The Application of Virtual Laboratories Across Different Fields and Their Impact on Assessment
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52171/herald.374Keywords:
virtual reality, virtual laboratories, assessment systems, simulation-based learning, experiential learning model, statistical analysisAbstract
This study examines the use of virtual laboratories in physics, chemistry, and computer networks, focusing on their effects on learning assessment. Two groups of 24 students each partic-ipated – one used virtual labs, the other traditional methods. Performance was measured across five indicators: accuracy, task time, feedback-based revisions, satisfaction, and sense of presence. Re-sults showed that virtual labs, especially in computer networks, led to higher accuracy, faster com-pletion, and stronger engagement. In contrast, physics and chemistry showed varied outcomes due to content complexity. Statistical analysis confirmed significant differences. The study highlights that virtual lab effectiveness depends not only on technology but also on pedagogical design and user experience quality.
References
1. Ma J., Nickerson J.V. (2006). Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review. ACM Computing Surveys, 38(3), Article 7.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1132960.1132961
2. Rutten N., van Joolingen W.R., van der Veen J.T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017
3. Makransky G., Terkildsen T. S., Mayer R. E. (2019). Adding immersive virtual reality to a science lab simulation causes more presence but less learning. Learning and Instruction, 60, 225–236.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.12.007
4. de Jong T., Linn M. C., Zacharia Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308.
https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230579
5. 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 & Education, 87, 218–237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.07.003
6. Tatli Z., Ayas A. (2013). Effect of a virtual chemistry laboratory on students’ achievement. Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 159–170.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.16.1.159
7. Scheckler R.K. (2003). Virtual labs: A substitute for traditional labs? International Journal of Developmental Biology, 47(2–3), 231–236.
https://ijdb.ehu.eus/article/pdf/12705675
8. Gafarzada H., Gafarov A., Khankishiyev I. (2023). The Analysis of Information Processing Methods to Assess Reliability of Machines and Equipment // Azərbaycan Mühəndislik Akademiyasının Xəbərləri, 15(2), 29–41.
https://doi.org/10.52171/2076-0515_2023_15_02_29_41
9. Cohen J. (1977). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences.
https://doi.org/10.1016/C2013-0-10517-X
10. Ghadeer H., Ahmad A. (2020). The effectiveness of using virtual experiments on students’ learning in the general physics lab. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 977-996.
11. Osmanli, T. (2025). AI-enhanced predictive modelling of virtual laboratory microlearning in online distance education. Ingénierie des Systèmes d’Information, Vol. 30, No. 9, pp. 2461-2471.
https://doi.org/10.18280/isi.300920
12. Osmanli, T. (2025). The Impact of Virtual Laboratories on Student Motivation and Academic Performance: An Integrated Fuzzy-Sem and Machine Learning Study. Journal of Applied Engineering and Technological Science (JAETS), 7(1), 414–438.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 T.E. Osmanlı, L.N. Əhmədov
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
