e-ISSN 2231-8526
ISSN 0128-7680

Home / Pre-Press / JST-3820-2022


Measuring the Learning Effectiveness in the Cognitive, Affective, and Psychomotor (CAP) Domains in Electrical Engineering Laboratory Courses Using Online Delivery Mode: Universiti Teknologi MARA

A’zraaAfhzan Ab Rahim, Ng Kok Mun, Azilah Saparon, Ahmad Fadzli Nizam Abdul Rahman and Norlida Buniyamin

Pertanika Journal of Science & Technology, Pre-Press


Keywords: Online laboratories, perceived affective, perceived cognitive, perceived psychomotor

Published: 2023-05-25

Online laboratories have been conducted in Malaysian universities using video demonstrations, virtual or simulation tools, or/and remote laboratories. Recent studies on online engineering labs mainly focused on the student learning experience, facilities, and teaching quality. The literature review indicated that the effectiveness of online laboratory learning should be approached from the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor (CAP) domains. The perceived effectiveness of these learning domains will help practitioners identify learning gaps in current practices. This study aims to measure learning effectiveness in CAP using the perceived CAP tool in electrical engineering online laboratory courses in a Malaysian public university. Three electrical and electronics online laboratory courses were selected. A survey questionnaire based on perceived CAP was distributed to 273 students and received 139 responses, a 50.92% response rate. The measured data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and reliability analysis in SPSS. The survey results suggest that affective learning is enhanced. However, psychomotor learning efficiency is badly affected when the delivery mode of the laboratory course content is changed from physical face-to-face to total online delivery. The evaluation of the effectiveness of cognitive learning was inconclusive due to the limitation of sample size in this area to enable accurate measurement.

  • Ahmad, A., Kamin, Y., & Nasir, A. N. M. (2018). Applying psychomotor domain for competency-based teaching in Vocational Education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1049, Article 012049.

  • Bennett, R. E., Deane, P., & van Rijn, P. W. (2016). From cognitive-domain theory to assessment practice. Educational Psychologist, 51(1), 82-107.

  • Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. David McKay.

  • Bloom, B. S., Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook II: Affective Domain. David McKay Company.

  • Chan, C., & Fok, W. (2015). Evaluating learning experiences in virtual laboratory training through student perceptions: A case study in electrical and electronic engineering at the University of Hong Kong. Engineering Education, 4(2), 70-75.

  • Chen, H. C., & Wang, N. S. (2014). The assignment of scores procedure for ordinal categorical data. Scientific World Journal, 2014, Article 304213.

  • Chowdury, H., Alam, F., & Mustary, I. (2019). Development of an innovative technique for teaching and learning of laboratory experiments for engineering courses. Energy Procedia, 160, 806-811.

  • Cooper, H., & Higgins, S. (2015). The effectiveness of online instructional videos in the acquisition and demonstration of cognitive, affective, and psychomotor rehabilitation skills. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(4), 768-779.

  • Worldometer. (2021). COVID live update:179,937,394 cases: Coronavirus Statistics.

  • Davies, C. (2008). Learning and Teaching in Laboratories. Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre, Loughborough University.

  • Gamage, K. A. A., Wijesuriya, D. I., Ekanayake, S. Y., Rennie, A. E. W., Lambert, C. G., & Gunawardhana, N. (2020). Online delivery of teaching and laboratory practices: Continuity of university programmes during covid-19 pandemic. Education Sciences, 10(10), Article 291.

  • Jewett, A. E., Jones, L. S., Luneke, S. M., & Robinson, S. M. (1971). Educational change through a taxonomy for writing physical education objectives. Quest, 15(1), 32-38.

  • Kapilan, N., Vidhya, P., & Gao, X-Z (2020). Virtual laboratory: A boon to the mechanical engineering education during Covid-19 pandemic. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 31-46.

  • Kawasaki, H., Yamasaki, S., Masuoka, Y., Iwasa, M., Fukita, S., & Matsuyama, R. (2021). Remote teaching due to COVID-19: An exploration of its effectiveness and issues. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(5), Article 2672.

  • Khanna, D., & Prasad, A. (2020). Problems faced by students and teachers during online education due to covid-19 and how to resolve them. In 2020 6th International Conference on Education and Technology (ICET) (pp. 32-35). IEEE Publishing.

  • Khidzir, N. Z., Daud, K. A. M., & Ibrahim, M. A. H. (2016). The relationship among student's domain of learning development implementing virtual learning in higher learning institutions. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 6(6), 418-422.

  • Kostoulas, A. (2014). How to summarize Likert Scale data using SPSS.

  • Lau, S. L., & Sim, T. Y. (2020). Feedback of university students on online delivery learning during the covid-19 pandemic period. In 2020 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management, and e-Services (IC3e) (pp.13-18). IEEE Publishing

  • Lewis, L. D. (2014). The Pedagogical Benefits and Pitfalls of Virtual Tools for Teaching and Learning Laboratory Practices in the Biological Sciences. The Higher Education Academy.

  • Monash University. (2020). Remote labs ensure continuity of lab exercises. University News.

  • Murphy, M. P. A. (2020). Covid-19 and emergency e-Learning: Consequences of the securitization of higher education for post-pandemic pedagogy. Contemporary Security Policy, 41, 492-505.

  • Nature. (2022, April 17). Coronavirus: The first three months as it happened. Nature.

  • Noor, N. A. M., Saim, N. M., Alias, R., & Rosli, S. H. (2020). Students' performance on cognitive, psychomotor and affective domain in the course outcome for embedded course. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(8), 3469-3474.

  • Rachmawati, E., Mufidah, L., Sulistiyani, T., & Ab-Latif, Z. (2019). Examining the students' cognitive, affective and psychomotor abilities in the bakery industry. Journal of Technology and Operations Management, 14(2), 1-9.

  • Rovai, A., Wighting, M., Baker, J., & Grooms, L. (2009). Development of an instrument to measure perceived cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning in traditional and virtual classroom higher education settings. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 7-13.

  • Taherdoost, H. (2017). Determining sample size: How to calculate survey sample size. International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 2, 237-239.

  • Tan, P. L. (2021, June 1). Online learning: Leave no student behind. The Star.

  • Taber, K. S. (2018) The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273-1296.

  • Taneri, P. O. (2017). The viewpoints of instructors about the effects of teacher education programs on prospective teachers' affective characteristics. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 17(70), 105-120.

  • Tomei, L. (2010). The cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains: The taxonomy of the traditional learner. IGI Global.

  • Zhai, G., Wang, Y., & Liu, L. (2012). Design of electrical online laboratory and E-learning. IERI Procedia, 2, 325-330.

ISSN 0128-7702

e-ISSN 2231-8534

Article ID


Download Full Article PDF

Share this article

Related Articles