of school.
3 I learn how science can be part of my 5 4 3 2 1
out-of-school life.
In my science class…..
4 I get a better understanding of the 5 4 3 2 1
world outside of school.
5 I learn interesting things about the 5 4 3 2 1
world outside of school.
6 What I learn has nothing to do with 5 4 3 2 1
my out-of-school life.
Learning about Science Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my cience class…..
7 I learn that science cannot provide 5 4 3 2 1
perfect answers to problems.
8 I learn that science has changed over 5 4 3 2 1
time.
9 I learn that science is influenced by 5 4 3 2 1
people's values and opinions.
In my science class…..
10 I learn about the different sciences 5 4 3 2 1
used by people in other cultures.
11 I learn that modern science is different 5 4 3 2 1

32
 from the science of long ago.
12 I learn that science is about inventing 5 4 3 2 1
theories.
Learning to Speak Out Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my science class…..
13 It's OK to ask the teacher "why do we 5 4 3 2 1
have to learn this?"
14 It's OK to question the way I'm being 5 4 3 2 1
taught.
15 It's OK to complain about activities 5 4 3 2 1
that are confusing.
In my science class…..
16 It's OK to complain about anything 5 4 3 2 1
that prevents me from learning.
17 It's OK to express my opinion. 5 4 3 2 1
18 It's OK to speak up for my rights. 5 4 3 2 1
Learning to Learn Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my science class…..
19 I help the teacher to plan what I'm 5 4 3 2 1
going to learn.
20 I help the teacher to decide how well I 5 4 3 2 1
am learning.
21 I help the teacher to decide which 5 4 3 2 1
activities are best for me.
Learning to Learn Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my science class…..
22 I help the teacher to decide how much 5 4 3 2 1
time I spend on activities.
23 I help the teacher to decide which 5 4 3 2 1
activities I do.
24 I help the teacher to assess my 5 4 3 2 1
learning.
Learning to Communicate Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my science class…..
25 I get the chance to talk to other 5 4 3 2 1
students.
26 I talk with other students about how to 5 4 3 2 1
solve problems.
27 I explain my ideas to other students. 5 4 3 2 1

33
In my science class…..
28 I ask other students to explain their 5 4 3 2 1
ideas.
29 Other students ask me to explain my 5 4 3 2 1
ideas.
30 Other students explain their ideas to 5 4 3 2 1
me.
Interest in Learning Science Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Always Never
In my science class…..
31 I am interested in science lessons. 5 4 3 2 1
32 I am willing to learn. 5 4 3 2 1
33 What we do in science class is 5 4 3 2 1
important to me.
In my science class…..
34 I try my best. 5 4 3 2 1
35 I pay attention. 5 4 3 2 1
36 I enjoy science lessons. 5 4 3 2 1
Teacher Support in Learning Almost Often Sometimes Seldom Almost
Science Always Never
In my science class…..
37 The teacher is friendly to me. 5 4 3 2 1
38 The teacher helps me with the work. 5 4 3 2 1
39 The teacher is interested in my 5 4 3 2 1
problems.
In my science class…..
40 The teacher goes out of his/her way to 5 4 3 2 1
help me.
41 The teacher moves around the class to 5 4 3 2 1
talk to me.
42 The teacher considers my feelings. 5 4 3 2 1

34
Appendix IV. Constructivist Learning Environment Survey Scale Grouping

35
Appendix V. Constructivist-Oriented Learning Environment Survey

36
37
38
39
40
Appendix VI. Figures

Figure 1. The PraxiLabs Virtual Laboratory

Figure 2. The Map of Research Environment

41