4.3 Article

Empirical Analysis of the Use of the VISIR Remote Lab in Teaching Analog Electronics

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION
卷 60, 期 2, 页码 149-156

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TE.2016.2608790

关键词

Active learning; electrical engineering; engineering curriculum; remote laboratory; virtual instrument systems in reality (VISIR) remote laboratory

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Remote laboratories give students the opportunity of experimenting in STEM by using the Internet to control and measure an experimental setting. Remote laboratories are increasingly used in the classroom to complement, or substitute for, hands-on laboratories, so it is important to know its learning value. While many authors approach this question through qualitative analyses, this paper reports a replicated quantitative study that evaluates the teaching performance of one of these resources, the virtual instrument systems in reality (VISIR) remote laboratory. VISIR, described here, is the most popular remote laboratory for basic analog electronics. This paper hypothesizes that use of a remote laboratory has a positive effect on students' learning process. This report analyzes the effect of the use of VISIR in five different groups of students from two different academic years (2013-2014 and 2014-2015), with three teachers and at two educational levels. The empirical experience focuses on Ohm's Law. The results obtained are reported using a pretest and post-test design. The tests were carefully designed and analyzed, and their reliability and validity were assessed. The analysis of knowledge test question results shows that the post-test scores are higher that the pretest. The difference is significant according to Wilcoxon test (p < 0.001), and produces a Cohen effect size of 1.0. The VISIR remote laboratory's positive effect on students' learning processes indicates that remote laboratories can produce a positive effect in students' learning if an appropriate activity is used.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据