Skip to main content

How Virtual Reality Is Changing the Future of Learning in K-12 and Beyond

Using Needs-Affordances-Features Perspective

Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNISA,volume 12425)

Abstract

The integration of digital tools into alternative education strategies presents a potentially rich area of practical research. Non-traditional learning opportunities are multiplying and gaining widespread implementation due to their efficacy in fostering student engagement with course materials. Immersion tools such as Virtual Reality (VR) educational experiences have received significant attention as potential replacements or complements to existing multimedia educational tools given their increasing affordability and demonstrated value in fostering greater soft skills in students, such as critical thinking and community engagement. In light of the practical value of leveraging VR for alternative education, this study investigates five sampled VR experiences to determine their potential usefulness as teaching aids. Using the Needs, Affordances, and Features (NAF) framework, this research compares and contrasts five fully-immersive VR programs and analyzes the intersection of Needs, Affordances, and Features in each to determine their value in addressing gaps in current alternative education platforms. This study finds that fully immersive VR educational features enable multiple affordances for Teacher Users, Student Users, and both that fulfill specific experiential needs for each group. As such, these VR programs do address needs left unmet by traditional educational tools and underfunded institutions. Further, the inclusion of fully immersive VR tools in educational plans may help address gaps in content creation, distribution, and assessment that are presented by current alternative educational strategies. Therefore, a NAF framework might be implemented for use by VR developers, education professionals, and researchers to determine the potential of a given VR experience for meeting the needs of students and teachers pursuing alternative education strategies.

Keywords

  • Virtual reality
  • VR
  • Education
  • Alternative education
  • Education technology
  • Needs
  • Affordances
  • Features
  • Experiential leaning needs

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-60128-7_22
  • Chapter length: 20 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-3-030-60128-7
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Softcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1.

Notes

  1. 1.

    In this paper, we define alternative education as educational activities that fall outside the traditional K–12 curriculum to serve students who are at risk of school failure due to the limited access to quality instruction, education facilities and/or learning resources.

References

  1. Elmqaddem, N.: Augmented reality and virtual reality in education. Myth or reality? Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 14, 234–242 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i03.9289

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  2. Dale, E.: Audiovisual Methods in Teaching. 3rd Ed. (1969)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Jackson, R.L., Taylor, W., Winn, W.: Peer collaboration and virtual environments: a preliminary investigation of multi-participant virtual reality applied in science education. In: Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp 121–125 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kaufmann, H., Steinbügl, K., Dünser, A., Glück, J.: General Training of Spatial Abilities by Geometry Education in Augmented Reality (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Di, S.Á., Blanca Ibáñez, M., Delgado Kloos, C.: Impact of an augmented reality system on students’ motivation for a visual art course. Comput. Educ. 68, 586–596 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.002

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Holley, D., Mike, H., Menown, C.: The augmented library: motivating STEM students. Networks 19, 77–84 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., Graf, S.: Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 17, 133–149 (2014). https://doi.org/10.2307/jeductechsoci.17.4.133

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Luís Saorín, J., Contero, M., et al.: Design and validation of an augmented book for spatial abilities development in engineering students. Comput. Graph. 34, 77–91 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2009.11.003

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. White, D.W.: What is STEM Education and Why Is It Important? (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hughes, J.M.: Digital making with “At-Risk” youth. Int. J. Inf. Learn. Technol. 34, 102–113 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-08-2016-0037

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Reimer, K., Pangrazio, L.: Educating on the margins: young people’s insights into effective alternative education. Int. J. Incl. Educ. 24, 479–495 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1467977

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Kumm, S., Wilkinson, S., McDaniel, S.: Alternative education settings in the United States. Interv. Sch. Clin. 105345122091489 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220914895

  13. Ferry, B., Kervin, L., Cambourne, B., et al.: (Online classroom simulation: the ‘next wave’ for pre-service teacher education? In: Atkinson, R., C., McBeath, R., Jonas-Dwyer, D., Phillips, R. (eds.) Beyond the Comfort Zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference, pp. 294–302 (004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Steinberg, R.N.: Computers in teaching science: To simulate or not to simulate? Am. J. Phys. 68, S37–S41 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1119/1.19517

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Simulations Author, E., Klopfer, E.: Environmental detectives-the development of an augmented reality platform for environmental simulations. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 56, 203–228 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9037-6

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Merchant, Z., Goetz, E.T., Cifuentes, L., et al.: Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: a meta-analysis. Comput. Educ. 70, 29–40 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Ip, H.H.S., et al.: Virtual reality enabled training for social adaptation in inclusive education settings for school-aged children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In: Cheung, S.K.S., Kwok, L.-f., Shang, J., Wang, A., Kwan, R. (eds.) ICBL 2016. LNCS, vol. 9757, pp. 94–102. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41165-1_9

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Kotranza, A., Lind, D.S., Pugh, C.M., Lok, B.: Real-time in-situ visual feedback of task performance in mixed environments for learning joint psychomotor-cognitive tasks. In: Science Technology Proceedings - IEEE 2009 International Symposium Mixed Augment Reality, ISMAR 2009, pp. 125–134 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2009.5336485

  19. Singhal, S., Bagga, S., Goyal, P., Saxena, V.: Augmented Chemistry: Interactive Education System. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 49, 1–5 (2012). https://doi.org/10.5120/7700-1041

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Smidt, H., Thornton, M., Abhari, K.: The future of social learning: a novel approach to connectivism. In: Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 2116–2125 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Nilson, L.: Creating Self-Regulated Learners: Strategies to Strengthen Students? Self-Awareness and Learning Skills. Stylus Publishing, LLC (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Darroch, J., Mcnaughton, R.: Examining the link between knowledge management practices and types of innovation. Knowl. Creat. Diffus. Util. (1930). https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930210435570

  23. Kurilovas, E.: Evaluation of quality and personalisation of VR/AR/MR learning systems. Behav. Inf. Technol. 35, 998–1007 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1212929

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  24. Kitsantas, A.: Fostering college students’ selfregulated learning with learning technologies. Hell. J. Psychol. 10, 235–252 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kim, M., Jeong, J.-S., Park, C., Jang, R.-H., Yoo, K.-H.: A situated experiential learning system based on a real-time 3D virtual studio. In: Richards, D., Kang, B.H. (eds.) PKAW 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7457, pp. 364–371. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32541-0_32

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  26. Harms, R.: Self-regulated learning, team learning and project performance in entrepreneurship education: learning in a lean startup environment (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.02.007

  27. Grandgirard, J., Poinsot, D., Krespi, L., et al.: Students’ attitudes towards educational virtual environments. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 103, 239–248 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009687025419

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  28. Mütterlein, J., Hess, T.: Specifics of collaboration in virtual reality: how immersion drives the intention to collaborate use of social live streaming services at the individual level view project e-commerce view project (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Treem, J.W., Leonardi, P.M.: Social media use in organizations: exploring the affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. In: Salmon, C.T. (ed.) Communication Yearbook, New York, pp. 143–189 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Steve, B.: The top 10 educational VR Apps of 2018 – VRFocus (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rasmussen, N.: Best Educational VR Apps To Try in 2020 - VR Today Magazine (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Priyanka, G.: VR Educational Apps—VR Science Apps - EdTechReviewTM (ETR) (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bridget, P.: What Is virtual reality? (+3 Types of VR Experiences) (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  34. O’Riordan, S., Feller, J., Nagle, T.: Exploring the affordances of social network sites: an analysis of three networks. In: European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS 2012), Barcelona (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Abhari, K., Davidson, E.J., Xiao, B.: Co-innovation platform affordances: developing a conceptual model and measurement instrument. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 117, 873–895 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-05-2016-0156

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  36. Karahanna, E., Xu, S.X., Xu, Y., Zhang, N.: The needs-affordances-features perspective for the use of social media. MIS. Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 42, 737–756 (2018)

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  37. Abhari, K., Vomero, A., Davidson, E.: Psychology of business intelligence tools: needs-affordances-features perspective. In: Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Smith, K., Rayfield, J.: STEM knowledge, learning disabilities and experiential learning: influences of sequencing instruction. J. Agric. Educ. 60, 222–236 (2019). https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2019.02222

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  39. Kluge, A.: Experiential learning methods, simulation complexity and their effects on different target groups. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 36, 323–349 (2007). https://doi.org/10.2190/B48U-7186-2786-5429

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  40. Ndoye, A.: Experiential learning, self-beliefs and adult performance in Senegal. Int. J. Lifelong Educ. 22, 353–366 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370304831

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  41. Ryser, L., Halseth, G., Thien, D.: Strategies and intervening factors influencing student social interaction and experiential learning in an interdisciplinary research team. Res. High. Educ. 50, 248–267 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-008-9118-3

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  42. Breen, H., Jones, M.: Experiential learning: using virtual simulation in an online RN-to-BSN program. J. Contin. Educ. Nurs. 46, 27–33 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20141120-02

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  43. Jordi, R.: Reframing the concept of reflection: consciousness, experiential learning, and reflective learning practices. Adult Educ. Q. 61, 181–197 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713610380439

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  44. Dewey, J.: Collected works of John Dewey, 1882–1953: The electronic edition (2003)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaveh Abhari .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Adžgauskaitė, M., Abhari, K., Pesavento, M. (2020). How Virtual Reality Is Changing the Future of Learning in K-12 and Beyond. In: , et al. HCI International 2020 – Late Breaking Papers: Cognition, Learning and Games. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12425. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60128-7_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60128-7_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-60127-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-60128-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)