A Study of Conceptual Understanding, Science Process Skills, and Representational Coordination through Guided Inquiry with Integrated Physical and Virtual Laboratories
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v14i3.20783Keywords:
Guided inquiry, Physical laboratories, Virtual laboratories, Optics geometric, Representational coordinationAbstract
This study examines changes in prospective physics teachers’ conceptual understanding, science process skills, and representational coordination in light refraction learning following a guided inquiry design integrating real and virtual laboratories. The study employed a one-group pretest–posttest design with a concurrent embedded mixed-methods approach involving 15 prospective physics teacher students. Quantitative data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and N-gain analysis, while qualitative data were examined through representational coordination coding, including visual-graphical, symbolic-mathematical, and verbal-textual representations. The results showed an increase in students’ conceptual understanding, with average scores rising from 10.07 on the pretest to 21.80 on the posttest, as indicated by the Wilcoxon test result (p < 0.05). he average N-gain score of 0.79 falls within the high category of improvement. Science process skills also increased from 3.93 to 8.33 (p < 0.001), with an average N-gain of 0.73, which falls within the high category. Qualitative findings indicated a shift from predominantly verbal and fragmented explanations toward more varied representations and relatively more coherent conceptual structures. Overall, the findings suggest that the integration of real and virtual laboratories within guided inquiry was associated with changes in conceptual understanding, science process skills, and representational coordination among prospective physics teachers.
References
Afifah, S., Mudzakir, A., & Nandiyanto, A. B. D. (2022). How to calculate paired sample t-test using SPSS software: From step-by-step processing for users to the practical examples in the analysis of the effect of application anti-fire bamboo teaching materials on student learning outcomes. Indonesian Journal of Teaching in Science, 2(1), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijotis.v2i1.45895
Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 191–208). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2024.2423071
Airey, J., Lindqvist, J. G., & Kung, R. L. (2019). What does it mean to understand a physics equation? A study of undergraduate answers in three countries. Bridging Research and Practice in Science Education: Selected Papers from the ESERA 2017 Conference, 225–239. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17219-0_14
Aktamış, H., Hiğde, E., & Özden, B. (2016). Effects of the ınquiry-based learning method on students’ achievement, science process skills and attitudes towards science: a meta-analysis science. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 13(4), 248–261. https://doi.org/10.12973/tused.10183a
Aktaş, İ., & Karamustafaoğlu, O. (2025). The effect of guided inquiry-based virtual and physical laboratories on science learning outcomes. Research in Science & Technological Education, 43(4), 1145–1166. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14980
Alanazi, A. A., Osman, K., & Halim, L. (2024). Effect of scaffolding strategies and guided discovery on higher-order thinking skills in physics education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(9), em2496. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14980
Arantika, J., Saputro, S., & Mulyani, S. (2019). Effectiveness of guided inquiry-based module to improve science process skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 42019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042019
Aregehagn, E., Lykknes, A., Getahun, D. A., & Febri, M. I. M. (2023). Representation of image formation—observation in optics in Ethiopian textbooks: Student learning difficulties as an analytical tool. Education Sciences, 13(5), 445. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050445
Bell, R. L., Smetana, L., & Binns, I. (2005). Simplifying inquiry instruction. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 30–33.
Bica, M. S. N., Carpes, P. B. M., & Roehrs, R. (2018). A neurociência e as múltiplas representações: possíveis convergências para o ensino de ciências. # Tear: Revista de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia, 7(2). https://doi.org/10.35819/tear.v7.n2.a3192
Caymaz, B. (2021). Secondary School Students’ Knowledge and Views on Laboratory Safety. Journal of Science Learning, 4(3), 220–229. https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v4i3.30752
Ceuppens, S., Deprez, J., Dehaene, W., & De Cock, M. (2018). Tackling misconceptions in geometrical optics. Physics Education, 53(4), 45020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/aac604
Chang, C.-C., & Chen, Y. (2020). Cognition, attitude, and interest in cross-disciplinary i-STEM robotics curriculum developed by thematic integration approaches of webbed and threaded models: A concurrent embedded mixed methods study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(5), 622–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09841-9
Crawford, B. A. (2014). From Inquiry to Scientific Practices in the Science Classroom. In Handbook of Research on Science Education: Vol. II (pp. 529–556). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203097267-36
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). MA Pearson.
Diab, H., Daher, W., Rayan, B., Issa, N., & Rayan, A. (2024). Transforming science education in elementary schools: The power of PhET simulations in enhancing student learning. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 8(11), 105. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti8110105
Dinçer, S. (2025). Coordinating Multiple Representations in a Hybrid Real-Virtual Laboratory: Students’ Strategies in Learning Light Reflection and Refraction. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 22(4), 703–723. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2025.035
DiSessa, A. A. (2018). A friendly introduction to “knowledge in pieces”: Modeling types of knowledge and their roles in learning. Invited Lectures from the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72170-5_5
Dunnett, K., Kristiansson, M. K., Eklund, G., Öström, H., Rydh, A., & Hellberg, F. (2020). Transforming physics laboratory work from’cookbook’type to genuine inquiry. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2004.12831. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2004.12831
Efstathiou, C., Hovardas, T., Xenofontos, N. A., Zacharia, Z. C., DeJong, T., Anjewierden, A., & van Riesen, S. A. N. (2018). Providing guidance in virtual lab experimentation: the case of an experiment design tool. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(3), 767–791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-018-9576-z
El Kharki, K., Berrada, K., & Burgos, D. (2021). Design and implementation of a virtual laboratory for physics subjects in Moroccan universities. Sustainability, 13(7), 3711. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073711
Flegr, S., Kuhn, J., & Scheiter, K. (2023). When the whole is greater than the sum of its parts: Combining real and virtual experiments in science education. Computers & Education, 197, 104745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2023.104745
Gizaw, G., & Sota, S. (2023). Improving science process skills of students: A review of literature. Science Education International, 34(3), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v34.i3.5
Grusche, S. (2017). Developing students’ ideas about lens imaging: teaching experiments with an image-based approach. Physics Education, 52(4), 44002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/aa6d27
Gultepe, N., & Kilic, Z. (2015). Effect of Scientific Argumentation on the Development of Scientific Process Skills in the Context of Teaching Chemistry. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 10(1), 111–132. https://doi.org/10.12973/ijese.2015.234a
Gutierrez, R. R., Escusa, F., Lyon, J. A., Magana, A. J., Cabrera, J. H., Pehovaz, R., Link, O., Rivillas‐Ospina, G., Acuña, G. J., & Kuroiwa, J. M. (2022). Combining hands‐on and virtual experiments for enhancing fluid mechanics teaching: A design‐based research study. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 30(6), 1701–1724. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22551
Halliday, D., Resnick, R., & Walker, J. (2014). Fundamental of Physics (10th ed.). Wiley and Sons.
Han, S., Cetin, C., & Matteson, S. (2016). Examining the Pattern of Middle Grade Mathematics Teachers’ Performance: A Concurrent Embedded Mixed Methods Study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(3), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1206a
Hartanto, T. J., Dinata, P. A. C., Azizah, N., Qadariah, A., & Pratama, A. (2023). Students’ science process skills and understanding on Ohm’s law and direct current circuit through virtual laboratory based predict-observe-explain model. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Science Education), 11(1), 113–128. https://doi.org/10.24815/jpsi.v11i1.27477
Hartanto, T. J., Dinata, P. A. C., Hakim, L., & Suhartono, S. (2025). Can Concreteness Fading and Multi-Representational Learning Enhance Students’ Understanding of Geometrical Optics? Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 26(2), 1086–1106. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa.v26i2.pp1086-1106
Hill, M., & Sharma, M. D. (2015). Students’ representational fluency at university: A cross-sectional measure of how multiple representations are used by physics students using the representational fluency survey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1633–1655. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1427a
Hubber, P., Tytler, R., & Chittleborough, G. (2017). Representation construction: A guided inquiry approach for science education. In STEM education in the junior secondary: the state of play (pp. 57–89). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5448-8_5
Husnaini, S. J., & Chen, S. (2019). Effects of guided inquiry virtual and physical laboratories on conceptual understanding, inquiry performance, scientific inquiry self-efficacy, and enjoyment. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 10119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010119
Idris, N., Talib, O., & Razali, F. (2022). Strategies in mastering science process skills in science experiments: A systematic literature review. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 155–170. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.32969
Kapici, H. O., Akcay, H., & de Jong, T. (2019). Using hands-on and virtual laboratories alone or together―which works better for acquiring knowledge and skills? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9762-0
Khatin-Zadeh, O., Eskandari, Z., Farsani, D., & Banaruee, H. (2025). Dynamic mathematical processing through symbolic, situational, and verbal representations. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 59(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-025-09899-3
Klein, P., Müller, A., & Kuhn, J. (2017). Assessment of representational competence in kinematics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 10132. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.13.010132
Koo, T. K., & Li, M. Y. (2016). A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 15(2), 155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012
Kuo, Y.-R., Won, M., Zadnik, M., Siddiqui, S., & Treagust, D. F. (2017). Learning optics with multiple representations: Not as simple as expected. In Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 123–138). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_6
Lee, V. S., Greene, D. B., Odom, J., Schechter, E., & Slatta, R. W. (2023). What is inquiry-guided learning? In Teaching and learning through inquiry (pp. 3–16). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003447351-2
Li, M., & Yu, T. (2022). Methodological issues on evaluating agreement between two detection methods by Cohen’s kappa analysis. Parasites & Vectors, 15(1), 270. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-022-05402-8
Lin, S.-Y., & Singh, C. (2015). Effect of scaffolding on helping introductory physics students solve quantitative problems involving strong alternative conceptions. Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 11(2), 20105. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevstper.11.020105
Lucas, L. L., & Lewis, E. B. (2019). High school students’ use of representations in physics problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 119(6), 327–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12357
Lusiyana, A., Festiyed, & Yulkifli. (2019). The problems of integrating multiple representation skills in physics learning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1185(1), 12035. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1185/1/012035
McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282. https://doi.org/10.11613/bm.2012.031
Müller, A., Hettmannsperger, R., Scheid, J., & Schnotz, W. (2017). Representational competence, understanding of experiments, phenomena and basic concepts in geometrical optics: A representational approach. In Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 209–229). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_10
Munfaridah, N., Avraamidou, L., & Goedhart, M. (2021). The use of multiple representations in undergraduate physics education: what do we know and where do we go from here? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1), em1934. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9577
Ntumi, S., Agbenyo, S., & Bulala, T. (2023). Estimating the Psychometric Properties (“ Item Difficulty, Discrimination and Reliability Indices”) of Test Items Using Kuder-Richardson Approach (KR-20). Shanlax International Journal of Education, 11(3), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v11i3.6081
Ogunsola-bandele, M., & Kennepohl, D. (2024). Alternatives to Traditional Physical Science Laboratory Experiences: A Review. West African Journal of Open and Flexible Learning, 12(2), 165–200.
Opfermann, M., Schmeck, A., & Fischer, H. E. (2017). Multiple representations in physics and science education–why should we use them? In Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 1–22). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_1
Ouahi, M. Ben, Zghida, N., Omari, S., Belhadj, K., Chakir, E. M., & Tan, E. M. (2024). Effects of Using a Combination of Real and Virtual Labs Based on the 5E Learning Cycle Model on Electrical Student Learning Outcomes. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.15294/pmttfw97
Pande, P., & Chandrasekharan, S. (2017). Representational competence: towards a distributed and embodied cognition account. Studies in Science Education, 53(1), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2017.1248627
Papalazarou, N., Lefkos, I., & Fachantidis, N. (2024). The effect of physical and virtual inquiry-based experiments on students’ attitudes and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 33(3), 349–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10088-3
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003
Peşman, H., Arı, Ü., Cirit, D. K., & Ayazgök, B. (2025). Effect of amount of guidance in inquiry-based physics laboratory on conceptual understanding and metacognitive awareness. Science & Education, 34(5), 3667–3687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00595-z
Pinna, B., Porcheddu, D., & Šķilters, J. (2026). From the Visible to the Invisible: On the Phenomenal Gradient of Appearance. Brain Sciences, 16(1), 114. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci16010114
Psillos, D. (2023). The role and impact of virtual laboratories in physics teaching and learning: A synthesis of literature. The International Handbook of Physics Education Research: Teaching Physics. https://doi.org/10.1063/9780735425712_002
Ranney, M., & Thagard, P. (2019). Explanatory coherence and belief revision in naive physics. 10th Annual Conference Cognitive Science Society Pod, 426–432. https://doi.org/10.21236/ada201093
Ratamun, M. M., & Osman, K. (2018). The Effectiveness of Virtual Lab Compared to Physical Lab in the Mastery of Science Process Skills for Chemistry Experiment. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 76(4), 544–560. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/18.76.544
Redish, E. F. (2021). Using math in physics: Overview. The Physics Teacher, 59(5), 314–318. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0021129
Rokhmat, J., & Putrie, S. D. (2019). A strategy of scaffolding development to ıncrease students’ problem-solving abilities: the case of physics learning with causalitic-thinking approach. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 16(4), 569–579. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.8
Sabaruddin, S., Nur, M., Fadli, M., & Mazlan, M. (2022). Content Validity of KIP-K Scholarship Instruments at Higher Education Using Aiken’s Coefficient Validity Scale. Al-Tanzim: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 6(3), 934–947. https://doi.org/10.33650/al-tanzim.v6i3.3680
Scheid, J., Müller, A., Hettmannsperger, R., & Schnotz, W. (2019). Improving learners’ representational coherence ability with experiment-related representational activity tasks. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 10142. https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevphyseducres.15.010142
Sebald, J., Fliegauf, K., Veith, J. M., Spiecker, H., & Bitzenbauer, P. (2022). The world through my eyes: Fostering students’ understanding of basic optics concepts related to vision and image formation. Physics, 4(4), 1117–1134. https://doi.org/10.3390/physics4040073
Sugiyono. (2020). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
Tipler, P. A., & Mosca, G. (2022). Physics for scientists and engineers (6th ed.). McGraw Hills Companies.
Trabelsi, K., Saif, Z., Driller, M. W., Vitiello, M. V, & Jahrami, H. (2024). Evaluating the reliability of the athlete sleep behavior questionnaire (ASBQ): a meta-analysis of Cronbach’s alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 16(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-023-00787-0
Tytler, R., & Hubber, P. (2016). Constructing representations to learn science. In Using multimodal representations to support learning in the science classroom (pp. 159–181). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16450-2_9
Urbančič, M., & Glažar, S. A. (2012). Impact of experiments on 13-year-old pupils’ understanding of selected science concepts. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 8(3), 207–218. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2012.836a
Usmonova, S. (2025). Increasing the effectiveness of teaching physics through virtual laboratories. AIP Conference Proceedings, 3268(1), 40022. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0258388
Uwamahoro, J., Ndihokubwayo, K., Ralph, M., & Ndayambaje, I. (2021). Physics students’ conceptual understanding of geometric optics: Revisited analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(5), 706–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09913-4
Volkwyn, T. S., Airey, J., Gregorcic, B., & Linder, C. (2020). Developing representational competence: linking real-world motion to physics concepts through graphs. Learning: Research and Practice, 6(1), 88–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2020.1750670
Wang, J., & Fan, W. (2025). The effect of ChatGPT on students’ learning performance, learning perception, and higher-order thinking: insights from a meta-analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04787-y
Wang, X.-M., Yu, X.-H., Yu, D., Hwang, G.-J., & Lan, M. (2025). Does combining real and virtual experiments improve learning achievement in physics? Evidence from a meta-analysis (2001–2021). Educational Research Review, 46, 100661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2024.100661
Wörner, S., Kuhn, J., & Scheiter, K. (2022). The best of two worlds: A systematic review on combining real and virtual experiments in science education. Review of Educational Research, 92(6), 911–952. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543221079417
Wu, H.-K., & Puntambekar, S. (2012). Pedagogical affordances of multiple external representations in scientific processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 754–767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9363-7
Yakob, M., Muhammad, G. M., Putri, M. D., & Ihsan, I. R. (2026). Coordinating Multiple Representations in Mechanics: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Prospective Physics Teachers. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 27(1), 416–432. https://doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa.v27i1.pp416-432
Zhuang, J., Chen, C., & Wang, J. (2024). Redesigning Building Thermal Science Education Through Inquiry-Based Experiential Learning. Buildings, 14(11), 3455. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14113455
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Theo Jhoni Hartanto, Pri Ariadi Cahya Dinata, Suhartono Suhartono
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
