Article Preview
TopIntroduction
Science education constitutes a ubiquitous element in secondary school curricula worldwide. Hodson (2014) outlined three primary learning objectives in science education: understanding science, understanding the nature and history of science, and developing scientific inquiry skills. The first objective involves comprehending scientific concepts, models, and theories. The second explores how scientific knowledge evolves. The third objective focuses on acquiring the skills necessary for scientific inquiry. Hodson (2020) later incorporated and continually emphasized a fourth learning goal, namely addressing socio-scientific issues. This involves developing critical skills to engage with the personal, social, economic, environmental, and moral-ethical dimensions of science. This paper specifically focuses on learning to do science, particularly in the context of ‘laboratory work’ in school settings.
Our work builds on Wellington and Ireson’s (2017) three main arguments advocating for laboratory work in school science. First is the cognitive argument, which posits that laboratory work enhances learners’ comprehension of science and fosters conceptual development. Second is the affective argument, which contends that laboratory work is motivating and exciting and generates interest in science education. The third is the skills argument, which asserts that laboratory work cultivates learners’ practical and higher order thinking skills, including observation, prediction, and inference (Wellington & Ireson, 2017). Similarly, prominent science education scholars such as Schauble et al. (1995) and Hofstein (2017) have long contended that the school science laboratory is a unique resource that enhances learners’ interest and knowledge of science concepts and procedures.
Despite the established wisdom on the centrality of laboratory work, a significant gap persists in advancing science education through laboratory work, especially in rural and under-resourced schools of the Global South. This gap is attributed to a myriad of challenges confronting rural school science education, including inadequate infrastructure, subpar service delivery, and insufficient funding (Assey & Babyegeya, 2022; Khethiwe, 2023). Consequently, despite persistent advocacy from UNESCO, governments, and numerous non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for quality science education for all, this aspiration remains elusive for most secondary school learners in rural and disadvantaged communities.
Faced with these restrictive conditions, many science education researchers (Larijani & Abedi, 2021) including historians such as Harari (2018), view educational technologies as a panacea to address present and future challenges in science education, including in disadvantaged and rural settings. Consequently, there is a growing call for teachers to incorporate technology into their teaching, driven by the perceived usefulness that technology offers, especially in science teaching. A notable technological development in the science education landscape is Virtual Lab (VL). Elfakki et al. (2023) defined VL as a simulated version of a traditional laboratory in which the learner is provided with instruments that are virtual representations of real objects used in traditional laboratories. In this paper, we view VL as a tool that enables learners and teachers to conduct experiments on digital devices such as computers and smartphones, converting buildings and physical laboratory instruments into computer software applications. Many VL programs are presently accessible and do not require school Internet infrastructure, providing a feasible option for schools.