METHODOLOGY FOR ORGANIZING PROJECT-BASED PHYSICS LABORATORY CLASSES: A FIVE-STAGE SYSTEM AND THE INTEGRATION OF VIRTUAL AND REAL EXPERIMENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.24141248Abstract
The article presents a methodology for transforming general physics laboratory classes from the traditional receptive “cookbook” format into a problem- and project-based format. Seven methodological requirements for developing students’ design competence are substantiated, together with a methodological system comprising motivational-problem, theoretical-analytical, design-planning, experimental-practical, and analytical-reflective stages. The didactic potential of the “Problem – Project – Experiment – Analysis”, “Predict – Experiment – Explain”, “Small-Group Experiment Design”, and “Integration of Virtual and Real Laboratories” methods is revealed. A system of project-based tasks and an assessment rubric comprising six criteria and four performance levels are also proposed.Keywords
laboratory class, project-based learning, design competence, ISLE, virtual laboratory, PhET, assessment rubric, general physicsReferences
1. Bell, S. (2010). Project-Based Learning for the 21st Century: Skills for the Future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650903505415
2. Boymirov, Sh. T. (2021). Improving Problem-Based Teaching Technologies for the “Electrodynamics” Section of Physics in General Secondary Schools: Abstract of PhD Dissertation in Pedagogical Sciences.
3. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Macmillan.
4. Etkina, E. (2006). Van Heuvelen A., White-Brahmia S., Brookes D. T., Gentile M., Murthy S., Rosengrant D., Warren A. Scientific Abilities and Their Assessment. Physical Review Special Topics, 2(2).
5. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-Engagement versus Traditional Methods: A Six-Thousand-Student Survey of Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
6. Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10106
7. Kilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The Project Method. Teachers College Record, 19(4), 319–335.
8. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall.
9. Maxmanov, E. B. (2023). Methodology for Developing Students’ Practical Competence in Physics in Technical Higher Education Institutions: Abstract of PhD Dissertation in Pedagogical Sciences. Chirchik State Pedagogical University.
10. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. Prentice Hall.
11. McDermott, L. C. (1995). Physics Education Group. Physics by Inquiry: An Introduction to Physics and the Physical Sciences. John Wiley & Sons.
12. Perkins, K., Adams, W., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N., Reid, S., Wieman, C., & LeMaster, R. (2006). PhET: Interactive Simulations for Teaching and Learning Physics. The Physics Teacher, 44(1), 18–23.
13. Redish, E. F. (2003). Teaching Physics with the Physics Suite. John Wiley & Sons.
14. Turdiyev, U. Sh. (2025). Methodology for Forming Students’ Research Competence Based on the Organization of a Physics Laboratory Cluster (on the Example of Semiconductor Physics): Abstract of PhD Dissertation in Pedagogical Sciences.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
