Vol.
8, Núm. 2 / octubre 2016 – marzo 2017 / ISSN 2007-1094
Virtual experimentation with Dose-Response simulator
as a teaching tool in biology
Arturo Reyes Lazalde[1]
Marleni Reyes Monreal[2]
María Eugenia Pérez Bonilla[3]
Abstract
We present an educational
innovation strategy that consists on the implementation of a virtual
investigation project in biology. In university education, some lab practices
are prohibitive due to high costs. For distance university education, there are
few virtual educational resources that can be used instead. In this paper we
share the experience of using the dose-response simulator 1.0. The simulator
has been developed in our lab to explore the usability and the learning levels
achieved by the students. An exploratory study was conducted with a group of
students from the Research Methods I course of the Bachelor’s degree biology
program. The work corresponds to a virtual, structured, semi-closed type,
guided by specialized teaching supervision. Two levels of knowledge were
evaluated: the management of the program and the understanding of theoretical
knowledge. 69.2% of the students stated that using the simulator was easy.
According with Bloom's taxonomy, from 100 to 92.3% performed well in activities
at the apply and analyze levels, and 76.9 to 61.5% at the
synthesize level. 7.7% did not adapt at all. The results indicate a high level
of student learning. Simulators are an alternative for teaching when lab
practices are expensive.
Keywords: Virtual laboratory; Learning method; Virtual learning;
Simulators.
INTRODUCTION
The teaching of science through laboratory practices
or research projects results rather expensive, especially when laboratory
equipment, test animals, and reagents are required. The questions that result
from this are: are there teaching alternatives? Are
simulators an alternative? Is the learning achieved with virtual practices
equivalent to that achieved with traditional laboratory practices? Is it
possible for each student to individually carry out the laboratory practices?
Is the learning achieved during group practices what was expected? Does a
demonstrative laboratory practice produce superior learning in comparison with
virtual practices? Do the high costs of some projects and laboratory practices
justify overlooking some subjects or do they incentivize looking for
alternatives? The information published regarding these aspects is still
lacking. Some results indicate a favorable response, especially in the teaching-learning of engineering (Cooper, 2005). In Mexico,
developments and studies carried out in this regard are practically zero.
In this article we explore, in a pilot group, the
usability of the dose-response simulator 1.0, developed by our work group, and
its impact in the learning of the subject: the effect of the agonists to glutamatergic receptors. The strategy was to situate the
student in a virtual research environment. The students were guided during the
investigation. With the results generated by the simulator, we analyzed the
data and each student redacted a research article. This paper was carried out
in the context of the Research Methods I of the third quarter of the Biology
bachelor’s degree.
The laboratory
work in the teaching of science.
In general, the inclusion of laboratory work in the
curricula dates to 1960. The approaches posed have passed through various
stages: from learning through discovery, a focus in processes, up to contemporary
constructivist approaches (Barolli, Laburú and Guridi, 2010; Hodson, 1996). The initial and central ideal consists on replicating
the means and methods of how scientists develop new discoveries. Consequently,
the students, by carrying out laboratory practices, learn how to “conduct
science” in some way.
Nedelsky (1958) explores the relation between physics and
reality, stating that “an empiricist vision lays the
foundation for scientific education”. The laboratory work is seen as a research
process. In the case of biological sciences, this focus implies a didactic
strategy that goes beyond setting up a simple practice. During the disciplinary
practices and the laboratory works, emphasis is placed on the guide of the
student’s learning process (Cronbach & Snow,
1977); this idea is contrary to the hypothesis that the students learn better
when they are not guided or has a minimum guide, so that they can discover or
build essential information by themselves (Bruner, 1961).
An analysis of these two contrary means of searching
for better learning showed that the learning with a specialized guide is more
effective than that obtained through discovery with a minimal guide (Kirschner, Sweller & Clark,
2006; García, 2005). According to Hacking (1983),
“the experiments play a central role in the teaching of science, so long as a
planned intervention is carried out”. López-Trujillo,
Nava-Monroy, and Moreno-Colin (2013) note that “the Biology students show different learning
styles with a greater preference towards visual, tactile, kinesthetic, and as a
group”. These characteristics challenge teachers to the design of specific
strategies in order to achieve significant learning. The greatest problem
manifests when the laboratory practices linked to a scientific approach are so
expensive that they are impossible to carry out. A viable alternative is to use
computational simulators for this purpose.
Virtual
laboratories and their efficiency.
With the new technologies we can move on to
computational simulation in order to carry out a series of experiments, obtain
data, analyze it and understand the meaning of quantitative research. The
virtual laboratories are highly useful tools in the teaching of biology in
order to work with subjects that, due to various reasons, do not allow for
experimentation in a school laboratory. They consist on simulations of
practical activities, i.e., digital imitations of laboratory practices or
reduced field practices in a computer screen. They are of great interest in
order to address biological processes in which experimentation is limited due
to safety, time, material availability, ethics, specialized equipment, etc.
This manner of addressing biological processes gives rise to virtual
experiments.
In this paper we used the definition of Cooper, Vik and Waltemath (2014): “We
define a virtual experiment as the in sílico analogue of a laboratory or field experiment,
carried out on a computational model instead of the real system or physical
model.” The simulation allows reproducing these processes by outlining research
activities to the students, who can interact with the program. The virtual
experiments are an essential support in teaching science in a presence-based
modality and online. Therefore, the development of computational simulators is
seen as a rather important tool for the teaching and learning processes of this
century (García and Gil, 2006).
Computational technology and the Internet have a
potential to promote the learning of engineering in a highly interactive
environment. “The functions of the professors and students are changing, and
there are, without a doubt, means of learning that have yet to be discovered” (Ertugrul, 2000). Before beginning a laboratory practice
with simulators, it is necessary to plan the pedagogical strategy; have in mind a chronogram with the sequence of topics
prior to using the simulator, and establish objectives, abilities, skills, and
capabilities to be developed in the student. These
recommendations have been proposed by various authors (Lefèvre, 1988).
The
support of the simulators in teaching.
According to Waldrop (2013), “it is the time to start
thinking in education in a completely new way”. Massive Open Online Courses
(MOOC) are starting and are available for tenths of
thousands of students. The universities in developed countries are starting to
associate with MOOC companies, and it is expected that in the next couple of
years they will be offering science related courses. For this type of online
science courses, it is necessary to design and build virtual laboratories where
the student can learn with scientific discoveries (García
and Gil, 2006). This does not refer to hardware simulators, such as a plane
simulator for example; rather, it refers to process simulators through which
the users assimilate the performance protocols, methodology and logical steps
in a natural manner. There already exist various virtual laboratories whose
objective is to teach by means of this type of simulators. The results in
learning prove to be favorable (Ray, Koshy, Diwakar, Nair & Srivastava,
2012; Bernhard, 2010; Dantas and Kemm,
2008; Ravert, 2002).
In the teaching-learning of
medical disciplines, Zhang, Thompson and Miller (2011) made a revision of the
inter-professional education (IPE) based on simulations. These authors
undertook a search in various bases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO)
for the years 1999 to 2009. They focused on the design of the study and the
research strategies. They reviewed 356 papers, of which 138 articles used simulators
and, in addition, collaborated two or more professions (IPE). Of these
articles, 45 carried out an educational investigation; 19, a qualitative study;
25, a quantitative study, and in one of them the impact on the students was not
reported. The authors found that the educational instruction was rather diverse;
however, the majority of authors report a combination of active learning
strategies, in addition to a combination of didactic material available in
online modules or readings followed by an activity with the simulator.
In the majority of these cases the satisfaction of
the participants, the perception of learning, and the action of the students
during the simulation process were shown. Results were positive in all these
cases. The behavior of the students was enthusiastic. The evaluated levels
were: attendance, satisfaction with the program, knowledge acquisition, and
competencies. Regarding subjects of a medical nature the following is added:
attention to the patient and attention to the community. The other papers
reviewed focus on addressing the design and development of the simulators.
Thus, in this type of papers there are two guidelines:
the design of the simulators, in which the results generated by the simulator
are analyzed to see if they are similar to those found in real experiments, and
putting to the test its usability and use as didactic tools. In the first
guideline the mathematical model from which it is derived is put to the test;
the relations between the variables are observed and, as the case may be, new
relations between variables are discovered or variables that in real
experiments could not be measured are calculated. In Mexico, there is scarce
development of proper simulators; for example, there have been simulators
reported by Govea-Valladares, Medellín-Castillo,
Lim, Khambay, Rodríguez-Florido,
and Ballesteros (2012). The reports on the educational impact are even scarcer.
Problem Statement
The impact of laboratory work in teaching science has
been sufficiently addressed. There is a great number
of papers, especially regarding the learning of physics and mathematics.
However, the study of the impact of virtual practices in the teaching of biology
is scarce. The knowledge, abilities and skills that can be attained have been
scarcely explored. The development of simulators to teach biology in Mexico is
incipient. In this paper we describe the experience and strategies for the use
of the dose-response simulator. We intend to assess the learning reached on the
subject and demonstrate that guide virtual experimentation situates the student
in an activity that allows them to obtain a general idea of what is a
scientific work and how it is carried out.
MATERIALS AND METHOD
During the Investigation Methods I course of the
Biology bachelor’s degree, one of the simulators designed and developed in the Laboratorio de Biología Interactiva by the authors of this paper was utilized.
The simulator called dose-response 1.0 is executed in a Windows® environment,
from XP to version 8, in a PC-compatible computer. The computing requirements
are 2 MB of free space in the hard drive and a Pentium processor or greater
with a SVGA monitor with true color depth. We used the computer room with one
student at each computer.
Thirteen students used the simulator and each of them
had individual access to the program. The CREATE (consider, read, establish a
hypothesis, analyze and interpret data, and think on the following experiment)
method was followed, proposed by Hoskins, Stevens and Nehm
in 2007.
The work was frontal, i.e., everyone carried out the
same practice. The simulator generates different data within an interval of
real values, for reach run, so that a personalized practiced is executed.
According to Gómez (1999), “This type of frontal work is what most closely
approximates the students to scientific experimental research.” Interaction
between students was allowed at all times. The virtual laboratory practice had
a methodological nature of the semi-closed type in accordance with the
classification by Crespo and Álvarez
(2001), i.e., only some developed knowledge is facilitated to the students.
With the employment of the problematic situation, it motivates to investigate,
assume and issue a hypothesis (Siso, Briceño, Álvarez and Arana, 2009;
Crespo and Álvarez, 2001).
According to Fraga (1996), we resort to a research,
experimental and project focus, and not like a cooking recipe. The results
emitted by the simulator were analyzed using the program Origin®
version 3.0.
For the implementation of the practice, the students
follow a rubric, describe objectives, suggest a hypothesis, plan the stages to
carry out the experiment (methods and procedures), observations and
measurements that can be recorded and the conclusion that can be drawn from the
experience.
Development of the
experience
The thematic sequence planned and the activities
programmed are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Strategy for the
educational use of the dose-response simulator.
Subject |
Sessions* |
Objective That the students are capable of |
Types
of investigation |
3 |
Differentiate
between experimental and non-experimental investigation. |
Search
of scientific articles through the internet |
5 |
Acquire
the abilities to carry out searches of scientific articles, differentiating
them from dissemination articles and begin to form criteria to select the
more adequate articles for your investigation. |
Mathematical
models |
5 |
Intuitively
understand the differential equations, the meaning of their solution, their
relation with the identification of variables, and the relation between them. |
Mathematical
functions |
3 |
Understand
the mathematical functions as solutions of a differential equation and their
use in the adjustment of experimental data. |
Use
of the Origin® program |
3 |
Acquire
the abilities and skills in the use of the Origin® program for the analysis
and adjustment of experimental data. |
Neuroanatomy and basic physiology of the
vestibular system |
2 |
Understand
the basic biological subject of the project to be developed. |
Ligand-receptor
interaction |
1 |
Understand
the meaning of the dose-response curve and of dose fifty. Apply this
knowledge in the analysis of the collected data. |
Introduction
to writing scientific articles |
5 |
Acquire
the basic knowledge for the writing of scientific articles. |
Use
of the dose-response simulator |
2 |
Generate
experimental data of the extracellular record of the simulated vestibular
nerve. |
Analysis
of the data generated with the simulator |
Extra
class Activity in the computer room. In collaboration with their classmates. |
Develop
the abilities learned during the previous sessions. |
Write
a scientific article from the results generated by the simulator |
Extra
class activity. In the course of a week interaction between students is
allowed. They may check with the professor. |
Begin
writing a scientific article. |
Review
in pairs |
1 |
Participate
in reviewing the articles written by their classmates; issue a critique of
the work and suggestions for improvement. |
Correct
the work |
Extra class activity |
Receive
critiques on their work and be able to correct it. |
Evaluation
and specification of errors in the work |
One week |
Recognize
and correct the errors. |
Feedback |
1 |
Hand-in
the corrected work to receive a final grade. |
*Each session corresponds to one
hour. The students could use the simulator throughout the entire course and
freely outside of it. The simulator was located in the server of the school and
was available on the Biology webpage throughout the entire course.
The subjects are specifically focused on biology,
which in this case is the ligand-receptor interaction
and the generation of dose-response curves. This means, e.g., that the subjects
related to mathematics or statistics are directed towards the solution of the
problem stated and there is no intention to develop students in the broad sense
of mathematics, rather, for the student to manage to integrate a series of
tools that allow them to solve a specific problem.
Use
of the Origin® program.
Before carrying out the virtual practice, the group
received three one-hour sessions on the use of the Origin® program. During the
first session they received a rundown on the program and were shown the menu
bar, how to execute the program, and how to open and save a new file. Emphasis
was placed on the data entry and on how to select the data in order to create
various graph types, as well as how to modify the titles of the axis, the size
of the font and of the graph, and how to design their own graph. During the
second session, the student learned how to carry out basic statistical analysis
in columns and lines, and graphs with error bars and their meaning. During the
third session they were taught the use of statistics and the mathematical
analysis of the data allowed by the program.
Levels
of learning.
The use of the simulator was accompanied by a series
of subjects and activities that favored the learning of the student and that
aid in reaching the established abilities, skills and objectives. According
with the taxonomy of Bloom (1956) and of Anderson and Krathwohl
(2001), that the aim is for the student to have a
reflective learning with the processes to remember, understand and apply. The
independent creation of content is intended by evaluating and summarizing, and
by creating, through the writing of their own article, it is intended for the
student to acquire independence (see table 2).
Table 2. Activities according to
Bloom’s updated taxonomy.
Information to remember |
Understand |
Apply |
Analyze |
Evaluate (summarize) |
Create |
Types
of receptors, what is an agonist and what is an
antagonist? What is an action potential? |
Classify,
summarize and relate the scientific articles to the subject. |
Use
the simulator to generate data. |
Categorize
the scientific articles that will be useful in your project. |
Evaluate
your results and compare them to those reported. |
Write
your own scientific article. |
Describe
the vestibular system. Describe
how a multi-unit record with suction electrode is carried out. |
Understand
the use of the simulator. |
Experiment
with growing agonist doses and measure the trigger frequency on each
experimental condition and graph the results. |
Analyze
the results and explain that the effect of the agonists follows a sigmoid
function. |
Evaluate
if your results prove the formulated hypothesis. Discuss
your results with your classmates. |
Propose
future investigations. |
Locate
scientific articles on the subject. |
|
Discover
that the potency of the effect of the test acids is different. |
Determine
D50 for each case and compare the results. |
Formulate
conclusions for the virtual experiments carried out. |
|
Brief description of the simulator.
The simulator
is based on experiments that were carried out on the vestibular organ of the
Axolotl (Ambystoma tigrinum).
The material and method used in the real experiment was presented in PowerPoint
and is explained step by step by the student. The potentials of the vestibular
nerve are recorded with a suction electrode. The negative pressure on the
electrode is maintained throughout the experiment, with which it is ensured
that the nerve is kept within the electrode (see Figure 1).
The
dose-response simulator reproduces the experimental results. The interface
window shows: in the left half, the work table on which one can observe a
microscope, the micromanipulators, the syringe to achieve the described
negative pressure, and three buttons: ≪Control≫, ≪Q. A.≫
and ≪K.
A.≫,
which allow to simulate the control frequency and the effect of the
administration of the quisqualic acid and kainic acid, respectively.
The right half
shows a window that sometimes has the function of an oscilloscope, a box where
the corresponding trigger frequency is shown, and at the bottom there is a button
to start recording (see Figure 2). In order to use the simulator, the first
step is to select the ≪Control≫ button to indicate to the program to send
results in control conditions. In order to make the records, simply press the ≪Start recording≫ button. Each time this button is pressed,
a new simulation is generated (see Figure 2).
Figure 1. Simulation of the extracellular
record with suction electrode. The diagram on the left shows the
vestibular preparation of the axolotl with the recording electrode, whereas the
left diagram shows the trigger frequency. The interval comprised between the
two vertical lines corresponds to the records that will be simulated.
Figure 2. Simulation of the
application of quisqualic acid. In the module,
on the lower part, a horizontal sliding bar is located. Sliding to the right
increases the does to be administered. Once having selected the dose, press the
≪Apply≫ button. Subsequently press the ≪Start recording≫ button to execute the simulation.
Evaluation
of the process.
Our study was explorative and descriptive, and no
inferential statistics were used. We followed an evaluation similar to that
proposed by Gaytán and Pásaro
(2001), with some modifications. We evaluated two levels of knowledge: the
management of the program and the comprehension of the theoretical knowledge.
For the first point, we carried out a survey on the usability of the program,
whereas for the second, there were two related activities: the writing of the
simulation’s results in the form of a scientific article and a knowledge exam.
RESULTS
Examples
of simulations.
With the dose-response program experiments with the quisqualic acid (Q. A.) and kainic
(K. A.) acid were simulated. Figure 2 shows a simulation with the first acid; in this case the ≪Q. A.≫ button is pressed and a module is shown
to select the administered dose. In this example: 41.2 μM.
The trigger frequency is recorded in the oscilloscope. In the square below the
average frequency is shown: 409 Hz.
In order to obtain the dose-response curve, we
administered growing concentrations of the drug. Figure 3 shows the registered
response for each administered dose. With the increase of the dose so did the
response increase in a non-linear manner. A rapid growth begins until reaching
a maximum. The program reproduces a different response each time a new
simulation is started.
Figure 3. Examples of agonist
administration. Simulations that show the trigger
frequencies produced by increasing the dose of quisqualic
acid. (A) Response of 118.40 Hz at a concentration of 3.1 μM. (B) Response of 212.17 Hz with a concentration of 10.1 μM. (C) Response of 353.34 Hz with 20.2 μM.
(D) Response of 449.18 Hz with 48.3 μM.
The dose-response curve was built with various
simulations, in which the response is recorded facing the increase of the
concentration of the drug. It is necessary to press the ≪Q.A.≫ button each time that a new simulation is
to be carried out. For each selected concentration thirty records were made.
The mean and standard deviation of the data was calculated. Consequently, the
students carry out statistical tests of the data generated by the simulator.
Figure 4 shows the results.
Frequency
(Hz)
Quisqualic Acid (μM)
Figure 4. Dose-response curve of
the quisqualic acid. The dose of the drug was
increased on each simulation for a total of thirty records at nine different
concentrations in order to obtain the corresponding mean and standard
deviation. The curve is adjusted to a sigmoid function. The frequency reaches a
maximum, indicative that the receptor has been saturated (graph presented in
the article of a student).
Results
of the process evaluation.
Two levels of knowledge were evaluated: the
management of the program and the understanding of the theoretical knowledge
(writing the results of the simulations as a scientific article and a knowledge
exam).
Usability
of the simulator.
We explored how easy or difficult it was to use the
simulator. Figure 5 shows the results: 69.2% of the students indicated that it
was easy
to use; 23.1%, that it was regular; and 7.7% that it
was difficult.
% of students
Usability; Easy, Regular, Difficult
Figure 5. Usability graph. For the majority of
students, the simulator was easy to use.
Exploration the activities
performed
Writing a scientific article
In the final part of the work an intervention was
carried out in order to analyze if the student achieved a reflective learning
that would allow them to write their own scientific article based on the data collected
with the simulator. The intervention combined the collaborative review in pairs
and with the professor.
The writing was done in two steps: writing the first
rough draft and its review in pairs, and writing the final article with the
corrections. The students wrote an article following the copyright instructions
provided. One-hundred percent of the students adequately
followed the format, sections and report of the bibliography. Eight of the
students (61.5%) described in the abstract and in the introduction the
importance of the work performed; 76.9% (10) of the students implicitly
described a working hypothesis at the end of the introduction; nine of them
proved their hypothesis with the results. Thirteen students (100%) showed the
effect of kainic and quisqualic
acid. The calculation of the D50 was reported by
ten students (76.9%). All of the students created the graphs in
accordance with what they learned in the corresponding sections and were able
to make scientific bibliographic searchers in accordance to the subject; twelve
students found specific bibliography regarding the effect of quisqualic and kainic acid on the
vestibule of the axolotl (see Figure 6).
STUDENTS %
1. Follow
the instructions...
2. Describe
explicitly...
3. Propose explicitly...
4.
Demonstrate the hypothesis...
5. Report
the effect of the...
6. Report
the effect of...
7.
Determine the D50 for the...
8.
Determine the D50 for the...
9. Carry
out adequately...
10. Report
the bibliography...
11. Report
the bibliography...
Figure 6. Graph of the performance
of writing the article. The abilities reached by the students are shown
in the following – rubrics analyzed: 1. Follow the copyright instructions. 2. Explicitly
describe the importance of the work. 3. Implicitly propose a hypothesis. 4.
Demonstrate the hypothesis through the results. 5. Report the effect of the quisqualic acid. 6. Report the effect of the kainic acid. 7. Determine the D50 for the quisqualic acid. 8. Determine the D50 for the kainic acid. 9. Adequately create the graphs. 10. Report
the bibliography related to receptors, agonists and antagonist of the receptor
to glutamate. 11. Report the bibliography related to the activity of the
agonists utilized in the vestibular nerve of the axolotl. The scale from 0 to
100 corresponds to the percentage.
According to Bloom’s taxonomy, the results show that
the activities: to generate data with the simulator, to experiment with growing
agonist doses, to graph the results (rubrics 1 and 9), located in the apply
level, and to discover the effect of the agonists, classify and report
specialized and specific bibliography (rubrics 5, 6, 10, and 11), in the
analyze level, were achieved by 100 – 92.3% of the students. Rubrics 7 and 8,
which also correspond to analysis, were reached by 76.9%, and a higher level
such as synthesize (rubrics 2, 3, and 4), was reached by 76.9 to 61.5% of the
students.
Knowledge test
The learning reached by the students was explored.
Six multiple choice questions were formulated. Table 3
shows the questions, the answers and the percentage of students who selected
each response.
Table 3. Knowledge test.
Questions |
Answers |
Students (%) |
1.
The administration of quisqualic acid shows: |
(1)
That it has no effect. (2)
That it decreases the trigger frequency. (3)
That it increases the trigger frequency. |
0 7.7 92.3 |
2.
The administration of quisqualic acid shows: |
(1)
Both acids are antagonists. (2)
Both acids have no effect. (3)
Both acids are agonists. |
0 0 100 |
3.
Given the previous results which hypothesis is corroborated: |
(1)
The kainic and quisqualic
acids have no effect on the vestibular system. (2)
Their effect on the beta-adrenergic receptors. (3)
The trigger frequency in the vestibular system is mediated by glutamate
receptors. |
0 0 100 |
4.
What differences are observed in the responses found between the quisqualic and kainic acids? |
(1)
No difference. (2)
Kainic acid has a greater effect than quisqualic acid. (3)
Quisqualic acid has a greater effect than kainic acid. |
0 0 100 |
5.
In a dose-response curve what is the fiftieth dose (D50): |
(1)
It is the minimum response value. (2)
Is the necessary dose to reach 50% effect. (3)
Is the trigger frequency at 50%. |
0 92.3 7.7 |
6.
With the data generated by the simulator: |
(1)
Nothing can be done with it. (2)
The data is confusing. (3)
A hypothesis can be proven. |
0 0 100 |
Figure 7. summarizes the
results. Each vertex of the hexagon corresponds to a question. The numbering of
the questions follows that from Table 3.
CORRECT
INCORRECT
1. The
administration of the acid...
2. The
administration of the acid...
3. Of the
previous results...
4. What
differences are observed in the...
5. In a
dose-response curve what is the...
6. With the
data generated by the simulator:
Figure 7. Graph that shows the
results of the knowledge test. The numbers 1 to 6 correspond to the
questions from Table 3. The numbers from 0 to 100 are the percentage. The
majority of the students answered all the questions correctly; 7.7% answered
questions 1 and 5 incorrectly.
DISCUSSION
The laboratory equipment and the reagents used in the
experiments are extremely expensive; definitely, in our conditions, they are
impossible to carry out for the teaching-learning. Due
to the fact that the subject posed in the virtual experiments corresponds to an
activity of the disciplinary background, it has great meaning for the students.
It consists on carrying out a guided virtual experiment in order to achieve the
building of knowledge (López-Bonilla, 2003; Cronbach and Snow, 1977).
Comparing the results in this work with real
experiments is impossible due to the high costs it implies. However, a similar
experience was carried out in Biology in the University of Sevilla
(Gaytán and Pásaro, 2001).
These authors carried out a pilot student on the interactive learning of
neurobiology. For this, they designed an interactive informatics application.
They evaluated two levels of knowledge: the comprehension of the theoretical
concepts and the technical training, which refers to the management of the
program (the recording equipment) and the analysis of said recording. The
students were evaluated through three activities: a revision work, a discussion
session, and a session of panels. The authors indicate that the majority of the
students recognized having improved their understanding of the neuronal
physiology.
Our work is exploratory; we designed and developed an
interactive computer program for the multi-unit extracellular recording of the
vestibular nerve of the axolotl. We studied the same knowledge levels:
comprehension of the basic concepts, management of the program, and data
analysis. In order to explore these points, the students wrote a scientific article
and took a knowledge exam. Our results agree with those of Gaytán
and Pásaro (2001).
There are various studies on the use of simulators in
other disciplines. Table 4 summarizes the perceived results on the learning
achieved with the simulators on three different works: virtual instruments,
chemical reaction simulator, and hemodynamics simulator. In the first, 146
professors gave their perception on the learning of the students. In the
second, 30 students expressed their perception on the benefit regarding their
knowledge, with a scale of 1 to 10. In the third, 90 students provided their
perception on its clinical benefit. In all cases, the study was descriptive.
Both the teachers as well as the students recognized the benefit in the use of
simulators with regard to learning. Our work agrees with the results of these
authors.
Table 4. Perception results of
the learning.
Authors |
“n” |
Perception of the students (%) On the learning of the students |
|||||||||||||
Gorghiu, Gorghiu,
Dumitrescu, Olteanu, Bîzoi &Suduc, 2010 |
46 Professors |
||||||||||||||
Great measure |
Good measure |
Very little |
Nothing |
||||||||||||
32 |
56 |
12 |
0 |
||||||||||||
Brocks,
2015 |
30 Students |
Perception: benefit of the
knowledge (%) (evaluation
range from 10 to 1) |
|||||||||||||
10 |
9 |
8 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
||||||
30 |
16.6 |
30 |
10 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
0 |
3.3 |
0 |
3.3 |
||||||
McCaughey & Traynor, 2010 |
90 Students |
Perception: clinical benefit (%) |
|||||||||||||
Useful |
Efficient |
Integral attention |
|||||||||||||
96.8 |
82.8 |
81.7 |
|||||||||||||
|
It is worth noting that the scientific subject
addressed in the simulator is found in the eighth quarter of the bachelor’s
degree, and the students that participated in the processes were in their third
quarter. Nevertheless, 69.2% achieved the highest learning level. This suggests
an acceleration of the learning that ought to be investigated in future Works.
CONCLUSIONS
The simulation of the laboratory experiments allows
the students to situate themselves in a real scientific activity, carried out
on the computer. A real experiment of this type has a
duration of five to seven hours, and obtaining a dose-response curve requires
multiple experiments. With the simulator, the times decrease considerably; an
experiment is carried out in minutes. The simulators allow the implementation
of experiments that, due to their high costs, are impossible to carry out in
the study of a bachelor’s degree.
In online courses, where the implementation of
laboratory practices is necessary, the simulators are a good alternative. The
simulator is a good didactic tool that makes use of the new technologies, but
which does not substitute the professor. The methods used to evaluate the
process are complementary and allowed for the distinction of different learning
levels. We observed that the technical part (apply) was achieved that all the
students. As the learning level increases, the quantity of students that
achieved it lowered (analyze, 92.3%; synthesize, 76.9%; evaluate and create,
69.2%). There is a group of students (7.7%) that did not adapt to this type of teaching-learning. In order to meet the high order
objectives (analyze, synthesize, evaluate and create), it was necessary to
increase the mental effort of the students: going from the simple demonstrative
or expositive practices recipe type to a laboratory practice of the structured
research type.
REFERENCES
Anderson, Lorin W. & Krathwohl, David. (Eds.).
(2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision
of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Boston, MA (Pearson
Education Group): Allyn & Bacon.
Barolli, Elisabeth; Laburú,
Carlos; y Guridi, Verónica. (2010). Laboratorio
didáctico de ciencias: caminos de investigación. Revista Electrónica de Enseñanza de las Ciencias, vol. 9, núm. 1, pp.
88-110. Recuperado de http://reec.uvigo.es/volumenes/volumen9/ART6_VOL9_N1.pdf
Bernhard, Jonte. (2010). Insightful learning in the laboratory: Some
experiences from 10 years of designing and using conceptual labs. European Journal of Engineering Education,
vol. 35, núm. 3, pp. 271-287. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/03043791003739759
Bloom, Benjamin. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The classification of educational
goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. Nueva York: Longmans, Green.
Brocks, Dion. (2015). uSIMPK. An Excel
for Windows-based simulation program for instruction of basic pharmacokinetics
principles to pharmacy students. Computer Methods and Programs in
Biomedicine, vol. 120, núm. 3, pp. 154-163. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2015.04.006
Bruner, Jerome. (1961). The art of discovery. Harvard
Educational Review, vol. 31, pp. 21–32.
Cooper, Martyn. (2005). Remote laboratories in teaching
and learning-issues impinging on widespread adoption in science and engineering
education. International Journal
of Online Engineering (iJOE), vol. 1, núm. 1, pp 1-7.
Recuperado de http://online-journals.org/i-joe/article/view/298
Cooper,
Jonathan; Vik, Jon; & Waltemath,
Dagmar. (2014). A call
for virtual experiments: accelerating the scientific process. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology,
vol. 117, núm. 1, pp. 99-106. doi: 10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2014.10.001
Crespo, Elio y Álvarez, Tomás. (2001). Clasificación de las prácticas de laboratorio de Física. Pedagogía Universitaria, vol. 6, núm.
2, pp. 1-7. Recuperado de http://cvi.mes.edu.cu/peduniv/index.php/peduniv/article/view/181
Cronbach, Lee Joseph & Snow, Richard. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A
handbook for research on interactions. Nueva York: Irvington.
Dantas, Arianne & Kemm,
Robert. (2008). A blended approach to active learning in a
physiology laboratory-based subject facilitated by an e-learning component.
Advances in Physiology Education, vol.
32, núm. 1, pp. 65–75. doi: https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00006.2007
Ertugrul, Nesimi.
(2000). Towards virtual laboratories: A survey of LabVIEW-based
teaching/learning tools and future trends. International
Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 16, núm.
2, pp. 1-10. Recuperado de https://www.ni.com/pdf/academic/us/journals/ijee_04.pdf
Fraga, Jesús.
(1996). Estrategia metodológica para la enseñanza del método experimental en la
física. En Temas escogidos de didáctica de la física (pp. 65-71). Pueblo y
Educación.
García, Agustín
y Gil, Mario. (2006). Entornos constructivistas de aprendizaje basados en
simulaciones informáticas. Revista
Electrónica de Enseñanza de las Ciencias, vol. 5, núm. 2, pp. 304-322. Recuperado
de http://www.docenciauniversitaria.org/volumenes/volumen5/ART6_Vol5_N2.pdf
García, Miguel.
(2005). El laboratorio de química en microescala en
las actividades experimentales. Enseñanza
de las Ciencias, número extra, VII congreso. Recuperado de https://ddd.uab.cat/pub/edlc/edlc_a2005nEXTRA/edlc_a2005nEXTRAp358labqui.pdf
Gaytán, Susana;
Pontiga, Francisco; y Pásaro,
María. (2001). Programa piloto de aprendizaje interactivo de la neurobiología: nuevas
estrategias de enseñanza de la electrofisiología. Revista de Enseñanza Universitaria, núm. 18, pp. 73-80. Recuperado
de https://idus.us.es/xmlui/handle/11441/13435
Gómez,
A. (1999). Una alternativa didáctica para
el perfeccionamiento de la formación de habilidades experimentales en los
futuros licenciados en Educación de la carrera Física y Electrónica. Santiago
de Cuba: Centro de Estudios de Educación Superior “Manuel F. Grant”, Universidad de Oriente.
Gorghiu, Laura; Gorghiu,
Gabriel; Dumitrescu, Crinela;
Olteanu, Radu; Bîzoi, Mihai; & Suduc, Ana-Maria. (2010). Implementing virtual
experiments in sciences education-challenges and experiences achieved in the
frame of VccSSe Comenius 2.1. Project. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 2,
pp. 2952–2956. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.446
Govea-Valladares,
E., Medellín-Castillo, H., Lim, T., Khambay, B., Rodríguez-Florido,
M. y Ballesteros, J. (2012). Desarrollo
de un simulador virtual para planeación de osteotomías mandibulares en cirugías
ortognáticas. Revista Mexicana de Ingeniería
Biomédica, vol. 33, núm. 2, pp. 147-158. Recuperado de
http://new.medigraphic.com/cgi-bin/resumen.cgi?IDARTICULO=62899
Hacking, Ian. (1983). Representing
and Intervening. Cambridge: University Press.
Hodson, Derek. (1996). Laboratory work as
scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol. 28, núm. 2, pp. 115-135. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280201
Hoskins, Sally; Stevens, Leslie; & Nehm, Ross. (2007). Selective use of the primary literature transforms the
classroom into a virtual laboratory. Genetics, vol. 176, núm. 3, pp. 1381-1389.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1534/genetics.107.071183
Kirschner, Paul; Sweller,
John; & Clark, Richard. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An
analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based,
experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational
Psychologist, vol. 41, núm. 2, pp. 75-86. doi: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Lefèvre, J. (1988). Guía
práctica de la enseñanza asistida por ordenador. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.
López-Bonilla,
Guadalupe. (2013). Prácticas disciplinares, prácticas escolares: qué son las
disciplinas académicas y cómo se relacionan con la educación formal en las
ciencias y en las humanidades. Revista
Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, vol. 18, núm. 57, pp. 413-435.
Recuperado de https://www.comie.org.mx/v1/revista/portal.php?idm=es&sec=SC03&&sub=SBB&criterio=ART57003
López-Trujillo,
Arlette; Nava-Monroy, Ma. Esther; y Moreno-Colin, Roberto. (2013). Exploración de los estilos de
aprendizaje en los estudiantes de la carrera de Biología. Revista de Estilos de Aprendizaje, vol. 11, núm. 11, pp. 118-138.
Recuperado de: http://www2.uned.es/revistaestilosdeaprendizaje/numero_11/articulos/articulo_08.pdf
McCaughey, Caroline & Traynor, Marian. (2010). The role of
simulation in nurse education. Nurse
Education Today, vol. 30, núm 8, pp. 827–832. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2010.10.029
Nedelsky Leo. (1958). Introductory physics
laboratory. American Journal of Physics,
vol. 26, núm. 2, pp. 267-285. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1996103
Ravert, Patricia. (2002). An
integrative review of computer-based simulation in the education process.
Computers Informatics Nursing, vol.
20, núm. 5, pp. 203-208.
Ray, Sandipan; Koshy, Nicole; Diwakar, Shyam; Nair, Bipin; & Srivastava, Sanjeeva. (2012). Sakshat Labs: India’s virtual
proteomics initiative. PLoS Biol, vol.
10, núm, 7, e1001353. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1001353
Siso, Zenahir; Briceño, José; Álvarez, Christian; y Arana, José.
(2009). Las prácticas de laboratorio en la formación del profesorado de
química. Un primer acercamiento. Revista
Electrónica Diálogos Educativos, núm. 18, pp. 139-162. Recuperado de https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3158982
Waldrop, Mitchell. (2013).
Education online: the virtual lab. Nature,
vol. 499, pp. 268-270. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/499268a
Zhang, Chao;
Thompson, Sarah; & Miller, Connie. (2011). A review of
simulation-based interprofessional education. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, vol. 7, núm. 4, pp. e117-e126. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2010.02.008
Received: 19/01/2016
Published: 18/03/2016
[1] Doctor in Basic Biomedic
Research. Research Professor of the Biology School of the Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico.
[2] Master’s degree in Education and Master’s
degree in Aesthetics and Art. Research professor of the Digital Art’s
Bachelor’s degree of the Visual and Audiovisual Arts School and of the General
Directorate on Educational Innovation of the Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico.
[3] Doctor in Experimental Pathology. Research
professor of the Biology School of the Benemérita Universidad
Autónoma de Puebla, Mexico.
Métricas de artículo
Metrics powered by PLOS ALM
Enlaces refback
- No hay ningún enlace refback.
Apertura vol. 16, núm. 1, abril - septiembre 2024, es una revista científica especializada en innovación educativa en ambientes virtuales que se publica de manera semestral por la Universidad de Guadalajara, a través de la Coordinación de Recursos Informativos del Sistema de Universidad Virtual. Oficinas en Av. La Paz 2453, colonia Arcos Sur, CP 44140, Guadalajara, Jalisco, México. Tel.: 3268-8888, ext. 18775, www.udgvirtual.udg.mx/apertura, apertura@udgvirtual.udg.mx. Editor responsable: Alicia Zúñiga Llamas. Número de la Reserva de Derechos al Uso Exclusivo del Título de la versión electrónica: 04-2009-080712102200-203, e-ISSN: 2007-1094; número de la Reserva de Derechos al Uso Exclusivo del Título de la versión impresa: 04-2009-121512273300-102, ISSN: 1665-6180, otorgados por el Instituto Nacional del Derecho de Autor. Número de Licitud de Título: 13449 y número de Licitud de contenido: 11022 de la versión impresa, ambos otorgados por la Comisión Calificadora de Publicaciones y Revistas Ilustradas de la Secretaría de Gobernación. Responsable de la última actualización de este número: Sergio Alberto Mendoza Hernández. Fecha de última actualización: 22 de marzo de 2024.