Online laboratories in higher engineering education – solutions, challenges, and future directions from a pedagogical perspective

Dear Reader,

Welcome to this Special Issue on online laboratories in higher engineering education! The laboratory in engineering education is a place where theoretical and conceptual knowledge can be applied to practice and where theoretical and conceptual knowledge can be developed through practice (Bernhard 2010). Because of its importance for engineering education, the integration of laboratories has a long tradition and practice-oriented laboratories are an essential part of nearly every engineering curriculum (Abdulwahed and Nagy 2009; Feisel and Rosa 2005; Sheppard et al. 2008; Tekkaya et al. 2016; Zubía and Alves 2012). Laboratory education furthermore aims at the students’ development of technical knowledge, empirical skills, practical skills, and field-specific as well as overarching competences through independent scientific inquiry (Feisel et al. 2002; Gustavsson et al. 2009; Kammasch 2006).

Over the last years, the introduction of digital media has not only affected the general way of teaching and learning in higher education, but has especially affected laboratory-based learning. This has led to the emergence of virtual laboratory equipment, augmented laboratories, and remote laboratories – subsumed under the term Online Laboratories (Abdulwahed and Nagy 2009; Auer, Zutin, and Mujkanovic 2015; Azad, Auer, and Harward 2011; Gomes and Zubía 2007; Gustavsson et al. 2009; Heradio et al. 2016; Lowe et al. 2008; Pester and Auer 2011). The term ‘remote laboratory’ describes a test setup that uses physically existing experimental equipment, but the experimental procedure can be conducted via the internet from virtually everywhere and at any time. Augmented laboratories include experimental setups, which are enhanced with augmented reality during experimentation, e.g. to display real time data at experimental equipment’s point of origin. Virtual laboratories refer to virtual environments and make use of simulations instead of real equipment for the experimental procedure. All of the above-mentioned approaches include opportunities as well as challenges in terms of flexibility, capacity, range, audience, and teaching and learning methods.

Although online laboratories have been around for some time, the questions around their pedagogical solutions, challenges and future directions have so far not been sufficiently discussed through the lenses of a thorough engineering education research perspective. The articles included in this Special Issue centre around the advancements in pedagogy and instruction, instructional design, and learning technologies in the area of online laboratories. Each article presents findings and conclusions based on empirical investigations, offering valuable insights into fundamental research, effective practices, methodologies, or technologies in this domain. As you will see, the articles cover a wide variety of different online solutions, pedagogical approaches, and research perspectives. Specifically in their interplay, the articles demonstrate the significant advancements made in the development of online laboratories, particularly during the pandemic.

The primary objective of this Special Issue was to address a notable gap in comprehensively understanding the educational aspects of online laboratories by focusing on the factors beyond just technological usability. Hence, the overall goal with this Special Issue was to emphasise the integration of online laboratories within a broader teaching and learning ecosystem, which takes into account both the technological but not least importantly the pedagogical aspects. Achieving this integration is a complex task that benefits from diverse perspectives and research approaches from various educational fields as you will see in the articles of this Special Issue.

Each of the articles collected in this Special Issue contributes a unique perspective or research finding to our understanding of laboratory learning. All of them shed light on the above-described overarching discussion on the laboratory and its role in higher engineering education. We hope that the content of this Special Issue proves beneficial to you as a reader and provides valuable insights for your own research and practice. We provide a short overview of the articles included in this Special Issue below.

We as the Guest Editors of this Special Issue start off this Special Issue with our article Between hands-on experiments and Cross Reality learning environments – a reflection on contemporary educational approaches in instructional laboratories. In this reflective article, we argue that laboratories have been crucial in science and engineering education for centuries, serving as practical tools for teaching and learning. They offer diverse formats and pedagogical approaches, yet debates persist on their goals. Our contribution categorises these debates, highlighting the laboratory’s potential for enhancing the learning experience. We also explore modern roles, learning objectives, and instructional methods of laboratories, including research-based learning. Finally, the article introduces the concept of Cross Reality laboratories as the next innovative step after online laboratories.

Karin Wolff, Karel Kruger, Robert Pott, and Nico de Koker argue in The conceptual nuances of technology-supported learning in engineering that enabling theory-practice integration in engineering education is crucial for developing modern graduate capabilities. Resource constraints and technological advancements have led to alternative practical engagement methods such as online labs, prompting inquiry into their effectiveness. Using case studies, their paper outlines how multimodal approaches, utilising verbal, symbolic, graphic, and physical tools, facilitate progressive learning in Fluid Mechanics, Finite Element Analysis, and Control Systems across programme stages.

In Use of virtual labs to support demand-oriented engineering pedagogy in engineering technology and vocational education training programmes: a systematic review of the literature Kristin Frady argues that there is a need to further explore the implementation of virtual laboratories in higher education, particularly in engineering technology (ET), vocational education and training (VET), and related programmes. The presented systematic review aims to consolidate knowledge about the use of virtual laboratories in these programmes, highlighting pedagogical integration and key attributes, thus contributing to a better grasp of their application. Such understanding can inform pedagogy in postsecondary sub-baccalaureate engineering education, encompassing scientific, social, student, and economic perspectives, and yield research recommendations and implications for integrating virtual laboratories in ET and VET programmes.

In their article Rapid transition of traditionally hands-on labs to online instruction in engineering courses, Dominik May, Beshoy Morkos, Andrew Jackson, Nathaniel J. Hunsu, Amy Ingalls, and Fred Beyette put a special focus on the use of online laboratories during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic led universities to swiftly move to online education, including laboratory courses, offering a rare chance to study challenges in virtual laboratories for both students and instructors. The exploratory study on online laboratory learning analysed 121 students, focusing on motivation and self-regulation, finding that students’ majors were the primary factor influencing these aspects. Unfamiliarity with online laboratories and course expectations contributed to lower self-regulation. Interviews revealed three key themes: Learning Compatibility, Questions and Inquiry, and Planning and Coordination, identified using latent Dirichlet allocation.

The work described by Debarati Basu and Vinod K. Lohani, in Learning and engagement with an online laboratory for environmental monitoring education investigated students’ learning outcomes and engagement using the Online Watershed Learning System (OWLS) in a Civil and Environmental Engineering course. OWLS is a real-time environmental monitoring web interface with user tracking. Key findings reveal OWLS’ effectiveness in achieving environmental monitoring learning goals, question order’s impact on performance but not engagement, and an inverse relationship between students’ task performance and clicks. The study informs online laboratory design for effective education and utilisation of online laboratories.

The article A roadmap for the VISIR remote lab by Gustavo R. Alves, Maria A. Marques, André V. Fidalgo, Javier García-Zubía, Manuel Castro, Unai Hernández-Jayo, Felix García-Loro, and Christian Kreiter outline a roadmap for enhancing the VISIR remote laboratory. The roadmap is based on a SWOT analysis conducted by experienced experts, considering technical, pedagogical, and educational factors. The resulting strategy focuses on a RAKID model and highlights strengths like the user interface and weaknesses like matrix limitations. Opportunities include new developments, while threats in the educational category relate to ICT availability, a challenge influenced by institutional practices. This roadmap aims to ensure the future growth and sustainability of VISIR, fostering community expansion.

Typically, laboratory tasks prioritise mechanical processes, leaving little room for conceptual learning. In Using voluntary laboratory simulations as preparatory tasks to improve conceptual knowledge and engagement, Philip Coleman and Anesa Hosein explore how incorporating simulation tasks into preparation can enhance students’ conceptual understanding. Two student groups in an electronics module were surveyed, with laboratory report scores compared before and after adding simulations. While no significant cohort difference was observed, maximum marks increased post-simulations. Students felt simulations bolstered their knowledge and confidence, benefiting conceptualisation, result validation, and scenario exploration before and after physical laboratory sessions. These findings advocate for supplementing laboratory practicals with simulation software when feasible.

In their study Design and implementation of a virtual online lab on optical communications, Dimitris Uzunidis and Gerasimos Pagiatakis discuss a virtual laboratory designed for online optical communications training as part of a course at ASPETE in Greece. Utilising OptiSystem 16 software and MS-Teams, the laboratory comprises synchronous and asynchronous components. Initial implementation yielded promising results, with 79% of students passing, yet improvement is needed as 60% struggled. Issues stemmed from inadequate foundational knowledge in mathematics, physics, and signal quantities. Future enhancements include optimising the physical-simulation laboratory mix, creating concise notes and multiple-choice questions, linking laboratory work to tasks/projects, and refining feedback processes.

The article The retention of information in virtual reality based engineering simulations, written by Jiri Motejlek and Esat Alpay, shows how immersive virtual reality (VR) simulations in engineering education can contextualise learning through real-life scenarios like exploring a chemical plant. Their study introduces a VR simulation of a pilot plant, comparing its impact on student learning and self-efficacy with a traditional multimedia video. The study’s findings show that both methods achieve similar data retention and self-efficacy, while students appreciate the VR experience as a valuable addition to their learning resources.

In their article Developing a real-world scenario to foster learning and working 4.0 – on using a digital twin of a jet pump experiment in process engineering laboratory education, Konrad Boettcher, Claudius Terkowsky, Marcel Schade, Dean Brandner, Sabrina Grünendahl, and Bujar Pasaliu describe a novel immersive virtual reality (VR) online laboratory experiment for process engineering students. A real-world scenario (RWS) challenges students to autonomously resolve an ambiguous problem, addressing W4.0 complexities. Evaluation involved assessing Constructive Alignment and surveying students’ attitudes towards this new learning approach. The findings reveal that while initially overwhelmed, students successfully tackle the engineering challenge with varying degrees of assistance, appreciating the opportunity for creative, independent problem-solving.

Lisa Bosman, Bhavana Kotla, Aasakiran Madamanchi, Scott Bartholomew, and Vetria Byrd shift gears and round out this Special Issue with their article by focussing on artificial intelligence (AI) as a novel tool in education. They claim in Preparing the future entrepreneurial engineering workforce using web-based AI-enabled tools that AI technology is gaining importance in engineering for analysing large data sets. Yet there is a lack of guidance on teaching AI to engineers. The ‘Beer Distribution Game’ has traditionally taught supply chain management. This study introduces two AI-based web tools, OpexAnalytics (for the Beer Distribution Game) and CompareAssess (for ‘learning by evaluation’), enhancing students’ understanding of AI and supply chain management. While not comprehensive for data science, this 5-week module improves student perceptions and learning outcomes, serving as a foundation for further skill development.