Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 171

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Conceptual Understanding of Electrical Circuits in Secondary Vocational Engineering Education: Combining Traditional Instruction with Inquiry Learning in a Virtual Lab

Kollöffel, Bas, de Jong, Ton·2013·Journal of Engineering Education

Abstract

Background: Traditionally, engineering curricula about electrical circuits use textbook instruction and hands‐on lessons, which are effective approaches for teaching terms and definitions, the procedural use of formulas, and how to build circuits. Nonetheless, students often lack conceptual understanding. Purpose (Hypothesis): The aim of this study was to discover how to facilitate the acquisition of conceptual understanding. We hypothesized that adding an instructional approach in the form of inquiry learning in a virtual lab would be more effective than relying on traditional instruction alone. Design/Method: Students in secondary vocational engineering education were randomly assigned to one of two conditions in a quasi‐experimental study. In the traditional condition, the curriculum was supplemented with computer‐based practice. In the virtual lab condition, the traditional curriculum was supplemented with inquiry learning in a virtual lab. Results: Results showed that students in the virtual lab condition scored significantly higher on conceptual understanding (Cohen's d = 0.65) and on procedural skills (d = 0.76). In particular, students in this condition scored higher (d = 1.19) on solving complex problems. This result occurred for both complex conceptual and procedural problems. Conclusion: Since students in the virtual lab condition acquired better conceptual understanding and also developed better procedural skills than students in the traditional condition, it appears that conceptual understanding and procedural skills develop in an iterative fashion.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/jee.20022

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Kollöffel, B., & de Jong, T.
Venue
Journal of Engineering Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-07
Volume
102
Issue
3
Pages
375-393
ISSN
  • 1069-4730 (ISSN-L)
  • 2168-9830
OpenAlex
W1850015201
Cited by
171
References
4
FWCI
15.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.