Virtual labs: a substitute for traditional labs? REBECCA K. SCHECKLER* Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA ABSTRACT Current technologies give us the ability to enhance and replace developmental biology classes with computer-based resources, often called virtual labs. In the process of using these resources, teachers may be tempted to neglect the simpler technologies and lab bench activities, which can be labor intensive. In this paper, I take a critical look at the role of computer- based materials for the teaching of developmental biology in order to aid teachers in assessing their value. I conclude that while digital tools have value, they should not replace all of the traditional laboratory activities. Clearly, both computer-enhanced activities and traditional labs must be included in laboratory exercises. Reliance on only one or the other is inappropriate. In order to determine when it is appropriate to use a particular educational tool, the goals of the course and the needs of biology students for an education that gives them a realistic and engaged view of biology must be understood. In this paper, I dispel some of the myths of computer tools and give specific guidelines for assessing their usage, taking into account the special needs of a developmen- tal biology class and the difficulties of observing all the developmental stages of subject organisms in the timescale of class meetings. KEY WORDS: World Wide Web, teaching, developmental biology, virtual, digital Int. J. Dev. Biol. 47: 231-236 (2003) 0214-6282/2003/$25.00 © UBC Press Printed in Spain www.ijdb.ehu.es *Address correspondence to: Dr. Rebecca K. Scheckler. Department of Computer Science, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, McBryde Hall. Blacksburg, VA 24060, USA. e-mail: rebecca@vt.edu Background Information Scholarly Interests of the Author The author’s fields of research are the social effects of instruc- tional technology, issues of race, gender, and class in technology and science, and how digital technologies transact with the forma- tion of community and situated learning. Previous careers in developmental psychology and computer science inform this essay as well as her latest research in instructional technology. Representative Publications BARAB, S., SCHATZ, S. and SCHECKLER, R.K. Using Activity Theory to Conceptu- alize Online Community and Using Online Community to Conceptualize Activity Theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity (In press). HERRING, S., SLUDER, K., SCHECKLER, R. and BARAB, S. Searching for Safety Online: Managing “Trolling” on a Feminist Bulletin Board. The Information Society 18: 371-384. HERRING, S., MARTINSON, A. and SCHECKLER, R. (2002). Designing for Commu- nity: The Effects of Gender Representation in Videos on a Web Site, Proceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos. SCHECKLER, R.K. (1998). Rethinking Distance Education: A Prolegomenon. In Proceedings of the Forty-Third Annual Meeting of the South Atlantic Philosophy of Education Society (Ed. McKernan, J), pp. 57-69. SCHECKLER, R.K. (1999). Locating Feminist Pragmatism in Ecological Feminism. In Proceedings of the Forty-Fourth Annual Meeting of the South Atlantic Philosophy of Education Society (Ed. McKernan, J), pp. 112-121. SCHECKLER, R.K. (2001). The Intersection of Race, Pragmatism, and Instructional Technology. In Proceedings of the Forty-Fifth Annual Meeting of the South Atlantic Philosophy of Education Society (Ed. McKernan, J). SCHECKLER, R.K. and BARAB, S. (2002). Review of Online Communities: Com- merce, Community Action, and the Virtual University, edited by Chris Werry and Miranda Mowbray. The Information Society 18: 303-305. Introduction It is tempting to jettison traditional lab bench materials in favor of computer-based activities. Myths abound surrounding the eco- nomic, educational, and entertainment value of such tools. Profes- sors wonder whether children weaned on Barney and Sesame Street will persevere with textbooks and microscope slides when they reach college age. Administrators claim that virtual labs save money. Occasional readers of John Dewey may even interpret his calls for experience in education (Dewey, 1938) as fulfilled by the experience of computer-mediated simulations. We are left wonder- ing, if we have computers, is there any reason to also have microscopes, wet labs, and culture chambers and to go through the trouble and expense of preparing biological materials? The imme- diate answer is that totally online labs are rarely optimal, that both computer mediated and face-to-face types of activities have value, that hands-on labs are a very special type of engaged learning, and that clearly we need both computer-enhanced activities for their exposure to the activities that evade the time and space context of