Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

3D Multiuser Virtual Environments and Environmental Education: The Virtual Island of the Mediterranean Monk Seal

  • Original research
  • Published:
Technology, Knowledge and Learning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study presents the results from a project in which a 3D multi-user virtual environment was used for informing students on issues related to the protection of the Mediterranean monk seal. The target group was 326, 10–12-years old students divided into three groups. The first one was taught using printed material, the second used a web-based application, and the third used the virtual environment. Data were collected by means of evaluation sheets and three questionnaires for recording students' views and attitudes. The third group of students had better learning outcomes compared to the first, but the results were inconclusive compared to the second. Then again, the MUVE had a notable impact on students' attitudes toward seals compared to the other tools. As for attitudes toward eco problems, the outcomes were better only compared to the first group. Moreover, fun and an increased motivation for learning were evident in the third group but co-existed with significant problems related to the use of the virtual environment. The findings point to the need for further examination of the use of multi-user virtual environments for raising the awareness of environmental issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abu Dhabi Global Environmental Data Initiative (AGEDI). (2016). Eye on environmental education. Retrieved from https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/education-environment/why-does-educationand-environment-matter/eye-environmental. Accessed 25 April 2019.

  • Ahn, S. J., Bostick, J., Ogle, E., Nowak, K. L., McGillicuddy, K. T., & Bailenson, J. N. (2016). Experiencing nature: Embodying animals in immersive virtual environments increases inclusion of nature in self and involvement with nature. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(6), 399–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, D., & Hodges, L. F. (2000). Virtual reality for education. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology, 60–165. NY: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/502390.502420

  • Anderson, M. W. (2012). New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale. The Berskshire encyclopedia of sustainability: Measurements, indicators, and research methods for sustainability (pp. 260–262).

  • Apps, K., Dimmock, K., & Lloyd, D. (2015). Scuba divers and the grey nurse shark: Beliefs, knowledge and behavior. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 20, 425–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2015.1037028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, J. O., Bailenson, J. N., & Casasanto, D. (2016). When does virtual embodiment change our minds? Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 25(3), 222–233. https://doi.org/10.1162/PRES_a_00263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., Hughes, K., & Dierking, L. (2007). Conservation learning in wildlife tourism settings: Lessons from research in zoos and aquariums. Environmental Education Research, 13, 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701430604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballouard, J. M., Brischoux, F., & Bonnet, X. (2011). Children prioritize virtual exotic biodiversity over local biodiversity. PLoS ONE, 6(8), e23152. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, E. C., Mintzes, J. J., & Yen, C.-F. (2005). Assessing knowledge, attitudes, and behavior toward charismatic megafauna: the case of dolphins. Journal of Environmental Education. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOEE.36.2.41-55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beaumont, N. (2001). Ecotourism and the conservation ethic: Recruiting the uninitiated or preaching to the converted? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9, 317–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckler, C., & Creech, H. (2014). Shaping the future we want: UN decade of education for sustainable development; final report. Paris: UNESCO.

  • Bulu, S. T. (2012). Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds. Computers & Education, 58(1), 154–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., et al. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness (Vol. 5, pp. 88–98). Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS.

  • Cai, Y., Chia, N. K., Thalmann, D., Kee, N. K., Zheng, J., & Thalmann, N. M. (2013). Design and development of a virtual dolphinarium for children with autism. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 21(2), 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2013.2240700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castronovo, F., Yilmaz, S., Rao, A., Condori, W., Jr., Monga, K., & Gooranorimi, H. (2018). Board 63: development of a virtual reality educational game for waste management: Attack of the recyclops. In Proceedings of the 2018 ASEE annual conference & exposition.

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage

    Google Scholar 

  • Crudge, B., O’Connor, D., Hunt, M., Davis, E. O., & Browne-Nunez, C. (2016). Groundwork for effective conservation education: An example of in situ and ex situ collaboration in South East Asia. International Zoo Sourcebook, 50, 34–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dabbagh, N., & Kitsantas, A. (2012). Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: a natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVellis, R. F. (2003). Scale development: Theory and applications (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickman, A. J. (2010). Complexities of conflict: the importance of considering social factors for effectively resolving human-wildlife conflict. Animal Conservation, 13, 458–466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillahunt, T., Becker, G., Mankoff, J., & Kraut, R. (2008). Motivating environmentally sustainable behavior changes with a virtual polar bear. Proceedings of the Pervasive 2008 Workshop, 8, 58–62.

  • Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jones, R. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 425–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckelman, M. J., Lifset, R. J., Yessios, I., & Panko, K. (2011). Teaching industrial ecology and environmental management in second life. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19, 1273–1278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrhardt, N. M., & Witham, R. (1992). Analysis of growth of the green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas) in the western central Atlantic. Bulletin of Marine Science, 50(2), 275–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faiola, A., Newlon, C., Pfaff, M., & Smyslova, O. (2013). Correlating the effects of flow and telepresence in virtual worlds: Enhancing our understanding of user behavior in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1113–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fauville, G., Lantz-Andersson, A., & Säljö, R. (2014). ICT tools in environmental education: Reviewing two newcomers to schools. Environmental Education Research, 20(2), 248–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2013.775220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flogaiti, Ε. (2005). Εκπαίδευση για το περιβάλλον και τηναειφορία [Education for the environment and sustainable development]. Αθήνα: Ελληνικά Γράμματα.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fokides, E., & Atsikpasi, P. (2018). Development of a model for explaining the learning outcomes when using 3D virtual environments in informal learning settings. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 2265–2287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9719-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fokides, E., Chachlaki, F., & Liarakou, G. (2017). MUVES and Environmental Education. The paradigm of the Mediterranean monk seal's island. In Proceedings of the 5th Panhellenic Conference for the Integration and Use of ICT in the Educational Process (pp. 492–503). Athens, Greece: School of Pedagogical and Technological Education.

  • Fokides, E., Kaimara, P., Deliyiannis, I., & Atsikpasi, P. (2019). Development of a scale for measuring the learning experience in serious games. Preliminary results. In Proceedings of the digital culture & audiovisual challenges international conference. Corfu, Greece: Ionian University.

  • Freina, L., & Ott, M. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: state of the art and perspectives. In Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education (Vol. 1, p. 133). Carol I, National Defence University.

  • Gehlbach, H., Marietta, G., King, A. M., Karutz, C., Bailenson, J. N., & Dede, C. (2015). Many ways to walk a mile in another’s moccasins: Type of social perspective taking and its effect on negotiation outcomes. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 523–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grotzer, T. A., Kamarainen, A., Tutwiler, M. S., Metcalf, S., & Dede, C. (2013). Learning to reason about ecosystems dynamics over time: The challenges of an event-based causal focus. BioScience, 63(4), 288–296. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2013.63.4.9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, S. (2007). Can interpretation really make a difference? Answers to four questions from cognitive and behavioral psychology. In Proceedings of the interpreting world heritage conference (pp. 25–29), Vancouver, Canada.

  • Harlen, W., & Qualter, A. (2014). The teaching of science in primary schools (6th ed.). London: Routledge.

  • Harrington, M. C. (2012). The virtual trillium trail and the empirical effects of freedom and fidelity on discovery-based learning. Virtual Reality, 16(2), 105–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-011-0189-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. (2013). The place of experience and the experience of place: Intersections between sustainability education and outdoor learning. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 29(1), 18–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2013.13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, W. C., Tseng, C. M., & Kang, S. C. (2018). Using exaggerated feedback in a virtual reality environment to enhance behavior intention of water-conservation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(4), 187–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, K. (2013). Measuring the impact of viewing wildlife: Do positive intentions equate to longterm changes in conservation behavior? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21, 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, A. R., Militello, R., & Baveye, P. C. (2009). Development of computer-assisted virtual field trips to support multidisciplinary learning. Computers & Education, 52(3), 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, S. K., McDuff, M. D., & Monroe, M. C. (2015). Conservation education and outreach techniques. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198716686.001.0001.

  • Kamarainen, A., Metcalf, S., Grotzer, T., & Dede, C. J. (2015). Exploring ecosystems from the inside: How immersion in a multi-user virtual environment supports epistemologically grounded practices in ecosystem science instruction. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(2), 148–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-014-9531-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karamanlidis, A., & Dendrinos, P. (2015). Monachus monachus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, 2015, e.T13653A45227543. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T13653A45227543.en.

  • Kellert, S. R. (1985). Attitudes toward animals: Age-related development among children. Advances in Animal Welfare Science,1984, 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4998-0_3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, A.-K., Airey, D., & Szivas, E. (2011). The multiple assessment of interpretation effectiveness: Promoting visitors’ environmental attitudes and behavior. Journal of Travel Research, 50, 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287510362786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozlov, M. D., & Johansen, M. K. (2010). Real behavior in virtual environments: Psychology experiments in a simple virtual-reality paradigm using video games. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(6), 711–714. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, I.-L. (2002). The effectiveness of environmental interpretation at resource-sensitive tourism destinations. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4, 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwan, B. K., Cheung, J. H., Law, A. C., Cheung, S. G., & Shin, P. K. (2017). Conservation education program for threatened Asian horseshoe crabs: A step towards reducing community apathy to environmental conservation. Journal for Nature Conservation, 35, 53–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2016.12.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larson, K. L., & Redman, E. N. (2014). Water education for sustainability: Criteria and recommendations. Society & Natural Resources, 27(11), 1213–1222. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2014.933932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, E. A. L., Wong, K. W., & Fung, C. C. (2010). How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modeling approach. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1424–1442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, D. M., Laha, R., Perone, B. P., Pea, R. D., & Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Immersive virtual reality field trips facilitate learning about climate change. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02364

  • McLellan, H. (2004). Virtual realites. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

  • Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metcalf, S. J., Kamarainen, A. M., Torres, E., Grotzer, T. A., & Dede, C. (2018). EcoMUVE: A case study on the affordances of MUVEs in ecosystem science education. In J. Y. Qian (Ed.), Integrating Multi-User Virtual Environments in Modern Classrooms (pp. 1–25). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mikropoulos, T. A., & Natsis, A. (2011). Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & Education, 56(3), 769–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, L. J., Zeigler-Hill, V., Mellen, J., Koeppel, J., Greer, T., & Kuczaj, S. (2013). Dolphin shows and interaction programs: Benefits for conservation education? Zoo Biology, 32(1), 45–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, S., Spradlin, T. R., Mackey, B., McVee, J., Androukaki, E., Tounta, E., et al. (2012). Age estimation, growth and age-related mortality of Mediterranean monk seals Monachus monachus. Endangered Species Research, 16(2), 149–163. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neulight, N., Kafai, Y. B., Kao, L., Foley, B., & Galas, C. (2007). Children’s participation in a virtual epidemic in the science classroom: Making connections to natural infectious diseases. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9029-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., Adamantopoulou, S., Androukaki, E., Dendrinos, P., Karamanlidis, A. A., Paravas, V., et al. (2009). National strategy and action plan for the conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal in Greece, 2009–2015. Report on evaluating the past and structuring the future. Paper prepared as part of the LIFE-Nature Project: MOFI:Monk Seal and Fisheries: Mitigating the conflict in Greek Seas. Athens, Greece: Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the Mediterranean monk seal (MOm).

  • Pan, Z., Cheok, A. D., Yang, H., Zhu, J., & Shi, J. (2006). Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Computers & Graphics, 30(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2005.10.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prokop, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2008). “Disgusting” animals: Primary school children's attitudes and myths of bats and spiders. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4(2), 87–97. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prokop, P., & Fančovičová, J. (2013). Does colour matter? The influence of animal warning coloration on human emotions and willingness to protect them. Animal Conservation, 16(4), 458–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prokop, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2010). Effects of having pets at home on children’s attitudes toward popular and unpopular animals. Anthrozoös, 23, 21–35. https://doi.org/10.2752/175303710X12627079939107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, F., & Lyons, T. (2013). Educating for sustainability in virtual worlds: Does the virtual have value? Strand 9 Environmental, Health andOutdoor Science Education, 118.

  • Rutten, N., Van Joolingen, W. R., & Van der Veen, J. T. (2012). The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Computers & Education, 58(1), 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaller, D. T., Goldman, K. H., Spickelmier, G., Allison-Bunnell, S., & Koepfler, J. (2009). Learning in the wild: What Wolfquest taught developers and game players. Museums and the Web, 2009.

  • Schott, C. (2017). Virtual fieldtrips and climate change education for tourism students. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 21, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhlste.2017.05.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skolverket,. (2011). Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen ochfritidshemmet [Curriculum for elementary school, preschool class and recreation center]. Stockholm: Skolverket.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, R. B. (2007). Schooling and environmental education: Contradictions in purpose and practice. Environmental Education Research, 13(2), 139–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504620701295726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarng, W., Change, M. Y., Ou, K. L., Chang, Y. W., & Liou, H. H. (2008). The development of a virtual marine museum for educational applications. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 37(1), 39–59. https://doi.org/10.2190/ET.37.1.d.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tisdell, C. (2013). Ecotourism experiences promoting conservation and changing economic values: the case of Mon Repos turtles. In R. Ballantyne & J. Packer (Eds.), International handbook on ecotourism (pp. 382–393). Northampton, Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Tomažič, I. (2011). Reported experiences enhance favourable attitudes toward toads. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 7(4), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1978). Intergovernmental conference on environmental education, final report. Paris: UNESCO.

  • Wals, A. E., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Stevenson, R. B. (2014). Convergence between science and environmental education. Science,344(6184), 583–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, D., & Newgarden, K. (2011). Rethinking language learning: Virtual worlds as a catalyst for change. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(2), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.1162/ijlm_a_00067.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Primary Education, University of the Aegean, 1 Dimokratias str., Rhodes, Greece

    Emmanuel Fokides & Foteini Chachlaki

Authors
  1. Emmanuel Fokides
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Foteini Chachlaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emmanuel Fokides.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

The revised Toad Attitude Questionnaire (Tomažič 2011).

Scientistic

  1. 1.

    I would like to learn about different species of seals.

  2. 2.

    I would like to learn about the environments where seals live.

  3. 3.

    I would like to read about seals.

  4. 4.

    I would like to know how seals eat, smell and hear.

  5. 5.

    I would like to know how seals develop.

  6. 6.

    I would like to study seals in nature.

  7. 7.

    I get bored when the teacher is talking about seals. (reversed)

  8. 8.

    Fishermen kill too many seals each year.

  9. 9.

    I could observe seals for a long time.

    Negativistic

  10. 10.

    When I am on the beach, I do not have a special wish to meet a seal. (reversed)

  11. 11.

    I would rather see a model of a seal than a live one. (reversed)

  12. 12.

    Seals are disgusting animals. (reversed)

  13. 13.

    I would rather see a movie about seals than watch them in nature. (reversed)

  14. 14.

    I would like to hold a seal in my arms.

  15. 15.

    I am afraid of seals. (reversed)

  16. 16.

    I would like to have a seal as a pet.

  17. 17.

    Seals are ugly. (reversed)

    Moralistic

  18. 18.

    We don't need to protect the Aegean Sea, because seals living there will move elsewhere. (reversed)

  19. 19.

    It would be for the best if all seals were killed. (reversed)

  20. 20.

    Seals need to have rights too.

  21. 21.

    I wouldn't like to hunt seals.

  22. 22.

    Hunting seals for fun is cruel.

  23. 23.

    Keeping seals in captivity is cruel.

  24. 24.

    Seals are very important in nature.

  25. 25.

    Toads are of value as they eat mosquitoes and other bugs. (excluded)

New Ecological Paradigm scale (Dunlap et al. 2000).

  1. 1.

    We are approaching the limit of the number of people the Earth can support.

  2. 2.

    Humans have the right to modify the natural environment to suit their needs.

  3. 3.

    When humans interfere with nature it often produces disastrous consequences.

  4. 4.

    Human ingenuity will ensure that we do not make the Earth unlivable.

  5. 5.

    Humans are seriously abusing the environment.

  6. 6.

    The Earth has plenty of natural resources if we just learn how to develop them.

  7. 7.

    Plants and animals have as much right as humans to exist.

  8. 8.

    The balance of nature is strong enough to cope with the impacts of modern industrial nations.

  9. 9.

    Despite our special abilities, humans are still subject to the laws of nature.

  10. 10.

    The so-called "ecological crisis" facing humankind has been greatly exaggerated.

  11. 11.

    The Earth is like a spaceship with very limited room and resources.

  12. 12.

    Humans were meant to rule over the rest of nature.

  13. 13.

    The balance of nature is very delicate and easily upset.

  14. 14.

    Humans will eventually learn enough about how nature works to be able to control it.

  15. 15.

    If things continue on their present course, we will soon experience a major ecological catastrophe.

The Learning Experience Questionnaire-selected factors (Fokides et al. in press).

Perceived ease of use (not applicable for printed material).

  1. 1.

    I think it was easy to learn how to use the application.

  2. 2.

    I found the application unnecessarily complex. (reversed)

  3. 3.

    I would imagine that most people would learn to use this application very quickly.

  4. 4.

    I needed to learn a lot of things before I could get going with this application. (reversed)

  5. 5.

    I felt that I needed help from someone else to use the application because it was not easy for me to use it. (reversed)

  6. 6.

    It was easy for me to become skillful at using the application.

    Enjoyment

  7. 7.

    I think the application/printed material was fun to use/read.

  8. 8.

    I felt bored while using/reading the application/printed material. (reversed)

  9. 9.

    I enjoyed using/reading the application/printed material.

  10. 10.

    I really enjoyed studying with this application/printed material.

  11. 11.

    It felt good to successfully complete the tasks in this application/printed material.

  12. 12.

    I felt frustrated. (reversed)

    Motivation

  13. 13.

    This application/printed material did not hold my attention. (reversed)

  14. 14.

    The application/printed material was interesting and got my attention. (reversed)

  15. 15.

    When using/reading the application/printed material, I did not have the impulse to learn more about the subject. (reversed)

  16. 16.

    The application/printed material did not motivate me to learn. (reversed)

  17. 17.

    This application/printed material had things that stimulated my curiosity.

  18. 18.

    The amount of repetition in this application/printed material caused me to get bored. (reversed)

    Perceived usefulness

  19. 19.

    I feel that this application/printed material eased the way I learn.

  20. 20.

    This application/printed material was a much easier way to learn compared to the usual teaching.

  21. 21.

    Why use this application/printed material? There are easier ways to learn what I want to learn. (reversed)

  22. 22.

    The application/printed material can make learning more interesting.

    Perceived knowledge improvement

  23. 23.

    I felt that the application/printed material increased my knowledge.

  24. 24.

    I felt that I caught the basic ideas of the subject I was taught.

  25. 25.

    I will definitely try to apply the knowledge I learned.

  26. 26.

    There were explanations and examples of how to use the knowledge I acquired.

  27. 27.

    The presentation of the learning material conveyed the impression that its content is worth knowing.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fokides, E., Chachlaki, F. 3D Multiuser Virtual Environments and Environmental Education: The Virtual Island of the Mediterranean Monk Seal. Tech Know Learn 25, 1–24 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09409-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-019-09409-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation