Authors : Rexie Frias; Jonathan Caparida

Volume/Issue : Volume 10 - 2025, Issue 6 - June

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/yjhvzdx2

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/25jun1828

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Note : Google Scholar may take 30 to 40 days to display the article.

Abstract : To equip students with practical competencies, technical education must incorporate experiential learning. Despite its advantages, experiential learning still has gaps, especially in electrical installation and maintenance, which makes it more difficult for students to convert abstract ideas into practical technical skills. By analyzing the efficacy of useful applications in technical education settings, this study assesses instructional strategies to enhance hands-on learning among junior high school students. Using a mixed-methods approach, the study examines the responses of 120 junior high school students to determine how experiential learning affects their technical competence and self-assurance in electrical installation and maintenance. The results highlight the importance of structured experiential learning in enhancing technical competency and offer suggestions for curriculum design, resource allocation, and innovative teaching methods to maximize student learning outcomes. This shows how valuable hands-on experience is alongside traditional classroom learning. [1]. This study aims to enhance students’ practical skills through immersive training, bridging the gap between theoretical instruction and real-world application. This research seeks to empower students with the skills necessary for technical proficiency and future career readiness by refining instructional methodologies and integrating practical learning tools. By refining teaching methods and incorporating hands-on tools, educators can better prepare students for future careers, ensuring they are equipped with both knowledge and practical experience. This research highlights the importance of blending theory with practice to foster meaningful learning outcomes. [2]. They argue that this gap particularly affects junior high students in electrical fields, limiting their confidence and ability to solve hands-on problems effectively. Experiential learning methods have been shown to significantly enhance students' critical thinking and technical skills by actively engaging them in practical tasks." Their research emphasizes the need to integrate interactive and hands-on approaches into traditional classroom instruction to better prepare students for the technical challenges they will face. [3]. Their study highlights the need for innovative teaching strategies that effectively bridge the gap between theory and practice in electrical installation and maintenance education. Evaluating the impact of targeted, hands-on interventions reveals significant improvements in students’ practical competencies and readiness for industry demands." This research supports the continuous refinement of technical education methods to better prepare students for real-world electrical careers. [4] Experiential learning enhances students' ability to apply theoretical concepts through hands-on training, fostering problem-solving skills and technical proficiency. By integrating structured instructional methods and practical exercises, students develop confidence and readiness for real-world electrical installation and maintenance tasks. [5] Experiential learning enhances students' ability to apply theoretical concepts through hands-on training, fostering problem-solving skills and technical proficiency. By integrating structured instructional methods and practical exercises, students develop confidence and readiness for real-world electrical installation and maintenance tasks. Quantitative research is a powerful tool for understanding how students learn and grow. pretest-posttest evaluations and observational checklists, in identifying how hands-on learning impacts students' engagement, confidence, and skill development. These methods ensure that instructional strategies are refined based on real student outcomes, leading to more effective teaching approaches. [6] A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design is commonly used to measure the effectiveness of instructional interventions in education. [7] Purposive sampling helps researchers select participants who directly engage with experiential learning, ensuring the findings are relevant to real-world applications. According to Crossman (2020), this approach allows studies to focus on specific student groups who actively participate in hands-on learning, making the research more applicable to improving instructional strategies. Nyimbili and Nyimbili (2024) further highlight that purposive sampling strengthens the reliability of research by ensuring that selected participants have meaningful experiences that contribute to the study’s objectives, leading to deeper insights into hands-on learning effectiveness. [8] Stratified random sampling ensures that students with different levels of technical knowledge and experience are fairly represented in the study. According to George (2021), this method improves the accuracy of research findings by dividing participants into meaningful subgroups, allowing for a more balanced analysis of learning outcomes. Additionally, Hassan (2024) highlights that power analysis plays a crucial role in determining the appropriate sample size, ensuring statistical reliability and precise evaluation of hands-on learning interventions. [9] Statistical tools play a crucial role in evaluating the effectiveness of hands-on learning interventions in technical education. According to Johnson and Brown (2022), structured data analysis methods, such as pretest-posttest evaluations and skill assessments, provide measurable insights into student proficiency and instructional effectiveness. Additionally, Miller et al. (2023) emphasize that statistical techniques, including correlation analysis and regression models, help determine the relationship between hands-on exposure and students' confidence in applying technical skills. [11] To find the average, we’ll add up all the values and divide by how many there are—this gives us the mean, a simple way to understand the overall trend in the data. We’re using ANOVA to see how different amounts of hands-on learning affect various groups. The goal is to better understand where experiential learning works best and how it can be improved moving forward. [12] We’ll use Cohen’s d to measure how big the difference is between groups—basically, it tells us whether the effect of hands-on learning is small, medium, or large in a way that’s easy to understand. [13] We’ll use linear regression to explore how one factor—like time spent on hands-on learning—might predict outcomes such as student performance. It helps us draw a straight-line connection between the two, making it easier to see patterns and make informed decisions. [14]

Keywords : Hands-On Learning, Technical Education, Electrical Installation, Experiential Learning, Curriculum Enhancement, Instructional Design.

References :

1. Crossman, A. (2020). Purposive sampling in research. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/purposive-sampling-3026727
2. George, L. (2021). Understanding stratified random sampling in educational research. Journal of Educational Methodologies, 29(4), 214–228.
3. Hassan, M. (2024). Power analysis in social science research. Educational Statistics Review, 15(2), 101–115.
4. Johnson, R., & Brown, T. (2022). Analyzing the impact of experiential learning on student engagement. Journal of Technical Education, 41(1), 55–69.
5. Miller, S., Thomas, J., & Rivera, C. (2023). Correlation and regression in educational research. Practical Research Quarterly, 38(3), 89–97.
6. Nyimbili, A., & Nyimbili, T. (2024). Enhancing technical education through purposive sampling. Global Journal of Vocational Education, 17(1), 33–45.
7. Kolb, D. A. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
8. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
9. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
10. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.
11. Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x
12. Tight, M. (2017). Understanding case study research: Small-scale research with meaning. SAGE Publications.