The Impact of Computer Simulation on the Development of the Inquiry Skills of High School Students in Physics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to compare the effectiveness of visualization of natural phenomena via computer simulation and manipulations of concrete objects, in a physics laboratory, on the development of studentsâ inquiry skills in mechanics. A quasi-experimental method that employed the 2 Learning Tools x 2 Time of learning split-plot factorial design was applied in the study. The sample consisted of 54 Grade 11 students from two physics classes of the university preparation section in the Ottawa-Catholic School Board. One class was assigned to interactive computer simulations (treatment) and the other to concrete objects in physics laboratory (control) as learning tools. Both tools were embedded in the general framework of the guided-inquiry cycle approach. The results showed that the interaction effect of the Learning Tools x Time of learning was not statistically significant. However, the results also showed a significant effect on the development of studentsâ inquiry skills (indicated by the pre- and post-inquiry skills test) regardless of the type of learning tool they had used. The findings suggested that these two strategies are effective in developing studentsâ inquiry skills in mechanics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".