I've spent the last decade as a biology teacher, and every year I see students struggle with genetic inheritance until they actually map out Punnett squares themselves. Hands-on lab work, like dissecting a flower to trace pollen tube growth, makes abstract concepts stick far better than any textbook diagram. But I also recognize that not every school has the budget for equipment or the time to design meaningful experiments, especially when standardized tests demand coverage over depth. So is it fair to claim that hands-on learning is always superior to traditional lectures in biology education, even when resources are tight?