Augmented and Virtual Reality Authoring
A Study of Educators’ Views
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55016/zsd8mr61Keywords:
AR/VR applications, learning design, beliefs, teacher authoring, engagementAbstract
This study reports a collaborative self-study of five educators’ experiences of teaching and learning augmented, virtual, and mixed reality (XR hereafter) in education. Specifically, it aims to examine educators’ beliefs about XR applications and the design considerations when they are engaged in authoring educational XR applications. The analysis of data showed that the educators put the learning outcomes at the forefront of their design of XR applications. When considering the topics for XR applications, educators tended to focus on content customized to their local contexts. Important design considerations also included curriculum and instructional design, equity, safety and other topics.
Downloads
References
Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., Graf, S., & Kinshuk, K. (2014). Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 133-149.
Bani-Salameh, H., Al-Gharaibeh, J., Jeffery, C. L., & Al-Sharif, Z. A. (2017). Collaborative education in a virtual learning environment. International Journal of Business Information Systems, 25(4), 474-489. http://doi.org/10.1504/IJBIS.2017.085172
Bower, M., DeWitt, D., & Lai, J. WM (2020). Reasons associated with preservice teachers' intention to use immersive virtual reality in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2214–2232.
Buchner, J., & Hofmann, M. (2022). The more the better? Comparing two SQD-based learning designs in a teacher training on augmented and virtual reality. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(24). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00329-7
Chang, Y. S., Hu, K. J., Chiang, C. W., & Lugmayr, A. (2019). Applying mobile augmented reality (AR) to teach interior design students in layout plans: evaluation of learning effectiveness based on the ARCS model of learning motivation theory. Sensors, 20(1), 105-126. http://doi.org/10.3390/s20010105
Cheng, K.H. (2022). Teachers' perceptions of exploiting immersive virtual field trips for learning in primary education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54(3), 438–455. https://doi-org.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/10.1080/15391523.2021.1876576
Cooper, G., Park, H., Nasr, Z., Thong, L. P., Johnson, R. (2019). Using virtual reality in the classroom: preservice teachers' perceptions of its use as a teaching and learning tool. Educational Media International, 56(1), 1–13.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
Correia, A., Fonseca, B., Paredes, H., Martins, P., & Morgado, L. (2016). Computer-simulated 3D virtual environments in collaborative learning and training: meta-review, refinement, and roadmap. Handbook on 3D3C Platforms, 403-440. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22041-3_15
Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design; Choosing Among Five Traditions. Sage Publications.
Davis, B., & Sumara, D. (2002). Constructivist discourses and the field of education: Problems and possibilities. Educational Theory, 52(4), 409-428. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2002.00409.x
Davis, B., Sumara, D., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2008). Engaging Minds: Changing Teaching in Complex Times (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.
Dede, C. J., Jacobson, J., & Richards, J. (2017). Introduction: Virtual, augmented, and mixed realities in education. In Virtual, augmented, and mixed realities in education (pp. 1-16). Singapore: Springer Singapore.
Di Paolo, E., Rohde, M., & De Jaegher, H. (2010). Horizons for the enactive mind: Values, social interaction, and play. In J. Stewart, O. Gapenne, E. Paolo (eds.). Enaction: Towards a new paradigm for cognitive science. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8629.003.0003
Dodds, H. E. (2021). Immersive learning environments: designing XR into higher education. In J. E. Stefaniak, S. Conklin, B. Oyarzun, & R. M. Reese (Eds.) A Practitioner’s Guide to Instructional Design in Higher Education. (pp. 69-78). EdTech Books.
Doğan, D., Demir, Ö., & Tüzün, H. (2022). Exploring the role of situational flow experience in learning through design in 3D multi-user virtual environments. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(4), 2217-2237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09680-8
Eutsler, L., & Long, C. S. (2021). Preservice teachers' acceptance of virtual reality to plan science instruction. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(2), 28–43.
Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2011). Educational Research: Competencies for Analysis and Applications. Pearson Higher Ed.
Han, I., & Patterson, T. (2020). Teacher learning through technology-enhanced curriculum design using virtual reality. Teachers College Record, 122(7), 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146812012200706
Khan, R., Plahouras, J., Johnston, B. C., Scaffidi, M. A., Grover, S. C., & Walsh, C. M. (2019). Virtual reality simulation training in endoscopy: a Cochrane review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy, 51(07), 653-664. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-0894-4400
Lee, J. J., & Hu-Au, E. (2021). E3XR: An analytical framework for ethical, educational and eudaimonic XR design. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 2, 697667. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2021.697667
Li, Q., Clark, B., & Winchester, I. (2010). Instructional design and technology grounded in enactivism: A paradigm shift? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 403-419. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00954.x
Li, Q., Lemieux, C., Vandermeiden, E., & Nathoo, S. (2013). Are you ready to teach secondary mathematics in the 21st century? A study of preservice teachers’ digital game design experience. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(4), 309-337. http://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2013.10782608
Liu, D., Dede, C., Huang, R., & Richards, J. (2017). Virtual, augmented, and mixed realities in education. Springer.
Lyk, P. B., Majgaard, G., Dietrich, T., & Stock, C. (2019). Co-designing an immersive and interactive alcohol resistance training tool using 360-degree video. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 450–458. https://doi-org.proxy-tu.researchport.umd.edu/10.34190/GBL19.081
Maheux, J.-F., & Proulx, J. (2015). Doing mathematics: Analysing data with/in an enactivist-inspired approach. ZDM, 47(2), 211-221. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0642-7
Maiese, M. (2017). Transformative learning, enactivism, and affectivity. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 36(2), 197-216. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11217-015-9506-z
Meccawy, M. (2022). Creating an immersive xr learning experience: A roadmap for educators. Electronics, 11(21), 3547. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11213547
Michos, K., & Hernández-Leo, D. (2020). CIDA: A collective inquiry framework to study and support teachers as designers in technological environments. Computers & Education, 143, 103679. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103679
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. (1994). An Expanded Sourcebook: Qualitative Data Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Mystakidis, S., Fragkaki, M., & Filippousis, G. (2021). Ready teacher one: virtual and augmented reality online professional development for K-12 school teachers. Computers, 10(10), 134. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers10100134
O'Shea, P., & Curry-Corcoran, D. (2013). The viability and value of student and teacher-created augmented reality experiences. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(3), 78–87.
Patterson, T., & Han, I. (2019). Learning to teach with virtual reality: Lessons from one elementary teacher. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 63(4), 463–469.
Pinnegar, S., & Hamilton, M. L. (2009). Self-study of practice as a genre of qualitative research: Theory, methodology, and practice (Vol. 8). Springer Science & Business Media.
Proulx, J. (2004). The enactivist theory of cognition and behaviorism: An account of the processes of individual sense-making. Complexity Science and Educational Research conference, Chaffey’ Locks, Canada. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338124333
Seckin Kapucu, M., Yurtseven Avci, Z., & Sural, I. (2021). Innovative approaches in development of educational materials: A case study of science teachers. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 22(4), 58–81.
Sibbald, S. L., Paciocco, S., Fournie, M., Van Asseldonk, R., & Scurr, T. (2021, September). Continuing to enhance the quality of case study methodology in health services research. Healthcare Management Forum 34(5) 291-296. SAGE Publications.
Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. Sage.
Stanney, K. M., Skinner, A., & Hughes, C. (2023). Exercisable Learning-Theory and Evidence-Based Andragogy for Training Effectiveness using XR (ELEVATE-XR): Elevating the ROI of Immersive Technologies. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 39(11), 2177-2198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2188529
Varela, F., & Maturana, H. (1992). The Tree of Knowledge. Shambhala.
Yildirim, B., Sahin-Topalcengiz, E., Arikan, G., & Timur, S. (2020). Using virtual reality in the classroom: Reflections of STEM teachers on the use of teaching and learning Tools. Journal of Education in Science, Environment and Health, 6(3), 231–245.
Yin, R. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Sage.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Journal of Educational Thought retains first publication rights for all articles. The Journal grants reproduction rights for noncommercial educational purposes with the provision that full acknowledgement of the work’s source be noted on each copy. The Journal will redirect to the appropriate authors any inquiries for further commercial publication of individual articles. All authors wishing to publish in JET will be asked to fill in and sign a Consent to Publish and Transfer of Copyright agreement.
Authors must affirm that any submission to JET has not been and will not be published or submitted elsewhere while under considration by JET.
