Advertisement

Exploring Student Interest of Online Peer Assisted Learning Using Mixed-Reality Technology

  • Sasha Nikolic
  • Benjamin Nicholls
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 715)

Abstract

Supplementary Instruction, also known as Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS), is a popular program supporting the educational development of students in a collaborative setting. Flexibility of delivery has been explored for a number of reasons including: work and family commitments; distance from campus; and integrating regional and transnational satellite campuses. Previous studies have found attempts to undertake online delivery of PASS lacking in student interest and have been restrained by the technology. This study attempts to build upon this research by investigating student interest and the suitability of using a mixed reality technology called iSee, based on video avatars within a 3D virtual world. Consistent with previous studies student interest was low, converting a planned quasi-experimental study into a simulation. The simulation suggests that the technology was suitable for online collaboration, with effective communication of course content between participants and a good sense of presence. This suggests this trial may gain greater student interest if undertaken within institutions offering predominantly online, distance education.

Keywords

Collaborative learning iSee Online learning PASS Peer learning Mixed-reality Supplementary instruction 

References

  1. 1.
    Power Ms, C.: Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS): through a complexity lens. J. Peer Learn. 3(1), 1–11 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Birch, E., Li, I.: The impact of peer assisted study sessions on tertiary academic performance. In: Paper presented at the Quantitative Analysis of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in Business, Economics and Commerce: Forum Proceedings (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beaumont, T.J., Mannion, A.P., Shen, B.O.: From the campus to the cloud: the online peer assisted learning scheme. J. Peer Learn. 5(1), 1–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dawson, P., van der Meer, J., Skalicky, J., Cowley, K.: On the effectiveness of supplemental instruction: a systematic review of supplemental instruction and peer-assisted study sessions literature between 2001 and 2010. Rev. Educ. Res. 84(4), 609–639 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stout, M.L., McDaniel, A.J.: Benefits to supplemental instruction leaders. New Dir. Teach. Learn. 2006(106), 55–62 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nikolic, S., Suesse, T., McCarthy, T., Goldfinch, T.: Maximising resource allocation in the teaching laboratory: understanding student evaluations of teaching assistants in a team based teaching format. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. (in Press)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, Y., Dang, Y., Amer, B.: A large-scale blended and flipped class: class design and investigation of factors influencing students intention to learn. IEEE Trans. Educ. 59(4), 263–273 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2535205 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Watts, H., Malliris, M., Billingham, O.: Online peer assisted learning: reporting on practice. J. Peer Learn. 8(1), 85–104 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nikolic, S., Lee, M.J.W., Vial, P.J.: 2D versus 3D collaborative online spaces for student team meetings: comparing a web conferencing environment and a video-augmented virtual world. Paper presented at the 26th Annual Conference of the Australasian Association for Engineering Education, Geelong (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee, M.J.W., Nikolic, S., Vial, P.J., Ritz, C., Li, W., Goldfinch, T.: Enhancing project-based learning through student and industry engagement in a video-augmented 3D virtual trade fair. IEEE Trans. Educ. 59(4), 290–298 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2016.2546230 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nikolic, S., Lee, M.J.W., Goldfinch, T., Ritz, C.H.: Addressing misconceptions about engineering through student–industry interaction in a video-augmented 3D immersive virtual world. In: Paper Presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nikolic, S., Li, W.: Facilitating student and staff engagement across multiple offshore campuses for transnational education using an immersive video augmented learning platform. In: Paper Presented at the 2016 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE), 7–9 December 2016Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee, M.J.W., Nikolic, S., Ritz, C.H.: Supporting the conceptualization of student innovation projects through peer and expert feedback on virtual pitches. In: Wilder, H.A., Ferris, S.P. (eds.) Unplugging the Classroom, pp. 119–131. Chandos Publishing, Cambridge (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jonassen, D.H.: Designing constructivist learning environments. Instr. Des. Theor. Models New Paradigm Instr. Theory 2, 215–239 (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bower, M., Kennedy, G.E., Dalgarno, B., Lee, M.J.W., Kenney, J.: Blended Synchronous Learning: A Handbook for Educators (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations