Imagining technology-enhanced learning with heritage artefacts: teacher-perceived potential of 2D and 3D heritage site visualisations

Background: There is much to be realised in the educational potential of national and world heritage sites. Such sites need to be supported in sharing their resources with a wide and international public, especially within formal education. Two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) heritage site visualisations could serve this need. Our study focuses on the teacher-perceived possibilities and benefits for education around such visualisations. Purpose: We describe how a group of UK teachers perceive the potential of cross-curricular learning that could arise from an Italian world heritage site. The teachers commented on 2D visualisations of artefacts from this site, as well as the design of a 3D immersive environment to serve educational purposes. We consider as follows: (1) how the cross-curricular teaching potential of such resources is perceived, and (2) what design features of a 3D immersive environment teachers suggest are needed for educational explorations. Sample: We recruited 10 teachers from the Midlands region of the UK and carried out semi-structured interviews. Methods: Interviews were transcribed and a thematic analysis applied to the conversations. Questioning was grounded in the examination of 2D and 3D visual resources. This provoked cross-curricular and educational design thinking. Results: Teacher responses highlighted a wide range of cross-curricular possibilities. However, they expressed a more ‘assimilative’ than ‘accommodative’ approach when relating resources to the curriculum. Such ‘assimilation’ involved seeing the site artefacts as raw material for more instrumental ‘curriculum activities’ (e.g. within art and design, geography, maths or literacy) rather than a more accommodative approach whereby curricular disciplines were exercised to make new meaning from the artefacts. In relation to 3D technology design, most teachers highlighted three technology features that would render it well matched to educational practice and three educational benefits over non-3D immersive environments. Conclusions: Teachers can easily imagine a rich range of opportunities to utilise 2D and 3D heritage site artefacts within the curriculum. However, the largely assimilative nature of this cross-curricular appropriation suggests the value of providing more guidance and support to teachers in the interpretation and application of artefacts. Their design suggestions can usefully inform construction of educational features within 3D immersive technologies that support heritage site experiences.

[1]  M. Savin-Baden,et al.  Situating pedagogies, positions and practices in immersive virtual worlds , 2010 .

[2]  G. Salmon,et al.  Developing a five-stage model of learning in Second Life , 2010 .

[3]  D. Muijs,et al.  Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice , 2001 .

[4]  D. Carr.  TOWARDS AN EDUCATIONALLY MEANINGFUL CURRICULUM: EPISTEMIC HOLISM AND KNOWLEDGE INTEGRATION REVISITED , 2007 .

[5]  George C. Brauer,et al.  Archaeology for Education Needs: An Archaeologist and an Educator Discuss Archaeology in the Baltimore Country Public Schools , 2007 .

[6]  P. Stone.  Presenting the past: a framework for discussion , 1997 .

[7]  N. Selwyn.  Distrusting Educational Technology: Critical Questions for Changing Times , 2013 .

[8]  Barry J. Wadsworth.  Piaget's Theory of Cognitive and Affective Development: Foundations of Constructivism , 2003 .

[9]  R. Brandt,et al.  21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn , 2010 .

[10]  Yoav Yair,et al.  3D-Virtual Reality in Science Education: An Implication for Astronomy Teaching , 2001 .

[11]  Reynolds David,et al.  Effective Teaching: Evidence and Practice , 2011 .

[12]  Mike Corbishley,et al.  Learning Beyond the Classroom: Archaeological Sites and Schools , 2008 .

[13]  M. Dietler.  “Our Ancestors the Gauls”: Archaeology, Ethnic Nationalism, and the Manipulation of Celtic Identity in Modern Europe , 1994 .

[14]  M. Ramos,et al.  Exploring Public Perceptions and Attitudes about Archaeology , 2000 .

[15]  Amy Bruckman,et al.  No Magic Bullet: 3D Video Games in Education , 2002 .

[16]  J. Barnes.  Cross-Curricular Learning 3-14 , 2007 .

[17]  Allan M. Brandt,et al.  No Magic Bullet: A Social History of Venereal Disease in the United States Since 1880 , 1987 .

[18]  Jim Rose,et al.  Curriculum organisation and classroom practice in primary schools : a discussion paper , 1992 .

[19]  Maria Economou,et al.  Worth a Thousand Words? The Usefulness of Immersive Virtual Reality for Learning in Cultural Heritage Settings , 2009 .

[20]  L. A. Hausman.  How we Think , 1921 .

[21]  R. Shields,et al.  Places on the margin , 1991 .

[22]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[23]  Tom Bentley,et al.  Learning Beyond the Classroom , 2000 .

[24]  C. Rivet.  Archaeology and Heritage: An Introduction , 2004, European Journal of Archaeology.

[25]  E. Parkinson.  Back to the Future: Where next in a world of cross-curricular primary education? , 2010 .

[26]  Stories to tell? Narrative tools in museum education texts , 2009 .

[27]  George S. Smith,et al.  TEACHING AND LEARNING ARCHAEOLOGY: SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE AND ABILITIES FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY , 2008 .

[28]  Brian C. Nelson,et al.  Designing for real-world scientific inquiry in virtual environments , 2010 .

[29]  Richard Harris,et al.  Pupil perspectives on the purposes and benefits of studying history in high school: a view from the UK , 2010 .

[30]  Guy Merchant.  3D virtual worlds as environments for literacy learning , 2010 .