This paper presents the development of an educational immersive virtual reality (IVR) program considering both technological and pedagogical affordances of such learning environments. The CDIO Standards have been used as guidelines to ensure desirable outcomes of IVR for an engineering course. A learning model has been followed to use VR characteristics and learning affordances in teaching basic principles. Different game modes, considered as learning activities, are incorporated to benefit from experiential and spatial knowledge representation and to create a learning experience that fulfills intended learning outcomes (ILOs) (defined by CDIO Standard 2 and Bloom’s learning taxonomy) associated with the particular course moment. The evaluation of IVR laboratory highlights the effectiveness of the approach in achieving ILOs provided that pedagogical models have been followed to create powerful modes of learning.
Pages:
12
Affiliations:
Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
Keywords:
Immersive Virtual Reality
Virtual learning environments
CDIO Standard 2
CDIO Standard 6
CDIO Standard 8
CDIO Standard 11
Year:
2019
Reference:
Bloom, B., Engelhart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. London: Longmans, Green and Co LTD.:
CDIO, I. (2019, January 29). CDIO. Retrieved from CDIO Syllabus 2.0: http://www.cdio.org/benefitscdio/cdio-syllabus/cdio-syllabus-topical-form:
Chien, C., You-Send, Y., & Hsieh-Lung, H. (1997). Construction of a Virtual Reality Learning Environment for Teaching Structural Analysis. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 5(4).:
Clark, D., Tanner-Smith, E., & Killingsworth, S. (2016). Digital Games, Design, and Learning: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79-122. :
10.3102/0034654315582065
Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. (2010, January). What are the learning affordances of 3‐D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32.:
Daniela, L. (2019). Smart Pedagogy for Technology-Enhanced Learning. In L. Daniela, Didactics of Smart Pedagogy (pp. 3-21). Riga: Springer.:
Davis, S., Nesbitt, K., & Nalivaiko, E. (2014). A Systematic Review of Cybersickness. Conference on Interactive Entertainment (pp. 1-9). Newcastle: ACM. :
10.1145/2677758.2677780
Dede, C. (2009). Introduction to Virtual Reality in Education. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 2, 7-9.:
Erhel, S., & Jamet, E. (2015, May 15). The effects of goal-oriented instructions in digital game-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 1744-1757. :
10.1080/10494820.2015.1041409
Fowler, & Mayes. (1999). Learning relationships from theory to design. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 7(3), 6-16. :
10.1080/0968776990070302
Fowler, C. (2014). Virtual reality and learning: Where is the pedagogy? British Journal of Education Technology, 46(2), 412-422. :
10.1111/bjet.12135
Freina, L., & Ott, M. (2015). A Literature Review on Immersive Virtual Reality in Education : State of the Art and Perspectives. Genova: Institute for Educational Technology, CNR.:
Gartner, Inc. (2017, August 15). Top Trends in the Gartner Hype Cycle for Emerging Technologies, 2017. Retrieved from Smart with Gartner: https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/top-trends-inthe-gartner-hype-cycle-for-emerging-technologies-2017/:
Karl, D., Soderquist, K., Grant, A., Farhi, M., Krohn, D. P., Murphy, B., . . . Straughan, B. (2018). Augmented and Virtual Reality Survey Report. PerkinsCoie LLP:
Krämer, N. (2017). The Immersive Power of Social Interaction. In D. Liu, C. Dede, R. Huang, & J. Richards, Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Realities in Education (pp. 55-70). Singapur: Springer.:
Lau, K. W., & Lee, P. Y. (2015, November 27). The use of virtual reality for creating unusual environmental stimulation to motivate students to explore creative ideas. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(1), 3-18. Retrieved from :
10.1080/10494820.2012.745426
Liu, D., Bhagat, K. K., Gao, Y., Chang, T.-W., & Huang, R. (2017). The Potentials and Trends of Virtual Reality in Education. In D. Liu, C. Dede, R. Huang, & J. Richards, Virtual, Augmented, and Mixed Realities in Education (pp. 105-130). Singapur: Springer.:
Mayes, & Fowler. (1999). Learning technology and usability: a framework for understanding courseware. Interacting with Computers, 11, 485-497.:
Merchant, Z., Goetz, E., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. (2014, January). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A metaanalysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29-40. :
10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033
Mikropoulos, T., & Natsis, A. (2011). Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999-2009). Computers & Educations, 56, 769-780.:
Pantelidis, V. (2009). Reasons to Use Virtual Reality in Education and Training Courses and a Model to Determine When to Use Virtual Reality. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 2, 59-70.:
Saleeb, N., & Dafoulas, G. (2011). Effects of Virtual World Environments in Student Satisfaction: An Examination of the Role of Architecture in 3D Education. International Journal of Knowledge Society Research, 2(1), 28-48.:
Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding Virtual Reality: Interface, Application, and Design. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.:
Slater, M. (2003). A Note on Presence Terminology. Department of Computer Science . London: University College London. Retrieved from http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/research/vr/Projects/Presencia/ConsortiumPublications/ucl_cs_papers/prese nce-terminology.htm:
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (2016). Profiles in Innovation, Virtual & Augmented Reality, Understanding the race for the next computing platform. New York: The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.:
on September 22, 2019 - 12:05 Tyrone Machado
Conceive
Design
Implement
Operate
