A Comparative Study of Educational Laboratories from Cost & Learning Effectiveness Perspective

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 349)


Laboratory education plays a prominent role in the education of engineers and scientists for the practical knowledge and research skill sets they impart. The cost of laboratory set up can vary in magnitudes depending on the level of sophisticated analysis they deliver. Added are the costs of maintenance and facility requirements. Recent advancements in technology enhanced laboratories such as virtual simulation based laboratory and remotely triggerable laboratories, both of which allow e-learning for laboratory education has shown to impact the laboratory education in a significant way. This paper focuses on comparing the tangible and intangible benefits of the various types of laboratories available to students today. Evaluating the differences in infrastructural set up, safety elements, equipment costs, the experimentation time and the effective learning from these laboratories are examined closely. Using pair wise correlation, the advantages and difficulties observed in chemistry based experiments are presented. The compromises, if any, using cost effective laboratories is investigated using N=141 students that underwent undergraduate education. Although most students use physical labs today, the growing trends in online and distance education makes this work significant to teachers and administrators alike. Although not an alternative, the scalability and functional proficiency these virtual laboratories allow bridging the gaps found in traditional laboratories.


Cost-Benefit Analysis Attributes Virtual laboratory Physical Laboratory Analytical Hierarchy Process Remotely Triggerable Laboratory 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Feisel, L.D., Albert, J.R.: The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education 94(1), 121–130 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ma, J., Nickerson, J.V.: Hands-on, simulated, and remote laboratories: A comparative literature review. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 38(3), 7 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Benetazzo, L., Bertocco, M., Ferraris, F., Ferrero, A., Offelli, C., Parvis, M., Piuri, V.: A Web-based distributed virtual educational laboratory. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement 49(2), 349–356 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abdulwahed, M., Nagy, Z.K.: The TriLab, a novel ICT based triple access mode laboratory education model. Computers & Education 56(1), 262–274 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tatli, Z., Ayas, A.: Virtual Chemistry Laboratory: Effect of Constructivist Learning Environment. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education (TOJDE) 13(1) (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tüysüz, C.: The Effect of the Virtual Laboratory on Students’ Achievement and Attitude in Chemistry. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences 2(1) (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patterson, D.A.: Impact of a multimedia laboratory manual: Investigating the influence of student learning styles on laboratory preparation and performance over one semester. Education for Chemical Engineers 6(1), e10–e30 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Achuthan, K., Sreelatha, K.S., Surendran, S., Diwakar, S., Nedungadi, P., Humphreys, S., ... Mahesh, S.: The VALUE@ Amrita Virtual Labs Project: Using Web Technology to Provide Virtual Laboratory Access to Students. In: 2011 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), pp. 117–121. IEEE (October 2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Diwakar, S., Achuthan, K., Nedungadi, P., Nair, B.: Enhanced facilitation of biotechnology education in developing nations via virtual labs: analysis, implementation and case-studies. International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering 3(1), 1–8 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Raman, R., Nedungadi, P., Achuthan, K., Diwakar, S.: Integrating collaboration and accessibility for deploying virtual labs using vlcap. International Transaction Journal of Engineering, Management, & Applied Sciences & Technologies 2(5) (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Merchant, Z., Goetz, E.T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., Davis, T.J.: Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-based Instruction on Students’ Learning Outcomes in K-12 and Higher Education: A Meta-Analysis. Computer Education 70, 29–40 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tatli, Z., Ayas, A.: Effect of a Virtual Chemistry Laboratory on Students’ Achievement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 16(1) (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hanes, N., Lundberg, S.: E-learning as a Regional Policy Tool: Principles for a Cost-benefit Analysis. RUSC. Universities and Knowledge Society Journal 5(1) (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cohen, A., Nachmias, R.: Implementing a Cost Effectiveness Analyzer for Web-Supported Academic Instruction: A Campus Wide Analysis. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saaty, T.L.: How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process. European Journal of Operational Research 48(1), 9–26 (1990)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zimmer, S., Klumpp, M., Abidi, H.: Industry Project Evaluation with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. In: 10th Annual Industrial Simulation Conference, pp. 4–6 (June 2012)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amrita Center for Cybersecurity Systems & NetworksAmrita Vishwa VidyapeethamKollamIndia
  2. 2.VALUE Virtual LabsAmrita Vishwa VidyapeethamKollamIndia

Personalised recommendations