JOURNAL OF GEOSCIENCE EDUCATION 61, 213–221 (2013)

The Importance of a Laboratory Section on Student Learning

Outcomes in a University Introductory Earth Science Course
Frank L. Forcino1,a

ABSTRACT
Laboratory sections of university Earth science courses provide hands-on, inquiry-based activities for students in support of
lecture and discussion. Here, I compare student conceptual knowledge outcomes of laboratory sections by administering an
independent concept inventory at the beginning and end of two courses: one that had a lecture and a laboratory section, and
one that had only a lecture. Students in both courses demonstrated a significant increase in inventory scores over the course of
the semester. The mean increase in score for the course with a laboratory was 33% greater (43% greater for matched-
identification score analysis) than for the lecture-only course. One notable difference between the two courses was that the
course without the lab was also a time-shortened course, while the course with a lab spanned a full, traditional-length
academic term. Because a great deal of research exists demonstrating that time-shortened, intensive university courses
produce the same increase in student concept knowledge as traditional-length courses, the inclusion of the laboratory section
most likely led to the greater student learning gains in the full-length course. This study demonstrates the importance of
having a laboratory component of an introductory-level, university Earth science course. Ó 2013 National Association of
Geoscience Teachers. [DOI: 10.5408/12-412.1]

Key words: time-shortened, intensive, Geoscience Concept Inventory

INTRODUCTION complement the auditory component from the lecture, it is

Laboratory activities and experiments often accompany important to determine whether the additional modalities
lecture and discussion portions of science courses. University lead to higher learning gains.
science courses often have a separate laboratory section for Independent concept inventories (validity- and reliabil-
students, in addition to a lecture section. The importance of ity-tested assessments administered by someone not directly
the laboratory sections is argued by almost all science instructing students and not counted toward student grades)
educators, using mostly anecdotal evidence to support their of university courses are becoming more prevalent (Libarkin
claims (Blosser, 1983; Baird, 1990; Hofstein and Lunetta, and Kurdzel, 2001; Perkins, 2004; Libarkin and Anderson,
2004). However, there has been little direct research into the 2006; Jolley et al., 2012). Because such inventories have low
effect of laboratories on student learning outcomes in stakes, students may not put forth an optimal effort.
university science courses (Doran, 1978; Hofstein and However, in conjunction with course exams and projects,
Lunetta, 1982, 2004; Prades and Espinar, 2010; Matz et al., concept inventories inform instructors as to whether
2012). students understand the material and are accomplishing
Specifically for the Earth sciences, laboratory sections of the desired learning outcomes. Graded activities can add
university courses are important for student learning confounds, such as curving of exams scores, which make it
(Neilson et al., 2010; Huysken et al., 2011). The laboratories difficult to compare student performance from semester to
ostensibly provide students with hands-on activities in semester. Variation in student attitude or aptitude from term
which inquiry, experimentation, and discovery play key to term also makes it problematic to use exam or course
roles. In addition, laboratories are where student are able to scores for comparing student performance in subsequent
spend time interacting with samples (e.g., rocks, minerals, semesters. Independent concept inventories can remove
and fossils) and conduct activities using maps and geo- possible biases (e.g., favoritism for a student) that the course
graphic information systems. Earth sciences are historically instructor might unknowingly add, because the independent
field-based sciences; geoscientists must be able to identify inventory is blinded.
and interpret material in the field. Laboratories prepare Here, I compare student conceptual knowledge out-
students for future field-based experiences, as well as for comes of laboratory sections by administering a modified
more advanced Earth science courses. In addition, students version of the Geoscience Concept Inventory (GCI) at the
learn material better when multiple modalities are employed beginning and end of two courses: one that had a lecture
(Penney, 1989; Cowan, 1998; Gadt-Johnson and Price, 2000; and a laboratory section, and one that only had a lecture.
Prain and Waldrip, 2006). Because a laboratory section often Two aspects that set this study apart from previous work are
adds tactile and visual learning methods for students that (1) a consistent independent concept inventory was used at
the beginning and end of each course and (2) the same
instructors taught the same material in both courses.
Received 22 December 2012; revised 28 January 2013; accepted 31 January 2013;
published online 14 May 2013. Because one course had a laboratory section and one did
1 not, any difference in the change in inventory scores is likely
Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta,
1-26 Earth Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 2E3 attributable to the laboratory, or lack thereof. My hypothesis
a
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: was that the course with the laboratory section would lead to
[email protected]. Tel.: 484-467-7887. Fax: 780-492-2030 a greater increase in concept inventory scores from the

1089-9995/2013/61(2)/213/9 213 Q Nat. Assoc. Geosci. Teachers

214 F. L. Forcino J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013)

TABLE I: Course attributes of both courses examined in this study.1

Planet Earth (With Lab) Earth Sciences I (Lecture Only)
Course objectives Show how the Earth functions as a dynamic Students will gain a basic understanding of the
system that is shaped by interactions among its geoscience topics (see text), as they relate to the
geological, physical, chemical, and biological scientific method, global warming, global climate
elements. Overall, provide a solid foundation in change, and interactions among the geosphere,
all branches of Earth science. atmosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere, including
the recent impacts of human activities.
Delivery Lecture and lab Lecture
Prerequisites None Any 100-level science course
Course length 13 weeks 3 weeks
Period length 50 min 2.5 h
Credit hours 3 3
Evaluation mode Exams and lab exercises Exams
GE requirements satisfied Varies among programs Varies among programs
1
GE = general education.

beginning to the end of the course. This would corroborate tion, and they cover topics such as the water cycle, glaciers,
previous research and anecdotal evidence that laboratory the atmosphere, the history of the Earth, and the human
sections benefit student learning outcomes. To examine footprint on the Earth. Because the background information
possible confounding effects because the lecture-only course is taught in the lecture sections, and the lectures are the
was a time-shortened intensive course, I tested a subhypo- same for both the course with and the course without the
thesis that students enrolled in the course with the lab, the students enrolled in the lecture-only course do not
laboratory would score higher on questions that corre- receive the hands-on experience of the laboratory to
sponded to content that was explicitly covered in at least one reinforce the lecture material (Table I).
laboratory exercise. This would indicate that the laboratory Students may enroll in the lecture-only course if the
exercises, rather than the difference between course lengths, general science requirements for their particular major do
were affecting student learning outcomes. not include a science course with a laboratory (Table I).
Often these students still enroll in the lab course because it is
more conveniently scheduled during the semester and more
METHODS sections are offered per year. Thus, there is a consistent mix
Course Descriptions of students from various majors among the courses. There is
I conducted this experiment in an Earth science no evidence that a student more adept at science would
department at a Canadian university. The department offers enroll in one course instead of the other. However, I did test
two versions of an introductory Earth science course (Table to determine whether a bias existed toward science majors in
I). Planet Earth contains a laboratory section, while Earth one course or the other (as explained later).
Sciences I does not. Both courses offer an introduction to the
origin and evolution of the Earth and solar system. Specific Instrument and Administration
topics covered include plate tectonics, the rock cycle, energy The instrument used to evaluate the students was a
balances, the water cycle, evolution of life, global climate modified version of the GCI. The GCI is a multiple-choice
change, the carbon cycle, human interaction with the Earth, assessment instrument used in introductory geoscience
and mineral and energy resources. The same lecture material courses. It consists of a set of 69 questions, from which I
was taught in both courses in each instructor’s respective selected 28 (see the supplemental material, available at
sections. The only apparent differences were (1) the lack of a http://dx.doi.org/10.5408/12-412s1, for the complete concept
laboratory section in Earth Sciences I and (2) Planet Earth inventory). Each of these questions has gone through
was 13 weeks (with three 50-min lectures per week), rigorous reliability and validation studies (Libarkin and
whereas Earth Sciences I was 3 weeks (with 12.5 h of Anderson, 2005, 2006). These particular 28 questions were
lecture per week). I was unable to test directly whether the chosen from the entire pool of GCI questions because they
lab or the full-length course caused differences in student most closely aligned with the lecture material. I constructed
learning gains in the lab course. However, previous research another nine questions to cover content that was not part of
has found that intensive and traditional courses to be equally the GCI. These nine questions were created to measure
effective in producing the same student learning gains content retention of material taught in the two courses.
(Daniel, 2000, and references within; Davies, 2006, and Incorrect response options were provided to reflect common
references within; Kucsera and Zimmaro, 2010; Nasiri and misconceptions, based on statements from the instructors of
Shokrpour, 2012). So, differences would likely be attributed the Planet Earth course. These nine questions are marked in
to having the laboratory section or not. red in the supplemental material.
The Planet Earth laboratory exercises support topics The total score possible on the concept inventory
taught in the lecture section of the course. Laboratory instrument was 46 points—some of the 37 questions had
activities include mapping and rock and mineral identifica- multiple possible answers and, therefore, multiple possible
J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013) Laboratory Importance 215

TABLE II: Dates each pre- and postcourse assessment was administered.1
With Lab Lecture Only
Instructor Precourse Postcourse Precourse Postcourse Precourse Postcourse
Instructor 1 Sept. 9 Dec. 5 Jan. 11 Apr. 11 May 7 May 24
Instructor 2 Sept. 9 Dec. 5 N/A N/A May 28 June 13
1
N/A = not applicable.

points. In addition to the 37 questions, students were asked I was only allotted by each of the instructors a certain
to volunteer their student identification numbers in order to amount of time for students to take the concept inventory.
match scores from precourse to those from postcourse. The
37 questions were intended to gauge general Earth science Statistical Analysis
knowledge. One advantage of using a standard instrument To test for a statistically significant increase in student
such as the GCI is that it is not specific to any university or to conceptual knowledge, I performed t-tests between pre- and
any particular course. The transferability of this instrument postcourse inventory scores for the lecture-only course and
made it appropriate for this study. the lab course, separately. Two sets of t-tests were
I administered pre- and postcourse concept inventories conducted: (1) all scores from pre- and postcourse invento-
to students between September 2011 and June 2012 (Table ries for both the lecture-only course and the lab course were
II). The concept inventory instrument was identical for both examined and (2) the individual scores—matched by student
Earth and atmospheric science courses and for both the pre- identification numbers—were sequentially compared to one
and the postcourse inventories. The purpose of the another. For the first analysis, I conducted t-tests to test for
precourse inventory was to measure students’ incoming significant differences between the pre- and the postcourse
concept knowledge, while the postcourse inventory mea- scores. For the second analysis, I conducted paired-sample t-
sured conceptual knowledge gained throughout the span of tests to test for a significant difference between the two sets
each course. of inventory scores. The paired-sample t-tests take into
Student random guessing could lead to anomalously account the changes of individual student’s scores from pre-
high scores. To determine the average assessment score that to postcourse.
would be achieved by random guessing, I created a null In addition to the analysis that included all 37 questions,
model of randomly generated responses to the assessment a secondary analysis was conducting examining 12 particular
questions. The null model was constructed by randomly questions. These 12 questions contained content that was
selecting one response for each of the 37 questions. explicitly covered in at least one laboratory exercise. Because
the concept inventory was initially designed for general
Although some questions had multiple correct answers
assessment of the lab course, without this specific study in
(meaning that the test had 46 correct selections, for 46 total
mind, the questions were geared toward general Earth
points), this aspect was omitted from the model. This
science knowledge (the bulk of the material instructed in the
simplified the model and took into account the likely
lecture section). As a secondary test of the differences in
scenario that students who ignored the instruction to not
student conceptual knowledge gains between the lecture-
randomly select answers would also not pay attention to the
only and the lab courses, I compared the results of these 12
test instructions, which directed students to select multiple inventory questions (totaling 16 points) between the two
responses when appropriate. The random selection of courses. Because students in the lab course had a greater
responses to all 37 questions was repeated 1,000 times to opportunity to actively engage in the material covered by
determine the mean score achieved by random guessing. these 12 questions, it is possible that the students in the
This null model simulates 1,000 students randomly choosing lecture-only course would not demonstrate as strong of an
responses to all assessment questions. increase in scores for these 12 questions. Therefore, evidence
I obtained human subject research permission in for a greater increase in the conceptual knowledge for these
accordance with applicable Canadian laws and university 12 questions among students enrolled in the lab course
protocol. Student responses to inventory questions were would provide evidence that the laboratory course directly
coded to remove identifiers. Therefore, student anonymity aids in student learning outcomes.
was maintained even though identification numbers were Because 9 of the 37 questions (10 out of the total 46
collected, because I never obtained a list of student’s names points) on the inventory were not from the GCI and were
and I was the only person in possession of the scores. The not tested for reliability or validity, additional t-tests were
variables I gathered from the students were instructor conducted comparing standardized scores for only the 28
identity (one of two possibilities), class standing (first GCI questions to scores of all 37 questions. If there are no
through fourth year), and academic major. For purposes of significant differences between the scores of the 28 GCI
this study, I categorized the majors as Earth science, science, questions and all 37 inventory questions, this suggests that
or nonscience. Earth science majors included geology, the 9 questions were not biased.
petroleum geology, Earth science, and atmospheric science Within each course, there were two possible instructors,
majors. Science majors included other ‘‘hard’’ sciences, and the enrolled students pursued a range of majors,
including chemistry, biology, ecology, and physics. Every including Earth science majors, science majors, and nonsci-
other major was included as nonscience majors, including ence majors. Furthermore, as is often the case with time-
engineering and math majors. I did not collect student shortened, intensive courses, students in the lecture-only
gender, age, or ethnicity because I was limited by class time; course tended to be further along in their university careers
216 F. L. Forcino J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013)

TABLE III: The percentage (and number) of each year of

student academic standing for both the course with the
laboratory section and the lecture-only course.
With Lab Lecture Only
1st year 57% (122) 2% (1)
2nd year 26% (55) 14% (9)
3rd year 12% (25) 33% (21)
4th year 6% (12) 51% (32)

than those in the full-length course (Daniel, 2000; Table III).

To evaluate the possible effects of instructor, academic
major, and class standing on the change in inventory scores
from the pre- to postcourse, I performed and analyzed
general linear models (GLMs). The GLMs statistically
evaluate the goodness of fit of the different populations
(i.e., pre- and postcourse inventories for lecture-only and lab
courses), different instructors, year, and major to the FIGURE 1: Mean – 1 SD of assessment scores for
inventory scores. The GLM consisting of just the inventory analysis including all scores. The four numbers repre-
scores for the pre- and postcourse populations is the same as sent the four sample sizes for each of the four
a t-test. However, by conducting this univariate GLM, a
populations.
baseline is created to compare to the bivariate GLM. To
measure the effect of the instructor, year, and major on the
change in concept inventory scores, I calculated the Even though the nine questions created for this inventory
difference between the r2 statistics between the univariate were not tested for reliability and validity, they had no effect
GLM (the two populations) and the bivariate GLM (the two on student performance. Therefore, I focus on the results of
populations and the different instructors, year, or major). In all 37 concept inventory questions for the discussion.
addition to the three bivariate GLMs, I conducted one Within the analysis of the inventory scores for the
multivariate GLM consisting of the inventory scores, year, matched-identification numbers, students demonstrated an
and major. If any variable were to have a significant effect on increase of 11.9% for the lecture-only course and 17.0% for
the change in scores, the r2 statistic would be greater in the the lab course (Fig. 3 and Table IV). That is a 43% greater
bivariate analysis than the univariate analysis. However, in increase for the lab course compared with the lecture-only
most cases, adding variables to the GLM would result in course.
some increase in the r2 statistic. So, each GLM was evaluated The null model of randomly selected student responses
using the Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian produced a mean inventory score of 9.1 with a standard
information criterion (BIC; also known as the Schwarz deviation (SD) of 2.4; this translates to a mean score of 25%
criterion; Akaike, 1977; Schwarz, 1978). BIC evaluates the if out of 37 total questions and 20% if out of 46 total correct
goodness of fit of the model while scaling with the sample responses. Because all inventory scores (pre- and post-
size or the number of variables, whereas AIC does not take course) were greater than 47.6%, there is a low likelihood
into account the sample size or the number of variables. The that the mean scores (pre- or postcourse for both courses)
model with the most explanatory power has the highest r2 were influenced by random guessing.
value and lowest AIC and BIC (i.e., the greatest percentage There was a significant difference between the pre- and
of variation explained per degree of freedom). the postcourse inventory scores for both courses (p < 0.001;
I performed two separate sets of GLM analyses, one for Table V). The postcourse inventory scores were significantly
the lecture-only course and one for the lab course. If any
variable were determined to have an effect on the postcourse
TABLE IV: Absolute scores (and percentage scores) for the
inventory scores in either of the two populations (lecture
student concept inventory.
only or lab), that variable would help explain differences
between the lecture-only and the lab courses. Precourse Postcourse
Complete analysis
With lab 21.9 (47.6%) 29.9 (64.9%)
RESULTS
From the pre- to the postcourse inventory, mean scores Lecture only 22.2 (48.3%) 28.2 (61.2%)
increased 12.9% for students in the lecture-only course and Matched identification
17.3% for students in the lab course. That is a 33% greater With lab 22.8 (49.5%) 30.6 (66.6%)
increase for the lab course compared with the lecture-only
course (Fig. 1 and Table IV). Lecture only 22.6 (49.2%) 28.1 (61.1%)
There was no significant difference found between the 12 lab-specific questions
standardized inventory scores of the 28 GCI questions and With lab 7.8 (49%) 11.2 (70%)
those of all 37 inventory questions (Fig. 2). This result was
Lecture only 8.5 (53%) 10.3 (64%)
consistent for both the pre- and the postcourse inventories.
J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013) Laboratory Importance 217

TABLE V: T-test results for comparisons of all assessment

scores. ‘‘Y’’ or ‘‘N’’ denotes whether the test was statistically
significant at p < 0.05.
With Lab Lecture Only
Pre- vs. Postcourse Pre- vs. Postcourse
p < 0.001 (Y) p < 0.001 (Y)
t = -14.28 t = -4.96
n = 354 (pre) n = 74 (pre)
n = 253 (post) n = 56 (post)

There were no effects from instructor, class standing, or

academic major on either of the GLMs (Fig. 5 and Table
VIII). The GLM for both the lab course and the lecture-only
course had minimal increases in r2 statistics and the lowest
AIC and BIC results from the univariate models consisting of
only the inventory scores without other variables.
FIGURE 2: Standardized scores for pre- and postcourse
concept inventories consisting of the 28 GCI questions
DISCUSSION
only and all 37 questions. The results for the two t-tests Students in both courses (lecture-only and lecture plus
are also presented: one between the two precourse score lab) demonstrated a significant increase in concept inventory
populations and one between the two postcourse score scores over the span of each course (Figs. 1 and 2 and Tables
populations. IV–VII). However, the inventory scores for the lab course
increased 33% more than those for lecture-only course and
43% more within the matched-identification score analysis.
greater for both courses. Using a paired-sample t-test, a Because the same two instructors teach the same material in
significant difference was found between the pre- and the the lecture sections of both courses, the greater increase of
postcourse matched-identification scores for both courses (p scores for students enrolled in the lab course reflects that
< 0.001; Table VI). those students gained more conceptual knowledge in the
Within the analysis of the 12 questions that were specific course with an associated laboratory.
to exercises performed in the laboratory section of the lab Because of the experimental design, a disadvantage of
course, there was an increase of 21% for the lab course and this study is that I cannot directly distinguish between the
11% for the lecture-only course (Table IV). That is an 84% lack of a lab and the shortened length of the course (3 weeks
greater increase for the lab course compared with the as opposed to 13 weeks) as the cause for the lower learning
lecture-only course (Fig. 4 and Table VII). gains in the lecture-only course. I was unable to manipulate
either course to setup a proper control for the experiment. It
would be unethical, and possibly detrimental to the students,
to remove the laboratory section from the lab course.
However, there are two novel and important factors of this
study that overcome this one disadvantage. (1) The same
two instructors teach the same material in the lecture section
of both the lab course and the lecture-only course.
Introductory courses often either have a required lab or do
not. It is less common to have the same instructors teach two
versions of a course, particularly without adding material to
the lecture to compensate for the lack of a laboratory
component. (2) An independent instrument was employed,
and the same concept inventory questions were given to all

TABLE VI: Paired-sample t-test results for comparisons of

matched-identification assessment scores. ‘‘Y’’ or ‘‘N’’ denotes
whether the test was statistically significant at p < 0.05.
With Lab Lecture Only
Pre- vs. Postcourse Pre- vs. Postcourse
p < 0.001 (Y) p < 0.001 (Y)
FIGURE 3: Mean – 1 SD of assessment scores for t = -21.89 t = -7.58
analysis of the matched-identification scores. The four
n = 203 (pre) n = 56 (pre)
numbers represent the four sample sizes for each of the
n = 203 (post) n = 56 (post)
four populations.
218 F. L. Forcino J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013)

FIGURE 4: Mean – 1 SD of concept inventory scores for FIGURE 5: Mean – 1 SD of assessment scores for
analysis of the 12 questions (totaling 16 points) that were analysis including all scores separated by the two
directly asked in one of the questions within a lab instructors. The ‘‘#1’’ represents scores from instructor
exercise. The four numbers represent the four sample 1, and the ‘‘#2’’ represents scores from instructor 2.
sizes for each of the four populations.
accompanying university science courses (Hofstein and
students pre- and postcourse. By using the GCI, I am able to Lunetta, 1982, 2004). Specifically for the Earth sciences, only
conduct a controlled inventory using a reliability- and one study has examined the importance of having a
validity-tested instrument to gauge student conceptual laboratory section along with a lecture section (Neilson et
understanding prior to and after the course. This method al., 2010). Neilson et al. found that students enrolled in an
provides a measure independent from the graded evalua- optional laboratory section of an introductory Earth science
tions administered by the instructors. Furthermore, provid- course performed better than students not enrolled in the
ing the same questions pre- and postcourse is the most laboratory section; the students obtained a greater amount
direct means of assessing student conceptual knowledge of total course points. The results of the present study
outcomes. If the questions change or if some other measure corroborate the findings of Neilson et al. and support the
is used, there is a chance for error in gauging what the long-held assumption that laboratory sections increase
students have gained. student learning outcomes (Hofstein and Lunetta, 2004).
Even though I was unable to control for course length, Thus, it is likely that the 33% greater increase in student
previous literature indicates that intensive courses are as concept knowledge in the lab course compared to the
effective as full-length courses in that these courses produce lecture-only course was a direct result of the laboratory
the same student learning gains (Daniel, 2000, and component. This is an important affirmation of the
references within; Davies, 2006, and references within; effectiveness of university Earth science laboratory sections.
Kucsera and Zimmaro, 2010; Nasiri and Shokrpour, 2012). To further support the importance of Earth science
Inventory scores for time-shortened and intensive courses laboratories in university student education, researchers
are consistently the same as for traditional-length courses in need to conduct additional quantitative and qualitative case
a range of disciplines, including the Earth sciences studies into the outcomes of introductory course laborato-
(Waechter, 1966). This evidence suggests that the shortened ries. In addition, assessment of the effectiveness of upper-
nature of the lecture-only course did not lead to the lower level Earth science courses is needed to reveal how
learning gains compared with the lab course. laboratories aid student learning in more advanced geosci-
If the shortened length of the lecture-only course was ence courses.
not the cause for the poorer learning gains observed, the lack In this study, the course that contained a lecture and a
of a laboratory sections was the most likely cause. There has lab provided the students with approximately twice the
been little research into the effects of laboratory components amount of class time as the lecture-only course. Therefore,

TABLE VII: t-test results for comparisons of concept inventory scores for the 12 questions (totaling 16 points) that were explicitly
asked in one of the questions within a lab exercise. ‘‘Y’’ or ‘‘N’’ denotes whether the test was statistically significant at p < 0.05.
With Lab Pre- vs. Postcourse Lecture Only Pre- vs. Postcourse With Lab vs. Lecture Only Postcourse
p < 0.001 (Y) p < 0.001 (Y) p = 0.11 (N)
t = -6.66 t = -3.60 t = -1.61
n = 90 (pre) n = 74 (pre) n = 64 (lab)
n = 64 (post) n = 58 (post) n = 58 (no lab)
J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013) Laboratory Importance 219

TABLE VIII: GLM results taking into account the different instructors on the assessment scores.
p value r2 BIC AIC
With lab
Inventory only <0.001 0.41 807.13 798.44
Inventory + different instructors <0.001 0.41 811.02 799.43
Inventory + class standing (year) <0.001 0.45 821.28 798.10
Inventory + major <0.001 0.46 810.07 792.67
Inventory + class standing (year) + major <0.001 0.46 827.95 798.97
Lecture only
Inventory only <0.001 0.44 344.47 338.45
Inventory + different instructors <0.001 0.47 349.93 339.89
Inventory + class standing (year) <0.001 0.47 358.40 344.35
Inventory + major <0.001 0.45 351.92 341.89
Inventory + class standing (year) + major <0.001 0.47 366.02 347.95

the students in the lab course could have gained a greater lower than those for the lab course, it can reasonably be
amount of conceptual knowledge because they had a greater concluded that the greater number of third- and fourth-year
amount of time on task. I tested this possibility by examining students was not a factor. Conversely, if the older and
the inventory scores of a subset of 12 of the total 37 nontraditional students were taking the intensive, lecture-
questions (Fig. 4 and Table VII). These 12 questions only course because of poor planning early in their university
contained content that was within a question the students career, lack of desire to take a science course, or some other
had to answer for at least one of the lab exercises. Students negative motive, I would not expect their scores to be higher.
in the lab course had a greater opportunity to actively engage However, the mean precourse scores (and assessment score
in the material covered by these 12 questions. There was SD) for both courses were approximately the same (Figs. 1–3
only a marginally significant difference between the post- and Table IV). In addition, there was no effect of student
course score populations of these 12 questions (p = 0.11). academic year on the increase in pre- to postinventory
Although this is greater than the often employed threshold scores as determined by the two separate GLMs (Table VIII).
of p = 0.05, I contend this marginally significant difference To further examine this complex issue, I plan to conduct
provides evidence that the students in the lab course are future examinations where student academic year is
gaining a greater amount of conceptual knowledge on this controlled.
subset of inventory questions. Furthermore, the students in The length of lecture period differed between the two
the lab course had an increased score 10% greater than that courses. Class length for the lab course was 50 min three
of students in the lecture-only course (Table IV). Thus, the times per week. Class length for the lecture-only course was
greater increase in concept knowledge on these 12 questions 3 h per day (with two 10-min breaks), 5 d per week. The
by students in the lab course is evidence the lab course longer length of lecture period for the lecture-only course
directly aids in student learning outcomes (Fig. 4 and Table may have resulted in lower learning gains. It is difficult for
VII). students to continually take in and process information for
Some may argue the greater increase of scores on these more than 2.5 h (Hartley and Davies, 1978; Wankat, 2002).
12 questions is not sufficient evidence (and not statistically However, a lengthy lecture period is often a factor in time-
great enough) that the lab content was leading to the greater shortened, intensive courses. If the long lecture period led to
increase in student conceptual knowledge. In this case, lower learning gains, this should be a consistent finding for
whether the greater increase in inventory scores on these 12 all time-shortened, intensive courses. Because I established
questions was due to greater time on task, reinforcement of that this is not the case (as explained earlier), the length of
the lecture material, or students learning the material for the the lecture periods most likely had little impact on the
first time, the students in the lab section still had greater difference in learning gains between the two courses.
increases in conceptual knowledge (on these 12 questions Furthermore, research has demonstrated the student learn-
and all 37 questions). The laboratory section provided ing outcomes are not affected by longer, intensive lecture
students with a worthy complement to the lecture section, periods (Daniel, 2000).
leading to a greater understanding of Earth science concepts. There was no statistical evidence of any difference in
As is the case with many time-shortened or intensive inventory scores (pre- or postcourse) among the two
courses (Daniel, 2000), the students in the lecture-only instructors, 4 y, or academic majors (Fig. 5). None of these
course were generally further along in their university variables led to a greater increase in scores from pre- to
careers than were the students in the course with the lab postcourse (Table VIII). This is further evidence that the
(Table III). Students further into their university career often differences between the two courses were caused by the
have a stronger work ethic (Daniel, 2000; Davies, 2006). If inclusion or exclusion of the laboratory component.
this factor did affect student performance on the concept An alternative qualitative interpretation of the results
inventory, I predicted it would lead to higher scores. Given from this study is that the increase in inventory scores in the
that the postcourse scores for the lecture-only course were lab course is similar to the increase for the lecture-only
220 F. L. Forcino J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013)

course. This interpretation suggests that students in the lab throughout the span of this project and for their helpful
course did not gain more conceptual knowledge than comments leading to a better project. I thank Emily Stafford,
students in the lecture-only course. When the time and Julie Libarkin, and the Michigan State University Geo-
resources put into the lab course are weighed, the increase in cognition Research Laboratory for help with the manuscript.
conceptual knowledge gains may not be resource beneficial. A special thank you goes to instructors Fred Clark, Solweig
Two responses to this interpretation are (1) that any increase Balzer, and David Chesterman for volunteering to take part
in conceptual knowledge is worth the cost. To better our in this study.
society, people need to understand how the world works to
be informed decision makers. Particularly, at the university
level, this may be the students’ one science course, REFERENCES
specifically preparing preservice teachers, whose science Akaike, H. 1977. On entropy maximization principle. In Krishnaiah,
preparation is often lacking (McDermott, 1990; Supovitz and P.R., ed., Applications of statistics. Amsterdam, the Nether-
Turner, 2000; Loverude et al., 2011). Without laboratories for lands: North-Holland Publishing, p. 27–41.
experiential learning, these students may be unprepared to Baird, J.R. 1990. Metacognition, purposeful enquiry and conceptual
lead laboratory activities for their own future students. change. In Hegarty-Hazel, E., ed., The student laboratory and
the science curriculum. London: Routledge, p. 183–200.
Therefore, providing all students at all levels with the best Blosser, P. 1983. The role of laboratory in science education. School
opportunity for gaining knowledge is worth the cost. (2) This Science and Mathematics, 83:165–169.
study is a first step in examining the effectiveness of Cowan, N. 1998. Visual and auditory working memory capacity.
laboratories compared with lecture-only courses. Additional Trends in Cognitive Science, 2:77–78.
studies using the GCI will further explore student learning Daniel, E.L. 2000. A review of time-shortened courses across
gains in courses with and without laboratories. I will employ disciplines. College Student Journal, 34:298–308.
additional sample populations, plus a specialized assessment Davies, W.M. 2006. Intensive teaching formats: A review. Issues in
instrument geared specifically toward measuring the effects Education Research, 16:1–20.
of laboratory courses. These data will help to determine Doran, R.L. 1978. Assessing the outcomes of science laboratory
whether the greater increase in conceptual knowledge by activities. Science Education, 62:401–409.
Gadt-Johnson, C.D., and Price, G.E. 2000. Comparing students
students in the lab course is a consistent result, whether a
with high and low preferences for tactile learning. Education,
reassessment of the laboratory activities may be in order, 120:581–585.
and whether the mechanisms by which laboratories increase Hartley, J., and Davies, I. 1978. Note taking: A critical review.
student understanding match the hypotheses developed Programmed Learning and Education Technology, 15:207–224.
from anecdotal observations. Hofstein, A., and Lunetta, V.N. 1982. The role of laboratory in
science teaching: Neglected aspects of research. Review of
Education Research, 52:201–217.
CONCLUSIONS Hofstein, A., and Lunetta, V.N. 2004. The laboratory in science
To conduct a direct test of the effect of a laboratory education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science
section on student learning gains, I administered the same Education, 88:28–54.
Huysken, K., Neilson, K.G., and Kilibarda, Z. 2011. Assessing the
pre- and postcourse concept inventory to students in two
effect of laboratory enrollment on lecture performance in
courses, one that contained a laboratory section one that was introductory Earth science courses. Geological Society of America
only a lecture. The same two instructors taught the same Abstracts with Programs, 43:146.
material in both courses. The mean increase in inventory Jolley, A., Lane, E., Kennedy, B., and Frappe-Seneclauze, T. 2012.
score for the course with a laboratory was 33% greater (43% SPESS: A new instrument for measuring student perceptions
greater for matched-identification score analysis) than the in Earth and ocean science. Journal of Geoscience Education,
mean score increase for the lecture-only course. The only 60:83–91.
notable difference between the courses was that the lecture- Kucsera, J.V., and Zimmaro, D.M. 2010. Comparing the effective-
only course was a time-shortened course. Because over- ness of intensive and traditional courses. College Teaching,
whelming research exists demonstrating that time-short- 58:62–68.
ened, intensive university courses produce the same student Libarkin, J.C., and Anderson, S.W. 2005. Assessment of learning in
entry-level geoscience courses: Results from the Geoscience
learning gains as traditional-length courses, the inclusion of
Cognitive Inventory. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54:394–
the laboratory section most likely led to the greater increase 401.
in student conceptual knowledge in that course. This result Libarkin, J.C., and Anderson, S.W. 2006. The Geoscience Concept
demonstrates the importance of a laboratory section Inventory: Application of Rasch analysis to concept inventory
accompanying the lecture section of introductory-level, development in higher education. In Liu, X., and Boone, W.,
university Earth science courses to maximize the educational eds., Applications of Rasch measurement in science education.
outcomes for students. Maple Grove, MN: JAM Publishers, p. 45–73.
Libarkin, J.C., and Kurdzel, J.P. 2001. Research methodologies for
Acknowledgments science education: Strategies for productive assessment. Journal
Thank you to Dr. Kristen St. John and two anonymous of Geoscience Education, 49:300–304.
reviewers for thoughtful and helpful comments that greatly Loverude, M.E., Gonzelas, B.L., and Nanes, R. 2011. Inquiry-based
course in physics and chemistry for preservice K–8 teachers.
improved this manuscript. I thank the Centre for Teaching Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 7:1–
and Learning at the University of Alberta, and in particular 18.
Academic Director Dr. Heather Kanuka, for enthusiastically Matz, R.L., Rothman, E.D., Krajcik, J.S., and Banaszak-Holl, M.M.
supporting this project, both with insights into the issues 2012. Concurrent enrollment in lecture and laboratory
and with funding to allow me to do this project. I also thank enhances student performance and retention. Journal of
Lindsey Leighton and Bob Luth for supporting me Research in Science Teaching, 49:659–682.
J. Geosci. Educ. 61, 213–221 (2013) Laboratory Importance 221

McDermott, L.C. 1990. A perspective on teacher preparation in process. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 35:449–
physics and other sciences: The need for special science 461.
courses for teachers. American Journal of Physics, 58:734–742. Prain, V., and Waldrip, B. 2006. An explanatory study of teachers’
Nasiri, E., and Shokrpour, N. 2012. Comparison of intensive and and students’ use of multi-modal representations of concepts
non-intensive English courses and their effects on the in primary science. International Journal of Science Education,
student’s performance in an EFL university context. European 28:1843–1866.
Scientific Journal, 8:127–137. Schwarz, G.E. 1978. Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of
Neilson, K.G., Huysken, K., and Kilibarda, Z. 2010. Assessing the Statistics, 6:461–464.
impact of geoscience laboratories on student learning: Who Supovitz, J.A., and Turner, H.M. 2000. The effects of professional
benefits from introductory labs? Journal of Geoscience Education, development on science teacher practices and classroom
58:43–50. culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37:963–980.
Penney, C. 1989. Modality effects of short-term and the structure Waechter, R.F. 1966. A comparison of achievement and retention
verbal memory. Memory and Cognition, 17:398–422. by college junior students in an Earth science course after
Perkins, D. 2004. Scholarship of teaching and learning, assessment, learning under massed and spaced conditions [Ph.D. disser-
and the Journal of Geoscience Education. Journal of Geoscience tation]. State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University. p. 1–
Education, 52:113–114. 139.
Prades, A., and Espinar, S.R. 2010. Laboratory assessment in Wankat, P. 2002. The effective efficient professor: Teaching,
chemistry: An analysis of the adequacy of the assessment scholarship, and service. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.