Pedagogical Research

• Abd‐El‐Khalick, F. (2005). Developing deeper understandings of nature of science: The impact of a philosophy of science course on preservice science teachers’ views and instructional planning. International Journal of Science education, 27(1), 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690410001673810
• Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200012)37:10<1057::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C
• Afriani, T. A. (2019). The effect of guided inquiry laboratory activity with video embedded on students’ understanding and motivation in learning light and optics. Journal of Science Learning, 2(4), 79-84. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v2i3.15144
• Agustian, H. Y. (2020). Students’ understanding of the nature of science in the context of an undergraduate chemistry laboratory. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 24(2), 56-85.
• Akani, O. (2015). Laboratory teaching: Implication on students’ achievement in chemistry in secondary schools in Ebonyi State of Nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(30), 206-213.
• Bernhard, J. (2018). What matters for students’ learning in the laboratory? Do not neglect the role of experimental equipment! Instructional Science, 46(6), 819-846. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9469-x
• Bradley, D. (2005). Practicals in science education: A study of the theoretical bases, rationale, and implementation of practicals in junior secondary science education [Doctoral dissertation, Curtin University].
• 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
• Buaraphan, K. (2011). Pre-service physics teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. US-China Education Review, 8(2), 137-148.
• Chan, J. B., & Black, M. (2006). Direct-manipulation animation: Incorporating the haptic channel in the learning process to support middle school students in science learning and mental model acquisition. In Proceedings of the 7^th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 64-70).
• Chini, J. J., Madsen, A., Gire, E., Rebello, N. S., & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Exploration of factors that affect the comparative effectiveness of physical and virtual manipulatives in an undergraduate laboratory. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 8(1), 010113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.010113
• Daniel, A., & Lemma, A. (2021). The effects of some selected demographic characteristics on in-service teachers’ views of nature of science and process skills. Brazilian Journal of Education, Technology and Society, 14(3), 471-487.
• 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
• Fadzil, H. M., & Saat, R. M. (2013). Phenomenographic study of students’ manipulative skills during transition from primary to secondary school. Sains Humanika [Humanic Science], 63(2), 71-75. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v63.2013
• Findlay, M., & Souter, N. (2008). Student teachers views on the nature of science: Do they change during a one year pre-service programme. In British Educational Research Association Annual Conference.
• Finkelstein, N. D., Adams, W. K., Keller, C. J., Kohl, P. B., Perkins, K. K., Podolefsky, N. S., Reid, S., & LeMaster, R. (2005). When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 1(1), 010103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.1.010103
• Gire, E., Carmichael, A., Chini, J. J., Rouinfar, A., Rebello, S., Smith, G., & Puntambekar, S. (2010). The effects of physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual learning about pulleys. In Proceedings of the 9^th International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
• Glaze, A. L. (2018). Teaching and learning science in the 21^st century: Challenging critical assumptions in post-test-secondary science. Education Sciences, 8(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8010012
• Godek, Y. (2004). The development of science education in developing countries. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Journal of Ahi Evran University Kirsehir Education Faculty], 5(1), 1-11.
• Gumilar, S., Ismail, A., Budiman, D. M., & Siswanto, S. (2019). Inquiry instructional model infused blended experiment: Helping students enhance critical thinking skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157, 032009. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/3/032009
• Hanif, M., Sneddon, P., Ahmadi, F., & Reid, N. (2009). The perceptions, views, and opinions of university students about phy sics learning during undergraduate laboratory work. European Journal of Physics, 30, 85-96. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/30/1/009
• Hind, A., Leach, J., & Ryder, J. (2001). Teaching about the nature of scientific knowledge and investigation on AS/A level science courses. The Nuffield Foundation. https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/TASNuffProjReport.pdf
• Hinkhouse, H. C. (2013). Investigating blended learning in the high school science classroom [Master’s thesis, University of Northern Iowa].
• Hinneh, J. T. (2017). Attitude towards practical work and students’ achievement in biology: A case of a private senior secondary school in Gaborone, Botswana. IOSR Journal of Mathematics, 13(4), 6-11.
• Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty‐first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28-54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
• Hurtado-Bermúdez, S., & Romero-Abrio, A. (2020). The effects of combining virtual laboratory and advanced technology research laboratory on university students’ conceptual understanding of electron microscopy. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1821716
• Imaduddin, M., & Hidayah, F. F. (2019). Redesigning laboratories for pre-service chemistry teachers: From cookbook experiments to inquiry-based science, environment, technology, and society approach. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(4), 489-507. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.3
• Izci, K. (2017). Nature of science as portrayed in the middle school science and technology curriculum: The case of Turkey. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 14-28. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.275656
• Jensen, E. (2014). Does teaching students how to explicitly model the causal structure of systems improve their understanding of these systems? European Journal of Engineering Education, 39(4), 391-411. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2014.881320
• Jones, G. M., Minogue, J., Tretter, T. R., Negishi, A., & Taylor, R. (2006). Haptic augmentation of science instruction: Does touch matter? Science Education, 90, 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20086
• Jones, M. G., Andre, T., Superfine, R., & Taylor, R. (2003). Learning at the nanoscale: The impact of students’ use of remote microscopy on concepts of viruses, scale, and microscopy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 303-322. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10078
• Kaptan, K., & Timurlenk, O. (2012). Challenges for science education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 51, 763-771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.08.237
• Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10036
• Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404
• Lederman, N. G., Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034
• Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., & Antink, A. (2013). Nature of science and scientific inquiry as contexts for the learning of science and achievement of scientific literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(3), 138-147.
• Liang, L. L., Chen, S., Chen, X., Kaya, O. N., Adams, A. D., Macklin, M., & Ebenezer. (2008). Preservice teachers’ views about nature of scientific knowledge development: An international collaborative study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(5), 987-1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-008-9140-0
• Lindwall, O., & Ivarsson, J. (2010). Differences that make a difference. In S. R. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures, and practices (pp. 364-380). Routledge.
• Marshall, J. A., & Young, E. S. (2006). Preservice teachers’ theory development in physical and simulated environments. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 43(9), 907-937. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20124
• Martin-Dunlop, C. S. (2013). Prospective elementary teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and perceptions of the classroom learning environment. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 873-893. https://doi.org710.1007/s11165-012-9290-5
• McComas, W. F. (2006). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies (Vol. 5). Springer Science & Business Media.
• Mesci, G., & Schwartz, R. (2017). Changing preservice science teachers’ views of nature of science: Why some conceptions may be more easily altered than others. Research in Science Education, 47, 329-351. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9503-9
• Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. National Academy of Sciences. https://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/dbassesite/documents/webpage/dbasse_073330.pdf
• Miller, M. C., Montplaisir, L. M., Offerdahl, E. G., Cheng, F.-C., & Ketterling, G. L. (2010). Comparison of views of the nature of science between natural science and nonscience majors. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 9(1), 45-54. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.09-05-0029
• Minogue, J., & Jones, G. (2009). Measuring the impact of haptic feedback using the SOLO taxonomy. International Journal of Science Education, 31(10), 1359-1378. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690801992862
• NRC. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11625
• NRC. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
• OECD. (2016). PISA 2015: Excellence and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/19963777
• Okam, C. C., & Zakari, I. I. (2017). Impact of laboratory-based teaching strategy on students’ attitudes and mastery of chemistry in Katsina Metropolis, Katsina State, Nigeria. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development, 6(1), 112-121.
• Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2010). Comparing the use of virtual and physical manipulatives in physics education. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Education, Training and Informatics.
• Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21-47.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20463
• Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives in physics laboratory experimentation. In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien, & P. Clément (Eds.), Topics and trends in current science education (pp. 419-433). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7281-6_26
• Prima, E. C., Utari, S., Chandra, D. T., Hasanah, L., & Rusdiana, D. (2018). Heat and temperature experiment designs to support students’ conception on nature of science. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 8(4), 453-472. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.419
• Sardag, M., Aydin, S., Kalender, N., Tortumlu, S., Çiftçi, M., & Perihanoglu, S. (2014). The integration of nature of science in the new secondary physics, chemistry, and biology curricula. Eğitim ve Bilim [Education and Science], 39(174), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3069
• Shim, M. K., Young, B. J., & Paolucci, J. (2010). Elementary teachers’ views on the nature of scientific knowledge: A comparison of inservice and preservice teachers. The Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics Education, 4(1), 1-18.
• Siddiqui, S., Zadnik, M., Shapter, J., & Schmidt, L. (2013). An inquiry-based approach to laboratory experiences: Investigating students’ ways of active learning. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 21(5), 42-53.
• Singer, S., Hilton, M., & Schweingruber, H. (2006). America’s lab report: Investigations in high school science. The National Academies Press.
• Tanel, Z. (2013). The effect of learning the history of physics on the scientific epistemological beliefs of pre-service teachers. Science Education International, 24(3), 232-253. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.321355
• Triona, L. M., & Klahr, D. (2003). Point and click or grab and heft: Comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students’ ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction, 21(2), 149-173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2102_02
• Zacharia, Z. C. (2007). Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 120-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00215.x
• Zacharia, Z. C., & de Jong, T. (2014). The effects on students’ conceptual understanding of electric circuits of introducing virtual manipulatives within a physical manipulatives oriented curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 32, 101-158. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2014.887083
• Zacharia, Z. C., & Michael, M. (2016). Using physical and virtual manipulatives to improve primary school students’ understanding of concepts of electric circuits. In M. Riopel, & Z. Smyrnaiou (Eds.), New developments in science and technology education (pp. 125-140). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22933-1_12
• Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.001
• Zacharia, Z. C., Olympiou, G., & Papaevripidou, M. (2008). Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1021-1035. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20260

APA

Mihret, Z., Alemu, M., & Assefa, S. (2023). Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607

Vancouver

Mihret Z, Alemu M, Assefa S. Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2023;8(1):em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607

AMA

Mihret Z, Alemu M, Assefa S. Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2023;8(1), em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607

Chicago

Mihret, Zemenu, Mekbib Alemu, and Shimeles Assefa. "Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science". Pedagogical Research 2023 8 no. 1 (2023): em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607

Harvard

Mihret, Z., Alemu, M., and Assefa, S. (2023). Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science. Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607

MLA

Mihret, Zemenu et al. "Effectiveness of blended physics laboratory experimentation on pre-service physics teachers’ understanding of the nature of science". Pedagogical Research, vol. 8, no. 1, 2023, em0144. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12607