{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029403902699812884, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008642965339035908, 'mean_word_length': 5.36281179138322, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 1, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 1, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Using Virtual Simulations in Online Laboratory Instruction and Active Learning Exercises as a Response to Instructional Challenges during COVID-19

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring of 2020 thrust instructors into a world of frenzy, presenting unique challenges to delivering course content. A particular challenge was determining suitable substitutes for wet lab experiments that are often comprised in science labs. Recognizing that this problem was not short-term, I started to look into virtual substitutions to be implemented in the 2020–2021 academic year. Virtual simulations can replace labs, be incorporated as pre-lab assignments, or used as active-learning or experiential learning exercises in a traditional classroom setting while providing low-cost, safe, and acceptable solutions to the current problem. Virtual simulations were examined on different platforms, including Labster, McGraw Hill Connect Virtual Labs, HHMI BioInteractive, Learn.Genetics, Virtual Interactive Bacteriology Laboratory, and Biology Corner. The goal was to provide faculty around the world with a reference list of virtual simulations that are aligned to specific AAAS and ASM student learning outcomes. These simulations are discussed in terms of content, features, and advantages of use. A list of lab exercises aligned to biology courses (microbiology, genetics, and cell biology) is also provided.


INTRODUCTION
The current COVID-19 pandemic has forced many instructors to incorporate more online course-delivery mechanisms while still retaining student learning outcomes. The rapid transition exposed the challenge of teaching science courses with a laboratory component and prompted two questions: How do you convert a hands-on lab to an online lab? Can we use simulations for experiential and or active learning? Studies show that use of gamified laboratory simulations and active learning increase student interest, motivation, learning effectiveness, and self-efficacy (1)(2)(3). Furthermore, active learning decreases learning gaps, thus increasing student achievement (4). Advantages to virtual laboratory simulations include cost-effectiveness, the elimination of biosafety concerns, and increased engagement of digital-age students (1,5,6). Many of these simulations are associated with real world problems, such as stem cell therapy to treat blindness, visualizing cancer cells to distinguish unique characteristics, and analyzing DNA to solve a crime.
Here, I review simulations in general biology, microbiology, genetics, and cell biology from Labster, HHMI BioInteractive, and various other online sources. My goal was to provide instructors who are looking to transition to online delivery a resource that aligns traditional topics of in-person lab sessions with virtual simulations (see Table  1 and Appendix 1).

PROCEDURE
Virtual simulations from Labster, McGraw Hill Connect, Virtual Interactive Bacteriology Laboratory, HHMI BioInteractive, Learn.Genetics, and Biology Corner were reviewed for content, delivery, and assessment (Appendices 2 and 3). Each simulation can be used as an active-learning or experiential learning activity, a stand-alone lab in an online course, or as a pre-lab assignment for a physical lab. For example, an instructor can implement a weekly virtual lab with a pre-lab video that introduces the goal of the lab, presents brief background on the topic, and highlights some theoretical concepts discussed in the lecture. Most of the simulations reviewed have a built-in quiz, assignment, and/ or student handout. A post-lab quiz administered online or in person can also be used to assess learning outcomes.
As noted, various simulations from different sources were reviewed. Table 1 shows virtual lab options in microbiology along with ASM fundamental statements and the AAAS Vision and Change core concepts and competencies covered in traditional microbiology labs (7,8). Additionally, the microbiology labs in Table 1 also satisfy the Microbiology Laboratory Skills as outlined by ASM curriculum guidelines. Many of these labs can be cross-listed across curriculum. Labs used in other biology courses are listed in Appendix 1. Appendix 3 lists the benefits and drawbacks of each simulation. Along with basic criteria such as scientific procedure, pre-and post-assessment, lab handout, and technology needs, a scale of 1 to 5 was developed to rate the "immersive" content of each simulation and its resemblance to a real-life, physical lab (see Appendix 3). Each simulation is assigned a score based on engagement, real world application, and degree of complexity. A score of 5 is considered completely engaging and immersive and is defined as follows: uses a "bot" to navigate the lab; requires use of lab procedures and equipment as done in physical labs (slide preparation, solution prep, incubator, microscope, pipette, etc.). Criteria for scores of 1 to 4 are outlined in Appendix 3.
In both Labster and McGraw Hill Connect simulations, the instructor can choose a laboratory from a list of science disciplines (Appendix 2). Labster provides simulations for topics in multiple biology disciplines, including general biology, microbiology, genetics, cell biology, and molecular biology. However, the biology-related simulation topics are limited in McGraw Hill Connect Virtual Labs (Appendices 2 and 3). Labs from both Labster and McGraw Hill Connect contain 3D graphics that mimic a real laboratory environment so that the student understands the general lab setup and use of equipment, and they follow typical experimental procedures. These simulations also address specific student learning outcomes with hypothesis-driven experiments, analysis of results, and generation of conclusions. Most of the labs have an experiential component, such as identifying pathogenic bacteria, using stem cell therapy for treatment, and developing a detection assay for hemophilia. The use of realistic and practical scenarios supports the use of these simulations in an experiential learning environment. Both of these virtual simulation packages offer built-in assessment: Labster has a limited number of multiple-choice questions, and McGraw Hill Connect provides pre-and post-assessment options from a test bank.
Labster was used in the fall of 2020 for an upper-level genetics course at Culver-Stockton College. Lab topics included cell division, cytogenetics, molecular cloning, PCR, and next-generation sequencing. Simulations were chosen based on topics previously covered during in-person labs. Students appreciated the immersive nature, 3D reality, and application. They felt that it was an adequate substitute for in-person experiments. Most simulations were completed in 1 hour. An example of a post-lab assessment for one of these labs is provided in Appendix 4.
McGraw Hill Connect Virtual Labs was used in a nonmajor general biology lab in the fall of 2020. Lab exercises on scientific method, scientific measurement, diffusion and osmosis, enzyme function, and cellular macromolecules were used. These labs were less immersive and not all were data-driven. Post-assessment was administered in the form of exams and most students were able to answer questions based on these simulations. Students were able to complete the simulations in the allotted time with an average time of 30 minutes for each assigned exercise.
Online labs available from HHMI BioInteractive, Learn. Genetics, and Biology Corner were also reviewed (see Table  1 and Appendix 1). While the labs from these sources are limited in terms of immersive reality, experiential component, and assessment, they may serve as viable substitutes for in-person labs but may be better as pre-lab assignments or active-learning exercises in the lecture. All of these labs are accessible free of cost. These simulations are more like animations that can be incorporated in multiple biology courses to highlight the various experimental techniques and resources and they require some aspect of "hands-on" activity which involves a point-and-click action. These labs do not include embedded assessment, but some do have a student lab handout.
An HHMI BioInteractive lab on bacterial identification can substitute for the unknown bacteria project incorporated into every undergraduate microbiology course that involves identifying bacteria. This simulation uses 16S ribosome sequence, DNA isolation, and sequencing (Appendices 1 and 2). HHMI BioInteractive also has labs on evolution, genetics, and immunology (ELISA). Learn.Genetics provides options for virtual labs that are limited to molecular biology topics such as DNA extraction and PCR. These labs are somewhat realistic and have minimal application. Biology Corner has extensive options of animations and some experiential exercises which can be incorporated into a lab (many labs are for physical lab experiments). One such activity is on karyotyping (https://www.biologycorner.com/ worksheets/karyotyping.html). The author of this exercise has generated a click-and-sort activity to diagnose three genetic disorders based on karyotypes. This activity was used in a fall 2020 genetics course after a lecture on meiosis and substituted for a similar activity provided in a lab manual (9). The activity was less tedious than a paper exercise, which involved clicking and dragging actions to form homologous chromosome pairs. Students worked independently on one of the four karyotypes assigned and then compared results after diagnosis. Once a diagnosis was verified, students were asked to investigate prognosis and treatment for each disorder citing evidence from primary literature. Topics of these labs are listed in Appendix 1, and features of each simulation are listed in Appendix 3.

CONCLUSION
The information presented here aligns traditional physical labs with useful virtual simulations. The demand for virtual simulations that mimic traditional physical labs will only increase with time (10). The use of virtual labs, even as a supplemental component, can only enhance science learning and performance (2,8,11,13). Both physical and virtual labs can achieve similar learning outcomes, such as interaction with theoretical concepts, hypothesis development and testing, and data collection and analysis, as well as developing teamwork and inquiry skills, while increasing interest in science (11)(12)(13). Several studies have shown that active learning using simulations improves conceptual learning and retention, increases motivation and study intensity, and narrows the achievement gap in underrepresented STEM students (1,2,4,8,9). Furthermore, virtual and online alternative, inquiry-based labs have been viewed favorably by students (13). Students using virtual labs are less likely to be distracted by measurement errors (13). Instead of being caught up in multiday procedures that can get complicated and often lead to "failure," students using virtual labs instantly produce data for reflection, allowing instructors to identify student understanding (11). While it is important for students to experience failure in lab and develop problem-solving skills, these negative experiences often mask the desired student outcomes.