Abstract:

This study compared the effect of Physical (PM) and Virtual Manipulatives (VM) on preschoolers’ conceptual understanding in the domain of sinking/floating (s/f). Both manipulatives can facilitate experimentation but their unique affordances can differentiate the learning outcome. A unique affordance of PM is the touch sensory feedback available during manipulation which cannot be matched in the same extent by VM. In addition, there is scarce research in early childhood education concerning the use of digital means during experimentation, since most comparative studies involved mostly older students. Hence, this study addressed the following research question: How does preschoolers’ understanding in the domain of s/f compare before, during and after their exposition to PM and VM experimentation? The participants were 36 preschoolers who were equally separated into two conditions according to the type of experimentation they used (PM/VM) during a semi-structured interview. The interview involved three phases (initial evaluation, experimentation, final evaluation). During the initial and final evaluation, assessment items were orally administered to both groups. In the second part, participants experimented with the use of VM or PM respectively. The PM condition involved the use of pairs of cubes varying in mass or volume and/or material and a water container. The VM condition included the objects used in the PM condition but in a simulation-based environment. The cognitive goal was to understand that the “type of material” that the objects are made of affects their behavior in water. The interviews were transcribed and then open coding followed for the qualitative treatment. Scoring through rubrics followed and non-parametric tests were performed. The most frequent idea used in the initial evaluation concerned the mass of the objects (i.e. heavy cubes sink/light cubes float). During experimentation, the appearance of the mass-related idea increased by 5% in the PM and by 3% in the VM. Material-related ideas also appeared during experimentation (PM=10%, VM=8%). In the final evaluation, the most frequent used idea still concerned mass but it appeared in higher percentages in the PM (46%) than in the VM condition (34%). In addition, the material-related idea appeared in the VM condition in higher frequency percentage (30%) than in the PM condition (14%). Both conditions appeared to have facilitated the development of understanding of the participants (PM; Z=-3,76 p<,001, VM; Z=-3,74 p<,001). The comparison of the post-test scores of the two conditions showcased that the participants engaged with VM outperformed the participants engaged in the PM condition (Z=-5,14,p<,001). These findings indicate that VM was more beneficial in terms of developing understanding in this domain than the PM condition. In addition, participants involved in the PM condition used the mass-related idea more frequently to provide explanations, whereas the use of the mass-related idea in the VM condition decreased, and the use of the material-related idea increased. These findings can be attributed to the fact that mass was multimodally grounded in the PM condition due to the touch sensory feedback available, whereas in the VM condition mass was a salient feature. It seems that digital means can be integrated in experimentation for the s/f domain and the learning outcomes can be greater than the engagement with physical materials.

Keywords:

Early science education, virtual manipulatives, physical manipulatives, sinking/floating.