After the COVID-19 pandemic, it became clear that enhancing the provision of engineering laboratories was essential. However, it remains uncertain whether engagement and learning in face-to-face labs (F2FL) can be effectively replicated through virtual labs (VL). As we transition back to in-person labs, a blended learning approach utilizing online resources may enable students to have more lab practice through greater availability.

Existing literature indicates that exclusively remote and VL teaching often leads to a loss of mentorship, community, and peer motivation, resulting in diminished student engagement overall. Consequently, this article examines the differences in the attainment of Intended Learning Outcomes (ILOs) and the cognitive and emotional engagement between VL and F2FL, providing valuable insights for designing engineering virtual labs.

To this end, we developed a sample of electronics virtual labs for engineering students at the University of Glasgow Singapore and the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT). Two virtual labs were conducted with 150 undergraduates, focusing on Fundamentals of Electronics and Circuits and Real-Time Computing Systems.

Surveys were distributed to compare face-to-face learning (F2FL) and virtual learning (VL) by evaluating three research questions:
(1) students' perceptions of whether the learning outcomes were achieved,
(2) their preferences for teamwork versus independent work, and
(3) factors influencing cognitive and emotional engagement based on Self-Determination Theory (SDT).

Our results demonstrated a Cronbach’s alpha (a reliability coefficient) of at least 0.8033 for the questionnaires, indicating strong internal consistency and validating our findings.

The results indicated that fewer students agreed or strongly agreed that the ILOs were met in VL compared to F2FL. Additionally, emotional engagement was lower in VL than in F2FL. However, there was no significant difference in cognitive engagement between the two formats. Further investigation into the ILOs attained, and the importance of different engagement dimensions for both F2FL and VL provided useful insights for improving the design of virtual labs. Notably, students felt that teamwork was crucial, as they disagreed that independent work contributed to achieving key learning outcomes.

This study has yielded valuable insights into students' perceptions of ILO attainment and engagement in F2FL versus VL. For the first research question, it was found that the attainment of ILOs and emotional engagement were lower in VL compared to F2FL. Interestingly, cognitive engagement did not differ between the two formats. A deeper analysis of the ILOs revealed that higher-level ILOs related to critical thinking and analysis were rated highly for both modes but more so in VL compared to F2FL. Students in F2FL identified critical thinking as the most important aspect, while those in VL highlighted the importance of understanding the limitations of theoretical models.

Regarding the second research question, it is evident that teamwork is the preferred method of working in both F2F and VL. Teamwork was deemed important, as students disagreed that independent work contributes to achieving key learning outcomes.

Finally, the psychological needs influencing the achievement of learning outcomes, according to SDT, relate to social presence in F2FL and autonomy in VL. Further research could explore how to structure VL to achieve higher-level ILOs.

Keywords: Virtual Laboratory, Student Engagement, self-determination theory.