A systematic review of research on laboratory work in secondary school

References

• *Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science. International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), 1945–1969. doi. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701749305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Abrahams, I., & Reiss, M. J. (2012). Practical work: Its effectiveness in primary and secondary schools in England. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 1035–1055. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Allen, M. (2011). Theory-led confirmation bias and experimental persona. Research in Science & Technological Education, 29(1), 107–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2010.539973
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Andersson, J., & Enghag, M. (2017). The relation between students’ communicative moves during laboratory work in physics and outcomes of their actions. International Journal of Science Education, 39(2), 158–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1270478
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Arnold, J. C., Kremer, K., & Mayer, J. (2014). Understanding students’ experiments—What kind of support do they need in inquiry tasks? International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2719–2749. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.930209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J. W., Sampson, V. D., Annetta, L. A., & Granger, E. M. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability?: A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94(4), 577–616. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Carter, G., Westbrook, S. L., & Thompkins, C. D. (1999). Examining science tools as mediators of students’ learning about circuits. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199901)36:1<89::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Cheng, S. C., She, H. C., & Huang, L. Y. (2018). The Impact of problem-solving instruction on middle school students’ physical science learning: Interplays of knowledge, reasoning, and problem solving. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(3), 731–743. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80902
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Chin, C., & Kayalvizhi, G. (2002). Posing problems for open investigations: What questions do pupils ask? Research in Science & Technological Education, 20(2), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514022000030499
   Google Scholar
• *Ding, N., & Harskamp, E. G. (2011). Collaboration and peer tutoring in chemistry laboratory education. International Journal of Science Education, 33(6), 839–863. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.498842
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Fadzil, H. M., & Saat, R. M. (2017). Exploring students’ acquisition of manipulative skills during science practical work. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(8), 4591–4607. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00953a
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Freedman, M. P. (1997). Relationship among laboratory instruction, attitude toward science, and achievement in science knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 343–357. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199704)34:4<343::AID-TEA5>3.0.CO;2-R
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Garcia-Mila, M., Andersen, C., & Rojo, N. E. (2011). Elementary students’ laboratory record keeping during scientific inquiry. International Journal of Science Education, 33(7), 915–942. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.480986
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2013). Student engagement with artefacts and scientific ideas in a laboratory and a concept-mapping activity. International Journal of Science Education, 35(13), 2254–2277. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.743696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hand, B., Wallace, C. W., & Yang, E.-M. (2004). Using a Science Writing Heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh‐grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education, 26(2), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070252
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Haslam, C. Y., & Hamilton, R. J. (2010). Investigating the use of integrated instructions to reduce the cognitive load associated with doing practical work in secondary school science. International Journal of Science Education, 32(13), 1715–1737. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903183741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hodges, G. W., Wang, L. L., Lee, J., Cohen, A., & Jang, Y. (2018). An exploratory study of blending the virtual world and the laboratory experience in secondary chemistry classrooms. Computers & Education, 122, 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hofstein, A., Shore, R., & Kipnis, M. (2004). Providing high school chemistry students with opportunities to develop learning skills in an inquiry-type laboratory: A case study. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000070342
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Hofstein, A., Navon, O., Kipnis, M., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(7), 791–806. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Högström, P., Ottander, C., & Benckert, S. (2010). Lab work and learning in secondary school chemistry: The importance of teacher and student interaction. Research in Science Education, 40(4), 505–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9131-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kanari, Z., & Millar, R. (2004). Reasoning from data: How students collect and interpret data in science investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(7), 748–769. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Katchevich, D., Hofstein, A., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2013). Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 317–345. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9267-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kind, P. M., Kind, V., Hofstein, A., & Wilson, J. (2011). Peer argumentation in the school science laboratory–Exploring effects of task features. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), 2527–2558. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.550952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Kipnis, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). The inquiry laboratory as a source for development of metacognitive skills. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(3), 601–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9066-y
   Google Scholar
• *Lazarowitz, R., & Naim, R. (2014). Learning the cell structures with three-dimensional models: Students’ achievement by methods, type of school and questions’ cognitive level. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9409-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lundin, M., & Lindahl, M. G. (2014). Negotiating the relevance of laboratory work: Safety, procedures and accuracy brought to the fore in science education. NorDiNa: Nordic Studies in Science Education, 10(1), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.638
   Google Scholar
• *Marcum-Dietrich, N. I., & Ford, D. J. (2002). The place for the computer is in the laboratory: An investigation of the effect of computer probeware on student learning. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 21(4), 361–379. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/9527/
   Google Scholar
• *McRobbie, C. J., & Thomas, G. P. (2000). Epistemological and contextual issues in the use of microcomputer-based laboratories in a year 11 chemistry classroom. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 19(2), 137–160. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/8067/
   Google Scholar
• *Munn, M., Knuth, R., Van Horne, K., Shouse, A. W., & Levias, S. (2017). How do you like your science, wet or dry? How two lab experiences influence student understanding of science concepts and perceptions of authentic scientific practice. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 16(2), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.16-04-0158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Peker, D., & Wallace, C. S. (2011). Characterizing high school students’ written explanations in biology laboratories. Research in Science Education, 41(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-009-9151-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Roth, W.-M., McRobbie, C. J., Lucas, K. B., & Boutonné, S. (1997). The local production of order in traditional science laboratories: A phenomenological analysis. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 107–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00013-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Schmidt-Borcherding, F., Hänze, M., Wodzinski, R., & Rincke, K. (2013). Inquiring scaffolds in laboratory tasks: An instance of a “worked laboratory guide effect”? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(4), 1381–1395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-013-0171-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Schwichow, M., Zimmerman, C., Croker, S., & Härtig, H. (2016). What students learn from hands-on activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 980–1002. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Seda Cetin, P., Eymur, G., Southerland, S. A., Walker, J., & Whittington, K. (2018). Exploring the effectiveness of engagement in a broad range of disciplinary practices on learning of Turkish high-school chemistry students. International Journal of Science Education, 40(5), 473–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1432914
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Sesen, B. A., & Tarhan, L. (2013). Inquiry-based laboratory activities in electrochemistry: High school students’ achievements and attitudes. Research in Science Education, 43(1), 413–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9275-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Strimaitis, A. M., Southerland, S. A., Sampson, V., Enderle, P., & Grooms, J. (2017). Promoting equitable biology lab instruction by engaging all students in a broad range of science practices: An exploratory study. School Science and Mathematics, 117(3), 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12212
   Google Scholar
• *Tan, A.-L. (2008). Tensions in the biology laboratory: What are they? International Journal of Science Education, 30(12), 1661–1676. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701564621
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Toplis, R. (2007). Evaluating science investigations at ages 14–16: Dealing with anomalous results. International Journal of Science Education, 29(2), 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500498278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Wolf, S. J., & Fraser, B. J. (2008). Learning environment, attitudes and achievement among middle-school science students using inquiry-based laboratory activities. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 321–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9052-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agustian, H., & Seery, M. (2017). Reasserting the role of pre-laboratory activities in university chemistry laboratories: A proposed framework for their design. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(4), 518–532https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00140A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akuma, F. V., & Callaghan, R. (2019). A systematic review characterizing and clarifying intrinsic teaching challenges linked to inquiry-based practical work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(5), 619–648. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21516
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26–29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43174976
   Google Scholar
• Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity: Theory, research, critique. Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, R. W. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 1–27). American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Caglak, S. (2017). Does hands-on science practices make an impact on achievement in science? A meta-analysis. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 3(1), 69–87. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.275708
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: A potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260701828101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crawford, B. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. 2, pp. 515–541). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dillon, J. (2008). A review of the research on practical work in school science. King‘s College.
   Google Scholar
• Dobber, M., Zwart, R., Tanis, M., & van Oers, B. (2017). Literature review: The role of the teacher in inquiry-based education. Educational Research Review, 22, 194–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300–329. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Gough, D., Thomas, J., & Oliver, S. (2019). Clarifying differences between reviews within evidence ecosystems. Systematic Reviews, 8(170), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1089-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halawa, S., Hsu, Y.-S., Zhang, W.-X., Kuo, Y.-R., & Wu, J.-Y. (2020). Features and trends of teaching strategies for scientific practices from a review of 2008–2017 articles. International Journal of Science Education, 42(7), 1183–1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1752415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heindl, M. (2019). Inquiry-based learning and the pre-requisite for its use in science at school: A meta-analysis. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 3(2), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2019254160
   Google Scholar
• Herranen, J., & Aksela, M. (2019). Student-question-based inquiry in science education. Studies in Science Education, 55(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2019.1658059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22(1), 85–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269308560022
   Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. (1996). Laboratory work as scientific method: Three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(2), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027980280201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. (2014). Learning science, learning about science, doing science: Different goals demand different learning methods. International Journal of Science Education, 36(15), 2534–2553. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.899722
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, Q. N., Pluye, P., Bujold, M., & Wassef, M. (2017). Convergent and sequential synthesis designs: Implications for conducting and reporting systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Systematic Reviews, 6(61). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0454-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hong, Q. N., Rees, R., Sutcliffe, K., & Thomas, J. (2020). Variations of mixed methods reviews approaches: A case study. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(6), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1437
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lederman, N. G., Antink, A., & Bartos, S. (2014). Nature of science, scientific inquiry, and socio-scientific issues arising from genetics: A pathway to developing a scientifically literate citizenry. Science & Education, 23(2), 285–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9503-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lederman, J., Lederman, N., Bartels, S., Jimenez, J., Akubo, M., Aly, S., Bao, C., Blanquet, E., Blonder, R., Bologna Soares de Andrade, M., Buntting, C., Cakir, M., EL-Deghaidy, H., ElZorkani, A., Gaigher, E., Guo, S., Hakanen, A., Hamed Al-Lal, S., Han-Tosunoglu, C., & Zhou, Q. (2019). An international collaborative investigation of beginning seventh grade students’ understandings of scientific inquiry: Establishing a baseline. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(4), 486–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21512
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewin, S., Glenton, C., Munthe-Kaas, H., Carlsen, B., Colvin, C. J., Gülmezoglu, M., Noyes, J., Booth, A., Garside, R., & Rashidian, A. (2015). Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: An approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Medicine, 12(10), e1001895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001895
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lunetta, V. N., Hofstein, A., & Clough, M. P. (2007). Teaching and learning in the school science laboratory. An analysis of research, theory, and practice. In S. K. A. In & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 393–431). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Multilingual Matters Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Millar, R. (2004). The role of practical work in the teaching and learning of science. High School Science Laboratories: Role and Vision] ( [Paper prepared for the committee). National Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, T. P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://www.nap.edu/read/13165/chapter/1
   Google Scholar
• Ouzzani, M., Hammady, H., Fedorowicz, Z., & Elmagarmid, A. (2016). Rayyan—A web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 210. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Penuel, W. R., Riedy, R., Barber, M. S., Peurach, D. J., LeBoeuf, W. A., & Clark, T. (2020). Principles of collaborative education research with stakeholders: Toward requirements for a new research and development infrastructure. Review of Educational Research, 90(5), 627–674. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320938126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollock, A., Campbell, P., Struthers, C., Synnot, A., Nunn, J., Hill, S., Goodare, H., Morris, J., Watts, C., & Morley, R. (2018). Stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews: A scoping review. Systematic Reviews, 7(208), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0852-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puttick, G., Drayton, B., & Cohen, E. (2015). A study of the literature on lab-based instruction in biology. The American Biology Teacher, 77(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2015.77.1.3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudolph, J. L. (2019). How we teach science: What’s changed, and why it matters. Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rudolph, J. L. (2020). The lost moral purpose of science education. Science Education, 104(5), 895–906. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Swedish Institute for Educational Research. (2020). Laborationer i naturvetenskapsundervisningen. Systematisk översikt 2020:01. [Laboratory work in science education. A systematic review]. Skolforskningsinstitutet.
   Google Scholar
• Swedish National Agency for Education. (2019). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet 2011 Reviderad 2019 [Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare 2011: Revised 2019] (6th ed.). https://www.skolverket.se/getFile?file=4206
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, A., & Lee, P. (2000). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Its causes and consequences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00161-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426–431. https://doi.org/10.2307/3109916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wellington, J. (Ed.). (1998). Practical work in school science. which way now? Routledge.
   Google Scholar