Simulation versus Hands-On Learning Methodologies: A Comparative Study for Engineering and Technology Curricula
This paper compares the findings of two studies conducted to determine the effectiveness of simulation-based, hands-on and feedback mechanism on students learning by answering the following questions: 1). Does the use of simulation improve students’ learning outcomes? 2). How do students perceive the instructional design features embedded in the simulation program such as exploration and scaffolding support in learning new concepts? 3.) What is the effect of feedback mechanisms on students’ learning in the use of simulation-based labs? The paper also discusses the other aspects of findings which reveal that simulation by itself is not very effective in promoting student learning. Simulation becomes effective when it is followed by hands-on activity and feedback mechanisms. Furthermore, the paper presents recommendations for improving student learning through the use of simulation-based, hands-on, and feedback-based teaching methodologies.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1111534Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 1112
 Nahvi, M. (1996). Dynamics of student-computer interaction in a simulation environment: Reflections on curricular issues. Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education, USA, 1383-1386.
 Hsieh, S., & Hsieh, P.Y. (2004). Integrating virtual learning system for programmable logic controller. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 169-178.
 Dewey, J. (1938). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.
 Sevgi, L. (2006). Electrical and computer engineering education in 21st century: Issues, perspectives and challenges, Paper presented at the meeting, Istanbul, Turkey.
 Veenman, M. V., Elshout, J., & Busato, V. (1994). Metacognitive mediation in learning with computer based simulations. Computers in Human Behavior, 101(1), 93-106.
 McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Lin, Y., & Smith, D. A. F. (1986). Teaching and learning in the college classroom: A review of the research literature. Ann Arbor, MI: Regents of The University of Michigan.
 Wolfe, J. (1993). A history of business teaching games in English-speaking and post-socialist countries: The origination and diffusion of a management education and development technology. Simulation & Gaming, 24, 446-463.
 Garcia, J. R. (1995). Use of technology in developing problem solving/critical thinking skills. Journal of Industrial Technology, 11(1), 14-17.
 Pogrow, S. (1994). Students who just don’t understand. Educational Leadership, 52(3), 62-66.
 Faryniarz, J. V., & Lockwood, L. G. (1992). Effectiveness of microcomputer simulations in simulating strategy in a Logo microworld. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 368-379.
 Mayes, R. L. (1992). The effects of using software tools on mathematical problem: Solving in secondary schools.School Science and Mathematics, 92(5), 243-248.
 Woolf, B., & Hall, W. (1995). Multimedia pedagogues: Interactive systems for teaching and learning. IEEE Multimedia, 74-80.
 Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. (1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 43-50.
 Clariana, R. B., Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1991). The effects of different feedback strategies using computer-administered multiple-choice questions as instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(2), 5-17.
 Institute for Creative Technologies. (2009). Intelligent guided experiential learning: Tutoring for practice. Retrieved from http://ict.usc.edu/projects
 Cuevas, H. M., Fiore, S. M., Bowers, C. A., & Salas, E. (2004). Fostering constructive cognitive and metacognitive activity in computer-based complex task training environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 225-241.
 Corter, J., Nickerson, J., Esche, S., Chassapis, C., Im, S., & Ma, J. (2007). Constructing reality: A study ofremote, hands-on, and simulated laboratories. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 14(2), 17-37.