Collaborative learning across physical and virtual worlds: Factors supporting and constraining learners in a blended reality environment

This article presents the outcomes of a pilot study investigating factors that supported and constrained collaborative learning in a blended reality environment. Pre-service teachers at an Australian university took part in a hybrid tutorial lesson involving a mixture of students who were co-located in the same face-to-face (F2F) classroom along with others who were participating remotely via their avatars in a three-dimensional virtual world. Video and sound recording equipment captured activity in the classroom, which was streamed live into the virtual world so the remote participants could see and hear their instructor and F2F peers; the in-world activity was also simultaneously displayed on a projector screen, with the audio broadcast via speakers, for the benefit of the F2F participants. While technical issues constrained communication and learning in some instances, the majority of remote and F2F participants felt the blended reality environment supported effective communication, collaboration and co-presence. Qualitative analysis of participant evaluations revealed a number of pedagogical, technological and logistical factors that supported and constrained learning. The article concludes with a detailed discussion of present and future implications of blended reality collaborative environments for learning and teaching as well as recommendations for educators looking to design and deliver their own blended reality lessons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[1]  W. Anderson,et al.  2007 National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research , 2011, Internal medicine journal.

[2]  Barney Dalgarno,et al.  Uniting on-campus and distributed learners through media-rich synchronous tools: A national project , 2011 .

[3]  Michael Gardner,et al.  MiRTLE (Mixed-Reality Teaching and Learning Environment): from prototype to production and implementation , 2011 .

[4]  Matt Bower,et al.  Blended reality: Issues and potentials in combining virtual worlds and face-to-face classes , 2010 .

[5]  Elson Szeto,et al.  Community of Inquiry as an instructional approach: What effects of teaching, social and cognitive presences are there in blended synchronous learning and teaching? , 2015, Comput. Educ..

[6]  Barney Dalgarno,et al.  Patterns and principles for blended synchronous learning: Engaging remote and face-to-face learners in rich-media real-time collaborative activities , 2014 .

[7]  Universities Australia Australian code for the responsible conduct of research , 2018 .

[8]  Barney Dalgarno,et al.  Design and implementation factors in blended synchronous learning environments: Outcomes from a cross-case analysis , 2015, Comput. Educ..

[9]  Carlos Delgado Kloos,et al.  Architecture for Collaborative Learning Activities in Hybrid Learning Environments , 2012, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[10]  Marco Kalz,et al.  ARLearn: Augmented Reality Meets Augmented Virtuality , 2012, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[11]  Burkhard Wünsche,et al.  Mixed reality simulation for mobile robots , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[12]  Matthew Schmidt,et al.  The best way to predict the future is to create it : Introducing the Holodeck @ UH mixed-reality teaching and learning environment , 2014 .

[13]  Jyh-Chong Liang,et al.  Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[14]  Rebecca Ferguson,et al.  Augmented Reality and Mobile Learning: the State of the Art , 2013, mLearn.

[15]  F. Paas,et al.  Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design , 1998 .

[16]  Ken Sakamura,et al.  Multimedia Montage—Counterpoint Synthesis of Movies , 1999, Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems.

[17]  Hani Hagras,et al.  Panoramic Audio and Video: Towards an Immersive Learning Experience , 2013 .

[18]  Jillianne Code,et al.  Realigning Higher Education for the 21st-Century Learner through Multi-Access Learning , 2013 .

[19]  Wanqing Li,et al.  Enhancing Project-Based Learning Through Student and Industry Engagement in a Video-Augmented 3-D Virtual Trade Fair , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[20]  Stephanie Smith Second Life Mixed Reality Broadcasts: A Timeline of Practical Experiments at the NASA CoLab Island , 2008 .

[21]  Mark Mon-Williams,et al.  What does virtual reality NEED?: human factors issues in the design of three-dimensional computer environments , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  Sang Chul Ahn,et al.  Real-time 3D video avatar in mixed reality: An implementation for immersive telecommunication , 2006 .

[23]  Barney Dalgarno,et al.  What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? , 2010, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[24]  Michael Gardner,et al.  MiRTLE: a mixed reality teaching & learning environment , 2009 .

[25]  David B. Kaber,et al.  Telepresence , 1998, Hum. Factors.

[26]  Dieter Müller,et al.  Mixed reality learning spaces for collaborative experimentation: A challenge for engineering education and training , 2007, Int. J. Online Eng..

[27]  Yasin Ozarslan,et al.  Augmented Reality in Education: Current Technologies and the Potential for Education , 2012 .

[28]  Kangdon Lee,et al.  Augmented Reality in Education and Training , 2012, TechTrends.

[29]  W. Neuman,et al.  Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches , 2002 .

[30]  Sasha Nikolic,et al.  2D versus 3D collaborative online spaces for student team meetings: Comparing a web conferencing environment and a video-augmented virtual world , 2015 .

[31]  John Bell,et al.  SYNCHROMODAL CLASSES: DESIGNING FOR SHARED LEARNING EXPERIENCES BETWEEN FACE-TO-FACE AND ONLINE STUDENTS , 2014 .

[32]  P. Milgram,et al.  A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays , 1994 .

[33]  Daniel Robert Franklin,et al.  Large-scale immersive video conferencing by altering video quality and distribution based on the virtual context , 2014, IEEE Communications Magazine.