Abstract:
Computer simulations are increasingly used in science classrooms for educational
purposes. Some research studies have shown positive results when using simulations as
cognitive instructional tools while others have shown no difference when compared to
other approaches. This research study aimed to answer the following research questions:
Does a simulation within inquiry-based learning teaching approach improve the quality
of student explanations in the domain of genetics? Does the addition of simulations to
inquiry-based learning improve students’ explanations more than inquiry-based learning
alone? How do the features of the simulations within inquiry-based learning impact the
quality of students’ explanations? The sample of students used in this study included 22
4th grade students in an IBO school in Lebanon. This sample was divided randomly and
equally into a simulation-inquiry group and a non-simulation-inquiry group. To help
answering the research questions, the researcher used a variety of quantitative and
qualitative methods of data collection and analysis that included: administering pre-and
post-tests, videotaping the simulation groups’ interactions, and audio taping interviews
with three students from the inquiry group and four students from the simulation group.
The pre and post tests were analyzed using an ANCOVA. The results of analyzing the
pre-and post-tests showed that simulations and inquiry-based learning both helped
improve students’ explanations in the domain of genetics, but no one was better than the
other. The videos of the interactions were transcribed and the researcher was able to
identify distinct features of the interactions that were relevant to the goal of improving
the quality of explanations in genetics. These included the following categories: ease of
using the simulations; features of the simulations that help clarify the concepts
presented; simulations readily encouraged spontaneous connection to daily life; using
examples from the simulations to answer questions related to the domain of genetics;
guidance from the worksheets; need of support from the teacher; and features of
simulations that caused confusion among students. Moreover, the audio recorded
interviews were transcribed and analysis revealed the following categories that captured
differences in reasoning between the inquiry and the simulation group members
interviewed: source of ideas; use of analogies; use of terminology; and
scientific/nonscientific explanations. The implications of the study for further research
and teaching are also discussed.
