Robson Santiago Viol
ABSTRACT
Integrating novel technologies in education, namely technology-enhanced learning (TEL), is broadly discussed in educational and technology development areas. It is understood that educators can improve their comprehension of each student’s learning processes using gathered data and provide more personalized content using technology. This work proposes a novel solution to automating getting data from interactions executed in Virtual Reality. This system offers a user-friendly interface allowing educators to create and share multimedia content in the game, collect data to provide insights about the users’ behavior based on his interactions with the system, and provide an analytic tool for feedback and future analysis. The system’s design discusses the main lessons learned by analyzing the theoretical concepts, functional and non-functional requirements, and the architecture proposal.
- Peter Armbruster, Maya Patel, Erika Johnson, and Martha Weiss. 2009. Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. CBE—Life Sciences Education 8, 3 (2009), 203–213.Google Scholar
- Sander Bakkes, Chek Tien Tan, and Yusuf Pisan. 2012. Personalised gaming: a motivation and overview of literature. In Proceedings of the 8th Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment: Playing the System. 1–10.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Doug Clow. 2013. An overview of learning analytics. Teaching in Higher Education 18, 6 (2013), 683–695.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Adam Cooper. 2014. Learning analytics interoperability-the big picture in brief. Learning Analytics Community Exchange (2014).Google Scholar
- Emilio Crisol-Moya, María Asunción Romero-López, and María Jesús Caurcel-Cara. 2020. Active methodologies in higher education: perception and opinion as evaluated by professors and their students in the teaching-learning process. Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2020), 1703.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christo Dichev and Darina Dicheva. 2017. Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International journal of educational technology in higher education 14, 1 (2017), 1–36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Scott Freeman, Sarah L Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle K Smith, Nnadozie Okoroafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences 111, 23 (2014), 8410–8415.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sara Freitas, Genaro Rebolledo-Mendez, Fotis Liarokapis, George Magoulas, and Alexandra Poulovassilis. 2010. Learning as immersive experiences: Using the four-dimensional framework for designing and evaluating immersive learning experiences in a virtual world. British Journal of Educational Technology 41 (01 2010), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01024.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Mark J Gierl, Okan Bulut, Qi Guo, and Xinxin Zhang. 2017. Developing, analyzing, and using distractors for multiple-choice tests in education: A comprehensive review. Review of Educational Research 87, 6 (2017), 1082–1116.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Amina Khaldi, Rokia Bouzidi, and Fahima Nader. 2023. Gamification of e-learning in higher education: a systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environments 10, 1 (2023), 10.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Adrian Kirkwood and Linda Price. 2014. Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, media and technology 39, 1 (2014), 6–36.Google Scholar
- Alexandra Kitson, Mirjana Prpa, and Bernhard E Riecke. 2018. Immersive interactive technologies for positive change: a scoping review and design considerations. Frontiers in psychology 9 (2018), 1354.Google Scholar
- Charles Lang, George Siemens, Alyssa Wise, and Dragan Gasevic. 2017. Handbook of learning analytics. SOLAR, Society for Learning Analytics and Research New York.Google Scholar
- Diana Laurillard. 2007. Modelling benefits-oriented costs for technology enhanced learning. Higher Education 54, 1 (2007), 21–39.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kin Chew Lim. 2015. Case studies of xAPI applications to e-Learning. In The twelfth international conference on eLearning for knowledge-based society. 3–1.Google Scholar
- Katerina Mangaroska and Michail Giannakos. 2018. Learning analytics for learning design: A systematic literature review of analytics-driven design to enhance learning. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 12, 4 (2018), 516–534.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zhigeng Pan, Adrian David Cheok, Hongwei Yang, Jiejie Zhu, and Jiaoying Shi. 2006. Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Computers & graphics 30, 1 (2006), 20–28.Google Scholar
- John F. Pane, Elizabeth D. Steiner, Matthew D. Baird, and Laura S. Hamilton. 2015. Continued Progress: Promising Evidence on Personalized Learning. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. https://doi.org/10.7249/RR1365Google ScholarCross Ref
- Manisha Pathania, Archana Mantri, Deepti Prit Kaur, Chander Partap Singh, and Bhanu Sharma. 2021. A chronological literature review of different augmented reality approaches in education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning (2021), 1–18.Google Scholar
- Roger Säljö. 1979. Learning about learning. Higher education 8, 4 (1979), 443–451.Google Scholar
- Joshua Secretan, Fridolin Wild, and Will Guest. 2019. Learning Analytics in Augmented Reality: Blueprint for an AR/xAPI Framework. In 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education (TALE). IEEE, 1–6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Becky Spittle, Maite Frutos-Pascual, Chris Creed, and Ian Williams. 2022. A review of interaction techniques for immersive environments. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics (2022).Google ScholarDigital Library
- J Steuer. 1992. Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42 (4), 73-93.Future Generation Computer Systems 94 (1992), 302–316.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Georgi Tuparov, Delyan Keremedchiev, Daniela Tuparova, and Maya Stoyanova. 2018. Gamification and educational computer games in open source learning management systems as a part of assessment. In 2018 17th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET). 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITHET.2018.8424768Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ángel Serrano-Laguna, Iván Martínez-Ortiz, Jason Haag, Damon Regan, Andy Johnson, and Baltasar Fernández-Manjón. 2017. Applying standards to systematize learning analytics in serious games. Computer Standards & Interfaces 50 (2017), 116–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csi.2016.09.014Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- EduVR: Towards an Evaluation Platform for User Interactions in Personalized Virtual Reality Learning Environments
Recommendations
Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments
This paper explores educational uses of virtual learning environment (VLE) concerned with issues of learning, training and entertainment. We analyze the state-of-art research of VLE based on virtual reality and augmented reality. Some examples for the ...
Virtual reality as a pedagogical tool: An experimental study of English learner in lower elementary grades
AbstractArtificial intelligence (AI) technology significantly impacted educational institutions, and AI application in education brought new perspectives to develop improved technology-enhanced learning systems. Recently, novel approaches in technology-...
Teaching training in a mixed-reality integrated learning environment
In this mixed-method study, we examined the design and potential impact of a mixed-reality integrated learning environment (MILE) in providing the simulated and immersive teaching practice for university teaching assistants. A virtual-reality-based ...
Comments