CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Experimental Learning in EngineeringVarious Chemistry Research TopicsScience Education and Pedagogy

Virtual Laboratories in STEM Higher Education: A Scoping Review

Open access
Sellberg, Charlott, Nazari, Zeinab, Solberg, Mads·2024·Nordic Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education
DOI 10.23865/njsre.v2.5766
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Synthetic learning environments like virtual laboratories are increasingly used in pedagogical practice across the landscape of higher education, in both professional and non-professional study programs. Virtual laboratories are simulations of experiments or other hands-on activities that allow students to explore scientific concepts and principles in a virtual environment. These simulations can be used to supplement or replace traditional laboratory experiences on campus, providing students with a flexible and convenient way to learn and engage with the laboratory as a context for work. The conceptual and theoretical foundations of these simulations, however, are still poorly understood. This study provides a scoping review of the literature on how virtual laboratories are conceptualized in STEM higher education, and the ideas, principles and presuppositions that inform and sustain research on virtual laboratories in STEM. By searching through databases (n = 7) for peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between 2012 and 2023, focusing on the use of virtual laboratories in STEM higher education, a selection of articles (n = 23) was identified as relevant for the study aim and subjected to thematic analysis and narrative synthesis. The results add to our knowledge from previous systematic reviews of studies on virtual laboratories in STEM higher education, particularly by identifying common characteristics between various definitions of virtual laboratories. Moreover, the review identifies three theoretical traditions influencing work on virtual laboratories for STEM in higher education. While this highlights a field of research committed to evidence-informed pedagogy and instructional effectiveness, it also points to a lack of descriptive, qualitative research that systematically investigates everyday instructional practices with virtual laboratories in STEM-education in naturalistic contexts. Further studies on what happens in such settings would be valuable for informing future theorizing about virtual laboratories in STEM.

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 · 10.23865/njsre.v2.5766

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Embracing AI shifts the narrative from disruption to collaboration, encouraging educators to personalise learning, streamline administrative tasks, and enhance critical thinking through discipline-specific tools.

    “Embracing AI shifts the narrative from disruption to collaboration, encouraging educators to personalise learning, streamline administrative tasks, and enhance critical thinking through discipline-specific tools such as virtual STEM laboratories (Sellberg et al., 2024) or humanities computational analysis (Dobson, 2019).”

    From From avoidance to adoption: strategies for integrating AI in higher education contexts (2026) · cites this paper as Sellberg et al., 2024

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 38

  1. August, S. E., Hammers, M. L., Murphy, D. B., Neyer, A., Gueye, P., & Thames, R. Q. (2015). Virtual engineering sciences learning lab: Giving STEM education a second life. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 9(1), 18-30. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2015.2419253 · DOI
  2. Balsamo, A. (1995). Forms of technological embodiment: Reading the body in contemporary culture. Body & Society, 1(3-4), 215-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357034x95001003013 · DOI
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
  4. 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 · DOI
  5. Brinson, J. R. (2017). A further characterization of empirical research related to learning outcome achievement in remote and virtual science labs. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(5), 546-560. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10956-017-9699-8 · DOI
  6. Cannon-Bowers, J., & Bowers, C. (2009). Synthetic learning environments: On developing a science of simulation, games, and virtual worlds for training. In S. W. J. Kozlowski & E. Salas (Eds.), Learning, training, and development in organizations (pp. 250-282). Routledge.
  7. Chowdhury, H., Alam, F., & Mustary, I. (2019). Development of an innovative technique for teaching and learning of laboratory experiments for engineering courses. Energy Procedia, 160, 806-811. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.egypro.2019.02.154 · DOI
  8. Costabile, M. (2020). Using online simulations to teach biochemistry laboratory content during COVID-19. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 48(5), 509-510. https://doi.org/10.1002/bmb.21427 · DOI
  9. DeVries, R. (2000). Vygotsky, Piaget, and education: A reciprocal assimilation of theories and educational practices. New Ideas in Psychology, 18(2-3), 187-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-118X(00)00008-8 · DOI
  10. Diwakar, S., Kolil, V. K., Francis, S. P., & Achuthan, K. (2023). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among students for laboratory courses-Assessing the impact of virtual laboratories. Computers & Education, 198, 104758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104758 · DOI
  11. Elme, L., Jørgensen, M. L., Dandanell, G., Mottelson, A., & Makransky, G. (2022). Immersive virtual reality in STEM: Is IVR an effective learning medium and does adding self-explanation after a lesson improve learning outcomes?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(5), 1601-1626. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11423-022-10139-3 · DOI
  12. Garcia-Zubia, J., Cuadros, J., Romero, S., Hernandez-Jayo, U., Orduna, P., Guenaga, M., … & Gustavsson, I. (2017). Empirical analysis of the use of the VISIR remote lab in teaching analog electronics. IEEE Transactions on Education, 60(2), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2608790 · DOI
  13. Grodotzki, J., Ortelt, T. R., & Tekkaya, A. E. (2018). Remote and virtual labs for engineering education 4.0: Achievements of the ELLI project at the TU Dortmund University. Procedia Manufacturing, 26, 1349- 1360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.126 · DOI
  14. Gutiérrez-Carreón, G., Daradoumis, T., Jorba, J., & Peña-Gomar, M. C. (2020). A study on the effectiveness of an undergraduate online teaching laboratory with semantic mechanism from a student perspective. Journal of Information Technology Education, 19, 137. https://doi.org/10.28945/4624 · DOI
  15. Holly, M., Pirker, J., Resch, S., Brettschuh, S., & Gütl, C. (2021). Designing VR experiences -Expectations for teaching and learning in VR. Educational Technology & Society, 24(2), 107-119.
  16. Hsu, T. S., TAng, K. Y., & Lin, T. C. (2023). Trends and hot topics of STEM and STEM education: A co-word analysis of literature published in 2011-2020. Science & Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-023- 00419-6 · DOI
  17. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Sage Publications.
  18. Makransky, G. (2021). The immersion principle in multimedia learning. In R. Mayer, & L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 296-303). Cambridge University Press. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781108894333.031 · DOI
  19. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers' perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594- 018-0151-2 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Martín-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799-822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522 · DOI
  21. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography -Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00132516 · DOI
  22. Nuanmeesri, S., & Poomhiran, L. (2019). Perspective electrical circuit simulation with virtual reality. International Journal of Online & Biomedical Engineering, 15(5).
  23. O'Connor, K. (2022). Constructivism, curriculum and the knowledge question: Tensions and challenges for higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 47(2), 412-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2020. 1750585 · DOI
  24. Potkonjak, V., Gardner, M., Callaghan, V., Mattila, P., Guetl, C., Petrović, V. M., & Jovanović, K. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education, 95, 309-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.002 · DOI
  25. Rannikmäe, M., Holbrook, J. & Soobard, R. (2020). Social constructivism-Jerome Bruner. In B. Akpan, & T. J. Kennedy (Eds.), Science education in theory and practice. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030- 43620-9_18 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Reeves, S. M., & Crippen, K. J. (2021). Virtual laboratories in undergraduate science and engineering courses: A systematic review, 2009-2019. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(1), 16-30. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10956-020-09866-0 · DOI
  27. Reeves, S. M., Crippen, K. J., & McCray, E. D. (2021). The varied experience of undergraduate students learning chemistry in virtual reality laboratories. Computers & Education, 175, 104320. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104320 · DOI
  28. Riva, G. (2008). From virtual to real body: Virtual reality as embodied technology. Journal of Cyber Therapy and Rehabilitation, 1(1), 7-22.
  29. Rozin, P. (2009). What kind of empirical research should we publish, fund, and reward? A different perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(4), 435-439. https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1745-6924.2009.01151.x · DOI
  30. Sari, U., Duygu, E., Sen, Ö. F., & Kirindi, T. (2020). The effects of STEM education on scientific process skills and STEM awareness in simulation based inquiry learning environment. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(3), 387-405. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020. · DOI
  31. Shaughnessy, J. M. (2013). Mathematics in a STEM context. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 18(6), 324. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacmiddscho.18.6.0324 · DOI
  32. Tricco, A. C., Soobiah, C., Antony, J., Cogo, E., MacDonald, H., Lillie, E., Tran, J., D'Souza, J., Hui, W., Perrier, L., Welch, V., Horsley, T., Straus, S., & Kastner, M. (2016b). A scoping review identifies multiple emerging knowledge synthesis methods, but few studies operationalize the method. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.08.030 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Uriel, C., Sergio, S., Carolina, G., Mariano, G., Paola, D., & Martín, A. (2020). Improving the understanding of basic sciences concepts by using virtual and augmented reality. Procedia Computer Science, 172, 389-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.165 · DOI
  34. Viegas, C., Pavani, A., Lima, N., Marques, A., Pozzo, I., Dobboletta, E., Atencia, V., Barreto, D., Calliari, F., Fidalgo, A., Lima, D., Temporao, G., & Alves, G. (2018). Impact of a remote lab on teaching practices and student learning. Computers & Education, 126, 201-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.012 · DOI
  35. Von Glasersfeld, E. (2012). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. P. Steffe, & J.Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 21-34). Routledge.
  36. Wu, B., Hu, Y., & Wang, M. (2020). How do head-mounted displays and planning strategy influence problem- solving-based learning in introductory electrical circuit design? Educational Technology & Society, 23(3), 40-52.
  37. Xie, Y., Fang, M., & Shauman, K. (2015). STEM education. Annual Review of Sociology, 41, 331-357. https:// doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-071312-145659 · DOI
  38. Zupanc, G. K., Lehotzky, D., & Tripp, I. P. (2021). The neurosphere simulator: An educational online tool for modeling neural stem cell behavior and tissue growth. Developmental Biology, 469, 80-85. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2020.09.016 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sellberg, C., Nazari, Z., & Solberg, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Oslo (NO)
  • Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
ORCID
Venue
Nordic Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education
Publisher
Cappelen Damm AS - Cappelen Damm Akademisk
Published
2024-03-05
Volume
2
ISSN
2704-1883 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.23865/njsre.v2.5766
OpenAlex
W4392707065
Cited by
39
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 3
FWCI
6.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Nordic Journal of Systematic Reviews in Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Norges Forskningsråd (316212)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Experimental Learning in Engineering
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Physical and Theoretical Chemistry › Various Chemistry Research Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
virtual laboratory, STEM education, higher education, virtual simulation, laboratory-based learning, theoretical traditions, instructional practices, teaching effectiveness

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