Self-guided Exploration of Virtual Learning Spaces



Virtual learning spaces provide the opportunity to create authentic, immersive and high-fidelity experiences for learners; often enhanced with new technology to increase the interaction and perception with the learning space. Instead of creating mock-ups in classrooms, educators are able to recreate a controlled replica of the real world, i.e. scenarios and situations can be created that are difficult or impossible to achieve otherwise. However, an unrestricted and unsupervised exploration imposes challenges to monitor the learner, offer supportive guidance and provide formative feedback. Preliminary studies demonstrated that different approaches are able to engage the learner, create an intrinsic motivation and therefore provide curiosity to drive the self-paced learning; yet the use-case-based exploration is not transferred to a framework including a comprehensive tool for education. In this chapter, we demonstrate the prototype of the nDiVE framework, which combines authentic education, gamification, emerging technology and design principles used in the game industry to create an engaging learning space for students and workers.


Virtual Learning Space Container Terminals Head-mounted Display (HMD) Container Bridge PlayStation Controller 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Support for the production of this publication has been provided by the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching (Grant: Development of an authentic training environment to support skill acquisition in logistics and supply chain management, ID: ID12-2498). The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching.


  1. Bates, A. T., & Sangra, A. (2011). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for transforming teaching and learning. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, R., & Briggs, C. (1990). Poetics and performance as critical perspectives on language and social life. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 59–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biocca, F., & Delaney, B. (1995). Immersive virtual reality technology. In F. Biocca & M. Levy (Eds.), Communication in the age of virtual reality (pp. 57–124). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, E., & Cairns, P. (2004). A grounded investigation of game Immersion. In CHI ’04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1297–1300). New York, New York, USA: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/985921.986048.
  5. Cummings, J. J., Bailenson, J. N., & Fidler, M. J. (2012). How immersive is enough? A foundation for a meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on measured presence. In Proceedings of the International Society for Presence Research Annual Conference.Google Scholar
  6. Danilicheva, P., Klimenko, S., Baturin, Y., & Serebrov, A. (2009). Education in virtual worlds: Virtual storytelling. In International Conference on CyberWorlds (pp. 333–338). IEEE.Google Scholar
  7. Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323(5910), 66–69. doi: 10.1126/science.1167311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ermi, L., & Mäyrä, F. (2005). Fundamental components of the gameplay experience: Analysing immersion. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2005 Conference: Changing Views – Worlds in Play. Retrieved from
  9. Fardinpour, A., & Reiners, T. (2014). The taxonomy of goal-oriented actions in virtual training environments. Procedia Technology, 13, 38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Friedman, T. L. (2006). The world is flat: The globalized world in the twenty-first century. London: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  11. Gibson, D., & Jackl, P. (2015). Theoretical considerations for game-based e-learning analytics. In T. Reiners, & L.C. Wood (Eds.), Gamification in education and business (pp. 403–416). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Gregory, S. (2011). Teaching higher education students with diverse learning outcomes in the virtual world of Second Life. In R. Hinrichs & C. Wankel (Eds.), Transforming virtual world learning, Cutting-edge technologies in higher education (Vol. 4, pp. 333–362). Teynampet, India: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  13. Hebbel-Seeger, A. (2013). Pedagogical and psychological impacts of teaching and learning in virtual realities. In A. Hebbel-Seeger, T. Reiners, & D. Schäffer (Eds.), Synthetic worlds: Emerging technologies in education and economics. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  14. Herrington, J. (2006). Authentic e-learning in higher education: Design principles for authentic learning environments and tasks. In T. Reeves & S. Yamashita (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2006 (pp. 3164–3173). Chesapeake, VA.Google Scholar
  15. Herrington, J., & Kervin, L. (2007). Authentic learning supported by technology: 10 suggestions and cases of integration in classrooms. Educational Media International, 44(3), 219–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2012). Defining gamification - A service marketing perspective. In MindTrek2012 (pp. 17–22). Tampere: Finland: ACM. Retrieved from 10.1145/2400000/2393137/p17-huotari.pdf?ip=
  17. Jennett, C., Cox, A. L., Cairns, P., Dhoparee, S., Epps, A., Tijs, T., et al. (2008). Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(9), 641–661. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education (1st ed.). Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
  19. Landers, R. N., Bauer, K. N., Callan, R. C., & Armstrong, M. B. (2015). Psychological theory and the gamification of learning. In T. Reiners, & L.C. Wood (Eds.), Gamification in education and business (pp. 165–168). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Loh, C. S. (2007). Designing online games assessment as “Information Trails”. In D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, & M. Prensky (Eds.), Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development frameworks (pp. 323–348). Hershey: Information Science Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world (Reprint). Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  22. Mestre, D., & Vercher, J. L. (2011). Immersion and Presence. In P. Fuchs, G. Moreau, & P. Guitton (Eds.), Virtual reality: Concepts and technologies (pp. 93–102). London, U.K.: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  23. Oculus. (2013). About Oculus VR. Retrieved from
  24. Palmer, F. (1995). Interpersonal communication and virtual reality: Mediating Interpersonal relationships. In F. Biocca & M. Levy (Eds.), Communication in the age of virtual reality (pp. 277–302). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  25. Pederson, E. M. (1995). Storytelling and the art of teaching. Forum, 33(1)Google Scholar
  26. Reiners, T., Wood, L. C., & Dron, J. (2014a). From chaos towards sense: A learner-centric narrative virtual learning space. In J. Bishop (Ed.), Gamification for human factors integration: Social, education, and psychological issues (pp. 242–258). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reiners, T., Wood, L. C., & Gregory, S. (2014b). Experimental study on technology-induced authentic immersion in virtual worlds for education and vocational training. Report Curtin University.Google Scholar
  28. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rystedt, H., & Sjoblom, B. (2012). Realism, authenticity, and learning in healthcare simulations: rules of relevance and irrelevance as interactive achievements. Instructional Science, 40, 785–798. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9213-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Slater, M. (2003). A note on presence terminology. Presence Connect, 3(3)Google Scholar
  31. Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(6), 603–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(3), 225–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wood, L. C., & Reefke, H. (2010). Working with a diverse class: Reflections on the role of team teaching, teaching tools and technological support. In H. Huai, P. Kommers, & P. Isaías (Eds.), Presented at the IADIS international conference on international higher education (pp. 72–79) (IHE 2010).Google Scholar
  34. Wood, L. C., & Reiners, T. (2013). Game-based elements to upgrade bots to non-player characters in support of educators. In A. Hebbel-Seeger, T. Reiners, & D. Schäfer (Eds.), Synthetic worlds: Emerging technologies in education and economics (pp. 257–277). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  35. Wood, L. C., Teräs, H., Reiners, T., & Gregory, S. (2013). The role of gamification and game-based learning in authentic assessment within virtual environments. In S. Frielick, N. Buissink-Smith, P. Wyse, J. Billot, J. Hallas, & E. Whitehead (Eds.), Research and Development in Higher Education: The Place of Learning and Teaching (Vol. 36, pp. 514–523). Auckland, New Zealand: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Inc.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia
  2. 2.University of OtagoDunedinNew Zealand
  3. 3.Murdoch UniversityPerthAustralia
  4. 4.University of New EnglandArmidaleAustralia
  5. 5.Wise Realities, Curtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations