Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding

Traditional, template physics labs are often associated with student dissatisfaction and superficial applications, and are known to leave students with fragmented knowledge. An alternative known as labatorials, a conceptually driven approach to labs, has been proposed. In a number of studies, labato...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Franco La Braca, Calvin S. Kalman
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	American Physical Society 2021
Materias:	Special aspects of education LC8-6691 Physics QC1-999
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/e0f33239461a4e109aec0a198a12c046
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:e0f33239461a4e109aec0a198a12c046
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:e0f33239461a4e109aec0a198a12c0462021-12-02T18:24:14ZComparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.0101312469-9896https://doaj.org/article/e0f33239461a4e109aec0a198a12c0462021-04-01T00:00:00Zhttp://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010131http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010131https://doaj.org/toc/2469-9896Traditional, template physics labs are often associated with student dissatisfaction and superficial applications, and are known to leave students with fragmented knowledge. An alternative known as labatorials, a conceptually driven approach to labs, has been proposed. In a number of studies, labatorials have been shown to work well. However, what has been missing is a study comparing labatorials to traditional labs. In this study, labatorials are compared with traditional labs in terms of students’ learning experience and the quality of their conceptual learning. Additionally, we identify the scaffolding mechanisms that impact these elements. In the context of Concordia University’s introductory experimental mechanics course, we collect data spanning semistructured student and teaching assistant (TA) interviews, class observations, TA surveys, post-test and final exam scores and responses, and student writing products. Upon analysis and triangulation, we find that due to the scaffolding present in labatorials, students typically exhibit a high degree of collaboration and engagement with the material in a low-pressure environment, which allows students to focus on the learning. This is attributed to three primary forms of scaffolding inherent to the design of labatorials: peer scaffolding, instructor scaffolding, and scaffolding by the activity worksheet. In contrast, students in traditional labs have a tendency to rely on step-by-step instructions and focus on avoiding errors, which may inhibit their conceptual learning. These conclusions are supported by the students’ differing performance and understanding exhibited in different types of questions; traditional lab students tend to perform better on questions involving standardized processes or simple, memorization-based calculations, while labatorial students tend to perform better on conceptual questions.Franco La BracaCalvin S. KalmanAmerican Physical SocietyarticleSpecial aspects of educationLC8-6691PhysicsQC1-999ENPhysical Review Physics Education Research, Vol 17, Iss 1, p 010131 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Special aspects of education LC8-6691 Physics QC1-999
spellingShingle	Special aspects of education LC8-6691 Physics QC1-999 Franco La Braca Calvin S. Kalman Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
description	Traditional, template physics labs are often associated with student dissatisfaction and superficial applications, and are known to leave students with fragmented knowledge. An alternative known as labatorials, a conceptually driven approach to labs, has been proposed. In a number of studies, labatorials have been shown to work well. However, what has been missing is a study comparing labatorials to traditional labs. In this study, labatorials are compared with traditional labs in terms of students’ learning experience and the quality of their conceptual learning. Additionally, we identify the scaffolding mechanisms that impact these elements. In the context of Concordia University’s introductory experimental mechanics course, we collect data spanning semistructured student and teaching assistant (TA) interviews, class observations, TA surveys, post-test and final exam scores and responses, and student writing products. Upon analysis and triangulation, we find that due to the scaffolding present in labatorials, students typically exhibit a high degree of collaboration and engagement with the material in a low-pressure environment, which allows students to focus on the learning. This is attributed to three primary forms of scaffolding inherent to the design of labatorials: peer scaffolding, instructor scaffolding, and scaffolding by the activity worksheet. In contrast, students in traditional labs have a tendency to rely on step-by-step instructions and focus on avoiding errors, which may inhibit their conceptual learning. These conclusions are supported by the students’ differing performance and understanding exhibited in different types of questions; traditional lab students tend to perform better on questions involving standardized processes or simple, memorization-based calculations, while labatorial students tend to perform better on conceptual questions.
format	article
author	Franco La Braca Calvin S. Kalman
author_facet	Franco La Braca Calvin S. Kalman
author_sort	Franco La Braca
title	Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
title_short	Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
title_full	Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
title_fullStr	Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
title_full_unstemmed	Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
title_sort	comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: the impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding
publisher	American Physical Society
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/e0f33239461a4e109aec0a198a12c046
work_keys_str_mv	AT francolabraca comparisonoflabatorialsandtraditionallabstheimpactsofinstructionalscaffoldingonthestudentexperienceandconceptualunderstanding AT calvinskalman comparisonoflabatorialsandtraditionallabstheimpactsofinstructionalscaffoldingonthestudentexperienceandconceptualunderstanding
_version_	1718378130968674304

Comparison of labatorials and traditional labs: The impacts of instructional scaffolding on the student experience and conceptual understanding

Ejemplares similares