Short answer

Designers should consider the diverse needs of students, particularly regarding physical and linguistic accessibility, and strategically combine online and in-person elements to create a more equitable and effective learning experience.

Field
Human Factors
Source
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice (2023)
Method
Mixed Methods
Sample
58 participants
Evidence
Moderate effect

The format of science laboratory courses significantly impacts student experience and accessibility, with online environments proving more accommodating for certain physical and linguistic needs, whereas in-person settings foster crucial interpersonal and technical learning. This human factors research insight is drawn from a 2023 study published in Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice. Using Mixed methods with 58 participants, researchers explored how this design variable affects real-world outcomes. The key design takeaway: Designers should consider the diverse needs of students, particularly regarding physical and linguistic accessibility, and strategically combine online and in-person elements to create a more equitable and effective learning experience.

Study
Human FactorsRecentModerate effect

Online labs offer accessibility advantages for students with physical and language barriers, while in-person labs excel in fostering collaboration and technical skill development.

The format of science laboratory courses significantly impacts student experience and accessibility, with online environments proving more accommodating for certain physical and linguistic needs, whereas in-person settings foster crucial interpersonal and technical learning.

Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice · 2023

01

Key Findings

  • 01Online labs were perceived as flexible, convenient, self-paced, and inclusive for students with physical disabilities and language barriers.
  • 02In-person labs were valued for technical skill development and inclusivity in collaboration, academic support, and communication.
  • 03Common barriers across both formats included physical and language accessibility, financial constraints, and stereotypical attitudes.
02

Application

Design takeaway

Designers should consider the diverse needs of students, particularly regarding physical and linguistic accessibility, and strategically combine online and in-person elements to create a more equitable and effective learning experience.

How to apply

When designing science laboratory courses, evaluate the accessibility features of both online platforms and physical lab spaces. Consider incorporating virtual labs or simulations to supplement in-person sessions, and ensure clear communication channels and support resources are available for all students.

Project actions

  • 01When evaluating different design solutions for educational tools or environments, consider how each option addresses diverse user needs, such as physical accessibility and language support.
  • 02Think about how the format of a learning experience (e.g., online vs. in-person) can create or remove barriers for different users.
03

Method & Evidence

AimTo explore students' perspectives on the accessibility and inclusivity of online versus in-person undergraduate science laboratory courses and identify barriers and support structures for EDIA.
MethodMixed Methods
ProcedureData was collected through an online questionnaire and semi-structured interviews with undergraduate science laboratory students.
Sample58 participants
ContextUndergraduate science laboratory courses (online and in-person) at a Canadian university.

Variables

IV["Lab delivery format (online vs. in-person)"]
DV["Student perceptions of accessibility","Student perceptions of inclusivity","Identification of EDIA barriers","Recommendations for support structures"]
CV["Student background (cultural, ethnic, racial, socioeconomic)","Type of science laboratory course"]
04

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

  • +Employs a mixed-methods approach to capture both quantitative trends and qualitative depth.
  • +Focuses on underrepresented and equity-deserving groups, providing valuable insights into their experiences.

Limitations

The study's findings are based on student opinions and might not reflect the full picture. The specific university context might also influence the results.

Reliability & validity

The use of mixed methods (questionnaires and interviews) enhances the validity of the findings by triangulating data. Reliability could be strengthened by using standardized interview protocols and ensuring consistent data analysis procedures.

Think critically

How might the perceived benefits of online labs for certain students be offset by a lack of hands-on experience, and how can designers bridge this gap?

05

Design Principles

"Design for diverse needs by offering flexible and accessible learning modalities."

Understanding these differential impacts is crucial for designing inclusive educational experiences. Designers and educators can leverage the strengths of each format to create hybrid or blended learning approaches that cater to a wider range of student needs and learning styles, ultimately enhancing engagement and learning outcomes.

06

What This Means for Your Design

Online science labs can be easier for students with physical limitations or who speak different languages, but in-person labs are better for learning practical skills and working with others. Both types of labs can have problems with access, cost, and unfair ideas about people.

How to use in your project

  • 1.Use this study to justify the need for accessible design in your own design project, especially if it involves educational settings or tools.
  • 2.Cite this research when discussing the benefits of different delivery methods for user engagement and inclusivity.
07

Add to My Project

08

Quick Cite

Paragraph starter

This research highlights that the format of science laboratory courses significantly influences student accessibility and inclusivity. Online labs were found to offer advantages for students with physical and language barriers, while in-person labs were valued for technical skill development and collaborative learning. Both formats presented challenges related to accessibility, financial constraints, and stereotypes, underscoring the need for thoughtful design that addresses diverse user needs.

09

Source

Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice

Students’ perspectives and experiences with equity, diversity, inclusion, and accessibility in online and in-person undergraduate science laboratory courses

journal · 2023

View source

Questions About This Research

What does the research say about online labs offer accessibility advantages for students with physical and language barriers, while in-person labs excel in fostering collaboration and technical skill development?
Designers should consider the diverse needs of students, particularly regarding physical and linguistic accessibility, and strategically combine online and in-person elements to create a more equitable and effective learning experience. Evidence: Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice (2023).
Why does "Online labs offer accessibility advantages for students with physical and language barriers, while in-person labs excel in fostering collaboration and technical skill development." matter for design?
Understanding these differential impacts is crucial for designing inclusive educational experiences. Designers and educators can leverage the strengths of each format to create hybrid or blended learning approaches that cater to a wider range of student needs and learning styles, ultimately enhancing engagement and learning outcomes.
How can designers apply this research?
Designers should consider the diverse needs of students, particularly regarding physical and linguistic accessibility, and strategically combine online and in-person elements to create a more equitable and effective learning experience.
What were the main findings?
Online labs were perceived as flexible, convenient, self-paced, and inclusive for students with physical disabilities and language barriers.. In-person labs were valued for technical skill development and inclusivity in collaboration, academic support, and communication.. Common barriers across both formats included physical and language accessibility, financial constraints, and stereotypical attitudes.
What research method was used?
Mixed Methods with 58 participants.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence strength is rated Moderate effect, based on a 2023 journal from Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice.
What should I do differently in my next project?
When designing science laboratory courses, evaluate the accessibility features of both online platforms and physical lab spaces. Consider incorporating virtual labs or simulations to supplement in-person sessions, and ensure clear communication channels and support resources are available for all students.
What are the limitations?
Findings are specific to the context of a Canadian university and may not be universally applicable. The study focused on student perspectives, and faculty or institutional perspectives were not included.