Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Education for Chemical Engineers

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ece

Use of virtual learning to increase key laboratory skills and essential

non-cognitive characteristics
Mostafa Seifan a , Nigel Robertson b , Aydin Berenjian a,∗
a
School of Engineering, Faculty of Science and Engineering, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
b
Centre for Tertiary Teaching and Learning, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Simulation based learning has emerged as a new tool that potentially could replace and amplify the real-
Received 1 April 2020 world experience in a fully interactive way. This learning technique can play a key role in the classroom
Received in revised form 5 July 2020 setting to provide engineering students with the required knowledge and skills. In order to evaluate
Accepted 21 July 2020
the possibility of using virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory as a tool in learning to mitigate practi-
Available online 25 July 2020
cal dilemmas in chemical engineering curriculum, a virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory has been
designed and developed at the University of Waikato. The virtual laboratory was made available to the
Keywords:
third-year chemical engineering students enrolled in the biotechnology course. Participants were asked
Virtual simulation
Bioprocess laboratory
to attend both the physical and virtual laboratories and complete a range of questionnaires. It was found
Real laboratory that by conducting the virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory, students gained a deeper understand-
Learning outcome ing about fermentation principles, laboratory safety rules, experiment design and analysis of data. Based
Non-cognitive skill on the results, virtual reality bioprocess engineering laboratory can also provide a safe, affordable and
timely experience to gain the required bioprocess engineering proficiency and skills. More than 90 % of
students found the virtual lab to be an essential tool to undertake hands-on experiments effectively.
© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction university students who investigated simulated electric circuits

showing moving electrons acquired more theoretical knowledge
Experimental activities like teaching laboratories provide the than those performed physical laboratory (Finkelstein et al., 2005).
learners with compelling and realistic challenges by capturing their In another study, students who used virtual optics materials dis-
concentration and stimulating their information processing capa- playing light rays, performed much better as compared to students
bilities (Bellotti et al., 2010). Students can obtain laboratory content who used physical materials (Olympiou and Zacharia, 2012). Brin-
information from two types of laboratories namely virtual and son has extensively reviewed the recent (post-2005) empirical
physical laboratories (Nersesian et al., 2019). studies to compare the learning achievement in virtual and tra-
Several studies aiming to evaluate the differences between ditional hands-on lab experiments. This study found that more the
physical and virtual laboratories found no difference between 50 % of the studies support virtual laboratories to be even better
them. For example, physical and virtual laboratories were com- than traditional physical laboratories (Brinson, 2015).
pared for measurement of heat exchange and mass transfer rates Interactive virtual reality laboratory could also be used as part
by Wiesner and Lan (2004). Authors found no differences in the of the flipped classroom learning strategy, where technology and
performance of engineering students on a test that underlying prin- active learning are key elements to help with improved learning
ciples were measured. No differences between virtual and hands on outcomes. Zhang et al., found that the blended combination of
experiments for undergraduates learning about heat and tempera- the virtual and physical laboratories to be the ideal combination
ture were also reported by Zacharia et al. (2008). On the other hand, to teach the students the concept of light and colour (Olympiou
several studies have shown the advantages of virtual, laboratories and Zacharia, 2012). In physical investigations students can explore
as compared with physical one on unobservable phenomena, such the scientific complexities by dealing with unexpected occasions
as thermodynamics, chemical reactions or electricity. For instance, like range of measurement errors while developing inquiry skills
and promoting conceptual understanding. Students would also be
able to develop practical laboratory skills by taking advantage of
∗ Corresponding author. tactile information that can promote development of their con-
E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Berenjian). ceptual knowledge. On the other hand, an important feature of

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2020.07.006
1749-7728/© 2020 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75 67

virtual laboratories is that the learning process can be simplified Table 1

Student survey statements in simulation laboratory.
by highlighting relevant information and avoiding confusing details
(Trundle and Bell, 2010). Virtual platform also makes the interpre- Statement No. Questions on virtual experiment (software)
tation of certain phenomena easier (Ford and McCormack, 2000). 1 Does a virtual fermentation lab help you to understand lab
Students can perform experimental work on many unobservable safety?
phenomena and perform more experiments and collect more infor- 2 The virtual lab improved my knowledge of lab safety, what
mation during shorter time frame as it would take to do in the real to do in case of an accident and how to report an accident
3 Which order of doing the labs do you think would be most
experiment (Zhang and Linn, 2011).
helpful for understanding lab safety?
Simulation based learning laboratories can have a great poten- 4 Do you have any comments about the virtual lab and
tial as a new way to transform many engineering curricula into understanding lab safety?
virtual environments where learners can actively participate, solve 5 Does a virtual fermentation lab help you to understand
fermentation processes?
problems and interact in a simulated environment (Hansen, 2008;
6 I experimented in the virtual lab to understand how
Makransky et al., 2016). Virtual laboratories take place within a changing parameters such as mixing speed, aeration and
meaningful, simulated context where learners can interact with temperature affected the fermentation outputs.
the content more effectively in a safe and simulated environ- 7 The virtual lab has helped me understand the effect of
ment (Hansen, 2008). Moreover, 3D virtual environments provide aeration on bacterial (Bacillus subtilis) growth
8 The virtual lab has helped me understand the effect of
immersion and realistic interaction within a virtual world governed
mixing speed on bacterial (Bacillus subtilis) growth
by established scientific principles (Fischer et al., 2007). These fea- 9 The virtual lab has helped me understand the effect of
tures can change the learning focus from a passive instructional aeration on vitamin K production
model to one of active experimentation, repetition, and rapid feed- 10 The virtual lab has helped me understand the effect of
mixing speed on vitamin K production
back (Gance-Cleveland et al., 2016). This process will help learners
11 Which order of doing the labs do you think would be most
to effectively explore, interact, and learn more effective (Parong helpful for understanding fermentation processes?
and Mayer, 2018). 12 After completion of virtual lab, I am able to explain the
However, building a useful virtual laboratory is a highly complex principles of fermentation processes?
process which involves implementing different components from 13 Do you have any comments about the virtual lab and
understanding fermentation processes?
interactive interface and visualisation to pedagogy. Often, the com-
14 The virtual lab has helped in the analysis and
plexity of such development ends up to not achieving the desired interpretation of the results
goals. In this sense, Stahre Wästberg et al. identified few key chal- 15 Does it complement the use of related hands-on labs?
lenges in developing virtual laboratories which significantly impact 16 Immediate exposure to virtual lab has helped me to apply
classroom theoretical knowledge to practical experience
the performance and the usability of them in promoting learning
17 A step by step procedure of the experiment in virtual lab
in education context as a pedagogical method (Stahre Wästberg, has helped me to perform experiment in a systematic way
Eriksson et al. 2019). In line with that, to support the best learning in 18 After completion of virtual lab, I am able to perform a
a bioprocess engineering laboratory component of a biotechnology fermentation process correctly without the help of an
course in chemical engineering curriculum, this study was per- instructor?
19 The virtual lab is easy to use
formed to evaluate the effectiveness of this pedagogical approach to
20 What would improve your experience with the virtual lab?
support learning and improve laboratory skills. To achieve this, an
open source virtual bioprocess engineering software was designed
and developed at the University of Waikato where students could laboratory, students need to follow the instruction provided during
learn about both basics of laboratory safety and fermentation the laboratory and complete the survey questions upon the comple-
principles using multimillion-dollar facilities. Subsequently, virtual tion of experiments. As shown in Table 1, the survey questions were
bioprocess engineering laboratory was assessed and compared for designed using the four-level Likert response scale and to eval-
its usefulness as a supporting tool for a physical laboratory activity. uate the learning outcomes. The response options were strongly
disagree, disagree, agree and strongly agree.

2. Materials and methods

2.3. Hands-on experiment and survey

2.1. Sample (or participant)

The basic goals of the hands-on laboratory were similar to the
virtual laboratory experiment. Before performing the experiments,
The curriculum for the Biotechnology course (ENMP322) at the
students were asked to identify the major steps and devise a work
University of Waikato was designed to cover the key elements of
plan among the group member to assure an equal portion of the
fermentation technology for BEng level students. The main empha-
responsibilities. To perform experiments, students were divided
sis of the course is to understand the roles of biotic and operating
into groups working on four laboratory zones including media
factors on the fermentation process, select a suitable bioreactor
preparation, bacterial preparation, inoculum injection and plate
and mode of operation for maximizing productivity and implement
counting, and spectroscopy (to measure the produced MK-7). Due
biotechnological concepts in production of target product. In this
to the time constraints and time limitation, students had to share
study, the sample consisted of 17 undergraduate students from the
equipment and collaborate on the given tasks. After completion of
University of Waikato.
hands-on laboratory, students were asked to participate in hands-
on laboratory survey. As presented in Table 2, a total of 9 statements
2.2. Virtual experiments in simulator were prepared according to the four-level Likert response scale to
investigate the effect of virtual laboratory on the effectiveness of
Virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory was designed to hands-on laboratory and the learning outcomes.
accommodate students’ needs to better understand the fundamen-
tal of fermentation process. In the virtual laboratory, students were 2.4. Statistical analysis
exposed to the aims of the laboratory and then asked to perform
bacterial growth, run the bioreactor and measure the limiting nutri- An statistical package (IBM SPSS statistics) was employed to
ent (glycerol) and the product menaquinone-7 (MK-7). In virtual determine whether there is a significant difference between stu-
68 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75

Table 2
Student survey statement in hands-on laboratory.

Statement No. Questions on real laboratory experiment

1 I believe the virtual lab allowed me to undertake the

hands-on experiment effectively
2 How could virtual lab improve hands-on skills?
3 Do you agree or disagree that the virtual lab improves the
hands-on lab?
4 Did virtual lab improve your confidence in performing a
lab/fermentation technique in a real lab?
5 Do you agree or disagree that the virtual lab complements
the hands-on lab?
6 List anything that you learned in the virtual lab that you
think would be difficult to learn in the hands-on lab.
7 List anything that you learned in the hands-on lab that you
think would be difficult to learn in the virtual lab.
8 What would improve your experience with the hands-on
lab?
9 Do you have any final comments about the hands-on
fermentation lab?

dent’s experience in simulation and hands-on lab. The qualitative

data from students’ reflections on learning (both virtual and real
laboratories) were analysed using NVivo v.12.

2.5. Human research ethics

The ethical approval has been obtained from the University of

Waikato Human Research Ethics Committee (ethics approval num-
ber: FSEN 2019 4). Fig. 1. Graphical representation of laboratory formality before (a) attending a PC-1
laboratory and (b) leaving a PC-1 laboratory.
3. Results

3.1. Effect of simulation laboratory on understanding laboratory considered as an inefficient and confusing approach as it does not
formality and safety provide enough information and awareness to students. In the bio-
process engineering virtual laboratory simulator, students will be
The bioprocess engineering virtual laboratory was designed and informed about the potential hazards they may face in a fermen-
developed to accommodate students’ need to understand the fun- tation laboratory through multiple choice questions and provides
damental of fermentation process and material preparation, and practical solutions to the hazards. For example, Fig. 1 shows the
examine the effect of most influential operating conditions such as graphical representation of laboratory formality before attending
aeration and agitation speed on bacterial growth, dissolved oxygen to a PC-1 laboratory where students need to wear lab coat, safety
(DO), product yield and glycerol consumption. The software was glasses and gloves as well as laboratory formality when they finish
designed in a way that students undergo a laboratory orientation the laboratory work prior to leaving a PC-1 laboratory. A compre-
and need to understand the importance of health and safety. Once hensive health and safety documents were also embedded in the
they passed the health and safety quiz, students are allowed to wear simulator for those who are interested in more in-depth informa-
an appropriate PPE (personal protective equipment) and enter the tion regarding hazard management. Once the student passed the
laboratory. There is extra module where students can find more quiz, they are allowed to wear PPE and enter the laboratory.
information regarding health and safety matters when attending a To investigate the usefulness of health and safety module in the
PC-1 (Physical containment level 1) laboratory. Thereafter, they are bioprocessing simulator, students were asked to respond to state-
guided to the laboratory and start preparing media and inoculum to ments 1–4 in the simulation laboratory survey (Table 1). As shown
produce a fermented product using a bioreactor. Meanwhile, stu- in Fig. 2, students unanimously agreed on the role of virtual fermen-
dents can freely adjust the operating condition levels and observe tation laboratory to understand laboratory safety (statement 1 in
their effects. Kinetic equations were used to allow the simulator simulation laboratory survey). Except one student who responded
to generate graphical results. Additionally, textual features have disagreement, all the remaining students found the simulator soft-
been embedded in simulation for student reference. The software ware effective to promote awareness in case of accident or incident
can be used alone or supporting element for an engineering-based in the laboratory (statement 2 in simulation laboratory survey).
course. The developed bioprocess engineering virtual laboratory is The results also indicated that all participants are in favour to be
available as an open-source fermentation software simulation at inducted into the laboratory via simulator software prior to attend-
https://biovirtuallab.cms.waikato.ac.nz/ to be used free of charge ing the laboratory. Students also noted the virtual laboratory as a
by others. “fun while effective activity” and “an easy to follow the process”
Experimentation is the key part of the scientific method which (statement 4 in simulation laboratory survey).
relies on gathering measurable evidence and accurate data. Atten-
dance to such an environment must comply with the code of 3.2. Effect of simulation laboratory on understanding
conducts’ principles to minimize the risks associated with the fermentation process
potential hazards. Laboratory safety induction is a common practice
to allow students to work in the laboratory. Laboratory man- An overview of the virtual fermentation laboratory from media
ager/technician usually provides a series of documents and then preparation and sterilization of bioreactor to inoculation step is
induct students into the laboratory. However, this approach is often shown in Fig. 3. These features help students to understand the
 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75 69

Fig. 2. Students responses on the effect of simulation laboratory on understanding health and safety code of compliance.

Fig. 3. Graphical represantation of simulator software on a) laboratory arrangement, b) bioreactor and fermentation media, c) sterilization condition and d) inoculum addition.

procedures involved in the fermentation process and how they can 3.3. Data analysis, independency and other experience in
manipulate operating conditions to increase the product yield. simulation laboratory
Figs. 4 and 5 illustrate the students’ responses on the effect of
virtual laboratory on understanding the effect of operating condi- To evaluate the usefulness of virtual laboratory on data analysis
tions such as aeration and mixing on bacterial growth and MK-7 skills, students were asked to rate the effectiveness of the software
production. In general, students mostly agreed or strongly agreed in helping the analysis and interpretation of the data (statement
on the positive influence of the virtual laboratory on understanding 14 in simulation laboratory survey). According to Fig. 6, students
fermentation processes. More than 95 % of students rated agree or unanimously found the virtual simulator a powerful tool to stim-
strongly agree to the role of virtual laboratory on understanding ulate data analysis skills and help to interpret the experimental
the effect of aeration on bacterial (Bacillus subtilis) growth (state- data. As shown in Fig. 9, the virtual bioprocess laboratory simula-
ment 7 in simulation laboratory survey), while only 5% of students tor provides a great opportunity for students to see the results in
were disagreed on such observation. A similar observation was also forms of graphs showing bacterial growth, productivity, DO level
noticed where students found virtual laboratory as a useful tool and nutrient consumption. This feature can substantially help stu-
to understand the effect of aeration on MK-7 production and the dents to understand how changes in operating conditions (aeration
influence of mixing speed on bacterial (Bacillus subtilis) growth and from 0.25 vvm to 0.75 vvm and agitation speed from 300 rpm to
MK-7 production (statements 8–10). As shown in Fig. 5, 88 % of 500 rpm) can affect the fermentation process and therefore they
students understood how changing parameters affect the fermen- will be able to optimize the process at the lowest cost in a time-
tation outputs by working in virtual laboratory, whereas only 12 % efficient manner (Fig. 7). More than 96 % of students (32 % strongly
rated disagree and strongly disagree for the same statement. agree and 64 % agree) rated the virtual simulator laboratory as the
70 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75

Fig. 4. Students responses on the effect of simulation laboratory on understanding of fermentation process.

them to apply theoretical knowledge learned in classroom to prac-

tical experience (statement 16 in simulation laboratory survey).
The results also indicated that virtual laboratory is a successful
technique to aid students to design and perform experiments in
a systematic way in the shortest period of time to minimize the
operations costs without compromising the accuracy of results. The
ability to act independently is one of the most significant learning
outcomes in undergraduate education which its level is directly
related to confidence gained during studying. Statement 18 (sim-
ulation laboratory survey) was prepared to evaluate the effect of
virtual laboratory on promoting such skills. Interestingly, as shown
in Fig. 6, no one scored a “strongly agree” response on the usefulness
of virtual laboratory to promote independence for performing a
fermentation process correctly without the help of an instructor or
laboratory supervisor. All responses scattered between “agree” and
“disagree” which clearly illustrate its ineffectiveness to stimulate
such important skills. Overall, most of students found the virtual
laboratory as a user-friendly and easy to use tool as a powerful sup-
plement for the fermentation laboratory. At the end of the survey
after performing virtual laboratory, students were asked to include
Fig. 5. Students responses on statement No. 6 in simulation laboratory survey. their comments and feedback regarding the simulator. Most of the
students provided positive feedback on the simulator while a few
others requested more questions and better explanation of the pro-
complement for hands-on laboratory, while only one response was
cess.
recorded as disagreement on the same statement. In terms of prac-
In order to improve learning, students were asked to think about
tical constraints and requirements recognition, all students found
three questions related to the topic after completion of simulation
that the immediate exposure to the virtual laboratory can help

Fig. 6. Students responses on the effect of simulation laboratory on data analysis skills.
 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75 71

Fig. 7. Variation of the most important bioreactor parameters (operating conditions) along with the generated results (dissolved oxygen, glycerol consumption, bacteria
growth and product).
72 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75

Fig. 8. Questions were asked after completion of simulation laboratory to improve learining and encourage students to think beyound the task.

Fig. 9. Students responses on the effects of simulation laboratory to improve their performance in hands-on laboratory.

laboratory (Fig. 8). The “question to think” section was embedded promote the required skills to execute accurate experiments. A
in the simulation laboratory to encourage the students to think comparison was made between the received responses on the effect
beyond the learning task and be more creative. The first two ques- of simulation laboratory to increase the student’s confidence in
tions were designed to encourage students to learn more in- depth performing laboratory techniques before and after hands-on exper-
about the roles, applications and advantages of using microorgan- iment laboratory. A significantly different responses (p value 0.009)
isms in producing high value-added products. In addition, students were noted in students’ though after performing hands-on experi-
were asked to think and identify the potential issues in industrial ment. In simulation laboratory survey, only 65 % of students agreed
scale of fermentation process and propose practical solution(s) to on the positive effect of virtual laboratory to promote confidence
overcome those challenges. in performing laboratory practice while after attending physical
laboratory, the level of agreement reached to 94 %. However, no
3.4. Effect of simulation laboratory on students’ performance in significant difference (p value 0.657) in responses was observed
hands-on laboratory where students were asked whether the simulation laboratory
complements the hands-on practices before and after hands-on
In the post-survey, students’ performance in hands-on labo- experiments laboratory.
ratory after attending virtual laboratory was studied. The results According to responses recorded for statement 6 (hands-on lab-
showed that more than 94 % of students (81 % agreed and 13 % oratory survey), students reported the valuable experience gained
strongly agreed) found the virtual laboratory to be a promising tool in virtual laboratory such as “health and safety procedures” and
to undertake hands-on experiments effectively. However, students “in-depth understanding the effect of aeration and mixing speed
found the inclusion of basic spectroscopy, laminar flow cabinet in fermentation process” that are difficult to learn in hands-on
and plate counting demos could further improve the performance laboratory. On the other hand, as it depicted in Fig. 10, agar plat-
of virtual laboratory in preparation for a hands-on experiment. ing and inoculum preparation are among the most difficult tasks
Similar to statement 1 (hands-on laboratory survey), the same to be learned in virtual laboratory, but exposure to such experi-
responses were recorded where students agreed that virtual lab- ence in simulation laboratory can help to learn bacterial streaking
oratory improves the hands-on laboratory experience and can in hands-on laboratory. Although students found practical experi-
 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75 73

ing real experiment (i.g. inadequate laboratory resources, external

pressure on faculty to do administrative jobs and being efficient
on research), it has been shown that the lack of pre-knowledge and
experience significantly decrease the effectiveness of hands-on lab-
oratory practices (Seifan et al., 2019). Therefore, it is important to
provide necessary information to students so that they can take
advantages of laboratory experiments in a biotechnology course.
Watching virtual experiments is one of the approaches that
provides pre-knowledge on the topic in terms of fundamentals,
methodology, preparation and execution. In this type of practice,
prior to attending a laboratory, students can be prepared by watch-
ing interactive videos. However, they cannot acquire the required
skills needed to execute accurate experiments in the laboratory and
they mostly observe contradictory results from what they learned
in the textbooks.
Several studies reported the advantages of interactive virtual
laboratory on unobservable phenomena as compared to physical
experiments of observable phenomena. For instance, students who
explored simulated electric circuits developed more conceptual
knowledge as compared to those who only used physical materials
(Finkelstein et al., 2005). Studies show that virtual experiments can
help students to use complex inquiry practices to separate range of
variables that might be hard to use in physical laboratories (Klahr
Fig. 10. Students’ response to statement 7 in hands-on survey.
et al., 2007). Virtual experiments also produce clean data which
consequently support a better acquisition of conceptual knowl-
edge. For example, Pyatt and Sims, 2012 reported students who
conducted virtual chemistry experiments outperformed their peers
on conceptual understanding since they produced messy data dur-
ing a physical laboratory experiments (2012). In another study, it
was found that the use of virtual laboratory provides students with
more time to experiment and to experience conceptual aspects
as compared to the corresponding physical experiment (Zacharia
et al., 2008).
As compared to traditional laboratory practices, Brinson (2015)
reported that the student’s learning achievements are equal or
greater in virtual laboratory environments. However, the success in
the implementation of virtual laboratories is significantly affected
by different factors. Those are mainly associated with the com-
plexity of designing a useful virtual tool to meet the desired goals
in terms of usability, clarity, technology and design. Therefore,
designing a virtual lab is not unproblematic and the process devel-
opment is an iterative process to achieve the desired goals. In this
regard, Stahre Wästberg et al. (Stahre Wästberg, Eriksson et al.
2019) identified common problems related to the design, devel-
opment and implementation of virtual laboratories. It was found
that there are five main design challenges namely “(i) ambitions
Fig. 11. Students’ response to statement 8 in hands-on survey.
and expectations versus lack of resources, (ii) explorative inter-
action versus linear narrative, (iii) appropriate levels of realism
and accuracy, (iv) cloned versus enhanced laboratory and (v) self-
ments useful, they noted that the long waiting to prepare media and instructive versus teacher-guided debriefing”. In response to these
culture bacteria in physical laboratory decreases their performance challenges, appropriate technology and the level of realism must
(statement 8 in hands-on survey; Fig. 11). Overall, students found be selected based on the purpose and end-users in designing vir-
the hands-on laboratory very useful and efficient as they already tual practices. However, due to the nature of different courses and
exposed to the fundamental of fermentation process in virtual lab- the level of student’s perception, implementing these strategies
oratory. This offers them an opportunity to discover more aspects might not lead to design an ideal virtual tool. Instead, evaluating
of fermentation process and encourage them to pursue research in students’ feedback and then implementing the enhanced features
the same field of study. into the virtual simulator could be a systematic step towards the
pedagogical development of high-quality virtual laboratory tools.
4. Discussion It must be considered that both physical and virtual laboratories
have their own advantages as well as trade-offs. While performing
Over the recent decade, a number of different strategies have virtual laboratories students can easily investigate unobservable
been introduced to encourage active learning and critical thinking phenomena that are not found in the physical experiments, conduct
skills (Montgomery, 2004; Seifan et al., 2020). Hands-on pedagogy higher number of experiments that may not be possible to perform
is one of the most effective active learning styles that dynami- under physical setting. On the other hand, physical laboratories are
cally engages students in personal application of knowledge to beneficial when the students need to acquire a sophisticated epis-
real-world problems. Apart from limitations associated in perform- temology of science including but not limited to acquire practical
74 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75

skills and gain ability to make sense of imperfect measurements (De ratory. In laboratory conditions, students could mostly identify the
Jong et al., 2013). Therefore, it may be an ideal to have a blended experimental errors after finishing the time-consuming laboratory
combination of the virtual and physical laboratories as the ideal work and analysing the obtained data.
mixture. Zacharia et al., found that students who performed both a Virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory was significantly
physical and a virtual laboratory outperformed their counterparts helpful for the students to understand the fundamental of
who just conducted the physical laboratory (2008). Kolloffel et al., biotechnological processes by executing different fermentation
also reported that engineering students who attend a combination experiments and comparing the resulted data without concern
of physical and virtual laboratories were more successful than those about time, laboratory resources and health and safety matters
who only conducted a physical laboratory on both procedural and through a more enjoyable learning experience. Overall, well-
conceptual knowledge of electric circuits (2013). In another study, designed combinations of virtual and physical experiments allowed
chemistry students conducted a physical laboratory and were com- engineering students to gain a more nuanced understanding of sci-
pared with students who used a simulation of distillation along entific phenomena and a more robust understanding of inquiry.
with the physical laboratory. Authors found an advantage in combi- Several factors such class size and number of students would
nation of virtual and physical laboratories (Martinez-Jiménez et al., affect the efficacy of the virtual reality software (LeCroy, 2006). The
2003). Olympiou et al., investigated the effect of only virtual, only results of the present investigation were based on the small class
physical, and their combination on students learning about optics. which makes statistical analysis challenging. Therefore, employ-
Based on the results, students who attended a combined condi- ing the virtual reality simulation may not be as effective for some
tion outperformed those who performed physical or virtual alone learners. These can include students who do not appreciate playing
laboratories (2012). educational games or have difficulties with processing the informa-
The present investigation is aiming to evaluate the applicabil- tion. Therefore, before developing the software the desired content
ity and effectiveness of a virtual bioprocess engineering laboratory and audience must be determined. To be more specific, the class
in combination with the physical one on enhancing learners curriculum should include other pedagogical strategies to better
understanding about fermentation principles, laboratory safety support different learning styles (Resko and Chorba, 1992; Cunning
rules, experiment design and data analysis. The software has two and Pflederer, 1986). Furthermore, evaluation and feedback from
distinct, interacting components: the mathematical model and wider range of students with different educational backgrounds
data-generating component that simulates the physicochemical will be extremely valuable in assessing the success of the developed
system, and the 3D interactive virtual interface that creates the virtual laboratory and making any necessary revisions.
laboratory environment experience for the students. Students were
tasked to make a pilot scale experiment and develop a process for 5. Conclusion
efficient production of a target biochemical. The virtual interface
was emulate the experience of being in a state-of-the-art labo- The virtual process engineering laboratory was successfully
ratory, allowing students to select and use equipment to change introduced into the chemical engineering curriculum. The com-
various fermentation parameters (including temperature, stirring parison study between both physical and virtual bioprocess
rate, and aeration). Their choices were passed to the underly- engineering laboratories was conducted. It was found that the com-
ing mathematical model and the effects of those choices on the bination of both laboratories to be effective in actively engaging
model were reported back to the interface. The state of the chang- students with different learning environments and styles. Virtual
ing system is depicted graphically in the 3D environment, and laboratory experiments delivered with computer technology added
key data is plotted on a graph in real-time, showing the system’s value to physical one by allowing students to investigate unobserv-
response (over time) to the student’s choices. Data were automati- able phenomena while enabling them to conduct cost-effective,
cally recorded in a spreadsheet containing time, biomass, glycerol, affordable and timely experiments. Development of virtual labora-
oxygen and product amounts reflecting the specific parameters. tories could be seen as an emerging tool to promote a safe, fun, and
Students were thus able to further analyse the output data and cre- interactive environment for the chemical engineering curriculum
ate new plots to demonstrate optimum conditions for production to enhance students’ perception on range of topics.
of target product.
Given that the scholarly research establishes the benefits of
Funding
discussions to facilitate active engagement and better learning
(Roberts, 1993; Gruending et al., 1991; Pollock et al., 2011). It
This project was funded through the Ako Aotearoa Regional Hub
should be noted that small-group discussions are more likely to
Project Fund.
engage a higher number of students than discussions in large
classes. This study, found that by employing the proposed virtual
laboratory, students gained a deeper understanding about fermen- Declaration of Competing Interest
tation principles, laboratory safety rules, experiment design and
analysis of data that they were not able to acquire by just conduct- The authors declare no conflict of interest.
ing the physical experiments. Learners acquired a tool with which
to experiment without limitations of space, time and cost. Acknowledgement
The software is available all year without being limited to a spe-
cific place or time. Apart from the capability to execute accurate The authors would like to thank the students of Engineering
laboratory works, the analysis of the experimental data is another Biotechnology class of The University of Waikato, New Zealand for
key factor to generate knowledge-based works and innovations. their active participation in this research.
Although students show much interests in data acquisition, they
often find data analysis frustrating as the resulted conclusions were References
different from what they usually see in the textbooks. This is mainly
due to the lack of fully understanding the fundamentals behind Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., 2010. Designing effective serious games: oppor-
the experimental works as a result of time and resources limita- tunities and challenges for research. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 5, 22–35.
Brinson, J.R., 2015. Learning outcome achievement in non-traditional (virtual and
tions. Therefore, the aims and objectives of the laboratory should be remote) versus traditional (hands-on) laboratories: a review of the empirical
defined for the students to help them to better prepare for the labo- research. Comput. Educ. 87, 218–237.
 M. Seifan et al. / Education for Chemical Engineers 33 (2020) 66–75 75

Cunning, B., Pflederer, D., 1986. Tackling the nursing process, gamely. Nurs. Manage. Olympiou, G., Zacharia, Z.C., 2012. Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: an
17, 49–50. effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science labora-
De Jong, T., Linn, M.C., Zacharia, Z.C., 2013. Physical and virtual laboratories in science tory experimentation. Sci. Educ. 96, 21–47.
and engineering education. Science 340, 305–308. Parong, J., Mayer, R.E., 2018. Learning science in immersive virtual reality. J. Educ.
Finkelstein, N.D., Adams, W.K., Keller, C.J., Kohl, P.B., Perkins, K.K., Podolefsky, N.S., Psychol. 110, 785–797.
Reid, S., Lemaster, R., 2005. When learning about the real world is better done vir- Pollock, P.H., Hamann, K., Wilson, B.M., 2011. Learning through discussions: com-
tually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. paring the benefits of small-group and large-class settings. J. Political Sci. Educ.
Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. - Phys. Educ. Res., 1. 7, 48–64.
Fischer, J., Mitchell, R., Del Alamo, J., 2007. Inquiry-learning with WebLab: under- Pyatt, K., Sims, R., 2012. Virtual and physical experimentation in inquiry-based sci-
graduate attitudes and experiences. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 16, 337–348. ence labs: attitudes, performance and access. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 21, 133–147.
Ford, D.N., McCormack, D.E.M., 2000. Effects of time scale focus on system under- Resko, D., Chorba, M., 1992. Enhancing learning through the use of games. Dimens.
standing in decision support systems. Simul. Gaming 31, 309–330. Crit. Care Nurs. 3, 173–177.
Gance-Cleveland, B., Aldrich, H., Schmiege, S., Tyler, K., 2016. Virtual obesity collab- Roberts, A.E., 1993. An evaluation of the effectiveness of educational gaming as a
orative with and without decision-support technology. Int. J. Qual. Health Care teaching method for therapists. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 526, 371–375.
28, 316–323. Seifan, M., Dada, D., Berenjian, A., 2019. The effect of virtual field trip as an introduc-
Gruending, D.L., Fenty, D., Hogan, T., 1991. Fun and games in nursing staff develop- tory tool for an engineering real field trip. Educ. Chem. Eng. 27, 6–11.
ment. J. Contin. Educ. Nurs. 22, 259–262. Seifan, M., Dada, O.D., Berenjian, A., 2020. The effect of real and virtual construc-
Hansen, M.M., 2008. Versatile, immersive, creative and dynamic virtual 3-D health- tion field trips on students’ perception and career aspiration. Sustainability 12,
care learning environments: a review of the literature. J. Med. Internet Res., 1200.
10. Stahre Wästberg, B., Eriksson, T., Karlsson, G., Sunnerstam, M., Axelsson, M., Billger,
Klahr, D., Triona, L.M., Williams, C., 2007. Hands on what? The relative effectiveness M., 2019. Design considerations for virtual laboratories: a comparative study of
of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle two virtual laboratories for learning about gas solubility and colour appearance.
school children. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 44, 183–203. Educ. Inf. Technol. 24 (3), 2059–2080.
LeCroy, C., 2006. Games as an innovative teaching strategy for overactive bladder Trundle, K.C., Bell, R.L., 2010. The use of a computer simulation to promote concep-
and BPH. Urologic Nurs. 26, 381–384. tual change: a quasi-experimental study. Comput. Educ. 54, 1078–1088.
Makransky, G., Thisgaard, M.W., Gadegaard, H., 2016. Virtual simulations as prepara- Wiesner, T.F., Lan, W., 2004. Comparison of student learning in physical and simu-
tion for lab exercises: assessing learning of key laboratory skills in microbiology lated unit operations experiments. J. Eng. Educ. 93, 195–204.
and improvement of essential non-cognitive skills. PLoS One, 11. Zacharia, Z.C., Olympiou, G., Papaevripidou, M., 2008. Effects of experimenting with
Martinez-Jiménez, P., Pontes-Pedrajas, A., Polo, J., Climent-Bellido, M.S., 2003. Learn- physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in
ing in chemistry with virtual laboratories. J. Chem. Educ. 80, 346–352. heat and temperature. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 45, 1021–1035.
Montgomery, B.L., 2004. Teaching the nature of biotechnology using service- Zhang, Z.H., Linn, M.C., 2011. Can generating representations enhance learning with
learning instruction. Biosci. Educ. E-journal 4, 1–12. dynamic visualizations. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 48, 1177–1198.
Nersesian, E., Spryszynski, A., Lee, M.J., 2019. Integration of virtual reality in
secondary STEM education. In: 2019 9th IEEE Integrated STEM Education Con-
ference, ISEC 2019, pp. 83–90.