Some of my favorite undergraduate classes were those with a heavy laboratory portion. Hands-on experience always helped me to better understand the concepts that my professors lectured on. For example, in my physiology class we dissected a frog heart, exposing the aorta to acetylcholine and other neurotransmitters to increase and decrease the heart rate. Actually being able to watch the heart in motion helped me learn the cardiovascular system and ace my exam. There is a practical problem to these tools though: what happens when a concept is too expensive to demonstrate in class, or takes too long of a time frame to properly evaluate?
The solution, as many higher education institutions already know, is computer models for education. Researchers at the University of Gothenburg recently followed upper-secondary students from Sweden as their instructors use virtual laboratories to evaluate the effects of acidification on marine environments. Partnered with Stanford University, the researchers found that these virtual laboratories were valuable in teaching otherwise difficult to understand concepts.
It comes as no surprise that when education leaves the textbook and utilizes different parts of our brains, students learn concepts better. Virtual laboratories serve a similar purpose, as does JoVE: provide visually-stimulating education using modern technology. However, the use of electronic resources for educators does not need to be limited to video or virtual laboratories. Medical schools and health professionals are already using robotic patients and simulators to educate their students and entice prospective students. Obviously, these resources provide a crucial groundwork for future scientists and doctors.
What do you think? Do virtual tools help or hurt our students? Tell us in the comments or e-mail me at neal.moawed@jove.com.
