Search

There has been a gradual shift in the delivery of physiology laboratory classes over the last 30 years. For many, wet-lab demonstrations using animal tissues have been reduced or replaced with student-led investigations where students are both subjects and researchers. Despite these changes, expectations remain that physiology courses should include a practical component to encourage deeper and higher-order learning. Wet-lab tissue experiments and student-based group research formats can be expensive to run, associated with various ethical constraints, and, as discovered in these times of COVID-19, difficult to operate while adhering to physical distancing. We address the proposition that online and/or remote delivery of laboratory classes using digital technologies may provide a solution to both financial and ethical constraints of on-campus laboratory classes. Our discussions, as an international group of 10 physiologists from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia, revealed that although some of the financial and ethical constraints of using animal tissues and student-led investigations were addressed by the introduction of online alternatives, the construction and maintenance of online delivery modes could also be expensive and ethical issues, not previously considered, included digital equity and student data security. There was also a collective perception that if face-to-face laboratory classes were changed to an entirely virtual mode there was a risk that some intended learning outcomes would not be met. It was concluded that the “ideal” approach is likely a hybrid model whereby student attendance in face-to-face, on-campus classes is supported with interactive digital content either developed in house or obtained through third-party providers.

The COVID-19 pandemic triggered university lockdowns, forcing physiology educators to rapidly pivot laboratories into a remote delivery format. This study documents the experiences of an international group of 10 physiology educators surrounding this transition. They wrote reflective narratives, framed by guiding questions, to answer the research question: “What were the changes to physiology laboratories in response to the COVID-19 pandemic?” These narratives probed educators’ attitudes toward virtual laboratories before, during, and after the transition to remote delivery. Thematic analysis of the reflections found that before COVID-19 only a few respondents had utilized virtual laboratories and most felt that virtual laboratories could not replace the in-person laboratory experience. In response to university lockdowns, most respondents transitioned from traditional labs to remote formats within a week or less. The most common remote delivery formats were commercially available online physiology laboratories, homemade videos, and sample experimental data. The main challenges associated with the rapid remote transition included workload and expertise constraints, disparities in online access and workspaces, issues with academic integrity, educator and student stress, changes in learning outcomes, and reduced engagement. However, the experience generated opportunities including exploration of unfamiliar technologies, new collaborations, and revisiting the physiology laboratory curriculum and structure. Most of the respondents reported planning on retaining some aspects of the remote laboratories postpandemic, particularly with a blended model of remote and on-campus laboratories. This study concludes with recommendations for physiology educators as to how they can successfully develop and deliver remote laboratories.