5. Class 4 (Applied Learning):

1. a. Class exploration and group topic presentations in SL and real life

2. b. Class feedback and conclusions

Students were given in-class time to work on their project and to collaborate with their groups to complete the project. Extra time outside of class was also needed as most groups needed extra study time on the topics and also time to complete the presentation files. In Second Life, an area was purchased in the main grid by the instructors, specifically in the Goodnight region. This area was 16,384 square meters and was sufficient for several class sections to work. The virtual space was divided into multiple sections and separated by fences. The space was also sufficient in size to have enough space in between each group area for additional separation. Each group was assigned a specific area to build and to contain their design. It is important to let students know that there is a specific number of virtual objects (or “prims” short for primitive objects) that can housed in an area, so as not to include an excessive amount of unneeded objects in their design. It is also important to remind students not to build in other student areas or disrupt other groups. When students are using the in-world chat feature, other conversations can be “heard” by other groups if they are too close.

By the last in-class building session, student groups had managed to complete most of the assignment. Some groups struggled to build kiosk areas that were related to their topic and some had problems getting their presentation slides uploaded without help (figure 1). On the last day of the project, each of the groups presented the research completed on their assigned topic. The presentations took place in-world and in real life simultaneously. In real life, the presenting group stood in front of the class at the instructor station. One group member was logged into SL at the instructor station with Second Life projected on the overhead screen. The other members of the presenting group were also at the front of the room to assist in their section of the presentation. These students were logged in at their desk computers, but physically located at the front of the classroom. The remainder of the class was able to watch and listen to the presentation though Second Life (by being logged as their self) and in Real Life at the same time. Being in-world and in the real-life class had the advantage of allowing students multiple ways to interact with the content and at the same time provide a real life overlay of the presentation in which they were more accustomed. The class did experience a few technical difficulties during two presentations, which included the platform crashing for one group, and another group had their presentation slides inadvertently reset. Having the real life aspect of the presentation, allowed the group to continue presenting during the challenges. At the conclusion of each presentation, students asked questions to the presenting group via SL through the chat window where each presenting group responded through SL and in person to the class. Several of the presenting groups also posed their own created quiz questions to the class virtually, creating a multi-layered discussion. Figure 2 illustrates a group of students, represented by avatars, in a virtual presentation area.

At the conclusion of the project, the instructors had open discussions with the class to elicit feedback on their experiences with Second Life and the alternate form of presenting. The instructors also wanted to gain key insights into what parts of the project were useful, difficult or lacking in order to make improvements for the future. As mentioned previously, this was a preliminary pilot study in the early testing phase where more in-depth analysis will occur in the future. Feedback was elicited through class discussion and was not explicitly recorded for this pilot study. Student feedback after the project was generally positive on this mixed reality mode of presenting. Many expressed surprise in presenting in this format as it was something very new that they had never before experienced. During the presentations there were very minimal technical problems or complications and by this time in the project, students were much more comfortable being able to navigate and control the avatars for the presentation without help. There were some challenges encouraged in and out of the classroom, beyond those of a technical nature.

Challenges In and Out of the Classroom

This section highlights some issues that were encountered during the Pilot Project, both inside the classroom and for at home assignments.

Inside the Classroom

The real-life classroom was a typical computer lab setting with twenty-four computers. The computers were positioned around the perimeter of the room, so that the instructor could easily assist students that were having problems and keep students on task. This also helped with the collaboration component of the project, as other students could easily maneuver around the class to help other group members. The computers used were 3.2 Ghz with i5 processors with 4GB of RAM, all running the Windows 7 operating system. The instructors were pleasantly surprised regarding the low number of technical difficulties encountered in the classroom.

To make installation and accesses less of a problem, the instructors were able to obtain a large set of 2 gigabyte USB flash drives. These flash drives were generously donated by the college to assist in the Pilot Project. A copy of SL was installed on each flash drive. The intention was to have flash drives readily available with a SL install so that students could use it in class, on another computer on campus, or off-campus. Providing a flash drive, with SL installed was a support system so students could keep working without needing to worry about installing additional software. There were a few issues with defective flash drives, and in those cases the students temporarily installed SL on the lab computer as needed. At the end of the activity, the flash drives were collected back from students who expressed that they would not need the drive or would use Second Life in the future.

Additionally the class did not encounter many problems with the video cards or graphics capabilities during class. Most installations of the SL software defaulted to the highest video settings (which later needed to be adjusted in some instances). During the Project Pilot about 10-15% of the computers experienced periodic crashes, causing SL to need restarting. Lowering the graphic settings one to two levels below maximum seemed to limit the number of crashes. Crashing often occurred when users were moving between regions or teleporting, or when students were located within graphically rich areas. Being close to large bodies of water in SL also seemed to cause problem with some of the graphics cards. The instructors made sure to notify students of these issues as they became known.

Outside the Classroom

A first challenge outside for the classroom pertained to documentary Life 2.0 by Jason Spingarn-Koff that students were asked to watch (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUwD7u7wwcY).While the instructors considered this to be a useful documentary that revealed several motivations of why some people use or are attracted to Second Life, student feedback, was mixed. The class had a discussion about the video, along with several related instructor led questions about how students felt about the video. It is important to that that this discussion was held prior to the students had experience within the virtual world of in Second Life. One perception that was communicated during the discussion was that many students had the impression that users of Second Life were addicted to the environment, led unfulfilled lives and that SL was not a useful space for “normal” people. Other students had opinions that were different, and observed that indeed SL has very useful purposes in many contexts and could be an interesting collaborative and social space. Overall, student’s first impressions of SL were more negative than positive. In the future an alternative video that provides more focus on SL content or several shorter introductory videos on virtual worlds will be used.

A second challenge that occurred was related to those students that did not complete the avatar creation assignment prior to class. Students that failed to complete this homework assignment had difficulties creating their accounts while on campus. After a few students created their account, additional students were blocked from registering because the Internet Protocol (IP) address for the campus location was temporarily blocked from creating additional accounts. As of the time of this writing, this is still a problem, and addition accounts cannot be created on campus. The remaining students were able to complete the registration process by using their internet connection on their phone (using their own data plan and connection having a separate IP address). In future semesters, the need to complete the registration process prior to the class, will be stressed in order to alleviate this challenge in the future.

DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Overall, the Pilot Project using SL in a “Diversity in a Technological Society” course was successful. We gained key insights for increasing student engagement from the project, and additionally identified improvements. The original instructor for the course noted improvement in enthusiasm and detail in submitted projects compared to non-SL usage. Anecdotal evidence from the experience suggests that using a virtual world can have a positive impact on student perception of the project and it can increase enthusiasm for some assignments. Some students did report seeing a positive benefit pertaining to gaining knowledge about virtual worlds for future use. After participating in the assignment, most students that previously had a negative view of SL, had changed their viewpoints. This initial negative opinion may be due to the novelty of the software, but additional research is needed in order to understand preconceived negative perceptions. Understanding these perceptions would be helpful as they could be addressed in the beginning of the assignment.

In future incarnations of this project there are several elements that the instructors wish to change and improve. To assist in streamlining the assignment in the future, the instructors plan on creating additional videos on virtual worlds in addition to video tutorials on how to create objects, upload the presentation files and purchase items in-world. The assignment instructions themselves will also be enhanced to include more detail. Video recorded training sessions will provide additional context for the students of the importance of knowing about virtual world software. It is our wish that other educators can gain insight on how similar projects for their classes may be adapted and used for other diverse content. By placing several of the training videos online, other educators could make use of the information in their classes.

Recommendations

Following is a list of recommendations for integrating the virtual world of SL into a college course using an approach similar to the Pilot Project discussed in this chapter. With each recommendation is a discussed of how the authors plan to implement the changes in future courses.

1. 1. Include at least two smaller training sessions for students to increase awareness of virtual worlds. Overall the initial lectures and discussion sessions about Second Life, combined with several training sessions on the use of SL were helpful for students based on their general comments in class and observations during the project. These training sessions (which included controls, communication, building etc.) were instrumental for student success in using SL to complete the assignment. As students became conformable with the SL technology and understood its application in a wider scope, communication and collaboration expectations were established. Students were able to communicate effectively with their group in-world to complete assigned tasks. Anecdotal evidence, gathered through the author’s observations, suggests that training (even at a basic level) greatly improves overall outcomes when using SL for an educational purpose. There are several orientation areas (e.g., Orientation Island) premade and maintained within SL that can be used by students when instructors do not have a readily available class module for orientation.

2. 2. Require students to complete virtual world activities outside of the classroom. It is beneficial for both the students and instructors to conduct some preliminary research about virtual worlds outside of the classroom. This allows students to pursue topics related to virtual worlds that may be interesting to them. It would be useful to provide a set of guiding questions, depending on the context of a particular course and how virtual worlds could be useful in that domain. For example, in a business course, an instructor could assign specific readings on the value of virtual goods, or articles on virtual world marketing. In the case of this project students were asked to watch a video related to SL. There are many other such videos available that are more general that may be appropriate. Based on student feedback, an alternate video (yet to be determined) will be selected for future semesters. An additional benefit of having students do a portion of the investigation outside of class time is that more time can be focused on the technology and on the collaboration component. A flipped classroom approach for the individual group project topics is useful.

3. 3. Evaluate the available resources and technology. Having backup plans for technical problems will allow for a much smoother class activity. It is important to test the equipment available in the labs especially that of the video card and internet speed. Since SL relies on both components, problems with the video card or internet speeds can easily derail an activity, and frustrate students. Also be sure to check for any scheduled updates for SL as it may pose for some complications if there are any glitches. One major problem that many may face is the lack of ability to install the SL client application on lab computers. Without administrator rights, installation can be difficult or impossible. Also needed updates to the platform that occur periodically can cause problems if instructors lack administrator rights to perform the updates. In this pilot we used flash drives with pre-installed copies of SL which cut down many problems in the classroom. Even though we did have the ability to install software as needed, computers are reset each day which would have required the reinstallation of the program. Be aware however, that the downside of the flash drive approach is the amount of time needed to install the software on each drive. This should be completed well in advance to the actual class activity.

4. 4. Provide students with sufficient use of context for the use of Second Life. It is important that students understand the importance of virtual worlds and that it is a technology that is increasingly being used in education, business settings and for social interactions. Having an understanding of the technology and its impacts can be advantageous. To help students become more fluent and comfortable with the technology in a general sense (not just with SL), then sufficient knowledge of virtual worlds is required. If students are able to use a virtual world throughout the semester, and not just for one project, then additional skills may develop. Students can learn more advanced features and skills that can be used in outer areas. If a particular course does not lend itself to using a virtual world platform all semester, than be sure to provide students with enough context information about how the technology can be used and examples of its current use. For example, show the class how businesses are using the technology to reinforce that it’s not just a “game” but a serious place to conduct work. One could also show the class how it could be used in the medical field by describing its usage in medical education for simulation and information display (Meskó, 2008). There are numerous examples of how educators and researchers are using the platforms in many areas.

5. 5. Aim to reduce costs of conducting an in-class project. The cost of conducting implementing SL into a course, especially if there are a large number of students or a large land requirement, can be rather expensive. One needs to purchase an area of land, and then in addition to that expense, a monthly land rental fee is assessed. For example, a smaller 2,048 square meter parcel costs $15.00 USD or a 32,768 square meter parcel costs $125.00 USD per month. A full link to the Mainland Pricing and fees can be found at: https://secondlife.com/land/pricing.php. It is important to access the particular needs for implementation prior to purchasing space so as not to incur unneeded costs. There are alternative worlds available, some of which are free that can be hosted locally and customized, such as OpenSim. As an added benefit of using a locally hosted world to that institution, security and control of the space can be better maintained. An additional cost that was incurred as part of this Pilot Project was the purchase cost for each group’s PowerPoint presentation boards. In order for the students to present their slides on the topic, they needed a presentation object to do so (discussed more in the next section). For the duration of the Pilot Project each group was given a limited amount of virtual currency (Linden dollars) so that they could purchase a presentation viewer to display their presentation slides. Any additional money that remained could be used by the group to purchase additional decorative items for their space if needed. The students were encouraged to use as many freely available items and content as possible. Students did quickly discover how to obtain and search for free items in the Second Life marketplace: https://marketplace.secondlife.com. Students did learn valuable knowledge on how to make real purchases and how to work with alternate virtual currencies for the project, as well as how to buy from the web, items for their avatar and how to un-package items. There is a large amount of content available in the marketplace and within Second Life for the needs of most projects.

6. 6. Use a created display board instead of a purchased display board for the activity. Part of the Pilot Project required that students upload their final version of their presentation files to SL as image files (either in .jpg or .png format) to be integrated into an in-world presenter object. These presenter objects act as an interactive display board, where a presenter can show a slide and then advance to the next one while speaking. It is similar to use the instructor station in a classroom to go through a set of PowerPoint’s. Initially, to save time and to allow students a chance to actually purchase goods in SL, the instructors requested that students visit the SL Marketplace to purchase a specific item for the assignment. In order for this to work, each group needed approximately $500L (500 Linden dollars) which was supplied by the instructors. This amount of virtual currency is approximate equivalent to $1.89 USD, but the exchange rate of the virtual current changes daily and is controlled by Linden Lab (Bray & Konsynski, 2008). While this is not a substantial amount of money, it could become problematic if there are a large number of groups across many sections. In the future it is planned to create a specific presentation object for the activity that can be copied and modified by each group for no cost. If time allows, students could be given instructions to create this presentation object own their own (given adequate time and directions). This would be a more advanced exercise.

7. 7. Train instructors to be fluent with Second Life and acclimated to the platform. It is also strongly recommend that educators stay current in topics related to virtual worlds so that they can provide relevance to students about why they are using the technology and how it can be useful for in their future as a technology tool. Providing relevance to using virtual worlds in class can strengthen the relationship of its importance to a learning activity. This can often be accomplished by adding additional readings or discussions that highlight high profile uses of the platform in the business world, by educational institutions, use in government, in medicine, etc. Additionally, due to the technical nature of the software and the many changing features, it is helpful for the students to have an instructor that is able to help if, and when problems occur during use. The students can face an array of challenges and raise many questions during the activity. As some students are hesitant about using the software or quickly overwhelmed by it, having a background in the features often helps to calm student fears if something happens. It is also helpful as an educator to be familiar with many of the advanced features and how to use many of the building tools as one can then create much more inviting and engaging learning spaces. This advanced ability could lend itself to being able to link the learning space to outside resources such as websites or to create very engaging self-directed learning tools for outside class time learning.

8. 8. Decide on a design for the virtual world space. As the nature of the virtual learning space is very fluid, the environment can take on many forms. The authors recommended analyzing the needs of a particular project to help determine the form of the virtual space early. The size of the area, the amount of avatars for the class that need to be supported, the need for a sandbox area, and the need for certain tools are all main elements to consider. Visiting public educational areas in SL, to get a sense of what is possible and to see what tools are available in-world (such as display areas, simulations, posters, lecture areas, or video screens, etc.), is recommended. It can be a daunting task to figure out how one’s educational space should appear, balancing both functionally and having an interesting and inviting landscape. Often virtual learning environments are designed very differently depending on the subject matter of a course and discipline. Virtual environments can range from being a recreation of a scene from a science fiction novel or a play, which could be used by an English course, or an area that is visually simpler such as a lecture style amphitheater for class presentations. Alternatively the environment could be a replica of a full scale campus. Simulations through Second Life have great potential (Teoh, 2012).

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

In this section, future goals for the Pilot Project are discussed, specifically addressing improvements needed. A first goal is to integrate SL further into the curriculum and also compare retention and learning outcomes in courses integrating SL and those that do not. Although specific measurable feedback from students or grade outcomes from the assignment were not measured at this time, the instructors observed that this Pilot Project, was extremely beneficial in increasing student confidence for using SL in the future and enthusiasm for the assignment. A more detailed and integrated approach using SL earlier in the course, and in multiple assignments would be advantageous. However, further experimentation on selecting specific assignments and best practices are needed.

A second goal is to seek feedback from students using Second Life for class activities. Student feedback is essential for making improvements in the assignment and for understanding strategies that were helpful. Hepplestone et al. (2011) discusses the importance of student feedback regarding technology used within courses and particularly use that encourages engagement (Hepplestone, Holden, Irwin, Parking, & Thorpe, 2011). While the teaching methods and features may be quite different with technology providing a 3D environment compared to more traditional technology, student involvement and feedback is equally essential. Instructors using any virtual world or classroom assignment based on SL should continually seek student comments. These environments change often and content and directions will need to be updated and checked regularly. Using additional student feedback will be useful in implementing changes noted earlier in the chapter.

A third goal, is to use varied quantitative and qualitative methods for collecting detailed feedback from students through discussions, assignments and also through surveys using a more detailed research methodology. Using a more solid project framework that measures student skills and knowledge as well as perceptions about engagement and perceptions would be greatly beneficial. The authors plan to adopt a similar set of survey questions following Wang and Braman (2009) and Braman et al. (2011) with additional questions aimed at engagement and student perception of virtual worlds. A fourth goal is to create and maintain a more permanent space within Second Life that could be used for additional projects, virtual office hours and display of student and faculty projects. Having a fixed space to serve as a location online where students can meet virtually could help improve the project’s visibility and encourage more collaboration.

While the future directions pertaining to the Pilot Project provides ideas for those who are interested in the next steps for the authors, there is a need to make specific directions for use of SL in higher education courses in general. To date, use of SL in higher education has been limited. For those readers who have not yet implemented a virtual world tool, following are future directions suggested as an extension of this chapter.

1. 1. Identify colleagues that are interested in identifying tools to engage students in active learning and begin the processing of exploring SL (or other virtual worlds), such as those described in this chapter, for the purpose of increasing instructor knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy with virtual world technology.

2. 2. Meet regularly to share what has been learned individually; use journal articles and book chapters that describe the use of SL in college courses; develop a reference list. The list at the end of this chapter could be an initial resource.

3. 3. Stay current in educational trends related to virtual worlds, and aim to tailor 3D content to be relevant to the course using the technology.

4. 4. Seek continuous student and faculty feedback from those involved in using virtual worlds in a course to enhance content and interaction. Including students in the process is helpful in increasing engagement and for making improvements.

CONCLUSION

In this chapter, the authors have discussed a Pilot Project using Second Life in a diversity course to help foster interest and increase student engagement. As presented in this chapter, there have been many changes in this technology over the years including how it can be used in an educational context. By using tools such as SL to increase student engagement, educators can improve their courses and teach materials in new ways. In this chapter we have provided key background on virtual worlds including how they can be used in higher education. Following, a discussion on a pilot project using SL in a diversity course at a community college where the goal was to increase student engagement and teach a new technology tool. This discussion included the project outline and key activities and student feedback. A discussion about difficulties, both in and out of the classroom was presented as well as a set of recommendations for educators interested in incorporating SL into their own classes. A set of future research goals were also presented as the authors move forward into more detailed research questions and collection of student feedback.

It is a sincere hope that more educators decide to use virtual worlds or similar platforms for educational purposes. SL can be an effective tool to excite and engage students in new ways and extend the capabilities of the traditional classroom setting. With the growing set of features and affordances of virtual worlds, they can become even more commonplace where educators are encouraged to experiment more. While much research is still needed to determine best practices, the literature suggests many positive usages and potential learning outcomes.

REFERENCES

Antonacci, D., DiBartolo, S., Edwards, N., Fritch, K., McMullen, B., & Murch-Shafer, R. (2008). The power of virtual worlds in education: a second primer and resource for exploring the potential of virtual worlds to impact teaching and learning. ANGEL Learning ISLE Steering Committee. Retrieved from http://www.angellearning.com/products/secondlife/downloads/The%20Power%20of%20Virtual%20Worlds%20in%20Education_0708.pdf

Arnone, M., Small, R., Chauncey, S., & McKenna, H. (2011). Curiosity, interest and engagement in technology-pervasive learning environments: A new research agenda. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(2), 181–198. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9190-9

Bainbridge, W. (2007). The scientific research potential of virtual worlds. Science , 317(5837), 472–476. doi:10.1126/science.1146930

Bartle, R. (2003). Designing virtual worlds . United States: New Riders Publishing.

Bélisle, J., & Bodur, H. (2010). Avatars as information: Perception of consumers based on their avatars in virtual worlds. Psychology and Marketing , 27(8), 741–765. doi:10.1002/mar.20354

Bradshaw, D. (2009). New practices in flexible learning: virtual worlds – real learning! Pedagogical Reflections. Retrieved from http://virtualworlds.flexiblelearning.net.au/reports/VWRL_pedagog_reflect.pdf

Braman, J., Dudley, A., Colt, K., Vincenti, V., & Wang, Y. (2011). Gaining insight into the application of second life in a computer course: student's perspectives. Proceedings of the 14th HCI International Conference on Online Communities and Social Computing. Orlando, FL.

Braman, J., Meiselwitz, G., & Vincenti, G. (2013). Virtual worlds in the general education curriculum. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (pp. 2692-2697).

Bray, D. A., & Konsynski, B. (2008). Virtual worlds, virtual economies, virtual institutions. Proceedings of the Virtual Worlds and New Realities Conference . Atlanta, GA: Emory University.

Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2004). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments. JISC Technology Applications Program, (41)

Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2004). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments. Research Report. Retrieved from: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00696234/document

Carini, R., Kuh, G., & Klein, S. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education , 47(1), 1–32. doi:10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9

Cohen, A., & Brawer, F. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience . Harper Perennial Modern Classics.

De Freitas, S. (2008). Serious virtual worlds. A scoping guide: Prepared for the JISC e-Learning Programme, The Joint Information Systems Committee . UK: JISC.

Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J.-J. (2013). Pagés, & C. Martínez-Herráiz, J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical Implications and Outcomes. Computers & Education , 63, 380–392. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020

Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual world usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6). DOI: 10:1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01263.x

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education , 18, 7–22.

Falloon, G. (2010). Using avatars and virtual and virtual environments in learning: What do they have to offer? British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 108–122. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00991.x

Gabriel, K., & Flake, S. (2008). Teaching unprepared students: strategies for promoting success and retention in higher education . Stylus Publishing.

Gallagher, C. (2014). Minecraft in the classroom: ideas, inspiration, and student projects for teachers . Peachpit Press.

Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology , 19(2), 117–127. doi:10.1080/21567069.2011.586677

High Fidelity. (2015). High Fidelity Inc. Retrieved from https://highfidelity.com/

Holmberg, K., & Huvila, I. (2008). Learning together apart: Distance education in a virtual world. First Monday , 13(10). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2178/2033

Kapp, K., & O’Driscoll, T. (2010). Learning in 3D: adding a new dimension to enterprise learning and collaboration . Pfeiffer.

KZero. (2014). KZero Reports – Universe Charts. Retrieved from http://kzero.co.uk/

Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://67.192.40.213/~/media/Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Social_Media_and_Young_Adults_Report_Final_with_toplines.pdf

Lester, J. (2014). Augmented mind- The evolution of learning tools from language to immersive reality. Keynote speech presented at the 1st International Conference on e-Learning e-Education and Online Training. Bethesda, Maryland, United States.

Linden Lab. (2013). Infographic - 10 Years of Second Life. Retrieved from http://lindenlab.com/releases/infographic-10-years-of-second-life

Linden Lab. (2015). Mainland Pricing and Fees. Retrieved from https://secondlife.com/land/pricing.php

Macίas-Dίaz, A. (2008). Survey of e-business module (MN5553). St. Andrews University: St. Andrews, Scotland.

McArthur, V., Teather, R., & Stuerzlinger, W. (2010). Comparing 3D content creation interfaces in two virtual worlds: World of Warcraft and second life. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds , 2(3), 239–258. doi:10.1386/jgvw.2.3.239_1

Meskó, B. (2008). Unique medical simulation in second life! Science Roll Blog. Retrieved from http://scienceroll.com/2008/08/17/unique-medical-simulation-in-second-life/

Pew Internet. (2009). Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Retrieved from http://www.distributedworkplace.com/DW/Research/Internet%20broadband%20and%20cell%20phone%20statistics%20-%20Pew%20Internet%20Report%20Jan%202010.pdf

Roehl, A., Reddy, S., & Shannon, G. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences , 105(2), 44–49. doi:10.14307/JFCS105.2.12

Salmon, G. (2009). The future for (second) life and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(3), 526–538. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00967.x

Teoh, J. (2012). Pre-service teachers in second life: Potential of simulations. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 40(4), 415–441. doi:10.2190/ET.40.4.g

The Schome Community. (2007). The schome-NAGTY teen second life pilot final report: a summary of key findings and lessons learnt. Retrieved from http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/getfile.cfm?documentfileid-11344

Vincenti, G., & Braman, J. (2010). Teaching through multi-user virtual environments: applying dynamic elements to the modern classroom . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1-61692-822-3

Vincenti, G., & Braman, J. (2011). Multi-User virtual environments for the classroom: practical approaches to teaching in virtual worlds . Hershey, PA: IGI Global; doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-545-2

Wagner, M. (2008). Second life's popularity rests on breadth of activities. Information Week. Retrieved from http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/virtualworlds/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=210602197

Wang, Y., & Braman, J. (2009). Extending the classroom through second life. Journal of Information Systems. Special Issue: Impacts of Web 2.0 and Virtual World Technologies on IS Education, 20(2), 235-247.

Wang, Y., Dudley, A., Braman, J., & Vincenti, G. (2009). Simulating ethical dilemmas: teaching ethics through immersive virtual environments. Proceedings of the 12th IASTED International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology in Education. St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands.

Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations, and derived experiences of users of massively multi-user online graphical environments . Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 15(3), 309–329. doi:10.1162/pres.15.3.309

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Hwang, J. K., & Collins, P. (2014). Laptop use, interactive science software, and science learning among at-Risk students. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 1(5).

ADDITIONAL READING

Aldrich, C. (2009). Learning online with games, simulations, and virtual worlds: strategies for online instruction . John Wiley & Sons.

Balkin, J., & Noveck, S. (2006). The state of play: law, games, and virtual worlds . New York University Press.

Castronova, E. (2007). Exodus to the virtual world: how online fun is changing reality . Palgrave Macmillan.

Corneliussen, H., & Rettberg, W. (2008). Digital culture, play, and identity: a world of warcraft reader. The MIT Press. Cambridge, Massachusetts. London, England.

Hai-Jew, S. (2010). Virtual immersive and 3D learning spaces: emerging technologies and trends . IGI Publishing.

Heaton, J. (2007). Scripting recipes for second life . Heaton Research Inc.

Hinrichs, R., & Wankel, C. (2012). Engaging the avatar: new frontiers in immersive education . Information Age Publishing.

Hodge, E., Collins, S., & Giordana, T. (2011). The virtual worlds handbook: how to use second life and other 3D virtual environments . Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Nelson, B., & Erlandson, B. (2012). Design for learning in virtual worlds. Interdisciplinary Approaches to Educational Technology . Routledge.

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: identity in the age of the internet . New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks.

Wankel, C., & Kingsley, J. (2009). Higher education in virtual worlds: teaching and learning in second life. International Perspectives on Education and Society . Emerald Group Publishing.

Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (2009). Emerging ethical issues of life in virtual worlds . Information Age Publishing.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Avatar: A 3D representation of a user within a virtual world. Avatars can take many shapes and forms such as a humanoid representation, animal, shape or other figure which allows the use to interact within the world and with other users.

Educational Game: A game in which the main goal is a specific learning outcome. Educational games are often used to increase student engagement.

Educational Space: A web-based, 3D or virtual representation of a classroom or learning area. In relation to virtual worlds, an educational space is often related to the 3D area used for learning which can be represented in a myriad of ways.

Multi-User Virtual Environment: Also known as a MUVE. This term can be used to describe a virtual world that can be used for a collaborative purpose where users can interact in real-time.

Second Life: A popular internet based 3D world created by Linden Labs.

Script: A set of instructions or a small program designed to carry out a specific function or task. In Second Life the Linden Scripting Language is used (LSL) to make objects interactive.

Student Engagement: Increasing student interest, focus and, or motivation for a particular learning activity.

Virtual World: A virtual world often refers to an internet based 3D or 2 ½ D environment where users can interact within the world or with other users through an avatar. Often virtual worlds are persistent environments where a large number of users can participate.

Virtual Reality: A term that can refer to a virtual representation of a scene or reality simulation in 3D. Virtual Reality can be viewed on a traditional display or using immersive VR goggles.

Social Networking Site (SNS): A website that is aimed at social interaction that often includes a public profile, ability to post user generated content and also to connect to other users.

Section 2

Virtual Reality Across Disciplines

Chapter 5

Using Second Life® for Situated and Active Learning in Teacher Education

• Barbara L. Ludlow West Virginia University, USA

• Melissa D. Hartley West Virginia University, USA

ABSTRACT

Preservice and inservice special education teachers used Second Life® as the educational platform in online courses in a graduate level distance education program. Faculty designed the virtual learning experiences to facilitate situated and active learning through the creation of a virtual campus and course-specific learning activities. The purpose of this chapter is to describe how instructors designed environments and activities to optimize learning in a three-dimensional virtual immersive environment, to report students’ responses to learning in the virtual world, and to discuss the implications of virtual simulations for teacher education.

Introduction

Virtual reality applications represent a new technology for use in teacher education programs to assist prospective teachers in acquiring knowledge and skills. Constructivist theories of situated learning and active learning underlie the long-standing and widespread use of educational simulations in teacher education (Richardson, 1997) to help preservice students acquire knowledge and skills in college courses to become effective practicing teachers in their own classrooms in future years. Virtual environments offer new opportunities for creating educational simulations for these teachers-in-training (Calandra & Puvirajah, 2014) to help them acquire and practice skills through project-based activities or roleplaying exercises. The purpose of this chapter is to share how Second Life®(SL), an online virtual world, has been used to support situated and active learning in an online graduate program to prepare special education personnel.

BACKGROUND

Constructivist Theories of Learning

Constructivist theories of human learning have emphasized two key principles: learning must be situated and learners must be active. These principles have been widely applied in teacher education for many years and are equally applicable to face-to-face and online program models. Technology-based learning environments such as games and virtual worlds give educators new tools to promote situated and active learning, especially in online courses and programs.

Situated Learning

Situated learning refers to opportunities for the learner to acquire knowledge and skills in meaningful, often natural contexts. Constructivist learning theorists (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Lave & Wenger, 1991) have asserted that meaningful learning does not occur through the simple transmission of information from expert to novice but rather results from a learner’s co-construction of knowledge through shared experiences and interactions with others in realistic contexts. Situated learning implies that learners need opportunities to learn through being 1) “located” in a real or simulated context through a learning activity such as a project, simulation, laboratory session, or field experience, and 2) provided with opportunities to “be active” as they learn by engaging and collaborating with other learners (Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt, 1993). Teacher education programs have long made extensive use of situated learning through field experiences in schools, problem-based learning activities, and educational simulations that support preservice students in learning concepts and skills related to educational practice (Korthagen, 2010).

Active Learning

Active learning refers to materials and instructions that allow the learner to manipulate objects and interact with others to acquire both physical and social information necessary to develop conceptual understanding and practical skills. Proponents of instructional practices based upon active learning recommended learning activities such as discussion, role playing exercises, case studies, and games (Bonwell & Eison, 1991). Principles of active learning have long been recommended for use at the college level to motivate and engage learners (Meyers & Jones, 1993). More recently, educators have explored how computer- and Web-based applications can be used to design technology-enabled active learning activities (Dorf et al., 2010).

Use of Virtual Environments for Active and Situated Learning

Virtual reality offers new opportunities for instructional design through the creation of learning environments (contextual settings and physical objects) and learning activities (manipulation of objects and interaction with others) that can be accessed on campus or online. Virtual reality applications can be used to design simulations that provide a game-like format that enhances motivation and engagement in learning, a three-dimensional (3D) interface that promotes immersion in the activity, and a personal avatar that enhances the sense of presence in an online environment (Dede, 2009). Virtual simulations avoid the practical constraints and ethical issues sometimes presented by real world activities and settings and allow learners access to a wider range of experiences that might not otherwise be possible (Falconer, 2013).

Virtual environments such as games and online worlds support constructivist learning principles through specially designed contexts that simulate the real world (situated learning) and avatars that enable embodied, immersive, and interactive experiences (active learning) (Dawley & Dede, 2014). They promote situated learning by allowing individuals to explore and interact within authentic and purposeful simulated contexts (Whitton & Hollins, 2008). They also promote active learning by allowing individuals at a variety of remote locations to act upon multiple media as well as collaborate online in real time through movement, text, and speech (Pantelidis, 2009). Several independent literature reviews noted that virtual environments have been used successfully for educational simulations across many fields (Hew & Chung, 2010; Kim, Lee & Thomas, 2012). Ellis, Anderson, and Kibbe (2014) argued that virtual environments may be especially appropriate for educational applications because they integrate the preferences of today’s learners for digital technologies, gaming activities, and online social interactions.

Use of Second Life® for Active and Situated Learning

SL is an online virtual world that is available globally, offers free access to a personal avatar and easy-to-use software, and does not require a high degree of technical skill to navigate or design. This virtual world is the one that is most widely used in educational applications, as many colleges and universities have established a presence in-world for online learning activities (Ellis, Anderson, & Kibbe, 2014). SL has been used in higher education for hybrid and online courses, at the undergraduate and graduate levels, and across a variety of disciplines as well as in professional preparation programs in counseling, nursing and education (Wang & Burton, 2013). Cooke-Plagwitz (2009) argued that SL has three primary benefits for instruction: 1) operating in an immersive environment enables contextualized learning; 2) manipulating one’s avatar promotes active learning; and 3) interacting with others in-world facilitates collaborative learning.

Jarmon (2008) indicated that SL is effective in supporting both situated and active learning in distance education because learners experience embodiment and social presence through an avatar that can be maneuvered through three-dimensional space as well as engagement and connection through opportunities for interaction and collaboration within shared experiences. Recent research reports have shown that SL has been used to support situated learning in online courses through providing an immersive environment (Falconer, 2012), increasing the sense of social presence through avatar interactions (Annetta, Folta, & Klesath, 2010), and facilitating project completion through participation in learning communities (Messer, Evans, Cownie, & Dawe, 2012). Other reports have indicated that SL also has been used to support active learning through game-like activities that enhance motivation and engagement (Schiller, Goodrich, & Gupta, 2013) as well as interaction and collaboration (Caruso, Morch, Thomassen, Hartley, & Ludlow, 2014).

A CASE STUDY OF VR IMPLEMENTATION IN ONLINE COURSE DELIVERY

Contextual Factors

A major research university, and land-grant institution, in the South has offered an online graduate program leading to initial teaching certification in special education for over a decade. This online program was designed to make training available to individuals living in rural areas near the university and is also available across the U.S. and in approved international locations. Courses are offered through Blackboard Learn 9, an online course management system that provides the platform for asynchronous activities and assessments. Blackboard Collaborate is used as the virtual classroom program for synchronous class sessions in real time. For the past four years, faculty also have incorporated SL for real time activities in courses, creating and using a private virtual island funded by the College and maintained by the department. An island in SL is defined as an island in real life; it’s a piece of land surrounded by water on all sides. To date, SL has been used in six different graduate courses totaling 37 course sections, by six individual instructors, and collectively delivered to nearly 700 students.

SL was used as the educational platform for these graduate courses; in many cases, all instructional activities took place within this virtual environment, while in others, instructors also made some use of Blackboard Learn 9 and Blackboard Collaborate. Within each course, students met with the instructor weekly or bi-weekly on the college’s virtual campus within SL for activities in real time but some assignments required them to access SL independently at their own convenience. Instructional design efforts focused on two categories: learning environments designed to facilitate situated learning and learning activities designed to promote active learning.

Learning Environments for Situated Learning

Learning environments that represent the critical features of real life contexts are important for situated learning (Herrington & Oliver, 2000). Therefore, one participating faculty member designed learning environments to represent typical learning spaces encountered in college settings as well as in K-12 school settings.

College Campus Environments

To engage students and simulate the experience of being in a college classroom while taking an online course, learning environments within the College’s island in SL were carefully crafted, and developed over time. Since the university has two real-life physical campuses, the SL faculty designer built two campuses on the SL island. Students taking campus-based courses use the university’s personal rapid transit (PRT) system to get from one campus to another; therefore, a PRT was built and scripted to transport students between the campuses in the SL island. Figure 1 presents a screenshot of a student taking the PRT to commute between campuses.

The SL faculty designer built lecture halls with display boards for interactive lecture, and a common meeting area with stadium style seating for all students to meet at the beginning of class. The SL faculty designer created the lecture halls by linking multiple boxes together, and making the interior of the boxes transparent. After multiple boxes were linked together, the textures of the outsides of the boxes were changed to make the buildings resemble the architectural style of buildings on the actual campus. Figure 2 presents a screenshot of a lecture hall.

The SL faculty designer also built small group buildings for group work within courses. The small group buildings were positioned so that they were 60 meters apart to minimize conversation interference between groups during group work. Inside the small group buildings, an oval table is available for formal group work, and a comfortable seating area is provided for informal group work. Picture frames were hung around the room for including student photos in each of the group buildings. Students could choose to display photos of themselves, their family, their pets, or any photos they would like to share with their colleagues. Figure 3 is a screenshot showing students working within a small group building.

The SL faculty designer created an SL skill practice tutorial area so that students could become proficient in the skills they would need to use this technology for course activities. The skills included in the practice area were using object view, buying content from a box, retrieving an item from one’s inventory, creating a notecard, and sharing a notecard. Using object view involved zooming in on an object to have a better view. For example, when students were viewing the presentation slides on display boards, it helped to zoom in if their avatar was standing behind other students or toward the back of the classroom. Buying content from a box involved right clicking on the box and selecting buy. Once the contents of the box were purchased (for free), the students could locate the content within their inventory in world. Inventory is defined as an archiving of materials one has acquired, much like the download folder in one’s computer, and retrieving an item from one’s inventory involved opening the inventory and finding the material within a folder. The most common item to retrieve from one’s inventory during class was a notecard. Notecards are similar to a Microsoft Word document with only text features, where one can read typed information. In addition to reading content from a notecard, students were also asked to create notecards. One way to create a notecard involved clicking, “Create notecard” in the drop down menu of one’s inventory; however, there are many routes to creating a notecard. Lastly, sharing a notecard involved right clicking the notecard, selecting share, and then selecting the individual (avatar name) with whom one would like to share the notecard. However, there are also many different routes to sharing a notecard. Students were asked to practice using these skills in the practice area because these were skills that were typically used in class. Students used object view to see the display boards with the presentation slides when other students’ avatars were standing in their line of vision. Students purchased boxes, for $0 Linden dollars (the virtual in-world currency) to obtain the materials for the class session. In order to review the materials purchased from the box, students needed to know how to retrieve the materials from the boxes within their inventory. Finally, students needed to know how to create and send notecards in order to share the information they learned with their instructor.

The college’s island was private; therefore, faculty instructors sent students an invitation to join the group accompanied with a landmark for the island. A landmark is defined as a location with coordinates. It could be compared to sending someone else one’s location using a “pin” with an iPhone. Once students accepted the group invitation, they could use the landmark to teleport to the virtual College island.

K-12 School Environments

In addition to planning the space on the island for the campuses, the faculty designer also created a primary school on the campus. When students entered the primary school, they were greeted and asked to proceed to the main office. Once they walked over to the main office, their attendance was logged and they received a visitor badge. The primary school was designed for students to practice and engage in instructional activities with K-12 student bots (scripted objects built to resemble students) independent of class time. Within the primary school there was a kindergarten classroom, two resource rooms, a third grade classroom and a fifth grade classroom. Within each classroom, there was a teacher’s desk, an area for small group work with a kidney table and chairs, and desks for independent seatwork. Each classroom had a chalkboard and wall decorations that would be appropriate for the age level of the classroom. Within the resource room, there was a file cabinet that included the present level statements for student bots with disabilities. Students could click on the file cabinet drawer they would like to open and obtain a notecard with the present level statement for any students whose name began with the letters reflected on the drawer. The resource room contained a kidney table for small group learning, student desks for independent learning, and a chalkboard. The wall decorations in the room were reflective of the content for the assignments students would be working on in the resource room.

The learning environments on the virtual college campus were designed to facilitate interaction and collaboration as well as skill acquisition, maintenance, and refinement. The primary school was designed for students to practice skills needed by K-12 teachers. The main classrooms were designed for interactive lecture and the small group buildings were designed to facilitate group work without interruption. While these virtual environments were important for facilitating learning and collaboration within a virtual world, the design of activities to promote active learning were critical to addressing the content of each course

Active Learning

Faculty instructors designed the activities within each course to promote active learning. A typical class session included five activity components: begin with an activator, review the activator, deliver an interactive lecture, conduct individual activities, oversee a group activity, and debrief. Figure 4 presents a screenshot of students participating in interactive lecture. During each session, students manipulated objects within SL, interacted with others, and collaborated with others.

Manipulation of Objects

Within the virtual class sessions, students manipulated objects on a regular basis to acquire information. For example, once on the virtual College island, students teleported to buildings for their specific courses or to K-12 classrooms as required for specific learning activities. In order to teleport to the classrooms, students touched an object and selected Teleport from the drop down options. Once inside the classrooms, students navigated the areas by moving their avatars.

Students also manipulated objects through the use of boxes to share information. Depending upon the type of information needed, the instructors shared information through notecards or textures. Notecards were contained within boxes while textures were used to upload and post images, including presentation slides (i.e., PowerPoint or Keynote). Students bought boxes ($0L) to obtain the notecards. To buy the boxes, students touched the boxes and selected buy and then retrieved the notecard(s) from their inventory. After retrieving the notecard(s) from their inventory, students reviewed the information on the notecard(s). After completing the activity on the notecard, students created their own notecard to share their information with the instructor.

In addition to manipulating objects for everyday learning activities, three new activities involving manipulating objects were created. These new activities included: 1) how students accessed the private island, 2) how students were oriented to the learning space, and 3) an activity on classroom configuration.

The first new activity involved how students accessed the virtual private island. In the past, class time was reserved for access and orientation to the College’s virtual island; however, faculty wanted to see if students could access the private island independently to maximize class time for learning course content. Since the college’s virtual island is private, students previously met the instructor in an area called SPED Retreat on the first SL class session. SPED Retreat was the personal property that accompanied the purchase of a premium avatar and was decorated to look less like a personal residence and more like an office. A handout, with screenshots and detailed directions on how to accept the group’s invitation, was given to students through the course management system prior to the first meeting in SL. Once class began, the instructor sent students the invitations during the live class session in case there were any problems with accepting the invitation. Students purchased the landmark for the virtual private island from a box in SPED Retreat for free, and then teleported to the island once they accepted the invitation. This process took approximately 15-30 minutes depending upon the size of the class. Faculty sent the invitations during a live class session because there were concerns that new students may struggle with accepting the invitation and teleporting to the island. However, after nine semesters of sending the invitations during the first class session, faculty decided to send the invitations to students outside of class time. Students were given the same handout, and an additional handout was created to provide directions on how to teleport to the island once students were sent the landmark. Faculty were concerned that students would struggle; however, when talking with a student who was new to SL, the student said, “This has been the easiest part so far.”

The second new activity was orienting students to the learning space through experiencing an independent virtual scavenger hunt for the College island orientation. In early semesters of using SL, students were given an orientation to the island during the first class session. After everyone had accepted the group invitation and teleported to the island, the instructor would lead the class through an orientation of the virtual campus. After nine semesters of using class time for the orientation to the campus, faculty decided to create an individual activity where students would acclimate themselves to the virtual campus through a scavenger hunt led by a student bot. When students first arrived at the virtual island, they were greeted by, Marcus, the student bot. Students bought a notecard from Marcus ($0), by clicking on the box on his desk, which contained the directions to the scavenger hunt. The scavenger hunt led students to the tutorial area within the island where they could practice skills regularly used in class, such as object view, buying a box, creating a notecard, retrieving a notecard from one’s inventory, and submitting a notecard. After students finished practicing procedural skills in the tutorial area, Marcus prompted them to use the PRT for transportation to the virtual Evansdale campus. To take the PRT, students clicked on the PRT, and selected “teleport” from the drop down menu. When students arrived at the Evansdale campus, Marcus prompted them to enter the Main Classroom and have a seat. The Main Classroom was the area where students would meet for their first class session. To earn credit for participating in the scavenger hunt, students chose to either take screenshots of their avatar practicing the skill, or they created a video of their avatar demonstrating the skills. Faculty were concerned that students may prefer having faculty lead the orientation to the campus. However, one student shared that they preferred completing the orientation independently because they could work at their own pace. The student had taken previous courses in SL where the faculty led the orientation and they felt like they had to rush to keep up with the group; however, during the independent orientation this factor was removed.

Finally, the last newly created activity regarding the manipulation of objects involved planning and implementing classroom configuration. The classroom configuration activity took place within a virtual classroom inside of the virtual Primary School. When students approached the classroom they had the choice between two classroom configuration activities: Assignment A and Assignment B.

For Assignment A, students were given the following scenario, “It is the beginning of the school year, and your task is to arrange your classroom to increase student participation. Your teaching style includes a lot of group work and discussion.” Students were also given the following information, “Please arrange the following: 12 student desks, 5 chairs, teacher desk, waste basket, small group table, and computer desk with computer. Please go to the following URL for a video tutorial on how to rearrange the furniture in your room. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AolhYGP0xMY” . In addition to the information about the furniture in the room, and a video tutorial on how to move objects in SL, students were also asked to return the furniture to the way they found it when they entered, and were given this task, “ Rearrange the classroom & take a screenshot (or multiple if needed) to show how you would arrange the classroom. Please use your text, or additional sources, to support your classroom arrangement to increase participation and facilitate both group work and discussions. Create one word document with the screenshots and your justification.”

For Assignment B, students were given the following scenario, “It's the 2nd week of school, and the arrangement of the classroom has been problematic. Your task is to arrange the classroom to optimize independent work & to decide where students should sit.” In addition to the scenario, they were given the following names of fictitious students, Jenny, Brian, Sophia, Natalie, Oliver, Olivia, Liam, Carisa, Marcus, Joe, Harper, and Jackson. Students were also given the following additional information to assist them in completing the task, “Olivia and Liam are constantly fighting. Liam picks on Olivia every chance he gets. Carisa is disruptive and is constantly getting out of her seat. She has one non-content related talk out every 9 seconds. Marcus and Joe are friends and like to have side conversations. Harper is easily distracted. Jackson loves to read.” They were also given the following task, “Rearrange the classroom & decide where students should sit. Create a Word document with a screenshot showing your classroom arrangement. Then label a screenshot showing where you would have each student sit based upon the additional information. Here is a video tutorial on how to move objects in SL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AolhYGP0xMY”

After selecting Activity A or B, students walked into the classroom where there were 12 desks with chairs, 5 chairs, a teacher desk, a wastebasket, a small group table, and a computer table with a computer all in the middle of the room. After watching a faculty-created video tutorial on how to move objects in SL, students moved the furniture in the room based upon the scenario in the assignment they selected, and then wrote a paper justifying their selection with literature to support their selection.

A Classroom Configuration Activity was offered as a bonus activity to 31 students, of which 12 students completed the activity for bonus points. Graduate student responses to the Classroom Configuration Activity demonstrated their understanding of the importance of classroom configuration in facilitating collaborative learning experiences for K-12 students. One graduate student highlighted evidenced-based practices within his response. Please see Figure 5 for a screenshot of the way this graduate student rearranged his classroom and the classroom reference in his response.

In an effort to increase the participation given my teaching style much of the instruction will take place in the view from picture B. By setting up the 12 desks (the group of 2 would be 4 if there were enough desks in the room.) It allows flexibility of assignments. It allows the use of jigsaw learning, peer tutoring, and the ability to differentiate instruction by group by giving modified assignments to each group that will help accomplish the learning objective. This set up also allows for group debate and instruction. By having this layout it afford me the ability to quickly teach mini lessons to a group that may be struggling. Being close to the chalkboard also allows for information to be shared quickly for guided notes, or “do now” strategies. By using this lay out it would be easy to accomplish, choral response, lecture, class discussions moderated by the teacher, discussion groups, committee report, reading assignments.

Another graduate student also highlighted evidenced-based practices in her decisions for configuring the classroom to promote collaboration.

I used two Internet sources to influence my classroom layout. On the website http://www.learningandteaching.info/teaching/layout.htm, the author, J.S. Atherton, discussed ideal configurations for varying types of teaching/learning styles. Atherton indicated that for whole group discussion, a U shaped set-up was beneficial and for group work, “tables” were the best option. In the article Seating arrangements that promote positive academic and behavioural outcomes: a review of empirical research, authors Rachel Wannarka And Kathy Ruhl discuss the benefits of rows for behavior management, but acknowledge that grouped seating is useful for collaborative work.

Students are grouped in U shaped “tables” consisting of 4 to 5 seats per group. This will promote conversation during collaborative tasks and for assignments in which students need to share materials, the desks could be pushed together to form a more traditional table shape.

While student responses varied in how they would organize the classroom, each response demonstrated understanding of how to organize a space to facilitate collaboration.

Interaction with Others

Within virtual class sessions, many learning activities were designed to facilitate interaction. Through the design of activities specific to each course, students were expected to interact with both their peers and faculty-created student bots.

Interacting with Peers

During class sessions, students interacted with either their instructor or their peers for approximately 90% of the class session. During the interactive lecture, students completed individual activities related to course content. During these individual activities, students were asked to apply the content that was learned and/or make a personal connection to the content that was learned. An example of an individual activity in the graduate collaboration course included evaluating the professional tone of email exchanges. An example of an individual activity in the mathematics course included determining the types of problems to include on a curriculum-based assessment after reviewing grade level Common Core standards, which are national educational standards for K-12 students.

After students finished their independent work, they were asked to share their work, or ideas, with their peers. Faculty led the debriefing and called on students to share their work; students typically shared their thoughts orally. After students were finished sharing, the class returned to the interactive lecture, participating through the SL chat text feature. While students could respond by speaking during the interactive lecture, a large majority of students chose to type their responses during the lecture.

In addition to interactive lecture, students also interacted with one another during small group activities. Students worked with the same group throughout the semester, and self-selected their group at the beginning of the semester based upon common interests for the specific class they were taking (i.e. disability category, level of mathematics, etc.). To facilitate the group selection process, the course faculty created display boards to show the special education categories (i.e. Vision, Gifted, Autism, Multicategorical K-6, Multicategorical 5-Adult), and asked that students walk over to the display board showing the area where they were working toward certification. Students were asked to join another group if the group already had five people in it. Students could see how many people were in the group by looking at how many avatars were standing in front of the display boards.

Each class session had 45 minutes to one hour dedicated for completion of small group activities. During this time, students role-played to practice skills, worked through case studies, and used their knowledge from their text and other sources to solve common problems in K-12 teacher experience. In order to encourage collaboration, students were asked to solve problems that would be difficult or time consuming to solve independently, or they were asked to practice skills that would require role-playing.

Many students enjoyed interacting with their instructor and peers through SL as demonstrated in the following student reflections:

I appreciate use of the Second Life environment; as a result, I believe this has been my MOST interactive and “inclusive-feeling” online course EVER! It was very powerful to be able to “see” my colleagues and work in small groups with them. I look forward to future classes offered in the Second Life medium.

I love Second Life. I feel like I am really in the classroom.

I learned I a lot during this class and the way we were able to interact with each other and the Second Life program was very interesting.

Second Life is an amazing idea to help in collaboration and also to make me feel like I was actually a part of a group.

I had never used Second Life for any class. However, I have had other instructors require group work without Second Life. The SL program made this class more like a traditional class. Even though I had to get used to the program in the beginning, I felt that SL was a benefit especially to this class.

Out of all the classes I have taken online this was the class that made me feel most like a student in a traditional classroom because of Second

Life. -Interacting with Student Bots

Students not only interacted with one another, but they also interacted with newly faculty-created student bots. There were six student bots with special needs, and 12 general education student bots. Each bot was created to have his/her own personality and had accompanying background information. The bots with special needs had present level statements to let the graduate students know their current levels of academic performance. Each bot was scripted to respond to common academic phrases (i.e. please take out your homework). The bots were scripted using a free scripts available online, and through creation of an accompanying notecard as a “brain” for each bot. The notecard and the script were then added to each bot by dragging each to the content area of the bot. The brain of the bot was created to respond to keywords. Each bot was programmed to respond differently. In addition to the types of responses the bots could give, the bots were also programmed to respond freely a certain percentage of time. This meant that the bots would respond when not called upon directly. Each bot was given a different percentage for his or her free response based upon his/her personality. Due to the ability to respond freely, without being called upon, faculty decided to create learning activities that were graduated in the number of bots with whom the students would work. This decision was made to minimize the anxiety level of graduate students when first working with the bots. Learning activities, incorporating the student bots, were created to transition the graduate students from working with a small number of bots to a larger number of bots. The first activity involved two bots, the second activity involved four bots, and then students could gradually work up to working with the inclusion classroom with all 18 bots. It was hypothesized that beginning with 18 bots could be overwhelming.

To pilot working with the newly created bots, activities were created for 25 graduate students taking a course on how to teach mathematics to students with disabilities. The graduate students began by working in the resource room with two student bots. The resource room activity involved re-teaching mathematics content to the student bots. Before they entered the resource room, graduate students selected the activity, by clicking a box, and reviewed the accompanying notecard.

The students could choose from activities pertaining to topics such as, Factors, Greatest Common Factor, Least Common Multiples, and Algebraic Expressions. The notecards for the activities included the Common Core Standard for the activity, the session objective, and the materials needed to complete it. Students then entered the classroom and walked to the file cabinet to retrieve the students’ present levels of academic performance. Following is an example of a present levels statement for Monique, one of the bots in the Resource Room.

Monique is a 13 year old student in 7th grade and is diagnosed with a learning disability. She enjoys reading, watching movies, shopping, and dancing. Monique is very enthusiastic and cares about her school work. She is currently placed in the general education classroom.

When informally assessed with the Math Grade Level Test, Monique scored 16/28 correct, or a 5.0 grade equivalent level (performing at the same level as a student entering the 5th grade).

Monique can multiply two single digit whole numbers (1/1), but struggles with multiplying decimals or single digit numbers by double or triple digit numbers (0/2). She cannot divide double or triple digit numbers by single or double digit numbers (0/2) and incorrectly identified a division sign as a subtraction sign in one problem. Monique struggles with adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing fractions or mixed numbers (0/4). She cannot convert between units, although she is able to do so with the assistance of a conversion chart. These difficulties in math inhibit Monique’s progress in the general curriculum.

Monique was informally assessed using the Phonological Awareness Inventory and scored 2/3 on rhyme identification, 3/3 on rhyme production, 3/3 on syllable blending, 2/3 on syllable segmentation, 3/3 on syllable deletion, 3/3 on phoneme identification, 3/3 on phoneme isolation (initial), 3/3 on phoneme isolation (final), 3/3 on phoneme blending, and 3/3 on phoneme segmentation. Although mistakes were made on rhyme identification and syllable segmentation, it is not believed that the errors are significant or are inhibiting her reading or comprehension skills.

Monique was informally assessed using the Word ID Fluency Test and scored 30/40 correctly, or a 3.4 grade level equivalent (performing at the same level as a student in the fourth month of the 3rd grade).

Her errors included the omission of letter sounds, especially vowel-consonant-e-syllable words, such as saying “priss” instead of “price” and “futter” instead of “future.” She also omitted other letter sounds, such as the “i” in “tailor,” saying “taller” instead. Monique made substitutions in letter sounds, such as saying “errand” instead of “around” and “sint” instead of “since.” In some cases she reversed sounds by saying “year” instead of “every” and “sever” instead of “served.” Monique’s disability impacts her involvement in general education by affecting her reading comprehension due to lack of knowledge of word identification skills.

When informally assessed with the Reading Comprehension Grade Level Test, Monique successfully completed the 3rd grade level assessment. She showed text-implicit comprehension by forming opinions and making predictions and showed script-implicit comprehension by relating to the text verbally as she read.

Monique’s errors included text-explicit reading comprehension errors, such as incorrectly identifying characters, items, or characters’ actions that were directly stated in the text.

Monique’s difficulties in recalling information from text through text-explicit comprehension inhibits her progress in the general curriculum.

After reviewing the virtual students’ present levels, the graduate students decided which instructional strategies they would use to reteach the information in the activity. When the student bots made errors, the graduate students were asked to determine the type of error that was made (procedural, conceptual, declarative) and what instructional strategies would be most effective for that type of error.

Many students entered the Resource Room and practiced working with the bots before the assignment was due. During the beginning of a class session, students expressed their concerns that no matter how many different strategies they used to reteach the bots that the bots could not get the answers correct. The students were concerned that their grades would be impacted by their inability to get correct responses from the bots. This was a very interesting and unexpected consequence of the activity. Students personalized the bots and attributed human-like characteristics to the bots in that they thought that if they only taught them better the bots would learn, much like real children in real life.

For the assignment, students interacted with the bots through chat text. See Figure 6 for an example of a student working with the bots in the resource room. To use chat text in SL, one types his/her comments in the chat section of the screen. The bots were scripted to respond to keywords that would be common in a math lesson; however, the graduate students were not given the keywords that would assist them in getting a mathematical response from the bots. The bots were scripted to say statements when their “brain” did not understand what was being said to them. For example, one bot may say, “I don’t understand” while another bot may say, “This is stupid.” when he/she did not understand. In order for the graduate students to get a response from the bots, they often had to think of multiple ways to ask the same question because their original question did not include a keyword. Graduate students were not given the keywords for interacting with the bots.

Through interacting with the bots, students were able to apply skills of identifying the types of mathematical errors, and in using evidenced-based teaching strategies as a practice prior to working with children in real life, as is demonstrated in this student’s answer to the activity.

When I worked with Vince, I asked him to give me the answer to 2x-3y when x=2 and y=1 he replied “5”, when the correct answer is 1. I asked him to give me the answer to question 2, which is “4w+2z when w=-2 and z=5” and he replied “4” when the correct answer is 2. Based on this information, I believe that Vince is making a conceptual error. The reason I believe that it is a conceptual error with Vince is because I don’t think Vince understands the concept of substituting a number in for a variable and then multiplying those two numbers together then adding the products together. I believe that Vince is merely guessing at what the correct answer is, which is common with students who do not have conceptual knowledge.

When I worked with Monique, I asked her to give me the answer to 2x-3y when x=2 and y=1 and she replied “260”. I asked her to give me the answer to problem 2, which is “4w+2z when w=-2 and z=5” and she replied “152” and the correct answer is 2. Based on this information, I believe that Monique also has a conceptual problem, because I believe that she does not understand the concepts of substituting in the numbers for the variables, multiplying and then adding the two products together. I believe that she is guessing her answers to the problem, which is common when students have a conceptual error. I believe that Monique is guessing really high numbers because she believes that larger numbers would make more sense with these problems given that it is algebra and the problems appear to be long.

The strategy that I have selected to use with Vince and Monique is the graphic advance organizer– modeling “I do” – group guided practice “we do”– independent practice strategy “you do”. I chose this strategy because the graphic advanced organizer will give Vince & Monique a better understanding of the concepts of adding, subtracting and multiplying because it will include a pictorial representation of adding, subtracting and multiplying as well as a written form of the problem. With this information readily available for them to use, I feel that the most effective way to reteach this to them would be to first model how to solve these problems, providing both visual demonstration and oral explanation. I would model the first problem for them, giving them an idea of what the problem is asking us to do and what each number and variable in the problem is representing. The next step in the strategy would be to do group guided practice, which means that I will prompt Vince on what the problem means, and how we go about solving it. I will ask him questions on how to start and what to do next, and guide him through the process of solving the problem. We will solve problems 2 and 3 using group guided practice, the first one will be with Vince and the second one will be with Monique. The last part of the strategy is independent practice, which is where Vince and Monique will take the knowledge they (hopefully) gained from the modeling and group guided practice and will use it to solve problems 3-6. I feel that this strategy is the best to use with them so that he can learn to solve these types of algebraic problems.

The graduate student’s response demonstrated his ability to determine the type of errors the bots were making and his justification for the determination. The strategy selected demonstrated the student’s ability to select a strategy appropriate for remediating conceptual errors, and his response detailed how he would execute the use of the strategy. This level of application demonstrates understanding of how to apply the skills learned from the text.

In addition to demonstrating their ability to apply important skills in teaching mathematics, several themes emerged when reviewing students’ reflections on experiences in working in the resource room with the student bots. An interesting, and unintentional consequence of working with bots that were programmed by keywords was that students had to construct their questions in ways that would elicit a response from the bots without knowing the keywords. Since the graduate students did not know the keywords, they often had to rephrase their questions in different ways in order to get a response from the bots. This was evident in the following student reflections.

The experience made me question myself and really made me think about what questions to ask and how to ask them. I realize that I need to apply this more in my classroom and I think that is one of the reasons that you asked us to write this reflection.

I thought this was an interesting experience. It made me think about my own teaching and not just recognizing that my students made a mistake. It is more effective to figure out what kind of mistake your students are making and pick a strategy that will help them more specifically with their errors. Working with the bots was a bit frustrating at times because they wouldn’t respond to the question you were asking, but after I thought about it that is also pretty true to real life. There are many times that I ask my own students something and they do not respond in a way that answers my question. In times like that you have to learn to be patient and figure out a different approach to get a desired response. After you have established that they have answered the intended question then you begin working on finding their errors and helping them correct those.

I also believe that you wanted us to work with the bots for our own experience. We had to try different terminologies, ask questions in different ways, feel frustration when things don’t go how we expect them to, and resign ourselves to the fact that students (real or virtual) don’t always understand what you are trying to explain, no matter how hard you try.

The ability to rephrase questions in multiple ways is an important skill for a special education teacher because students often need questions rephrased in order to understand. If students do not understand the question being asked of them, they will mostly likely be unable to solve the problem; therefore, it is important that future teachers be able to ask questions in a variety of ways to engage all learners.

Another theme that emerged from this experience involved students’ comfort level with teaching mathematics involved in the lesson. Many students were not comfortable with teaching mathematics content because they did not plan on nor want to be mathematics teachers, and many students felt completely comfortable with the content. Unlike general education where teachers are certified in one content area, in special education, teachers are typically certified by disability category groups (i.e. mild/moderate, moderate/severe, etc.), and then they complete content area endorsements (i.e. English, math, science, social studies). While certification requirements vary by geographic location, typically once at a school site, special education teachers have some degree of choice in the content area where they would be teaching. Therefore, individuals who do not have a strong background in mathematics could choose to work in other areas once they obtain a position. However, all candidates in this graduate program must complete the course on how to teach mathematics to students with disabilities. The following comments demonstrate the theme of comfort level in teaching mathematics.

The Resource Room activity was very interesting. I do not have a strong math background, so I am a little apprehensive when it comes to teaching math.

For the resource room activity, I chose the greatest common factor assignment. This is a skill that I find myself teaching and re-teaching on a regular basis. I feel very comfortable with my ability to teach this mathematical skill.

For the students who did not feel comfortable teaching mathematics, several shared that working with the bots made them feel more comfortable. The students shared that working with the bots before working with real children made them feel more comfortable in their ability to teach the skills.

Working with the bots allowed me to practice teaching without totally confusing an actual student.

This enabled us to be able to get through feeling uncomfortable and better know how to approach and reteach strategies despite obstacles we may have personally with the subject matter.

It helped in becoming more comfortable in asking questions related to math and how to word and approach the questions. It was also nice to be able to practice before having a larger assignment for those who do not work with students in the math classroom or resource room on regular basis.

There were many learning experiences in piloting the bots, which will be discussed later in the chapter; however, the overall sentiment was that many students enjoyed working with the bots. The following excerpts reflect segments of student reflections on working with the bots in the Resource Room.

Overall, I really enjoyed working with the bots in SL to complete this assignment, because it really did feel like I was working with real students. I think it provides a good opportunity to really think about the types of errors students make, and provides a good opportunity to try to identify the error and find a strategy to try and correct the error. It provides us with good practice in a real life situation. It took words from a textbook and helped us actually apply the ideas, which for me, helps me to really learn what the text is trying to teach.

I was very nervous about starting this activity, which is probably why I waited so long to do it, after I got into the room and started chatting with Vince and Monique I started to relax. Vince and Monique did react like some of the children in my classroom and I was very comfortable with teaching math because I am a math resource teacher.

Overall, I really did enjoy this activity. After hearing most of the other students in our class talk about it, I was very nervous going into the activity. I was pleased that I could actually get the bots to respond with mathematical answers; I had more fun with Monique.

I also like the idea of doing this with bots, instead of real students because I could imagine the insecurities I would feel.

Regardless of enjoyment of the experience, it is pertinent that preservice and inservice special education teachers are able to identify student errors in mathematics and know the evidenced-based strategies that will best remediate the error. While students can read about the types of errors students make in a textbook, it is very different from actually working with a student and determining the types of errors he/she is making during live time. A different level of skill application is involved to be able to determine student errors at a level of automaticity. While the mathematics activities in the resource room were new, it is the intention that graduate students working with the bots will be able to determine the types of errors the bots are making at a level of automaticity by the end of a semester. It is not the expectation that bots will replace working with real children in field experiences; however, it is the hope that practice will the bots in simulations will improve the experiences students have when applying their skills in K-12 schools.

After students completed the activities in the resource room, faculty were ready to pilot the use of a small group of bots at one time. Since students had successfully worked with two bots, faculty were interested in seeing how students would interact with four bots at one time. The activity with the small group of bots was offered as a bonus activity in three graduate courses with the possibility for 56 participants. The bonus activity was offered one week in advance to the due date toward the beginning of the academic semester. One student participated in the bonus activity with the small group of bots.

The small group activity included four bots and language arts curriculum. Graduate students were asked to select an activity by clicking a box, and then were given a notecard. The notecards included the common core standard for the activity, the session objective, and a lesson plan. Students were then asked to teach the lesson to the small group of student bots and assist them with any areas of need. The bots were programmed to respond to keywords, just as they were with the math bots, but they were programmed to respond to keywords for a language arts lesson. For this activity, students were given a specific lesson plan; therefore, the bots were programmed specifically for this lesson. The following is an example of the student’s response to the activity.

Before working with the bots, I reviewed each students’ present level of performance. All 4 students had a deficiency in reading. Two of the students’ reports (Carisa, Marcus) specifically stated that their deficiency was related to decoding. I focused much of the time on conceptual understanding. Before the students could determine the difference between a sentence and a sentence fragment, they needed to understand the format of a sentence, subject and verb. I took it back one step further and reviewed the definitions of a subject and a verb are to ensure they had full understanding before moving forward. After reviewing the basic knowledge of subject/verb, I went through the activity page #1, sentence by sentence, to determine if it was a sentence or a sentence fragment.

I felt more comfortable working with the bots for this assignment than the previous assignment. I felt like I had more realistic expectations of what to expect from the bots this time. I ignored negative behaviors and continued teaching/reviewing the lesson. I also did not become frustrated by the bots’ lack of correct answers because my expectations were more realistic toward what they could answer. Although I felt more comfortable with the bots this time, I felt more comfortable teaching the algebraic expression assignment than this assignment.

The student’s response demonstrates the important practice of reviewing students with disabilities present levels of performance from their Individualized Education Plan (IEP) before beginning instruction. Reviewing students’ present levels of performance assists the special education teacher in knowing the strengths and areas of need of the student. The student’s response also shows that in working with the bots for a second activity, she felt more comfortable in working with them. See Figure 7 for a screenshot of the graduate student working with the four student bots. Further investigation will be needed to determine specific reasons for the increased level of ease in working with the bots.

Once students have completed the activities with the small group of student bots, they would be ready to proceed to the classroom with 18 student bots. For this activity, students would create their own lesson plan, and submit it to faculty. Faculty would then program the bots’ responses so that they are customized to the graduate student’s lesson. At this point in time, the classroom with 18 bots has only been used by faculty for demonstration purposes.

Collaboration with Others

Learning activities were also designed to facilitate collaboration among graduate students. In addition to small group activities during class sessions with interactive lecture, there were also four collaborative sessions throughout the semester where students work together to solve problems. During these collaborative sessions, students were given the full class session to work collaboratively to solve a problem. The problems assigned were ones that would be difficult for a student to solve independently due to either the size of the project or the need for a variety of skills. To facilitate collaboration, students began the first collaborative session by showing their group members the photo they submitted that is hanging in their small group building, and discussing it. After each student shared their photo(s), they discussed each member’s strengths, group norms, and created goals. After this introductory activity, students began their first problem solving activity. Students worked collaboratively, to complete activities, during each class session for the remainder of the semester. Across multiple courses students found that the collaborative activities were helpful to their skill acquisition as related to working with students with disabilities. In the course evaluation of instruction, when responding to the question, “Did collaboratively completing the group activities increase your understanding of the content for that session and ability to demonstrate the skills requested?” students stated that working collaboratively assisted them with the course content, as can be seen in the following comments.

I think that meeting for the group activities was beneficial to increasing understanding of content. The collaborative work helped us to share ideas and learn new methods that we were not previously familiar with.

I believe that collaboratively completing the group activities was very beneficial to the assignment. We had students in our group that had experience in the field and some that were brand new so I believe we worked together in order to succeed.

Yes, because we all learned from each other. Each person also had a role within the group, and that helped keep the groups sessions organized and moving along.

Working in groups helped me to use my own knowledge and my teammates knowledge to correctly complete activities. If I wasn't sure about something, it really helped to have others to rely on.

Yes, I enjoy having group time that is more like a group instead of having to coordinate e-mails for a group project, which I have had to do before and it was not fun. I enjoyed getting to know others in my class and felt we had a great relationship and were able to work well together. This helped us talk about the concepts and each share our ideas to get a better understanding of the concepts.

Using SL as the educational platform for distance education courses promoted collaboration, as students could “see” one another and interacted much like they would do so in a campus-based classroom. Students also responded to questions involving collaboration quantitatively in anonymous course evaluations. The questions had a five-point Likert-type scale with responses including (1) rarely, (2) seldom, (3) usually, (4) frequently, and (5) always. Of the 700 students who participated in 37 course sections, 122 students anonymously responding to the prompt, “collaborative problem solving and teamwork were encouraged via technologies,” 93% (n= 113) of students felt that using SL as the educational platform always encouraged collaboration and teamwork. The remaining students (how many) felt that SL frequently (n = 7) encouraged collaboration or usually (n =2) encouraged collaboration. There were not any students who responded that the use of SL as the educational platform for the course seldom or rarely encouraged collaborative problem solving or teamwork. The mean score for student responses to this prompt was 4.91, on a five-point scale, demonstrating that a large majority of students indicated that the use of SL as the educational platform for their course encouraged collaboration.

Using the same Likert-type scale, students also responded to the prompt, “Even though we were not physically together in a traditional classroom, I still felt like I was part of a group in the online course.” In response to this prompt, 77% (n = 94) of students reported that they always felt like they were part of a group using SL as the educational platform for their course, and 13% (n = 16) of students frequently felt like part of a group. Therefore, 90% of the students indicated they were frequently or always part of a group when using the virtual reality for the educational platform in their online course. The remaining students stated that they usually (n = 7), seldom (n = 3), or rarely (n = 1) felt like they were a part of a group when using SL as the educational platform for their online course. The mean score for student responses to this prompt was 4.61, on a five-point scale, demonstrating that a large majority of students responded that they were part of a group even though they were not physically together within a traditional classroom.

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

When developing an academic virtual world for the purpose of increasing the skill base of students, it is important to assess/review what worked and what did not work to meet established learning goals. Such a process has been integral to implementing the use of SL in graduate courses for students completing coursework for special education certification. The solutions and recommendations will be discussed within the two categories of instructional design: learning environments for situated learning and learning activities to promote active learning.

Learning Environments

Learning environments should include a skill practice area for students who are new to learning SL, simulate campus-based buildings and classrooms to facilitate instruction, and simulate other environments, such s K-12 classrooms, to provide practice in different contexts. There is a learning curve when learning to use SL, and it is important that the skills needed to access and share information during class are made explicit to students. It is also important to include the skills in a beginning assignment to ensure that students practice the skills. Spaces for educational simulations (i.e., working with K-12 students), should replicate the real life space to the extent possible to provide a life-like context that will promote learning and generalization. While the bots in the pilot study did not always respond like real children, the space looked like a resource room does in a real life school, which resulted in students’ feelings of the experience being life-like.

Learning Activities

The recommendations and solutions related to active learning will be discussed within three areas: manipulation of objects, interaction with others, and collaboration with others.

Manipulation of Objects

After 10 semesters of using SL as the educational platform for online courses, it is highly recommended that invitations to the virtual private island and orientation to the learning spaces occur independent of class time. Not only do students prefer it, but it also eliminates the need to address information not directly related to course content during class time. When students completed these activities outside of class time, faculty could devote the first class session in SL to learning course content.

Another area where faculty gained knowledge, involved the classroom configuration activity where students organized the furniture within the room to facilitate different activities based on a case scenario given. Due to everyone having the ability to move the objects within the room and the college being on an island, there were desks in the ocean, and in other rooms of the building because students had lost control of the item and moved it outside of the room. When students need to demonstrate conceptual understanding through the manipulation of physical objects, it is recommended that instructors either script the objects to return to a certain location after a specified amount of time, or make the walls to the room fixed, instead of permeable, to make it impossible for objects to be removed from the room. While instructors were initially concerned that students who were new to SL would lack the skills necessary to move objects for the activity, that was not the case. With a set of instructions and a brief video, which merely included screenshots, students were able to move the objects in the classroom before their second class session in SL was held. Since students had only had one prior class session in SL, this is worth mentioning because if the assignment had been given at the end of the semester, students would have felt much more comfortable completing the assignment. In addition to the learning opportunities surrounding active learning involving the manipulation of objects, instructors also learned from activities involving interactions with others.

Interaction with Others

Students enjoyed using SL as the educational platform for distance education courses. Furthermore, students stated that they enjoyed interacting with their peers in Second Life, and that interacting with their peers within SL made their class experience feel like they were in a traditional campus-based class. It is recommended that studies involving student preference between types of platforms used within distance education, and performance within different types of platforms used within distance education be conducted.

While students interacted with one another, they also interacted with newly created student bots. This initial pilot study with the bots included 25 students in one graduate course at one institution. While the course is an online course with students across the country, there is still a need for more participants; therefore, one recommendation is to include more participants in future studies with the bots. Another recommendation involves the bots’ brains and the selection of keywords. Instructors selected keywords for the responses, and need to further tailor the bots’ brains to respond to specific keywords for each activity. When tailoring bots’ responses, it is recommended that instructors make sure that the errors the bots make are appropriate for the activity. Another recommendation to the initial pilot with the bots is to make the responses of the bots seem more like responses of K-12 students. While several students stated that the bots gave life-like responses, many students stated that the students did not give responses that were similar to real children. When expanding the work with the bots to three courses in the hopes of getting 56 participants, only one student chose to complete the bonus activity with the four bots; therefore, more work with the small group of bots will need to be done before any recommendations can be made.

Collaboration with Others

Qualitative student responses showed that they enjoyed working collaboratively with other students in the courses using SL as the educational platform. Quantitative results also showed students enjoyed the collaborative nature of working together within Second Life. Since many students are new to using SL, it is recommended that instructors consider incorporating collaborative work into learning experiences. The interactive nature of SL promotes collaborative work experiences and students enjoy working together to complete activities.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

There are many directions for future work in using SL as the educational platform for distance learning. The faculty designer has added a preschool room in the Primary School on the Evansdale Campus in SL and is currently working on building preschool student bots for preschool classroom simulations. The preschool student bots will be used in online graduate courses with preservice and inservice preschool teachers working with children with special needs. The preschool bots will be programmed to facilitate skill acquisition in the use of evidenced-based teaching practices.

The faculty designer is also working on improving the current bots. One improvement includes researching scripting using voice commands instead of text chat so that the student bots could respond to voice and then reply using voice instead of typing. Voice response from the bots would further increase the feeling of the simulation being real while practicing skills. Another improvement to the bots includes working on improving the key words to which the bots respond, and trying to make the interactions as close to a real life experience as possible. The faculty designer would like to more closely tailor the key words to specific activities and align the errors the bots make with common types of errors that students make in K-12 classrooms.

The faculty designer is also researching the use of scripted agents within SL as well as the advantages and limitations to using the scripted agents instead of bots. A scripted agent has been created but has not yet been used in a K-12 classroom. Future developments will include 1) exploring how SL can be used to create machanimations, which could support learning activities in which teacher education students design animated instructional materials for K-12 students; and 2) investigating hardware and software options for creating bots or scripted avatars that use voice rather than text communication to more closely simulate real K-12 classroom experiences.

REFERENCES

Annetta, L. A., Folta, E., & Klesath, M. (2010). V-learning: Distance education in the 21st century through 3D virtual environments . New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3627-8

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

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

Calandra, B., & Puvirajah, A. (2014). Teacher practice in multi user virtual environments:A fourth space. TechTrends , 58(6), 29–35. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0800-3

Caruso, V., Morch, A. I., Thomassen, I., Hartley, M., & Ludlow, B. L. (2014). Practicing collaboration skills through role-play activities in a 3D virtual world. In R. Huang, Kinshuk, & N. Chen (Eds.), The new development of technology enhanced learning: Concept, research and best practices (pp. 165-184). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology , 33(3), 52–70.

Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (2009). A new language for the Net generation: Why Second Life works for the net generation . In Oxford, R., & Oxford, J. (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning in the Net generation (pp. 173–180). Manoa, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii.

Dawley, L., & Dede, C. (2014). Situated learning in virtual worlds and immersive simulations . In Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.), The handbook of research for educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 723–734). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_58

Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science 2, 323(5910), 66-69. DOI:.10.1126/science.1167311

Dorf, Y. J., Belcher, J., Bessetta, M., Danziger, M., McKinney, A., & Hult, E. (2010). Technology for active learning. Materials Today , 6(12), 44–49.

Ellis, M., Anderson, P. J., & Kibbe, S. (2014). Second Life: Simplifying and enhancing the processes of teaching and learning . In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Handbook of research on education and technology in a changing society (pp. 483–503). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6046-5.ch036

Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 24(3), 285–300.

Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development , 48(3), 23–48. doi:10.1007/BF02319856

Hew, K.F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimension (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 33–55. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00900.x

Jarmon, L. (2008). Pedagogy and learning in the virtual world of Second Life . In Rogers, P., Berg, G., Boettcher, J., Howard, C., Justice, L., & Schenck, K. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance learning (2nd ed., pp. 1610–1619). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Kim, S. H., Lee, J., & Thomas, M. K. (2012). Between purpose and method: A review of educational research on 3D virtual worlds. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 5(1), 1–18.

Korthagen, F. A. J. (2010). Situated learning theory and the pedagogy of teacher education: Towards an integrative view of teacher behavior and teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies , 26(1), 98–106. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.05.001

Lave, G., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511815355

Messer, S., Evans, S., Cownie, M., & Dawe, C. (2012). Greenbank – A model for situated learning in Second Life. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2012 (pp. 844-849). Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Pantelidis, V. (2009). Reasons to use virtual reality in education and training courses and a model to determine when to use virtual reality. Themes in Science and Technology Education , 2(1), 58–70.

Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teaching and teacher education: Theory and practice . In Richardson, V. (Ed.), Constructivist teacher education: Building a world of new understandings (pp. 3–14). Florence, KY: Psychology Press.

Schiller, S. Z., Goodrich, K., & Gupka, P. B. (2013). Let them play! Active learning in a virtual world. Information Systems Management , 30(1), 50–62. doi:10.1080/10580530.2013.739891

Wang, F., & Burton, J. K. (2013). Second Life in education: A review of publications from its launch to 2011. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44(3), 357–371. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01334.x

Whitton, N., & Hollins, P. (2008). Collaborative virtual gaming worlds in higher education. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology , 16(3), 221–229. doi:10.1080/09687760802526756

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Activator: A warm-up activity to activate prior knowledge at the beginning of class.

Bot: An object in SL that is scripted to respond to other users during live time. Bots can be programmed to merely greet users or they can be programmed to interact with users through the use of keywords.

Box: A box is a 3-dimensional shape in SL and users can put contents inside of the box for other users to purchase. Users can determine the cost of the materials within the box, and can make them free.

Individualized Education Plan (IEP): Students who qualify for special education services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) have an IEP that states their present levels of academic &/or functional performance, annual goals (with or without short-term objectives), their amount of involvement in general education, their level of participation in state-wide testing, accommodations &/or modifications needed in classes & testing, and transition planning if the student is of age. IEPs serve as the student’s road map for instructional decision making.

Island: A piece of virtual land surrounded by water.

Inventory: A virtual place to store materials, much like the document folder in one’s computer.

Notecard: A writing feature within SL where users can type information onto a notecard and store the notecard within their inventory in Second Life.

PRT: It stands for Personal Rapid Transportation system, and it carries students between campuses. It travels on tracks above ground.

Object View: A tool in SL where the user can zoom in and out when looking at an object.

Situated Learning: A theory of learning that states that learning occurs as learners construct new understandings through involvement in real or simulated contexts (settings and activities) in which specific knowledge or skills are needed.

Teleport: To physically relocate to another area within Second Life.

Textures: A texture is used to put on an object within SL to change its appearance. For example, if one has a white box, one could put a texture on it of an image and the sides of the box would then display the image.

Chapter 6

Teaching Economics in World of Warcraft

• András Margitay-Becht St. Mary's College of California, USA

ABSTRACT

This chapter is a go-to guide for education professionals (primarily in the undergraduate and graduate college-level degree programs) for understanding and designing Economics classes in World of Warcraft. The premier MMORPG of the Western world, World of Warcraft boasts a number of features that makes it an ideal sandbox for economic education. It was deliberately designed to represent a large number of important real-world institutions like trade, production, cooperation, thus it can become a platform for learning about them. Moreover, since students encounter these institutions in a vibrant virtual world setting, they not only get to verify the learned materials but can practice their applications in their day-to-day dealings with other World of Warcraft denizens. This will lead to more student engagement, better learning outcomes, a more thorough understanding of both the principles of the theory and their applications, and greatly improved knowledge retention.

Introduction

Virtual worlds, or synthetic worlds (Castronova, 2005) are computer-based simulated environments that can be navigated by a participant (in a gaming context, referred to as a player). While the aim and purpose of these environments vary widely, all share the exploration of a different reality. The multi-user versions of virtual gaming worlds were developed as early as 1973 when Maze War, the forefather of the genre became available through the Advanced Research Project Agency Network (ARPANET – the predecessor of the Internet). The current iteration of the gaming genre is termed Massively Multi-Player On-line Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs).

Modern virtual worlds are nearly exclusively graphical, and most of them represent a three-dimensional (3D) space¹. Players negotiate this environment via the use of a virtual representation called an avatar. The avatars move like a person; the immersive feedback a player receives is the actual movement of their avatar within the virtual world. To explore the virtual world, players have to guide their avatars as if they themselves were exploring; for example, walking through forests, swimming across lakes, entering houses, mapping caves. Certain virtual worlds implement transportation vehicles like cars, planes, helicopters, horses. Depending on the virtual world used, superhuman navigation options are also available, usually in the form of flight or teleportation.

Virtual worlds are also frequently themed. For example, one of the first successful MMORPGs, Ultima Online, was built on the existing mythology of the sword-and-socery themed Ultima games series. EverQuest, a product developed by Sony Corporation, also focused on the sword-and-socery theme. Current popular game titles such as GuildWars and World of Warcraft are also set in sword-and-socery Tolkienesque worlds. Another popular meta-theme is science fiction; Anarchy Online or the cult classic Eve Online are examples. Some virtual worlds combine science fiction with sword and sorcery fantasy themes, such as Star Wars: The Old Republic and Wildstar. There are also theme-less worlds. Second Life, developed by Linden Lab, famously provides only a sand-box environment, and participants are given powerful tools to generate virtual objects. The 3D virtual world of gaming has become so popular that it is being used for educational purposes.

This chapter will provide an in-depth examination of the MMORPG World of Warcraft, discuss the use of virtual environments in education, compare the World of Warcraft with principles of economics, and identify steps to implementing a virtual environment, such as Word of Warcraft, into an introductory economics college course.

EDUCATION IN VIRTUAL WORLDS

Using real-world examples in an undergraduate college program frequently is pointless, as the students are usually inexperienced in the real world. It is not helpful for them to explain that understanding the elasticity of the demand curve will help them formulate the long-term pricing strategy of aluminum, as they have never faced the problem of being responsible for the long-term pricing strategy of aluminum. Social sciences attempt to explain and simplify the complex reality – but these simplifying models themselves are hard to understand without a point of reference. In graduate programs we can assume a working understanding of certain social institutions, and can base our lectures on that; but in the undergraduate setting this is not always realistic. The construction of virtual worlds can bridge this knowledge gap: using the familiar virtual setting, the teacher can introduce both the real-world problem, and the social science model designed to help deal with the problem.

The Knowledge Transmission Mechanism When Using Virtual Worlds for Education

According to Nick Yee (2006), virtual gaming world players can be grouped into three broad categories in relation to their motivation: achievement, social, and immersion. The achievement motivation group encompasses progress, accumulation of power, overcoming challenges both in-game and out-of-game (understanding underlying mechanics, optimization etc.). The social motivation group contains factors like making friends, casual chatting and collaboration. The immersion motivation group contained the joy of discovery, role-playing and escapism, among other factors. It is also important to emphasize that the three motivational groups were not exclusive – they were mostly unrelated.

All three motivations can serve as hooks to which educational applications can be connected. For example, for those who are looking for achievement, power, or technical understanding, the teacher can point out how various in-class concepts can help students progress in the game to higher levels or further understanding of the virtual environment. The social motivation can be connected with exercises in psychology, social sciences, behavioral sciences or management sciences (Margitay-Becht & Herrera, 2013). Immersion, which is characterized by intense engagement can be used for the gamification of tasks and challenges, potentially encompassing both achievement and social motivations.

Most successful MMORPGs incorporate real-world institutions in their core ruleset (frequently the very fabric of the virtual reality itself). As discussed earlier, the three main motivations for players to participate in MMORPGs are of the Achievement, Social and Immersion components. The players have to explore and learn the new setting, navigating an unknown land with unknown rules. They have to understand the physical and social rules to be able to be successful – the immersion leads to the social understanding, which leads to potential achievement. MMORPGs create a community the players can participate in – which leads to them identifying with their in-game roles, avatars; and at the end, greater immersion. This high level of immersion manifests in the players considering participation in MMORPGs an integral part of their life. Some consider this alarming; but this great attachment to the virtual experience can be used for heightened educational experience.

The emotional attachment that develops means that players care a lot about the world – and thus are frequently intimately familiar with its workings. Using the connection between the real-world institutions and the virtual world institutions, teachers can build on to and utilize this emotional investment to form a bond between students and the material covered.

As shown in Figure 1, institutions from the physical world are mapped in the virtual world. The institution of trade, for example, appears in World of Warcraft through the institution of the auction house. In the real world, buyers purchase products in stores (themselves physical or on-line). In World of Warcraft, players buy things by going to the auction house. Since both of these institutions are representative of trade, economic models describing trade (like the supply-demand model, or the production possibilities frontier model) describe both the physical and virtual-world institution. Practiced World of Warcraft players have an understanding of how the auction house operates – and new players can interact and understand the auction house a lot easier than if they had to understand the physical world counterpart. Using this virtual world understanding makes it easier to explain the underlying theoretical concepts, which then the students can easily try out in their virtual setting. We can then use this advanced understanding of both the virtual world institution and the theory to explain the workings of te real world institution.

Principles of Learning In Virtual Environments

James Paul Gee (2007) organized the major ways of learning into 36 principles. These principles can be grouped into five categories:

1. 1. System-level understanding: the students learn how the environment operates, what are the rules. This learning is active as the players have to explore and probe the environment to learn something about it. Moreover, the very fact of exploration is the conduit of fun, which coincidentally will become the conduit for learning as well. World of Warcraft, the three-dimensional virtual environment is very conducive to experiential learning.

2. 2. Learning process principles: these encompass the trinity of (i) convincing the learner to try difficult tasks, then (ii) getting them to devote lots of time and resources to solving the problem, and finally (iii) providing some kind of reward for the successful solution to complete the feedback loop. An actual implementation of these principles can be observed in World of Warcraft. A few years ago, Blizzard noticed that there is a chronic lack of people who play the “tank” or “healer” roles. To increase participation, they started to provide extra rewards to people playing tank or healer, but that lead to a large influx of inexperienced players. Blizzard then developed an entirely new, self-contained sub-game, called “proving grounds”. These proving grounds are designed to provide a fun, single-player content where the players can practice the common tasks of a given role. By making the experience fun, the players are convinced to try out and spend some time mastering the environment. By requiring the completion of the proving grounds in order to be able to participate in group content, the reward scheme is also in place.

3. 3. Situation-dependent learning: current neuroscientific research seems to (strongly) suggest that learning works by relating previous life experiences to solving current problems. Learning is not so much about knowledge generation than about experience generation. Putting the students in an immersive virtual setting will force them to create new experiences, and understand the importance of context and situation-dependence. A hostile enemy player out in the wild might “mean” something else than if she is found in our capital city. In the former case they could be just going about their business, in the latter we can interpret their presence as precursor to aggression.

4. 4. Social principles: being part of the gaming community such as the World of Warcraft community, players will relate to other players, both within the game and without.

5. 5. Educational principles: these principles describe that gradual, step-by-step learning is critical so that the students both learn and keep excited about learning. Successful games, like World of Warcraft, spend considerable amount of design effort to engage players.

Central to Gee's (2007) description of principles of learning in a virtual world, is the focus on experiential learning: students in a virtual world setting experience their environment, and are able to probe it, experiment with it. This experiential learning process leads to a more thorough understanding of how the environment works, and creates greater immersion as well.

Effectiveness of Using Virtual Worlds in the Classroom

To test the efficacy of using virtual worlds in the classroom, the author, with his co-researcher put together a course as part of a January Term program. During the January Term the professors are invited to offer experimental courses to the students, who take only a single, extra intensive class. The course offered, aimed at discussing introductory level anthropology and economics theories through virtual worlds.

The audience of the course was rather mixed. Students were of mixed majors (sciences, pre-medical, anthropology, economics etc.), though a majority of them majored in business. They also had different gaming backgrounds: some were hardcore gamers, many were casual, and a few did not even have significant experience in virtual worlds.

The course was a combination of lectures and experiential learning. Class sessions started with rigorous discussions of theories and ideas. The students began to experience the virtual environment, where they explored the world, informed by the material covered. To make the experience similar to most students, World of Warcraft was not chosen as the medium. Instead, the class used the theme-less Second Life as one of the virtual worlds, while the other world used was Hellgate: London. Hellgate has just been released (a few weeks prior to the class), and the publishers gave the class access to the servers. Since that environment was brand new, no students had significant experience in that world, so exploration was a critical element for everyone's interaction.

The class was very well received. Pre- and post-tests were conducted to be able to assess student learning, and it found (Margitay-Becht & Herrera, 2008) that student learning was intensive, deep, and knowledge retention great. Students were extremely motivated in the classroom, they were very engaged with the material, and some performed so well that they presented at a conference, despite being only undergraduates themselves.

The experiment was repeated, by that time by the author alone, focusing exclusively on production economics. A companion course on programming was also offered. Both courses had similar positive results.

WORLD OF WARCRAFT OVERVIEW AND FEATURES

World of Warcraft was released in the fall of 2004 by Blizzard Entertainment. To this day, it is one of the most popular MMORPGs that has ever been deployed, and it is the most popular subscription-based MMORPG in the world (MMOs.com, 2015). At the peak of its popularity, World of Warcraft had 12 million subscribers; currently 7 million people participate. This makes World of Warcraft the world's 103^rd most populous country, albeit a virtual one (The World Factbook, 2015), placing it between Hong Kong and Bulgaria. The high popularity of World of Warcraft suggests the likelihood that either students are familiar with the game, or can familiarize themselves with its operational procedures relatively easily.

In the developmental stages of World of Warcraft, the developing company Blizzard Entertainment built on the mythology of their existing Warcraft franchise, a series of real-time strategy games focusing on a perpetual conflict between war-like orcs and humans. To lift this spirit of war and conflict into an MMORPG, players in World of Warcraft were divided into two groups: the ferocious Horde faction, led by the Orcs, and the Alliance faction, led by the Humans.

Most traditional MMORPGs include a strong progression aspect; avatars (called “characters” in World of Warcraft) are continually challenged to move to a higher level of functioning and power. Generally there are two paths to gaining more power: through improving the character itself (generally by gaining “levels” through collecting experience by performing activities), or by gathering more powerful equipment. World of Warcraft incorporates these two routes. At the initial release of the game the maximum attainable level was 60. Once reached, the character could only gain more power by getting better gear². Currently the maximum character level is 100.

The initial focus of the game developers' was on the immersion aspect. The beta version of the game contained few pre-generated tasks, and players were expected to explore the world, and feel as if they were exploring a real place, to feel at home. During beta testing it became obvious that the immersion approach is insufficient. Players were lost and did not know what to do. Blizzard responded by adding quests, pre-generated tasks offered to players by so-called “non-player characters” (avatars operated by the artificial intelligence/world itself, not other players). These quests formed the major source of content in the game for the characters during their leveling progress, sending the player on errand after errand while providing experience and combining the motivations of exploration/immersion with achievement/power. The social aspect of the game was satisfied mostly through chat channels, but some quests and tasks also required cooperation among players.

One of the challenges of content generation for virtual worlds is the proper balance of “things to do” for characters with different levels of power, and for players with different skills and interest. As Figure 2 shows, in World of Warcraft most players play with maximum level characters. This means, that game developers focus most of their efforts in creating content for level 100, as the quests provided for leveling up will not be of interest to players with maximum level characters. To tackle this issue, Blizzard introduced a number of ways to attain more power for level 100 characters. The traditional elite activity is participation in organized, multi-player challenges, either in the form of five-person “dungeons” or 10-30 person “raids”. The assembled players face a series of computer controlled enemies, and they use their characters specializing in one of three roles to overcome the opponents. These activities require preparation, a thorough understanding of one's own character and the challenge itself, and serious dedication, as these raids can take many hours to tackle.

For those who want to face other humans and not pre-scripted machine-controlled enemies, Blizzard provided so-called Player Versus Player (PVP) content. Teams of two, three, or five players can face others in same-sized teams in a last-man-standing arena battle. Teams of 10, 15 or 40 can face each other in objective-centric battlegrounds with various goals (capture the flag, zone defense, payload protection). Recently even larger scale Player Versus Player encounters were introduced to create even more epic encounters.

To serve those who are more casual players, Blizzard provided a number of auxiliary activities. Each character can have up to two professions that they can use to gather materials from around the world or use said materials to craft powerful or fun items. These items can be either used by the crafting character, or can be offered up for sale for others through a built-in auction house system. Players can also take part in high level individual or group quests, which either provide powerful rewards or serve as a conduit of storytelling. Key Features of World of Warcraft

There are certain features of World of Warcraft that make it a powerful learning environment. In this section, the following features will be discussed: 3D environment, addons, specializations, group content, Player Versus Player, professions, trade.

3D Environment

The game is implemented as a freely navigable large 3D virtual space. Its total size is approximately 150 square miles (Stoutfoot, 2007), spread among 6 major continents, which themselves are subdivided into smaller areas. One feature that is prominent in World of Warcraft is that each zone has its appropriate “level range” and the content and entities will be scaled to be appropriately challenging only for characters whose level is within that range. This means that a large majority of the 150 square miles is designed for low level characters, thus the overwhelming majority of characters (over 90%) are compressed together in a much smaller area. This feature is by design, and the developers hope to achieve a feeling of liveliness because of the density: people adventuring around in the world do not feel alone. They are not lone wanderers among computer-controlled entities; instead they explore a living, vibrant world.

The fact that the majority of the game world is presented in a 3D setting means that players have to familiarize themselves with the environment, and have to quickly learn the economics of negotiating the setting. What is the optimal way of exploring new areas? How much risk is it worthwhile taking? In World of Warcraft there is little permanent punishment for death (a small amount of in-game resource, gold, has to be sacrificed to repair damaged equipment, but the cost is trivial in most cases). Concurrently, every time a character dies, its soul gets resurrected at a spirit healer, and then the player has to run back to their corpse to revive themselves. These spirit healers are sparsely placed, so it can take minutes to travel the distance and by the time the character arrives at the scene of their death the area might not be safe which leads to further potential deaths and time wasted.

Like most MMORPGs, World of Warcraft also receives regular content updates. This is essential, as the business model of the game (monthly subscriptions) requires the availability of activity for people. As the game itself is over 10 years old, its original content these days would be considered extremely boring, but the content patches and updates give the players newer things to do.

While this primarily serves the interest of continued subscription, the content updates also provide critical educational opportunities, as well. The most obvious opportunity comes from the changing of the environment itself: players have to explore and learn to navigate a new virtual setting. The content patches are frequently also the source of disruptive technologies, changing the trading landscape.

In January 2007, Blizzard released their first major content patch, called the Burning Crusade. This raised the character level limit from 60 to 70, added a whole new continent to the world³. The most disruptive technology introduced was the ability for characters to fly. This apparently innocuous change significantly shrunk the perceived size of the world, since characters could not only travel faster between point A and point B with the aid of flying, but it also enabled players to skip content. Before flying was introduced, once players arrived to an area (through the use of the game's built-in mass transportation system), they had to negotiate the environment to complete tasks. This included fighting monsters, avoiding players of the opposite factions, and finding paths to the appropriate area. Both enemies and the environment can be avoided with flying mounts, and players could just swoop in, complete the task and swoop out.

November 2014 saw the release of the most recent content patch, Warlords of Draenor. In this version, Blizzard took the controversial step of removing the ability of players to fly. This was a hotly debated issue, as many felt they are artificially inconvenienced since a capability they used to have was being taken away. Gradually many players realized that this added difficulty and this removal of a powerful option led to a better overall gameplay experience, as players had to actively engage and negotiate the environment, had to spend more time and effort learning.

Addons

When designing World of Warcraft, Blizzard made a progressive decision. They opened to the public, the Application Programming Interface (API) of the World of Warcraft Graphical User Interface. In practice this means that anybody who is familiar with programming can write small programs that run within World of Warcraft, and change the way the game displays information. The entire user experience can be customized this way. This availability provided an immediate educational utilization of World of Warcraft as an entry-level programming experience. The author has taught a very popular and successful Introduction to Programming course using the World of Warcraft API.

The custom user interface elements (called add-ons or addons) can also have special educational value. An addon can be created, for example, that helps communication among group members, improving synchronization and learning about coordination. There are addons available that track individual and group performance (useful for ranking the damage dealers based on how much damage they did, or the healers based on the amount of healing they provided), addons that track trade information, and addons that monitor the chat channels for certain words (easily applicable for educational or research purposes). If the teacher is determined enough, the ability to customize the students' user interface can be an effective addition for the learning experience; not many other virtual worlds provide this opportunity.

Specialization

Like in many MMORPGs, in World of Warcraft players choose a “class” that their character belongs to. This class will then define the abilities and capabilities available to the character. Currently there are 11 classes available, and each class can have three distinct specializations (with the exception of Druids, who can have four). This leads to overall 34 different playstyles – but they all come down to one of three-four archetypal roles.

The default role is the damage dealer (in World of Warcraft terminology, “dps”); 23 of the available 34 possible playstyles count as dps. Characters with this role deal a lot of damage, but are relatively fragile. They are easily capable of dealing with most content designed for single players, but usually have a hard time surviving the attacks of masses of enemies for an extended period of time. Sometimes the dps role is split into two easily substituting sub-roles: that of the ranged and the melee damage dealer.

The role of tank focuses on survival. These roles (five out of 34 specializations) all have abilities that reduce the damage the character takes, so the role of tank can survive attacks from powerful foes that would decimate members of the other roles – or they live through the onslaught of a horde of weaker foes. To compensate for their increased durability, tank characters usually do lower damage compared to the dps roles.

The final role is that of the healer. Healers have powerful healing abilities such as restoring the lost life of other characters or themselves. Healers further increase the durability of the tank roles, and increase the survival of the dps roles as well. In return for this great utility to others, healers tend to be as fragile as dps characters, and do even less damage than tanks.

The availability of the three different roles (dps, tank, and healer) serve as important lesson in cooperation. Usually single person content is designed with a dps role in mind – and all 11 classes have access to at least one dps role. More challenging content, however, frequently requires groups composed of specialized characters.

Group Content

Building on the concept of specialization, World of Warcraft provides many different kinds of content for groups of players.

Grouped Player Versus Environment (PVE) content is often instanced; instanced means that once a group of players formed a group, they enter a separated virtual space, reserved only for them, where they tackle hard enemies. The so-called dungeons are designed for five players, specifically one tank, one healer and three dps. The enemies are powerful enough that if no tanks are available, all party members die a swift death. Similarly, a healer is required to help keep the tank alive while the dps players kill the enemies. Raids provide a longer, larger challenge, requiring 10-30 people of different roles. These challenges are complex enough that players frequently need direct voice communication with each other to be able to coordinate their actions. An early lesson in this environment is that one misstep can cause the downfall of all. Personal responsibility and societal enforcement mechanisms are the reality of the raiding scene.

In the PVP content players face characters controlled by other players. While in smaller scale encounters (1v1 dueling or the greatly popular 2v2 arenas) the teams frequently are composed of players of the same (dps) role, as more and more players are added, the greater becomes the benefit of variety. The most competitive of these encounters are the 3v3 arenas, fast becoming an e-sport sensation, which in most professional settings require 1 healer and 2 dps roles. It is important to note, that while in the PVE settings most frequently only the role of a character is important, in the PVP content the actual class also becomes a factor. It is the case as in PVE settings the tasks of the players are so specialized, that most players do not (frequently) use their non-damaging utility abilities. In a PVP encounter, however, these secondary abilities (like the small heals of certain DPS roles, or various control capabilities) become the central focus of the gameplay. Because of this, PVP teams are even more varied, with significantly higher level of specialization than PVE teams.

From an educational standpoint the presence of specialization and group content provides valuable lessons. On the surface, specialization and group content enable players to practice their social and coordination skills. But perhaps even more importantly they teach the students that following a plan, even a bad plan, can be more beneficial than uncoordinated action.

World PVP

Most MMORPGs constrain PVP combat to instanced, enclosed areas. The developers do this for fear of alienating their player base: it can be rather frustrating to be attacked by other players when one just wants to collect some herbs or ore. World of Warcraft is rare among MMORPGs in that it allows players of the opposite faction to freely attack each other across most of the game world. While EVE Online famously allows any players to attack any other player no matter what, World of Warcraft itself contains both world PVP enabled and world PVP disabled (PVE) servers. Players who play on PVP enabled servers can freely attack each other, while those who play on PVE servers can only be attacked if they explicitly set a flag to allow themselves be attacked (or if they attack someone who can be attacked). Players on both kinds of servers can engage in instanced PVP. Roughly half of the playerbase plays on PVP enabled servers (EURO Quick server stats, 2015).

An interesting element of playing on a world PVP enabled server is that every action a player takes is immediately a high risk action. They cannot only be overcome by computer controlled enemies, but also by enemy players as well. This threat is especially omnipresent if one understands that two of the eleven classes, rogues and druids, are capable of entering “stealth” mode, in which case the opponents cannot see them until they are attacked. This means that in a PVP server players cannot ever feel secure, they can be attacked at any moment. This heightened awareness contributes to the immersion – and will serve as an important lesson in social coordination as well. It is usually challenging for a player to fend off multiple attackers. Because of this, in a PVP environment there is more incentive to form groups, similar to the convoys of the world wars, getting protection and strength in numbers. This behavior parallels the working of unions in the real world: workers of a trade pool their resources to become more powerful in negotiations, and be able to better represent their interests.

Professions

In World of Warcraft, every character can have two primary professions and four secondary professions. These professions are like jobs in the real world: characters of a certain profession are able to produce things other characters, other players might want.

The primary professions can be either gathering (mining, herbalism, skinning) or trade professions (alchemy, blacksmithing, enchanting, engineering, inscription, jewelcrafting, leatherworking, tailoring). The gathering professions simply enable the character to collect resources around the world. Miners and herbalists are able to process mining nodes or herbs in the world; skinners are able to skin furred enemies for leather. These professions simply increase the monetary gain from exploring, by providing additional materials that the player can either sell for someone with a trade profession, or use with their own trade profession as well. Leatherworking, for example, is frequently paired with skinning, as the raw materials from leatherworking are generated from the skinning profession. Herbalism provides similar support to Alchemy and Inscription, Mining supports Blacksmithing, Engineering and Jewelcrafting. Enchanting generates its own raw materials, while the raw materials for Tailoring (pieces of cloth) are gathered from humanoid enemies even without a gathering profession.

The trade professions produce durable and consumable products. Blacksmithing, Leatherworking, Engineering and Tailoring produces clothing and armor, usually expensive durable goods. Jewelcrafting, Inscription and Enchanting can produce a few durable goods, and some semi-consumable items improving the power of the player (in case of inscription) or the player's equipment (in case of Enchanting and Jewelcrafting). Alchemy nearly exclusively focuses on producing magic potions that provide short-time power increases for the players. These alchemical products act as proper consumable goods, as players involved in large-scale Player Versus Environment content (mostly raids) are frequently required to use large quantities of these potions to improve personal performance, and thus group success chance.

Needless to say, it is a critical economic decision to choose which professions should a player choose. Gathering professions are generally easy to use, but they require the player to actively roam the world. Their ease of use means that frequently their profit rate is rather low, as many players choose them. Durable good producing professions usually start with a high profit rate, as opposed to the profit rate of consumable goods, but the profit of durable goods decreases rapidly with the passage of time, while the profit of consumable goods tend to remain constant.

To provide added depth to the already complex system, Blizzard frequently introduces materials to professions that they can produce only in a limited supply (frequently one batch a day). This adds a new time dimension to the cost of production, meaning supply itself is time-limited. This is a critical learning opportunity for students to understand the importance of the distinction between being able to mass-produce something, or being limited by artificial barriers.

The secondary professions are all available for every character, and they produce less powerful products. Fishing allows the character to catch fish from the virtual waters of the virtual world, which are used as raw materials for the many cooking recipes. Cooking, like alchemy, produces temporary performance boosts. While the boost the cooked food provides is less than the boost alchemy produces, since the two are additive, there is usually high demand for the products of cooking as well. First aid can produce weak healing products, while archaeology produces hardly anything of use, and is mostly added to provide additional lore for the interested players.

These professions provide a simple value chain for most products. For example, the sample value chain represented by Figure 3 describes the parts and components of creating the “Shrediron's Shredder Mk. 2” gun. The blue ovals are the professions that generate the linked materials. The green materials are intermediate goods, that can be produced in an unlimited amount, as long as all the raw materials are available. The purple boxes (Gearspring Parts and Alchemical Catalyst) are materials that can only be generated once per day (artificial shortage).

It is easy to see that the production of the “Shrediron's Shredder Mk. 2” gun involves four primary and one secondary professions, which is impossible for a single character to have. This means that producers of this item have to either utilize multiple characters with different professions (a player can have up to 11 characters on one server), in essence creating a vertically integrated value chain, or engage in trading.

Trade

Trade, the willing exchange of goods between two players, has two major conduits in World of Warcraft: the trade channel and the auction house.

The trade channel is a channel that can be read in all major cities of World of Warcraft, and is designated for buy and sell offers. The buyers or sellers regularly repeat their message on this channel (called spamming the channel), in the hopes of someone noticing it and willing to do business. Once two players find each other, they need to get to the same (virtual) location, and then they can exchange their goods with each other.

The other, and by far more popular means of trading is through the auction house. Players can just walk to one of the many auction houses in the world, and list an item (or a stack of an item, in case of commodities) for 12, 24 or 48 hours. The listing contains a bid price and an optional buyout price. When the auction expires, highest bid wins, or if someone paid the buyout price they receive the product immediately. To prevent people from doing high-frequency trading, every time someone posts an item, they have to pay a small fee. If the item sells, they get back this fee, but a fixed % of the sales price will be deducted. If the item does not sell or the seller cancels the auction, they lose the posting fee.

The real lure of using the auction house is that it does not require the buyer and the seller to be at the same place the same time. The seller does not even need to be logged in to World of Warcraft for the sale to go through. Because of this, the trade channel is mostly used to sell high-value products, where the auction cut starts to be a relevant amount.

Observing the behavior of the prices of certain products in the auction house provides a powerful educational experience. The students see whether something sells well (thus low-priced auctions quickly disappear from the listing), or if the demand is insufficient (more and more products appear, undercutting the previous offers).

A further benefit for educational purposes comes from the application of auction house addons. Some of these, like the extensive Auctioneer, provides in-depth statistical data about an item: how its price has been changing over time, what products can it be used for, are there apparent arbitrage opportunities etc.

To make matters even more convenient and useful, Blizzard also implemented an auction house API. Using this it is possible to download all the information from an entire auction house in one easy-to-analyze file. A bit of programming knowledge can lead to a large wealth of economic data. Even for those who lack the programming skills to do so, there are publicly available services which do this in a convenient, easy-to-use way (see: theunderminejournal.com).

ECONOMICS IN WORLD OF WARCRAFT

Multiple MMORPG operators have contracted economists to help run their virtual economy, highlighting the role economics plays in maintaining structural balance in a virtual world.

For example, on June 27, 2007 CCP, the Icelandic company running Eve Online announced that they hired Dr. Eyjólfur Guðmundsson to observe the economy of the game, and help the game operators improve the economy. With his help, CCP was able to curve the rampant inflation plaguing their economy (Roman, 2011). He was in employ until the summer of 2014, when he became the rector of the University of Akureyri.

In March 2012, Valve corporation (running, among other things, the extremely successful Steam platform, which in essence implements a brand new business model for gaming companies) hired Yanis Varoufakis to help run their economy. Today he is the finance minister of Greece, trying to work out deals with the IMF, Germany and the ECB to stabilize his country (Skipper, 2015).

In the following section certain key economic issues, topics, theories and tools will be introduced, and their application in World of Warcraft will be showcased. These theories include: opportunity cost, supply/demand, Economic crises, personal finance/liquidity, inflation, and pathfinding. This section will close with a discussion of using World of Warcraft for research related to economics.

Opportunity Cost

Economics, at its heart, is the science of making decisions in an environment of scarcity. No economic theory showcases this more than that of the theory of opportunity cost. When one makes a choice, by definition they choose something over something else. The potential gain provided by the option not chosen becomes the opportunity cost of the choice, and as such becomes the “true cost” of the chosen activity.

A traditional example of opportunity cost would be attending college. Students are asked to describe what it costs for them to attend class. They frequently recognize that part of the cost is the tuition they pay, but fail to count the value of time it takes to attend.

The simplest economic model describing opportunity cost is the Production Possibilities Frontier (PPF). The PPF shows the maximum possible production amount among two goods that use the same resources. The more the economy wants to produce of one good, the more resources they need to allocate to the production of that one good, and consequently they have less resources for the production of the other good, whose production then will have to be lowered. The opportunity cost of producing more of the first good is less production of the second good. This model is used to understand the production possibilities of nations, and the rationale behind international trade. The model can also be used to explain individual decisions and resource use as well (the more one works, the less time they have for other things, for example).

There are many occasions the theory of opportunity cost is useful in World of Warcraft. The most obvious is when addressing the optimal use of those crafting materials whose production Blizzard has limited. Limiting production constitutes a real constraint for the crafting characters, as they are available only in a limited supply (and are frequently also not tradable). An example for this could be the introduction of the rare resource “Jard's Peculiar Energy Source” to the game on September 10, 2013. Every character could only create one of resource per day, and it was used in the construction of four products. While the resource itself was not tradable, thus time-limited, the final products were tradable. The most desirable of the final products was a new, rare flying robot the players could use to travel around in the world – yet it required 30 of the new rare resource. Parallel to this, a number of in game toys could also be created by using 15 resources. Clearly, the more of resources used for the creation of the toys, the less could be used to create the flying robots. Each player had to decide for themselves whether it was worth their while to wait until they collected 30 of the resources to make potentially a large amount of money by selling the robot, or if they should use the resources earlier and corner the toy market.

A variant of this problem is the problem of vertical integration – an issue frequently plaguing physical world companies, too. A company is vertically integrated if it does not only produce a single good or service, but also produces either the materials to produce their product (upstream), and/or uses the product to manufacture other products (downstream). Many players choose a crafting profession paired with the gathering profession that produces the raw materials for the crafting profession, thus implementing a vertically integrated value chain: they produce the raw materials as well as the finished products. The vertical integration problem occurs when players with such integrated value chains make the assumption that processing the raw material with the crafting profession will lead to higher profits. If enough players make this assumption without checking the auction house for raw material prices, the assumption will end up being wrong. Players do not realize that they could make more money by selling the raw herbs than processing it to potions – the opportunity cost of the potion is actually greater than the market price, thus the economic profit of potion making becomes negative.

Another use of the opportunity cost concept in World of Warcraft is the discussion of what to do? Players have limited time available to play, so choosing any activity inherently means giving up other possible activities. If someone decides to take part in a raid, that is going to take two to three hours that could have been used exploring the world or fighting other players in a PVP setting. This kind of choice is obviously mirrored in the real world by the very choice of whether to invest time in playing World of Warcraft or not. In reality, the two decisions are the same. For a player who really enjoys the challenges of organized PVE (i.e., raiding) content, when their peer group participates in raids, they choose to play World of Warcraft at the expense of physical world activities. If, however, the selfsame player is not interested much in doing other in-game activities, once raid is over they might be inclined to terminate their World of Warcraft presence, and go to the movies or study some more economics instead.

For the casual players it is easy to miss the most direct application of the opportunity cost theory, even though it is extremely central to the gameplay itself. All 34 player class specializations have a combination of resources. Some use a resource that generates by itself over time (called energy or focus) while other classes use resources that generate through the use of other abilities (like warriors, who use rage). Even others use a large pool of magical energy called mana. Many class specializations have more than one resource: they use one resource to generate another resource that they can use with more powerful abilities. When a player plays their class, they continuously make decisions based on these resources. A feral druid, for example, spends most of their time turned into a giant cat fighting enemies. Their base resource is energy, that slowly replenishes over time. They have multiple abilities (shred, rake) that use energy, and both generate a different kind of resource, called combo points. They also have multiple abilities that use these combo points to create powerful “finisher” effects. The druid player has to make a decision practically every second about which button to press, what to spend the scarce energy or combo point resource on. These questions are complicated enough that answering them is beyond most casual players. There are many websites available where people with advanced knowledge of statistics try to approximate the optimal way of spending resources in different scenarios.

In case of those playing the healer role, the situation becomes even more complicated. All healers use the mana resource, which is initially abundant but regenerates very slowly. Healers thus need to focus on two things: efficiency and throughput. In case of efficiency, they try to maximize the amount of healing they do per mana spent. In case of the throughput focus, they are maximizing the amount of healing done per second. If a healer chooses to apply spells that do not generate sufficient throughput, they run the risk of not being able to keep the tank alive, and once the tank dies, so does everybody else. If, however, all they focus on is throughput, they will soon run out of mana altogether, leading to no healing and tank death just the same.

In the above gameplay cases the resource scarcity is not just simply a problem players have to tackle, it becomes the central source of enjoyment in playing the game. Of course, different players like different play-styles. That is the reason why Blizzard, in essence, provided players with 34 different play-styles, and everyone can find something pleasing for them. At the end of the day, though, the players interact with their chosen characters through the economic principle of opportunity cost.

Supply-Demand

The supply-demand model is generally used in economics to explain the differences in prices of goods. Demand represents people's willingness to pay for the good (technical definition is the “quantity demanded at different price levels”), while supply shows the sellers' willingness to provide the product. The supply-demand model is central to many economics arguments, and included in many introductory economics courses.

The most obvious presence of the supply-demand model is at the auction house. Walking up to the auction house any player can check how much of each good is being offered, and for what price. This, in actuality, is the supply curve of the given good. Checking back frequently one can even get an idea of how this supply is changing – or indeed what the underlying demand might be.

To illustrate, let us use the earlier example about the flying robot. Because of the daily one limitation on its production, 30 days after Jard's Peculiar Energy Source was introduced to the game, was the first time a Sky Golem mount was available for purchase. In World of Warcraft terminology, the day starts at 3 AM (that is when all of the “daily” limits get reset), so the very first Sky Golems appeared at 3AM. For the first few minutes, sellers asked for as much as 200,000 gold for one of the flying robots – an excessive amount of currency. Within 15-20 minutes, the ask price dropped to 150,000, and by the day's end, down to 60,000. In a few days the price stabilized around 30,000 gold, where it stayed for over a year. This drastic change in price can be easily explained by the supply-demand model. Initially there was little supply (not many players were awake at 3AM), so the few people who wanted their flying robot as soon as possible had to pay the exorbitant prices. Later in the day, around 6:30-7:00 AM, as more and more players with engineering professions joined the market, Sky Golems flooded the auction house, driving down prices. Prices increased again around 6:00-7:00 PM where the raiding community joined the servers, and increased the demand for the product.

The above example shows an important but oft neglected aspect of supply-demand: that of timing. Economists traditionally compare two “snapshots” of time – show a supply and demand curve “initially” and another set of supply and/or demand curve “after the fact”. The difference in these two situations is what describes change, an approach called comparative static analysis. This helps economists focus on the equilibrium situation, an idealized state where price and quantity traded stabilized. The above example demonstrates that equilibrium might not happen at all; that price and quantity might have a cyclical nature. As students act as members of a dynamically changing society, they understand the transient nature of prices, supply, demand, and thus the importance of timing (being at the right place in the right time).

This daily seasonality can be observed in other products as well. Most notable of course is in the market for consumable goods. To avoid burnout, Blizzard introduced the concept of the “weekly reset”. Large-scale Player Versus Environment encounters like raids and powerful open-world entities can only be defeated for gear once a week. This week resets (on European servers) on Wednesday, at 9 AM. This means, that most hardcore gamers (who tend to be adults with work or school schedule during the day) start their intensive weekly raiding on Wednesdays at 7 or 8pm. It is this periodicity that leads to market demand for consumables vastly rising around 6-6:30pm on weekdays – and especially on a Wednesday. Similarly, the prices for consumables are generally lowest in the wee hours of Monday or Tuesday.

Economic Crises

Another key economic issue is the analysis of economic crises. As mentioned above, Blizzard regularly releases content updates to keep the game fresh. These content updates usually contain more powerful challenges than before, which reward better equipment than that was previously available. To not completely kill off the demand for the products of crafting professions, Blizzard usually also introduces newer craftable equipment. The availability of this improved gear makes the demand for the previously available gear drop drastically. The new gear, however, is usually somehow gated: the players have to complete some in-game task to get access to them. This gating can be the need to participate in raids to get access to the recipe, participate in raids to get access to the actual materials for the recipe, perform difficult challenges in the world itself etc. Such gating will lead to a low supply of the products. Paired with the dropped demand for the earlier goods – thus the high demand for these new products, market prices usually start very high. With time, however, more and more producers can overcome the artificial hurdles, thus supply increases. Parallel to that, as time passes more and more weekly lockouts have passed, so more and more equipment became available to players, consequently lowering demand. The net result is that at the launch of a content update the new products are extremely expensive, but with time their prices slowly drops.

The content updates not only impact the demand and supply of durable goods, however. It is understandable that at the launch of a content update there is usually a large influx of players tackling these new challenges. Over time some parts of the player base becomes disinterested in regular activities (most notably raiding), but this lack of interest is swept away at the launch of the content patch. Because of this heightened interest, the demand for consumable goods, such as potions and food, rises dramatically. Also, since a relatively large number of people receive better equipment, the semi-permanent consumable goods produced by jewelcrafters and enchanters also experience increased demand. After a few weeks pass, things slowly return to how they were before. In case of very long patch cycles (at times Blizzard did not release a content update for over a year) millions of players leave the game, reducing the revenue both for in-game artisans and Blizzard itself. But then a new content update re-starts the cycle from the beginning.

Personal Finance, Liquidity

A critical design challenge when creating a virtual world is to make sure the currency has value. Blizzard famously failed at this with their massively successful Diablo II game. Launched in the summer of 2000, Diablo II quickly became critically acclaimed and incredibly successful commercially. At the same time, the game's built-in currency was quickly becoming worthless.

In order for a currency to be successful, it has to be just rare enough. If it is too rare, it cannot fulfill its function as the means of exchange, since nobody has it (money is too valuable). If, on the other hand, like in Diablo II, currency is too abundant, it will lose its value. There were literally no places to spend Diablo II currency. The equipment the in-game vendors were offering for gold were far inferior to the gear found within the game, and the other use for gold, repairing equipment, required only trivial amounts. Because of this, the medium of exchange quickly became a specific type of rare ring, the Stone of Jordan (which had the other kind of problem initially of being too scarce).

To avoid this issue, Blizzard is paying careful attention to the amount of gold entering and exiting the World of Warcraft servers. According to Marco Koegler, Technical Director of World of Warcraft (Marco Koegler, personal communication, November 8, 2014) Blizzard is running an entire economic intelligence unit monitoring the amount of gold flowing in the economy and out. Both the inflows and the outflows have to be carefully designed so as to avoid both extreme poverty for the many – as that would lead to them being dissatisfied with the gaming experience and leave the world, and also to avoid the Diablo II-like devaluation of the currency.

From the student's perspective, this is an excellent opportunity to do some financial planning. First, the student decides on their personal goals. Different goals have different gold requirements. Traditionally, PVP encounters have the lowest gold requirement, as in this context Blizzard wants to emphasize the importance of skill over wealth. Raiding, however, is more expensive. Raiding players have to budget for not only repairing their equipment, which in itself can be somewhat pricey costing a few hundred gold per day, but also for purchasing all of the above mentioned consumable goods to increase performance: flasks, potions, food and augment runes, possibly costing another few hundred. Others might have goals even beyond raiding, like the purchase of a rare and expensive mount (the above mentioned Sky Golem currently costs 11,000 gold, but the extremely rare and desirable Spectral Tiger mount costs over 750,000).

Once the personal goals are set, the player has to select a set of activities to achieve that goal. Some choose to specialize in gathering professions, wander the world and collect resources that they sell. Others try to find niche products that they can reliably sell for high profits. Still others try to optimize the game's built-in money flows (like finding a group of repeatable quests that can be quickly and efficiently completed). The chosen ways of making money, of course, will be a function of individual player preferences, as well: opportunity cost once again becomes the driver of the decision.

Inflation

Another key economic issue is that of inflation. While avoiding excessive inflation is critical, during the launch of larger content patches Blizzard deliberately inflates away the wealth of the players. This is usually somewhat gradual, so the extremely wealthy will remain rich, but the poor will have access to the higher rate of incomes, closing the wealth gap a little.

Detecting the magnitude of inflation, however, is no easy feat. Discussions of inflation are an excellent opportunity for students to understand the complexities of macroeconomic statistics. The basic idea behind inflation is simple: the price of a reference consumption bundle – a selection of goods the “average” consumer purchases – is calculated and then the change of price of this bundle is observed. The problem is that the price of the reference bundle would show a slow and steady decline across the content patch, and when the new expansion launches, the measure would indicate a drastic drop in inflation. The reason for this is that the demand for the goods in the reference basket drops greatly, and a new reference basket needs to be selected. At this point, however, the prices of the two baskets are not comparable. This is an effect that macroeconomic statisticians also have to deal with, but in the case of World of Warcraft, the magnitude of the problem is far greater, as the entire reference bundle has to be replaced, not just a few products substituted in or out.

Research in World of Warcraft

The World of Warcraft is not only ideal for teaching economics, but it is also optimal for performing certain social science inquiries. In this section some ongoing research is showcased, to emphasize how virtual worlds can be places of inquiry for more advanced settings than a simple introductory course.

In a virtual world students and researchers observe the behavior of real individuals; people who follow their own, selfish (and not primarily economics-driven) goals. Compared to this, in a business or psychological simulation setting participants can try to figure out what the simulation is all about, how it works. This will change their behavior, so the simulation results might not be lifelike. Even in simulations where they face off other humans, the purpose of the interaction is the simulation itself. Compared to this, observing and engaging the virtual-world players leads to more lifelike results, since their participation in the exchange is not motivated by the simulation, but instead by their own personal goals.

The author of this paper is currently conducting behavioral economic research in World of Warcraft. The question posed was how rational are humans? Economics frequently makes the assumption of the perfectly rational human decision maker, but the author has found frequent and systemic violation of this rule.

Other disciplines have also used World of Warcraft as a research platform. Carnegie Melon's famous Human Computer Interaction Institute, founded by Herbert A. Simon, conducts research projects in World of Warcraft (World of Warcraft Research Assistant, 2015). Due to a bug in the World of Warcraft system, a virtual epidemic started in the world and consequently epidemiologists descended on World of Warcraft to study the spread pattern of infections in human societies (Sydell, 2005). A recent study has been conducted, aimed at figuring out whether World of Warcraft can have therapeutic effects on dealing with the strains of aging (Whitlock, McLaughin & Allaire, 2012). World of Warcraft has even been used to study the formation and impact of diasporas (Herrera, Margitay-Becht & Chagas, 2010).

PRIMER TO INTEGRATING VIRTUAL WORLDS INTO COURSEWORK

In the previous sections the general education transmission mechanism was introduced, then World of Warcraft was introduced, and finally some key critical economics issues were introduced around which coursework can be built. In this section a general primer is being provided on the steps necessary to integrate virtual worlds in a general course.

Before discussing the actual steps to be taken to gamify a course, it is important to call attention to a number of caveats. The most important consideration is the institutional environment. Using virtual worlds or computer games in education might raise negative connotations from both colleagues and students. Despite the fact that a properly structured class integrating virtual worlds creates a more immersive, effective and active learning environment, colleagues could view it as a playful, light-minded class. Students might pick the course expecting an easy course with fewer requirements. However, when a course is well-organized,, students will experience quite the opposite. The first time the author ran a course using World of Warcraft as a teaching tool, students frequently commented that they felt the class was very informative and beneficial, but a lot harder than they expected. Communicating expectations ahead of time, through a detailed syllabus, is critical.

Step 1: Establish the Purpose and Context Of The Course

As the first step in designing a course using virtual worlds, the purpose of the course must be determined, the target audience identified, and it has to be decided whether the course is offered as an alternative to a traditional introductory courses, an elective course, or possibly offered as an upper-division course. The author's personal experience only extends to courses offered as optional classes that students opt in. For these courses, virtual worlds were an effective strategy for expanding on a student’s existing interest or knowledge in the field of economics.

Step 2: Select the Virtual World

Depending on the context of the course, a list of potential virtual worlds can be drawn up. It is important to acknowledge that not all virtual worlds and not all genres of digital realities are equally applicable for all discussions. For example, World of Warcraft can be effectively used to discuss economics, Grand Theft Auto can be used to discuss physics, Second Life can be used to discuss economics, business strategy, product design, marketing, etc.

It is of equal importance that the chosen virtual world be a place that the teacher is comfortable with, otherwise they run the risk of losing student confidence and respect. This factor indeed is one of the most dangerous aspects of using virtual realities in education: the appearance of educational capability and authenticity of the teacher might be negatively impacted if they fail to demonstrate competence in the virtual reality itself.

Step 3: Analyze the Virtual World

Once a virtual world is identified, it needs to be critically analyzed to identify aspects and gameplay elements that are conducive in the education of the given material. There are two, complementing necessary conditions to pay attention to. First: is it possible to address all of the critical issues identified in Step 1 using the virtual reality? Second: what do the students gain using this medium over a traditional course? Is it possible to address the critical issues in a clearer manner? Do the students get to practice the theoretical material in the simulated environment? Does the virtual world allow discussion of topics that are hard to address in a traditional setting?

For example, World of Warcraft makes it possible to discuss the supply-demand model, the production possibility frontier, the simple consumer and producer models used in the analysis in microeconomics courses, so it meets the first necessary condition of applicability to teach microeconomics. Is there however any point to doing so? Aside from the greater immersion and student motivation, students tackle the critical assumptions of perfect information and economic rationality, and practice the importance of timing.

Similarly, if the focus is more production oriented, it is possible to use the complex crafting model of World of Warcraft to identify and practice critical economic and value-chain decisions. Which industries should we operate in? Which markets should we sell to? Which production channel should we use to target those markets (trade channel vs. auction house)? What, if any, level of vertical integration should we choose to use? What are the major cycles in the supply and demand of our raw materials? Of our final goods?

Step 4: Review Curriculum and Game Selection

Once the game has been selected and analyzed, a final syllabus can be drawn up. It needs to address not only all the topics discussed during the course, but also pair those topics with the appropriate exercises the students have to conduct in World of Warcraft. Some form of assessment of said exercises also needs to be designed, either through external resources like quizzes, presentations or written reports, or some form of internal tracking mechanisms, possibly through the use of a customized addon.

Once the course is so laid out, it is heavily advisable to compare the results with the initially set constraints. Are all curricular requirements met? Does the course seem to provide sufficient extra value over a traditional course? If the answer is no to any of the questions, a new iteration can be started from Step 2.

CONCLUSION

This chapter discussed the applicability of World of Warcraft to teaching economics in particular, and virtual worlds to college education in general.

The introduction described virtual worlds. Then a generic introduction to how virtual worlds can be used for education was described, building on the mirroring of real-world phenomena within virtual realities. The following section introduced World of Warcraft and its main features, the 3D environment, addons, specialization, group content, world PVP, professions and trade. The economics in World of Warcraft section demonstrated certain key economic features present in the game that can serve as a hook into the educational environment: opportunity cost, supply-demand, economic crises, personal finance and inflation. It also discussed the research potential of World of Warcraft, to highlight its applicability of more advanced coursework as well. The final section generalized the previously introduced ideas to incorporating virtual worlds to any general college course.

Using virtual worlds for education is a challenging endeavor, but is well worth the extra effort. While both the professors and the students have to work significantly harder than in a traditionally conducted course, student outcomes and experience improve dramatically. At the same time, during the current academic social environment, the extra effort might be rewarded with skepticism.

REFERENCES

Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic worlds: The business and culture of online games . University of Chicago Press.

EURO Quick server stats. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.warcraftrealms.com/eu_realmstats.php

Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy . Palgrave Macmillan.

Herrera, D. R., Margitay-Becht, A., & Chagas, J. (2010). Cyber-disaporas: The Effects of Migration to Virtual Worlds . In DePretto, L., Macri, G., & Wong, C. (Eds.), Diasporas: Revisiting and Discovering(pp. 287–298). Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press.

Margitay-Becht, A., & Herrera, D. R. (2008). Fun is Learning: A Case Study of Gaming as Education in Virtual Worlds . In Nygaard, C., & Holtham, C. (Eds.), Understanding Learning-centred Higher Education . Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

Margitay-Becht, A., & Herrera, D. R. (2013). Teaching Social Skills in Virtual Worlds: A primer for extending existing social science education to business management . In D'Agustino, S. (Ed.), Immersive Environments, Augmented Realities and Virtual Worlds: Assessing Future Trends in Education . IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2670-6.ch011

MMOs.com. (2015). Retrieved from http://mmos.com/editorials/most-popular-mmorpgs-world

Roman, D. (2011, February 11). Online Game's Banker Battles Inflation. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704132204576135931023983542

Skipper, B. (2015, January 27). Greece's new finance minister Yanis Varoufakis is Valve's former Steam Market economist. International Business Times. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/greeces-new-finance-minister-yanis-varoufakis-valves-former-steam-market-economist-1485336

Stoutfoot, T. (2007) How big is Azeroth? (Pseudonym) Retrieved from http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2007/01/how-big-is-azeroth.html

Sydell, L. (2005). 'Virtual' Virus Sheds Light on Real-World Behavior. NPR, Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4946772

Toon activity by level. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.wow-stats.info/pact01.html

Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 9(6), 772–775. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772

Whitlock, L. A., McLaughlin, A. C., & Allaire, J. C. (2012). Individual differences in response to cognitive training: Using a multi-modal, attentionally demanding game-based intervention for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior , 28(4), 1091–1096. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.012

The World Factbook. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html

World of Warcraft Research Assistant. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.hcii.cmu.edu/careers/2011/world-warcraft-research-assistant

ADDITIONAL READING

D’Agustino, S. (Ed.). (2013). Immersive Environments, Augmented Realities, and Virtual Worlds: Assessing Future Trends in Education . Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.

Alberti, J. (2013). Rhetoric/Composition/play Through Video Games: Reshaping Theory and Practice of Writing . Palgrave Macmillan.

Boellstorff, T. (2008). Coming of age in Second Life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human . Princeton University Press.

Bowers, C., Smith, P. A., Cannon-Bowers, J., & Nicholson, D. (2008). Using virtual worlds to assist distributed teams. Handbook of research on virtual workplaces and the new nature of business practices (pp. 408-423).

Castronova, E. (2008). Exodus to the virtual world: How online fun is changing reality . Palgrave Macmillan.

Castronova, E., Williams, D., Shen, C., Ratan, R., Xiong, L., Huang, Y., & Keegan, B. (2009). As real as real? Macroeconomic behavior in a large-scale virtual world. New Media & Society , 11(5), 685–707. doi:10.1177/1461444809105346

Devlin, K. (2011). Mathematics education for a new era: Video games as a medium for learning . CRC Press. doi:10.1201/b10816

Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games and good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy (New literacies and digital epistemologies).

Gee, J. P. (2014). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy . Macmillan.

Gee, J. P. (2014). Unified Discourse Analysis: Language, Reality, Virtual Worlds and Video Games . Routledge.

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education . John Wiley & Sons.

Lacasa, P. (2013). Learning in Real and Virtual Worlds: Commercial Video Games as Educational Tools. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137312051

Mayer, R. E. (2014). Computer Games for Learning: An Evidence-Based Approach . MIT Press.

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. Penguin.

Prensky, M. (2005). Computer games and learning: Digital game-based learning. Handbook of Computer Game Studies, 18 , 97-122.

Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn . Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230601994

Sheldon, L. (2011). The multiplayer classroom: Designing coursework as a game . Cengage Learning.

Squire, K. (2011). Video Games and Learning: Teaching and Participatory Culture in the Digital Age. Technology, Education – Connections (the TEC Series) . Teachers College Press.

Steinkuehler, C., Squire, K., & Barab, S. (Eds.), (2012). Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age . Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139031127

Whitton, N. (2009). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engaging students in higher education . Routledge.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Avatar: Avatar is the virtual representation of the participant or player in the virtual world.

Blizzard Entertainment: Blizzard Entertainment or Blizzard for short is the name of the gaming company that created and maintains World of Warcraft.

Character: Avatars in World of Warcraft are called character.

Disruptive Technologies: When new technologies arise, if they provide products that are superior to existing products in every way, they disrupt the way business is being done. The better the new product is, the greater the impact of the disruption. Example: the introduction of the iPhone by Apple.

Economics: Economics is the science of making choices in an environment of scarcity.

Experiential Learning: Experiental learning is the collective name for learning techniques that put student engagement and experience at their center.

Gamification: Observing player behavior in virtual worlds and other computer simulated environments, it has been realized that players are greatly motivated to participate. Gamification tries to identify the reason for this motivation, and transplant the motivation mechanisms into other (corporate, educational) settings.

Immersive Experience: Participants of virtual worlds highly identify with their virtual lives lived within the virtual world. It can become similarly important to them as their lives lived outside the virtual setting.

Institutions: In social sciences institutions are everything that describe how things are done in a society. Aside from those obvious institutions like the Central Bank, they also include things like law and trade.

Opportunity Cost: In economics, opportunity cost describes the benefit or gain given up when making a choice, that comes from not choosing another option. It signifies the true cost of everything, as it describes not only the monetary dimension, but all of the other dimensions (time, space, social capital, etc.) as well. For example, if a person can either go to the movies or eat out, the opportunity cost of going to the movies is not eating out.

Player Versus Environment (PVE): When participating in PVE activities, the players engage computer controlled enemies or overcome computer-driven challenges.

Player Versus Player (PVP): When participating in PVE activities, the players engage each other, either in dedicated areas (instanced PVP), or in the virtual world at large (world PVP).

Role: In an MMORPG role describes what generic problems certain characters are good at solving. Traditionally there are three roles (frequently called the “trinity” of MMORPGs): tank, healer and dps, but certain virtual worlds include other roles like support as well.

Server/Shard: To balance the load hundreds of thousands or millions of players would cause on a virtual world, virtual world operators usually split the players up across identical copies of the same virtual reality. These copies are referred to as servers or shards. A notable exception is EVE online, where all players are on the same (virtual) shard.

Vertical Integration: A company is vertically integrated if it does not only produce a single good or service, but also produces either the materials to produce their product (upstream), and/or uses the product to manufacture other products (downstream).

ENDNOTES

1 Currently exceptions come mostly in the form of mobile-phone based virtual worlds, like the greatly successful freemium games Clash of Clans and Game of War. These have to keep into consideration the fact that smartphones have limited processing and battery power, so they usually use isometric view.

2 At that time there were other avenues to power too. In order to use weapons, characters had to train in weapon skills, so aside from character level and the equipment itself, another leveling process had to be completed. Spellcasters could find rare books of power empowering their spells, providing a combination of item-based and character-based leveling. These additional sources of power were eventually phased out; these days only the two traditional routes to power remain.

3 From the Game Lore's perspective, the new continent, called Draenor, was not a continent at all, instead an entirely new planet. From the players' perspective, however, this distinction hardly matters.

Chapter 7

The Use of Virtual Worlds in Foreign Language Teaching and Learning

• Ellen Yeh Columbia College Chicago, USA

• Guofang Wan Virginia Commonwealth University, USA

ABSTRACT

This book chapter presents, a review of the literature from 2004-2014 regarding the various models of virtual worlds used in foreign language teaching and learning, the impact of virtual world learning environments and the implications of language teaching. The study being reported aims to address the following questions: (1) What are the models of virtual worlds used in language learning instruction in K-12 and higher education; (2) How do VWLEs impact language learning in terms of motivation, communicative competency, intercultural competency, collaborative competency, constructivist learning, and sociocultural competency; and (3) What are the implications of using VWLEs in foreign language teaching and learning? Results indicate that social context and task-based learning enhanced language learners’ participation and motivations. Findings also indicate that consistent use of interactional strategies encouraged learners to engage in the tasks and stay motivated. The study suggested that a VWLE offers a motivating, engaging, and multi-dynamic environment for language learners.

Introduction

Policy-makers, researchers, educators, and learners have paid significant attention to three-dimensional space (3D) virtual world learning environments (VWLEs), which provide learning across curricula and cultures (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009). 3D virtual worlds learning environments are defined as “persistent virtual environments in which people experience others as being there with them and where they interact with them” (Schroeder, 2008, p.2). Virtual worlds are also described as computer-simulated environments that take place in either realistic settings or imaginary settings (Wickens, 1992). The term “virtual world” has expanded its meaning to a type of online platform. One unique characteristic in virtual worlds is that the systems allow participants to interact simultaneously with other players in a persistent virtual environment.

As learning platforms, VWLEs have four main features that educators may use in various ways: (1) an avatar function that visually represents the participant; (2) various interactive functions for communications including text, audio, and symbolic formats (Dickey, 2005; Dickey, 2011; Wang, Calandra, Hibbard, & McDowell, 2012); (3) a function for a participant to “act” in the virtual world; and (4) a 3D interactive space (Wang et al., 2012). Research studies also reveal that in K-12 and higher education settings, VWLEs provide communication spaces, experiential spaces, and simulation spaces (Hew & Cheung, 2008). The use of virtual worlds in education have been reported in the literature, including Active Worlds, Blaxxun, Community Place, OnLive!, Open Wonderland, Quest Atlantis, Second Life, and Traveler in instruction in academic settings (Berns, Gonzalez-Pardo, & Camacho, 2012; Ibanez et al., 2011).

Among these virtual worlds, Second Life and Active Worlds are the most commonly used in the United States. (Peterson, 2011). These virtual worlds are multi-user virtual environments without fixed storylines or games. The software allows participants to have total freedom to construct their communities, create storylines, and form contexts for communication. Furthermore, Second Life has been popular in higher education settings; at least 300 higher education institutes around the world teach courses or conduct research in Second Life (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Second Life, n.d.). As of 2014, the developer, Linden Labs, reports that Second Life has one million active users daily (Second Life, n.d.).

Educational uses of VWLEs have been studied for the purpose of enhancing the quality of students’ learning (Jarmon, Traphagan, Mayrath, & Trivedi, 2008; Wang, Calandra, Hibbard, & McDowell, 2012), expanding learning and life experiences (Jarmon et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2012), and providing collaborative learning opportunities (Erlanson, Nelson & Wilhelmina, 2010; Wang et al., 2012). Research studies show that VWLEs offer opportunities for social interactions, integrating technology in both academic and daily life, and accessing and analyzing information (Wang et al., 2012).

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the rapid advancement of technology has brought easy access to a plethora of open source software, mobile apps, and virtual worlds to the public, which are changing the landscape of foreign language teaching and learning.

Specifically, in the field of computer-assisted language learning (CALL), the features in virtual worlds allow participants to interact with native speakers of their target language in real-time communication and on a high-quality 3D platform with a rich, interesting simulated learning environment (Peterson, 2011). Virtual world software collects written records of participants’ linguistic output by recording data in the game so researchers can analyze participants’ use of the target language.

The current study aims to review, analyze, and synthesize recent literature on the various models of virtual worlds used in foreign language instruction, the impact of VWLEs on foreign language learning, and the implications of teaching and learning foreign language instruction through virtual worlds.

Research Questions

The study being reported aims to address the following questions: (1) What are the models of virtual worlds used in language learning instruction in K-12 and higher education; (2) How do VWLEs impact language learning in terms of motivation, communicative competency, intercultural competency, collaborative competency, constructivist learning, and sociocultural competency; and (3) What are the implications of using VWLEs in foreign language teaching and learning?

Criteria for Selection of Studies

In order to capture all studies that included use of VWLEs with foreign language learners at the K-12 or higher education levels, the inclusion criteria for studies was intentionally defined broadly. Following are the inclusionary criteria used: discussions of (1) various models of the VWLEs in foreign language learning, (2) the impact of VWLEs on foreign language learning, (3) the implications of using VWLEs in foreign language curricula, and (4) published between the ten year period of 2004 and 2014.

Locating Relevant Studies

The data base of studies include in this literature review was established in two steps: a search of electronic databases and a review of the articles identified in Step 1 to verify that they met the criteria listed. Basic searches were performed using Education Resources Information Center (ERIC), Education Research Complete, and Google Scholar

The following keywords were used: virtual worlds, 3D virtual learning environment, collaborative virtual learning environment, videogame-like applications, Second Life, language learning, teacher education, professional development, intercultural competency, language proficiency, as well as computer-mediated communication (CMC). Through this search, fifty related articles were generated from twenty-eight academic journals. These fifty articles focused on using virtual tools in education. However, only eighteen of the fifty articles met the established selection criteria (using virtual tools in language teaching and learning) and were used to answer the research questions (see Appendix 1 & Table 1). These eighteen related articles were generated from fourteen academic journals.

Table 1. Studies Review

Coding the Studies

Based on the framework of qualitative evidence synthesis methods, two researchers read through the eighteen articles that met selection criteria and coded them manually and independently, examining the articles for common and major themes related to the research questions; then they discussed and compared their findings and collaboratively identified the common themes to be presented in the results section. The findings were based on pre-established criteria and guidelines for identifying information and keywords related to answering the three research questions. For the first research question (Models of Virtual World Environments Used in Foreign Language), the researchers investigated the methodology section of the literature. More specifically, the researchers examined what types of virtual world model the studies implemented in the language curricula, how the participants interacted with each other, and what types of model language teachers preferred or applied. For the second question (VWLEs Impact on Learning), the researchers focused on the result section of the literature. The researchers investigated how the VWLEs influenced language learning and what are some benefits while applying virtual tools in language classrooms. For the third research question (Implications of VWLE Use in Foreign Language Curriculum), the researchers examined both the results and discussion section of the literature. The researchers looked for practical implications, limitations, and future studies.

The researchers applied qualitative evidence synthesis methods, which include elements of applying aggregation approaches (Peterson, 2012). Aggregative synthesis methods involve listing the results of various previous literature and then further organizing and combining them into themes or categories to produce a general description of the certain research issue (Peterson, 2012). The researchers had the three questions listed at the top of a page of paper and as they read each study they wrote down any information that contributed an answer to each of the research questions. Then, they combined all of that data and come up with common themes.

Mainly, aggregative methods are the systematic review method used by the Joanna Briggs Institute, but they also use meta-summary, content-analysis, and thematic analysis, case study, qualitative comparative analysis, and Bayesian meta-analysis (McInnes & Wimpenny, 2008).

RESULTS

Models of Virtual World Environments Used in Foreign Language Instruction

A review of the literature from 2004 to 2014 pertaining to teaching and learning foreign language found nine studies (Blankenship, 2010; Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Jauregi, Graaff & Canto, 2012; Kim & Blankenship, 2013; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Peterson, 2011; Wang et al, 2012; Wang & Shao, 2012; Zhang, 2013) which focus on the use of virtual world Second Life, with several studies focusing on other online 3D multiuser virtual environments such as Quest Atlantis (QA), a virtual gaming Active Worlds metaverse (Zheng, Young, Wagner, & Brewer, 2009), OpenSim, a videogame-like application (Berns et al., 2012), Open Wonderland, an open source 3D virtual world development tool (Ibanez et al., 2011), VEC3D, a 3D virtual English classroom (Shih & Yang, 2008), virtual communities via mobile apps, social network sites, video games and online videos (Pasfield-Neofitou, 2011), and the uses of Skye, Google Docs and Active World (Blankenship, 2010; Peterson, 2011; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012).

The major uses of 3D VWLEs in language instructions include (1) utilizing the resource as the main vehicle for instruction (Blankenship, 2010; Wang et al, 2012; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009), and (2) curriculum integration involving both traditional instruction and VWLEs.

3D VWLEs Used In Teacher Training

The professional development program with simulated virtual classrooms in Second Life and Skype allow pre-service teachers to practice competencies of second language (L2) instruction while scaffolded by their instructors and peers (Blankenship, 2010). Cheong (2010, as cited in Kim & Blankenship, 2013) investigated the impact of teaching in Second Life on preservice teachers’ efficacy and claimed, “preservice teachers can gain valuable teaching practice in Second Life and that collaborative teaching practice is effective” (p.23). 3D VWLEs programs used to teach L2 and to train L2 teachers: the collaboration and partnership on 3D VWLEs between language instruction programs and pre-service L2 teacher training programs are important features. For example, the L2 in the Global Classroom program (Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012) improved their spoken and listening English while pre-service English language teachers (as partners for the Global Classroom) practiced their skills in teaching English as foreign or second language. The purpose of Deutschmann and Panichi’s (2009) study was to identify how supportive moves made by teachers encourage learners to engage with the target language, and what type of linguistic behavior, such as turn length and turn-taking, leads to engagement in others. The researchers analyzed the first and the last sessions from the online oral proficiency course aimed at seven doctoral students and two language teachers in the VWLE Second Life. The study showed that students were able to (1) keep an informal conversation going; (2) be more attentive to the listener’s comprehension; (3) be more supportive and interested in a conversation by asking questions, recognizing turn-taking rules, giving constructive feedback, etc.; (4) signal when they didn’t understand and when they needed more information; and (5) be aware of cultural differences during the conversation. The findings also suggest that supportive linguistic behavior of teachers is crucial in enhancing learners’ engagements. Participants changed their linguistic behavior between the first and the last sessions; they became more active in signaling involvement as the course progressed.

Experimental and Short 3D VWLEs Programs

Exploratory programs created in VWLEs, such as Second Life, showed significant gains in learning among English learners (Wang et al, 2012). The oral proficiency course for doctoral students conducted in the virtual world Second Life, suggests that supportive moves and linguistic behaviors by teachers are important for students’ learning and language gains (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009). 3D virtual English classroom (VEC3D) as a novel language-learning platform, motivated advanced English as a foreign language (EFL) undergraduate students in learning, “acquiring communication strategies, and further extending autonomy in virtual communication through integrating goal-based design, role-play and 3D VR….” (Shih & Yang, 2008, p.66).

Important Trend of 3D VWLE Instruction

Another important trend of using 3D VWLEs in language instruction is integrating VWLEs programs into traditional curriculum as extended programs and activities enrich and innovate foreign language instruction (Berns et al., 2012; Jauregi et al., 2012; Wang & Shao, 2012; Zhang, 2013). In conjunction with classroom instructions, 3D VWLEs are often used as complimentary resources and add-ons to create opportunities for L2 to interact in virtual worlds with native speakers and practice spoken and written forms of target languages (Zhang, 2013). Authentic language learning activities and classroom projects created on 3D VWLEs, such as Second Life, motivated students in language learning. Programs created on other 3D multi-user virtual world, such as Open Wonderland (Ibanez et al., 2011), OpenSim (Berns et al., 2012) and VEC3D immerse learners in real-time communications or interactions in learning (Shih & Yang, 2008; Zheng et al., 2009).

Characteristics of Design

The characteristics of designs of programs created on 3D VWLEs are many; however, authentic situation, immersion, cross-cultural collaboration and goal-based design appear to be prominent in the review studies. The authentic cultural interactions occurring synchronously in virtual worlds allow students to develop their own cultural understanding and language awareness. Jauregi et al. (2012) report L2 experience added values through cross-cultural interactions, besides other benefits. Exchanges and negotiations of meanings both socially and culturally appear while participants collaborate with each other, reflecting on and clarifying concepts, customs, styles, or behaviors on 3D VWLEs. Quest Atlantis (the game-based virtual world) affords language acquisitions (i.e. pragmatics, syntax, semantics, and discourse) via the avatar-embodied intercultural interactions between native English and non-native English speakers (Zheng et al, 2009). Australian learners of Japanese, who participated in language-specific virtual communities (Facebook, Mixi, SNSs, forums), interacted with Japanese native speakers and observed interactions among native Japanese, believe they could model after the language uses by native speakers and that virtual communities provided them with greater access to popular culture and other authentic cultural materials, which were shared by other native speakers and advertisings from website sponsors (Pasfield-Neofitou, 2011).

Authentic Language Communication

Programs in 3D VWLEs put L2 in authentic language/communication situations virtually - where they speak, listen, read and write in the target language with native speakers. This is instrumental for L2 to learn as “the best language learning takes place when the learner is immersed in an environment where the language is natively spoken (Ibanez et al., 2011, p. 2). Pasfield-Neofitou’s (2011) natural and social communications on blog, email, SNS, chat room, game profiles and mobile Apps were analyzed and results showed that “gaining access to an authentic audience, was the most important source of motivation for L2 production….” (p.105). Their study reported a four-year long study on virtual communities formed with 12 Australian Japanese learners and 18 Japanese English learners. In the Global Classroom project of Knutzen and Kennedy (2012), 200 participants, half Hong Kong-based English learners and half US-based TESOL students, interacted in a 1950’s style American diner created in Second Life. Their instant message (IM) chat and Voice over Internet Protocol (VOIP) voices and behaviors recorded showed that, “Chat proved to be an extremely useful form of interaction for new users…. The immersive virtual environment offers a very good simulation of face-to-face interaction, with its fast-paced small talk and informal language style” (p. 90).

When used appropriately, VWLEs can be beneficial to language learners by developing their socializing and problem-solving skills, providing entertainment, and facilitating learning. Shih and Yang (2008) designed an immersive and interactive virtual English classroom called 3D virtual English classroom (VEC3D). VEC3D is a 3D campus simulated interactive learning environment designed to enhance students’ communicative skills and motivation. VEC3D applied task-based and goal-based instructional design (Sadler & Nurmukhamedov, 2008; Thorne, Black, & Sykes, 2009). The results indicate that language learners are inclined to be highly motivated when they are required to search for information to accomplish goals or solve problems in authentic contexts.

Collaboration and Partnerships

Collaboration and partnerships are seen in several reviewed studies. Some collaborate between two countries, involving language learners and native speakers from China and US (Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Wang et al., 2012), from Austria and Japan (Pasfield-Neofitou, 2011), Japan and US (Zhang, 2013), and students from three schools in Poland and Spain (Prieto-Arranz, Juan-Garau, & Jacob, 2013). Other 3D VWLEs programs involve foreign language learners interacting with native language teachers-in-training, while both groups benefit from the experience (Kim & Blankenship, 2013). Language learners from multiple countries, Russia, Sweden, Italy, Span, Australia and Maltese are found practicing target languages with native language teachers in Second Life (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009). The findings of Jauregi et al. (2012) showed that integrating synchronous collaboration projects through video communication and virtual world gaming environments, such as Second Life, have value in linguistic, interpersonal, and motivation issues. They proved that networked sessions offer a positive impact on motivation. Compared to the control group (i.e., the group taking a regular language class), foreign language learners in the experimental group (i.e., the group using Second Life and video communication) were more willing to communicate in their target language, showed significant differences in improvement of the target language, had more positive attitudes towards communication, and had decreased anxiety regarding speaking. Based on the theory of Collaborative Language Teaching (CLT) (Larsen-Freeman, 2007), VWLEs offer an innovative language learning experience with extended immersion in a natural and authentic context with mentoring and support. A virtual world is considered a collaborative and constructivist learning tool. In a qualitative analysis, the study found themes about social boundaries and the anxiety of entering into the virtual world environment.

3D VWLE-Based Programs with Specific Learning Objectives

3D VWLE-based programs with specific learning objectives and goals for language learners are beneficial (Berns et al. 2012; Zheng et al., 2009). Programs that are designed with goal-based and learning outcome-oriented tasks, activities and exercises use technology (3D VWLEs) as a tool rather than an ultimate goal of learning. The supermarket-game created on OpenSim (Berns et al. 2012) introduces students to basic vocabulary related to German food and beverages. Created within Open Wonderland, the natural text chatting with non-player characters, textual tagging of virtual objects, and automatic reading of texts in learning sequences foster students’ communication skills (Ibanez et al., 2011). The goal-based instructional design and interactive virtual English classroom, VEC3D, advances student communicative competence and through vivid 3D graphic and real-time voice communication, VEC3D helps enhance learners’ English communication skills and promote positive attitude toward learning (Shih & Yang, 2008).

Virtual World Learning Environments Impact on Learning

To answer the second research question, the author create a Virtual World Learning Environment Impact Model to illustrate to what extent VWLEs impact language learning in terms of motivation, communicative competency, intercultural competency, collaborative competency, constructivist learning, and sociocultural competency (See Appendix 2: Figure 1).

Motivation

Motivation is one important factor in the learning process, and, as technology has changed the way we learn and interact, it has also affected learner motivation. This section discusses how to benefit from virtual world environments by motivating learners.

Studies claim VWLEs help ELLs learn academic language and culture more effectively and efficiently. As a result, they enhance learners’ academic achievement and prepare them for careers (Berns et al., 2012; Blasing, 2010; Jauregi et al., 2012; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Shih & Yang, 2008; Wang et al., 2012). Several studies have found language learners have higher motivation in learning foreign languages through the use of VWLEs. For instance, Blasing (2010) conducted Russian college language learners’ interaction and to identify the formation of Russian language in the areas of Second Life. The study investigated participants’ second language (L2) identity choices, affective responses (i.e., motivation, anxiety, and confidence) to the virtual world, and learner interaction strategies with target speakers. These communicative strategies could transfer from the VWLE to real-world communication. The results reveal that VWLEs offer learners an authentic setting, which motivates them to participate actively in target language situational practice (for instance, role playing). VWLEs provide captivating social, emotional, and environmental stimuli that traditional EFL/ESL classrooms lack. Two key effects distinguish Second Life from other types of telecommunication tools. First, the virtual element increases anxiety to the level that mimics face-to-face interaction in the target language culture. Second, learners achieve a greater sense of confidence in their interactions with native speakers by selecting avatars in the Second Life gaming world (Blasing, 2010).

Regarding the effects of virtual world use on pedagogical practices, Wang et al. (2012) reported on the effects an experimental EFL program in Second Life had on Chinese EFL learning. The study collected data from 61 Chinese college students; 20 Chinese participants were selected for the Second Life EFL Program as an experimental group, and the rest of the participants were in a control group. The findings revealed that the Second Life EFL Program was significantly effective in EFL learning as measured by pre- and post- language tests. The data analysis from participants’ survey, in-depth interviews, and blog reflections showed that the program provides participants with a positive virtual learning platform. Additionally, participants in the experimental group claimed that the Second Life EFL Program is motivating, interactive, and successful.

Communicative Competency

VWLEs provided opportunities for language learners to acquire language in context and to develop communicative competency (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Deutschmann, Panichi, & Molka-Danielsson, 2009; Shih & Yang, 2008; Thorne et al., 2009; Zhang, 2013). Language learners develop various communicative strategies when they encounter difficulties communicating in the target language. Shih and Yang (2008) found that participants’ chat transcripts of six synchronous online activities indicated an enhanced acquisition of communicative competence and strategies and the study suggests that VWLEs offer opportunities for participants to repair communication breakdowns by using communicative strategies. Communication breakdowns also allowed the learners to practice discourse skills.

The seven communicative strategies used in order of accuracy and frequency in the conversation were: (1) paraphrasing (i.e., approximation, circumlocution); (2) borrowing (i.e., literal translation, language switch); (3) appeal for assistance; (4) non-linguistic means; (5) avoidance (i.e., topic avoidance, message avoidance); (6) prefabricated patterns; and (7) filler. The application and integration of VWLEs foster learners’ communicative competency through role-play and the construction and development of task-based curriculum design.

Preliminary research supports the findings that VWLEs present opportunities for developing communicative skills (e.g., Jauregi et al., 2012; Thorne et al., 2009; Zheng, Li & Zhao, 2008). For instance, Second Life provides opportunities for negotiation for meaning and higher levels of engagement for language learners. Blasing’s (2010) study found that there is evidence that language acquisition occurs through interaction and negotiation of meaning within the VWLE. In the virtual world discussion forums, ELLs have opportunities in online interaction and sharing to engage in intense negotiation for meaning (Yeh & Kessler, 2015).

Blasing (2010) also investigated interaction between participants and native speakers in Second Life using the typed chat function as the only means of communication. The findings showed that chatting benefits learners’ development of lexicon, improvement in writing skills, and self-correction; it also stimulates focus on form. In addition, the results suggest that participants were able to make connections and learn syntactical structures from native speakers more readily due to the written format of the chat interface. The researchers distinguish the difference from focus on form to focus on formS. According to Long (1991), focus on formS refers to traditional teaching approaches in which the main organizing principle of language learning was the accumulation of grammatical language items, such as plural endings and passives (Long, 1991; Gass & Selinker, 2008). Focus on form, on the other hand, refers to a need for meaning-focused activity in which attention to form is embedded. Long (1991) explained this concept that “overtly draws students’ attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overriding focus is on meaning or communication” (pp. 45-46). Virtual worlds can be a valuable tool in providing a learning environment that focuses on form.

Other communicative skills used by language learners include turn lengths and turn-taking patterns. Two studies showed that meaning-focused, task-based design involved authenticity and collaborative components (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Deutschmann et al., 2009). A meaning-focused, task-design refers to students’ learning the target language through communication and discussion rather than merely focusing on grammar. Deutschmann et al. (2009) found that meaning-focused activities help students to become supportive and interactive listeners who can ask supportive questions, recognize turn-taking rules, and give constructive feedback. Through these activities, students are able to present their research in a structured and comprehensible way. Students also are more aware of cultural differences through collaboration and communication.

The two research studies were conducted in Kamimo Island, a project funded by the Norwegian University. The studies aimed to “test and evaluate how effective the selected virtual environment was as a learning platform in a life-long learning perspective” and to “test selected learning tools or elements together in the virtual environment to determine if they were suitable to achieve learning through social interaction” (Deutschmann et al., 2009; Molka-Danielsen Richardson, Deutschmann, & Carter, 2007). The findings explore that the voice-chat function is one of the most effective tools in VWLEs.

Intercultural Competency

The intercultural concept is a growing concern for 21st-century citizens and communities pursuing sustainable life satisfaction and global awareness in a digital world (Wan, Yeh & Cheng, in press). Intercultural competency refers to how people from diverse backgrounds and cultures communicate and interact with others and negotiate for meaning in a second language (L2) (Byram, 1997; Kramsch, 1995). Primary studies suggest that language learners spontaneously exchange social and cultural meanings while interacting with native speakers of the target language in the VWLE (Blasing, 2010; Jauregi et al., 2012; Zheng et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2012).

The European NIFLAR project investigated how to integrate intercultural interaction through video communication and virtual worlds into foreign language teaching programs across the Netherlands, Portugal, Russia, and Spain (Jauregi et al., 2012). Researchers collected data from 430 college students. The results indicated that during cross-cultural interactions, participants performed frequent negotiations of meanings in terms of linguistic and cultural perspectives. As participants collaborated with other players, they reflected on and clarified concepts, customs, styles, and behaviors, resorting to their own experiences and cultural values. Participants shared empathy and worked toward creating symmetrical relationships during the interaction exchanges.

Studies also explored how language learners adjusted to the target language culture and how they represented themselves based on their cultural backgrounds in the VWLE (Blasing, 2010; Wang et al., 2012). Blasing (2010) asserts that cultural factors played an important role in the responses of learners in Second Life. For instance, the study found that language learners in Russia (or the “Russian area” of the virtual world) presented others with large, glowing flowers by Russian avatars in honor of International Women’s Day because, in Russia, giving flowers to female coworkers is customary on this day. The example shows how such a response from language learners of Second Life extends beyond the level of basic conversation to particular cultural norms and values.

Researchers also applied intercultural perspectives and concepts from ecological psychology to English language learning, as well as content-based learning, in an intercultural avatar-based online environment (Zheng et al., 2009). The study investigated three main areas in terms of negotiation for action (a.k.a. negotiation for meaning), intercultural identity development, and meaning making. The study analyzed the users' chat logs and activities on virtual-world software, Quest Atlantis (QA). The researchers proposed the concepts of negotiation for action to illustrate how interactions and collaborations occurred between native English and non-English native speakers. The findings revealed that participants successfully achieved their desired goals through intercultural collaboration on solving content-based problems, forming intercultural identities, and performing meaning-making tasks. Non-native English speakers also showed enthusiasm for participating in these authentic networking communities, such as chat log, virtual world community, and online multiplayer games. These online learning environments appear to offer significant affordances for language acquisition (Steinkuehler, 2006; Zheng et al., 2009). Contrary to the strict grammar rules students have to practice in the classroom setting, VWLEs enabled language learners to communicate in an authentic environment without worrying about making grammar mistakes.

Collaborative Competency

Collaborative tasks and activities have been suggested as being effective in language learning because they involve “creative and active language use” (Jones & Youngs, 2006; p. 276). In 2006, Hampel claims that collaborative tasks are active, participatory, and meaning-based. Researchers suggest that the benefits of applying collaborative tasks in language classrooms include the delivery of different perspectives and opinions in discussions, resulting in creating controversy, disagreement, resolution, and agreement (Deutschmann et al., 2009; Ligorio, Cesareni, & Schwartz, 2008; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Meskill, 1999; Shih & Yang, 2008). Further, collaborative tasks encourage active participation because there is no single accurate answer for the discussion. Therefore, participants are active agents who are motivated to take active roles and situate themselves in the group.

Knutzen and Kennedy (2012) claim that the integration of intercultural-collaborative virtual learning environments into English courses enhances language learners’ collaborative skills. This study explored the integration of Second Life with the curriculum and instruction of EFL courses in Hong Kong. The study collaborated with two TESOL teacher-training classes at Texas A&M University in the United States to examine how collaborative virtual environments affect motivation and engagement in academic settings. Two hundred participants were enrolled in the project, with approximately half from each university. The study also utilized other multimedia tools for collaboration including Moodle, IM-typed chat, and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP). The findings indicated that IM typed text chat in Second Life is an extremely useful form of communication for new users. This typing medium allows additional time for language learners to produce their responses. There is also a higher tolerance for learners to make spelling and grammar mistakes compared to a spoken forum in which learners are more anxious, producing incorrect pronunciations or syntax (Beauvois, 1997; Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012). This virtual world learning environment provides an effective simulation of face-to-face communication, with an informal small talk language format. The researchers also trained the language learners on how to use the machine translation built into the chat function to support voice communication. This approach could become extremely important in cross-cultural communication.

A study was conducted in Rome to provoke collaborative and intercultural competencies for language learners (Ligorio et al., 2008). Participants were a group of ten 13-year-old students from junior secondary schools in a Dutch class or an Italian class. The data were collected through observation and seven videotaped sessions in the classroom. The study assigned the participants from one country to build and decorate the cultural houses for the target language country. Therefore, the Italian classes built the Dutch cultural houses, and the Dutch classes built the Italian houses. Participants were required to put their intermediated products online. In this case, the VWLE was a window for the display of products and a platform for the negotiating of meaning, the developing of intercultural understanding, and the building of collaboration skills.

Constructivist Learning

Nine of the eighteen reviewed studies (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Ibanez et al., 2011; Kim & Blankenship, 2013; Shih & Yang, 2008; Wang et al, 2012; Wang & Shao, 2012; Zheng et al, 2009) framed their work around social constructive learning theories. A basis of social constructive learning theory is that learning (cognitive development) takes place socially during scaffolded interactions between the novice and the expert (Vygotsky, 1978). Vygotsky (1978) defines the zone of proximal development (ZPD) as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 86). Interactions with peers are effective ways of developing skills and strategies. L2 instructors should design cooperative learning exercises that allow less competent learners to develop with help from more skillful peers within the zone of proximal development.

Within 3D VWLEs, traditional language instruction featuring “silent, solitary acts” become “lively, meaning-making events rich in discussion” (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009, p. 310), and learners interact with peers and with native speakers in the virtual world. The virtual learning environment features support for knowledge construction, self-direction, immersion, interactivity, and education (Shih & Yang, 2008; Wang et al, 2012). 3D VWLEs also enable the deployment of simulations in realistic-looking environments, where social interactions are possible (Ibanez et al, 2011).

Sociocultural Competency

Several of the reviewed studies (Jauregi et al., 2012; Wang et al, 2012; Zheng et al, 2009) indicate that learning in 3D VWLEs adds value to learners’ sociocultural and intercultural competence. Intercultural competence refers to having the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values to communicate effectively and appropriately with people from other cultures (Byram, 1997).

In short, through learning and social interactions on 3D VWLEs, L2 learners have reportedly had gains on knowledge of target culture and skills on target language uses. As a result, L2 learners are able to communicate in socially and culturally more appropriate ways in target languages and understand the sociocultural aspects of target language better, thus better appreciating target cultures.

Implications of Virtual World Environment Use in Foreign Language Curriculum

To better facilitate and scaffold L2 learning in virtual world environments, the following implications and suggestions are provided for designing, developing, and implementing a curriculum. Four categories of implications are included here: (1) teaching strategies, (2) assessment tools, (3) administrative support, and (4) professional development programs.

Teaching Strategies

Researchers suggest various teaching and learning strategies for L2 learners in VWLEs (Deutschmann et al., 2009; Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Peterson, 2011; Wang et al., 2012). First, language teachers should prepare learners for task completion and train learners on how to use virtual tools before projects and tasks are assigned.

Second, teachers can closely monitor and facilitate L2 learners’ performance and learning process by reviewing the written texts and audio-recorded conversations that students produce with their language partners (Wang et al., 2012). In this type of student-centered activity, learners have opportunities to interact and communicate without feeling constantly evaluated by the teacher. Virtual world environments offer leeway for learners to make mistakes; however, teachers need to explain explicitly the rubric and assessment rules at the beginning of the activities. It is important for teachers to monitor and scaffold during the activities and to obtain a systematic assessment method and rubric (Berns et al., 2012; Ibanez et al., 2011).

Third, it is crucial for teachers to provide feedback and to encourage learners to conduct post-task reflections (Thorne et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2012) during and after the virtual-world activities. Studies indicated that receiving feedback and writing reflections allow L2 learners to practice higher-level thinking and critical-thinking skills. Feedback provides learners with information about the success (or lack of success) of their spoken and written utterances, as well as gives additional opportunities to focus on production or comprehension (Gass & Selinker, 2008). The activities in VWLEs require a lot of interactions and engagements among students and teachers. Therefore, it is essential for teachers to give appropriate feedback and scaffolding to L2 learners about activities in which they are involved, and that teachers recognize feedback as a crucial part of the learning process (Yeh, 2014).

Fourth, teachers should be aware of the workload and have clear learning objectives for the learners. It’s essential to be aware of not increasing learners’ workload while using virtual tools (Zhang, 2013) and to set a time limit for any given activity and task (Wang et al., 2012). Teachers need to keep in mind that virtual world tools are supplemental rather than primary means because students need face-to-face interaction and teachers’ explicit feedback while completing the assignments on VWLEs. The learning objective need to be communicating clearly, with virtual tools embedded to maintain high learner involvement and participation (Ligorio, et al, 2008).

Fifth, researchers encourage language teachers to provide effective interaction tasks and the opportunities to engage learners in meaningful interaction with higher language-proficiency-level peers or target language speakers (Berns et al., 2012; Ibanez et al., 2011; Jauregi et al., 2012; Peterson, 2011; Wang et al., 2012). Studies show positive relationships between project-based activities and the improvement of L2 skills, such as negotiation of meaning and focus on form (Berns et al., 2012; Peterson, 2011). Furthermore, opportunities to engage in meaningful interaction with target language speakers contributed to improving intercultural competence and communicative skills (Jauregi et al., 2012).

Assessment Tools

Previous studies suggest that applying systematic assessment tools and rubrics are beneficial for learners in project-based learning in VWLEs (Ibanez et al., 2011; Berns et al., 2012). In virtual world learning projects, teachers play facilitator, monitor roles, and the tasks focus on the learning process rather than the product of the learners. Therefore, teachers should conduct not only summative assessments but also formative assessments. Summative assessments refer to assessments that aim to measure, summarize, and evaluate what learners have grasped and typically occur at the end of a project, a course, or a unit of instruction, whereas the purpose of formative assessment is to assist learners during the growth process whiel they are forming skills and competencies. (Brown, 2004).

Administrative Support

Zhang (2013) suggests it is essential to have the support of policymakers and administrators to ensure the pedagogical success of implementing virtual-world learning environments into the language curriculum. Integrating the virtual-world software into the classrooms is a complex process. It is crucial for teachers to recognize that virtual tools are complex programs and require high-speed broadband to run properly (Wang, Song, Xia, & Yan, 2009; Wang & Hsu, 2010; Wang & Shao, 2012). They also usually require updated computers. As a result, administrative support is essential for both technological and financial support.

Professional Development Programs

Development of teachers’ computer, media, and virtual world literacy skills are the goals of 21st-century teacher education. Teacher education programs need to offer more global literacy and 21st century skill sets for educators (Yeh & Kessler, 2015); for example, using innovative technological tools for educational purposes (Berns et al., 2012; Zhang, 2013). The goal of using technology is to create projects that are meaningful to the learners, and that help them achieve learning objectives. Teachers can incorporate virtual world tools into the curriculum that are able to engage learners in authentic, meaningful, language-based tasks and allow them to learn at their own pace within a 21st-century learning environment.

DISCUSSION

Limitations

This study reveals that current research on virtual world language learning environments remain largely exploratory in nature and are subject to some limitations. Three main limitations are found: (1) learning difficulties, (2) technical issues, and (3) classroom management.

Learning Difficulties

The scaffolding system in VWLEs was insufficient to satisfy language learners who have lower language proficiency and confidence (Peterson, 2011; Shih & Yang, 2008). Lower language proficiency learner performance and motivation were negatively affected by time pressure; however, synchronous discussions involve both language skills and the ability to react to immediate changes and events during the tasks. Learners with limited typing skills and poor reading and listening comprehension struggled with completing the tasks on time. Also, both studies claim that sociocultural concerns influence language learners’ behavior, leading to avoidance and high learning anxiety. Under time pressure, these learners felt less motivated and more frustrated. Teachers need to be aware of meeting the needs of learners at different language proficiency levels, such as making the project more interesting, providing authentic situations, and offering a sense of community. Language teachers should also apply goal-based tasks, a story-centered curriculum, strategic interaction, and appropriate language-level materials to the instructional design of VWLEs.

Technical Issues

While learners enjoyed virtual world learning experiences in general, they also perceived some technical problems that impeded the learning process. Technical issues included poor audio quality during the chats (e.g., echoing and interrupted flow of audio sounds) and frozen screens (Berns et al., 2012; Peterson, 2011; Wang et al., 2012). These problems extremely hindered the flow of communication and task completion in VWLEs.

Classroom Management

L2 learners identified classroom management problems that occurred during the activities (Wang et al., 2012). For instance, in a cross-country or cross-cultural project, due to the time difference, some participants in the United States did not log into the virtual tool system in a timely manner. After waiting several minutes, participants from China would go talk to other participants in the virtual-world locations. Consequently, the American participants were not able to find their partners from China when they logged into the virtual world system. In addition, learners reported distractions, such as an animal regularly jumping from the water and uninvited people suddenly joining the discussion groups or conversations. These issues ought to be addressed when implementing similar curricula in the future.

Future Studies

This study points to the combination of design features and strategies that are distinct to VWLEs. Research studies have showed that these features may create a beneficial environment for language learning (Hislope, 2008); they also indicate directions for future studies (Peterson, 2011). Three areas of future studies that may become beneficial include: (1) models, (2) methods, and (3) learning outcomes.

Models

Research findings indicated that long-term goal-based exercises, task design activities, goal-directed activities, and problem-based collaborative learning with intentional instruction models and interactive models in VWLEs were beneficial for language learning (Berns et al., 2012; Blasing, 2010; Thorne et al., 2009; Zheng et al., 2009). Therefore, future studies should focus on developing and designing goal-based and problem-based tasks while using virtual world learning tools. The concept of collaborating and working together with a target language requires learners to take responsibility for the success and failure to achieve the goal. Learners become active agents while participating in these collaborative problem-solving tasks (Zheng et al., 2009). These types of tasks can enhance learners’ skills, including critical thinking, evaluation, problem-solving, collaboration, and communication with team members from different cultural backgrounds. Future research should develop and utilize direct assessments of these 21st-century skills that learners might gain in VWLEs. Studies should also investigate how language learners develop and acquire linguistic competencies in VWLEs that foster learners’ intercultural awareness while allowing opportunities for collaboration and interaction.

Methods

Researchers should pay attention to three main methods while conducting research in VWLEs. First, future studies should compare the results of the empirical research with those of the control group (Berns et al., 2012; Zheng, et al., 2009). The majority of the studies in VWLEs are exploratory studies. By comparing an experimental group with a control group, researchers have a better understanding of learning outcomes and how learners make progress.

Second, future studies should involve larger and more diverse learner groups (Ibanez et al., 2011; Zhang, 2013). The sample sizes in previous studies were small and mainly homogenous (Knutzen & Kennedy, 2012; Zhang, 2013). Learners at different universities and countries may vary widely in terms of technology access, media/computer literacy levels, family backgrounds, and school resources. Furthermore, larger and more diverse sample sizes may shed light on the role played by the new types of identity exploration (i.e., avatar characters) made feasible by virtual worlds (Zheng et al., 2009; Zhang, 2013).

Last but not least, future studies should apply discourse analysis methods for data analysis and focus on the analysis of communicative competency components, including phonology, grammar, lexicon, semantics, syntax, nonverbal, and paralinguistic components (Shih & Yang, 2008). Researchers and educators can investigate learners’ improvement in communicative competency through transcribing spoken and written discourses and conducting discourse analyses of chat data.

Learning Outcomes

Limited research focuses on identity formation, sociocultural factors, and their effect on learner behavior (Ibanez et al., 2011; Peterson, 2011; Thorne et al., 2009). Thus, future research studies should investigate (1) to what extent sociocultural factors influence identity formation and learner behaviors and (2) to what extent VWLEs offer resources for identity formation and experimentation for language learners. The question of how identity experimentation varies based on the type of virtual tools, learning tasks, virtual representation of avatars, and opportunities for user behavior has not been answered in previous literature (Ibanez et al., 2011; Thorne et al., 2009).

CONCLUSION

A number of studies reveal that virtual worlds can become effective environments for foreign language learning (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Ibanez et al., 2011; Shih & Yang, 2008). These studies indicate three main reasons that virtual worlds may benefit foreign language learning. First, a VWLE provides a 3D, open learning environment and offers opportunities for participants to speak their target languages with native speakers regardless of geographical distance. It is a valuable tool to enhance intercultural competency, motivation, and opportunities for authentic negotiation of meanings and interactions (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009). For instance, instructors can design a cross-cultural learning community in the virtual world, engaging both native speakers and language learners. Second, a VWLE creates a comfort zone for language learners to work collaboratively with other participants. This enhances language learners’ sociocultural competency by scaffolding their team members (Vygotsky, 1978) and reduces anxiety in learning the target language (Krashen, 1987). As many language learners in K-12 and higher education are digital natives (Prensky, 2001), using technology and online platforms to communicate comes naturally to them. Therefore, VWLEs enable language learners to learn a foreign language in a low anxiety setting. Third, a VWLE provides a small virtual community where language learners can develop constructivist learning, communicative competency, and collaborative competency skills. This learning environment is especially valuable for language learners who study languages in non-target language-speaking countries.

In the field of second/foreign language (ESL/EFL) teaching and learning, various linguistic courses have been offered by using virtual worlds, namely English, German, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish (Blasing, 2010; Berns et al., 2012; Erard, 2007; Wang & Shao, 2012). ESL/EFL educators and researchers focus primarily on how to use virtual worlds as learning environments where English language learners (ELLs) have opportunities for authentic interactions with native speakers of their target languages (Deutschmann & Panichi, 2009; Wang et al., 2009). Although literature suggests that VWLEs can assist ESL/EFL teaching and learning, studies also reveal challenges that would influence the instructional use of virtual worlds: Not only is there a steep learning curve for both teachers and students, but also, high-speed broadband is required for running the VWLEs (Wang et al., 2009; Wang & Hsu, 2010; Wang & Shao, 2012). These challenges may prevent ESL/EFL educators from integrating virtual world software into their classrooms. It is important for educators and researchers to recognize that successful language learning and teaching do not rely on technology (Colpaert, 2006); rather, they should focus on how the curricula and instruction are designed. Therefore, this chapter discusses practical implications of using virtual-world learning environments in foreign language curricula.

Previous literature on VWLEs in CALL is limited, especially on how the language learners' use of VWLEs affects learning. It is important to investigate how technology, such as a virtual world, has been integrated into language curricula, and its impact on outcomes of foreign language instruction. This study reveals that VWLEs can provide authentic language environments and rich linguistic, social, and cultural learning experiences for learners. Therefore, this chapter discusses the various ways that virtual worlds have been used for language instruction, the promises and challenges brought by virtual worlds to language learners, and the impact of VWLEs on language teaching and learning in the six areas: (1) motivation, (2) communicative competency, (3) intercultural learning, (4) collaborative competency, (5) constructivist learning, and (6) sociocultural competency.

REFERENCES

Beauvois, M. (1997). High-tech, high-Touch: From discussion to composition in the networked classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 10(1), 57–69. doi:10.1080/0958822970100104

Berns, A., Gonzalez-Pardo, A., & Camacho, D. (2012). Combining Face-to-Face Learning with Online Learning in Virtual Worlds. Paper presented at theEuropean Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (EUROCALL) Annual Conference.

Blankenship, R. J. (2010). Using virtual environments as professional development tools for pre-service teachers seeking ESOL endorsement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of South Florida, FL.

Blasing, M. T. (2010). Second language in Second Life: Exploring interaction, identify and pedagogical practice in a virtual world. Slavic and East European Journal , 54(1), 96–117.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence . Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Cheong, D. (2010). The effects of practice teaching sessions in Second Life on the change in pre-service teachers’ teaching efficacy. Computers & Education , 55(2), 868–880. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.018

Colpaert, J. (2006). Pedagogy-driven design for online language teaching and learning. CALICO Journal , 23(3), 477–497.

Deutschmann, M., & Panichi, L. (2009). Talking into Empty Space? Signaling Involvement in a Virtual Language Classroom in Second Life. Language Awareness , 18(3−4), 310–328. doi:10.1080/09658410903197306

Deutschmann, M., Panichi, L., & Molka-Danielsson, J. (2009). Designing oral participation in Second Life—A comparative study of two language proficiency courses. ReCALL , 21(02), 206–226. doi:10.1017/S0958344009000196

Dickey, M. D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development , 53(2), 67–83. doi:10.1007/BF02504866

Dickey, M. D. (2011). The pragmatics of virtual worlds for K-12 educators: Investigating the affordances and constraints of Active Worlds and Second Life with K-12 in-service teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(1), 1–20. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9163-4

Erard, M. (2007). A boon to Second Life language schools. Retrieved from http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/18510/page1/?a=f

Erlandson, B. E., Nelson, B. C., & Wilhelmina, C. S. (2010). Collaboration modality, cognitive load, and science inquiry learning in virtual inquiry environments. Educational Technology Research and Development , 58(6), 693–710. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9152-7

Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor Francis.

Hew, K., & Cheung, W. (2008). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology , 39(6), 959–1148.

Hislope, K. (2008). Language learning in a virtual world. The International Journal of Learning , 15(11), 51–58.

Ibanez, M., Garcia, J., Galan, S., Maroto, D., Morillo, D., & Kloos, C. (2011). Design and Implementation of a 3D Multi-User Virtual World for Language Learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 14(4), 2–10.

Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2008). Exploration of learning in Second Life in an interdisciplinary communication course. Paper presentation at American Educational Research Association . New York: AERA.

Jauregi, K., de Graaff, R., & Canto, S. (2012). Integrating Cross-Cultural Interaction through Video-Communication and Virtual Worlds in Foreign Language Teaching Programs: Burden or Added Value? Paper presented at theEuropean Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (EuroCALL) Annual Conference.

Jones, C. M., & Youngs, B. L. (2006). Teacher Preparation for Online Language Instruction . In Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (Eds.), Teacher Education in CALL (pp. 267–280). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/lllt.14.22jon

Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1999). Using constructivism in technology-mediated learning: Constructing order out of the chaos in the literature. Radical Pedagogy , 1, 1–12. Retrieved from http://www.radicalpedagogy.org/radicalpedagogy/Using_Constructivism_in_Technology-Mediated_Learning__Constructing_Order_out_of_the_Chaos_in_the_Literature.html

Kim, D., & Blankenship, R. J. (2013). Using “Second Life” as a Virtual Collaborative Tool for Preservice Teachers Seeking English for Speakers of Other Languages Endorsement. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 48(1), 19–43. doi:10.2190/EC.48.1.b

Knutzen, B., & Kennedy, D. (2012). The Global Classroom Project: Learning a Second Language in a Virtual Environment. Electronic Journal of E-Learning , 10(1), 90–106.

Kramsch, C. (1995). The cultural component of language teaching. Language, Culture and Curriculum , 8(2), 83–93. doi:10.1080/07908319509525192

Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition . London: Prentice-Hall International.

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ligorio, M., Cesareni, D., & Schwartz, N. (2008). Collaborative virtual environments as means to increase the level of intersubjectivity in a distributed cognition system. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 40(3), 339–357. doi:10.1080/15391523.2008.10782511

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: a design feature in language teaching methodology . In de Bot, K., Ginsberg, R., & Kramsch, C. (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon

Long, M. H. (1997). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition . In Ritchie, W., & Bhatia, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

McInnes, E., & Wimpenny, P. (2008). Using Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument software to synthesize studies on older people’s views and experiences of falls prevention. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare , 6, 337–344.

Meskill, C. (1999). Computers as Tool for Sociocollaborative Language Learning . In Cameron, K. (Ed.), Computer assisted language learning (CALL): media, design and applications (pp. 141–162). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Molka-Danielsen, J., Richardson, D., Deutschmann, M., & Carter, B. (2007). Teaching and Learning Affectively within a Virtual Campus. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organization (Special Issue: Toward Virtual Universities), 6(5), 476-498.

Pasfield-Neofitou, S. (2011). Online domains of language use: Second language learners’ experiences of virtual community and foreignness. Language Learning & Technology , 15(2), 92–108.

Peterson, B. (2012). It Looks Great but How do I Know If It Fits?: an Introduction to Meta-synthesis Research. In K. Hannes, & C. Lockwood (Ed.), Synthesizing Qualitative Research: Choosing the Right Approach. John Wiley & Sons, LTD: Hoboken, NJ.

Peterson, M. (2011). Towards a Research Agenda for the Use of Three-Dimensional Virtual Worlds in Language Learning. CALICO Journal , 29(1), 67–80. doi:10.11139/cj.29.1.67-80

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon , 9(5), 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816

Prieto-Arranz, J. I., Juan-Garau, M., & Jacob, K. L. (2013). Re-imagining cultural identity: Transcultural and translingual communication in virtual third-space environments. Language, Culture and Curriculum , 26(1), 19–35. doi:10.1080/07908318.2012.759585

Sadler, R., & Nurmukhamedov, U. (2008, March). Second Life and task-based learning. Paper presented atCALICO annual conference, San Francisco, CA.

Schroeder, R. (2008). Defining virtual worlds and virtual environments. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1), 2–3. doi:doi:10.1080/07908318.2012.759585

Second Life. (n. d.). Retrieved from the Second Life Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life

Shih, Y., & Yang, M. (2008). A Collaborative Virtual Environment for Situated Language Learning Using VEC3D. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 11(1), 56–68.

Steinkuehler, C. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participation in a Discourse. Mind, Culture, and Activity , 12(1), 38–52. doi:10.1207/s15327884mca1301_4

Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second Language Use, Socialization, and Learning in Internet Interest Communities and Online Gaming. Modern Language Journal , 93, 802–821. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00974.x

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wan, G., Yeh, E., & Cheng, H. (in press). Digital Media Use by Chinese Youth and Its Impact . In Cheung, C. K. (Ed.), Media Education in China . Hong Kong, China: Springer.

Wang, C., Calandra, B., Hibbard, S., & McDowell Lefaiver, M. (2012). Learning effects of an experimental EFL program in Second Life. Educational Technology Research and Development , 60(5), 943–961. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9259-0

Wang, C. X., Song, H., Xia, F., & Yan, Q. (2009). Integrating Second Life into an EFL program: Students’ perspectives. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange , 2(1), 1–16.

Wang, F., & Shao, E. (2012). Using Second Life to Assist EFL Teaching: We Do Not Have to Sign in to the Program. Techtrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning , 56(4), 15–18. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0582-4

Wang, S.-K., & Hsu, H.-Y. (2010). Using the ADDIE model to design Second Life activities for online learners. TechTrends , 53(6), 76–81.

Wickens, C. D. (1992). Virtual reality and education. Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.10.1109/ICSMC.1992.271688

Yeh, E. (2014). Teaching culture and language through the Multiple Intelligences Film Teaching Model in the ESL/EFL classroom. Journal of Effective Teaching , 14(1), 63–79.

Yeh, E., & Kessler, G. (2015). Enhancing Linguistic and Intercultural Competencies Through the Use of Social Network Sites and Google Earth . In Keengwe, J. (Ed.), Promoting Global Literacy Skills through Technology-Infused Teaching and Learning . Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6347-3.ch001

Zhang, H. (2013). Pedagogical Challenges of Spoken English Learning in the Second Life Virtual World: A Case Study. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44(2), 243–254. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01312.x

Zheng, D., Li, N., & Zhao, Y. (2008, March). Learning Chinese in Second Life Chinese language school. Paper presented atCALICO Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA.

Zheng, D., Young, F. M., Brewer, A. R., & Wagner, M. (2009). Attitude and self-efficacy change: English language learning in virtual worlds. CALICO Journal , 27(1), 205–231. doi:10.11139/cj.27.1.205-231

ADDITIONAL READING

Andreas, K., Tsiatsos, T., Terzidou, T., & Pomportsis, A. (2010). Fostering collaborative learning in Second Life: Metaphors and affordances. Computers & Education , 55(2), 603–615. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.021

Girvan, C., & Savage, T. (2010). Identifying an appropriate pedagogy for virtual worlds: A Communal Constructivism case study. Computers & Education , 55(1), 342–349. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.020

Herold, D. K. (2010). Mediating media studies—Stimulating critical awareness in a virtual environment. Computers & Education , 54(3), 791–798. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.019

Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S. S. (2010). Investigating learner’s attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education , 55(3), 1171–1182. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.014

Huang, Y.-C., Backman, S. J., & Backman, K. F. (2010). Student attitude toward virtual learning in Second Life: A flow theory approach. Journal of Teaching in Travel & Tourism , 10(4), 312–334. doi:10.1080/15313220.2010.525425

Inman, C., Wright, V. H., & Hartman, J. A. (2010). Use of Second Life in K-12 and higher education: A review of research. Journal of Interactive Online Learning , 9(1), 44–63.

Larach, D. U., & Cabra, J. F. (2010). Creative problem solving in Second Life: An action research study. Creativity and Innovation Management , 19(2), 167–179. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2010.00550.x

Zhang, H. (2011). Latest developments in the adoption of Second Life in education: A literature review. China Educational Technology , 4, 121–125.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

English as a Second Language (ESL): A term originally applied to English language programs at the postsecondary level, but today is used in the K−12 school system to describe students whose native language is not English, regardless of whether they attend language programs or services.

English Language Proficiency: Fluency and competency in the English language in the domains of Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills (BICS) and Cognitive/Academic Language Proficiency (CALP).

First Language (L1): The native language acquired by an individual.

Non-Native English Speakers (NNESs): The term Non-Native English Speakers (NNESs) is defined as those students who speak a language other than English at home. NNESs are inclusive of both competent biliterates and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) students.

Non-Native English Speakers (NNES) Status: NNES status is defined as a linguistic minority status and refers to NNESs’ linguistic background in terms of both Basic Interpersonal Communication Skills and Cognitive/Academic Language Proficiency, and language use in home and school settings.

VOIP: Voice over Internet Protocol is a method that turns audio signals into digital data that can be transmitted over the Internet.

Second Language (L2): The second or subsequent language learned by an individual.

Second Language Acquisition (SLA): The learning of another language after the first language has been learned (Gass & Selinker, 2008).

Sociocultural Characteristics: Sociocultural characteristics refer to the notion that knowledge or learning occurs in a social context. Learning is socially mediated, and comes from face-to-face interaction. Learners internalize knowledge and construct it in dyadic interactions through social impact (Gass & Selinker, 2008).

APPENDIX

Chapter 8

Augmented Reality as an Emerging Application in Tourism Marketing Education

• Azizul Hassan Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK

• Timothy Jung Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

ABSTRACT

Augmented Reality (AR) as an advanced format of Virtual Reality (VR) becomes widely available in numerous appliances, mainly in mobile devices like Smartphones or wearable devices. As the prospective benefits of this technology are said to be immense, tourism marketing education is believed to experience a comprehensive application of AR in coming years. At present, AR technologies are in use in many academic disciplines including medicine, geography, information technology, computer aided entertainment and many more. Out of all of the recently developed technological advancements, those can be termed as ‘Innovations’, augmented reality can be considered as a key innovation. As coined, due to easier operational capacities, AR is becoming more popular and better fitting in tourism marketing education systems. This chapter outlines the use of AR, termed as an ‘Innovation’ as per the ‘Diffusion of Innovations’ theory of Rogers (1962), to meet tourism marketing education demands. The chapter critically examines relevant cross-country cases to support the arguments made above.

Introduction

This chapter discusses diverse features and potentials of augmented reality in tourism marketing education and suggests its inclusion in the academic syllabuses to be studied as a key module. Augmented reality (AR), an extension of virtual reality, is an emerging technology that can provide experiences in which real world places and activities are enhanced with computer-generated content, seamlessly mixing and overlapping human perception with two dimensional (2D) and three dimensional (3D) objects (Yuen, Yaoyuneyong, & Johnson, 2011). AR has emerged as an unprecedented use of technology in a number of fields including architecture, construction, military, medical, entertainment, advertising, travel, and marketing. Global brands from different sectors and industries have managed to use AR technology effectively and efficiently, garnering positive responses and support from consumers (Kaufman & Horton, 2015). As a result AR is having an impact on the everyday lives of consumers (Kipper & Rampolla, 2015).

The use of AR in the tourism industry is emerging. As an example, in 2008, Wikitude, a mobile AR software travel guide, was offered as freeware which displays information about the users' surroundings in a mobile camera view, including image recognition and 3D modeling. Tourists traveling in unfamiliar environments naturally require solid sources of data and information; AR applications can meet the demand of personalized, pertinent and rationalized information at a dependable level (Olsson & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, 2011). Today, AR applications are being created by tourism organizations all over the world for educational and marketing purposes. Tourism marketing professionals are responsible for advertising and publicizing a variety of goods and services, ranging from tourist sites, lodging establishments, and special events. Positions related to tourism marketing include, but are not limited to, an-house resort marketing representative, tourism specialist for a marketing firm, head of marketing for a resort or cruise line. Students studying to work in the tourist industry must have knowledge and skills in the use of AR in tourism marketing related jobs in order to be competitive in the employment arena.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of AR applications and platforms, discuss the use of AR applications and platforms within tourism marketing, and to make a case for including AR as a topic of study in institutions of higher education which offer bachelor’s and master’s degrees in tourism marketing and related programs. Specifically, this chapter is designed to outline augmented reality and its applications in tourism marketing education mainly in three aspects: theoretical, practical, and cross country examples.

BACKGROUND

AR has the potential to incorporate all human senses (sight, sound, taste, smell, touch) into a technological experience (Abernathy & Clark, 2007). AR applications are accelerated mainly by the latest developments in mobile computing, computer graphics, wire-less and sensor technologies. These advances influence and enhance human experiences through providing real time information displays and reviews (Suh, Shin, Woo, Dow, & MacIntyre, 2011). Gartner (2014) expects that, on the basis of continual technological advancements, the general public will be highly accepting the AR technologies. Still, the use of AR application as a tourism marketing tool are developing and seem futuristic to some individuals (Shen, Ong, & Nee, 2011; Seo, Kim, & Park, 2011). However, AR applications can appear as marketing tools where these are still subject of exploration, where, touristic demand for information source is common (Yovcheva, Buhalis, & Gatzidis, 2012).

AR technology can work on grounds like the Global Positioning System (GPS) and on mobile devices with capacities to add virtual features and to relate them with reality (Azuma, 1997). AR as a medium of displaying requires intensive use of hardware or electronic devices such as camera, display monitors and computing gadgets. The introduction of handheld electronic items like the Smartphone or the smaller version of wearable computers has extended the realms of AR technology (Buchholz, 2014). On the other side, gaming consoles such as the Nintendo DS or similar also are mostly equipped with augmented reality technologies today (Breeze, 2014). The strengths of AR lie in its technological simplicity and capacities to perform as an educational tool.

AR applications used for marketing products may be the most common and popular way that the everyday consumer has been introduced to the concept and practice of augmented reality. AR applications have specifically been used to market brand names in ways that the product becomes memorable to the consumer and subsequently may build brand loyalty. Following are descriptions of three brand name uses of AR for marketing.

Budweiser is one of the world’s famous and popular drink brands. As a part of effective marketing, Budweiser brings the Football Association Challenge Cup (FA Cup) directly into the consumers’ house by using AR application. The Football Association Challenge Cup is an annual knockout cup competition in English football that is commonly known as the FA Cup in the world (The FA Cup, 2015). The marketing approach of Budweiser is ground breaking and it has managed to immerse AR in conventional marketing strategies. The Budweiser ‘Man of the Match’ mobile application enables users to drink from the virtually-generated FA Cup. This application is developed on AR platform of the Aurasma that allows transforming the beer can into a virtual FA Cup trophy as a basic 3D model. Users have to click a selected button of their Smartphone camera for this purpose. Even though this application of AR for marketing can be effective, this entertainment option is limited, and can only be experienced by selected customers (Aurasma, 2015).

High street betting chain Paddy Power^® has also made contributions on putting augmented reality into practice. In cooperation with Blippar, Paddy Power developed a special application which turns the Queens face on a £10 bank note into the user’s own face. This technology is as simple as to hover on the face of the Queen’s and then enjoy. The digital copy of the Queen turns into animation as soon as the Smartphone can recognize the face. The face then moves as interactive and functional that resembles that the Queen is the official sponsor of the Euro 2012 (Preexamples, 2015).

The Muscle Milk^® brand has also used AR in marketing. Through the campaign of Shaq the bottle, this company is grabbing the attention of diverse clients and promoters from all over world. The celebration of Shaquille O’Neal was followed by augmented reality application. This initiative took place in the Cleveland market when the muscle milk brand was chosen to market into a new team created with O’Neals joining the team. A special form of AR marker in the shape of a QR code was printed on the back label of each milk bottle. When a webcam was placed on the marker of each bottle, a user could watch the virtual video showing a mini Shaq in Cleveland. Each of the five different flavours of the Muscle Milk^® followed five types of videos and these were limited by edition and number (Showcase, 2015).

TOURISM MARKETING

Digital Marketing

Still, no definition of digital tourism marketing has been offered that can be viewed as comprehensive and well accepted. There are still scopes to develop the definition and to turn it into a workable meaning for understanding the central theme and relevancy with existing market structures of tourism (Buhalis & Yovcheva, 2014). In a very general understanding, digital marketing refers to the pattern of marketing that uses technology as the main platform to reach the target bases of consumers. There are numerous techniques of professional practices in tourism marketing and digital marketing that are entirely technology-based. Wider selection of tourism products or services coupled with marketing tactics like branding or promotion is presented before consumers to allow them to reach an agreeable decision of purchase. Internet is the central base of digital tourism while, television, radio or even the mobile telephone devices are used for the purpose. Digital marketing has unparallel dependency on the Internet and thus very often this is termed as Internet marketing (Daim et al., 2012). The use of the Internet is more effective to reach wider consumer segments and, thus, to persuade them to access the available offers, services or products. Unlike conventional patterns of marketing, this Internet-based marketing is more focused; targeted and comprehensive that brings dynamism in marketing and consumer choice enhancements. This also supports consumers to have expanded formats of products or service selection. Technical terms like the search engine marketing (SEM) or search engine optimization (SEO) are quite familiar in digital marketing and have relevancy in numerous platforms of digital media. Other than the SEM or SEO, digital marketing is also relevant in non-mainstream spaces such as the service offers of mobile telephone technologies as the multimedia messaging service (MMS), short messaging service (SMS) or even games (Deighton & Kornfeld, 2007). The central theme of digital marketing is to create a bond between consumers and technology. There is a constant demand that technologies should support human livelihood and thus to create more spaces to understand the demand of tourism product or service consumers. Digital marketing is more engaged in creating and retaining a strong bond between consumers and technology. This pattern of marketing enables business entrepreneurs to become consumer led and also to become more capable to meet the increasing demands of consumers in more manageable ways (Dhir, 2004).

Digital marketing is entirely related to tourism marketing in recent times where, a specific tourism organization uses a digital marketing campaign for branding or marketing (Azim & Hassan, 2013). Other than email, SMS, MMS and social networking, a certain number of advanced options become available for digital marketing. Display supported digital marketing can offer realistic experiences to consumers and thus to select products or services from a more convenient way. The introduction of Smartphones has enabled digital tourism marketers and consumers to reach a mutual standpoint of offerings and accessibilities (Deluna, 2014). Digital marketing is fast, as a message can be shared quickly to numerous consumer bases across the world. However, evidently, digital tourism marketing requires expert knowledge on certain areas and on technical issues to help advancing capacities of both marketers and consumers. The advantages of digital marketing are mostly positive and getting enormous responses from almost all over the world (Wind & Mahajan, 2001). In comparison with direct marketing, digital marketing has specific advantages. These advantages are most similar to digital marketing and come in numerous forms. The main factor of personal attention of consumers is crucial and is related to interaction with customers. Also, digital marketing tends to focus on each of the customers and thus creates more possibilities to generate direct responses. In digital marketing, this is often manageable and possible to create a personalized message to an individual customer (MarketingWeek, 2015). Each customer can be addressed and greeted separately and uniformly. Thus, this promotes personal serviced marketing that is more effective than other conventional forms. Also, digital marketing supports the measurement of responses from customers (i.e. the replies or reactions from messages sent to each of the customers). This is also important to understand the customer bases and their responses or mindsets. Digital marketing also does not necessarily require specialized forms of knowledge on marketing or technology. This is more customer-tailored and relevant to meet their demands more satisfactorily (Rust, Katherine, & Valarie, 2004). Digital marketing can become an important addition to any existing or potential business evolving in the tourism sector. This helps customers to achieve a target that is more focused to reality and reliability. There is a gap between traditional and digital forms of marketing and this gap is gradually increasing over the years due to the availability of more advanced types of technologies that continuously surpass one another. Digital marketing is a positive and fruitful outcome of the Internet which is supported by diverse forms of technological innovations (Guimaraes, 2012). This is thus convincing that digital marketing continues evolving over the coming years through the adoption of more advanced technological innovations. This is a way to support, promote and expand an existing business or even to reach desired customer bases. Thus, this is important to ensure that the business is getting the maximum exposure from digital forms of marketing, even within a complex pattern of marketing (Hax, 2010). Digital marketing, due to the fact that it does not necessarily require professional expertise and experiences, has very good possibility to gain popularity in tourism.

Digital marketing has become a necessity for today’s business world and more supported by technologies than ever before. Also, the tourism sector requires working or practical knowledge in marketing and technology (Mohapatra, 2009). This form of tourism deals with both supply and demand side that involves interests of both marketers and consumers. Digital marketing is beneficial and rewarding in numerous marketing formats and technology applications. Customers normally stay connected with each other on digital platforms. Again, customer response generation relatively becomes more obvious than conventional marketing (Mobile Marketer, 2015). The success and activity of a tourism business enterprise depends on specific marketing factors. These are also related with diverse types of business functionalities including understanding the targeted customer base and becoming able to know their responses in a purposeful manner (Gay, Charlesworth, & Esen, 2007). The success of digital marketing relies on specific strategies or factors. Like conventional marketing approaches, in digital marketing, there are specific goals to reach. In digital marketing, set business goals are wider that target general expansion within the shortest possible time period. The more customers involved with a business enterprise, the more attention from marketers are required to serve their demands more successfully (Rayport & Jaworski, 2004). Digital marketing is particularly important for any business to reach success within the shortest possible timeframe.

AR Uses in Tourism Marketing

As the trend of creating closer interactions between technologies and electronic gadgets, tourism marketing becomes more powerful and it is obvious that AR marketing will gradually contest existing marketing tools. Technologies are dissolving in tourism marketing in faster motions than any other times. This becomes evident from some revolutionary inventions including augmented reality. Technology enhanced marketing strategies are challenging and replacing relatively more rigid theoretical notions. The content, features, and objectives are basically altered by the use of technology in tourism marketing. There are numerous examples, from around the world, of AR being used in an aspect of tourism marketing. Following are examples from six countries, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Greece, and China.

In Ontario of Canada, the tourism industry witnessed a global event termed as the ‘2013 Ontario Tourism Summit’ that actually gathered academics, scholars, researchers, industry practitioners and AR marketing experts to share their views and ideas. This summit particularly supported general tourism agendas. As an outcome of this summit, experts reached an agreement that mobile devices are becoming reliable for AR marketing and offer enormous potentials to increase the market. The summit concluded that, AR is no longer confined within photo, video, downloads, games or website links. Rather, AR is becoming a powerful marketing tool for tourism (Augmentedmarketing, 2013). In Canada, AR research has already been integrated with academia and Universities like York University and Ryerson University evidently welcomes research programs in AR (augmentedstories, 2015).

In France, AR is being used to promote historic and cultural sites for global audiences. The Louvre -DNP Museum Lab is a specialized research facility designed for AR application development in museums (Louvre -DNP Museum Lab, 2015). The Louvre is now equipped with AR technology enabled displays and devices that offer information about the collections, histories, compilations, and displays with related data and information. Another example from Paris, France involves using Smartphone devices for tourists to download information about historical images. These images are then contrasted with images of the present time in similar places of the city. Users of such applications can travel back as much as one hundred years and view more than two thousands places of interest. These establishments otherwise have to rely on museum attendants or tour operators to convey information to tourists. The AR technology can also help tourists pursue their own areas of interest. Lastly, the Cluny Abbey in Cluny, France has embraced one of the simplest technology displays of AR. In order to promote learning the history, a big size display screen is used to provide tourists with real-life experiences through AR technology. Displays on this screen actually offer tourists historic backgrounds of the city. Therefore, the intervention of AR technology enhances the tourists’ experience. On average, millions of tourists make visits and experience this screen to know the past of this city every year. This facility also creates interests among tourists about AR and its application. In general, such interests through AR technology show the huge potentials of AR for tourism marketing. This also demonstrates how AR technology can be diffused for experience generation, sharing, educational and marketing purposes (Digitalmeetsculture, 2015).

In Germany, remarkable advancements in augmented reality application has been jointly offered by the companies Instant Reality and IGD Fraunhofer. These companies have developed a special AR supported photo system that enables tourists to view images of important sites or attractions of Berlin. The exceptional feature that this system offers is to view images of a site or attraction of Berlin in different periods in history. This technological system is supported by wearable or handheld devices such as Smartphones or ultra-mobile personal computer. This technological application allows users to get connected with the central server system and get access to a database of photographs highlighting the city’s decade’s old growth (Stricker, Pagani, & Zoellner, 2009).

In the Netherlands, the function of augmented reality is fundamental. The Netherlands Architecture Institute has introduced a free application, Urban Augmented Reality that is available in eight main cities of the country, enabling both the residents and tourists viewing existing urban environment through historic layouts. In order to share views or ideas, tourists can leave their comments on a database linked to it and the public sector policy planners can also then extract themes of such comments and reflect them in public policy frameworks (Caarls, Jonker, Kolstee, Rotteveel, & van Eck, 2009).

The process of AR technology application found its way through virtual reconstruction of a prominent ancient temple located in Olympia of Greece. The development of AR technology supported systems is the outcome of many years long research. According to Vlahakis et al. (2002), the development of ArcheoGuide AR system allows tourists to have memorable sensations from tourism marketing education standpoints. Layar is an AR application which uses GPS location to show nearby service facilities on top of the image of a mobile phone’s camera. Through the use of Layar, an application that can be downloaded to a Smartphone, a tourist can get the option to point the phone towards the Berlin wall representing a reality based 3D model. In addition, in Seville, Greece the Past View Company has created a program that can offer tourists an entire city tour using AR. The application operates on a type of electronic earphones or video glasses and connects to a Smartphone to present the city’s history (Internet-science, 2015).

China, as a global tourism destination with an abundance of tourism resources, is becoming dominant for both present and future tourists. The Yuanmingyuan or the Garden of Perfect Brightness is located in Beijing and was built during the 18^th and 19^th centuries. During the Anglo-Chinese War, this majestic garden was totally destroyed. However, the attempt to regenerate the garden came into action through the use of both sketches and paintings with little use of photographs or digital formats. However, as soon as AR technology came into practice, a panel of experts of the Beijing Institute of Technology was engaged in creating a reconstruction process of virtual platforms (Wang, Wang, & Fournier, 2000). Facilities for tourists to learn about this garden were supported by numerous initiatives and approaches related to technology use. These included machines that are operated by coins inputted by customers and special facilities like model reconstruction (Lum, 2012).

Most countries in Europe such as Germany, France, Italy, Greece and the United Kingdom with their enriched social, cultural and historic backgrounds are using AR technologies for exhibiting cultural sites for marketing purposes (Hepburn, 2015; Lee, Chung, & Jung, 2015). However, augmented reality can be used in almost all parts of the world, including both technologically developed and under-developed countries by developing technological infrastructures (Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin, 2013; Jung, Chung, & Leue, 2015).

The use of AR in different marketing areas is immense. In practice, examples of brands using augment reality are huge and cannot be limited to Topshop Kinect Dressing Rooms, Shisedio Makeup Mirror, American Apparel Colour-Changing App, De Beers ‘Forevermark Fitting’, IKEA AR Catalogue, Sayduck Furniture Visualizer, IBM App, Converse Shoe Sampler, Burberry Beauty Box, Moosejaw X-Ray App (Creative Guerrilla Marketing, 2014). This technology becomes a solid platform for creating and maintaining relationship with the public and the general customer base that can be replicated in tourism and can be highlighted in tourism marketing education.

Resistance to AR Marketing

AR can be applied in marketing including tourism. Historic establishments can be rebuilt through the use of AR technologies enabling to support experience enhancements and to promote the site. Such regeneration process through images and visuals can be useful for both commercial and prototype educational purposes (Monday, 2015). The demands of tourism learners are diverse and thus should be offered to satisfied what they seek. If they seek to experience cultural heritage tourism, they should be offered a realistic experience using AR technology (Han, Jung, & Gibson, 2014; Jung & Han, 2014). The rapid advancement of wearable computing, such as Google Glass, adds possibilities of enhancing the learning experience within cultural organizations such as museums and art galleries. A later study by Hassan (2013) in the Whitechapel Gallery of London cited an example of effective technology application in terms of offering learning experience. Another recent study by Leue, Jung, and Tom-Dieck (2015) reveals specifically that wearable augmented reality application helps visitors see connections between paintings and personalizes their learning experience.

In tourism research, limited theories and models related to technology use have been developed by scholars, researchers or experts. Relevant theories of technology adoption have been mostly applied to understand the pattern of technology adoption by tourism products or service consumers. The Diffusion of Innovation (Rogers, 1962) is an example of those theories or models. However, understanding the relevancy of this theory in AR technology application context is unique. In a simple sense, this theory explains why, how and at what rate a new technology is diffused into a culture. This theory is originally concerned with technologies, artefacts and ideas that normally pass from theory to application stage (Spencer, Buhalis, & Moital, 2012). According to Rogers (2003), sequences that the Diffusion of Innovation Theory follows are: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation. On the other side, different stages of this theory are: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards. The ‘Diffusion of Innovations’ theory relies on the innovation-decision process that can be seen as valid in diverse cultures. This theory follows that technological innovations are connected through specific channels of the social system and act over a period of time.

Tourism industry is unprecedentedly gaining benefits from technology integration. Arguably, information and communication technologies are required to offer diverse typologies to become beneficial components for tourism marketing in recent times. The involvement of certain features of tourism is also essential in terms of effective use of technologies to make purchase decisions. The world is now better equipped to welcome and apply technological innovations than ever before (McElheran, 2012). Tour guides, travel agents, and tour operators are influenced by the utmost application of technologies; while tourism products or service and consumers are the direct subject of such influences. Results of technology application in tourism can be replicated in similar or emerging market contexts. From the applied viewpoint and most importantly, augmented reality as an innovation is beneficial for the tourism business enterprises, policy planners and business communities for competitive marketing strategy formulations. The basic question stays relevant to delineate consumer and product or service provider to become able to accept augmented reality as innovation. This question also seems as appropriate to explore the position of augmented reality in the Diffusion of Innovation theory. More importantly, concentrations need to be placed to determine the characteristics of augmented reality to incorporate a theory as the Diffusion of Innovation.

Key Practical Challenges to Inclusion of AR

Tourism is the world’s leading industry and there are several techniques of professional and practical practices in tourism marketing education where the strategies and patterns are entirely technology-based (World Tourism Organization, 2015). A purposeful selection of tourism products or services coupled with marketing tactics like branding, promotions with augmented reality technology needs to become valid and effective. In fact, this is a real challenge to introduce, support and promote augmented reality in tourism marketing academia. This allows consumers to reach an agreeable decision of purchase that might turn as positive. This chapter suggests two key challenges to apply augmented reality in tourism marketing. In both perspectives of augmented reality and tourism marketing education, the key challenges appear in theory and practice.

On the other side in practice, AR is also mostly viewed as a technological innovation and its mass use is mostly restricted. The activities and successes of a tourism business enterprise depend on the selection of specific marketing approaches followed by their effective application (Turban, McLean, & Wetherbe, 2008). In recent times, marketing approaches mostly rely on technologies and to serve the purposes of business enterprises, augmented reality technology can become effective given its proven capacities to attract consumer interests. The greater number of customers that are attracted to a business enterprise, the more opportunities are created for marketing on digital platforms. This requires proper attention of the marketers to each individual customer. Also, setting realistic business targets to ensure that the business is directed towards the desired goal is also important and can be seen as a challenge. The success of digital marketing relies on careful selection of strategies and policies and AR technology application can possibly be a good option. Like unconventional marketing approach, in digital marketing, there have to be specific goals for each individual business enterprise to reach.

TOURISM MARKETING EDUCATION

Tourism marketing education refers to the education that involves tourism marketing in its syllabus. This type of education can support preparing future tourism marketing professionals. Primarily, the use of technologies is crucial. Effective and valid application of technology for professional development including tourism can bring positive outcomes.

Preparing Future Tourism Marketing Professionals

Specific technology like AR is believed to have capacities to create impact among tourism marketing professionals. This impact can lead to influencing consumers. The world is gradually changing and is continuously embracing updated forms of technologies. It is wise to adopt technologies and to apply them effectively for the purpose of marketing (Lewis, Agarwal, & Sambamurthy, 2003). AR marketing, as a type of digital marketing, is relatively more cost effective and can offer better return of investment than traditional forms of marketing (prweb, 2011). AR applications can be useful to develop skills of tourism marketing professionals and can be viewed as a convenient source to create user interests. AR can be an effective means of sales and revenue generation for tourism businesses. This can render possibilities for professionals. AR application can enhance consumer experiences. In addition, a number of intermediaries and more selectively electronic mediaries (eMediaires) are adopting and using the Internet and AR to reach target customer segments all over the world (Kumar, Venkatesan, & Reinartz, 2006). On the other side, tourists also seek information on their desired services or products on the Internet. Thus, the Internet and in particular AR can be turned into common platforms of marketing. These cost effective and informative platforms are turning as valid and reliable platforms of marketing for tourists. In order to support digital marketing, numerous forms of display patterns are brought to influence a positive form of consumer decision. The Internet is being challenged by the Internet itself in terms of speed, information or accessibility. Visibly, not other platforms can be as reliable and valid for tourism marketing in the most recent tourism marketing contexts. This is termed as unbelievably simple and within the fingertips of customers (Thorpe, Holm, & van den Boer, 2014). Targeted customers are allowed to search for relevant information and thus to get access to it in more convenient ways than ever before with the effective support of AR technology application. This platform is also crucial to promote and make available certain products or services. The conventional types of digital marketing follow e-commerce, website trafficking and e-mail newsletters. All of these types are more conventional and have been in use for a long time. The demand for more advanced forms of digital marketing becomes apparent due to changing choices of consumers and the features of products or services (Song, Liu, & Chen, 2012). The use of AR becomes very effective in terms of getting responses or experiences shared on specific products or services. Blogging is relative less effective than social media but still offers relevant information. Sometimes, information sharing on networking websites becomes critical and thus appears as more capable to offer better service or product qualities with the support of AR technology application. Thus, AR can have a significant role to play to develop skills of marketing professionals in tourism.

In order to prepare more professionals in tourism marketing, marketers need to stress applying technologies for skills development. In tourism, the basic demand to capitalize on technological advancements is to learn operational skills. In many cases, tourism marketers struggle to apply an innovative technology like AR and this can be regarded as a resistance for a relatively new technology such as AR. However, AR, as an innovative technology, is already in use by tourism businesses and marketers. Following the Diffusion of Innovations by Rogers (1962), AR technology can be classified as ‘Early Majority’ stage. The basic reason for this categorization is that the tourism marketing and businesses have already advanced significantly to apply AR technology meaning that they are on the ‘Early Majority’ stage.

On the other side, government, university and tourism industry should look at the huge potential of AR marketing in tourism and take action to get this included in the academic syllabuses. This can be done by stressing AR technology and include this in both the undergraduate and postgraduate level academic syllabus. Tourism marketing education in almost every country is at the infancy stage with regards to including AR in its academic syllabus. On the other side, skills of the academics also need to reach that desired level to teach AR in tourism marketing education. On the basis of the Diffusion of Innovations theory of Rogers (1962), the present situation of tourism marketing education outlines that AR is an innovative technology at ‘Early Adopters’ stage.

Inclusion of ar Applications in Curriculum

Tourism marketing education syllabuses in graduate and postgraduate stage at university level can highlight AR in their academic syllabuses. Numerous evidences and cases from across the world show that the use of AR for marketing purposes is not rare anymore and the number is increasing (Kaufman & Horton, 2015). The effects and influences of augmented reality technology, in particular can hardly be ignored in many areas of tourism marketing. This supports the claim that AR technology needs to be included in tourism marketing education syllabuses. AR as a technology application supports marketing in a unique way that learners need to know. Tourism marketing dynamics outline that the use of AR technologies needs to be widely utilized. This is still a subject matter of consideration both from technology and marketing domains. In the tourism industry, tourists are mostly capable of using AR technologies through their mobile devices like Smartphones. AR is mainly responsible for experience sharing, education and marketing purposes for tourism. This technology can offer experiences of an entire city tour as linked with its basic history, features and related factors. This creates interests in areas of education, marketing and promoting of specific tourist attractions. Unlike conventional tourism marketing education and marketing types, AR marketing is more dependable, target focused and useful. Thus, tourism marketing education evolved as a necessity of today’s businesses as solely supported by technological knowledge (Vong, 2015). However, the availability and accessibility of technology are unequal for general learners and consumer segments. There is a strong demand for technological knowledge and use. A comprehensive academic and industry led understanding of tourism digital marketing is yet to be offered. Very often, it is believed that tourism digital marketing has a strong central theme of technology led knowledge and practical application. This possesses capacities to incorporate both existing and future tourism digital marketing. This study cites examples from several countries in the world in terms of AR technology use. Thus, this study advocates AR to be included in tourism marketing education.

Key Theoretical Challenges to Inclusion of AR

The first challenge is theoretical concept on the ground of knowledge exchange and expertise about augmented reality. This challenge is particularly directed for academics, scholars or experts in tourism marketing education. The application of augmented reality in tourism marketing education academia is a challenge. In theory, academic instructors need to possess sufficient knowledge about augmented reality and its application in tourism marketing education. On the other side in particular cases, augmented reality is seen as an element of post modern marketing outlining its relevancies in the marketing academia. Marketing in post modern age is in fact the blend of conventional and modern approaches of marketing. In post modern marketing, consumers typically stay connected and thus the response generation becomes more obvious than conventional marketing (Yang, 2004). Message on services or products pass over within a very short time to numerous consumer bases across the world. Post modern marketing is related with diverse types of business functionalities including identifying the target consumers and becoming able to comprehend their responses in purposeful manners (Petersen & Toop, 1994).

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The main message of this section is that AR offers features to be included in any tourism marketing education curriculum. The primary reason of such inclusion is its key feature as a technological innovation. Technology is changing the core contents and grounds of tourism marketing education and there is almost no scope left for ignoring the growing importance. Thus, the contribution of technology is gradually increasing in tourism marketing education leaving more impact on both academics and practitioners in these identified grounds. This chapter discusses diverse features and potentials of augmented reality in tourism marketing practice and education and suggests its inclusion in the academic syllabuses to be studied as a key module. Thus, it would be beneficial to include augmented reality in the tourism marketing education syllabus. The very basic benefit that this inclusion can generate is the diversified knowledge of students. On the other side, assigned teachers and researchers in the tourism marketing education discipline would also possibly become aware about the contents and presentations of AR in tourism marketing education. The future of augmented reality as both an academic and research element of tourism marketing education is convincing. Even at present, augmented reality is facing serious challenges but the potentials are enormous to be included in tourism marketing syllabuses across the globe. The key challenge that augmented reality is facing is its complex nature. This technology also requires relevant expertise of concerned academics. The level of knowledge also needs to be well developed to deliver to students. Consequently, this is mostly obvious that augmented reality is expected to manage a strong position in tourism marketing education syllabus in the near future.

The introduction and availability of a technology commonly varies between nations outlining acute differences between nations including the developed and the developing. Technology application cannot be expected to get similar responses in both developed and developing countries across the world. This requires the demand that updated technology needs to be made widely available and particularly for students, academics and researchers. Their involvement and activities would offer positive advancements to view augmented reality as a valid element of tourism marketing education in near future. Thus, this chapter proposes that augmented reality should be offered as an important subject matter of tourism marketing education in the future.

This chapter is a report of thoughts related to AR application in tourism marketing education. This chapter as a report could possibly be converted into comprehensive research supported by empirical data and information. From that perspective, the basic limitation of this chapter is the lack of empirical evidence from respondents through conducting interviews. Primary data and information could possibly enrich contents of this report by highlighting opinions, arguments and justification from user perspectives. This lack is significant in a manner because, a possible interrelationship between academics, students, experts and practitioners related to tourism marketing education could possibly intensify debate and arguments to view augmented reality as an element of an academic syllabus. A balanced interrelatedness between concepts and peoples’ ideologies could possibly create a bridge between theories and applications. This is a very generic limitation of this report that needs to be addressed in future research.

CONCLUSION

Conceptually, technology application supports massive consumption across the world where, such consumption patterns are mostly diverse and ever changing. Augmented reality is a computer generated reality but not necessarily fictitious or purely imaginary. Augmented reality supports the reality that is concerned with existing artifacts. Augmented reality as a technology can be termed as innovation on ground of the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (Rogers, 1962). On the basis of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory of Roger’s (1962), this study determines position of augmented reality for tourism marketer or business as the ‘Early Majority’ and tourism marketing education as the ‘Early Adopters’ stage, respectively. Basic logic for this claim is made on the perspective of an emerging trend in tourism marketing education. The very basic reason is that augmented reality as an element of tourism marketing syllabus still remains at the early stage. Academics, students and researchers are still to become fully aware concerning augmented reality in terms of its meaning and application where the technology is not widely available for mass use.

This paper discusses features of augmented reality to be included in the tourism marketing education syllabuses. The features of augmented reality as an advanced form of virtual reality (VR) is interesting and its application values are also relatively high. Recent technological developments of mobile computing, computer graphics, wireless, sensor technologies, Smartphones and wearable devices have created more prospects to view augmented reality as more rewarding. On the other side, global brands are also using this technology for both advertising and marketing purposes. Also, these brands are constantly relying on such technological innovation to create spaces for marketing and connectivity with mass consumers. In addition, global technological appliance manufacturers are constantly aiming to use and develop this technology creating more opportunities for research and employability for students and researchers. These global brands have allowed consumers to view how technological appliances are designed to perform and entertain. Wearable devices like Smartwatches or Smart glasses are also evolving with modifications creating more spaces for general consumers. The development of sensor and visual technologies are also supporting the potentials of augmented reality technology. This thus allows buyers to support and experience what they are going to purchase and how that will look like.

Thus evidently, AR both as a technology and as an innovation has already established the position in consumers’ traditional lifestyle. This is visible and evident through the customary use of technological gadgets those are mostly wearable. This chapter cites examples of augmented reality use from several countries of the world including the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Canada, France, Germany, Greece and China to establish the claim of its application.

This chapter outlines the prospects that AR can offer in terms of knowledge, research and practical aspect of employment possibility. Thus, this paper clearly suggests diverse aspects and examples of augmented reality as available and accessible for students, academics and practitioners in tourism marketing. Also, the paper strongly suggests augmented reality to be included in tourism marketing education syllabus to allow students learn about this technology and to become fit for employability. Augmented reality is an excellent and a trendy concept of recent times. This technology is expected to get wider popularity in the near future. Augmented reality shows prospects to turn into a reliable platform in tourism marketing mainly for its increasing capacities.

REFERENCES

Abernathy, W., & Clark, K. B. (2007). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative distruction. Research Policy , 14(1), 3–22. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90021-6

Augmentedmarketing. (2013). Ontarion Tourism Summit 2013 features interactive print. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRuwl6

Augmentedstories. (2015). Education. Retrieved from: http://augmentedstories.com/education/

Aurasma. (2015). The drink of champions. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1Fw66vl

Azim, R., & Hassan, A. (2013). Impact analysis of wireless and mobile technology on business management strategies. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management , 2(2), 141–150.

Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6(4), 355–385.

Breeze, M. (2014). How augmented reality will change the way we live. Retrieved from http://tnw.co/1nEDN6O

Buchholz, R. (2014). Augmented reality: new opportunities for marketing and sales. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nMCLYO

Buhalis, D., & Yovcheva, Z. (2014). Augmented reality in tourism: 10 best practices. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1tphods

Caarls, J., Jonker, P., Kolstee, Y., Rotteveel, J., & van Eck, W. (2009). Augmented reality for art, design and cultural heritage—system design and evaluation. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing , 2009, 1–16. doi:10.1155/2009/716160

Creative Guerrilla Marketing. (2014). 10 examples of augmented reality in retail. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/OxuyHI

Daim, T. U., Letts, M., Krampits, M., Khamis, R., Dash, P., & Monalisa, M. (2012). IT infrastructure refresh planning for enterprises: A business process perspective. Business Process Management Journal , 17(3), 1–16.

Deighton, J. A., & Kornfeld, L. (2007). Digital interactivity: unanticipated consequences for markets, marketing and consumers . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Deluna, K. (2014). 10 rockstar examples of augmented reality for 2014. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mIaCib

Dhir, A. (2004). The digital consumer technology handbook . Oxford: Elsevier.

Digitalmeetsculture. (2015). Augmented reality: enriching culture. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1E46st6

Dutra, J.P. (2015). ARgos – augmented reality in Volos – Greece. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTVTw

Edwards, J. (2011). Digital frontiers media uses augmented reality to market St. Pete/Clearwater tourism with miles media. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/03/prweb5141134.htm

Gartner Incorporated. (2014). Gartner Technology Research. Retrieved from: http://Online.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp>

Gay, R., Charlesworth, A., & Esen, R. (2007). Online marketing: A customer-led approach . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Guimaraes, T. (2012). Industry clockspeed's impact on business innovation success factors. European Journal of Innovation Management , 14(3), 322–344. doi:10.1108/14601061111148825

Han, D., Jung, T., & Gibson, A. (2014). Dublin AR: Implementing Augmented Reality (AR) in Tourism . In Xiang, Z., & Tussyadiah, I. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 511–523). Wien, New York: Springer International Publishing.

Hassan, A. (2013). Perspective analysis and implications of visitor management - experiences from the Whitechapel Gallery, London. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 24(3), 410-426. doi:.10.1080/13032917.2013.797916

Hax, A. C. (2010). Reinventing your business strategy . New York: Springer.

Hepburn, A. (2015). Top 10 augmented reality examples- digital buzz blog. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nXdp6l

Jung, T., Chung, N., & Leue, M. (2015). The Determinants of Recommendations to Use Augmented Reality Technologies - The Case of a Korean Theme Park . Tourism Management , 49, 75–86. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013

Jung, T., & Han, D. (2014). Augmented reality (AR) in urban heritage tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research.

Kaufman, I., & Horton, C. (2015). Digital marketing: Integrating strategy and tactics with values: A guidebook for executives, managers & students . New York: Routledge.

Kipper, G., & Rampolla, J. (2014). Augmented reality: An emerging technologies guide to AR . London: Elsevier.

Kumar, V., Venkatesan, R., & Reinartz, W. J. (2006). Knowing what to sell when to whom. Harvard Business Review , May, 131–145.

Lee, H., Chung, N., & Jung, T. (2015). Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of South Korea and Ireland . In Tussyadiah, I., & Inversini, A. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 477–491). Wien: Springer International Publishing New York. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14343-9_35

Leue, M. C., Jung, T., & Tom-Dieck, D. (2015). Google Glass Augmented Reality: Generic Learning Outcomes for Art Galleries. In I. Tussyadiah & A. Inversini (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 463-476). Wien: Springer International Publishing.

Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: An empirical study of knowledge workers. Management Information Systems Quarterly , 27(4), 657–678.

Louvre -DNP Museum Lab. (2015). Past presentation. Retrieved from http://www.museumlab.jp/english/tech/04tech.html

Lum, R. (2012). 10 mind-blowing augmented reality campaigns. Retrieved fromhttp://bit.ly/1kMP8AD

MarketingWeek. (2015). Online retail will drive innovation in interactive marketing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbpjdM

McElheran, K. S. (2012). Do market leaders lead in business process innovation? The case(s) of e-business adoption . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Mobile Marketer. (2015). Mobile augmented reality to drive $1.5B in revenue by 2015. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbq32r

Mohapatra, S. (2009). Business process automation . New Delhi: PHI Private Limited.

Monday, C. (2015). 5 augmented reality examples worth looking at - ignite social media. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mN1qZD

Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2013). A typology of technology-enhanced tourism experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research . doi:doi:10.1002/jtr.1958

Nordin, S. (2003). Tourism clustering and innovation- paths to economic growth and development. Ostersund . European Tourism Research Institute.

Olsson, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected User Experience of Mobile Augmented Reality Services. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 17(2), 287–304. doi:10.1007/s00779-011-0494-x

Petersen, C., & Toop, A. (1994). Sales Promotion in Postmodern Marketing . Aldershot: Gower Publishing Ltd.

Preexamples. (2015). Paddy Power augmented reality campaign brings the Queen’s face on £10 note to life. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRur13

Rayport, J. F., & Jaworski, B. J. (2004). Best face forward. Harvard Business Review , 82(12), 1–12.

Rogers, M. E. (1962). Diffusion of innovations . New York: Free Press.

Rogers, M. E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Rust, R. T., Katherine, N. L., & Valarie, A. Z. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing , 68(1), 109–127. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.109.24030

Seo, B.-K., Kim, K., & Park, J. (2011). Augmented reality-based on-site tour guide: A study in Gyeongbokgung. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6469, 276–285. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22819-3_28

Shen, Y., Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2011). Vision-based hand interaction in augmented reality environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 27(6), 523–544. doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555297

Showcase. (2015). Shaq augmented reality. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTZ5F

Song, H., Liu, J., & Chen, G. (2012). Tourism value chain governance- review and prospects. Journal of Travel Research , 52(1), 15–28. doi:10.1177/0047287512457264

Spencer, A. J., Buhalis, D., & Moital, M. (2012). A hierarchical model of technology adoption for small owner-managed travel firms: An organizational decision making and leadership perspective. Tourism Management , 33(5), 1195–1208. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.11.011

Stricker, D., Pagani, A., & Zoellner, M. (2009). In-situ visualization for cultural heritage sites using novel augmented reality technologies. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/192Vg5N

Suh, Y., Shin, C., Woo, W., Dow, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2011). Enhancing and evaluating users’ social experience with a mobile phone guide applied to cultural heritage. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 15(6), 649–665. doi:10.1007/s00779-010-0344-2

The, F. A. Cup. (2015). About the FA. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1GLcZYu

Thorpe, M., Holm, J., & van den Boer, G. (2014). Discovering the decisions within your business processes using IBM blueworks live . New York: International Business Machines Corporation.

Turban, E., McLean, E. R., & Wetherbe, J. C. (2008). Information technology for management . New Jersey: John Wiley & sons, Inc.

Vlahakis, V., Ioannidis, N., Karigiannis, J., Tsotros, M., Gounaris, M., Stricker, D., Gleue, T., Daehne, P., & Almeida, L. (2002). Archeoguide: An Augmented Reality Guide for Archaeological Sites. Computer Graphics in Art History and Archaeology, September/October, 52- 60.

Vong, K. (2015). How brands are using augmented reality in marketing to engage customers. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/SrBNTq

Wang, L., Wang, C., & Fournier, C. (2000). Envisioning Yuan Ming Yuan (Garden of Perfect Brightness). IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 20(1), 10–14. doi:10.1109/38.814532

Wind, J., & Mahajan, V. (2001). Digital Marketing: Global Strategies from the World's Leading Experts. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). (2015). Understanding tourism: basic glossary. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1ki2UGS

Yang, C. C. (2004). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. Telematics and Informatics , 22(3), 257–277. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2004.11.003

Yovcheva, Z., Buhalis, D., & Gatzidis, C. (2012). Smartphone Augmented Reality Applications for Tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 10(2), 63-66.

Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange , 4(1), 119–140.

ADDITIONAL READING

Bridges-to-technology. (2015). What is Technology Adoption? Retrieved from http://bit .ly/T5kFnb

Buhalis, D., & Lew, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the internet—the state of eTourism research. Tourism Management , 29(4), 609–623. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005

Business Dictionary. (2015). Consumer buying behaviour. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1kICBJX

Candela, G., & Figini, P. (2012). The economics of tourism destinations . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20874-4

Cantoni, L., & Zheng, X. (2013). Information and communication technologies in tourism . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Change Vision, A. R. M. (2015). Augmented reality marketing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1gVIqc0

Cooper, C., & Hall, M. C. (2008). Contemporary tourism: an international approach . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Duffy, J. A. M., & Ketchand, A. A. (1998). Examining the role of service quality in overall service satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues , 10, 240–255.

Hassan, A. (2012). Key components for an effective marketing planning: A conceptual analysis. International Journal of Management & Development Studies , 2(1), 68–70.

Hassan, A. (2012). Rationalization of Business Planning Through the Current Dynamics of Tourism. International Journal of Management & Development Studies , 2(1), 61–63.

Hassan, A. (2014). Revising the ‘Five - Fold Framework’ in Human Resource Management Practices – Insights from a Small Scale Travel Agent. Tourism Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal , 19(6), 799–805. doi:10.3727/108354214X14146848084400

Karch, M. (2015). Apps. Retrieved from http://abt.cm/1l48Ojv

Li, N., Buhalis, D., & Zhang, L. (2013). Interdisciplinary research on information science and tourism: A systematic review. Tourism Tribune , 28(1), 114–128.

Michopoulou, E., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Information provision for challenging markets: The case of the accessibility requiring market in the context of tourism. Information & Management , 50(5), 229–239. doi:10.1016/j.im.2013.04.001

Mihart, C. (2012). Impact of Integrated Marketing Communication on Consumer Behaviour: Effects on Consumer Decision – Making Process . International Journal of Marketing Studies , 4(2), 121–129. doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n2p121

Morrison, A. M. (2013). Marketing and managing tourism destinations . London: Routledge.

SAS Institute Inc. (2015). Digital marketing-what is it and why it matters. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1cRj6SG

The University of Bradford. (2015). Effective learning service-introduction to research and research methods. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1gUwTpo

Tremblay, P. (1998). The economic organization of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research , 25(4), 837–859. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00028-0

Walters, D. (2002). Operations strategy . New York: Palgrave.

Werthner, H., & Klein, S. (1999). Information technology and tourism - a challenging relationship . Vienna: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6363-4

Wynne, C., Berthon, P., Pitt, L., Ewing, M., & Napoli, J. (2001). The impact of the Internet on the distribution value chain- the case of the South African tourism industry. International Marketing Review , 18(4), 420–431. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005934

Youngdahl, W., & Loomba, A. (2000). Service-driven global supply chains. International Journal of Service Industry Management , 11(4), 329–347. doi:10.1108/09564230010355368

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Augmented Reality: This technology is generally viewed as the later stage of Virtual Reality. In this technology, a computer generated environment is created where, the humans as users act. This blends augmentation with reality.

The Diffusion of Innovation Theory: This theory offered by Rogers in 1962 explains why and how a new technology or idea spreads in a society and at what rate. The theory proposes five stages for such explanation as part of this theory as: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.

Digital Marketing: Digital marketing represents conducting marketing activities on digital platforms mainly, Internet.

Innovation: Innovation denotes an idea, method or product that is regarded as new.

Tourism Marketing Education: This deals with marketing in tourism education. In more specific understanding, this type education involves marketing aspects in particular grounds of tourism.

Chapter 8

Augmented Reality as an Emerging Application in Tourism Marketing Education

• Azizul Hassan Cardiff Metropolitan University, UK

• Timothy Jung Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

ABSTRACT

Augmented Reality (AR) as an advanced format of Virtual Reality (VR) becomes widely available in numerous appliances, mainly in mobile devices like Smartphones or wearable devices. As the prospective benefits of this technology are said to be immense, tourism marketing education is believed to experience a comprehensive application of AR in coming years. At present, AR technologies are in use in many academic disciplines including medicine, geography, information technology, computer aided entertainment and many more. Out of all of the recently developed technological advancements, those can be termed as ‘Innovations’, augmented reality can be considered as a key innovation. As coined, due to easier operational capacities, AR is becoming more popular and better fitting in tourism marketing education systems. This chapter outlines the use of AR, termed as an ‘Innovation’ as per the ‘Diffusion of Innovations’ theory of Rogers (1962), to meet tourism marketing education demands. The chapter critically examines relevant cross-country cases to support the arguments made above.

Introduction

This chapter discusses diverse features and potentials of augmented reality in tourism marketing education and suggests its inclusion in the academic syllabuses to be studied as a key module. Augmented reality (AR), an extension of virtual reality, is an emerging technology that can provide experiences in which real world places and activities are enhanced with computer-generated content, seamlessly mixing and overlapping human perception with two dimensional (2D) and three dimensional (3D) objects (Yuen, Yaoyuneyong, & Johnson, 2011). AR has emerged as an unprecedented use of technology in a number of fields including architecture, construction, military, medical, entertainment, advertising, travel, and marketing. Global brands from different sectors and industries have managed to use AR technology effectively and efficiently, garnering positive responses and support from consumers (Kaufman & Horton, 2015). As a result AR is having an impact on the everyday lives of consumers (Kipper & Rampolla, 2015).

The use of AR in the tourism industry is emerging. As an example, in 2008, Wikitude, a mobile AR software travel guide, was offered as freeware which displays information about the users' surroundings in a mobile camera view, including image recognition and 3D modeling. Tourists traveling in unfamiliar environments naturally require solid sources of data and information; AR applications can meet the demand of personalized, pertinent and rationalized information at a dependable level (Olsson & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, 2011). Today, AR applications are being created by tourism organizations all over the world for educational and marketing purposes. Tourism marketing professionals are responsible for advertising and publicizing a variety of goods and services, ranging from tourist sites, lodging establishments, and special events. Positions related to tourism marketing include, but are not limited to, an-house resort marketing representative, tourism specialist for a marketing firm, head of marketing for a resort or cruise line. Students studying to work in the tourist industry must have knowledge and skills in the use of AR in tourism marketing related jobs in order to be competitive in the employment arena.

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an overview of AR applications and platforms, discuss the use of AR applications and platforms within tourism marketing, and to make a case for including AR as a topic of study in institutions of higher education which offer bachelor’s and master’s degrees in tourism marketing and related programs. Specifically, this chapter is designed to outline augmented reality and its applications in tourism marketing education mainly in three aspects: theoretical, practical, and cross country examples.

BACKGROUND

AR has the potential to incorporate all human senses (sight, sound, taste, smell, touch) into a technological experience (Abernathy & Clark, 2007). AR applications are accelerated mainly by the latest developments in mobile computing, computer graphics, wire-less and sensor technologies. These advances influence and enhance human experiences through providing real time information displays and reviews (Suh, Shin, Woo, Dow, & MacIntyre, 2011). Gartner (2014) expects that, on the basis of continual technological advancements, the general public will be highly accepting the AR technologies. Still, the use of AR application as a tourism marketing tool are developing and seem futuristic to some individuals (Shen, Ong, & Nee, 2011; Seo, Kim, & Park, 2011). However, AR applications can appear as marketing tools where these are still subject of exploration, where, touristic demand for information source is common (Yovcheva, Buhalis, & Gatzidis, 2012).

AR technology can work on grounds like the Global Positioning System (GPS) and on mobile devices with capacities to add virtual features and to relate them with reality (Azuma, 1997). AR as a medium of displaying requires intensive use of hardware or electronic devices such as camera, display monitors and computing gadgets. The introduction of handheld electronic items like the Smartphone or the smaller version of wearable computers has extended the realms of AR technology (Buchholz, 2014). On the other side, gaming consoles such as the Nintendo DS or similar also are mostly equipped with augmented reality technologies today (Breeze, 2014). The strengths of AR lie in its technological simplicity and capacities to perform as an educational tool.

AR applications used for marketing products may be the most common and popular way that the everyday consumer has been introduced to the concept and practice of augmented reality. AR applications have specifically been used to market brand names in ways that the product becomes memorable to the consumer and subsequently may build brand loyalty. Following are descriptions of three brand name uses of AR for marketing.

Budweiser is one of the world’s famous and popular drink brands. As a part of effective marketing, Budweiser brings the Football Association Challenge Cup (FA Cup) directly into the consumers’ house by using AR application. The Football Association Challenge Cup is an annual knockout cup competition in English football that is commonly known as the FA Cup in the world (The FA Cup, 2015). The marketing approach of Budweiser is ground breaking and it has managed to immerse AR in conventional marketing strategies. The Budweiser ‘Man of the Match’ mobile application enables users to drink from the virtually-generated FA Cup. This application is developed on AR platform of the Aurasma that allows transforming the beer can into a virtual FA Cup trophy as a basic 3D model. Users have to click a selected button of their Smartphone camera for this purpose. Even though this application of AR for marketing can be effective, this entertainment option is limited, and can only be experienced by selected customers (Aurasma, 2015).

High street betting chain Paddy Power^® has also made contributions on putting augmented reality into practice. In cooperation with Blippar, Paddy Power developed a special application which turns the Queens face on a £10 bank note into the user’s own face. This technology is as simple as to hover on the face of the Queen’s and then enjoy. The digital copy of the Queen turns into animation as soon as the Smartphone can recognize the face. The face then moves as interactive and functional that resembles that the Queen is the official sponsor of the Euro 2012 (Preexamples, 2015).

The Muscle Milk^® brand has also used AR in marketing. Through the campaign of Shaq the bottle, this company is grabbing the attention of diverse clients and promoters from all over world. The celebration of Shaquille O’Neal was followed by augmented reality application. This initiative took place in the Cleveland market when the muscle milk brand was chosen to market into a new team created with O’Neals joining the team. A special form of AR marker in the shape of a QR code was printed on the back label of each milk bottle. When a webcam was placed on the marker of each bottle, a user could watch the virtual video showing a mini Shaq in Cleveland. Each of the five different flavours of the Muscle Milk^® followed five types of videos and these were limited by edition and number (Showcase, 2015).

TOURISM MARKETING

Digital Marketing

Still, no definition of digital tourism marketing has been offered that can be viewed as comprehensive and well accepted. There are still scopes to develop the definition and to turn it into a workable meaning for understanding the central theme and relevancy with existing market structures of tourism (Buhalis & Yovcheva, 2014). In a very general understanding, digital marketing refers to the pattern of marketing that uses technology as the main platform to reach the target bases of consumers. There are numerous techniques of professional practices in tourism marketing and digital marketing that are entirely technology-based. Wider selection of tourism products or services coupled with marketing tactics like branding or promotion is presented before consumers to allow them to reach an agreeable decision of purchase. Internet is the central base of digital tourism while, television, radio or even the mobile telephone devices are used for the purpose. Digital marketing has unparallel dependency on the Internet and thus very often this is termed as Internet marketing (Daim et al., 2012). The use of the Internet is more effective to reach wider consumer segments and, thus, to persuade them to access the available offers, services or products. Unlike conventional patterns of marketing, this Internet-based marketing is more focused; targeted and comprehensive that brings dynamism in marketing and consumer choice enhancements. This also supports consumers to have expanded formats of products or service selection. Technical terms like the search engine marketing (SEM) or search engine optimization (SEO) are quite familiar in digital marketing and have relevancy in numerous platforms of digital media. Other than the SEM or SEO, digital marketing is also relevant in non-mainstream spaces such as the service offers of mobile telephone technologies as the multimedia messaging service (MMS), short messaging service (SMS) or even games (Deighton & Kornfeld, 2007). The central theme of digital marketing is to create a bond between consumers and technology. There is a constant demand that technologies should support human livelihood and thus to create more spaces to understand the demand of tourism product or service consumers. Digital marketing is more engaged in creating and retaining a strong bond between consumers and technology. This pattern of marketing enables business entrepreneurs to become consumer led and also to become more capable to meet the increasing demands of consumers in more manageable ways (Dhir, 2004).

Digital marketing is entirely related to tourism marketing in recent times where, a specific tourism organization uses a digital marketing campaign for branding or marketing (Azim & Hassan, 2013). Other than email, SMS, MMS and social networking, a certain number of advanced options become available for digital marketing. Display supported digital marketing can offer realistic experiences to consumers and thus to select products or services from a more convenient way. The introduction of Smartphones has enabled digital tourism marketers and consumers to reach a mutual standpoint of offerings and accessibilities (Deluna, 2014). Digital marketing is fast, as a message can be shared quickly to numerous consumer bases across the world. However, evidently, digital tourism marketing requires expert knowledge on certain areas and on technical issues to help advancing capacities of both marketers and consumers. The advantages of digital marketing are mostly positive and getting enormous responses from almost all over the world (Wind & Mahajan, 2001). In comparison with direct marketing, digital marketing has specific advantages. These advantages are most similar to digital marketing and come in numerous forms. The main factor of personal attention of consumers is crucial and is related to interaction with customers. Also, digital marketing tends to focus on each of the customers and thus creates more possibilities to generate direct responses. In digital marketing, this is often manageable and possible to create a personalized message to an individual customer (MarketingWeek, 2015). Each customer can be addressed and greeted separately and uniformly. Thus, this promotes personal serviced marketing that is more effective than other conventional forms. Also, digital marketing supports the measurement of responses from customers (i.e. the replies or reactions from messages sent to each of the customers). This is also important to understand the customer bases and their responses or mindsets. Digital marketing also does not necessarily require specialized forms of knowledge on marketing or technology. This is more customer-tailored and relevant to meet their demands more satisfactorily (Rust, Katherine, & Valarie, 2004). Digital marketing can become an important addition to any existing or potential business evolving in the tourism sector. This helps customers to achieve a target that is more focused to reality and reliability. There is a gap between traditional and digital forms of marketing and this gap is gradually increasing over the years due to the availability of more advanced types of technologies that continuously surpass one another. Digital marketing is a positive and fruitful outcome of the Internet which is supported by diverse forms of technological innovations (Guimaraes, 2012). This is thus convincing that digital marketing continues evolving over the coming years through the adoption of more advanced technological innovations. This is a way to support, promote and expand an existing business or even to reach desired customer bases. Thus, this is important to ensure that the business is getting the maximum exposure from digital forms of marketing, even within a complex pattern of marketing (Hax, 2010). Digital marketing, due to the fact that it does not necessarily require professional expertise and experiences, has very good possibility to gain popularity in tourism.

Digital marketing has become a necessity for today’s business world and more supported by technologies than ever before. Also, the tourism sector requires working or practical knowledge in marketing and technology (Mohapatra, 2009). This form of tourism deals with both supply and demand side that involves interests of both marketers and consumers. Digital marketing is beneficial and rewarding in numerous marketing formats and technology applications. Customers normally stay connected with each other on digital platforms. Again, customer response generation relatively becomes more obvious than conventional marketing (Mobile Marketer, 2015). The success and activity of a tourism business enterprise depends on specific marketing factors. These are also related with diverse types of business functionalities including understanding the targeted customer base and becoming able to know their responses in a purposeful manner (Gay, Charlesworth, & Esen, 2007). The success of digital marketing relies on specific strategies or factors. Like conventional marketing approaches, in digital marketing, there are specific goals to reach. In digital marketing, set business goals are wider that target general expansion within the shortest possible time period. The more customers involved with a business enterprise, the more attention from marketers are required to serve their demands more successfully (Rayport & Jaworski, 2004). Digital marketing is particularly important for any business to reach success within the shortest possible timeframe.

AR Uses in Tourism Marketing

As the trend of creating closer interactions between technologies and electronic gadgets, tourism marketing becomes more powerful and it is obvious that AR marketing will gradually contest existing marketing tools. Technologies are dissolving in tourism marketing in faster motions than any other times. This becomes evident from some revolutionary inventions including augmented reality. Technology enhanced marketing strategies are challenging and replacing relatively more rigid theoretical notions. The content, features, and objectives are basically altered by the use of technology in tourism marketing. There are numerous examples, from around the world, of AR being used in an aspect of tourism marketing. Following are examples from six countries, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Greece, and China.

In Ontario of Canada, the tourism industry witnessed a global event termed as the ‘2013 Ontario Tourism Summit’ that actually gathered academics, scholars, researchers, industry practitioners and AR marketing experts to share their views and ideas. This summit particularly supported general tourism agendas. As an outcome of this summit, experts reached an agreement that mobile devices are becoming reliable for AR marketing and offer enormous potentials to increase the market. The summit concluded that, AR is no longer confined within photo, video, downloads, games or website links. Rather, AR is becoming a powerful marketing tool for tourism (Augmentedmarketing, 2013). In Canada, AR research has already been integrated with academia and Universities like York University and Ryerson University evidently welcomes research programs in AR (augmentedstories, 2015).

In France, AR is being used to promote historic and cultural sites for global audiences. The Louvre -DNP Museum Lab is a specialized research facility designed for AR application development in museums (Louvre -DNP Museum Lab, 2015). The Louvre is now equipped with AR technology enabled displays and devices that offer information about the collections, histories, compilations, and displays with related data and information. Another example from Paris, France involves using Smartphone devices for tourists to download information about historical images. These images are then contrasted with images of the present time in similar places of the city. Users of such applications can travel back as much as one hundred years and view more than two thousands places of interest. These establishments otherwise have to rely on museum attendants or tour operators to convey information to tourists. The AR technology can also help tourists pursue their own areas of interest. Lastly, the Cluny Abbey in Cluny, France has embraced one of the simplest technology displays of AR. In order to promote learning the history, a big size display screen is used to provide tourists with real-life experiences through AR technology. Displays on this screen actually offer tourists historic backgrounds of the city. Therefore, the intervention of AR technology enhances the tourists’ experience. On average, millions of tourists make visits and experience this screen to know the past of this city every year. This facility also creates interests among tourists about AR and its application. In general, such interests through AR technology show the huge potentials of AR for tourism marketing. This also demonstrates how AR technology can be diffused for experience generation, sharing, educational and marketing purposes (Digitalmeetsculture, 2015).

In Germany, remarkable advancements in augmented reality application has been jointly offered by the companies Instant Reality and IGD Fraunhofer. These companies have developed a special AR supported photo system that enables tourists to view images of important sites or attractions of Berlin. The exceptional feature that this system offers is to view images of a site or attraction of Berlin in different periods in history. This technological system is supported by wearable or handheld devices such as Smartphones or ultra-mobile personal computer. This technological application allows users to get connected with the central server system and get access to a database of photographs highlighting the city’s decade’s old growth (Stricker, Pagani, & Zoellner, 2009).

In the Netherlands, the function of augmented reality is fundamental. The Netherlands Architecture Institute has introduced a free application, Urban Augmented Reality that is available in eight main cities of the country, enabling both the residents and tourists viewing existing urban environment through historic layouts. In order to share views or ideas, tourists can leave their comments on a database linked to it and the public sector policy planners can also then extract themes of such comments and reflect them in public policy frameworks (Caarls, Jonker, Kolstee, Rotteveel, & van Eck, 2009).

The process of AR technology application found its way through virtual reconstruction of a prominent ancient temple located in Olympia of Greece. The development of AR technology supported systems is the outcome of many years long research. According to Vlahakis et al. (2002), the development of ArcheoGuide AR system allows tourists to have memorable sensations from tourism marketing education standpoints. Layar is an AR application which uses GPS location to show nearby service facilities on top of the image of a mobile phone’s camera. Through the use of Layar, an application that can be downloaded to a Smartphone, a tourist can get the option to point the phone towards the Berlin wall representing a reality based 3D model. In addition, in Seville, Greece the Past View Company has created a program that can offer tourists an entire city tour using AR. The application operates on a type of electronic earphones or video glasses and connects to a Smartphone to present the city’s history (Internet-science, 2015).

China, as a global tourism destination with an abundance of tourism resources, is becoming dominant for both present and future tourists. The Yuanmingyuan or the Garden of Perfect Brightness is located in Beijing and was built during the 18^th and 19^th centuries. During the Anglo-Chinese War, this majestic garden was totally destroyed. However, the attempt to regenerate the garden came into action through the use of both sketches and paintings with little use of photographs or digital formats. However, as soon as AR technology came into practice, a panel of experts of the Beijing Institute of Technology was engaged in creating a reconstruction process of virtual platforms (Wang, Wang, & Fournier, 2000). Facilities for tourists to learn about this garden were supported by numerous initiatives and approaches related to technology use. These included machines that are operated by coins inputted by customers and special facilities like model reconstruction (Lum, 2012).

Most countries in Europe such as Germany, France, Italy, Greece and the United Kingdom with their enriched social, cultural and historic backgrounds are using AR technologies for exhibiting cultural sites for marketing purposes (Hepburn, 2015; Lee, Chung, & Jung, 2015). However, augmented reality can be used in almost all parts of the world, including both technologically developed and under-developed countries by developing technological infrastructures (Neuhofer, Buhalis, & Ladkin, 2013; Jung, Chung, & Leue, 2015).

The use of AR in different marketing areas is immense. In practice, examples of brands using augment reality are huge and cannot be limited to Topshop Kinect Dressing Rooms, Shisedio Makeup Mirror, American Apparel Colour-Changing App, De Beers ‘Forevermark Fitting’, IKEA AR Catalogue, Sayduck Furniture Visualizer, IBM App, Converse Shoe Sampler, Burberry Beauty Box, Moosejaw X-Ray App (Creative Guerrilla Marketing, 2014). This technology becomes a solid platform for creating and maintaining relationship with the public and the general customer base that can be replicated in tourism and can be highlighted in tourism marketing education.

Resistance to AR Marketing

AR can be applied in marketing including tourism. Historic establishments can be rebuilt through the use of AR technologies enabling to support experience enhancements and to promote the site. Such regeneration process through images and visuals can be useful for both commercial and prototype educational purposes (Monday, 2015). The demands of tourism learners are diverse and thus should be offered to satisfied what they seek. If they seek to experience cultural heritage tourism, they should be offered a realistic experience using AR technology (Han, Jung, & Gibson, 2014; Jung & Han, 2014). The rapid advancement of wearable computing, such as Google Glass, adds possibilities of enhancing the learning experience within cultural organizations such as museums and art galleries. A later study by Hassan (2013) in the Whitechapel Gallery of London cited an example of effective technology application in terms of offering learning experience. Another recent study by Leue, Jung, and Tom-Dieck (2015) reveals specifically that wearable augmented reality application helps visitors see connections between paintings and personalizes their learning experience.

In tourism research, limited theories and models related to technology use have been developed by scholars, researchers or experts. Relevant theories of technology adoption have been mostly applied to understand the pattern of technology adoption by tourism products or service consumers. The Diffusion of Innovation (Rogers, 1962) is an example of those theories or models. However, understanding the relevancy of this theory in AR technology application context is unique. In a simple sense, this theory explains why, how and at what rate a new technology is diffused into a culture. This theory is originally concerned with technologies, artefacts and ideas that normally pass from theory to application stage (Spencer, Buhalis, & Moital, 2012). According to Rogers (2003), sequences that the Diffusion of Innovation Theory follows are: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation and confirmation. On the other side, different stages of this theory are: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards. The ‘Diffusion of Innovations’ theory relies on the innovation-decision process that can be seen as valid in diverse cultures. This theory follows that technological innovations are connected through specific channels of the social system and act over a period of time.

Tourism industry is unprecedentedly gaining benefits from technology integration. Arguably, information and communication technologies are required to offer diverse typologies to become beneficial components for tourism marketing in recent times. The involvement of certain features of tourism is also essential in terms of effective use of technologies to make purchase decisions. The world is now better equipped to welcome and apply technological innovations than ever before (McElheran, 2012). Tour guides, travel agents, and tour operators are influenced by the utmost application of technologies; while tourism products or service and consumers are the direct subject of such influences. Results of technology application in tourism can be replicated in similar or emerging market contexts. From the applied viewpoint and most importantly, augmented reality as an innovation is beneficial for the tourism business enterprises, policy planners and business communities for competitive marketing strategy formulations. The basic question stays relevant to delineate consumer and product or service provider to become able to accept augmented reality as innovation. This question also seems as appropriate to explore the position of augmented reality in the Diffusion of Innovation theory. More importantly, concentrations need to be placed to determine the characteristics of augmented reality to incorporate a theory as the Diffusion of Innovation.

Key Practical Challenges to Inclusion of AR

Tourism is the world’s leading industry and there are several techniques of professional and practical practices in tourism marketing education where the strategies and patterns are entirely technology-based (World Tourism Organization, 2015). A purposeful selection of tourism products or services coupled with marketing tactics like branding, promotions with augmented reality technology needs to become valid and effective. In fact, this is a real challenge to introduce, support and promote augmented reality in tourism marketing academia. This allows consumers to reach an agreeable decision of purchase that might turn as positive. This chapter suggests two key challenges to apply augmented reality in tourism marketing. In both perspectives of augmented reality and tourism marketing education, the key challenges appear in theory and practice.

On the other side in practice, AR is also mostly viewed as a technological innovation and its mass use is mostly restricted. The activities and successes of a tourism business enterprise depend on the selection of specific marketing approaches followed by their effective application (Turban, McLean, & Wetherbe, 2008). In recent times, marketing approaches mostly rely on technologies and to serve the purposes of business enterprises, augmented reality technology can become effective given its proven capacities to attract consumer interests. The greater number of customers that are attracted to a business enterprise, the more opportunities are created for marketing on digital platforms. This requires proper attention of the marketers to each individual customer. Also, setting realistic business targets to ensure that the business is directed towards the desired goal is also important and can be seen as a challenge. The success of digital marketing relies on careful selection of strategies and policies and AR technology application can possibly be a good option. Like unconventional marketing approach, in digital marketing, there have to be specific goals for each individual business enterprise to reach.

TOURISM MARKETING EDUCATION

Tourism marketing education refers to the education that involves tourism marketing in its syllabus. This type of education can support preparing future tourism marketing professionals. Primarily, the use of technologies is crucial. Effective and valid application of technology for professional development including tourism can bring positive outcomes.

Preparing Future Tourism Marketing Professionals

Specific technology like AR is believed to have capacities to create impact among tourism marketing professionals. This impact can lead to influencing consumers. The world is gradually changing and is continuously embracing updated forms of technologies. It is wise to adopt technologies and to apply them effectively for the purpose of marketing (Lewis, Agarwal, & Sambamurthy, 2003). AR marketing, as a type of digital marketing, is relatively more cost effective and can offer better return of investment than traditional forms of marketing (prweb, 2011). AR applications can be useful to develop skills of tourism marketing professionals and can be viewed as a convenient source to create user interests. AR can be an effective means of sales and revenue generation for tourism businesses. This can render possibilities for professionals. AR application can enhance consumer experiences. In addition, a number of intermediaries and more selectively electronic mediaries (eMediaires) are adopting and using the Internet and AR to reach target customer segments all over the world (Kumar, Venkatesan, & Reinartz, 2006). On the other side, tourists also seek information on their desired services or products on the Internet. Thus, the Internet and in particular AR can be turned into common platforms of marketing. These cost effective and informative platforms are turning as valid and reliable platforms of marketing for tourists. In order to support digital marketing, numerous forms of display patterns are brought to influence a positive form of consumer decision. The Internet is being challenged by the Internet itself in terms of speed, information or accessibility. Visibly, not other platforms can be as reliable and valid for tourism marketing in the most recent tourism marketing contexts. This is termed as unbelievably simple and within the fingertips of customers (Thorpe, Holm, & van den Boer, 2014). Targeted customers are allowed to search for relevant information and thus to get access to it in more convenient ways than ever before with the effective support of AR technology application. This platform is also crucial to promote and make available certain products or services. The conventional types of digital marketing follow e-commerce, website trafficking and e-mail newsletters. All of these types are more conventional and have been in use for a long time. The demand for more advanced forms of digital marketing becomes apparent due to changing choices of consumers and the features of products or services (Song, Liu, & Chen, 2012). The use of AR becomes very effective in terms of getting responses or experiences shared on specific products or services. Blogging is relative less effective than social media but still offers relevant information. Sometimes, information sharing on networking websites becomes critical and thus appears as more capable to offer better service or product qualities with the support of AR technology application. Thus, AR can have a significant role to play to develop skills of marketing professionals in tourism.

In order to prepare more professionals in tourism marketing, marketers need to stress applying technologies for skills development. In tourism, the basic demand to capitalize on technological advancements is to learn operational skills. In many cases, tourism marketers struggle to apply an innovative technology like AR and this can be regarded as a resistance for a relatively new technology such as AR. However, AR, as an innovative technology, is already in use by tourism businesses and marketers. Following the Diffusion of Innovations by Rogers (1962), AR technology can be classified as ‘Early Majority’ stage. The basic reason for this categorization is that the tourism marketing and businesses have already advanced significantly to apply AR technology meaning that they are on the ‘Early Majority’ stage.

On the other side, government, university and tourism industry should look at the huge potential of AR marketing in tourism and take action to get this included in the academic syllabuses. This can be done by stressing AR technology and include this in both the undergraduate and postgraduate level academic syllabus. Tourism marketing education in almost every country is at the infancy stage with regards to including AR in its academic syllabus. On the other side, skills of the academics also need to reach that desired level to teach AR in tourism marketing education. On the basis of the Diffusion of Innovations theory of Rogers (1962), the present situation of tourism marketing education outlines that AR is an innovative technology at ‘Early Adopters’ stage.

Inclusion of ar Applications in Curriculum

Tourism marketing education syllabuses in graduate and postgraduate stage at university level can highlight AR in their academic syllabuses. Numerous evidences and cases from across the world show that the use of AR for marketing purposes is not rare anymore and the number is increasing (Kaufman & Horton, 2015). The effects and influences of augmented reality technology, in particular can hardly be ignored in many areas of tourism marketing. This supports the claim that AR technology needs to be included in tourism marketing education syllabuses. AR as a technology application supports marketing in a unique way that learners need to know. Tourism marketing dynamics outline that the use of AR technologies needs to be widely utilized. This is still a subject matter of consideration both from technology and marketing domains. In the tourism industry, tourists are mostly capable of using AR technologies through their mobile devices like Smartphones. AR is mainly responsible for experience sharing, education and marketing purposes for tourism. This technology can offer experiences of an entire city tour as linked with its basic history, features and related factors. This creates interests in areas of education, marketing and promoting of specific tourist attractions. Unlike conventional tourism marketing education and marketing types, AR marketing is more dependable, target focused and useful. Thus, tourism marketing education evolved as a necessity of today’s businesses as solely supported by technological knowledge (Vong, 2015). However, the availability and accessibility of technology are unequal for general learners and consumer segments. There is a strong demand for technological knowledge and use. A comprehensive academic and industry led understanding of tourism digital marketing is yet to be offered. Very often, it is believed that tourism digital marketing has a strong central theme of technology led knowledge and practical application. This possesses capacities to incorporate both existing and future tourism digital marketing. This study cites examples from several countries in the world in terms of AR technology use. Thus, this study advocates AR to be included in tourism marketing education.

Key Theoretical Challenges to Inclusion of AR

The first challenge is theoretical concept on the ground of knowledge exchange and expertise about augmented reality. This challenge is particularly directed for academics, scholars or experts in tourism marketing education. The application of augmented reality in tourism marketing education academia is a challenge. In theory, academic instructors need to possess sufficient knowledge about augmented reality and its application in tourism marketing education. On the other side in particular cases, augmented reality is seen as an element of post modern marketing outlining its relevancies in the marketing academia. Marketing in post modern age is in fact the blend of conventional and modern approaches of marketing. In post modern marketing, consumers typically stay connected and thus the response generation becomes more obvious than conventional marketing (Yang, 2004). Message on services or products pass over within a very short time to numerous consumer bases across the world. Post modern marketing is related with diverse types of business functionalities including identifying the target consumers and becoming able to comprehend their responses in purposeful manners (Petersen & Toop, 1994).

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

The main message of this section is that AR offers features to be included in any tourism marketing education curriculum. The primary reason of such inclusion is its key feature as a technological innovation. Technology is changing the core contents and grounds of tourism marketing education and there is almost no scope left for ignoring the growing importance. Thus, the contribution of technology is gradually increasing in tourism marketing education leaving more impact on both academics and practitioners in these identified grounds. This chapter discusses diverse features and potentials of augmented reality in tourism marketing practice and education and suggests its inclusion in the academic syllabuses to be studied as a key module. Thus, it would be beneficial to include augmented reality in the tourism marketing education syllabus. The very basic benefit that this inclusion can generate is the diversified knowledge of students. On the other side, assigned teachers and researchers in the tourism marketing education discipline would also possibly become aware about the contents and presentations of AR in tourism marketing education. The future of augmented reality as both an academic and research element of tourism marketing education is convincing. Even at present, augmented reality is facing serious challenges but the potentials are enormous to be included in tourism marketing syllabuses across the globe. The key challenge that augmented reality is facing is its complex nature. This technology also requires relevant expertise of concerned academics. The level of knowledge also needs to be well developed to deliver to students. Consequently, this is mostly obvious that augmented reality is expected to manage a strong position in tourism marketing education syllabus in the near future.

The introduction and availability of a technology commonly varies between nations outlining acute differences between nations including the developed and the developing. Technology application cannot be expected to get similar responses in both developed and developing countries across the world. This requires the demand that updated technology needs to be made widely available and particularly for students, academics and researchers. Their involvement and activities would offer positive advancements to view augmented reality as a valid element of tourism marketing education in near future. Thus, this chapter proposes that augmented reality should be offered as an important subject matter of tourism marketing education in the future.

This chapter is a report of thoughts related to AR application in tourism marketing education. This chapter as a report could possibly be converted into comprehensive research supported by empirical data and information. From that perspective, the basic limitation of this chapter is the lack of empirical evidence from respondents through conducting interviews. Primary data and information could possibly enrich contents of this report by highlighting opinions, arguments and justification from user perspectives. This lack is significant in a manner because, a possible interrelationship between academics, students, experts and practitioners related to tourism marketing education could possibly intensify debate and arguments to view augmented reality as an element of an academic syllabus. A balanced interrelatedness between concepts and peoples’ ideologies could possibly create a bridge between theories and applications. This is a very generic limitation of this report that needs to be addressed in future research.

CONCLUSION

Conceptually, technology application supports massive consumption across the world where, such consumption patterns are mostly diverse and ever changing. Augmented reality is a computer generated reality but not necessarily fictitious or purely imaginary. Augmented reality supports the reality that is concerned with existing artifacts. Augmented reality as a technology can be termed as innovation on ground of the Diffusion of Innovation Theory (Rogers, 1962). On the basis of the Diffusion of Innovations Theory of Roger’s (1962), this study determines position of augmented reality for tourism marketer or business as the ‘Early Majority’ and tourism marketing education as the ‘Early Adopters’ stage, respectively. Basic logic for this claim is made on the perspective of an emerging trend in tourism marketing education. The very basic reason is that augmented reality as an element of tourism marketing syllabus still remains at the early stage. Academics, students and researchers are still to become fully aware concerning augmented reality in terms of its meaning and application where the technology is not widely available for mass use.

This paper discusses features of augmented reality to be included in the tourism marketing education syllabuses. The features of augmented reality as an advanced form of virtual reality (VR) is interesting and its application values are also relatively high. Recent technological developments of mobile computing, computer graphics, wireless, sensor technologies, Smartphones and wearable devices have created more prospects to view augmented reality as more rewarding. On the other side, global brands are also using this technology for both advertising and marketing purposes. Also, these brands are constantly relying on such technological innovation to create spaces for marketing and connectivity with mass consumers. In addition, global technological appliance manufacturers are constantly aiming to use and develop this technology creating more opportunities for research and employability for students and researchers. These global brands have allowed consumers to view how technological appliances are designed to perform and entertain. Wearable devices like Smartwatches or Smart glasses are also evolving with modifications creating more spaces for general consumers. The development of sensor and visual technologies are also supporting the potentials of augmented reality technology. This thus allows buyers to support and experience what they are going to purchase and how that will look like.

Thus evidently, AR both as a technology and as an innovation has already established the position in consumers’ traditional lifestyle. This is visible and evident through the customary use of technological gadgets those are mostly wearable. This chapter cites examples of augmented reality use from several countries of the world including the United Kingdom, Netherlands, Canada, France, Germany, Greece and China to establish the claim of its application.

This chapter outlines the prospects that AR can offer in terms of knowledge, research and practical aspect of employment possibility. Thus, this paper clearly suggests diverse aspects and examples of augmented reality as available and accessible for students, academics and practitioners in tourism marketing. Also, the paper strongly suggests augmented reality to be included in tourism marketing education syllabus to allow students learn about this technology and to become fit for employability. Augmented reality is an excellent and a trendy concept of recent times. This technology is expected to get wider popularity in the near future. Augmented reality shows prospects to turn into a reliable platform in tourism marketing mainly for its increasing capacities.

REFERENCES

Abernathy, W., & Clark, K. B. (2007). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative distruction. Research Policy , 14(1), 3–22. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90021-6

Augmentedmarketing. (2013). Ontarion Tourism Summit 2013 features interactive print. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRuwl6

Augmentedstories. (2015). Education. Retrieved from: http://augmentedstories.com/education/

Aurasma. (2015). The drink of champions. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1Fw66vl

Azim, R., & Hassan, A. (2013). Impact analysis of wireless and mobile technology on business management strategies. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management , 2(2), 141–150.

Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6(4), 355–385.

Breeze, M. (2014). How augmented reality will change the way we live. Retrieved from http://tnw.co/1nEDN6O

Buchholz, R. (2014). Augmented reality: new opportunities for marketing and sales. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nMCLYO

Buhalis, D., & Yovcheva, Z. (2014). Augmented reality in tourism: 10 best practices. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1tphods

Caarls, J., Jonker, P., Kolstee, Y., Rotteveel, J., & van Eck, W. (2009). Augmented reality for art, design and cultural heritage—system design and evaluation. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing , 2009, 1–16. doi:10.1155/2009/716160

Creative Guerrilla Marketing. (2014). 10 examples of augmented reality in retail. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/OxuyHI

Daim, T. U., Letts, M., Krampits, M., Khamis, R., Dash, P., & Monalisa, M. (2012). IT infrastructure refresh planning for enterprises: A business process perspective. Business Process Management Journal , 17(3), 1–16.

Deighton, J. A., & Kornfeld, L. (2007). Digital interactivity: unanticipated consequences for markets, marketing and consumers . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Deluna, K. (2014). 10 rockstar examples of augmented reality for 2014. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mIaCib

Dhir, A. (2004). The digital consumer technology handbook . Oxford: Elsevier.

Digitalmeetsculture. (2015). Augmented reality: enriching culture. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1E46st6

Dutra, J.P. (2015). ARgos – augmented reality in Volos – Greece. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTVTw

Edwards, J. (2011). Digital frontiers media uses augmented reality to market St. Pete/Clearwater tourism with miles media. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/03/prweb5141134.htm

Gartner Incorporated. (2014). Gartner Technology Research. Retrieved from: http://Online.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp>

Gay, R., Charlesworth, A., & Esen, R. (2007). Online marketing: A customer-led approach . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Guimaraes, T. (2012). Industry clockspeed's impact on business innovation success factors. European Journal of Innovation Management , 14(3), 322–344. doi:10.1108/14601061111148825

Han, D., Jung, T., & Gibson, A. (2014). Dublin AR: Implementing Augmented Reality (AR) in Tourism . In Xiang, Z., & Tussyadiah, I. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 511–523). Wien, New York: Springer International Publishing.

Hassan, A. (2013). Perspective analysis and implications of visitor management - experiences from the Whitechapel Gallery, London. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 24(3), 410-426. doi:.10.1080/13032917.2013.797916

Hax, A. C. (2010). Reinventing your business strategy . New York: Springer.

Hepburn, A. (2015). Top 10 augmented reality examples- digital buzz blog. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nXdp6l

Jung, T., Chung, N., & Leue, M. (2015). The Determinants of Recommendations to Use Augmented Reality Technologies - The Case of a Korean Theme Park . Tourism Management , 49, 75–86. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013

Jung, T., & Han, D. (2014). Augmented reality (AR) in urban heritage tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research.

Kaufman, I., & Horton, C. (2015). Digital marketing: Integrating strategy and tactics with values: A guidebook for executives, managers & students . New York: Routledge.

Kipper, G., & Rampolla, J. (2014). Augmented reality: An emerging technologies guide to AR . London: Elsevier.

Kumar, V., Venkatesan, R., & Reinartz, W. J. (2006). Knowing what to sell when to whom. Harvard Business Review , May, 131–145.

Lee, H., Chung, N., & Jung, T. (2015). Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of South Korea and Ireland . In Tussyadiah, I., & Inversini, A. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 477–491). Wien: Springer International Publishing New York. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14343-9_35

Leue, M. C., Jung, T., & Tom-Dieck, D. (2015). Google Glass Augmented Reality: Generic Learning Outcomes for Art Galleries. In I. Tussyadiah & A. Inversini (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 463-476). Wien: Springer International Publishing.

Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: An empirical study of knowledge workers. Management Information Systems Quarterly , 27(4), 657–678.

Louvre -DNP Museum Lab. (2015). Past presentation. Retrieved from http://www.museumlab.jp/english/tech/04tech.html

Lum, R. (2012). 10 mind-blowing augmented reality campaigns. Retrieved fromhttp://bit.ly/1kMP8AD

MarketingWeek. (2015). Online retail will drive innovation in interactive marketing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbpjdM

McElheran, K. S. (2012). Do market leaders lead in business process innovation? The case(s) of e-business adoption . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Mobile Marketer. (2015). Mobile augmented reality to drive $1.5B in revenue by 2015. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbq32r

Mohapatra, S. (2009). Business process automation . New Delhi: PHI Private Limited.

Monday, C. (2015). 5 augmented reality examples worth looking at - ignite social media. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mN1qZD

Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2013). A typology of technology-enhanced tourism experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research . doi:doi:10.1002/jtr.1958

Nordin, S. (2003). Tourism clustering and innovation- paths to economic growth and development. Ostersund . European Tourism Research Institute.

Olsson, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected User Experience of Mobile Augmented Reality Services. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 17(2), 287–304. doi:10.1007/s00779-011-0494-x

Petersen, C., & Toop, A. (1994). Sales Promotion in Postmodern Marketing . Aldershot: Gower Publishing Ltd.

Preexamples. (2015). Paddy Power augmented reality campaign brings the Queen’s face on £10 note to life. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRur13

Rayport, J. F., & Jaworski, B. J. (2004). Best face forward. Harvard Business Review , 82(12), 1–12.

Rogers, M. E. (1962). Diffusion of innovations . New York: Free Press.

Rogers, M. E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: Free Press.

Rust, R. T., Katherine, N. L., & Valarie, A. Z. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing , 68(1), 109–127. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.109.24030

Seo, B.-K., Kim, K., & Park, J. (2011). Augmented reality-based on-site tour guide: A study in Gyeongbokgung. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6469, 276–285. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22819-3_28

Shen, Y., Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2011). Vision-based hand interaction in augmented reality environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 27(6), 523–544. doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555297

Showcase. (2015). Shaq augmented reality. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTZ5F

Song, H., Liu, J., & Chen, G. (2012). Tourism value chain governance- review and prospects. Journal of Travel Research , 52(1), 15–28. doi:10.1177/0047287512457264

Spencer, A. J., Buhalis, D., & Moital, M. (2012). A hierarchical model of technology adoption for small owner-managed travel firms: An organizational decision making and leadership perspective. Tourism Management , 33(5), 1195–1208. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.11.011

Stricker, D., Pagani, A., & Zoellner, M. (2009). In-situ visualization for cultural heritage sites using novel augmented reality technologies. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/192Vg5N

Suh, Y., Shin, C., Woo, W., Dow, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2011). Enhancing and evaluating users’ social experience with a mobile phone guide applied to cultural heritage. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 15(6), 649–665. doi:10.1007/s00779-010-0344-2

The, F. A. Cup. (2015). About the FA. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1GLcZYu

Thorpe, M., Holm, J., & van den Boer, G. (2014). Discovering the decisions within your business processes using IBM blueworks live . New York: International Business Machines Corporation.

Turban, E., McLean, E. R., & Wetherbe, J. C. (2008). Information technology for management . New Jersey: John Wiley & sons, Inc.

Vlahakis, V., Ioannidis, N., Karigiannis, J., Tsotros, M., Gounaris, M., Stricker, D., Gleue, T., Daehne, P., & Almeida, L. (2002). Archeoguide: An Augmented Reality Guide for Archaeological Sites. Computer Graphics in Art History and Archaeology, September/October, 52- 60.

Vong, K. (2015). How brands are using augmented reality in marketing to engage customers. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/SrBNTq

Wang, L., Wang, C., & Fournier, C. (2000). Envisioning Yuan Ming Yuan (Garden of Perfect Brightness). IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 20(1), 10–14. doi:10.1109/38.814532

Wind, J., & Mahajan, V. (2001). Digital Marketing: Global Strategies from the World's Leading Experts. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). (2015). Understanding tourism: basic glossary. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1ki2UGS

Yang, C. C. (2004). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. Telematics and Informatics , 22(3), 257–277. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2004.11.003

Yovcheva, Z., Buhalis, D., & Gatzidis, C. (2012). Smartphone Augmented Reality Applications for Tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 10(2), 63-66.

Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange , 4(1), 119–140.

ADDITIONAL READING

Bridges-to-technology. (2015). What is Technology Adoption? Retrieved from http://bit .ly/T5kFnb

Buhalis, D., & Lew, R. (2008). Progress in information technology and tourism management: 20 years on and 10 years after the internet—the state of eTourism research. Tourism Management , 29(4), 609–623. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.01.005

Business Dictionary. (2015). Consumer buying behaviour. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1kICBJX

Candela, G., & Figini, P. (2012). The economics of tourism destinations . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-20874-4

Cantoni, L., & Zheng, X. (2013). Information and communication technologies in tourism . Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Change Vision, A. R. M. (2015). Augmented reality marketing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1gVIqc0

Cooper, C., & Hall, M. C. (2008). Contemporary tourism: an international approach . Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Duffy, J. A. M., & Ketchand, A. A. (1998). Examining the role of service quality in overall service satisfaction. Journal of Managerial Issues , 10, 240–255.

Hassan, A. (2012). Key components for an effective marketing planning: A conceptual analysis. International Journal of Management & Development Studies , 2(1), 68–70.

Hassan, A. (2012). Rationalization of Business Planning Through the Current Dynamics of Tourism. International Journal of Management & Development Studies , 2(1), 61–63.

Hassan, A. (2014). Revising the ‘Five - Fold Framework’ in Human Resource Management Practices – Insights from a Small Scale Travel Agent. Tourism Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Journal , 19(6), 799–805. doi:10.3727/108354214X14146848084400

Karch, M. (2015). Apps. Retrieved from http://abt.cm/1l48Ojv

Li, N., Buhalis, D., & Zhang, L. (2013). Interdisciplinary research on information science and tourism: A systematic review. Tourism Tribune , 28(1), 114–128.

Michopoulou, E., & Buhalis, D. (2013). Information provision for challenging markets: The case of the accessibility requiring market in the context of tourism. Information & Management , 50(5), 229–239. doi:10.1016/j.im.2013.04.001

Mihart, C. (2012). Impact of Integrated Marketing Communication on Consumer Behaviour: Effects on Consumer Decision – Making Process . International Journal of Marketing Studies , 4(2), 121–129. doi:10.5539/ijms.v4n2p121

Morrison, A. M. (2013). Marketing and managing tourism destinations . London: Routledge.

SAS Institute Inc. (2015). Digital marketing-what is it and why it matters. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1cRj6SG

The University of Bradford. (2015). Effective learning service-introduction to research and research methods. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1gUwTpo

Tremblay, P. (1998). The economic organization of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research , 25(4), 837–859. doi:10.1016/S0160-7383(98)00028-0

Walters, D. (2002). Operations strategy . New York: Palgrave.

Werthner, H., & Klein, S. (1999). Information technology and tourism - a challenging relationship . Vienna: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-6363-4

Wynne, C., Berthon, P., Pitt, L., Ewing, M., & Napoli, J. (2001). The impact of the Internet on the distribution value chain- the case of the South African tourism industry. International Marketing Review , 18(4), 420–431. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005934

Youngdahl, W., & Loomba, A. (2000). Service-driven global supply chains. International Journal of Service Industry Management , 11(4), 329–347. doi:10.1108/09564230010355368

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Augmented Reality: This technology is generally viewed as the later stage of Virtual Reality. In this technology, a computer generated environment is created where, the humans as users act. This blends augmentation with reality.

The Diffusion of Innovation Theory: This theory offered by Rogers in 1962 explains why and how a new technology or idea spreads in a society and at what rate. The theory proposes five stages for such explanation as part of this theory as: innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority and laggards.

Digital Marketing: Digital marketing represents conducting marketing activities on digital platforms mainly, Internet.

Innovation: Innovation denotes an idea, method or product that is regarded as new.

Tourism Marketing Education: This deals with marketing in tourism education. In more specific understanding, this type education involves marketing aspects in particular grounds of tourism.

Section 3 Next Generation of Learning: Catalysts and Considerations in Virtual Reality

Chapter 10

Pedagogical Agents for Learning

• Noah L. Schroeder Wright State University, USA

ABSTRACT

Throughout the past two decades, researchers have seen rapid innovations in the field of learning technologies. Virtual reality, video games, and online learning are becoming quite common in educational contexts. Pedagogical agents are often present in a variety of these virtual environments. Pedagogical agents are virtual characters with an on-screen presence that are designed to facilitate learning in multimedia environments. In this chapter the author examines the theoretical rationale for incorporating a pedagogical agent into a learning environment, critically examines their effectiveness for learning, and discusses how they have been implemented in research studies to date. Suggestions for future research in virtual reality environments are highlighted.

Introduction

Researchers in the field of educational technology have made massive strides in the past few decades. Each year new technologies become available, the cost of many technologies steadily decreases, and new graphic user interfaces make technically challenging programs more user-friendly. As advanced technologies have become more accessible in regard to both the cost and the technical ability needed to utilize them, the research literature has seen a plethora of studies using a variety of digital environments. For instance, virtual reality (e.g., Merchant, Goetz, Cifuentes, Keeney-Kennicutt, & Davis, 2014), mixed reality (e.g., Johnson-Glenberg, Birchfield, Tolentino, & Koziupa, 2014), augmented reality (e.g., Enyedy, Danish, Delacruz, & Kumar, 2012), and other multimedia interfaces such as smartphones (e.g., Huang, Wu, & Chen, 2012) and tablets (e.g., Alegría, Boscardin, Poncelet, Mayfield, & Wamsley, 2014; Alvarez, Brown, & Nussbaum, 2011) are increasingly common in the research literature. In educational contexts, virtual characters often appear within these environments.

There are many types of virtual character. For instance, researchers have investigated the use of avatars (Okita, Turkay, Kim, & Murai, 2013), pedagogical agents (Johnson, Ozogul, Moreno, & Reisslein, 2013; Lane et al., 2013), motivational agents (Baylor, 2011; Baylor & Kim, 2005), and conversational agents (Graesser, 2011). The wide variety of virtual characters has led to their implementation in a number of disciplines. For instance, virtual characters have appeared in content areas such as physics (VanLehn et al., 2007), communications skills (Adcock, Duggan, Nelson, & Nickel, 2006), microbiology (Sabourin & Lester, 2014), and informal science education (Lane et al., 2013).

Virtual characters are not always designed to accomplish the same tasks in the learning environment. For example, conversational agents are equipped with artificial intelligence that allows them to facilitate a conversation by holding a dialogue with the learner (Tegos, Demetriadis, & Tsiatsos, 2014), while motivational agents are designed to facilitate the learner’s motivation (Baylor, 2011). In order to accomplish these tasks, virtual characters’ features may vary widely depending upon their purpose. For instance, their level of artificial intelligence, their ability to communicate with the learner, how they communicate with the learner, their physical appearance, their ability to move around a virtual space, or even their teaching role in the learning environment (i.e., teacher or peer) can be manipulated in order to achieve different types of human-computer interactions.

Pedagogical agents are virtual characters designed to facilitate learning in multimedia-based environments (Johnson, Ozogul, & Reisslein, 2014). Research surrounding the efficacy of pedagogical agents for learning has yielded mixed results (Heidig & Clarebout, 2011), however a recent meta-analysis found an overall small, positive effect (Schroeder, Adesope, & Barouch Gilbert, 2013). Regardless of their past effectiveness, researchers strive to discover the salient features of agent design and implementation in order to facilitate learning. While the virtual environments used in many studies of pedagogical agents are not likely considered virtual reality environments, it is critical to understand the foundations of pedagogical agent research as instructional designers begin implementing them in novel environments and frameworks, such as virtual reality.

The purpose of this chapter is to review the many uses of pedagogical agents in desktop-based learning environments. The chapter begins with an examination of the theoretical perspectives that have guided pedagogical agent implementation. Second is a brief discussion situating theoretical contributions into practice. Third, the varied findings around pedagogical agents’ influence on learning outcomes are discussed. Fourth, a discussion of the different roles a pedagogical agent can play in the learning environment is presented. Finally, the chapter concludes with an examination of the implementation of pedagogical agents in specific knowledge domains and a discussion of the use of pedagogical agents in virtual reality environments. While a wide variety of studies will be reviewed in this chapter, all of those discussed measured learning outcomes when examining the use of a pedagogical agent compared to a non-agent condition

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Those in the field of pedagogical agent research have used a number of theories to guide their experimental designs. For the purposes of this chapter, three prominent theories in the literature surrounding how people learn with pedagogical agents are discussed. Specifically, we will examine how pedagogical agent research has been guided by the hypotheses of cognitive load theory (Sweller, 2010), the cognitive theory of multimedia learning (Mayer, 2014a), and social agency theory (Mayer, Sabko, & Mautone, 2003).

Cognitive Load Theory

Cognitive load theory describes how the brain processes information. Broadly, cognitive load refers to the amount of mental effort and mental load required to learn something (Paas, 1992). Paas and Sweller (2014) suggest that the brain is defined by two primary domains, the long-term memory and the working memory.

The long-term memory is the primary information storage structure within the brain. The information one knows, and thus can retrieve when desired, is stored in the long-term memory in organizational structures called schema (Paas & Sweller, 2012). Paas and Sweller (2014) describe two different types of knowledge that can be stored within the long-term memory: rote knowledge and knowledge with understanding. These constructs are analogous to Ausubel’s (1963) definitions of rote learning and meaningful learning. Concisely, the long-term memory can hold information that is retained in very similar, if not verbatim ways to which it was learned (i.e., rote learning), or it can hold information that is integrated with pre-existing knowledge structures (i.e., meaningful learning). These types of knowledge are similar to common learning outcome measures in experimental research. For example, retention tasks (i.e., rote learning tasks) often require general recall of information, or use of knowledge in very similar situations to which it was learned. Meanwhile, transfer tasks (i.e., those requiring meaningful learning, or learning with understanding) often require use of the knowledge in a novel situation. These tasks require that the learner must understand the material to a greater extent than it if it were learned through rote processes.

The working memory plays a different role than the long-term memory in human cognitive processes. Paas and Sweller (2014) describe the working memory as the processor of new information. For example, the working memory processes the information brought into the brain from a novel learning task. In addition, the working memory is a limited processor when working with new information, capable of handling only a few pieces of information at a time (Miller, 1956; Paas & Sweller, 2014). However, Paas and Sweller noted that the same limitations do not exist when dealing with information already held within the long-term memory. In these situations the limited capacity of the working memory does not apply, as the information is already stored within the long-term memory’s organizational structures (Paas & Sweller, 2014).

Cognitive load theorists have also suggested three different types of cognitive load. The three types of cognitive load have been described as extraneous, intrinsic, and germane (Paas & Sweller, 2014; Sweller, 2010). Extraneous cognitive load is the mental load not directly due to the learning materials, but rather the way they are presented to the learner in the learning environment (Paas & Sweller, 2014; Sweller, 2005, 2010). Accordingly, extraneous cognitive load is dependent upon the instructional design and the presentation of instruction to the learners. For example, presenting students with 15 worksheets when only two are relevant to the instructional task would be introducing extraneous cognitive load. Alternatively, intrinsic cognitive load is caused by the difficulty of the learning material and how many pieces, or elements, of the material must be understood in order for it to be learned (Paas & Sweller, 2014; Sweller, 2010). More interacting elements lead to higher intrinsic cognitive load. For example, a mathematician may find solving a differential equation to be quite simple, and thus, contain low intrinsic load. Yet, a high school student may struggle with the same task because they must first learn many other facts or procedures before solving the problem. Finally, germane cognitive load refers to how the learner utilizes their working memory to deal with the intrinsic cognitive load and process the material (Sweller, 2010). Despite the name, germane cognitive load does not contribute to or influence the working memory’s capacity to interpret new information (Sweller, 2010).

To summarize, those designing instruction should strive to minimize extraneous cognitive load, which allows the learner to devote more effort towards processing the necessary intrinsic elements (Paas & Sweller, 2014; Sweller, 2010). It has been argued that pedagogical agents can cause extraneous cognitive load for the learner (Clark & Choi, 2007), however Veletsianos (2007) argued that this could be moderated by the design of the pedagogical agent. Despite the various types of agents prevalent throughout the literature, few studies have shown that pedagogical agents can hinder learning outcomes. Rather, pedagogical agents’ impacts on learning are often non-significant (Heidig & Clarebout, 2011).

Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning

While cognitive load theory broadly describes how humans process information, the cognitive theory of multimedia learning denotes specifically how we process situations in which we experience multiple medias. Broadly defined, multimedia presentations are composed of information that contains both words and pictures (Mayer, 2014a; Mayer & Moreno, 2003). Relevant examples include a presenter verbally communicating information while referencing on-screen pictures, a traditional textbook that contains both pictures and text, or a virtual reality environment where the learner receives the verbal information through narration.

Mayer (2014a) describes the cognitive theory of multimedia learning as relying upon three primary assumptions. These assumptions are that they eyes and ears each have their own independent working memory processor (dual-processors), that the working memory processors are limited (as described by cognitive load theorists), and that learners actively process information. Mayer suggests that the notion of dual-processors is based on a foundation of cognitive psychology research. More specifically, Mayer suggests that the eyes can bring in information (such as pictures) and process it while the ears can bring in information (such as narration) and process it. This notion of processors dealing with novel information inherently leads to the assumption that each of these processors is limited, as they are essentially working memories (Mayer, 2014a). Thus, the cognitive theory of multimedia learning aligns well with cognitive load theory’s model of human cognitive architecture. Finally, within the cognitive theory of multimedia learning framework, Mayer assumes that learners are active processors of information. In other words, in order to meaningfully learn the information the individual must cognitively engage with the content. Mayer denotes that this process involves not only selecting the relevant information, but also organizing it and integrating it into their exiting schemas (i.e., prior knowledge structures).

Given the aforementioned assumptions when learning with multimedia, Mayer (2014a) describes the cognitive processes that take place when students learn. These processes are the selection of appropriate pictures and words, organizing the selected pictures and words, and finally integrating the new information into existing schemas (Mayer, 2014a). Mayer’s model denotes that these phases occur within or require the use of the working memory. Recalling the assumptions that words and pictures are processed separately (dual processors) and each working memory is limited, we can see why it is important to present material through both pictures and words in order to maximize the cognitive processing that can occur. After the verbal or pictorial information is organized in its respective processor, the cognitive theory of multimedia learning framework delineates that these two types of information are then integrated together to create a coherent model of the knowledge (Mayer, 2014a). This new knowledge then proceeds through an “encoding” (p. 58) phase where it is integrated into the learner’s existing schemas.

Finally, Mayer (2014a) describes three types of mental processing that can occur with multimedia learning. All three are analogous to different types of mental load as described in cognitive load theory. Essential processing takes place when the learner is creating an understandable mental model of the material, a process which requires mental effort identical to that as described by cognitive load theory’s intrinsic cognitive load (Mayer, 2014a). Generative processing, which is the same as germane cognitive load, is the mental effort required to learn the information and integrate it into their existing schemas (Mayer, 2014a). Finally, Mayer describes extraneous processing as that which “is caused by poor instructional design” (p. 59). In other words, extraneous processing and extraneous cognitive load describe the same constructs; the mental effort required to learn that is not related to the actual learning task itself, but rather the means of presentation to the learner.

Research surrounding the cognitive theory of multimedia learning has led to a variety of useful instructional design principles and effects. Many of these principles are relevant to the design and implementation of virtual characters. For instance, the modality principle suggests that words should be provided through narration while pictures are presented on screen (Low & Sweller, 2014; Mayer & Pilegard, 2014), implying that instructional designers should create pedagogical agents that speak through narration rather than provide speech bubbles with printed text. In fact, researchers have investigated this effect by conducting experiments where learners in one condition learned with a pedagogical agent that communicated through narration, while the other condition learned with a pedagogical agent that communicated through speech bubbles containing printed text (e.g., Atkinson, 2002; Moreno, Mayer, Spires, & Lester, 2001). Primary studies have shown results supporting the modality principle (Atkinson, 2002; Moreno, Mayer, Spires, & Lester, 2001).

A second principle that can guide the design and implementation of virtual characters is the embodiment principle, which suggests that virtual characters should utilize humanlike gestures (Mayer, 2014b). Researchers have also conducted a variety of studies investigating this effect (e.g., Lusk & Atkinson, 2007; Mayer & DaPra, 2012), with consistent findings suggesting that pedagogical agents should utilize humanlike gestures (Mayer, 2014b).

Finally, a third principle that stemmed from the cognitive theory of multimedia learning that has been applied to pedagogical agent research is the signaling principle. The signaling principle suggests that using visual cues to indicate salient information, such as a pedagogical agent pointing to relevant information on the screen, can increase learning outcomes (Mayer & Fiorella, 2014; van Gog, 2014). Numerous pedagogical agent studies have utilized the agents as cues in the learning environment. In most cases, the pedagogical agent points to relevant pieces of information on the screen such as a section of a diagram or important words in a slide (e.g., Choi & Clark, 2006; Johnson, Ozogul, Moreno, & Reisslein, 2013; van Mulken, André, & Müller, 1998).

Social Agency Theory

Outside of the nuts and bolts of the cognitive processing of new information, Mayer et al. (2003) proposed social agency theory. According to social agency theory, if an individual perceives the computer’s interaction as social, it will enact the social conversation schema within the individual, thereby encouraging them to react to the computer as they would a fellow human. Thus, the learner will try to understand what the computer is saying, which helps them engage in learning processes (Dunsworth & Atkinson, 2007). Recently, Domagk’s (2010) findings extended social agency theory. Her experiments showed that it is not merely the incorporation of social cues, but also the valence of the social cues that may influence learning outcomes.

Social agency theory has been an important premise in pedagogical agent research. Much of the research surrounding the theory has encouraged researchers to anthropomorphize their virtual characters in an effort to provide relevant social cues. For instance, the use of standard-accented (Mayer et al., 2003), human voices (Atkinson, Mayer, & Merrill, 2005; Mayer et al., 2003), agents likeable in appearance (Domagk, 2010), and embodiment features such as gestures, gaze, and facial expressions (see Mayer & DaPra, 2012) have all been guided by findings of studies investigating different aspects of social agency theory.

Summary

Synthesis of the above theories indicates that pedagogical agent researchers may find themselves in a theoretical quandary. While social agency theory suggests that certain social features of pedagogical agents may help the learners deeply engage in the material, cognitive load theory suggests that pedagogical agents may increase the cognitive load of the learning environment. Through utilizing principles derived from the cognitive theory of multimedia learning (e.g., signaling) researchers have explored ways in which agents can be designed to minimize the impact on cognitive load while facilitating learning.

Impact of theory on research and practice

While descriptions of theory provide salient background information, it is often challenging to understand how theories guide empirical research and what that means for practice. For example, due to the confluence of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning and cognitive load theory, it can be difficult to grasp the differences without in-depth exploration into the theoretical constructs. As mentioned, pedagogical agent researchers have used the cognitive theory of multimedia learning and cognitive load theory to guide numerous empirical investigations of agent design and effectiveness. These studies are often based on numerous “principles” and “effects” that have been found in prior studies. In this section, select studies will be examined in order to understand how theory has guided research, and how research has expanded theory.

Craig, Gholson, and Driscoll (2002) conducted two different experiments examining the impact of agent design features. Craig et al.’s work was guided by principles that have come out of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning and cognitive load theory. More specifically, in relation to pedagogical agents, they examined the split-attention principle (also referred to as the split-attention effect) and the redundancy effect. The first experiment examined the split-attention principle, or the idea that splitting attention between two sources of information, such as an agent and the picture, could inhibit learning by causing extraneous cognitive load (Clark & Choi, 2007; Craig et al., 2002; Sweller, Ayers, & Kalyuga, 2011; Sweller & Chandler, 1994). The results of their first experiment revealed that the presence of an agent did not facilitate learning, however it did not inhibit learning either. These results were consistent with other research at the time as well as more current reviews of the field (e.g., Heidig & Clarebout, 2011). Their second experiment examined the redundancy effect, which suggests that removing redundant materials can enhance learning outcomes (Craig et al., 2002; Kalyuga & Sweller, 2014; Sweller & Chandler, 1994). Participants interacted with a pedagogical agent that either provided visual, printed text, a pedagogical agent that provided narration, or a pedagogical agent that provided both the printed text and narration. Their results were consistent with the redundancy effect, in that participants who interacted with the agent that provided narration only outperformed students who interacted with an agent that provided narration and visual text. From these studies, we can see that incorporating a pedagogical agent does not always lead to increased or decreased effects on learning, and if an agent is included in the environment, it should communicate with the learner through narration.

Domagk’s (2010) work examined implications of social agency theory for pedagogical agent design. She conducted two experiments examining the influence of the agents’ appearance and voice on learning and motivational outcomes. In her first experiment, Domagk examined if a likable, dislikable, or neutral pedagogical agent was more or less effective for learning and motivational outcomes than a non-agent condition. The results revealed that the likable agent was rated higher in appeal than the other two agent conditions (Domagk, 2010). In addition, her results showed that while the participants in the agent-based conditions did not perform better on learning outcome tests or motivational measures than those in the non-agent condition, the participants working with the likable agent performed better on transfer tests and reported a higher level of state motivation compared to participants in the dislikable agent condition. In the second experiment, Domagk examined if the agent’s appearance (likable and dislikable) and voice (likable and dislikable) impacted motivational or learning outcomes when compared to a control group. No significant differences were found for motivational outcomes or retention outcomes, however the participants who worked with a dislikable agent with a dislikable voice scored significantly lower on the transfer test than the other groups. When taken together, the results from Domagk’s experiments reveal that “the valence – not the mere presentation of social cues – needs to be explicitly taken into account” (p. 94) in pedagogical agent design. In other words, the act of including an agent in itself will not increase motivation or learning outcomes. Rather, we must be cognizant of agent design as dislikable agents can impede the learners’ ability to learn the material and transfer it to new knowledge domains (Domagk, 2010).

Summary

Researchers in the field of pedagogical agents have conducted thorough empirical investigations into the practical influence of many agent features based on prominent theories of human cognitive processes. As could be expected, a variety of outcomes have been found in regards to learning. As such, researchers have different interpretations of pedagogical agents’ effectiveness for helping students learn. In the next section, we examine the influence of pedagogical agents on learning outcomes.

Influence of pedagogical agents on learning outcomes

By definition, pedagogical agents are designed to facilitate learning. As such, pedagogical agents often facilitate teaching methods rather than emphasizing purely affective responses. However, researchers’ aspirations do not always coincide with empirical results. It is well known that in regards to learning outcomes, mixed results prevail in the field of pedagogical agent research (Dehn & van Mulken, 2000; Domagk, 2010; Heidig & Clarebout, 2011).

The mixed results in the field are exemplified by three recent systematic reviews of the literature. All three reviews examine a similar and often overlapping set of studies. In addition, each review examines the effectiveness of agents to non-agent conditions, and all three reviews examine pedagogical agents’ influence on learning outcomes. These similarities notwithstanding, the conclusions drawn by each group of researchers has been different. These differing interpretations epitomize the broad range of views about the efficacy of pedagogical agent implementation. Examination of each review provides important insights into the field.

Heidig and Clarebout (2011) conducted a systematic review of the literature to examine the impact of pedagogical agents on learners’ motivation and learning. They searched three databases and located 75 articles, of which, 26 met their inclusion criteria. In order to discuss and examine the findings, Heidig and Clarebout discussed their pedagogical agents-conditions of use model (PACU). The PACU model denotes four related issues in agent implementation: the learner, the learning environment, the agents function, and the agents design. Within agent design, there are three additional levels of design decisions that must be made. Heidig and Clarebout described these levels as follows: the global level determines if the agent is animated, static, human, or cartoon; the medium level has to do with the technical decisions, such as how animated the agent should be; and the detail level has to do with the agent’s physical appearance. Collectively, these levels make up the pedagogical agents levels of design (PALD) model (Domagk, 2010). Heidig and Clarebout’s analysis of the results indicated that nine of 15 studies showed no difference in learning outcomes between learners who worked with pedagogical agents and those who did not, which led them to the conclusion that “a general motivating or learning facilitating effect of pedagogical agents has be questioned…a more fruitful approach is to ask under what conditions pedagogical agents might be effective for whom” (p. 51).

Schroeder et al.’s (2013) meta-analysis began to approach the question of under what conditions pedagogical agents can be effective. To locate studies, Schroeder et al. searched nine electronic databases, one online paper repository, and the references of three review articles (Gulz, 2004; Kim & Ryu, 2003; Moreno, 2005). Their search revealed 576 research abstracts. Of these 576 abstracts, 28 articles met all of the inclusion criteria. These articles allowed for the extraction of 43 different comparison conditions. In regards to an overall effect size, Schroeder et al. found pedagogical agents provided a small positive effect on learning compared to non-agent conditions, a finding that is consistent with those of other recent reviews (Mayer, 2005, 2014b). Their analysis revealed that significant heterogeneity existed within the sample, and therefore moderator analysis was conducted. Select findings from the study include that the pedagogical agent’s appearance as a humanoid or non-humanoid did not make a significant difference on learning, that pedagogical agents were more effective for students in grades 4-7 than college students, and that pedagogical agents were more effective in math and science domains than the humanities. Based on their findings that pedagogical agents can have a positive effect on learning, particularly in certain situations, Schroeder et al. concluded that “researchers should continue to explore the multifaceted features of pedagogical agents” (p. 20) and thus encouraged researchers to continue examining the features of pedagogical agents, such as those delineated by the PALD model (Domagk, 2010; Heidig & Clarebout, 2011).

Mayer (2014b) conducted a review examining the impact of pedagogical agents on learner’s scores on transfer tests compared to non-agent conditions. Mayer’s review is unique in that it only considers transfer outcomes, or those that should require meaningful learning. According to social agency theorists, pedagogical agents should be able to effectively facilitate meaningful learning. If this were the case, the effect sizes should be positive, indicating that the pedagogical agent was more effective at facilitating learning as interpreted through transfer tests than the non-agent conditions. Mayer’s analysis of the 14 experiments included in the review indicated a small positive effect. Based on his findings, Mayer concluded “there is not strong support for adding the speaker’s image to the screen...people do not necessarily learn more deeply from a multimedia lesson when a speaker’s image is added to the screen” (p. 360).

In summary, the mixed findings in recent reviews reveal a difference in research methodology and interpretation of the findings. However, together the three recent reviews provide interesting insights. For instance, Heidig and Clarebout’s (2011) systematic review concluded that the broad question of pedagogical agent effectiveness is not a meaningful way to examine the literature due to the diverse nature of the primary studies. Schroeder et al.’s (2013) meta-analysis provided a quantitative synthesis approach and highlighted a few areas in which agents may be particularly effective. In his review, Mayer (2014b) found an effect size consistent with Schroeder et al.’s meta-analysis, but he interpreted the overall effect size differently. While Mayer concluded that the current evidence does not support the inclusion of an agent, Schroeder et al. concluded that agents may be useful in some situations, and Heidig and Clarebout highlighted a number of areas for future research. Therefore, many may still argue that it is difficult to say what an agent should look like or actually do to be effective in any given implementation. Hence, the author reiterates other researchers’ calls for additional research into effective pedagogical agent design (Heidig & Clarebout, 2011; Kim, in press; Schroeder et al., 2013).

Due to the diverse findings in relation to the effectiveness of incorporating a pedagogical agent into a learning environment, it is productive to examine the roles pedagogical agents can play in the learning environment. An understanding of what pedagogical agents actually do in the learning environment will facilitate understanding of the nuances involved with implementing pedagogical agents within different learning domains.

ROLES OF PEDAGOGICAL AGENTS

Pedagogical agents are a type of software agent. Therefore, within the broad boundaries of helping students learn, their ability to perform a task is limited only by software restrictions and the capabilities of the designer. Accordingly, the description of a software agent as a pedagogical agent does not limit its role or capabilities in the environment, as long as the agent is designed to aid the learning process. As such, the pedagogical agent’s appearance, features, or role in the environment may change depending on the specific implementation.

Technology has reached a point where it can be quite simple to create basic virtual characters. There are websites that let you create three-dimensional talking characters (e.g., Oddcast Inc., 2015) as well as websites that allow for the creation of a two-dimensional animated scene that contain virtual characters (e.g., GoAnimate, 2015). Alternatively, creating and implementing a fully-animated, custom scripted three-dimensional character in an immersive virtual reality environment still requires specialized software and skills. In other words, while it is currently rather simple to create a talking head that delivers a monologue, it is more difficult to create a three-dimensional agent that demonstrates a task. Due to this reality it is not surprising that most pedagogical agents’ actions are scripted (Veletsianos & Russell, 2014). In essence, the limitations of pedagogical agent capabilities are more restricted by software skills, finances, and time than the existence of technologies themselves.

One may still question what a pedagogical agent can actually do in the learning environment. To investigate this question, we consider not only the instructional role of the pedagogical agent as an instructor, but also its role in facilitating the learning process. While these constructs are closely related, the former examines how the agent appears, acts, and speaks, while the latter examines what teaching methods or pedagogies the pedagogical agent utilizes to facilitate learning.

In regards to the instructional role of the agent as an instructor, Baylor and Kim (2005) suggested three distinct types of agents: the expert, the mentor, and the motivator. In their studies, the expert agent was operationalized by speaking authoritatively, professionally, and appearing as a college professor. The mentor agent spoke confidently and less formally then the expert agent, and appeared slightly younger than the expert agent. Finally, the motivator agent appeared similar in age to the learners and it spoke very enthusiastically. These roles highlight a few potential design considerations, as different applications denote the need for different instructional roles. While not all studies acknowledge designing their agent according to these roles, examples can be found in the literature that exemplify all three. For instance, Murray and Tenenbaum (2010) utilized an instructor (i.e., expert) agent. In Murray and Tenenbaum’s study, the instructor agent appeared as an adult (the participants were children). Schroeder and Adesope (2013) utilized a mentor agent. In their study, the pedagogical agent appeared around the same age as the students and used informal language. Finally, van der Meij (2013) utilized a motivator agent. In his study, the agent was designed according to the ARCS-model of motivation (see Keller, 2010) and often referred to its own state of mind by using words like “Cool” (p. 850).

Alternatively, Clarebout, Elen, Johnson, and Shaw (2002) described pedagogical agent roles by what they actually do to support the learning process. According to Clarebout et al., there are six different roles the agents can play: testing, demonstrating, scaffolding, supplanting, modeling, and coaching. Clarebout et al. described a testing agent as one that tests the learner’s knowledge. In other words, it acts as a test administrator. A demonstrating agent is one that physically shows how a task is performed. Once the task is completed, the agent then watches the learner demonstrate the same task (Clarebout et al., 2002). The scaffolding agent is described as one which assists the learner by completing activities that the learner cannot yet due themselves due to a lack of knowledge. According to Clarebout et al., this is distinct from the role of supplanting, in which the agent performs the tasks for the learners while they watch. The modeling agent is also similar to the demonstrating and supplanting agent, yet the modeling agent explains their process as they model how to complete the task (Clarebout et al., 2002). Finally, the coaching agent is described as one that can provide tips to the learner as they complete the task.

As presented above, there are many different instructor roles and ways that pedagogical agents can facilitate learning process, especially if more than one technique is used in tandem. In the next section, an overview of how pedagogical agents have been used in the different knowledge domains is examined.

USE OF PEDAGOGICAL AGENTS IN DIFFERENT DOMAINS

Teaching in the disciplines, while they may share commonalities, often may call for specialized techniques. Hence, one can find numerous specializations in these fields, such as chemistry education, biology education, and engineering education. In this section, we’ll examine pedagogical agent studies in the broader domains of science, mathematics, and the humanities in order to understand how pedagogical agents have been used to help students learn.

Science

An early pedagogical agent study that compared the use of a pedagogical agent to a non-agent condition was conducted by van Mulken et al. (1998). In their study, students learned from either a pedagogical agent that signaled their attention to relevant parts of the screen or a non-agent condition in which an arrow pointed to the relevant parts of the screen. The learning material in the first experiment contained information about pulley systems and how they work. Van Mulken et al. examined the students’ recall and comprehension of the learning material. Analysis of the results revealed that there were not significant differences between groups. They concluded that any motivating effect the pedagogical agent may have provided could have been mitigated by the visual distraction caused by the agent, therefore causing no significant increase or decrease in learning outcome scores (van Mulken et al., 1998).

Another early pedagogical agent study in the domain of science is Moreno et al.’s (2001) work with Herman the Bug. Herman is the animated pedagogical agent embedded in the Design-A-Plant microworld meant to teach students about different features of plants. In their first experiment, Moreno et al. found that college students performed better on transfer tests after working with the pedagogical agent compared to a non-agent condition. However, there were not significant differences found on the retention test. The results of their second experiment indicated that seventh-grade students had similar outcomes after working with a pedagogical agent compared to a non-agent condition. Their results indicated that the students who worked with an agent performed significantly better on transfer tests than those in the non-agent condition, but did not perform significantly better on the retention test. Accordingly, their results demonstrated that while pedagogical agents can help students perform better on transfer tests, the same cannot be said for strictly retention tasks.

Johnson, Ozogul, and Reisslein (2014) examined the effectiveness of a pedagogical agent for teaching students about a single-resistor electric circuit. In their study, students either worked with a pedagogical agent that signaled to relevant parts of the screen, an agent which did not signal, a control condition where an arrow signaled to relevant parts of the screen, or another control condition in which the arrow was absent. Their results revealed that while the presence of a pedagogical agent did not significantly improve learning overall, the inclusion of an agent did significantly impact students depending on their prior knowledge level. More specifically, students with low prior knowledge learned more with an agent while students with high prior knowledge learned more without an agent present. In addition, Johnson et al. did not find a significant difference in learning outcomes between students with high prior knowledge and low prior knowledge when an agent was present. Therefore, one could conclude that the inclusion of an agent helped the low prior knowledge learners attain a higher score, while perhaps slightly inhibiting the abilities of the high prior knowledge students.

A review of the literature indicates that the role of the pedagogical agent in studies investigating topics within the scientific domain tend to use the agent as an information source. In essence, the pedagogical agent generally appears on the screen, provides verbal instructions, and signals the learner’s attention to specific parts of the screen. The sciences in particular have numerous opportunities for future pedagogical agent research, as there are many topics in which the agents could model and demonstrate how certain processes, cycles, or functions take place.

Math

When compared to non-agent conditions, pedagogical agents have only occasionally been investigated in mathematics fields. Schroeder, Adesope, and Barouch (2013) meta-analysis found only eight comparison conditions in mathematics domains, yet the studies produced an encouraging effect on learning. However, it should be noted that six of the eight comparison conditions in the analysis came from one research laboratory. Next, three studies that examined the use of pedagogical agents in mathematics fields are reviewed.

Atkinson (2002) conducted two experiments with college students investigating the impacts of combining a pedagogical agent environment with worked examples in mathematics. The agent in his study was Peedy, an animated parrot that would signal the learner’s attention to certain parts of the screen through movement, gaze, and gesture. The first experiment compared a control condition, text-only condition, a narration-only condition, an agent that communicated through text condition, and an agent that communicated through narration condition. His analysis revealed that the participants who worked with the agent that provided narration performed significantly better on near and far transfer tests. In the second experiment, participants worked with either a text-only condition, a narration-only condition, or an agent with narration condition. Analysis of the results indicated that the learners in the pedagogical agent condition performed significantly better on a near transfer test than the students in the text-only condition, and they also performed significantly better on the far transfer test than the students in either the text-only and narration-only conditions (Atkinson, 2002). From the results of the experiments, one could conclude that pedagogical agents that provide instructions through narration can be effective for learning when coupled with worked examples.

Lusk and Atkinson (2007) examined the extent to which a fully embodied pedagogical agent that could talk, gaze, walk, and gesture influence learning compared to a static agent or a voice only condition. The agent in this experiment was Peedy the Parrot (as in Atkinson, 2002). Similar to Atkinson’s work, students once again learned about solving worked examples. Lusk and Atkinson’s results revealed that students working with the fully embodied pedagogical agent significantly outperformed students who worked with the voice only condition on both the near transfer and far transfer tests. Thus, their results indicated that having an animated agent present in the learning environment can facilitate learning compared to a non-agent condition.

A study by Plant, Baylor, Doerr, and Rosenberg-Kima (2009) examined if a male or female pedagogical agent would be more effective at changing student attitudes about engineering and math performance than a non-agent condition. The participants were middle school students, and the agent conditions consisted of either a male or female pedagogical agent that was designed to appear attractive, young, and cool. The agents delivered a 20 minute monologue about female engineers. In addition, the agents discussed a few benefits of a career in engineering. Plant et al. found that learning with the male agent did not lead to significantly better scores on the mathematics test. However, the students who learned with the female agent scored significantly higher than both the students in the male agent condition and the students in the no agent condition. The results of Plant et al.’s study adds to the literature base suggesting that the characteristics of the agent are salient in the design process.

Due to the limited amount of studies investigating the use of agents compared to non-agent conditions in the mathematics domain, there are many opportunities for novel agents to be developed. For instance, to date, the vast majority of studies use agents to facilitate the teaching with worked examples of word problems. However, there are many other fields of mathematics, and agents could presumably model and explain how to solve nearly any mathematics problem. Examples include topics such as basic mathematics (addition and subtraction) or even more advanced mathematics such as calculus.

Humanities

The meta-analysis conducted by Schroeder et al. (2013) indicated that while there were 16 comparison conditions in the fields of the humanities, pedagogical agents were not significantly effective for learning compared to non-agent conditions. In this section, three pedagogical agent studies in the humanities fields are reviewed.

Choi and Clark (2006) investigated the effectiveness of an animated pedagogical agent, Genie, for college students learning English relative clauses. The specific question was whether or not Genie was more effective for learning than a condition that contained narration and arrows (i.e., no on-screen character). Results indicated that there were no significant differences in learning outcomes between the group that learned without an agent and the group that learned with an agent. Furthermore, their additional analyses provided preliminary evidence that student characteristics (in this case, prior knowledge) can influence cognitive outcomes when students learn with animated pedagogical agents. As a side note, the experimental design used was particularly important in minimizing confounding variables, a persistent experimental design issue which has consistently influenced the understanding of pedagogical agent studies (Clark & Choi, 2005).

Theodoridou (2009) conducted an experiment to examine the effects of a pedagogical agent to help students learn Spanish vocabulary. The agent used in the study was Laura, a female agent that appeared in her mid-to-late twenties. Laura was a relatively static agent in that she did not gesture, but she had lip synchronization, head movements, and the ability to gaze different directions. Laura was also artificially intelligent, having a Spanish knowledge base that Theodoridou created using Artificial Intelligence Markup Language. Students either worked with Laura or they worked with a web-based program that did not contain the agent. Theodoridou examined students’ knowledge through the use of immediate and delayed post-tests. Analysis of the results revealed that there were not statistically significant differences in learning outcomes between groups. As such, this particular pedagogical agent was not more effective at facilitating students’ learning than a control condition. However, it is noteworthy that the students’ in the agent group did not perform significantly worse than the non-agent group. Therefore, the next step would be to examine what features of the pedagogical agent could make it more effective for specifically teaching language learning, yet very little research exists in the area that compares a pedagogical agent to a non-agent condition.

Murray and Tenenbaum (2010) investigated the impacts of pedagogical agents on middle school students’ health and fitness knowledge. In their study, students in one condition interacted with a teacher agent and a peer agent, in another condition the students only interacted with the teacher agent, and in the control condition the students were provided with written materials. Analysis of their results indicated that while students in both agent conditions significantly outperformed the control condition on the knowledge test, the students who worked with only the instructor agent outperformed those who also worked with a peer agent as well as the control group. Murray and Tenenbaum’s study is notable as it is one of the few longitudinal studies in the field, having consisted of five instructional sessions over the course of five weeks.

The humanities fields have seen numerous instances of pedagogical agents being implemented, yet the results tend to produce insignificant effects on learning outcomes compared to other knowledge domains (Schroeder et al., 2013). It is difficult to hypothesize why the findings of studies of pedagogical agents in the humanities have not found similar results to those in the mathematic or scientific domains.

Summary

As shown above, pedagogical agents have been incorporated in a wide variety of subject domains in efforts to help students learn. However, they have been explored in relation to non-agent conditions from relatively limited perspectives. Agents are often providing the instruction to learners rather than helping their learning through scaffolding, demonstrating, or modeling. In the future, researchers should begin examining more roles of pedagogical agents in learning environments, particularly with agents that can model or demonstrate tasks (Moreno, 2005). When creating these agents, researchers in the field may consider collaborative projects with those in the field of intelligent tutoring systems, as they continue to be found effective for learning (e.g., Ma, Adesope, Nesbit, & Liu, 2014; Steenbergen-Hu & Cooper, 2014; VanLehn, 2011). Artificially intelligent agents that can help scaffold student learning throughout the learning process may hold great promise.

THE FUTURE: PEDAGOGICAL AGENTS IN VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENTS

Many of the studies described in this chapter have often occurred in more “traditional” multimedia learning environments in which the learner could not explore a virtual space. To generalize, in the majority of studies cited above, the learners were presented with a designated, very controlled learning environment that contained a pedagogical agent and the agent would provide instruction. The background of the environment was generally a solid color, and generally, the learner couldn’t move around or explore the virtual space. In a sense, the learners often watched a pedagogical agent talk, similar to watching a video, and then they solved the learning problems. Interaction with the software or pedagogical agent was often limited. To summarize, there has been limited work that examines the influence of pedagogical agents compared to non-agent conditions in virtual reality environments.

As mentioned previously, integrating virtual characters of any variety into a virtual reality situation can be expensive, time consuming, and require specific technical skill sets. This is true regardless of whether the virtual human takes the role of a pedagogical, motivational, or conversational agent. Fortunately, technologies are emerging that are making the process of creating simulations, educational games, and other virtual reality environments more practical and accessible. One example is the Virtual Human Toolkit (Hartholt et al., 2013). The Toolkit assists in the integration of lifelike characters into virtual reality environments. The Toolkit works in conjunction with Unity3D (Unity Technologies, 2015), a popular game development software. By assisting with the creation of virtual humans, the Toolkit could facilitate the creation of conversational agents, pedagogical agents, and other types of virtual characters.

The Toolkit contains a number of modules that facilitate virtual human integration. Due to the broad scope of all the modules within the virtual human toolkit, a full description is outside the realm of this chapter. For detailed information, please refer to Hartholt et al. (2013). However, a few brief examples will highlight some of the many features within the modules provided in the virtual human toolkit. For instance, the MultiSense module allows for the tracking and analysis of the user’s physical response to the environment, such as body posture and facial expressions (Hartholt et al., 2013). In addition, the Toolkit includes modules that assist in creating basic artificial intelligence. For example, the NPCEditor module allows the instructional designer to write questions learners may ask the agent and then write in a number of appropriate responses for the agent to reply with (Hartholt et al., 2013).

As tools such as the Virtual Human Toolkit (Hartholt et al., 2013) become more commonly available and usable by non-specialists, it is plausible that the use of pedagogical agents will increase. This is especially true as game development platforms become more widespread and continue to fall in price. As mentioned previously, Unity3D (Unity Technologies, 2015) is a common game development software. Another option for game development software is Unreal Engine 4 (Epic Games Inc., 2015). Either platform can be used to develop immersive virtual environments that contain virtual characters.

Research with Virtual Characters in Virtual Reality Environments

The use of virtual reality environments for creating simulations and games holds much potential for researchers in the field who want to explore new types of research with pedagogical agents. Within the larger context of pedagogical agent research, researchers could explore the influence of pedagogical agents on learning when playing different roles in the virtual environment. As previously mentioned, the influence of pedagogical agents on learning when modeling or demonstrating a task has not yet been examined compared to a non-agent condition. Virtual reality environments present an exceptional opportunity for exploring these questions. For instance, in a chemistry context, in one condition a pedagogical agent could demonstrate how to perform titrations and properly mix chemicals. In the control condition, the pedagogical agent’s character could be removed. In the domain of nursing, a pedagogical agent could demonstrate how to interact with a patient. In a control condition, the pedagogical agent’s image could be removed. Studies of this sort can help explore if the inclusion of a virtual character facilitates learning when the agent is demonstrating or modeling a task.

Meanwhile, there are many more aspects of pedagogical agent design that could be considered in virtual reality environments. More specifically, Domagk’s (2010) PALD model presents an excellent foundation for research in virtual reality environments. This is because virtual reality environments allow for the creation of contextually relevant agents (for a description of contextually relevant agents, see Veletsianos, 2007; Veletsianos, 2010) that are not only relevant to the content being taught, but also to the environment in which they appear. For example, in a nursing simulation a virtual patient can be dressed in civilian clothing and the virtual nurse could be dressed as they would in the local area hospitals. In a control condition, the clothing could be changed to not be relevant. For instance, the virtual nurses in the simulation could be dressed in street clothes rather than traditional hospital nursing attire. Studies such as this would allow for insights into different levels of the PALD model.

Virtual Reality Environments Benefit From Iterative Design

One drawback of the use of virtual reality environments is the amount of work that must be done prior to implementing the intervention. A non-exhaustive list of tasks includes designing a narrative, creating the virtual space, creating assets for the virtual space, programming the environment for different levels of interaction, and the creation of animation loops. Due to the confluence of many techniques that must all work in tandem, virtual reality environments can benefit from iterative design. For instance, educational games can benefit from iterative design informed by play or usability testing (Moreno-Ger, Torrente, Hsieh, & Lester, 2012; Olsen, Procci, & Bowers, 2011; Warren, Jones, & Lin, 2011). This process can be time consuming and resource intensive, requiring numerous iterations of game development and testing. In addition, data should be collected at each point and the results of the analysis should guide revisions to the environment. While educational games may appear to be a specialized environment, other virtual reality environments benefit from play testing and usability testing as well. For instance, when developing a nursing pain assessment and management simulation, Romero-Hall, Watson, Papelis, and Garcia (2014) used a form of usability testing. In their study, the instructional designer went through the virtual environment through both the correct and incorrect order in an attempt to find bugs in the system.

While the benefits of iterative design are increased functionality and optimization, researchers in the field have suggested numerous methodologies that all constitute different forms of play or usability testing. The specifics of the method may not be generalizable to all virtual reality environments. Optimizing player experience can highly depend on the purpose of the intervention. Accordingly, the questions that should be examined at each stage of design and play testing are likely different depending upon the application. However, the author notes that collecting both qualitative and quantitative data may be beneficial. Quantitative data can help collect ratings to quantify the learner’s perceptions, but qualitative data may be informative for guiding revisions. Through the triangulation of numerous data sources the researcher can likely find more meaningful insights than through one data source alone. As such, those creating virtual environments that contain virtual characters may find it fruitful to utilize both qualitative and quantitative data sources collected over numerous points in the iterative design process. Furthermore, these results can be systematically reported to help the field create a framework for usability and play testing for specific applications.

Summary

A benefit of the movement towards virtual reality environments is that researchers can take what we’ve learned about pedagogical agent design and test them in new ways. However, a drawback is that while we are just getting access to technologies that make pedagogical agents easier to implement in traditional multimedia environments, implementing an agent in a virtual reality situation still requires specialized skills and software. Presumably the next decade will see drastic improvements in the accessibility of these environments. Researchers should take advantage of this to further explore the influence of pedagogical agents on learning outcomes.

CONCLUSION

As shown, pedagogical agent researchers have explored numerous salient research questions encompassing a wide variety of content domains. Pedagogical agents have played a number of different roles in the virtual environment, but there is a dearth of research that explores the influence of a pedagogical agent when it is demonstrating or modeling a task compared to a control group (i.e., a non-agent condition). The continuing rise of virtual reality and immersive game-based environments offer much promise to pedagogical agent researchers. Allowing the virtual character to appear within a more immersive environment can foster its “deictic believability” (Lester, Voerman, Towns, & Callaway, 1999, p. 384), or its ability to move around and reference its environment in an appropriate, meaningful way. As new technology tools become increasingly accessible, it is plausible to expect the number of pedagogical agent studies to continue to increase.

While the discussion within this chapter was limited to studies examining the influence of a pedagogical agent compared to a non-agent control condition, whether or not pedagogical agents generally impact student learning remains a major question in the field. Recent quantitative reviews of the field have found that pedagogical agents can have small, positive effects on learning outcomes (Mayer, 2014b; Schroeder et al., 2013). Still, the question remains as to how we can most effectively design pedagogical agents to best facilitate increased learning outcomes. While it may seem natural to omit the control (non-agent) condition in experimental designs, doing so would retain the issue of the broader question of pedagogical agents’ overall influence on learning. Heidig and Clarebout (2011) suggested that the question is simply too broad to answer. However, meta-analytic procedures can not only examine the question of overall agent effectiveness, but also examine the conditions in which the pedagogical agents are most effective (or ineffective) compared to a non-agent condition. These insights are important as if there are content areas or specific situations where pedagogical agents are not particularly effective, it may not be worth devoting the resources needed to implement one. As such, the author concurs with Heidig and Clarebout (2011) that experimental designs such as those used in Domagk (2010), which contain experimental groups with different features as well as a non-agent control group, may be the most fruitful as the field continues to expand.

REFERENCES

Adcock, A. B., Duggan, M. H., Nelson, E. K., & Nickel, C. (2006). Teaching effective helping skills at a distance: The development of project CATHIE. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education , 7(4), 349–360.

Alegría, D. A. H., Boscardin, C., Poncelet, A., Mayfield, C., & Wamsley, M. (2014). Using tablets to support self-regulated learning in a longitudinal integrated clerkship. Medical Education Online , 12.

Alvarez, C., Brown, C., & Nussbaum, M. (2011). Comparative study of netbooks and tablet PCs for fostering face-to-face collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior , 27(2), 834–844. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.008

Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology , 94(2), 416–427. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.416

Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 30(1), 117–139. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001

Ausubel, D. G. (1963). Cognitive structure and the facilitation of meaningful verbal learning. Journal of Teacher Education , 14(2), 217–222. doi:10.1177/002248716301400220

Baylor, A. L. (2011). The design of motivational agents and avatars. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(2), 291–300. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9196-3

Baylor, A. L., & Kim, Y. (2005). Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 15(2), 95–115.

Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent for learning English as a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 34(4), 441–466. doi:10.2190/A064-U776-4208-N145

Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Johnson, W. L., & Shaw, E. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents: An opportunity to be grasped? Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 11(3), 267–286.

Clark, R. E., & Choi, S. (2005). Five design principles for experiments on the effects of animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 32(3), 209–225. doi:10.2190/7LRM-3BR2-44GW-9QQY

Clark, R. E., & Choi, S. (2007). The questionable benefits of pedagogical agents: Response to Veletsianos. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 36(4), 379–381. doi:10.2190/2781-3471-67MG-5033

Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology , 94(2), 428–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.428

D’Mello, S. K., & Graesser, A. (2010). Multimodal semi-automated affect detection from conversational cues, gross body language, and facial features. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction , 20(2), 147–187. doi:10.1007/s11257-010-9074-4

Dehn, D. M., & van Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: A review of empirical literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 52(1), 1–22. doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0325

Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes? The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology , 22(2), 84–97. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000011

Dunsworth, Q., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Fostering multimedia learning of science: Exploring the role of an animated agent’s image. Computers & Education , 49(3), 677–690. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.010

Enyedy, N., Danish, J. A., Delacruz, G., & Kumar, M. (2012). Learning physics through play in an augmented reality environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 7(3), 347–378. doi:10.1007/s11412-012-9150-3

Epic Games Inc. (2015). Unreal engine 4 [computer software]. Retrieved from https://www.unrealengine.com/

GoAnimate. (2015). Make professional animated videos. Retrieved from http://goanimate.com/

Graesser, A. C. (2011). Learning, thinking, and emoting with discourse technologies. The American Psychologist , 66(8), 746–757. doi:10.1037/a0024974

Gulz, A. (2004). Benefits of virtual characters in computer based learning environments: Claims and evidence. Educational Research Review , 6, 27–54.

Hartholt, A., Traum, D., Marsella, S., Shapiro, A., Stratou, G., Leuski, A., . . . Gratch, J. (2013). All together now: Introducing the virtual human toolkit. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Humans. Retrieved from http://ict.usc.edu/pubs/All%20Together%20Now.pdf

Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review , 6(1), 27–54. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.004

Huang, H. W., Wu, C. W., & Chen, N. S. (2012). The effectiveness of using procedural scaffoldings in a paper-plus-smartphone collaborative learning context. Computers & Education , 59(2), 250–259. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.015

Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., Moreno, R., & Reisslein, M. (2013). Pedagogical agent signaling of multiple visual engineering representations: The case of the young female agent. The Journal of Engineering Education , 102(2), 319–337. doi:10.1002/jee.20009

Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2014). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signaling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning . doi:doi:10.111/jcal.12078

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(1), 86–104. doi:10.1037/a0034008

Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2014). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 247–262).

Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. The ARCS model approach . New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1250-3

Kim M. Ryu J. (2003). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of pedagogical agent. In LassnerD.McNaughtC. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 479-486). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Kim, Y. (in press). Pedagogical agents. In M. Spector, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=yanghee_kim

Lane, H. C., Cahill, C., Foutz, S., Auerbach, D., Noren, D., Lussenhop, C., & Swartout, W. (2013). The effects of a pedagogical agent for informal science education on learner behaviors and self-efficacy . In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 309–318). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_32

Lester, J. C., Voerman, J. L., Towns, S. G., & Callaway, C. B. (1999). Deictic believability: Coordinated gesture, locomotion, and speech in lifelike pedagogical agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence , 13(4-5), 383–414. doi:10.1080/088395199117324

Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2014). The modality principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 227–246). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: Does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples? Applied Cognitive Psychology , 21(6), 747–764. doi:10.1002/acp.1347

Ma, W., Adesope, O. O., Nesbit, J. C., & Liu, Q. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(4), 901–918. doi:10.1037/a0037123

Mayer, R. E. (2005). Principles of multimedia learning based on social cues: personalization, voice, and image principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 201–212). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.014

Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. (2014b). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 345–370). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.017

Mayer, R. E., & DaPra, C. S. (2012). An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied , 18(3), 239–252. doi:10.1037/a0028616

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist , 38(1), 43–52. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6

Mayer, R. E., & Pilegard, C. (2014). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 316–344). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.016

Mayer, R. E., & Pilegard, C., (2014). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 316–344). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.016

Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K., & Mautone, P. D. (2003). Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker’s voice. Journal of Educational Psychology , 95(2), 419–425. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.419

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. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review , 63(2), 81–97. doi:10.1037/h0043158

Moreno, R. (2005). Multimedia learning with animated pedagogical agents . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 507–524). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.032

Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction , 19(2), 177–213. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1902_02

Moreno-Ger, P., Torrente, J., Hsieh, Y. G., & Lester, W. T. (2012). Usability testing for serious games: Making informed design decisions with user data. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction , 2012, 1–13. doi:10.1155/2012/369637

Murray, M., & Tenenbaum, G. (2010). Computerized pedagogical agents as an educational means for developing physical self-efficacy and encouraging activity in youth. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 42(3), 267–283. doi:10.2190/EC.42.3.b

Oddcast Inc. (2015). SitePal. Retrieved from http://www.sitepal.com/

Okita, S. Y., Turkay, S., Mihwa, K., & Murai, Y. (2013). Learning by teaching with virtual peers and the effects of technological design choices on learning. Computers & Education , 63, 176–196. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.005

Olson, T., Procci, K., & Bowers, C. (2011). Serious games usability testing: How to ensure proper usability, playability, and effectiveness . In Design, user experience, and usability: Theory, methods, tools, and practice (pp. 625–634). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21708-1_70

Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review , 24(1), 27–45. doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2

Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2^nd ed., pp. 27-42).

Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology , 84(4), 429–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429

Plant, E. A., Baylor, A. L., Doeer, C. E., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. (2009). Changing middle-school students’ attitudes and performance regarding engineering with computer-based social models. Computers & Education , 53(2), 209–215. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.013

Romero-Hall, E., Watson, G. S., Papelis, Y., & Garcia, H. (2014). Nursing pain assessment and management: A 3D interactive simulation. International Journal of Designs for Learning , 5(1), 43–56.

Sabourin, J. L., & Lester, J. C. (2014). Affect and engagement in game-based learning environments. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing , 5(1), 45–56. doi:10.1109/T-AFFC.2013.27

Schroeder, N. L., & Adesope, O. O. (2013). How does a contextually-relevant peer pedagogical agent in a learner-attenuated system-paced learning environment affect cognitive and affective outcomes? Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology , 2(2), 114–133.

Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R.B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 49(1), 1–39. doi:10.2190/EC.49.1.a

Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Cooper, H. (2014). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students’ academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(2), 331–347. doi:10.1037/a0034752

Suter, W. N. (2012). Introduction to educational research: A critical thinking approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19-30). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review , 22(2), 123–138. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). The split-attention effect . In Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 111–128). Springer New York. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4_9

Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction , 12(3), 185–233. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1

Tegos, S., Demetriadis, S., & Tsiatsos, T. (2014). A configurable conversational agent to trigger students’ productive dialogue: A pilot study in the CALL domain. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 24(1), 62–91. doi:10.1007/s40593-013-0007-3

Theodoridou, K. D. (2009). Learning with Laura: Investigating the effects of a pedagogical agent on Spanish lexical acquisition (Doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

Unity Technologies. (2015). Unity3D [computer software]. Retrieved from http://unity3d.com/unity/download

van der Meij, H. (2013). Motivating agents in software tutorials. Computers in Human Behavior , 29(3), 845–857. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.018

van Gog, T. (2014). The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 263–278). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.014

van Mulken, S., André, E., & Müller, J. (1998). The persona effect: How substantial is it? In People and computers XIII (pp. 53–66). Springer London. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-3605-7_4

VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist , 46(4), 197–221. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.611369

VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science , 31(1), 3–62. doi:10.1080/03640210709336984

Veletsianos, G. (2007). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent: Considering contextual relevance and aesthetics. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 36(4), 373–377. doi:10.2190/T543-742X-033L-9877

Veletsianos, G. (2010). Contextually relevant pedagogical agents: Visual appearance, stereotypes, and first impressions and their impact on learning. Computers & Education , 55(2), 576–585. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.019

Veletsianos, G., & Russell, G. (2014). Pedagogical agents. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M.J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (4^th ed., pp. 759-769). Springer Academic. Retrieved from http://www.veletsianos.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/pedagogical_agents_synthesis_veletsianos_handbook.pdf

Warren, S., Jones, G., & Lin, L. (2011). Usability and play testing: The often missed assessment . In Annetta, L., & Bronack, S. (Eds.), Serious educational game assessment: Practical methods and models for educational games, simulations and virtual worlds (pp. 131–147). Netherlands: Sense Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-329-7_8

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Cognitive Outcome: The outcome of a learning task, such as a retention test or a transfer test.

Cognitive Load Theory: A theory describing how the brain processes information through the working and long-term memories.

Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning: A theory describing how individuals learn with multimedia. The theory is built upon the notion that the human brain can utilize two processors when presented with information, an auditory processor and a visual processor, and each has their own working memory limitations.

Conversational Agent: A type of software agent meant to facilitate a conversation with the user.

Domain: A domain is a broad field of study, such as science, mathematics, or the humanities.

Meta-Analysis: A statistical technique that allows researchers to analyze the results of different studies collectively.

PACU: Pedagogical agents-conditions of use model (see Heidig & Clarebout, 2011).

PALD: Pedagogical agents levels of design model (see Heidig & Clarebout, 2011).

Pedagogical Agent: A type of visually represented software agent, often in the form of a character, meant to aid in the learning process.

Social Agency Theory: A theory that describes how humans can interpret interactions from a computer in a similar way to how they would interpret interactions from another human.

Virtual Human Toolkit: Computer software that assists in the creation of virtual humans (see Hartholt et al., 2013).

Chapter 11

Augmented Reality:

A New Direction in Education

• Çelebi Uluyol Gazi University, Turkey

• Sami Şahin Gazi University, Turkey

ABSTRACT

Augmented Reality (AR) is an emerging technology that bridges the gap between the computer-generated digital information and the reality in real time. Despite the use of AR in numerous disciplines such as architecture, e-learning system, entertainment, medicine, engineering, and e-commerce, it has also potential implications in education. Therefore, in this study, augmented reality use in education is considered in all aspects. After the advantages and disadvantages of AR use in education is explained detailed, the phases of augmented reality book development are discussed. As a result, researchers should work on experimental studies to investigate how AR applications can be applied in educational settings in the future.

Introduction

In the last decade there has been a significant increase in the use of mobile technologies such as handheld devices, tablet computers and personal digital assistants (Dieterle & Dede, 2006; Lenhart & Madden, 2007). A learner’s choice of technology is dependent on the educational environment and on his or her access to different technologies. Providing access to effective information technology at any time and place in a rapidly changing society is a vital factor in classroom and school settings. Augmented reality (AR) is one technology that shifts the location and timing of training.

Researchers have explored using Augmented Reality (AR) applications within various disciplines such as medicine (Liu, Jenkins, Sanderson, Fabian, & Russell, 2010; Sielhorst, Feuerstein, & Navab, 2004), e-commerce (Zhu, Owen, Li, & Lee, 2004), architecture (Billinghurst & Henrysson, 2009), and interior design (Phan & Choo, 2010). The field of education has also demonstrated an interest in integrating AR, including distance learning environments (Cho, Lee, Soh, Lee, & Yang, 2007; Liarokapis, Petridis, Lister, & White, 2002), science education (Kerawalla, Luckin, Seljeflot, & Woolard, 2006; Shelton & Hedley, 2002), engineering education (Liarokapis et al., 2004), and mathematics and geometry education (Kaufmann & Dünser, 2007). Educational technologists and researchers have stressed the need for more research that investigates whether and how these technologies can be used in an effective and useful way for learning (Means & Haertel, 2004).

The 2010 and 2011 Horizon reports (New Media Consortium, 2011), which predict the impact of emerging technologies on different sectors, emphasized that AR will be used widely on US college campuses in the coming years. The reports also indicated that AR can positively impact learning and lead to a creative education. In this chapter, the topic of augmented reality will be explored, as well as the use of augmented reality in education. A case is made for AR being a viable an effective technology tool for teaching and learning in higher education.

DEFINING AND DESCRIBING AUGMENTED REALITY

AR is a technology in which the real environment or object is enhanced by digital content that is tied to certain activities, places or objects. AR allows digital content to be mixed into the perception of reality. 2D or 3D digital objects such as texts, audio materials, animations, graphics and pictures can be combined with individuals’ perceptions of the real environment. These digital objects aim to aid and improve users’ knowledge and understanding of what is going on around them.

AR was first described by researchers in terms of specific tools, such as head mounted displays (HMDs). Zhou, Duh, and Billinghurst (2008) define the three main characteristics of AR as (1) the combination of real-world and digital objects, (2) which are interactive in real-time, and (3) in which the display of digital information is tied to real-world orientation. Höllerer and Feiner (2004) similarly describe AR environments as those which integrate “real and computer generated information in a real environment, interactively and in real time, and virtual objects with physical ones” (p. 150). Ludwig and Reimann (2005) describe AR as “human-computer-interaction, which adds virtual objects to real senses that are provided by a video camera in real time” (p. 387). Zhou, Duh, & Billinghurst (2008) describes it as a technology “which allows computer generated virtual imagery to exactly overlay physical objects in real time” (p. 387).

According to Milgram, Tekamura, Utsumi, and Kishino (1994), augmented reality is closely linked to virtual reality (VR). They also emphasize that AR is an extension or variation of VR, very similar to VR. Both AR and VR of them are challenging, interactive and contain information sensitivity. As Azuma (1997) states, the user’s frame of reference is fully tied to the virtual environment in VR, whereas in AR the user’s perception is still centered within reality. The Second Life environment is an example of VR. On the other hand, sport games in game consoles such as the Xbox, Playstation and Nintendo Wii and smart phone applications that utilize GPS data or tie digitally-generated objects to real world places are the best-known examples of AR applications.

As Johnson, Levine, Smith, and Stone (2010) observe, AR applications can occur in two forms: marker-based or markerless-based. Marker-based applications contain three features, which include a booklet for introducing marker information, a gripper for taking information through the booklet and a cube for rendering information on the screen (Johnson et al., 2010). On the other hand, markerless-based applications contain a tracking system, a compass and an image recognition device instead of the three components of marker-based environments. Markerless-based applications have widespread use because they can be operated anywhere, without the need for supplemental points and special labeling.

Augmented Reality Applications

There are two methods of providing access to computer-generated content in augmented reality applications. One of these methods is Quick Response (QR) technology. It is possible to access the AR application through this special two-dimensional barcode technology from the camera of a mobile device. Barcodes that provide access to digital content can be placed on any surface, such as in the booklet, in the image, or on a separate sheet of paper. When this environment-carrying barcode object is placed in front of the web cam, the AR application works on the system and the display shows the results that are connected to the system. If the material is moved in front of the web cam, the direction of the AR application on the screen also changes. The augmented reality object changes depending on the direction of the user’s movement.

A second method that provides access to AR applications is the use of a special set of glasses, which is called a Head-Mounted Display (HMD). These glasses are larger and more functional than the glasses we use in everyday life and the lenses of the glasses function as small computer screens. Users can access digital content by looking at various objects in the real world while wearing the HMD glasses. The digital content to be connected can be displayed both on the screens of the lenses or on another big screen that is connected with the glasses. However, such an environment may only be implemented in a laboratory prepared for this purpose.

AR application consists of four components, real object; display screen; data and connection; and software. Nowadays, anyone who uses technological devices can develop simple AR applications. Therefore, it is important for developers and people to know the system components (figure 1).

• Real Object: The first element is reality or a real object. This can be a car, a house, a tree, a place, or anything in the real world. If there is not a reliance on reality in the environment, we cannot call the application an augmented reality application.

• Display Screen: The results, which combine both computer-generated objects and reality in an augmented reality application, should be displayed on a display screen. These screens can be an HMD, a television, a computer screen or any other display screen, such as a mobile or tablet PC screen.

• Data and Connection: The digital content that will be displayed on the screen is perhaps the most important matter. The design of the content to be displayed is an entirely different topic. Content may be accessed in two different ways: either digital content can be placed on a local database, or the Internet may be used to provide access to digital content.

• Software: Software that recognizes real objects and allows access to digital content should be used. The task of the augmented software is to detect objects in the external world, connect them to digital content, and show the results on the screen successfully. Many companies have their own augmented reality software and browsers.

Augmented Reality Browsers

The important point of augmented reality is the software. AR programs are written in some software development kit programs and are runned and tested throughout AR browsers. It is possible to reach many AR browsers working on both mobile devices and tablet computers. Some of these browsers are shown in Figure 2 below.

It is not the intent of this chapter to review all available AR broswers, but there are three whose utilization rates are high, so each of these will be discussed: Wikitude, Layar and Junaio.

Wikitude: Operations using the Wikitude AR browser can be summarized as follows:

• Exploring a place or showing it in a map with using augmented reality

• Browsing more than 100 million places and interactive content

• Quickly searching many restaurants and accessing information

• Adding bookmarks to content preferences

• A structure that is constantly updated

• Ability to search through many different categories

• Opportunity to find tweets, events, Wikipedia articles and ATMs

• Opportunity to find many more locations in your environment with recommendations from Yelp, Qype, TripAdvisor, and hotels.com

• Ability to find deals, discounts and mobile coupons that can be used at stores and shops near you

Layar: Layar is one of the well-known AR browsers in the world. Operations using Layar can be summarized as follows:

• Opportunity to develop augmented reality environments without any programming language knowledge

• Easy to use

• Support for graphics

• Adding any videos to content quickly and easily

• Providing the opportunity to interact with the content (e.g., adding a button to the application)

• Giving a chance to design and customize the applications

• Has the support of various applications

• Support through the Web page, advanced blog site, Facebook and Twitter

• Giving the opportunity to share layers with others

Junaio: The Junaio browser is one of the best-known AR browsers and is often used on mobile devices. It is developed by Metaio, which is one of the leading augmented reality research institutions. Operations using Junaio can be summarized as follows:

• Giving an opportunity to developers without no programming language knowledge

• Having a special programming language called AREL within, and PHP, HTML 5, and Javascript support for programmers who want to develop advanced AR network applications

• An easy way to develop augmented reality applications for iPhone, iPad, Android and tablet computers

• Advanced statistical analysis

• Opportunity for applications developer to develop layers

Augmented Reality vs. Virtual Reality

In spite of the fact that AR is an extension of Virtual Reality (VR), there are some differences between them. In a VR environment, real world objects are simulated and created, and users interact completely with the simulated objects. In an AR environment, computer-generated objects such as images, animation, graphics or sounds are used to strengthen the user’s visual feelings by adding these virtual objects to reality. As Hsieh and Lin (2011) posit that virtual reality is designed to take the place of the real environment and augmented reality is designed to augment reality with virtual objects generated by a computer. Some of different areas that use AR and VR is seen in Figure 3.

AUGMENTED REALITY IN EDUCATION

Despite a wide range of studies during the past decades, the use of AR in educational settings is still ripe for engagement and research, particularly because there are some issues with its integration due to traditional teaching methods, the costs for the design, implementation and maintenance of the AR system, and resistance to new technologies. However, considering developments in smart phones and the increased usage of tablet PCs with higher Internet connection, AR use in educational settings must have a more streamlined approach (with wider adoption) than ever before. In addition to that, some technological developments that make AR possible are increasingly efficient and effective and compact enough to deliver AR applications to academic environments through faster personal computers and smart devices. AR technology in education is more feasible because of the rapid increase in camera-equipped mobile technologies, such as handheld devices, tablet PCs and other electronic devices. Kerawalla, Luckin, Seljeflot, and Woolard (2006) state that AR’s potential and pragmatic tasks have only just begun to be investigated and utilized. AR has the potential to make students more engaged and motivated in discovery, learning and applying their studies to the real environment in new and innovative ways that have never been developed before.

There is also a wide range of ongoing studies that aim to enhance the applicability of AR into real life. However, there are still some questions about AR use in education, including cost effectiveness issues and efficiency between AR applications and methods.

Although there has been intensive study on AR, Wu, Lee, Chang, and Liang (2013), and Cheng and Tsai (2012) emphasize that AR is still in its infancy. In these studies, researchers indicate that research on AR should continue in depth and should focus on the differences between this technology and others. Chen and Tsai (2012) state that the research on AR in educational applications has just began a new era. Dunleavy, Dede, and Mitchell (2009) specify that “we are only beginning to understand effective instructional designs for this emerging technology” (p. 20).

In this section, AR use in education will be reviewed in the five sub-headings as follows: Types of AR in education, advantages of AR in education, limitations of AR in education, AR resources for higher education and a focused look at AR Book use in education.

Types of AR in Education

The results regarding the types of AR use in education in presented in Table 1 (Bacca, Baldiris, Fabregat, Graf, & Kinshuk, 2014).

Table 1. Types of AR use in education

According to the results shown in Table 1, three types of AR use are considered, as also emphasized by Wojciechowski and Cellary (2013). For the augmented reality applications, it is seen that mostly marker-based applications are used (59.38%). Other types of AR use in education are marker-less (12.50%) and location-based (21.88%).

Advantages of AR in Education

The results regarding the advantages of AR use in education in presented in Table 2 (Bacca et al., 2014).

Table 2. Advantages of AR use in education

According to Table 2, it is seen that AR presents various advantages. The major advantages of AR use in education are learning gains (43.75%) and motivation (31.25%). This means that AR can contribute to improving students’ learning performance and motivation. This result is very important when we consider that one of the problems faced in an educational environment is motivation. AR technology can be used in some applications to increase student motivation in educational settings. Some other reported advantages of AR use are interaction support (15.63%), collaboration (18.75%), low cost (12.50%), increasing the experience (12.50%), just-in-time learning (12.50%) and exploration of the real world (12.50%).

AR use has been most frequently studied in higher education (Bacca et al. 2014). This is followed by primary education, lower secondary education, upper secondary education, informal learning and short-cycle tertiary education. In these studies, AR was used to motivate learners, explain course topics and add information. As an example, İbili and Sahin (2013) studied augmented reality to find evidence that AR supports elementary-level geometry learning. They developed an augmented reality environment called ARGED3D using Visual Studio 2012 and Microsoft Silverlight. They implemented the environment as an AR book in an experimental setting. As a result, they found that the AR book improved students’ ability to learn abstract and complex geometry concepts. In addition, they observed that external use of an AR marking system increased interaction and ease of use. According to Bacca et al. (2014), there was no evidence of augmented reality use in the field of early childhood education, post-secondary non-tertiary education, master’s or equivalent level and doctoral degree.

One of the benefits of AR is that the system combines face to face collaboration with access to a computer generated object, permitting students have their own experiences and control over the virtuality, while preserving visual contact with others. Furthermore, augmented reality leverages situated cognition, by allowing the learner to access the digital world by simply displaying a camera in the real world, inside or outside the school. This behavior is beneficial to learners because appropriate information may be procured to satisfy the learner’s interest. Learner motivation can also be augmented through augmented reality applications because it changes learner perceptions of real world and provides experiences with individually suitable content. Augmented reality applications should also allow learners to control the course content, as well as have individualized views of the content. However, researchers need to further explore in order to specify these advantages in experimental studies. According to these results, there is a need to validate the advantages of augmented reality use in education and experimental studies in real educational settings.

Limitations of AR in Education

In contrast, Bacca et al. (2014) summarize the limitations or disadvantages of AR use in education. The results of limitations identified from the studies are shown in Table 3.

Table 3. Limitations of AR use in education

According to the results in Table 3, the most frequently reported limitations are difficulties maintaining information (9.38%), students’ attention to virtuality (6.25%) and intrusive technology (6.25%). Students can feel frustrated if the AR application does not work properly or if it is difficult for learners to use the markers to see the augmented information. To overcome these issues within the applications, there is a need to improve new algorithms, in engineering disciplines in particular. Usability studies are offered for future research on AR applications in educational settings. Paying too much attention to virtuality is related to the novelty of that technology when it is used for the first time in the classroom. Learners may be distracted by the virtual information itself. Using an HMD (Head mounted display) is also a limitation because the device can interrupt interaction between learners. One of the final limitations of AR use is related to teachers. Teachers often do not have the technical skills to create augmented reality environments. So, in the future, studies should be undertaken to assist teachers with using authoring tools to create these environments easily.

There are some limitations or challenges emphasized in other researches in the use of augmented reality in education. Dunleavy, Dede, and Mitchell (2009) found that GPS error is a limitation in augmented reality systems. Resarchers stated that GPS error is prohibitively high for large-scale implementations. GPS failure rates of 15–30% were observed in their study. When the learners were asked what they did not like about learning using an augmented reality system, GPS error was the highest reply. They also emphasized two major errors: “(1) software instability, and (2) the research team incorrectly setting up the mobile device configurations” (p. 13).

The second challenge in an AR environment as specified by Dunleavy et al. (2009) is logistical support and lesson management. There is a high management overhead that accompanies an augmented reality simulation design and implementation. The investigation and interview data from the study show the reality that some instructors could not design and develop the augmented reality unit. In addition to providing the GPS signal during development, the support team in the study also emphasized some points. These points are: “(1) distributed and collected all hardware, (2) tried to keep groups together, (3) answered content and handheld interface questions, (4) provided alternative handhelds to students whose machines had crashed (average 2 out of 15 per class), and (5) corralled the students out of the Street” (p. 16). Briefly, as a result, maintaining sufficient support to the instructors during the development was crucial. The researchers stated that a minimum of two people on web site duties were needed to support teachers with implementing and collecting data.

The last limitation in an AR environment reported by Dunleavy et al. (2009) is student cognitive overload. According to the study findings, students reported feeling frequently overwhelmed and confused by the material and the complexity of tasks they could handle throughout the simulation. Learners were exposed to and requested to rapidly apply various mixed skills: “geo-spatial navigation, collaborative problem solving, handheld manipulation, as well as the mathematics and literacy problems presented within the narrative” (p. 14). While it could be advocated that in isolation any of those skills would be smootly successful, the synthesis of all those skills was doubtful.

Augmented Reality Resources for Higher Education

Science Center to Go (www.sctg.eu) The LifeLong Learning project was supported by the European Union. In this project, an augmented reality technology was implemented in science education. This project converted an augmented reality system for educational use. Some educational scenarios were designed to be used by hundred of instructors, learners, and science teachers within the project. Teachers and students actively manipulated the experiments and played active roles in the environment. Thus, augmented reality experiences were experimented with in education by all stakeholders in the school. The results of the project can be summarized as follows: “(1) It is possible to combine reality with computer generated objects and to place suitable information into real surroundings, (2) AR technology has a potential to be used in education, (3) Augmented reality tools can visualize the invisible onto a real environment object, (4) AR applications allow learners to interact physically with educational learning scenarios materials, (5) Teachers and students can control their learning and teaching themselves, (6) the usability, availability and the prices of AR technology are making it soon available for everyday education” (p. 6).

Construct3D (www.ims.tuwien.ac.at/research/construct3d/) is a development kit for investigating geometry. It takes aspects of computer-aided design (CAD) and combines them with augmented reality to design and implement an educational tool aimed at increasing interaction with other students. The Construct3D tool was mostly used in an experimental study. Research results showed that the AR application was useful as a learning tool, allowing the learner to focus on the actual task rather than the application itself. It is suitable for learners to have the opportunity to investigate on their own initiative, in collaboration with each others. Learners work more effectively with each other if they can share a common workspace. By using an augmented reality system based on a tangible interface metaphor, real objects can have computer generated digital objects tied to them, allowing learners to engage with them in an intuitive way and collaborate and communicate in a more natural way within the real environment.

The LearnAR Project in the United Kingdom (http://www.learnar.org) designed an augmented reality curriculum resource that instructors and learners can investigate in different environments. AR systems have been used in a flexible way, allowing instructors to make demonstrations to a classroom. The same technology can be used by learners in a classroom through tablet computers, mobile devices, netbooks and desktop computers, and by learners independently outside of the school. There is no need for any extra tools, just access to the Web and a device.

The ARiSE Project was also developed to use augmented reality in a school setting. The project combines real and digital objects and lets learners communicate either in close vicinity to each other or from a remote location to administrate virtual objects related to their own culture. Various aspects of augmented reality were observed in the project, and results indicated that the recommended solution has been well received by learners and instructors and is well matched for collaborative learning. In another augmented reality project, called AR Volcano Kiosk (www.hitlabnz.org/wiki/AR_Volcano), the eruption of a volcano was displayed in interactive animated 3D. It demonstrated how augmented reality provides spatial and temporal assistance to the student.

The EXPLOAR Project (www.ea.gr/ep/exploar) is an augmented reality project that involved visitors to science locations such as museums in playful learning. This project looks upon informal training as an opportunity to transcend traditional museum visits and foster an emotional and interactive user experience. A set of scenarios, interactive visualisation technologies and learning paradigms were used in the Project. The EXPLOAR proposes a service that demonstrates the potential of AR to cover the emerging need for continuous updates, innovative exhibits, new exhibitions, new creative materials, new programmes and approaches to visitors.

AR systems can be applied both in higher education and K-12 settings. In relation to the use of augmented reality in K-12, Freitas and Campos (2008) created SMART (System of augmented reality for teaching), which is an educational application using augmented reality technology. This system superimposes 3D models such as cars, airplanes and trucks at 2^nd grade-level concepts. Several experimental studies by Freitas and Campos (2008) were performed with 54 students in various schools in Portugal. They concluded that SMART helps increase student motivation and has a positive impact on student learning, especially among less academically successful students. On the other hand, as Lee (2012) states, augmented reality is also a very productive technology for higher education. Students who are studying at university and colleges can develop their abilities, especially when it comes to complicated theories or systems. Regarding this idea, Liarokapis, Petridis, Lister, and White (2002) demonstrated that augmented reality technology can make difficult mechanisms and theories in higher education clearer for learners using contextually enriched interaction.

Additionally, El Sayed, Zayed, and Sharawy (2011) presented courses differently using AR environments so students could handle a wide range of computer-generated objects in an interactive way. Klopfer (2008) also emphasized that AR systems can facilitate skill acquisition. He concluded that AR mobile games can be used in educational setting to arrange, investigate and evaluate data and information.

Some essential knowledge in todays’s society can also be organized through AR learning systems (Rosenbaum, Klopfer, & Perry, 2007). For example, in Rosenbaum et al.’s (2007) study, AR learning systems increase students’ understanding of complex concepts. Moreover, AR systems could increase learners’ interest and motivation and help them improve their abilities and gain more accurate knowledge (Sotiriou & Bogner, 2008). Learners’ skills can be enhanced after utilizing cooperative augmented reality applications (Kaufmann, Steinbugl, Dunser, & Gluck, 2005; Martin-Gutierrez et al., 2010). Other skills that can be improved in augmented reality systems are psychomotor-cognitive skills, because augmented reality can make use of visual markers to improve learners’ knowledge (Feng, Duh, & Billinghurst, 2008). Kotranza, Lind, Pugh, and Lok (2009) stated that users could receive real time, in-situ responses that may enhance their performance and improve psychomotor skills in cognitive tasks by using an augmented reality system. Liu (2009) concluded that an AR learning environment may help learners overcome learning issues and develop their English speaking and listening skills.

Augmented Reality Book Use in Education

One example of AR use in education is the AR-Book. One of the most well known AR-Books is called the “Magic Book” (Billinghurst, Kato, & Poupyrev, 2001). A booklet can become interactive – or “magic” – using AR technology. This makes users’ imaginations a part of the story by using both a printed book and a camera-equipped device. In the Magic Book, while the user can turn the pages of the book, look at the images and read the text without any interactive assistance, he or she can also view 3D models appearing out of the pages through a handheld AR display. Billinghurst, Kato, and Poupyrev (2001) emphasized that younger people especially can read pages in more interactive and effective ways by using AR technology along with printed books. They also concluded that users are able to view three-dimensional scenes from different perspectives simply by moving the augmented reality device along the Magic Book. Moreover, Johnson et al. (2010) stated that AR-Books such as the Magic Book can be converted into an augmented reality version after publication by installing special software called AR Toolkits on users’ personal computers. After installing the software on a personal computer or a smart phone, the user can view computer-generated digital objects on the device screen through an embedded camera. Figure 4 shows an example of what a typical AR-book might look like. The scene on the screen shows real booklet with digital supports, such as text, graphics and pictures.

The Application Tool

There are many different tools for both programmers and non-programmers to create augmented reality applications. The Metaio Creator is one augmented reality tool for non-programmers in which the user can prepare augmented reality scenarios ranging from simple to complex environments through simply “dragging and dropping.” The program has also some highlights such as the ability to rapidly import content, multi-platform support and a complete tracking solution. Due to the various features of the mentioned tool, in this study, the Metaio Creator augmented reality software was used to prepare the AR-Book.

The Augmented Reality Browser

AR browsers have now become one of the major commercial AR applications. There are many AR browsers running smoothly on iOS or Android platforms; examples include Wikitude, Layar, Argon, AR Browser, Aurasma, Google Goggles, and Daqri. All these browsers can be downloaded easily and run on mobile platforms in a few steps. Junaio is an AR platform that allows the user to unlock digital information from places, products and sights around him or her. It is powered by Metaio and available for some glasses such as Epson, Vuzix and Google. Due to the many advantages of the browser, in this study, the Junaio augmented reality browser was used to test and run the designed and developed AR-Book.

Application Development Phases

All applications were developed in Creator demo mode, which has some limitations: (a) only 2 trackables (tracking references) can be loaded, (b) only 2 AR resources can be loaded, and (c) limited access to your channel & contents via QR code only. When the program runs, the user will see the screen shown in Figure 5.

In the new project window, after clicking the “Trackables” button at the bottom left, Figure 6 will appear. In this window, the user should choose tracking technology. We chose “image tracking” for preparing our AR material.

When “image tracking” has been chosen, the user will be prompted to select a picture from the hard drive. We chose the Faculty of Education logo, as seen in Figure 7.

The application cycle will be completed after matching the camera with the pointer. The user must choose an action, which can be a video, music, picture, or other. We chose a hyperlink as an action and wrote the faculty official web site address in the opening window, as seen in Figure 8.

The last step in the application is to create a new channel to upload the material to Metaio Cloud. After clicking the “create” button, the user will be asked the name of this new channel. In this study, we named it “education_faculty,” as seen in Figure 9.

The channel with a barcode will be created a few minutes later, as seen in Figure 10.

When the user opens Junaio browser on his or her tablet computer, smart phone or handheld device, after scanning the barcode in the browser screen, the device will recognize the application and will open the faculty web site any time it sees the faculty logo. The faculty logo and the created barcode can be printed closely on a booklet and the augmented reality application can be easily tested. A user working with a mobile operating systems such as iOS or Android can drive the application while reading the book. When the user scans the QR-Code, the Junaio augmented browser will connect to the Metaio server and download the application to the mobile platform.

CONCLUSION

Given the rapid changes and properties of AR as a growing technology, researchers emphasize that augmented reality has potential implications and various advantages and benefits for educational settings (Billinghurst, 2002; Cooperstock, 2001; Shelton & Hedley, 2002). In today’s society, learners can begin to use AR applications quickly. They can download AR browsers/software to their technological devices such as laptops, tablet computers or smartphones. They can also create their own applications and run and test the applications themselves easily.

Although AR applications are not new, the AR-Book is still in its infancy in education. There are still many problems to explore and overcome regarding the use of AR in education. Augmented reality content is still quite difficult for an instructor to design, develop and create. This study illustrates the simplicity of designing the AR-Book for educators who have no programming and coding skills or technical knowledge. In the future researches, experimental studies should be done about the use of AR-Book in education. Educators and researchers should monitor the impact of AR on learning, evaluate the implications of AR use for training and investigation and seek to determine how AR systems can be best applied to learning environments. Researchers should work with educators to explore how AR applications and systems can best be applied in the school environment.

REFERENCES

Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented Reality. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6(4), 355–385.

Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., & Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2014). Augmented Reality Trends in Education: A Systematic Review of Research and Applications. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 17(4), 133–149.

Billinghurst, M. (2002). Augmented Reality in Education. New Horizons for Learning. Retrieved from http://www.newhorizons.org/ strategies/technology/billinghurst.htm

Billinghurst, M., & Henrysson, A. (2009). Mobile architectural augmented reality . In Wang,, X., & Schnabel, M. (Eds.), Mixed Reality In Architecture, Design And Construction (pp. 93–104). The Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9088-2_6

Billinghurst, M., Kato, H., & Poupyrev, I. (2001). The Magic Book — Moving seamlessly between reality and virtuality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 21(3), 2–4.

Chen, C.-M., & Tsai, Y.-N. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education , 59(2), 638–652. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.001

Cheng, K.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 22(4), 449–462. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9405-9

Cho K. Lee J. Soh J. Lee J. Yang H. S. (2007). A realisitc e-learning system based on mixed reality.Proc 13th Intl Conference on Virtual System and Multimedia (pp. 57- 64). VSMM.

Cooperstock J. R. (2001). The classroom of the future: Enhancing education through augmented reality.Proceedings of HCI International (pp. 688-692). New Orleans: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Dieterle, E., & Dede, C. (2006). Building university faculty and student capacity to use wireless handheld devices for learning . In van‘t Hooft, M. (Ed.), Ubiquitous computing: invisible technology, visible impact (pp. 303–328). Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 18(1), 7–22. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1

El Sayed, N. A. M., Zayed, H. H., & Sharawy, M. I. (2011). ARSC: Augmented reality student card – an augmented reality solution for the education field. Computers & Education , 56(4), 1045–1061. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.019

Feng, Z., Duh, H. B.-L., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). Trends in augmented reality tracking, interaction and display: A review of ten years of ISMAR. Paper presented at the7th IEEE/ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), Cambridge, UK. 10.1109/ISMAR.2008.4637362

Freitas R. Campos R. (2008). SMART: A system of augmented reality for teaching 2^nd grade students.Proceedings of the 22^nd British computer society conference on human-computer interaction (HCI 2008) (pp. 27-30). LiverpoolJohn Moores University, UK.

Hsieh, M. C., & Lin, H. C. K. (2011). A Conceptual Study for Augmented Reality E-learning System Based on Usability Evaluation. CISME , 1(8), 5–7. doi:10.5963/CISME0108002

İbili, E., & Şahin, S. (2013). Software design and development of an interactive 3D geomety book using augmented reality: ARGE3D. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Science and Engineering , 13(1), 1–8. doi:10.5578/fmbd.6213

Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report . Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Kaufmann, H., & Dünser, A. (2007). Summary of usability evaluations of an educational augmented reality application. Virtual Reality,LNCS (Vol. 4563, pp. 660–669). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-73335-5_71

Kaufmann, H., Steinbugl, K., Dunser, A., & Gluck, J. (2005). General training of spatial abilities by geometry education in augmented reality. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 8(4), 330.

Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A. (2006). Making it real: Exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality (Waltham Cross) , 10(3-4), 163–174. doi:10.1007/s10055-006-0036-4

Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262113151.001.0001

Kotranza, A., Lind, D. S., Pugh, C. M., & Lok, B. (2009, October). Real-time in-situ visual feedback of task performance in mixed environments for learning joint psychomotorcognitive tasks. Paper presented at the8th IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), Orlando, FL.

Lee, K. (2012). Augmented reality in education and training. TechTrends , 56(2), 13–22. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0559-3

Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2007). Social networking websites and teens: an overview . Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.

Liarokapis, F., Mourkoussis, N., White, M., Darcy, J., Sifniotis, M., & Petridis, P. (2004). Web 3D and augmented reality to support engineering education. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education , 3(1), 11–14.

Liarokapis, F., Petridis, P., Lister, P., & White, M. (2002). Multimedia Augmented Reality Interface for E-learning (MARIE). World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education , 1(2), 173–176.

Liu, D., Jenkins, S. A., Sanderson, P. M., Fabian, P., & Russell, W. J. (2010). Monitoring with head-mounted displays in general anesthesia: A clinical evaluation in the operating room. Society for Technology in Anesthesia , 110(4), 1032–1038.

Liu, T.-Y. (2009). A context-aware ubiquitous learning environment for language listening and speaking. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 25(6), 515–527. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00329.x

Ludwig, C., & Reimann, C. (2005). Augmented reality: Information at focus. Cooperative Computing & Communication Laboratory, 4(1). Universitat Paderborn.

Martin-Gutierrez, J., Saorin, J. L., Contero, M., Alcaniz, M., Perez-Lopez, D. C., & Ortega, M. (2010). Design and validation of an augmented book for spatial abilities development in engineering students. Computers & Graphics , 34(1), 77–91. doi:10.1016/j.cag.2009.11.003

Means, B., & Haertel, G. D. (2004). Using technology evaluation to enhance student learning . New York: Teachers College Press.

Milgram, P., Tekamura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1994). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies , 2351, 282–292. doi:10.1117/12.197321

New Media Consortium. (2011). The Horizon Report 2011 Edition. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2011-Horizon-Report.pdf

Phan, V. T., & Choo, S. (2010). Interior design in augmented reality in environment. International Journal of Computers and Applications , 5(5), 16–21. doi:10.5120/912-1290

Rosenbaum, E., Klopfer, E., & Perry, J. (2007). On location learning: Authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 16(1), 31–45. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-9036-0

Shelton, B. E., & Hedley, N. R. (2002). Using augmented reality for teaching earth-sun relationship to undergraduate geography students. Proceedings ofthe First IEEE International Augmented Reality Toolkit Workshop (pp. 1-8). Darmstadt, Germany: IEEE. 10.1109/ART.2002.1106948

Sielhorst, T., Feuerstein, M., & Navab, N. (2008). Advanced medical displays: A literature review of augment reality. Journal of Display Display Technology , 4(4), 451–467. doi:10.1109/JDT.2008.2001575

Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2008). Visualizing the invisible: Augmented reality as an innovative science education scheme. Advanced Science Letters , 1(1), 114–122. doi:10.1166/asl.2008.012

Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education , 68, 570–585. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.014

Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education , 62, 41–49. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024

Zhou, F., Duh, H. L., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). Trends in augmented reality traching, iteraction nd display: A review of ten years in ISMAR. Proceedings of the Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR 7^thIEE/ACM International Symposium (pp. 193-202). Cambridge: IEEE.

Zhu, W., Owen, C., Li, H., & Lee, J.-H. (2004). Personalized in-store e-commerce with PromoPad: An augmented reality shopping assistant. Electronic Journal for E-commerce Tools and Applications , 1(3), 1–19.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

AR-Book: A book which becomes interactive or “magic” using AR technology.

Augmented Reality: Augmented Reality (AR) is a technology that combines computer-generated digital objects and reality in real time.

Augmented Reality Browsers: Augmented reality browsers run AR applications which are operated on mobile devices.

Digital Objects: Computer-generated objects such as text, pictures, graphics, sound and animation are called digital objects.

HMD: Head mounted device is a display device which has a small optic in front of each eye and allows to see virtual objects with reality in real environments.

Junaio: Junaio is a AR browser which allows to create and run AR applications.

Metaio Creator: Metaio Creator is one of the AR kits to design and develop AR applications.

Virtual Reality: Real world objects are simulated and created in virtual reality environments, and users interact with the simulated objects completely.

Wikitude: Wikitude is an AR browser that lets the user to explore a place or show it in a map using augmented reality.

Chapter 12

Ethics in Virtual World Environments Research

• Amit Goel University of Central Florida, USA

• William A. Rivera University of Central Florida, USA

• Peter Kincaid University of Central Florida, USA

• Michele Montgomery University of Central Florida, USA

• Waldemar Karwowski University of Central Florida, USA

• Neal M. Finkelstein US Army Research Laboratory, USA

ABSTRACT

With increased use of virtual worlds in education, training, military, arts, engineering, architecture, astronomy, medical, physical sciences, and many other fields, research in the field of distributed virtual world simulation environments has increased manifold in the last decade. This astounding growth has motivated us to think seriously about issues related to ethics in such research. Awareness of ethical issues is not only a responsibility of the researcher conducting research in virtual worlds, but also for ethics committees and institutional review board members. In this chapter we provide an overview of the past and current research attempting to identify ethics issues related to distributed virtual world simulation environments research. We raise questions related to virtual world research ethics that researcher and ethics committee members should ponder, and we provide several references for the reader to engage in thought provoking further study and discussion.

Introduction

Virtual worlds have grown beyond merely being a tool for gaming and enjoyment, and have become prolific in many areas of human life, being used for modeling, simulation, analysis, social interactions, and conducting business transactions. In addition, virtual world simulation environments are being used for conducting research in diverse areas such as education (Balula & Moreira, 2014), training (Gomes, Abade, Campos, Harriso, & Silva, 2014), military (Scacchi, Brown, & Nies, 2012), medical (Diener, Windsor, & Bodily, 2009; Gomes et al., 2014), physics, astronomy (Henckel & Lopes, 2010; Lopes, 2009), arts (Duran & Villagrasa, 2013), engineering (Duran & Villagrasa, 2013), architecture (Duran & Villagrasa, 2013), and many other fields. Overall, millions of users worldwide are involved with some kind of virtual world.

Events related to ethical issues in virtual worlds have been studied, including cyber rape (Dibbell, 1993, 1994) in LambdaMOO and Facebook's emotional contagion experiment (Kramer, Guillory, & Hancock, 2014). The Facebook experiment manipulated user feeds without users being aware of it, resulting in an outcry from the public that included a call for a review of ethical questions such as issues of informed consent before conducting human subject research. In response, some researchers voiced the opinion that in online contexts it is difficult to determine when research requires informed consent (Rosenberg, 2010). These examples demonstrate us it there are situations that make us think about issues of ethics in virtual worlds.

The purpose of this chapter is to raise awareness regarding issues related to ethics in the use of virtual reality in research. First, background information is provided on virtual worlds, ethics, and a brief literature review of published articles related to the topic of ethics and the use of virtual reality. Second is a discussion of ethical issues, including moral and ethical context, human subjects, public and private space. Third is a discussion of ethics in research including military research, ethics in mobile learning for K-12 and ethics in SecondLife. Fourth is a discussion of future research directions, followed by concluding remarks.

BACKGROUND

In this section we provide a brief overview of virtual worlds and ethics followed by related work in ethical issues in virtual worlds, their usage in general, and their usage n particular in research.

Virtual Worlds

A virtual world is computer-based interactive simulation environment where users take the form of an avatar, own virtual assets, perform virtual actions, and interact with other users and computer-controlled actors known as bots or non-player characters (NPC) (Bell, 2008; Schroeder, 2008).

Virtual worlds include three-dimensional (3D) interactive environments such as Second Life and OpenSimulator. Furthermore, the term virtual world represents Multi User Virtual Environment (MUVE), Massively Multiplayer Online Game (MMOG), Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPG), and Massively Multiplayer Online Social Games (MMOSG). Note that there are subtle differences in each of the above-mentioned terms, but those subtleties make no difference while discussing the issue of ethics. For example, MMORPG focuses on structured objective-based game play, whereas MMOSG focuses on social interaction and communication without a pre-defined structure.

Metaverse is the collective sum of all virtual worlds, virtual reality and augmented reality. The term metaverse was coined in a futuristic science fiction novel titled Snow Crash authored by Neal Stephenson in 1992 (Stephenson, 1992). In the Snow Crash novel human-controlled avatars interact with each other and with computer controlled agents known as bots, in a 3D space that uses the metaphor of the real world. In virtual worlds, users immerse themselves in a 3D environment using avatars to socialize, move around, buy objects, construct objects that they can sell or share, and communicate with other avatars and bots. Thus the immersive and global nature of virtual worlds with large number of users and complex interactions with elements of role-playing are attracting researchers from all fields to experiment using virtual worlds (McKee & Porter, 2009).

Ethics

Ethics is a branch of philosophy that conceptualizes right and wrong conduct in a moral context; ethics deals with morality, good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, virtue vs. vice, justice, legality, and crime (Robinson & Garratt, 2000). Ethics, for virtual world research, has evolved from ethics for the Internet, computer science, software engineering, and information technology. However, the virtual world research has a different context for application of concepts, theory and practice of ethics (McKee & Porter, 2009). The difference in context stems from the nature of virtual worlds. Virtual worlds contain spaces and avatars. Should these spaces be considered public or private? Should the avatars be treated the same as if they were human beings or should they just be treated as an object? How does informed consent take shape in such worlds? Does informed consent apply to some action of the avatar or the human controlling the avatar? In context of Virtual Worlds research, the researcher has to be immersed in the Virtual World itself by using an Avatar. Thus the context of Virtual Worlds Research has some additional and different aspects.

It is beyond the scope of this chapter to provide details of computer and the Internet ethics, but ample resources are available. (See Bynum & Rogerson, 2003; Bynum, 2000, 2001; Coleman, 2007, 2010; Floridi & Sanders, 2001; Floridi, 1999, 2004, 2005, 2010; Harshman, Gilsinan, Fisher, & Yeager, 2005; Himma & Tavani, 2008; Himma, 2007; Johnson, 2005, 2009; Noorman, 2014; Patrignani & Whitehouse, 2014)

Most institutions engaged in research have ethics related rules, regulations and responsibilities for their researchers. These rules and regulations are usually administered through an institute-wide body such as Institutional Review Board (IRB), Independent Ethics Committee (IEC), or Ethical Review Board (ERB).

For example, at the University of Central Florida (UCF), the Office of Research and Commercialization (ORC) administers ethics and compliance, and ensures that the research at UCF complies with regulatory guidelines and meets the highest standards of responsible conduct. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) is an independent body at ORC and is a committee established to protect rights and welfare of human participants in research¹. The Office of Animal Welfare at ORC protects animals from abuse in research.

Ethical Issues

In a search, using popular and academic search engines and scholarly databases, a comprehensive critique of ethical issues in virtual worlds and metaverse research was not located. Papers, book chapters and books on topics related to ethical issues in design, use and applications of virtual worlds were identified.

Robert W. Kerbs (2005) identified several activities that could lead to ethical issues in the virtual world such as gaming addiction, chatting in chat rooms, cyber stalking, child neglect and abuse. Gaming addiction may lead to destructive behavior towards self and others such as manipulation of situation to ones’ own advantage. An example of destructive behavior due to games is a young player who was found dead in a cyber café after playing virtual world game for several hours at a stretch. Public chartrooms often lead to privacy and security of information issues. Cyber stalking has become a prevalent crime and can take many forms such as stalking a female or male virtual world participant, to the extent of harassing them with information obtained from stalking. Access of virtual worlds by children raises concerns that are almost identical to concerns in real life. Thus, the activities identified by Kerbs lead to ethical issues in the virtual world that may also impact the work of researchers in the virtual world. His work also provides suggestions for preventive measures. Some of the preventive measures that he suggests include regulation of virtual world games, using public email identities, creating restricted online profiles for youngsters and kids, and browsing the web anonymously.

Warren and Lin (2012) discuss ethical consideration for virtual worlds design and development in learning published in the handbook of research on practices and outcomes in virtual worlds and environments (Yang & Yuen, 2012). Warren and Lin provided a discussion from the point of view of the designer for learning games and simulations in virtual worlds, and concluded with some interesting questions in the area of educational virtual worlds design. For example the authors discuss the questions of appropriateness of a virtual world game or simulation to their target audience. They also raise questions on measuring the effectiveness in learning and of the measuring the risks associated with the virtual world game or simulation.

Work by Wankel and Malleck (2009) related to ethical issues in the use of virtual worlds such as copyrights, violence, sex, difference, disability, and medical education, etc. Although the authors emphasize that the virtual worlds have to play a very important role in the context of developing twenty first century, the novel ethical problem arising from proliferation of virtual worlds cannot be ignored. The issue of copyright is discussed from ethical and legal dimensions in the virtual worlds and online gaming and the concept of gaming capital is discussed from an ethical viewpoint. The authors also discuss the abuse of the virtual worlds by adult players who use child avatars for engaging in sexual activities in virtual worlds. Second Life had a section called Wonderland for such child-avatar-sex activities that was allowed to continue in the name of free speech. Later this area was shut down due to overwhelming negative reaction and feedback from community. The authors discuss the ethical and moral implications of such activities in the virtual worlds in depth. The authors also discussed ethical issues for usage of virtual worlds in medical education. The ethical dilemmas discussed included whether or not virtual worlds sufficiently prepare students for real life. Overall this work provides a modern outlook and overview towards emerging ethical issues in virtual world and its recent usage in diverse areas.

Grimes, Fleischmann, and Jaeger (2010) discuss research pertaining to ethics from stakeholders’ point of view. They provide a detailed discussion on different internal and external stakeholders related to virtual worlds research, and give some generic suggestions for researchers. Understanding how each stakeholder might be affected by research actions or data collection helps researchers alleviate some of ethical issues. See Table 1 for a summary of stakeholders and research ethics considerations.

Table 1. Our identification of Research Ethics Considerations for Stakeholders adapted from Grimes et al. (Grimes, Fleischmann, & Jaeger, 2009, 2010)

However, there are additional considerations with respect to ethics for researchers engaged in researching about Virtual Worlds, which were not identified by earlier researchers, hence not listed in above table. This chapter attempts to raise awareness of some of those considerations in following sections.

Ethics in Virtual World Research

Virtual worlds are such a fertile ground for data that they have attracted various disciplines for social, behavioral, and educational modeling, simulation and research. This has led to increased focus on ethics in such research. Grimes et al. (2009, 2010) argue that as a result of the lack of information on ethics in virtual worlds research, a researcher may get approval for research that might be harmful or unethical. However, just because an Institutional Review Board approved the research, does not absolve the researcher, and probably the institution, from legal and ethical responsibilities.

Moral and Ethical Context

In this section, research questions guide the discussion on the context of ethics in virtual worlds research. Moral and ethical context identification is important, since without the contextual awareness, the discussion of ethical issues tends to be lost in technicalities. Examining the context sets the backdrop against which the researchers have to evaluate the general and particular cases of ethics in virtual world research.

Research Question(s)

• Is there a moral and ethical context and content in interactions and actions that happen in virtual worlds?

• Where does the “virtual” end and “real” begin?

• Do we have the same responsibilities in virtual worlds as we do in the real world?

Discussion

With regards to above questions, some researchers agree and provide their reasoning and analysis supported by theories from social science and philosophy. Thomas M. Powers (2003) argues in favor of the presence of morality and the ethical context. In order to provide reasoning for the existence of context, he extends Austin's speech act theory (Austin, 1975) and Rawl's conception of social practice (Rawls, 1955), with his own arguments. The various forms of communications in online communities are equated to examples of speech acts on the lines of Austin’s speech theory. According to Thomas, the connection between speech acts and realism about intentions suggests an inclusive realism in virtual worlds. Thus real people act in virtual worlds in a way that establishes moral context and brings strong identification between themselves and their online identities. Further, Thomas establishes the relationship between rules, expectations, and practices in virtual worlds, based on Rawl’s (Rawls, 1955) conception of social practice. The rules of virtual world are akin to real laws, sense of ownership of identities and objects is “stage-setting”, and the social irreplaceability of characters draws parallels to morality of real people. However, Thomas denies the presence of a moral context in game-based virtual worlds because the difference in respective expectations between online game-based virtual worlds and non-game based virtual worlds. The game-based virtual worlds have minimal rules and participants are punished for violating the rules. Whereas non-game based virtual worlds have either no rules or community-based guidelines and policies. Thus participants are under more harm in non-game based virtual worlds thus establishing a moral and ethical context.

Ren Reynolds (2012) further argues that criteria applied by Thomas M. Powers was too restrictive, and under a different set of criteria, even the game virtual worlds also have moral context Reynolds’ paper is centered around the following acts in game-based virtual worlds: Griefing, Cheating, Harassment, Power Imposition, Greed Play, Scamming, Kill-Stealing, Trains, Camping, Begging, Twinkling, Power Leveling, Ganking, and Ninja Looting. The acts are looked at in context of three major objections to ethical context in game based virtual world: Virtuality, Fantasy, and Gameness. Virtuality refers to the concept that game-based virtual worlds are virtual, not real. Fantasy refers to the concept that acts in game-based virtual worlds are based on a storyline or narrative and thus unreal. Gameness refers to the concept that interactions, events and transactions in game-based virtual worlds are just part of game, or an entertainment play. Reynolds thus modify the Powers’ criteria (Powers, 2003) to justify the moral context by refuting above three objections. The modified criteria is based on the fact that acts trade on trust; thus there is identification and attachment with aspects of virtual world; hence there are moral and ethical expectations of behavior in the circumstances under consideration.

According to Grimes et al. (2009, 2010), the assumption that virtual worlds are just sandboxes for research, without any lasting harmful impact, is naive and dangerous. Authors emphasize that avatars are psychological extensions and that avatars project the identities of the virtual world users.

Researchers that disagree with the existence of ethical and moral context in the game-based virtual worlds, base their reasoning on some of the following misconceptions:

• Virtual worlds are “virtual”, they do not exist in reality, and hence they are outside the consideration of ethics (Johnson, 1997).

• Virtual worlds have elements of fantasy and role-play; such as flying actions by an avatar in Open Simulator and Second Life, thus they are not within context of ethics (Consalvo, 2003; Southern, 2001).

• Virtual worlds are just games and hence not a serious activity. Games are set with nontraditional norms such as acts of lying, violence, and no fear of law or society (Consalvo, 2003; Southern, 2001).

Human Subjects

In this section, the issues around use of human subjects in virtual worlds research is discussed. Important and critical questions provide the basis for discussion.

Research Question(s)

• What are the ethical issues for using human subjects?

• Are they actually human subjects or just their virtual avatars?

• Are they still considered human subjects if we are not seeing, knowing or interacting with them physically?

Discussion

Use of human subjects in virtual worlds research is as common as any other research. Therefore the role of ethics is very important in order to avoid any kind of harm to such human subjects. Grimes et al. (2009, 2010, p. 79) provide a list of ethical issues and factors when conducting human subject based virtual world research:

• Psychological importance and emotional attachment to virtual objects

Human subjects may develop emotional attachment to virtual objects and identities. A human subject may start loving his virtual pet or virtual girlfriend to the extent of disturbing his real life. Human subjects may start giving more importance to their virtual assets such as virtual house, virtual money, virtual friends, and virtual family.

• Importance of privacy, confidentiality, anonymity, and reputation of users and their avatars

The virtual identity of human subject needs to be protected just like his/her real identity. The concepts of privacy, confidentially, and anonymity apply to virtual identities as well. In virtual world reputation has to be built and maintained, whether it is the reputation with respect to moral character, friendliness, technical skill or social behavior.

• Respect for the virtual world and the preservation of the social ecology

The social ecosystem in virtual world drives the interactions and growth. As in real life, users do not wish to venture into virtual worlds where the social ecosystem is missing. In real life we respect the social contracts and behaviors, such as not littering on streets or not playing loud music in public. Similarly in virtual worlds, researchers have to observe the respectfulness for virtual society such as taking consent before conducting research or before releasing information.

• Financial importance of virtual objects and virtual economy

Virtual economy is sustained by actions of users through their avatars. Thus researchers have to make sure that their actions do not bring virtual economy to a halt, just like mortgage crisis and other financial crisis in real life bring the real economy down.

• Inconsistencies of contractual documents in terms of legal restrictions

Human subject based research should ensure that there are no inconsistencies in contracts and other legal documents. Further, the restrictions posed by such documents on human documents should not take away their real life rights earned from so many centuries of human development and struggle.

• Issues of legal and social requirements of multiple jurisdictions and national boundaries

When using human subjects in virtual world research, it may be possible that human subjects from different geographical areas and different nations are participating. Researchers should be careful of legal requirements involving multiple jurisdictions imposed by different nations. Further, the area of jurisdiction should be clearly stated, in case a dispute or conflict arises. Similarly cross-cultural aspects should also be considered while using human subjects from across the national boundaries in virtual world research.

• Ethical considerations of artificial life and software agents

While using human subjects, researchers should be careful about the impact of a mixed use of human subjects with artificial software agents. How would human subjects respond to the artificial life of theirs and of other software agents, also popularly known as bots? It may be the case that bots are threatening to human subjects. If bots are not well designed, human subjects may develop anxiety and frustration while dealing with such bots in artificial life.

This list is not exhaustive; there is a need to consider other factors that are related to specific issues and concerns in other diverse domains where virtual worlds are being used as a research tool. For example, we provide additional factors to consider for using virtual worlds research in military context and K-12 Mobile Education.

Public and Private Space

A public space is considered accessible to anyone, and in context of virtual worlds public space includes a place, conversation or piece of information. On the other hand a private space is supposed to be only accessible by its intended audience, owner or originator. In this section a discussion pertaining to public and private spaces in virtual worlds is provided.

Research Question(s)

• Should the virtual worlds be considered public spaces?

• What areas, if any, are private?

• Does the data collected by virtual world hosting company belong to public domain?

• Can avatar communications, interactions, and activities be studied, recorded, analyzed, and reported without informed consent?

• What would be an appropriate way of getting informed consent from hundreds or thousands or millions of users?

Discussion

In virtual worlds research, private spaces are difficult to lockdown as they are in real world, because of the current nature of virtual worlds being open spaces accessible to everyone. Hence, it is critical for virtual world researchers to understand their responsibilities about respecting private spaces.

McKee and Porter (2009) report that concerns about public and private spaces on the Internet and online communities have been discussed in online and Internet research, and these concerns are similar to the concerns in the virtual worlds research. However, virtual worlds have different context for such earlier discussions to apply. For example, in virtual worlds, researchers collect data not only as a passive observer, but also most of the time researchers have to participate in the virtual world in order to study and analyze the elements of interactions. This is different from Internet and Online Communities context where the researchers usually collect data in form of logs and transcripts without actively participating in the community.

Rosenberg's work provides a detailed commentary with respect to public vs. private spaces in virtual worlds (Rosenberg, 2010). Authors propose the idea of private places, conversations, and information. They also recognize the public spaces with varying degrees of privacy. The authors suggest that researchers should determine the kind of relations that predominate the particular online context. Identifying the relationship types facilitates researchers in deciding the best approach to handle the issues of public and private space in presence of such relationships.

Military Related Virtual World Research

Military forces have been a leader in the use of virtual reality. In this section, questions are raised related to military use of virtual worlds research. The importance of raising these questions can be judged from the fact that military use can cause more harm than anything else since military is designed to use force for defensive actions.

Research Questions

• What are possible concerns from military's use of virtual world for research?

• Should it be bound by any ethical restrictions because military is using it for national interest?

• What are the issues military researchers need to be aware of while performing virtual world research?

Discussion

The military as a government entity provides a core function of protecting the states and country from external enemies, at times by using lethal force and weapons. Even though the core task of any military force is to defend, sometimes the military is also used to wage war against other countries. During peace times, the military engages in training exercises and may be called on to provide support for internal functions of state such as emergency services, social ceremonies and guarding important installations such as nuclear power plants or important infrastructure sources.

Military forces worldwide use Virtual Worlds for variety of purposes such as education and training, simulation of wartime or peacetime scenarios, “strategic, tactical and operational” analysis and planning, battlefield rehearsals, research and situational awareness (Aguiar & Monte, 2011; Allen & Demchak, 2011; Maxwell, Griffith, & Finkelstein, 2014; Thompson, 2011).

Ethics in military research of virtual worlds include traditional military ethics related questions such as:

• What are the overarching laws of engaging in war?

• What is the justification of using military force?

• What to target and how does the military select and justify targets for attack or defense?

• What kinds of weapons to use and how to decide whether weapons chosen are excessive or not?

• What are the laws protecting rights of countries who lose the war?

• What are the laws governing the handling of military force of losing side and handling of civilian and military personnel of opposing side imprisoned during war?

• What are the laws, standards, and processes governing violations of war ethics?

From an analysis of above listed questions, we see that use of virtual worlds for military research brings additional ethics related issues into the fold. Critically examining and answering these issues will make sure that military research in virtual worlds conforms and addresses ethical concerns. From examining the issues raised in military ethics, it’s evident that military force is designed to use force, however, the ethical discussions revolve around the use of force, or around amount of force and, or around the time of use. Military use mandates examination of such questions in virtual world research context.

No literature was located pertaining to virtual world research ethics in military use setting. The second research question, pertains to whether military should be allowed to break ethics guidelines, policies or principles set by virtual world. If military is given unrestricted access to virtual worlds, they may be able to pursue their research, but it may be harmful to other virtual world users. For example, military offices might want to use virtual worlds for doing data mining research, surveillance, and trouble detection. Another possible use might be to track down suspected users who are identified as potential threats. However, these threats might be unreal due to users assuming fake identities and avatars. Also, users might engage in meaningless fake conversations and unserious jokes assuming that virtual worlds is just a game play and fantasy, that might lead them to being suspects by virtual world research using virtual worlds for research. Having said that, we lay emphasis that military use of virtual worlds research needs to be investigated in detail further and readers are encouraged to read the literature from military ethics and other areas of virtual worlds research to apply to military context.

K-12 Related Virtual Worlds Research

Mobile learning communities and virtual worlds for K-12 has seen an increase in recent years. A large number of educators and institutions are discovering the potential of virtual worlds as a useful tool for classroom education. For some, virtual worlds are a supplemental tool, and for others it is replacement of real-world classroom. In this section we raise questions for ethical issues in mobile learning virtual worlds. Mobile learning virtual communities and virtual worlds, if not analyzed from ethics context, may cause potential harm among young users such as children, hence our motivation to study this context in the light of virtual world research.

Research Questions

• What considerations must be taken for parents and for their children?

• Does the content belong to the platform, the children or the parents?

• What should and shouldn’t be shared with parents?

Discussion

The availability of mobile devices has become more widespread because of their affordability and popularity. Mobile devices offer the advantages of portability, shared interaction, individual customization, interconnectivity and real time context sensitivity which allows the user to be connected anywhere at any time. The ubiquitous nature of these devices offers new learning experiences that are both flexible and pervasive.

An emerging area of research is the ability to connect virtual worlds to mobile learning platforms. During our search of popular and academic search engines we were not able to locate any literature that highlighted the ethical challenges of mobile learning virtual communities research. The literature that we found was limited to only technological and pedagogical concerns of mobile learning platforms (Dionisio, Iii, & Gilbert, 2013; Franklin, 2011; Pegrum, Oakley, & Faulkner, 2013; Pereira & Rodrigues, 2013; Rachel, Cobcroft, Towers, Smith, & Bruns, 2006; Sharples, Taylor, & Vavoula, 2005; Suslov, 2012). Since the current chapters is about ethics in virtual worlds research, hence we are not covering the above found literature in detail, however, reader is encouraged to read and bring some of those concepts in virtual worlds research ethics discussion.

An issue with the use of mobile devices is digital distraction which may have health considerations. Recent study suggests adverse health issues and sleep disturbances caused from the inappropriate use of mobile devices after hours (Munezawa et al., 2011). Aside from health concerns other ethical considerations for researchers include content and privacy rights for material collected from different context. This includes knowing what can be collected, from whom and how often. Special considerations for diverse age groups, religion and cultural backgrounds are also paramount considerations.

Mobile learning provides pervasive formal, informal and social learning but this access can also expose user content to external unauthorized users. Student records, images and institutional information must also be safe guarded at all times and proper training must consider how to handle data and how to report incidents. This is not limited to hackers but also to sharing content with friends or family which may be in violation of privacy rights.

Astronomy and Astrophysics Related Virtual World Research

Meta Institute of Computational Astrophysics (MICA) pioneered the use of Astrophysics Virtual World Research (Djorgovski et al., 2010). MICA is a professional scientific and educational, non-profit organization based in virtual worlds that researched problems in astrophysics using virtual world platforms such as SecondLife, OpenSim and ScienceSim. StellarSim (Henckel & Lopes, 2010; Lopes, 2009) is a plugin architecture framework for automated creation and population of stellar object in cosmological environments in virtual worlds. Thus the field of Astronomy and Astrophysics is embracing the virtual worlds for research purposes. From explorations of academic journals and search engines, literature discussing ethical concerns in virtual world research in the field of Astronomy and Astrophysics was found lacking, thus motivating to raise the questions listed below:

Research Questions

• What are ethical considerations for the astronomers and the astrophysicists in virtual worlds research?

• What are the ethical considerations in outreach research activities on virtual worlds?

• Do virtual worlds provide an accurate and stable platform for sharing and conducting astronomical simulations and research?

Discussion

Astronomy is a science mostly based on observations, theories, models and simulations. In astronomy, large-scale experiments are not feasible to conduct, as an example, researchers cannot go out in space and make two galaxies to collide to see the results, or they cannot explode a star to experiment if theory of star explosion is correct. Thus virtual worlds provide a natural stage for running these simulations and for conducting research.

The ethical issues and concerns in astronomical and astrophysical research in virtual worlds are not as grave as other fields discussed above. Such research is mostly simulations and does not affect the individuals or the avatars, as there is almost no interaction with the avatars or the individuals outside the research group. However, outreach research in virtual words does involve interacting with large community of virtual world users and thus the ethical context issues we discussed so far in this chapter apply to such research in virtual worlds.

Accuracy and stability of virtual world platform is a matter of concern in astronomical research. Since astronomical research relies on observations, models and simulations, thus accuracy and stability provided by research platform greatly affects the research results. The ethical context here relates to the fact that accuracy in research builds the trust and confidence in science and in researcher doing the research. It would be unethical to convey or report results from an unstable research.

Ethics in Second Life

In this section the adequacy of ethics in virtual world research is described for publicly available virtual worlds such as Second Life. Second Life has become a popular platform for usage among diverse users, hence, many different kinds of virtual worlds research is pursued in Second Life platform. This raises the questions of ethics and protecting the users from harm.

Research Questions

• Are the standards, guidelines and policies provided by Second Life adequate for researchers?

• Do they cover all aspects of researchers' use of Second Life?

Asking and discussing such questions are important because the standards, guidelines and policies provided by Second Life seem to be designed only for users, and not for researchers.

Discussion

Second Life is a 3D Interactive Virtual World developed and promoted by Linden Research Inc., also known as Linden Labs. The Second Life Environment is known as Second Life Grid, where virtual residents create and own objects. A user may register a free basic account or a paid premium account that comes with extra features and capabilities. The Second Life Grid may be accessed by Second Life Viewer or many of the freely available open source viewers. A viewer is almost like a 3D browser for virtual worlds.

Second Life Community Standards are provided with the goal of respectful treatment of each other without harassment. These standards list six behaviors that are considered unethical, hence result in punishment by suspension or in case of repeat offenses, expulsion from Second Life: Intolerance, Harassment, Assault, Disclosure, Adult Regions, Groups and Listing, and Disturbing the Peace.

Second Life's official wiki provides guidelines of ethical behavior to be observed at all times while using the virtual worlds. Also, Second Life’s etiquette available at their wiki describes the manners and customs for living in Second Life. Reader is encouraged to read the latest guidelines from SecondLife’s website for more details.

These etiquettes and community standards (mentioned above) are applicable to researchers participating in SecondLife to research about Virtual Worlds, just like any other SecondLife Resident. However, there is not enough evidence or research that these standards cover the special context of virtual world research itself. Perhaps Second Life hosting company itself is conducting virtual world research and does not want to impose any restrictions on themselves.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

As the virtual worlds continues to be used by researchers of various diverse fields for research, the need to address the concerns and issues related to ethics in such research has become a fertile ground of ethics research. In this regards, various professional societies have their own code of ethics. These codes of ethics cover both the practice of profession. Since the area of virtual worlds research ethics is in its nascent stage and a paucity literature is available, it is important to extend this research by evaluating code of ethics from various professional societies related to virtual world researchers, such as:

• Association of Computing Machinery

• IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) Computer Society

• Association of Information Systems

• American Psychological Association

• Association of Virtual Worlds

• Association of Internet Researchers

• American Association for Advancement of Science

The playgrounds for virtual worlds research are diverse and broad. Hence gaining insight into the awareness of code of ethics among these researchers, and how they are encountering and solving ethical issues in virtual world research, is an important research direction that has not been addressed.

Continued research on ethics in virtual worlds environments needs to be explored in the diverse fields such as Military, Education, Medicine, Astronomy, Engineering, and Architecture etc. Additional synergies in such multi-disciplinary research can be accomplished by sharing experience of researchers from diverse fields and skill areas.

CONCLUSION

Virtual worlds have penetrated many different fields for modeling, simulation, and analysis while conducting research. This increased usage has led to the questions and concerns related to ethical issues in such research. As discussed in this chapter, virtual worlds pose different and newer challenges for the field of ethics.

Studying ethics is very important for researchers and users of virtual worlds. Awareness of issues related to ethics in virtual worlds research enables the researcher to better design his or her experiments such that harmful effects can be avoided. This awareness is not only important for researchers, but also for ethics committees examining and evaluating requests related to ethical clearance for virtual world research.

In this work, we have discussed some critical issues in virtual world research ethics related to moral and ethical context, human subjects, public and private spaces, military research and Second Life. The big questions to explore are the existence of moral and ethical context for objects, subjects, and interactions in virtual world. We raised some interesting issues with respect to the usage of human subjects in virtual worlds. Although everything in virtual worlds can be in a public space by virtue of being online, but researchers should respect the private spaces within the context. We also commented on use of virtual worlds and ethical issues for domains of military research and astronomical research. Finally we presented issues related to effectiveness of guidelines issued by Second Life for virtual world researchers.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors acknowledge Mr. Doug Maxwell of the Simulation and Training Technology Center (STTC) of United States Army Research Laboratory for generously providing computational resources and support. The authors would also like to acknowledge Dr. Brian Goldiez, Dr. Paul Wiegand and Dr. Glenn Martin from Advanced Research Computing Center at University of Central Florida for sharing their thoughts and ideas.

REFERENCES

Aguiar, S., & Monte, P. (2011). Virtual Worlds for C2 Design, Analysis and Experimentation. Proceedings of the16th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2011), Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, June 21-23, 2011.

Allen, P. D., & Demchak, C. D. (2011). Applied Virtual Environments: Applications of Virtual Environments to Government, Military and Business Organizations. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 4(1).

Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words . Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001

Balula, A., & Moreira, A. (2014). e-Teaching evaluation in higher education. In Evaluation of Online Higher Education: Learning, Interaction and Technology (pp. 1–11). Springer. doi:doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05425-4

Bell, M. W. (2008). Toward a Definition of “Virtual Worlds” . Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1).

Bynum, T. W. (2000). The foundation of computer ethics. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society , 30(2), 6–13. doi:10.1145/572230.572231

Bynum, T. W. (2001). Computer ethics: Its birth and its future. Ethics and Information Technology , 3(2), 109–112. doi:10.1023/A:1011893925319

Bynum, T. W., & Rogerson, S. (2003). Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility: Introductory Text and Readings . Cambridge, MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing.

Coleman, K. G. (2007). Casuistry and Computer Ethics. Metaphilosophy , 38(4), 471–488. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2007.00494.x

Coleman, K. G. (2010). Computing and Moral Responsibility. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/computing-responsibility/

Consalvo, M. (2003). It’s No Videogame: News Commentary and the Second Gulf War. Proceedings Level Up Conference. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.77.44

Dibbell, J. (1993). A Rape in Cyberspace. The Village Voice.

Dibbell, J. (1994). A Rape in Cyberspace: How an Evil Clown, a Haitian Trickster Spirit, Two Wizards, and a Cast of Dozens Turned a Database into a Society. Annual Survey of American Law , 1994, 471–481.

Diener S. Windsor J. Bodily D. (2009). Design and development of clinical simulations in SecondLife.Proceedings of the EDUCAUSE Australasia Conference (pp. 1–13).

Dionisio, J. D. N., Iii, W. G. B., & Gilbert, R. (2013). 3D Virtual worlds and the metaverse. ACM Computing Surveys , 45(3), 1–38. doi:10.1145/2480741.2480751

Djorgovski, S. G., Hut, P., McMillan, S., Vesperini, E., Knop, R., Farr, W., & Graham, M. J. (2010). Exploring the use of virtual worlds as a scientific research platform: The meta-institute for computational astrophysics (MICA). In Facets of virtual worlds (pp. 29–43). Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-11743-5_3

Duran J. Villagrasa S. (2013). Teaching 3D arts using game engines for engineering and architecture.Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality (VAMR 2013) held as part of HCI International (HCII 2013) (pp. 113–121). Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-39420-1_13

Floridi, L. (1999). Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology , 1(1), 33–52. doi:10.1023/A:1010018611096

Floridi, L. (2004). Open Problems in the Philosophy of Information. Metaphilosophy , 35(4), 554–582. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2004.00336.x

Floridi, L. (2005). Information ethics, its nature and scope. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society , 35(2), 3. doi:10.1145/1111646.1111649

Floridi, L. (Ed.). (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics . Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511845239

Floridi, L., & Sanders, J. W. (2001). Artificial evil and the foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology , 3(1), 55–66. doi:10.1023/A:1011440125207

Franklin, T. (2011). Mobile learning: At the tipping point. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology , 10(4), 261–275.

Gomes, T., Abade, T., Campos, J. C., Harriso, M. D., & Silva, J. L. (2014). A Virtual Environment based Serious Game to Support Health Education. ICST Transactions on Ambient Systems , 1(3), e5. doi:10.4108/amsys.1.3.e5

Grimes, J. M., Fleischmann, K. R., & Jaeger, P. T. (2009). Virtual guinea pigs: Ethical implications of human subjects research in virtual worlds. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 2(1).

Grimes, J. M., Fleischmann, K. R., & Jaeger, P. T. (2010). Research ethics and virtual worlds . In Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds.), Emerging Ethical Issues of Life in Virtual Worlds (pp. 73–99). Information Age Publishing.

Harshman, E. M., Gilsinan, J. F., Fisher, J. E., & Yeager, F. C. (2005). Professional Ethics in a Virtual World: The Impact of the Internet on Traditional Notions of Professionalism. Journal of Business Ethics , 58(1-3), 227–236. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-1417-4

Henckel, A., & Lopes, C. V. (2010). Stellarsim: A plug-in architecture for scientific visualizations in virtual worlds. In Facets of Virtual environments (pp. 106–120). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-11743-5_9

Himma, K. E. (2007). Foundational issues in information ethics. Library Hi Tech , 25(1), 79–94. doi:10.1108/07378830710735876

Himma, K. E., & Tavani, H. T. (Eds.). (2008). The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics . John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9780470281819

Johnson, D. G. (1997). Ethics online. Communications of the ACM , 40(1), 60–65. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=242857.242875doi:10.1145/242857.242875

Johnson, D. G. (2005). Computer Ethics . In Frey, R. G., & Heath Wellman, C. (Eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics . Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing; doi:10.1002/9780470996621.ch45

Johnson, D. G. (2009). Computer Ethics (4th ed.). Pearson.

Kerbs, R. W. (2005). Social and ethical considerations in virtual worlds. The Electronic Library , 23(5), 539–546. doi:10.1108/02640470510631254

Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 111(24), 8788–8790. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320040111

Lopes, C. V. (2009). The massification and webification of systems’ modeling and simulation with virtual worlds. Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering (pp. 63–70). ACM; Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1595708

Maxwell, D., Griffith, T., & Finkelstein, N. M. (2014). Use of Virtual Worlds in the Military Services as Part of a Blended Learning Strategy . In Hale, K. S., & Stanney, K. M. (Eds.), Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation and Applications (2nd ed., pp. 959–1000). CRC Press. doi:10.1201/b17360-45

McKee, H. A., & Porter, J. E. (2009). Playing a Good Game : Ethical Issues in Researching MMOGs and Virtual Worlds. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 2(1).

Munezawa, T., Kaneita, Y., Osaki, Y., Kanda, H., Minowa, M., Suzuki, K., & Ohida, T. (2011). The association between use of mobile phones after lights out and sleep disturbances among Japanese adolescents: A nationwide cross-sectional survey. Sleep , 34(8), 1013–1020. doi:doi:10.5665/sleep.1152

Noorman, M. (2014). Computing and Moral Responsibility. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/computing-responsibility/

Patrignani, N., & Whitehouse, D. (2014, July 30 – August 1). Slow Tech: The Bridge between Computer Ethics and Business Ethics. In K. Kimppa, D. Whitehouse, T. Kuusela, & J. Phahlamohlaka (Eds.), Proceedings of 11th IFIP TC 9 International Conference on Human Choice and Computers (HCC11 2014), Turku, Finland (Vol. 431, pp. 92–106). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-44208-1

Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption of mobile handheld technologies in western Australian independent schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 29(1), 66–81. doi:doi:10.1234/ajet.v29i1.64

Pereira, O. R. E., & Rodrigues, J. J. P. C. (2013). Survey and Analysis of Current Mobile Learning Applications and Technologies. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(2), 27:1–27:35. doi:10.1145/2543581.2543594

Powers, T. M. (2003). Real Wrongs in Virtual Communities. Ethics and Information Technology , 5(4), 191–198. doi:10.1023/B:ETIN.0000017737.56971.20

Rachel, S., Cobcroft, R., Towers, S., Smith, J., & Bruns, A. (2006). Mobile Learning in Review: Opportunities and Challenges for Learners, Teachers, and Institutions. Proceedings of the Online Learning and Teaching (OLT) Conference 2006. doi:10.1016/S0190-9622(06)01179-0

Rawls, J. (1955). Two concepts of rules. The Philosophical Review , 64(1), 3–32. doi:10.2307/2182230

Reynolds, R. (2012). Ethics and practice in virtual worlds . In Sageng, J. R., Fossheim, H., & Larsen, T. M. (Eds.), The Philosophy of Computer Games (Vol. 7, pp. 143–158). Springer; doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4249-9_10

Robinson, D., & Garratt, C. (2000). Introducing Ethics . Totem Books.

Rosenberg, A. (2010). Virtual world research ethics and the private/public distinction. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 3, 23–36.

Scacchi, W., Brown, C., & Nies, K. (2012). Exploring the Potential of Virtual Worlds for Decentralized Command and Control Point of Contact. Proceedings of the 17th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2012). DTIC Document.

Schroeder, R. (2008). Defining virtual worlds and virtual environments. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1).

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a Theory of Mobile Learning. Proceedings of mLearn, 1, 1–9.

Southern, M. (2001). The cultural study of games: More than just games. Retrieved from http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~anthonyb/itp101/articles/cultural.doc

Stephenson, N. (1992). Snow Crash . Random House Publishing Group.

Suslov, N. (2012). Krestianstvo SDK towards end-user mobile 3D virtual learning environment. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing, C5 2012 (pp. 9–14). doi:10.1109/C5.2012.8

Thompson, C. W. (2011). Next-Generation Virtual Worlds. IEEE Internet Computing , 15(1), 60–65. doi:10.1109/MIC.2011.15

Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds.), (2009). Emerging Ethical Issues of Life in Virtual Worlds . Charlotte, NC, USA: Information Age Publishing.

Warren, S., & Lin, L. (2012). Ethical considerations for learning game, simulation, and virtual world design and development . In Yang, H. H., & Yuen, S. C.-Y. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in Virtual Worlds and Environments (Vol. 1). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-762-3.ch001

Yang, H. H., & Yuen, C.-Y. S. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in Virtual Worlds and Environments (Vol. 2). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Ethics: Ethics is a branch of philosophy that conceptualizes right and wrong conduct in moral context. Ethics deals with morality, good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, virtue vs. vice, justice, legality, and crime.

Metaverse: Metaverse is the collective sum of all virtual worlds, virtual reality and augmented reality on the Internet.

MMOG: Massively Multiplayer Online Game refers to Internet or online based games that allow hundreds or thousands of players to play the game at the same time, mostly in competitive or collaborative pursuit of some goals.

MMORPG: Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games refers to Internet or online based games that encourage role-play among players such that players can choose and play different roles from ones available.

MMOSG: Massively Multiplayer Online Social Games refers to Internet or online based games that allow players to interact with social goals and practices such as community building and trading.

MUVE: Multi User Virtual Environment refers to virtual environments that can be accessed by multiple users at the same time and allow users to be aware of each other’s’ presence and interact with each other.

NPC: Non-player character is a persona or character in virtual games that is not controlled by any human player. Non-players characters are automated programs that usually employ artificial intelligence techniques.

Opensimulator: Opensimulator is an open-source software program for simulation of the virtual worlds and the metaverse. The Opensimulator program mainly refers to the server component that is hosted on the Internet. The users connect to this server using Openserver or compatible client program in order to participate and play in the virtual world hosted by Opensimulator.

Private Space: A private space is supposed to be only accessed by its intended audience, owner or originator.

Public Space: A public space is accessible to anyone whether it is a place, conversation or piece of information.

ScienceSim: ScienceSim is a virtual world grid hosted using the OpenSimulator platform. ScienceSim is created for scientists to showcase science-based visualizations to the users.

SecondLife: SecondLife is a 3D Interactive Virtual World developed and promoted by Linden Research Inc., also known as Linden Labs. Users can use SecondLife or compatible client program for accessing the virtual world. Although anyone can register for free, and there are lots of virtual world areas and objects available for free, but users can also buy, sell and trade stuff using virtual money called Linden dollars.

SecondLife Grid: The SecondLife Environment is known as Second Life Grid, where virtual residents create and own objects.

Virtual World: A virtual world is computer-based interactive simulation environment where users take the form of an avatar, own virtual assets, perform virtual actions and interact with other users and computer-controlled actors known as bots or non-player characters (NPC).

Chapter 13

Integrating Technological Innovations to Enhance the Teaching-Learning Process

• Judi Simmons Estes Park University, USA

• Amber Dailey-Hebert Park University, USA

• Dong Hwa Choi Park University, USA

ABSTRACT

Virtual reality is one of the latest technologies to be integrated into the teaching-learning process and it holds significant potential to enhance instructional processes and impact student learning. Historically, technology integration for instruction has been initiated primarily within institutions of higher education, while K-12 integration has been gradual to become part of mainstream education. Likewise, as teachers play a pivotal role in the process of technology integration, it is imperative to train teachers not only in computer literacy, but also in the requisite technological knowledge and skills needed to use technology in instruction. Furthermore, such training should be accompanied by support for teachers in developing a pedagogy and self-efficacy for technology integration. Self-efficacy can also serve as a foundation of motivation for teachers to keep abreast of new technologies and to determine how and when to use such emergent tools to enhance instruction.

AN INTRODUCTION TO VIRTUAL REALITY

Virtual Reality (VR) is a computer-generated environment designed to simulate three-dimensional (3D) physical environments that provide user interaction. Three-dimensional immersive virtual worlds are one of the most exciting technologies being used today and have been successfully implemented to promote learning in K-12 and higher education (Dickey, 2005a). Immersive VR, such as Oculus Rift and Magic Lead, have transformed education due to the ability to transport conventional learning environment to any virtual learning environment imaginable (Afshar, 2014). While these emergent technologies offer a unique venue to enact learning and practice skills, they also require teacher training, support, and opportunities for experimentation. Therefore, it is important to understand the broad scope through defining VR, identifying characteristics of VR, and describing VR in practice.

Defining Virtual Reality

While there are countless uses for VR in education and industry, there are equally as many definitions; definitions of VR have shifted as the related hardware and software applications have evolved, moving from a single user interface to massively multiplayer online worlds (MMOW). For example, in 1996 Schroeder first posited that computer-generated display allows or compels users to have a sense of being present in an environment, other than the one they are actually in, and to interact with that environment (Schroeder, 2008). By 2003, Sherman and Craig expanded the definition of VR when they defined it as “a medium composed of interactive computer simulation that senses the participant’s position and actions and replaces or augments the feedback to one or more senses, giving the feeling of being mentally immersed or present in the simulation (a virtual world)” (p. 13). More recently, Kapp and O’Driscoll (2010) defined a virtual world as an “immersed 3D virtual environment in which a learner acts through an avatar to engage with the other avatars for the explicit purpose of learning” (p. 55). Hence, as the capabilities and applications of the VR functions have expanded, definitions and instructional uses for VR have changed. Often, visual, auditory, and other perceptual stimuli are incorporated within software and hardware applications of technology in a sequence of programmed events to which a person is expected to react.

The environment created through virtual reality is referred to as a virtual world (VW), virtual world environment (VWE), and/or a virtual world learning environment (VWLE). Simply, a VWE is an artificial physical environment created using digital technology viewed two-dimensionally (2D); a complex 3D environment contains digital objects and human avatars in real-time. VWLE’s can accommodate a wider range of learning styles and goals, encourage collaborative and resource-based learning and allow greater sharing and re-use of resources (Britain, 1999). These VR environments are used to support multiple learning styles and encourage such collaborative exchange through social learning as well. This focus evolved when innovators of VR noticed that users were responsive to the collaborative community and in 2003, the immersive virtual world of Second Life was launched (Linden Lab, 2013), allowing users opportunities for interaction, exploration, and collaboration. In Second Life, the user typically has some digital representation of self, known as an avatar. Users create their own identity and embody themselves through their avatars and by representing self as avatars, users report feeling socially and psychologically connected (Biocca, Harms, & Burgoon, 2003). Additionally, users can interact and communicate with each other in real time by using voice and text chat and/or gestures. It is notable that Tokel and Karrats (2014) found Second Life was the most commonly used platform given that it was used in 85% of virtual world studies. As VWE’s have evolved so have the characteristics of VR.

Characteristics of Virtual Reality

Designs of virtual worlds are quite diverse, ranging from the replication of real classrooms to imaginary worlds (Prasolova-Førland, 2008). Dickey (2005a) posited that 3-D virtual worlds typically share three features: 1) the illusion of 3-D space, 2) avatars that serve as visual representations of users and 3) an interactive chat tool for users to communicate with one another. Five years later, Hew and Cheung (2010) added a fourth feature; 4) the ability for a user to ‘act’ on the virtual world; this added feature provides the user with more opportunity for active engagement within the virtual world environment. For example, objects have properties that allow them to be taken or dropped, which makes it possible for students to learn by doing rather than simply learning by listening to the instructor or reading assigned content in a text. Bojonova (2011) suggested that through avatars, users can navigate, explore, create, and communicate in a virtual space as if it were an extension of the real world, but without the physical limitations and risk of the real world. One of the most attractive features of virtual worlds, and their use in learning environments, is the ability to extend beyond mere text and lecture to promote active learning, the application of knowledge and skills, and the ability to put learning into practice. Hence, VWs serve as optimal learning environments to promote the application of both content knowledge and procedural knowledge in a safe space (Noteborn, Dailey-Hebert, Bohle-Carbonell, & Gijselars, 2013).

Furthermore, VR promotes ‘knowledge creating cultures’ (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2006), which allow learners to not only collaborate virtually, but to create and produce new knowledge and experiences together. Regardless of specific hardware, software, or uses for VR, Smart, Cascio and Paffendof (2007) found that while VWs may appear in different forms, they possess a number of recurrent features:

• Persistence of an in-world environment.

• Shared space allowing multiple users to participate simultaneously.

• Virtual embodiment in the form of an avatar (a 3-D representation of the self).

• Interactions that occur between users and objects in a 3-D environment.

• Immediacy of action such that interactions occur in real time.

• Similarities to the real world (topography, movement, physics); a sense of being in the environment.

Collectively, these features influence and have been influenced by the practices that evolved in using VR.

Virtual Reality in Practice

In 2007, the Horizon Report predicted a two to three year time frame for the adoption of virtual worlds in education (The New Media Consortium, 2007). Similarly, the subsequent Australia- New Zealand Horizon Report enthusiastically identified virtual worlds as “spaces for truly immersive forms of learning and for a level of collaboration that is erasing traditional boundaries and borders rapidly” (Johnson, Levine, & Smith, 2008, p. 6). In 2008 and again in 2009, virtual worlds in higher education were at the peak of their hype cycle (Lowendahl et al., 2008) and there was a prediction that 80% of Internet users would have an avatar in a virtual world by the end of 2011 (Stamford, 2007). However, despite the persistence of interest, and with the development of many teaching facilities in VWs, teaching in these environments has not become mainstream, and the numbers of educators using such environments for teaching is in fact decreasing. This is evidenced by the number of underutilized and disused builds that are seen in virtual worlds (Gregory et al., 2015). According to Tokel and Karratas (2014), in analyzing studies from 2008 through 2013, the results showed that participants in VW studies were higher education students (53%), adult learners (20%), primary students (7%), and secondary students (4%). While innovative uses of VR technologies is reportedly lagging in education, the potential and promise for innovative uses of such technologies is evident in fields other than education.

Today, outside of education, VR is being used to help rehabilitate stroke victims (Saposnik & Levin, 2011), to enhance the design and manufacturing process in industry (Ong & Nee, 2013), to train medical staff in a virtual clinical learning lab (Pulse Simulation Technology, 2008), to take a jury through a crime scene (Hullinger, 2015), and to customize a virtual shopping experience and explore merchandise from the comfort of one’s own home (Chang, 2015). The possibilities, applications, and uses for virtual reality continue to be explored and continue to enhance these domains as a result. While VR and related technological knowledge has grown exponentially in the past two decades, the depth and breadth of knowledge on this subject remains relatively shallow and requires further development and research, particularly as it relates to educational applications. These applications are important to note because applications of VR in fields other than education may have educational applications.

EDUCATORS USE OF VIRTUAL REALITY

The world of education has changed from an orderly world of disciplines and courses to a world in which communication technologies are increasingly important. It is clear that we see a major restructuring of our social, industrial and educational institutions, and an increased reliance on telecommunications for work and education (Friedman, 2005;Molnar, 1990; Pink, 2006). When properly applied, technology can provide an effective means for learning; technologies are now available to significantly augment the skills that are necessary for the dynamic and globally connected workforce that exists today. For instance, within teacher preparation programs, the flexible and low impact affordance of a multi user virtual environment (MUVE) can allow teacher candidates to concentrate on certain discrete aspects of being a teacher, such as classroom management, conducting parent-teacher conferences, and application of instructional strategies without the need to attend to the myriad of other activities and responsibilities teachers take on during a normal teaching session or workday (Yilmaz, Topu, Goktas, & Coban, 2013).

The Importance of Pedagogy, Content, and Technology

Even though multiple benefits of using technology have been recognized, it needs to be noted that teachers’ roles are easily misconceptualized or minimized when education technology is used. With every new technology tool or application, it is still teachers who figure out how to use technology for student learning According to Umbach and Wawrzynski (2005), “faculty behaviors and attitudes affect students profoundly, which suggests that faculty members may play the single-most important role in student learning” (p. 176). In order to use technology effectively in the classroom, teachers should be able to plan out a whole teaching process with relevant knowledge and skills in technology. These knowledge and skills have been discussed in a variety of ways including (1) technological pedagogical content knowledge as well as relevant knowledge of information and communication (AACTE, 2008) and (2) pedagogical technology integration of content knowledge (Brantley-Dias, Kinuthia, Shoffner, DeCastro, & Rigole, 2007).

The development of innovative technology-integrated pedagogy lies in a teacher's interpretation of the newly learned technology and the value of that technology to the instructional and learning process. Teachers are constantly making decisions about what learning experiences are going to most efficiently and effectively deliver content to students and which technology will augment the student experience. Huang, Rauch, and Liaw (2010) argued that, “educators or instructional designers, as they apply a new VR technology to educational settings, need to consider carefully how pedagogy or a learning theory may influence the learning process” (p. 1172). Studies on the integration of technology into classrooms have shown the importance of the presence of technology as well as the pedagogy-supported use of technology (Bozkurt, 2011). Indeed, the power to develop innovative technology supported pedagogy lies in the teacher's interpretation of the technology's value for instruction and leaning in the classroom. This interpretation is mediated by past experience and accumulated knowledge (Bransford & Schwartz, 1999). Zhao, Pugh, and Sheldon (2002) noted that technological innovations perceived to be far from teacher's own practice are less likely to be established which means that effective technology integration depends on a consideration of the interactions among technology, content, and pedagogy. Teachers’ pedagogical knowledge on how to utilize technology for particular content in a certain context plays a critical role in learning outcomes. For example, contrary to common assumptions that assert beginning teachers more easily integrate technology, experienced teachers who often have less technology experience are more poised to integrate technology simply because they possess more knowledge and experience with making connections between learning and the contexts of teaching (Zech, Gause-Vega, Bray, Secules, & Goldman, 2000).

If teachers are going to be able to prepare their students to be technologically capable, they need to have, at the very least, basic technology skills. This expectation is reflected in International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE, 2008) National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (NETS-T), which were first published in 1998. As seen below, the NETS-T define a set of pedagogical knowledge and skills that teacher are expected to demonstrate in the digital age.

• Facilitate and inspire student learning and creativity: Teachers use their knowledge of subject matter, teaching and learning, and technology to facilitate experiences that advance student learning, creativity, and innovation in both face-to-face and virtual environments.

• Design and develop digital age learning experiences and assessments: Teachers design, develop, and evaluate authentic learning experiences and assessments incorporating contemporary tools and resources to maximize content learning in context and to develop the knowledge, skills, and attitudes identified in the Standards.

• Model digital age work and learning: Teachers exhibit knowledge, skills, and work processes representative of an innovative professional in a global and digital society.

• Promote and model digital citizenship and responsibility: Teachers understand local and global societal issues and responsibilities in an evolving digital culture and exhibit legal and ethical behavior in their professional practices.

• Engage in professional growth and leadership: Teachers continuously improve their professional practice, model lifelong learning, and exhibit leadership in their school and professional community by promoting and demonstrating the effective use of digital tools and resources. (ISTE, 2015)

The importance of teacher competency in applying technology with sound pedagogical knowledge for particular content is well recognized by Cerniamo et al. (2010, p. 10). According to Cerniamo et al. in order for “optimal” technology integration to occur, teachers need to know how to:

• Identify which technologies are needed to support specific curricular goals.

• Specify how the tools will be used to help students meet and demonstrate those goals.

• Enable students to use appropriate technologies in all phases of the learning process including exploration, analysis, and production.

• Select and use appropriate technologies to address needs, solve problems, and resolve issues related to their own professional practice and growth.

To successfully teach in VWs, educators must not only learn the skills to use the space but also to understand ways in which pedagogy is involved (Smith-Robbins, 2011). For example, upon initial use of a VR tool, educators often use virtual worlds primarily as a replacement to an instructional strategy typically used, in order to first explore the feasibility of using the virtual tool, before using VWs technology as a new and innovative experience (Hughes, 2005). However, it is important for educators to move beyond using technology simply to support lecture-based instruction; using VWs as a replacement technology is not recommended best practice (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2007).

Further expanding upon these pedagogical understandings, “heutagogy” is a learner-centered approach that builds on the theory of constructivism and self-determined learning (Hase, 2013). In more recent years, heutagogy has seen innovation through the application of VR and other e-learning to apply competencies to situations through learner generated content, personal empowerment, and learner centric training programs suggesting the importance of the learner and educator simultaneously in such co-created, co-experienced learning environments (Blaschke & Hase, 2015).

Virtual Reality to Support Student Learning

Today’s learners are ‘digital natives’ (Prensky, 2001) who have grown accustomed to the integration of technology in all aspects of life: for entertainment, communication, consumerism, and education. What makes digital natives unique is their ability to create and produce new knowledge in globally networked collaborative groups, rather than simply absorbing existing knowledge. As such, the experiential elements of learning in the VW are particularly appealing. Falloon (2009) stated, “The multimedia capabilities of virtual learning environments cater for a range of learning preferences and styles, enhancing engagement and enabling learners to set their own pace and blend the range of audio, video, graphic and text-based resources to match their own informational needs” (p. 112). This type of individualized learning pathway offers a more customized educational experience that is more specific to the learner’s needs. For educational purposes, 3-D virtual worlds make accessing information easier, and can increase the motivation of users by engaging them actively in a learning process (Mishra, 2009).

While VR can provide customized learning for the individual, it also offers opportunities for collaborative knowledge sharing and exchange, each of which is valued by today’s learners. Therefore, features of 3-D environments, such as interactions between users and between individual users and the environment, increase the users’ learning capacities through participation in the provided activities, and the feeling of truly being in the environment (Mishra, 2009). Student engagement is influenced by the feeling students get when they are present in the classroom and connected with peers and teacher. The concept of presence has been defined by Slater and Wilbur (1997) as the subjective feeling and psychological sense of “being present” in the VR environment. Slater and Steed (2000) suggested that a feeling of presence determines the level of immersion felt by each individual; level of immersion relates to a sense of feeling and behaving as if in a real world environment and the consequent learning that occurs from the VR experience. The sense of being present can vary person-to-person while in the same digital environment (Bowman & McMahan, 2007), however, the concept of presence is a key element in research related to VR effectiveness (Schuemie, Van Der Straaten, Krijn, &Van der Mast, 2001). In VW 3D environments, users enjoy exploring the simulated environment simultaneously with other users. In a sense, participation in the virtual environment is a social activity, while separated in real-life, a connectivity occurs through the interactions that the avatars have with one another and/or through exploring the VLE with others (Biocca, Harms, & Burgoon, 2003). Users who have fun, are interactive, and cooperate within 3-D virtual worlds tend to be more motivated (Arya, Hartwick, Graham, & Nowlan, 2011) and pay attention for longer durations of time (Bouta, Retalis, & Paraskeva, 2012). Through the use of collaborative communities, which are found in VR, the value of peers as lifelong teachers is often demonstrated.

Promoting Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

Technology can support the development of problem-solving and critical thinking, as well as working within a collaborative community. There has been a major paradigm shift in education from theories of “learning” to theories of “cognition.” Cognitive science approaches teaching and learning in a different way. It addresses how the human, as an information processor, functions and uses information. Rather than focusing on teaching facts through expository lectures or demonstrations, the emphasis is, instead, on developing higher-order, thinking and problem-solving skills. The cognitive approach is important because it recognizes human information processing strengths and weaknesses, and the limits of human perception and memory in coping with the information explosion. It focuses, instead, on organizing information to fit human capacity, and has changed the emphasis in education from learning to thinking (Gagne, 1980; Reinick, 1983). In information processing, VR contributes to make information concrete, highly visual, and/or spatial, especially for those who experience difficulties in processing merely abstract, verbal, or lineal information or those who prefer graphs, images, or more interactive ways of data collection. VR provides highly interactive and direct operations by the action of the learner (Barilli, 2012).

Educators in higher education positively influence student cognitive growth, development, and persistence of college; and model intellectual work, promote mastery of knowledge and skills, and help students make connections between their studies and post-graduate plans (NSSE, 2014).

Living in an unscripted future, in which it is difficult to predict, anticipate, or prepare for the uncertain workplace that waits, it becomes more imperative to strengthen such technological competencies (Dailey-Hebert, Donnelli-Sallee, & DiPadova-Stocks, 2008). For example, Thomas Frey (a senior Futurist at the DaVinci institute and Google’s top rated futurist speaker) identified 55 jobs of the future jobs that do not even exist today but which will most likely be created by 2020. Some jobs include: augmented reality architects, global systems architects, business colony managers, avatar designers, etc. (Frey, n.d.). The majority of these 55 jobs would benefit from experience learning and working in VR. More recently, researchers have found that learning in the VR environment may even translate to greater success in the workplace (Heili & Michel, 2011). Furthermore, as knowledge workers today have more flexibility and mobility in the spaces in which they work (Moravec, 2008), becoming proficient in such tools will be a marketable and important skillset to possess. While technology can increase productivity of students and teachers, it can be related to more than productivity when integrated with instruction. These are skills that are also beneficial in the workplace, particularly one that requires a more highly skilled work force with a broader education and a greater familiarity with the tools and theories of science. Competitiveness depends not only on the discovery of new innovations, but the speed at which that knowledge is transmitted through our educational systems, to create highly skilled workers who can apply knowledge, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. To achieve the kinds of technology uses required for 21st century teaching and learning, educators need to understand how to use technology to facilitate meaningful learning (Lai, 2008), and may need professional development to gain the requisite skills.

The Benefits of Professional Development

Technology is not consistently being used to support student-centered active learning and other kinds of instruction believed to be most powerful (ISTE, 2008; Partnership for 21st Century Learning, 2007). Rogers (2003) theorized that individual adoption rates of technological innovations can be visually represented with a bell-shaped curve with representing five categories of users: (a) innovators (2.5%), (b) early adopters (13.5%), (c) early majority (34%), (d) late majority (34%), and (e) laggards (2.5%). Professional development and training opportunities can support all educators but especially those who are classified as ‘late majority’ ‘laggards’ in adopting new technologies.

Working with colleagues in a professional learning community can provide a support system that can be invaluable to a teacher learning a new set of technology skills (Ertmer, Ottenbreit-Leftwich, & York, 2006). Participating in a professional learning community can be a supportive experience for teachers and contribute to their confidence and sense of self-efficacy (Putnam & Borko, 2000). ISTE placed an emphasis on collegial community in a white paper, Technology, Coaching, and Community, which emphasizes the value of having a technology coach within a school setting (Beglau et al., 2011). The technology coach essentially establishes and nurtures a professional learning community of teachers. These learning communities enable their members to share ideas and resources among each other, to create a shared knowledge base of best practices, and to provide “a sense of collective accountability” (Wong, 2010, p. 633).

ISTE (2011, p. 16) offers ten strategies in creating a transformational professional development model inclusive of technology, coaching and community.

• Learning with Technology Is More Important Than Learning about Technology: Technology should be used to increase skills and expand or enhance learning across all

• skills and subject areas.

• Relevance Wins: Adult learners learn best when knowledge is relevant. Position your program as an opportunity for teachers to improve their craft based upon their own needs and interests.

• Keep Millennial in Mind: Develop a millennial point of view. Give younger teachers learning opportunities that meet their learning styles: collaborative, on-line, and technology-driven.

• Relationships Matter: Allow coaches to build trust one teacher at a time. Your collaborative, technology-rich coaching presence should be perceived as a personal trainer, not an unwelcomed monitor.

• Be Inclusive: Don’t work on your own. Tap into your school or district’s professional development agenda when developing your technology coaching plan.

• Trust the Process: Implementation dips are likely to occur, yet sticking with a long-term plan that allows for iterative improvement over time yields stronger results than one-off skill-building events.

• Share Your Progress: One of the key indicators an administrator uses to determine the success of a professional development program is seeing that teachers are actually implementing what they are learning. Having an active communication plan to report progress and successes is crucial.

• Make the Most of Your Time: Coaching programs are having success regardless of whether they allow for full time coaches or peer-embedded support with other practicing teachers. Put your best thinking forward in determining a process that will work within budget and time variables.

• Take Technology Mainstream: Every professional development initiative can benefit from the integration of technology. Together, you’re better.

• Leverage the World: Resist the temptation to reinvent the wheel. Use technology, coaching methods, and learning communities as “power partners” to tap into existing resources, experts, and support structures.

Having a readily available support system for building professional knowledge and integrating new knowledge with practice can be beneficial to all teachers and particularly those new to the profession and/or with limited experience. It is important to note that one time workshops are not as effective as a system of on-going professional development, in regard to being most effective in supporting teachers’ ability to develop the knowledge, skills, new teaching strategies, and technology integration change in classrooms (Cifuentes, Maxwell, & Bulu, 2011). Ideally, effective professional development provides teachers a “new set of experiences, skills, resources, and knowledge that will support them as they implement the ideas they have studied in the field” (Holmes, Signer, & MacLeod, 2010, p. 76). The practice and application of professional development is particularly important, as applying technology to content specific learning goals helps a teacher integrate new technology knowledge and skills more easily. Ideally, participating in professional development that is collaborative and subject specific, within technology inquiry groups, supports a teacher’s ability to integrate technology into their subject areas. (Hughes, 2005).

eMINTS: Professional Development for Integrating Technology Into Instruction

Currently, institutions of higher education faculty have not universally accepted and employed the practice of a learner-centered approach to teaching (Weimer, 2010), nor have they integrated technology into their own teacher practice. A model has been developed to support teachers in the acquisition of skills so that they will, in turn, provide students with assignments that integrate the use of technology; Enhancing Missouri’s Instructional Networked Teaching Strategies (e-MINTS) is a model of learner-centered instruction powered by technology, for P-20 classrooms (see Estes, 2015). The eMINTS National Center at the University of Missouri, is a non-profit organization that has provided comprehensive research-based professional development services to educators since 1999. eMINTS professional development uses interactive group sessions and in-classroom coaching/mentoring to help teachers integrate technology into their teaching using an instructional model that a) authentic learning, b) high-quality lesson design, c) community of learners, and d) powered by technology.

• Authentic Learning: Through the use of real-world projects, students become problem-solvers, collaborators, critical thinkers, inventors, and creators. Through the use of global content, students begin to ask and think about their world in new and innovative ways.

• High-Quality Lesson Design: The best teaching and learning take place inclassrooms where teachers value self-directed learning. Through the use of varied instructional and assessment strategies teachers have the opportunity to create the kinds of lessons that meet the needs of learners.

• Community of Learners: Fundamental to eMINTS practice is the community of learners, not only within the classroom, but also among teachers and among trainers, as well as showing students how continuous life-long learning takes place in a community. eMINTS helps teachers and other participants learn the importance of building a community of learners where learners share, take risks, respect and push each other as they find their own best ways to learn and engage in deep content with one another.

• Powered by Technology: Seamless integration of technology with authentic learning and differentiated instruction bring about true learning. Technology adds excitement and motivation for students and teachers as they use digital tools to enhance and expand learning beyond the classroom walls. (eMINTS National Center, 2014).

Teachers trained in e-MINTS self-report improvement in their inquiry-based teaching activities, their computer use, and their perception of their own computer skills (Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis, 2001). Integrating the e-MINTS model into teacher preparation curriculum is inclusive of professional development that has been found to be most effective: training occurs over a two year period, using a cohort model, and with mentoring to meet needs of the individual attendees, as well as an annual national conference to keep abreast of emerging technology and applications. Through the process of developing a skill base in using technology to enhance instruction, seeds of self-efficacy become rooted for many educators.

Educators, Technology, and Self-Efficacy

A teacher’s belief structure about teaching and learning is one of the most important factors in determining whether or not a teacher will take steps to integrate technology into instruction (Becker, 2001; Hernández -Ramos, 2005; Windschitl & Sahl, 2002). Although teachers might believe that technology helps them to be more efficient in completing personal and professional tasks, teachers tend to be hesitant to incorporate technology tools into instruction for a variety of reasons including the lack of relevant knowledge (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007), low self-efficacy (Mueller et al., 2008), and existing belief systems (Subramaniam, 2007). In addition, time to learn how to use new technology, the lack of training in the use of new technology, and the unreliability of technology were significant inhibitors to the adoption of technology integration strategies (Cuban, Kirkpatrick, & Peck, 2001). Rogers (2003) posited that adapting to innovative practices is a social process and that “an important factor regarding the adoption rate of an innovation is its compatibility with the values, beliefs, and past experiences of individuals in the social system” (p. 4).

Bandura (1997) discussed the idea of self-efficacy as having confidence in one’s abilities to organize and execute an action; self-efficacy is a kind of self-confidence. Although knowledge of technology is necessary, it won’t be enough if teachers don’t also feel confident using that knowledge to facilitate student learning. In a survey of 764 teachers, Wozney, Venkatesh, and Abrami (2006), found that one of the two greatest predictors of teachers’ technology use was their confidence that they could achieve instructional goals using technology. This suggests that time and effort should be devoted to increasing teachers’ confidence for using technology, not just to accomplish administrative and communicative tasks, but to facilitate student learning.

Teacher’s competency for technology plays a critical role in using technology in instruction has been addressed. “Although computer related variables, in general, continue to impact a teachers’ ability to integrate technology, it is through positive experiences with computers in the classroom context, that build a teacher’s belief in computer technology and confidence in its potential as an instructional tool” (Mueller, Wood, Willoughby, Ross, & Specht, 2008, p.1533). There are many variables that contribute to a teacher’s sense of self-efficacy in regard to using technology integrated instruction. One of these variables is allowing enough time for teachers to familiarize with technology by manipulating it (Somekh, 2008). Being introduced to a new technology and gaining skills is not enough; there must be time to gain confidence through experimenting and learning the nuances of the technology. When teachers are taught technological knowledge and skills, but do not have an opportunity to relate the knowledge and skills to the instruction they provide for students, the meaning of the experience can be lost. When given opportunities to apply knowledge and skills learned in small steps and applied in small successful experiences, teacher confidence increases. Additionally, providing successful experience in technology, support systems through peer interaction or leaning community, or customized professional training contribute to developing teachers’ self-competency in technology (Ertmer & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, 2010).

Institutional Support

As early as 1991, Fullan and Stiegelbauer discussed the process of change that teachers often experience as they began to explore technology integration with instruction; the dimensions of

change involved (a) beliefs, attitudes, or pedagogical ideologies; (b) content knowledge; (c) pedagogical knowledge of instructional practices, strategies, methods, or approaches; and (d) novel or altered instructional resources, technology, or materials. When institutional systems are put into place to support teachers in these four dimensions of change, teachers will be more likely to be interested in learning the requisite knowledge and skills and have the motivation to invest needed time, energy, and effort in the process of integrating technology with the teaching-learning process. Given that it can take five years for a teacher to evolve from a direct instruction teacher to a constructivist teacher (Ertmer, 1999), providing institutional support and guidance is needed when teachers are first employed.

Implementing a VR environment affects several different stakeholders in the educational environment including students, faculty, and instructional technology personnel (Miller, 2014). In addition, institutional leadership also become stakeholders due to the expense of technology involved (particularly when providing a VR environment) and also require any VR implementation to be consistent with the mission and vision of the institution. A significant opportunity for school leadership is to create, with teachers, a shared vision for technology integration with the teaching-learning process. This shared vision should place emphasis on including technology as part of the definition of effective teaching. This can be achieved by creating standardized expectations that are articulated through professional development plans that include a technology component.

Giving teachers an opportunity to engage in professional goal setting, specifically related to technology is important (Somekh, 2008). Undoubtedly, a lack of resources and support can be a barrier to teacher technology use (Hew & Brush, 2007) and contribute to lack of faculty interest, use, and innovative endeavors. One suggested reason for the disinterest is the lack of support educators are afforded, in terms of technical and pedagogical support or provision of additional time to develop virtual world lessons (Smith-Robbins, 2011). As has been described earlier, technology is ever changing and the need for faculty growth and development is on-going. Not only do teachers need to continually keep themselves abreast of technology advances, teachers must be supported to decide how the learned knowledge and skills can be used within the instructional process to most efficiently and effectively engage students and teach content.

Virtualy reality: past, present, & future

Within schools, effectively integrating technology into instruction has been ever evolving. There have always been ‘early adopters’ of innovation (initiated by a few), and gradual adaptations of innovation by many. Technology integration into instruction is actually a developmental process with more than a 70-year history, receiving policy and fiduciary support from governmental agencies in some instances. In this section, a brief history of emergent technology use in education will be presented, followed by some of today’s most innovative projects, and developments that we can anticipate in the future.

Emergent Technology Adoption in Education: A Brief History (1944-2015)

Today, Silicon Valley is viewed as the U.S. birthplace of technological innovations. However, institutions of higher education have been the historical venues of new technological knowledge. In fact, the first operational computer was introduced in 1944 at Harvard with early educational uses primarily occurring within departments of mathematics, science and engineering for the purposes of critical thinking and problem-solving (Levien, 1972). As early as 1954, B. F. Skinner combined his theories related to direct instruction and programmed learning to provide students with individualized instruction; the skill base of each student was targeted and sequentially higher level skills were provided based on successful responses. Skinner referred to the technology that he developed as teaching machines (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTH3ob1IRFo).

Shortly thereafter, the U.S. National Defense Education Act legislation made money available for new technology in schools, primarily in vocational education (http://web.csulb.edu/~murdock/histofcs.html). In 1959, at the University of Illinois, Donald Bitier began the first, large-scale project for the use of computers in education, serving elementary school reading programs, a community college, and undergraduate programs (Office of Technology Assessment, 1982). In 1963, only 1% of U.S. secondary schools used computers for instructional purposes, by 1974, 55% of the schools had access to computers, over two million students used computers in their classes and 23% of these classrooms were using computers primarily for instruction (Molnar, 1975).

The Office of Technology Assessment, established in 1972, was intended to provide Congress with objective and authoritative analysis of the complex scientific and technical issues of the late 20th century. A report, Teachers and Technology: Making the Connection (Office of Technology Assessment, 1995), included one chapter focused specifically on Helping Teachers Learn About and Use Technology Resources (https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/ns20/year_f.html), recognizing the importance of training teachers (as the person responsible) for integrating technology into instruction.

In 1981, IBM became the first mainframe manufacturer to develop a personal computer (PC) used primarily for drill & practice, and by 1986, 25% of high schools used PCs for college and career guidance, while K-8 schools were primarily buying Apple II and Macintosh computers (http://web.csulb.edu/~murdock/histofcs.html). In 1992, the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), a department of the Executive Office of the President, initiated a government-wide effort to dramatically expand the U.S. portion of the Internet; the purpose was interconnecting the nation's educational infrastructure to its knowledge and information centers so that all may could share access to digital libraries, databases and diverse scientific instruments (OSTP, 1992).

As early as 1994, digital video, VR, and 3-D systems captured the attention of many business professionals. Digital video systems were the forerunners of VR emerging as a new paradigm in computer technology. Object-oriented authoring systems such as HyperCard, Hyperstudio, and Authorware were growing in popularity and use, particularly as a resource for instructional delivery by teachers, however in many K-12 schools there was a lack of availability to students (http://web.csulb.edu/~murdock/histofcs.html). The original educational intent of VR was for the learner to interact with electronically generated artificial environments as if they were real and to develop procedural knowledge in the process. In early 1990, Howard Rheingold expanded the concept and use of VR to the gaming industry (Rheingold, 1991; Mazuryk & Gervautz, 1996) but the cost and clunky nature of VR goggles and data gloves inhibited mass adoption during the 90’s (Virtual Reality, n.d.).

The Internet did not became commercialized and decommissioned until 1995 (Harris & Gerich, 1996) and as the internet grew in access, capability, and use, so did the VR movement. Such developments and applications highlighted the need to consider the future of VR from both the technical and social aspects (Mazuryk & Gervautz, 1996). By 2000 innovators of VR noticed that users were responsive to the collaborative community and in 2003, the less immersive virtual world of Second Life was launched (Linden Lab, 2013), where they could create their own avatars and socialize in a virtual space together. It is evident that between 1997 and today, the growth of the internet has expanded far faster than most predicted, becoming the world's largest database of information, graphics, and streaming video, making it an invaluable resource for educators.

Virtual Reality in Education Today: Challenges and Opportunities

Hew and Cheung (2010) conducted a literature review of the uses of VR in K-12 and higher education and found that the majority of studies were conducted in polytechnics and university settings (69%), followed by secondary schools (19%) and primary schools (12%). Within polytechnic and university settings, Hew and Cheung identified VR research in the following content areas: media arts (18.8%), health and environment (18.8%), education (12.5%), commerce (12.5%), computing (12.5%), others (12.5%), teaching of foreign language (6.3%), and librarianship (6.3%). In this study and others, not only do we see a low adoption rate for VR technology in education and across the disciplines, we also see the need to identify overarching challenges and opportunities that exist to implement VR.

Challenges

There remains a paucity of literature documenting the challenges in adapting VR technologies to the teaching and learning curriculum (Woods, 2009). The learning curve is steep for building knowledge, skills, and application for integration of VR with instruction. Having a research base to draw from would be an asset. For example, a scoping study undertaken in Australia and New Zealand reviewed and analyzed the use of 3D virtual worlds in teaching and learning in higher education and various categories of challenges were formulated from the feedback collected from educators using virtual worlds, including “[lack of] technology, support, funding and time, usability and familiarity, equity and ethics, inherent limitations of virtual worlds, acceptance of virtual worlds, and management and planning” (Dalgarno, Gregory, Carlson, Lee, & Tyson, 2013, p. 10).

A second challenge, and another related to research is that unfortunately, the literature that should help to inform our education and training tends to be dated and limiting in study design and global scope. In a comprehensive review of the literature, Hew and Cheung (2010) located 470 papers, but 455 were discarded because they were opinion papers, conceptual papers, non-empirical descriptions of program implementations, or non-K-12 and higher education related; finally fifteen papers were located, with fourteen of the fifteen using descriptive research methodology. A variety of data collection methods were used in the descriptive research, including questionnaire (most frequently used), interviews, observations, online log files (e.g., chat transcripts) and one study used exam scores. Only one study used an experimental design (Holmes, 2007).

A third challenge is that the diversity and global scale of VR related studies are scant. Hew and Cheung (2010) in their review of the literature found a majority of the studies located (87%) involved participants from countries in North America and Europe, compared with other countries. There is a continual need to study participants in other countries in order to better understand how different geographical contexts might influence the use of virtual worlds differently, and this continues to be a significant limiting factor in the study of VR.

Fourth, despite early projections for innovative applications, VR, avatar-centric environments have not yet resulted in a mainstream adoption among educators (Waters, 2014). Likewise, students also face a steep learning curve and difficulty in adoption of VR. Student dislikes related to virtual world technology include: (a) inability to access the virtual world environment through older computers, (b) technical requirements involving the need for robust computing and Internet connectivity, (c) general prohibition of the use of such virtual world software in public computers, (d) having to instantaneously formulate answers and responses and needing fast typing skills in order to communicate textually through the chat tool, (e) no provision of turn taking or threaded discussion because of the chat function and (f) unfamiliarity with the virtual world software (Dickey, 2005b; Miller, 2014).

A final challenge is keeping pace with the constant state of flux and advancements within the field of emergent technologies. As VR technologies continue to morph, advance, and evolve, it is likely that the definitions and their applications will also continue to evolve – hence, the more challenging it becomes to remain current and properly trained on such developments as they occur. Therefore, a significant need exists which focuses on more support, training, and access for students and educators.

Opportunities

While there is no question that challenges exist for the adoption of educational innovations for VR use, the opportunities that exist in the realm of VR and learning are exponential with many examples within the chapters of this book. There is significant growth in the use of VR within academic organizations for offering virtual campus tours, the expansion of digital libraries, institutional museums and much more. Some leaders in innovation who seek to provide a more rich understanding of VR include Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab. With numerous projects and dozens of publications, they investigate topics related to social issues, interactions, and applications for VR. (https://vhil.stanford.edu/pubs/) (Ahn, Bostick, Ogle, & Bailenson, 2015; Cummings & Bailenson, 2015). Standford is not alone in dedicated work to better understand and explore the VR space for learning. The University of Minnesota’s Virtual Realty Design Lab represents an interdisciplinary partnership between the College of Design and Computer Science & Engineering for a six-year project focused on a more immersive experience using perception headsets to investigate the learning effects of “Social VR”. (http://vr.design.umn.edu).

Other academic institutions are also leading the way to explore this unknown frontier, such as the University of Southern California’s Institute for Creative Technologies Medical Virtual Reality Group, that specializes in mental health therapy, motor and cognitive skills rehabilitation, assessment, and clinical skills training (http://medvr.ict.usc.edu). Today, these immersive learning-scapes have become quite popular particularly in medical and engineering programs that require the practical application of skills or the building and modeling of a design. The medical profession has typically served as an early adopter of emergent technologies and has been proactive in their uses for VR as well. One example includes the work of PULSE (developed in part by Texas A&M University Corpus Christi), a simulation game for health care professionals that “allows them to train and practice on avatars without the risk of harming patients. Players work in virtual hospitals where they respond to emergency situations to diagnose and treat patients at they would in the real world” (http://www.healthgamesresearch.org/games/pulse-the-virtual-clinical-learning-lab). Many universities and learning institutions are not only using VR in practice, but are dedicating research centers and funding collaborative efforts to support the expansion of such work on their campuses.

In regard to strategies that support educators, the concept of a virtual technology coach and its potential to support NETS*C (National Educational Technology Standards for Coaches) still needs to be considered in future studies (Sugar & Slagter van Tryon, 2014). Virtual communities of practices for teachers (e.g., Lewis, Koston, Quartley, & Adsit, 2011) have been offered in an online setting. A key facet of school technology integration needs point to the alignment between the NETS*C, International Society for Technology in Education’s (2012) education coach standards for skills necessary in promoting teachers’ classroom integration of technology, and the apparent value teachers place on their ability to learn more deeply about technology integration within a collaborative community. To better support and offer additional training and guidance, we also see potential for avatar-based, avatar-led instruction and training on demand through e-coaching (Warner, 2012). Such options could utilize VR to train educators on VR, which could be attractive for busy professionals (like teachers) and could offer hands-on experience using the virtual world from the learner perspective.

Research suggests that students like using the virtual worlds because of the following reasons: the ability to fly and move around freely in a 3-D space, to socialize and meet new people and to experience virtual field trips and simulated experiences (e.g., learners, in a sense, were embodied in the learning content and context (Dickey, 2005b), as opposed to the traditional flat, one-dimensional, text-driven digital displays. In addition to the content and procedural knowledge students can develop using VR, it helps to better prepare learners for the unscripted future they face, a future that is dynamic and constantly changing as a result of emergent technologies that shape it (Dailey-Hebert, Donnelli-Sallee, & DiPadova-Stocks, 2008). Providing a state-of-the- art learning experience for students will not only benefit the colleges and universities in their competitive environment, but also aid in preparing students for their entry into the workforce (Miller, 2014). This opportunity provides one key to moving forward with a vision for the future of virtual reality in education.

Moving Forward: A Vision for the Future of Virtual Reality in Education

A vision for the future of virtual reality in education can be highlighted by a few examples of curricular innovations that are and will continue to, shape the future of VR as we currently know it and beyond.

Innovative Education

Innovative Education is an initiative developed in Icelandic Schools with the InnoEd Project, a virtual learning environment with European schools; the purpose is to provide a pedagogical model, based on the use of a virtual reality learning environments, with supporting internet and database technologies to facilitate virtual classrooms on the web (Thorsteinsson & Page, 2008). “Of particular interest are the emphases within Innovative Education on: ethical issues, the motivational potential of close relationships with the students' home environment, ideation, use of Information and Communications Technology to support and develop ideation, communication through use of posters, presentations and internet presentations” (p. 33).

GemInGame

VR expansion into the gaming world grew significantly and continues to be the most popular application of VR reality today (Chouhan & Sharma, 2015). For example, KZero’s radar charts indicate that the number of virtual worlds and Massively Multiplayer On-line Role Playing Games (MMORPGs) totaled 900 as of 2013; KZero’s universe chart revealed 1,899 million registered users in virtual worlds and massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) as of 2013 (KZero, 2013). Given the popularity and engagement of such VR games, serious games as a learning tool have emerged and been effective at shaking up the slow to adapt world of academia and having positive affects in the workplace (Heili & Michel, 2011; Michel, 2013). In Grenoble France, professors developed a new curriculum they call GemInGame, in which students create, develop, and co-brand serious games as part of their curriculum. They are able to partner with external organizations in the area to create and co-brand serious games for employee training – giving students the opportunity to not only engage in a gaming system for the sake of learning, but to create and produce new serious games for market in the VR environment.

Oculus Rift

Oculus Rift is an evolving technology that was created in 2012, as a head-mounted display device that is worn like goggles to experience an immersive virtual world experiences. Already a leader in virtual reality technology, the Oculus company was purchased by the social media leader Facebook in 2014; CEO Mark Zuckerberg blogged, “We're going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a courtside seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world, or consulting with a doctor face-to-face (The Associated Press, 2014, para.1). The technology is being explored by several universities as a tool for taking a virtual tour of campus. An example can be viewed of a Yale University tour using the YouVisit virtual tour site (http://www.youvisit.com/tour/yale). While some technical problems remain and scalability for the general market continues to be a problem, there is promise for using such tools to enhance the educational teaching-learning process in the future.

CAVE Automatic Virtual Environment

Although it was originally presented in1992, the CAVE system holds promise for more mainstream uses of virtual reality and scientific visualization. Individual immersion in a VR environment is actualized through using immersive display devices, such as a head-mounted display. The device has a small optic display/screen in front of each eye in which the user sees a pre-programmed 3-D environment. Another example is the Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE). A CAVE system, when programmed well, can closely represent an environment by highly resembling the real world in full-scale. One advantage of using a CAVE system is that it allows the user to move naturally in the space surrounded by digitally created environmental cues. When users are immersed in a VR environment, they can interact in real time with digital objects and avatars. CAVE assures superior quality and resolution of viewed images, and a wider field of view in comparison to HMD based systems (Mazuryk & Gervautz, 1996).

Scalable Game Design

Alexander Repenning, Director of Scalable Game Design (SGD), housed at the University of Colorado in Boulder leads a 15 year effort to reinvent computer science education in public schools through game design starting at the middle school level (http://sgd.cs.colorado.edu/wiki/Scalable_Game_Design_wiki). SGD teachers computational thinking and critical thinking as well as problem-solving during the process of teaching students and teachers how to program virtual reality games. With over 10,000 students hundreds of teacher K-16, taking the SGD training, SGD is conducting the largest US study of computer science education which included middle schools in urban core areas, remote rural areas, and Native American communities (http://scalablegamedesign.cs.colorado.edu). Computational thinking tools that have evolved as game and simulation authoring systems include AgentSheets^TM for two-dimensional games and AgentCubes^TM for three-dimensional games (see Repenning, Webb, & Ioannidou, 2012). Results indicate that students, across genders and ethnicities, are not only highly motivated to learn computer science through game design but they also learn essential computational thinking skills. (Webb, Repenning, & Kuh, 2012).

Mobility of Virtual Reality

One final opportunity to consider involves the mobility of VR. While former VR accessories, such as clunky headgear or gloves, made accessibility cost prohibitive and intimidating, breakthroughs just this year plan to make VR accessible as never before. Advances in VR now plan to offer an accessory such as goggles, compatible with a cell phone, that allow for the VR experience (Pierce, 2015) which provides an untethered mobile experiences, immersing users with 360 panoramic views, and applications available from the Oculus VR app stores.

The cell phones and mobile device revolution, being merged with the VR revolution, is the next marriage of innovation that will also offer affordability and accessibility.

CONCLUSION

The premise of this chapter is that integrating VR into the teaching-learning cycle is a next step in a historical and on-going process of determining ways in which technology innovations can enhance instructional processes and student learning outcomes. The purpose of education is not simply for students to acquire knowledge and skills, but to be interested and engaged in the learning process, to successfully collaborate with peers, to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills to tackle unforeseen challenges, and to view self as a life-long learner who is capable of applying knowledge and skills to real-life situations. The utilization of VR to promote such development has been evident in the past and holds great promise for the future, as the evolution of technology tools, features, and functionalities continues to evolve.

Educators play a pivotal role in the process of technology integration. In spite of the fiduciary impact on institutions when educators are not motivated and able to stay current in their knowledge of technological advances and strategies for integration into instruction, there is a paucity of institutional support, training, and professional development opportunities provided for K-12 and higher education educators. Needed educator support includes not only requisite technology skill development, but as importantly providing guidance in the process of developing pedagogy and self-efficacy for technology integration. What is desperately needed is for educators to be motivated to keep abreast of new technologies and to have the self-efficacy to determine how and when to use such emergent tools to enhance instruction. Today’s technology innovation is VR; tomorrow’s technology innovation has not yet been imagined, much less brought to fruition. Regardless of the technology tools available, ways to support educators toward the meaningful integration of such tools for the benefit of lifespan learning, remains imperative.

REFERENCES

AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology. (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators . New York: Routledge.

Afshar, V. (2014). 10 Hottest Technologies in Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vala-afshar/10-hottest-technologies-i_b_6089740.html

Ahn, S. J., Bostick, J., Ogle, E., & Bailenson, J. N. (2015, August 6-9). Embodying nature’s experiences: Taking the perspective of nature with immersive virtual environments to promote connectedness with nature. Paper to be presented at the Annual Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) Conference, San Francisco, CA.

Arya, A., Hartwick, P., Graham, S., & Nowlan, N. (2011, May). Virtual space as a learning environment: Two case studies. Paper presented at themeeting of the International Education Technology Conference, Istanbul, Turkey.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . New York: Freeman.

Barilli, E. (2012). Virtual Reality Technology as a Didactical and Pedagogical Resource in Distance Education for Professional Training. In P. B. Muyinda (Ed.), Distance education. Retrieved from http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/39200.pdf

Becker, H. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the 2001 Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Retrieved

Beglau, M., Hare, J. C., Foltos, L., Gann, K., James, J., Jobe, H., . . . Smith, B. (2011). Technology, Coaching and Community. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/learn/coaching-white-paper.aspx

Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 12(5), 456–480. doi:10.1162/105474603322761270

Blaschke, B., & Hase, S. (2015). Heutagogy, technology and lifelong learning for professional part-time learners . In Dailey-Hebert, A., & Dennis, K. (Eds.), Transformative perspectives & processes in higher education . London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09247-8_5

Bojanova, I. (2011). Physical presence through virtual worlds. IT Professional , 13(4), 4–5. doi:10.1109/MITP.2011.66

Bouta, H., Retalis, S., & Paraskeva, F. (2012). Utilizing a collaborative macro-script to enhance student engagement: A mixed method study in a 3D virtual environment. Computers & Education , 58(1), 501–517. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.031

Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007). Virtual reality: How much immersion is enough? Computer , 40(7), 36–42. doi:10.1109/MC.2007.257

Bozkurt, A. (2011). A classroom observation-based evaluation of elementary teachers’ use of technology in the classrooms in Turkey. Educational Research Review , 2011, 367–373.

Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Brantley-Dias, L., Kinuthia, W., Shoffner, M. B., DeCastro, C., & Rigole, N. (2007). Developing pedagogical technology integration content knowledge in preservice teachers: A case study approach. Journal of Research on Computing in Teacher Education , 23, 143–149.

Britain, S. (1999). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual world learning environments. JISC Technology Applications Programme, Report 41: Joint Information Systems Committee of the Higher Educational Funding Council. Manchester, UK.

Cerniamo, K. S., Ross, J. D., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Chang, L. (2015, June 29). Go shopping from the comfort of your own home with your virtual reality headset. Digital Trends. Retrieved from http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool/retail/

Chouhan, R., & Sharma, G. K. (2015). Virtual Reality: In gaming. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Consortium , 2(2), 36.

Cifuentes, L., Maxwell, G., & Bulu, S. (2011). Technology integration through professional learning community. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 44(1), 59–82. doi:10.2190/EC.44.1.d

Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal , 38(4), 813834. doi:10.3102/00028312038004813

Cummings, J. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2015). How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology , 1–38. doi:10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740

Dailey-Hebert, A., Donnelli-Sallee, E., & DiPadova-Stocks, L. (2008). Service-eLearning as integrated pedagogy: An introduction. In A. Dailey-Hebert, E. Donnelli-Sallee, L. & DiPadova-Stocks (Eds.), Service-eLearning: Educating for citizenship (pp.1-5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Dalgarno, B., Gregory, S., Carlson, L., Lee, M. J. W., & Tynan, B. (2013). A systematic review and environmental analysis of the use of 3D immersive virtual worlds in Australian and New Zealand higher education institutions (Final Report) (pp. 1–226). Armidale, Australia: DEHub: Innovation in Distance Education, University of New England. Retrieved from http://www.dehub.edu.au/downloads/VWSSP_Report_V2_TD_200613_dehub.pdf

Dickey, M. D. (2005a). Brave new (interactive) worlds: A review of the design affordances and constraints of two 3D virtual worlds as interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments , 13(1–2), 121–137. doi:10.1080/10494820500173714

Dickey, M. D. (2005b). Three-dimensional virtual worlds and distance learning: Two case studies of Active Worlds as a medium for distance learning. British Journal of Educational Technology , 36(3), 439–451. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00477.x

eMINTS National Center. (2014). Instructional model. Retrieved from http://www.emints.org/professional-development/instructional-model/

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first and second order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development , 47(4), 4761. doi:10.1007/BF02299597

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher Technology Change: How Knowledge, Confidence, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 42(3), 255–284. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & York, C. (2006). Exemplary technology-using teachers: Perceptions of factors influencing success. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education , 23(2), 55–61.

Estes, J. S. (2015). A call for teacher preparation programs to model integrating technology into the instructional process . In Keengwe, J. (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational technology integration and active learning (pp. 62–77). Hershey, PA: IGI. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-8363-1.ch004

Falloon, G. (2010). Using avatars and virtual environments in learning: What do they have to offer? British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 108–122. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00991.x

Frey, T. (n. d.). 55 Jobs of the Future. Retrieved from http://www.futuristspeaker.com/2011/11/55-jobs-of-the-future /

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. Farrar, Straus and Giroux . New York: MacMillan Publishers.

Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change . New York: Teachers College Press.

Gagne, R. M. (1980). Is Educational Technology in Phase? Educational Technology , 1980, 7–14.

Gregory, S., Scutter, S., Jacka, L., McDonald, M., Farley, H., & Newman, C. (2015). Barriers and Enablers to the Use of Virtual Worlds in Higher Education: An Exploration of Educator Perceptions, Attitudes and Experiences. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 18(1), 3–12.

Harris, S. R., & Gerich, E. (1996). Retiring the NSFNET backbone service: Chronicling the end of an era. ConneXiona, 10(4).

Hase, S. (2013). Learning defined learning . In Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action . London: Bloomsbury.

Heili, J., & Michel, H. (2011, October). Do students Trained using serious games become better sales representatives? An experiment to study the performance of academic serious games. Proceedings of theEuropean Conference on Games-Based Learning.

Hernández-Ramos, P. (2005). If not here, where? Understanding teachers’ use of technology in Silicon Valley schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 38(1), 39–64. doi:10.1080/15391523.2005.10782449

Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development , 55(3), 223–252. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology , 4(1), 33–55. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00900.x

Holmes, A., Signer, B., & MacLeod, A. (2011). Professional development at a distance: A mixed-method study exploring inservice teachers’ views on presence online. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education , 27(2), 76–85. doi:10.1080/21532974.2010.10784660

Holmes, J. (2007). Designing agents to support learning by explaining. Computers & Education , 48(4), 523–525. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.007

Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S. S. (2010). Investigating learners’ attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education , 55(3), 1171–1182. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.014

Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 13(2), 277–302.

Hullinger, J. (2015, June 28). Six innovative uses for virtual reality. The Idea Factory. Retrieved from http://theweek.com/articles/562851/6

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National educational technology standards for teachers (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Author.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2011). Technology, Coaching, and Community: Power partners for improved professional development in elementary and secondary schools. Retrieved from http://www.instructionalcoach.org/images/downloads/ISTE_Whitepaper_June_Final_Edits.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education. (2012). Digital age coaching. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-coaches

International Society for Technology in Education. (2015). Standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/ISTE-standards/standards-for-teachers

Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2008). 2008 Horizon report Australia-New Zealand edition. In 2008 Horizon Report Australia-New Zealand Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://wp.nmc.org/horizon-anz-2008/

Kapp, K., & O'Driscoll, T. (2010). Learning in 3D. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Lai, K-W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: The premise, reality, and promise . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 215–230). New York: Springer.

KZero. (2013). Kzero Worldswide. Retrieved from http://www.kzero.co.uk/blog/category/education-and-academia

Lai, K.-W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: The premise, reality, and promise . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 215–230). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_13

Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research , 77(4), 575–614. doi:10.3102/0034654307309921

Levien, R. E. (1972). The Emerging Technology: Instructional Uses of the Computer in Higher Education . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Lewis, L. A., Koston, Z., Quartley, M., & Adsit, J. (2011). Virtual communities of practice: Bridging research and practice using Web 2.0. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 39(2), 155–161. doi:10.2190/ET.39.2.e

Linden Lab. (2013). Infographic: 10 years of Second Life. Retrieved from http://www.lindenlab.com/releases/infographic

Lowendahl, J. M. (2013, July 25). Hype Cycle for Education, 2013. Gartner. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=251104

Mazuryk, T., & Gervautz, M. (1996). Virtual reality, history, applications, technology and future, 1-72. Institute of Computer Graphics, Vienna University of Technology, Austria. Retrieved August 29, 2015 from https://www.cg.tuwien.ac.at/research/publications/1996/mazuryk-1996-VRH/TR-186-2-96-06Paper.pdf

Michel, H. (2013, January). From Haute-Couture to Ready-to-Wear: Typology of Serious Games Implementation Strategies in Higher Education. Proceedings of theEuropean Conference on Games Based Learning (p. 386). Academic Conferences International Limited.

Miller, R. (2014). The application of virtual reality in higher education distance learning. Journal of Applied Learning Technology , 4(4), 15–18.

Mishra, S. (2009). Virtual worlds. In S. Mishra (Ed.), E-Learning (pp. 110-113). New Delhi: IndiraGandhi National Open University. Retrieve from http://webserver.ignou.ac.in/institute/STRIDE_Hb8_webCD/STRIDE_Hb8_Full.pdf

Molnar, A. R. (1975). Viable Goals for New Educational Technology Efforts: Science Education and the New Technological Revolution . Educational Technology , 15(9).

Molnar, A. R. (1990). Computers in education: A historical perspective of the unfinished task . T.H.E. Journal , 18(4), 80–83.

Moravec, J. W. (2008). Knowmads in society 3.0 . Education Futures.

Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers & Education , 51(4), 1523–1537. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.003

National Survey of Student Engagement. (NSSE) (2014). Center for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University School of Education, Bloomington, IND. Retrieved from http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2014_Results/pdf/NSSE_2014_Annual_Results.pdf#page=8

Noteborn, G., Dailey-Hebert, A., Bohle-Carbonell, K., & Gijselears, W. (2013), Essential knowledge for academic performance: Educating in the virtual world to promote active learning. Teacher and Teacher Education, 37(January), 217-234. http://authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S0742051X1300156X

Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). (1992). Grand Challenges: High Performance Computing and Communications. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.hpcc.gov

Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA). (2001). Final results from the e-MINTS teacher survey . Columbia, MO: Author.

Office of Technology Assessment. (1982). Informational technology and its impact on American education, 128-133. U.S. Congress, Washington, DC.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2013). Virtual and augmented reality applications in manufacturing . Springer Science & Business Media.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2007). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org

Pierce, D. (2015, March 6). The Future of Virtual Reality is inside your smartphone, Wired, Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2015/03/future-virtual-reality-inside-smartphone/

Pink, D. H. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-brainers will rule the future . Penguin.

Prasolova-Førland, E. (2008). Analyzing place metaphors in 3D educational collaborative virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior , 24(2), 185–204. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.009

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon , 9(5), 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816

Pulse Simulation Technology. (2008). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q11aWO6dg2Q

Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher , 29(1), 4–15. doi:10.3102/0013189X029001004

Reinick, L. B. (1983). Mathematics and Science and Learning: A New Conception. Science , 220(4596), 477–478. doi:10.1126/science.220.4596.477

Repenning, A., Webb, D., & Ioannidou, A. (2012). Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. Association for Computer Machinery (ACM). Retrieved from http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~ralex/papers/PDF/SIGCSE10-repenning.pdf

Rheingold, H. (1991). Virtual reality: The revolutionary technology of computer generated artificial worlds . New York: Simon & Schuster Publishing.

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: The Free Press.

Saposnik, G., & Levin, M. (2011). Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation a meta-analysis and implications for clinicians. Stroke , 42(5), 1380–1386. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.605451

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology . In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schroeder, R. (2008). Defining Virtual Worlds and Virtual Environments. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1). Retrieved from http://journals.tdl.org/jvwr/article/view/294

Schuemie, M. J., Van Der Straaten, P., Krijn, M., & Van Der Mast, C. A. P. G. (2001). Research on presence in virtual reality: A survey. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 4(2), 183–201. doi:10.1089/109493101300117884

September 21, 2015 from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/FINDINGS/special3/

Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding virtual reality. Interface, application and design. Boston, MA: Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers.

Slater, M., & Steed, A. (2000). A virtual presence counter. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 9(5), 413–434. doi:10.1162/105474600566925

Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6, 603–616.

Smart, J., Cascio, J., & Paffendof, J. (2007). Metaverse roadmap: pathways to the 3D web. Retrieved from http://www.metaverseroadmap.org/overview

Smith-Robbins, J. (2011, December). Are virtual worlds (still) relevant in education? elearn Magazine: Education and Technology Perspective. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=207847

Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 449–460). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_27

Stamford, C. (2007, April 24). Gartner says 80 percent of active Internet users will have a “Second Life” in the virtual world by the end of 2011. Gartner Newsroom. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=503861

Subramaniam, K. (2007). Teachers’ mindsets and the integration of computer technology. British Journal of Educational Technology , 38(6), 1056–1071. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00693.x

Sugar, W., & Slagter van Tryon, P. J. (2014). Development of a virtual technology coach to support technology integration for K-12 educators. TechTrends , 58(3), 54–62. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0752-7

The Associated Press. (2014, March 25). Facebook to buy Oculus virtual reality firm for $2B. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/facebook-to-buy-oculus-virtual-reality-firm-for-zb-1,2586318

The New Media Consortium. (2007). The Horizon Report . Austin, Texas: New Media Consortium.

Thorsteinsson, G., & Page, T. (2008). Innovative technology education using a virtual reality learning environment, 90, 26-35. Pedagogy Studies/Pedigogika: Vilnius Pedagogical University.

Tokel, S. T., & Karitas, E. C. (2014). Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education , 10(1), 1–12.

Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynsli, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education , 46(2), 153–185. doi:10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1

Virtual reality. (n. d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality

Virtual reality. (n. d.). Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/virtualreality

Warner, T. (2012). E-coaching systems: Convenient, anytime, anywhere, and nonhuman. Performance Improvement , 51(9), 22–28. doi:10.1002/pfi.21305

Waters, J. (2014, October 9). Could the Oculus Rift redeem virtual reality in higher ed? Campus Technology. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/articles/2014/10/09/could-the-oculus-rift-redeem-virtual-reality-in-higher-ed.aspx

Webb, D., Repenninga, A., & Koh, K. (2012, February 29-March 3). Toward an emergent theory of broadening participation in computer science education. Proceeding of the Association for Computer Machinery (ACM) Special Interest Group on Computer Science Conference (SIGCSE) (pp. 173-178). Raleigh, NC. ACM. 10.1145/2157136.2157191

Weimer, M. (2010). Inspired college teaching: A career-long resource for professional growth . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002, Spring). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal , 39(1), 165–205. doi:10.3102/00028312039001165

Wong, J. N. (2010). Searching for good practice in teaching: A comparison of two subject-based professional learning communities in a secondary school in Shanghai. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), 623-639.

Woods, D. (2009). Experiential learning through real space placements undertaken in ‘virtual world’ spaces. Proceedings from Ascilite Auckland 2009.

Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 14(1), 173–207.

Yilmaz, R., Topu, F., Goktas, Y., & Coban, M. (2013). Social presence and motivation in a three dimensional virtual world An explanatory study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 29(6), 823–839.

Zech, L. K., Gause-Vega, C. L., Bray, M. H., Secules, T., & Goldman, S. R. (2000). Content-based collaborative inquiry: A professional development model for sustaining educational reform. Educational Psychologist , 35(3), 207–217. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3503_6

Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record , 104(3), 482–515. doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170

ADDITIONAL READING

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in technology and pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education , 52(1), 154–168. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.006

Barbour, M. (2011). The promise and the reality: Exploring virtual schooling in rural jurisdictions. Education in Rural Australia , 21, 1–19.

Blascovich, J., & Bailenson, J. (2011). Infinite Reality: Avatars, eternal life, new worlds and the dawn of the virtual revolution . New York: Harper Collins Publishing.

Blascovich, J., & Bailenson, J. (2012). Infinite Reality: The hidden blueprint of our virtual lives . New York: Harper Collins Publishing.

Cheong, D. (2010). The effects of practice teaching sessions in second like on the change in pre-service teachers’ teaching efficacy. Computers & Education , 55(2), 868–880. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.018

Cline, M. (2005). Power, madness & immortality: The future of virtual reality. University Village Press eBooks. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?id=7OxbJWzIaVEC&pg=PP1&lpg=PP1&dq=Cline,+Mychilo+Stephenson+(2005).+Power,+madness+%26+immortality:+The+future+of+virtual+reality.&source=bl&ots=OrCOjJD787&sig=1CdY3AjD3qj6SdGxGUgQqXkylms&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCEQ6AEwAGoVChMIsOSo5LvWxwIV1hSSCh0f_AWl#v=onepage&q=Cline%2C%20Mychilo%20Stephenson%20(2005).%20Power%2C%20madness%20%26%20immortality%3A%20The%20future%20of%20virtual%20reality.&f=false

Dede, C., Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., & Bowman, C. (2004, June). Design-based research strategies for studying situated learning in a multi-user virtual environment. Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 158-165). International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Diaz, D. P., & Botenbal, K. F. (2001). Learner preferences: Developing a learner-centered environment in the online or mediated classroom. Ed at a Distance, 15(8). Retrieved from http://www.usdla.org/html/hournal/AUGO1_Issue/article03.html

Digenti, D. (1998). Toward an understanding of the learning community. Organization Development Journal , 16(2), 91–96.

Gill, L., & Dalgarno, B. (2010). How does pre-service teacher preparedness to use ICTs for learning and teaching develop during the first two years of teacher training? In C. Steel, M. J. Keppell, P. Gerbic, & S. Housego (Eds.), Proceedings of Ascilite2010 Sydney (pp. 371–381). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney10/Ascilite%20conference%20proceedings%202010/Gillfull.pdf

Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary school teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers & Education , 51(4), 1499–1509. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.001

Kay, J., & FitzGerald, S. (2008). Educational uses of Second Life. Retrieved from http://sleducation.wikispaces.com/educationaluses

Kock, N. (2008). E-collaboration and e-commerce in virtual worlds: The potential of Second Life and World of Warcraft. International Journal of e-Collaboration , 4(3), 1–13. doi:10.4018/jec.2008070101

Mayo, M. J. (2009). Video games: A route to large scale STEM education? Science , 323(5910), 79–82. doi:10.1126/science.1166900

Monahan, T., McArdle, G., & Bertolotto, M. (2008). Virtual reality for collaborative e-learning. Computers & Education , 50(4), 1339–1353. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.12.008

Peterson, M. (2006). Learner interaction management in an avatar and chat-based virtual world. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 19(1), 79–103. doi:10.1080/09588220600804087

Rienties, B. C., Reeb-Gruber, S., Daly, P., & Van den Bossche, P. (2011). Proceedings of the 18th EDINEB Conference: From Innovation to Crème de la Crème Education.

Snoeyink, R., & Ertmer, P. A. (2001/2002). Thrust into technology: How veteran teachers respond. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 30(1), 85–111. doi:10.2190/YDL7-XH09-RLJ6-MTP1

Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown Up Digital. How The Net Generation Is Changing Your World . New York: McGraw Hill.

Verloop, N., VanDriel, J., & Meijer, P. (2001). Teacher knowledge and the knowledge base of teaching. International Journal of Educational Research , 35(5), 441–461. doi:10.1016/S0883-0355(02)00003-4

Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher education: Assessing the potential for and the barriers to deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(3), 414–426. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00952.x

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

e-MINTS: Enhancing Missouri’s Instructional Network Teaching Strategies; a professional development model that that supports high quality lesson design, promotes inquiry-based learning, creates a technology-rich learning environment and builds community among students and teachers.

Engagement: Student engagement involves active participation, critical thinking, synthesis, and application of content to real-life experiences. Highly engaged students tend to feel a connection to the process of learning, to their peers, and to the institutions of higher education in which they are enrolled.

Information and Communications Technology (ICT): ICT is a commonly used acronym for information and communication technology including the tools and resources used to communicate, create, disseminate, store, and manage information.

ISTE: The International Society for Technology in Education is a not-for –profit organization that provides standards and criteria for what teachers need to teach and what students need to learn, as well as what content needs to be provided by a professional development program in relation to educational technology.

Motivation: Motivation pertains to the general desire or willingness of a student to engage with peers, teacher, and content while enrolled in a course of study.

NETS-T (National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers): Developed by ISTE, the NETS-T standards guide teachers in use and application of technology within the instructional process.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA): OTA opened as an office of the U.S. Congress from 1972 to 1995 and responsible for providing Congress with authoritative and bipartisan reports on a wide range of issues in science and technology, including issues related to education. Princeton University now hosts the OTA legacy website (https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/).

Pedagogy: Beliefs and theory that guide the practice of teaching; what teachers do, based upon what they believe, when implementing their craft and assist student learning.

Pedagogical Content Knowledge: Pedagogical content knowledge is a synthesis of how teachers related what they know and belief about teaching (pedagogy) with the subject matter, or content that they are teaching.

Scalable Game Design: Scalable Game Design provides professional development for teachers and training for middle school students through use of a computer programming curriculum that begins with the use of simple game design and progressively advancing to the design and use of STEM related real-life simulations, enabling students to explore and create virtual realities.

Self-Efficacy: A person’s belief about their ability and competency; a teacher’s believe in their technology knowledge, skills, and ability to integrate technology into instruction.

Technology Integration: Technology integration refers to a process of intentionally choosing technology tools that enhance specific instructional strategies during the teaching and learning process.

Compilation of References

AACTE Committee on Innovation and Technology. (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators . New York: Routledge.

Abeles, T. P. (2007). Education unbound. On The Horizon , 15(4), 199–203. doi:10.1108/10748120710836219

Abernathy, W., & Clark, K. B. (2007). Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative distruction. Research Policy , 14(1), 3–22. doi:10.1016/0048-7333(85)90021-6

Adams, E. W. (2004). Postmodernism and the three types of immersion. Gamasutra. Retrieved from http://designersnotebook.com/Columns/063_Postmodernism/063_postmodernism.htm

Adcock, A. B., Duggan, M. H., Nelson, E. K., & Nickel, C. (2006). Teaching effective helping skills at a distance: The development of project CATHIE. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education , 7(4), 349–360.

Afshar, V. (2014). 10 Hottest Technologies in Higher Education. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vala-afshar/10-hottest-technologies-i_b_6089740.html

Aguiar, S., & Monte, P. (2011). Virtual Worlds for C2 Design, Analysis and Experimentation. Proceedings of the16th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2011), Quebec City, Quebec, Canada, June 21-23, 2011.

Ahn, S. J., Bostick, J., Ogle, E., & Bailenson, J. N. (2015, August 6-9). Embodying nature’s experiences: Taking the perspective of nature with immersive virtual environments to promote connectedness with nature. Paper to be presented at the Annual Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC) Conference, San Francisco, CA.

Ai-Lim Lee, E., 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. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.006

Alegría, D. A. H., Boscardin, C., Poncelet, A., Mayfield, C., & Wamsley, M. (2014). Using tablets to support self-regulated learning in a longitudinal integrated clerkship. Medical Education Online , 12.

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology , 103(1), 1–18. doi:10.1037/a0021017

Allen, P. D., & Demchak, C. D. (2011). Applied Virtual Environments: Applications of Virtual Environments to Government, Military and Business Organizations. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 4(1).

Alvarez, C., Brown, C., & Nussbaum, M. (2011). Comparative study of netbooks and tablet PCs for fostering face-to-face collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior , 27(2), 834–844. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.11.008

Amrollahi, A., Ghapanchi, A. H., & Talaei-Khoei, A. (2013). A systematic literature review on strategic information systems planning: Insights from the past decade. Pacific Asia Journal of the Association for Information Systems , 5(2), 4.

Annetta, L. A., Folta, E., & Klesath, M. (2010). V-learning: Distance education in the 21st century through 3D virtual environments . New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3627-8

Antell, S. E., & Keating, D. P. (1983). Perception of numerical invariance in neonates. Child Development , 54(3), 695–701. doi:10.2307/1130057

Antonacci, D., DiBartolo, S., Edwards, N., Fritch, K., McMullen, B., & Murch-Shafer, R. (2008). The power of virtual worlds in education: a second primer and resource for exploring the potential of virtual worlds to impact teaching and learning. ANGEL Learning ISLE Steering Committee. Retrieved from http://www.angellearning.com/products/secondlife/downloads/The%20Power%20of%20Virtual%20Worlds%20in%20Education_0708.pdf

Antonietti, A., Rasi, C., Imperio, E., & Sacco, M. (1999). Virtual reality in engineering instruction: In search of the best learning procedures. World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 1999 (Vol. 1, pp. 663-668).

Antonietti, A., Rasi, C., Imperio, E., & Sacco, M. (2000). The representation of virtual reality in education . Education and Information Technologies , 5(4), 317–327. doi:10.1023/A:1012057608694

Antonietti, A., Rasi, C., Imperio, E., & Sacco, M. (2001). Virtual reality and hypermedia in learning to use a turning lathe. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 17(2), 142–155. doi:10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00167.x

Appana, S. (2008). A Review of Benefits and Limitations of Online Learning in the Context of the Student, the Instructor and the Tenured Faculty. International Journal on E-Learning , 7(1), 5–22.

Arnone, M., Small, R., Chauncey, S., & McKenna, H. (2011). Curiosity, interest and engagement in technology-pervasive learning environments: A new research agenda. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(2), 181–198. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9190-9

Arya, A., Hartwick, P., Graham, S., & Nowlan, N. (2011, May). Virtual space as a learning environment: Two case studies. Paper presented at themeeting of the International Education Technology Conference, Istanbul, Turkey.

Astheimer, P., Dai, F., Göbel, M., Kruse, R., Müller, S., & Zachmann, G. (1994). Realism in virtual reality . In N. Magnenat Thalmann & D. Thalmann, Artificial life and virtual reality (pp. 189–209). New York, NY: John Wiley.

Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology , 94(2), 416–427. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.416

Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 30(1), 117–139. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001

Atkinson, T. (2009). Second Life for educators: Teaching and learning. TechTrends , 53(3), 30–32. doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0285-7

Attewell, P., Lavin, D., Domina, T., & Levey, T. (2006). New evidence on college remediation. The Journal of Higher Education , 77(5), 886–924. doi:10.1353/jhe.2006.0037

Augmentedmarketing. (2013). Ontarion Tourism Summit 2013 features interactive print. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRuwl6

Augmentedstories. (2015). Education. Retrieved from: http://augmentedstories.com/education/

Aurasma. (2015). The drink of champions. Retrieved from: http://bit.ly/1Fw66vl

Austin, J. L. (1975). How to do things with words . Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001

Ausubel, D. G. (1963). Cognitive structure and the facilitation of meaningful verbal learning. Journal of Teacher Education , 14(2), 217–222. doi:10.1177/002248716301400220

Aydogan, H., Aras, F., & Karakas, E. (2010). An assessment on distance education in a 3D virtual environment: How to produce electricity in a hydroelectric power plant.Paper presented at the Education Technology and Computer (ICETC), 2010 2nd International Conference. 10.1109/ICETC.2010.5529234

Azim, R., & Hassan, A. (2013). Impact analysis of wireless and mobile technology on business management strategies. Journal of Information and Knowledge Management , 2(2), 141–150.

Azuma, R. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6(4), 355–385.

Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented Reality. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6(4), 355–385.

Bacca, J., Baldiris, S., Fabregat, R., & Graf, S., & Kinshuk. (2014). Augmented Reality Trends in Education: A Systematic Review of Research and Applications. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 17(4), 133–149.

Bainbridge, W. (2007). The scientific research potential of virtual worlds. Science , 317(5837), 472–476. doi:10.1126/science.1146930

Baker, S. C., Wentz, R. K., & Woods, M. M. (2009). Using virtual worlds in education: Second Life® as an educational tool. Teaching of Psychology , 36(1), 59–64. doi:10.1080/00986280802529079

Bal A. Crittenden V. Halvorson W. Pitt L. Parent M. (2015, January). Second best in Second Life: Teaching marketing cases in a virtual world environment.Proceedings of the 2010 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 211-211). Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-319-11797-3_119

Balula, A., & Moreira, A. (2014). e-Teaching evaluation in higher education. In Evaluation of Online Higher Education: Learning, Interaction and Technology (pp. 1–11). Springer. doi:doi:10.1007/978-3-319-05425-4

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . New York: Freeman.

Barilli, E. (2012). Virtual Reality Technology as a Didactical and Pedagogical Resource in Distance Education for Professional Training. In P. B. Muyinda (Ed.), Distance education. Retrieved from http://cdn.intechopen.com/pdfs-wm/39200.pdf

Barker, J., & Gossman, P. (2013). The learning impact of a virtual learning environment: Students’ views. Tean Journal, 5(2). Retrieved from http://bit.ly/AtMwtr

Barry, D. M., Kanematsu, H., Fukumura, Y., Kobayashi, T., Ogawa, N., & Nagai, H. (2013). US Students Carry out Nuclear Safety Project in a Virtual Environment. Procedia Computer Science , 22, 1354–1360. doi:10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.224

Bartle, R. (2003). Designing virtual worlds . United States: New Riders Publishing.

Ba, S., Ke, D., Stallaert, J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). Why give away something for nothing? Investigating virtual goods pricing and permission strategies. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems , 1(1), 4. doi:10.1145/1877725.1877729

Baylor, A. L. (2011). The design of motivational agents and avatars. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(2), 291–300. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9196-3

Baylor, A. L., & Kim, Y. (2005). Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 15(2), 95–115.

Beauvois, M. (1997). High-tech, high-Touch: From discussion to composition in the networked classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 10(1), 57–69. doi:10.1080/0958822970100104

Becker, H. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at the 2001 Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA. Retrieved

Beglau, M., Hare, J. C., Foltos, L., Gann, K., James, J., Jobe, H., . . . Smith, B. (2011). Technology, Coaching and Community. International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/learn/coaching-white-paper.aspx

Bélisle, J., & Bodur, H. (2010). Avatars as information: Perception of consumers based on their avatars in virtual worlds. Psychology and Marketing , 27(8), 741–765. doi:10.1002/mar.20354

Bell, J. T., & Fogler, H. S. (1995). Virtual reality in chemical engineering education. Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education, Illinois / Indiana Sectional Conference, Purdue University, March 1995. 10.1109/VR.2004.1310077

Bell, J. T., & Fogler, H. S. (1997, January 12-15). The application of virtual reality to chemical engineering education. Proceedings of the 1997 International Conference on Simulation in Engineering Education (ICSEE ‘97), Society for Computer Simulation, San Diego. Simulation Series, 29(2). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.88.4744&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Bell, M. W. (2008). Toward a Definition of “Virtual Worlds” . Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1).

Bellotti, F., Kapralos, B., Lee, K., Moreno-Ger, P., & Berta, R. (2013). Assessment in and of serious games: An overview. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction. Retrieved from http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ahci/2013/136864/cta/

Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., & Primavera, L. (2010). Supporting authors in the development of task-based learning in Serious Virtual Worlds. British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 86–107. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01039.x

Benford, S., Greenhalgh, C., Reynard, G., Brown, C., & Koleva, B. (1998). Understanding and constructing shared spaces with mixed-reality boundaries. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction , 5(3), 185–223. doi:10.1145/292834.292836

Berns, A., Gonzalez-Pardo, A., & Camacho, D. (2012). Combining Face-to-Face Learning with Online Learning in Virtual Worlds. Paper presented at theEuropean Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (EUROCALL) Annual Conference.

Bers, M., & Chau, C. (2010). The virtual campus of the future: Stimulating and simulating civic actions in a virtual world. Journal of Computing in Higher Education , 22(1), 1–23. doi:10.1007/s12528-009-9026-3

Bijeljac-Babic, R., Bertoncini, J., & Mehler, J. (1993). How do 4-day-old infants categorize multisyllabic utterances? Developmental Psychology , 29(4), 711–721. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.29.4.711

Billinghurst, M. (2002). Augmented Reality in Education. New Horizons for Learning. Retrieved from http://www.newhorizons.org/ strategies/technology/billinghurst.htm

Billinghurst, M., & Henrysson, A. (2009). Mobile architectural augmented reality . In Wang,, X., & Schnabel, M. (Eds.), Mixed Reality In Architecture, Design And Construction (pp. 93–104). The Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-9088-2_6

Billinghurst, M., Kato, H., & Poupyrev, I. (2001). The Magic Book — Moving seamlessly between reality and virtuality. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 21(3), 2–4.

Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of social presence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 12(5), 456–480. doi:10.1162/105474603322761270

Björk, S., & Holopainen, J. (2004). Patterns in Game Design . Charles River Media.

Blackburn, D., Henderson, R., & Welz, G. (1996). VRML evolution. Internet World , 7(12), 65–70.

Blankenship, R. J. (2010). Using virtual environments as professional development tools for pre-service teachers seeking ESOL endorsement [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of South Florida, FL.

Blaschke, B., & Hase, S. (2015). Heutagogy, technology and lifelong learning for professional part-time learners . In Dailey-Hebert, A., & Dennis, K. (Eds.), Transformative perspectives & processes in higher education . London: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-09247-8_5

Blasing, M. T. (2010). Second language in Second Life: Exploring interaction, identify and pedagogical practice in a virtual world. Slavic and East European Journal , 54(1), 96–117.

Bojanova, I. (2011). Physical presence through virtual worlds. IT Professional , 13(4), 4–5. doi:10.1109/MITP.2011.66

Bonwell, C., & Eison, J. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Boudreau, C., & Okada, M. (1998). The foreign language acquisition system of Project Orbis: An example of educational, customizable language exposure in a shared virtual world . In Future generation computing systems . Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Bouras C. Filopoulos A. (1998). Distributed virtual reality environments over web for distance education. In Proceedings of EDEN Conference (pp. 481-484).

Bourke, P. (2007). Representing and modeling geometry in Second Life. Retrieved from http://paulbourke.net/fractals/secondlife/

Bourke, P. (2008). Evaluating Second Life as a tool for collaborative scientific visualization. Retrieved from http://paulbourke.net/papers/cgat08/

Bourke, P. (2008). Evaluating Second Life as a tool for collaborative scientific vizualisation. Proceedings of the Computer Games and Allied Technology in Animation, Multimedia, IPTV & Entertainment (CGAT 08). Retrieved from http://paulbourke.net/papers/cgat08/

Bouta, H., Retalis, S., & Paraskeva, F. (2012). Utilizing a collaborative macro-script to enhance student engagement: A mixed method study in a 3D virtual environment. Computers & Education , 58(1), 501–517. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.031

Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis—matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International , 45(1), 3–15. doi:10.1080/09523980701847115

Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007). Virtual reality: How much immersion is enough? Computer , 40(7), 36–42. doi:10.1109/MC.2007.257

Bozkurt, A. (2011). A classroom observation-based evaluation of elementary teachers’ use of technology in the classrooms in Turkey. Educational Research Review , 2011, 367–373.

Bradshaw, D. (2009). New practices in flexible learning: virtual worlds – real learning! Pedagogical Reflections. Retrieved from http://virtualworlds.flexiblelearning.net.au/reports/VWRL_pedagog_reflect.pdf

Braman, J., Dudley, A., Colt, K., Vincenti, V., & Wang, Y. (2011). Gaining insight into the application of second life in a computer course: student's perspectives. Proceedings of the 14th HCI International Conference on Online Communities and Social Computing. Orlando, FL.

Braman, J., Jinman, A., & Trajkovski, G. (2007). Exploring virtual worlds as an extension to classroom learning. In C. A. Shoniregun & A. Logvynovskiy (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Society (i-Society 2007) (pp. 82-86). London, UK: e-Centre for Infonomics. Retrieved from http://air.unimi.it/bitstream/2434/64612/1/i-SocietyProceedings.pdf

Braman, J., Meiselwitz, G., & Vincenti, G. (2013). Virtual worlds in the general education curriculum. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2013 (pp. 2692-2697).

Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Brantley-Dias, L., Kinuthia, W., Shoffner, M. B., DeCastro, C., & Rigole, N. (2007). Developing pedagogical technology integration content knowledge in preservice teachers: A case study approach. Journal of Research on Computing in Teacher Education , 23, 143–149.

Bray, D. A., & Konsynski, B. (2008). Virtual worlds, virtual economies, virtual institutions. Proceedings of the Virtual Worlds and New Realities Conference . Atlanta, GA: Emory University.

Breeze, M. (2014). How augmented reality will change the way we live. Retrieved from http://tnw.co/1nEDN6O

Britain, S. (1999). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual world learning environments. JISC Technology Applications Programme, Report 41: Joint Information Systems Committee of the Higher Educational Funding Council. Manchester, UK.

Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2000). A framework for the pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments. JTAP Report no. 041. Retrieved from http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001237.htm

Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2004). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments. JISC Technology Applications Program, (41)

Britain, S., & Liber, O. (2004). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments. Research Report. Retrieved from: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00696234/document

Bronack, S., Sanders, R., Cheney, A., Riedl, R., Tashner, J., & Matzen, N. (2008). Presence Pedagogy: Teaching and Learning in a 3D Virtual Immersive World. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education , 20(1), 59–69.

Brooks, F. P. (1999). What's real about virtual reality? IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 19(6), 16–27. doi:10.1109/38.799723

Brown, A. (2009). A second look at Second Life: Virtual worlds and education. Paper presented at theannual NECC conference, Washington, D.C.

Brown, H. D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.

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

Brown, R., Rasmussen, R., Baldwin, I., & Wyeth, P. (2012). Design and implementation of a virtual world training simulation of ICU first hour handover processes. Australian Critical Care , 25(3), 178–187. doi:10.1016/j.aucc.2012.02.005

Buchholz, R. (2014). Augmented reality: new opportunities for marketing and sales. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nMCLYO

Buhalis, D., & Yovcheva, Z. (2014). Augmented reality in tourism: 10 best practices. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1tphods

Burdea, G. C., & Coiffet, P. (2003). Virtual reality technology (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Wiley-IEEE Press.

Burgess, M. L., & Caverly, D. C. (2009). Techtalk:” Second Life” and Developmental Education. Journal of Developmental Education , 32(3), 42–43.

Butterworth, B. (2005). The development of arithmetical abilities. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines , 46(1), 3–18. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00374.x

Bynum, T. W. (2000). The foundation of computer ethics. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society , 30(2), 6–13. doi:10.1145/572230.572231

Bynum, T. W. (2001). Computer ethics: Its birth and its future. Ethics and Information Technology , 3(2), 109–112. doi:10.1023/A:1011893925319

Bynum, T. W., & Rogerson, S. (2003). Computer Ethics and Professional Responsibility: Introductory Text and Readings . Cambridge, MA, USA: Blackwell Publishing.

Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence . Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Byrne, C. M. (1996). Water on tap: The use of virtual reality as an educational tool (Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington).

Caarls, J., Jonker, P., Kolstee, Y., Rotteveel, J., & van Eck, W. (2009). Augmented reality for art, design and cultural heritage—system design and evaluation. EURASIP Journal on Image and Video Processing , 2009, 1–16. doi:10.1155/2009/716160

Calandra, B., & Puvirajah, A. (2014). Teacher practice in multi user virtual environments:A fourth space. TechTrends , 58(6), 29–35. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0800-3

Callaghan, M., McCusker, K., Losada, J. L., Harkin, J., & Wilson, S. (2009). Integrating virtual worlds & virtual learning environments for online education. Paper presented at the Games Innovations Conference ICE-GIC International IEEE Consumer Electronics Society.10.1109/ICEGIC.2009.5293576

Calongne, C., & Hiles, J. (2007). Blended Realities: A Virtual Tour of Education in Second Life. In Proceedings of TCC Worldwide Online Conference 2007 (pp. 70-90). Retrieved from http://etec.hawaii.edu/proceedings/2007/calongne.pdf

Calongne, C. (2008). Educational frontiers: Learning in a virtual world. EDUCAUSE Review , 43(5). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/educational-frontiers-learning-virtual-world

Carini, R., Kuh, G., & Klein, S. (2006). Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education , 47(1), 1–32. doi:10.1007/s11162-005-8150-9

Caruso, V., Morch, A. I., Thomassen, I., Hartley, M., & Ludlow, B. L. (2014). Practicing collaboration skills through role-play activities in a 3D virtual world. In R. Huang, Kinshuk, & N. Chen (Eds.), The new development of technology enhanced learning: Concept, research and best practices (pp. 165-184). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic worlds: The business and culture of online games . University of Chicago Press.

Cerniamo, K. S., Ross, J. D., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Technology integration for meaningful classroom use: A standards-based approach . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.

Chafer, J., & Childs, M. (2008, November 20-21). The impact of the characteristics of a virtual environment on performance: Concepts, constraints and complications. Proceedings of the ReLIVE 08 conference, Open University (pp. 94-105).

Chang, L. (2015, June 29). Go shopping from the comfort of your own home with your virtual reality headset. Digital Trends. Retrieved from http://www.digitaltrends.com/cool/retail/

Chapman, D. D., & Stone, S. (2010). Measurement of outcomes in virtual environments. Advances in Developing Human Resources , 12(6), 665–680. doi:10.1177/1523422310394792

Cheal, C. (2009). Student perceptions of a course taught in Second Life. Innovate: Journal of online . Education , 5(5), 2.

Chen, X., Siau, K., & Nah, F. F.-H. (2009). 3-D virtual worlds: Education and learning. SIGHCI 2009 Proceedings (p. 13).

Chen, C. J. (2006). The design, development and evaluation of a virtual reality based learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 22(1), 39–63.

Chen, C. J. (2010). Virtual reality (VR)-based learning environment: Design, develop, evaluate . Saarbrücken, Germany: Lambert Academic.

Chen, C. J., & Teh, C. S. (2000). Design issues of desktop virtual reality educational applications . In Khalid, H. M. (Ed.), Virtual reality: select issues and applications (pp. 63–78). London: Asean Academic.

Chen, C. J., Toh, S. C., & Ismail, W. M. F. W. (2005). Are learning styles relevant to virtual reality? Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 38(2), 123–141. doi:10.1080/15391523.2005.10782453

Chen, C.-M., & Tsai, Y.-N. (2012). Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Computers & Education , 59(2), 638–652. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.001

Cheng, K.-H., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 22(4), 449–462. doi:10.1007/s10956-012-9405-9

Cheng, Y., & Wang, S.-H. (2011). Applying a 3D virtual learning environment to facilitate student’s application ability–The case of marketing. Computers in Human Behavior , 27(1), 576–584. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.10.008

Cheong, D. (2010). The effects of practice teaching sessions in Second Life on the change in pre-service teachers’ teaching efficacy. Computers & Education , 55(2), 868–880. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.03.018

Childs, M. (2007). Real Learning in Virtual Worlds. Warwick International Journal, 30(2).

Childs, M. (2010). Learners’ experience of presence in Virtual Worlds [Doctoral dissertation]. Institute of Education. Retrieved from https://files.warwick.ac.uk/mchilds1/files/childs+thesis+final.pdf

Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent for learning English as a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 34(4), 441–466. doi:10.2190/A064-U776-4208-N145

Cho K. Lee J. Soh J. Lee J. Yang H. S. (2007). A realisitc e-learning system based on mixed reality.Proc 13th Intl Conference on Virtual System and Multimedia (pp. 57- 64). VSMM.

Chouhan, R., & Sharma, G. K. (2015). Virtual Reality: In gaming. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Consortium , 2(2), 36.

Chung, I. C., Huang, C. Y., Yeh, S. C., Chiang, W. C., & Tseng, M. H. (2014). Developing Kinect games integrated with virtual reality on activities of daily living for children with developmental delay. In Advanced technologies, embedded and multimedia for human-centric computing (pp. 1091-1097). Netherlands: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-7262-5_124

Cifuentes, L., Maxwell, G., & Bulu, S. (2011). Technology integration through professional learning community. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 44(1), 59–82. doi:10.2190/EC.44.1.d

Cihak, D. F., & Foust, J. L. (2008). Comparing number lines and touch points to teach addition facts to students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities , 23(3), 131–137. doi:10.1177/1088357608318950

Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Johnson, W. L., & Shaw, E. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents: An opportunity to be grasped? Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , 11(3), 267–286.

Clark, R. E., & Choi, S. (2005). Five design principles for experiments on the effects of animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 32(3), 209–225. doi:10.2190/7LRM-3BR2-44GW-9QQY

Clark, R. E., & Choi, S. (2007). The questionable benefits of pedagogical agents: Response to Veletsianos. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 36(4), 379–381. doi:10.2190/2781-3471-67MG-5033

Clark, S., & Maher, M. L. (2001). The role of place in designing a learner centred virtual learning environment Computer Aided Architectural Design Futures 2001 (pp. 187–200). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-94-010-0868-6_15

Cognition & Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology , 33(3), 52–70.

Cohen, A., & Brawer, F. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishing.

Colaric, S., & Taymans, J. (2004). Introducing Faculty to Online Learning: An Online Course as Professional Development. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2004 (pp. 549-554). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Coleman, K. G. (2010). Computing and Moral Responsibility. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2010/entries/computing-responsibility/

Coleman, K. G. (2007). Casuistry and Computer Ethics. Metaphilosophy , 38(4), 471–488. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2007.00494.x

Colpaert, J. (2006). Pedagogy-driven design for online language teaching and learning. CALICO Journal , 23(3), 477–497.

Common Core State Standards. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/other-resources/key-shifts-in-mathematics/

Community College Research Center. (2014). What we know about developmental education outcomes. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/media/k2/attachments/what-we- know-about-developmental-education-outcomes.pdf

Connolly, P. E. (2008). Virtual reality & immersive technology in education . In Van Slyke, C. (Ed.), Information communication technologies: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 2168–2172). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference; doi:10.4018/978-1-59904-949-6.ch158

Consalvo, M. (2003). It’s No Videogame: News Commentary and the Second Gulf War. Proceedings Level Up Conference. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.77.44

Cooke-Plagwitz, J. (2009). A new language for the Net generation: Why Second Life works for the net generation . In Oxford, R., & Oxford, J. (Eds.), Second language teaching and learning in the Net generation (pp. 173–180). Manoa, HI: National Foreign Language Resource Center, University of Hawaii.

Cooperstock J. R. (2001). The classroom of the future: Enhancing education through augmented reality.Proceedings of HCI International (pp. 688-692). New Orleans: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Coppola, N. W., Hiltz, S., & Rotter, N. G. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: Pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems , 18(4), 169–189.

Coyle, H., Traynor, V., & Solowij, N. (2015). Computerized and virtual reality cognitive training for individuals at high risk of cognitive decline: Systematic review of the literature. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry , 23(4), 335–359. doi:10.1016/j.jagp.2014.04.009

Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., & Driscoll, D. M. (2002). Animated pedagogical agents in multimedia educational environments: Effects of agent properties, picture features, and redundancy. Journal of Educational Psychology , 94(2), 428–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.428

Creative Guerrilla Marketing. (2014). 10 examples of augmented reality in retail. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/OxuyHI

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience . Harper Perennial Modern Classics.

Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal , 38(4), 813834. doi:10.3102/00028312038004813

Cummings, J. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2015). How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology , 1–38. doi:10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740

D’Mello, S. K., & Graesser, A. (2010). Multimodal semi-automated affect detection from conversational cues, gross body language, and facial features. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction , 20(2), 147–187. doi:10.1007/s11257-010-9074-4

Dafoulas, G., Saleeb, N., & Loomes, M. (2012). The impact of 3D virtual environments on communication patterns. Paper presented at the Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET) 2012 International Conference. 10.1109/ITHET.2012.6246065

Dailey-Hebert, A., Donnelli-Sallee, E., & DiPadova-Stocks, L. (2008). Service-eLearning as integrated pedagogy: An introduction. In A. Dailey-Hebert, E. Donnelli-Sallee, L. & DiPadova-Stocks (Eds.), Service-eLearning: Educating for citizenship (pp.1-5). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Daim, T. U., Letts, M., Krampits, M., Khamis, R., Dash, P., & Monalisa, M. (2012). IT infrastructure refresh planning for enterprises: A business process perspective. Business Process Management Journal , 17(3), 1–16.

Dalgarno, B., Gregory, S., Carlson, L., Lee, M. J. W., & Tynan, B. (2013). A systematic review and environmental analysis of the use of 3D immersive virtual worlds in Australian and New Zealand higher education institutions (Final Report) (pp. 1–226). Armidale, Australia: DEHub: Innovation in Distance Education, University of New England. Retrieved from http://www.dehub.edu.au/downloads/VWSSP_Report_V2_TD_200613_dehub.pdf

Damer, B. (1997). Avatars! Exploring and building virtual worlds on the Internet. Retrieved from http://www.digitalspace.com/avatars/book/chtu/chtu1.htm

D'Atri A. Missikoff O. Pauselli E. (2002). FairsNet: A virtual environment to support business education.Proceedings IASTED International Symposium on Web-based Education (WBE 2002), Cancun, Mexico (pp. 394-398).

Davis, J., II, Goel, M., Hylands, C., Kienhuis, B., Lee, E. A., Liu, J., . . . Reekie, J. (1999). Overview of the Ptolemy project (ERL Technical Report). UCB/ERL.

Dawley, L. (2007). Persistent social learning: An emergent ID model for virtual world design [Video file]. Retrieved from https://admin.acrobat.com/_a768376479/p17101188/

Dawley, L., & Dede, C. (2014). Situated learning in virtual worlds and immersive simulations . In Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Elen, J., & Bishop, M. J. (Eds.), The handbook of research for educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 723–734). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_58

De Bono, E. (1985). De Bono’s Thinking Course . New York, NY: Facts On File Publications.

De Freitas, S. (2008). Serious virtual worlds. A scoping guide: Prepared for the JISC e-Learning Programme, The Joint Information Systems Committee . UK: JISC.

De Lucia, A., Francese, R., Passero, I., & Tortora, G. (2009). Development and evaluation of a virtual campus on Second Life: The case of SecondDMI. Computers & Education , 52(1), 220–233. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.001

Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science 2, 323(5910), 66-69. DOI:.10.1126/science.1167311

Dede, C. (2005). Planning for neomillennial learning styles. EDUCAUSE Quarterly , 28(1), 1–10.

Dehaene, S. (2011). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics . Oxford University Press.

Dehn, D. M., & van Mulken, S. (2000). The impact of animated interface agents: A review of empirical literature. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies , 52(1), 1–22. doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0325

Deighton, J. A., & Kornfeld, L. (2007). Digital interactivity: unanticipated consequences for markets, marketing and consumers . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Delgarno, B., & Lee, M. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 10–32. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01038.x

Deluna, K. (2014). 10 rockstar examples of augmented reality for 2014. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mIaCib

Deutschmann, M., & Panichi, L. (2009). Talking into Empty Space? Signaling Involvement in a Virtual Language Classroom in Second Life. Language Awareness , 18(3−4), 310–328. doi:10.1080/09658410903197306

Deutschmann, M., Panichi, L., & Molka-Danielsson, J. (2009). Designing oral participation in Second Life—A comparative study of two language proficiency courses. ReCALL , 21(02), 206–226. doi:10.1017/S0958344009000196

Dhir, A. (2004). The digital consumer technology handbook . Oxford: Elsevier.

Di Blas, N., & Poggi, C. (2007). European virtual classrooms: Building effective “virtual” educational experiences. Virtual Reality (Waltham Cross) , 11(2-3), 129–143. doi:10.1007/s10055-006-0060-4

Dibbell, J. (1993). A Rape in Cyberspace. The Village Voice.

Dibbell, J. (1994). A Rape in Cyberspace: How an Evil Clown, a Haitian Trickster Spirit, Two Wizards, and a Cast of Dozens Turned a Database into a Society. Annual Survey of American Law , 1994, 471–481.

Dickey, M. D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development , 53(2), 67–83. doi:10.1007/BF02504866

Dickey, M. D. (2005). Three‐dimensional virtual worlds and distance learning: Two case studies of Active Worlds as a medium for distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology , 36(3), 439–451. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00477.x

Dickey, M. D. (2005a). Brave new (interactive) worlds: A review of the design affordances and constraints of two 3D virtual worlds as interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments , 13(1–2), 121–137. doi:10.1080/10494820500173714

Dickey, M. D. (2011). The pragmatics of virtual worlds for K-12 educators: Investigating the affordances and constraints of Active Worlds and Second Life with K-12 in-service teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development , 59(1), 1–20. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9163-4

Diener S. Windsor J. Bodily D. (2009). Design and development of clinical simulations in SecondLife.Proceedings of the EDUCAUSE Australasia Conference (pp. 1–13).

Dieterle, E., & Dede, C. (2006). Building university faculty and student capacity to use wireless handheld devices for learning . In van‘t Hooft, M. (Ed.), Ubiquitous computing: invisible technology, visible impact (pp. 303–328). Mahweh, NJ: Erlbaum.

Digitalmeetsculture. (2015). Augmented reality: enriching culture. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1E46st6

Dionisio, J. D. N., Iii, W. G. B., & Gilbert, R. (2013). 3D Virtual worlds and the metaverse. ACM Computing Surveys , 45(3), 1–38. doi:10.1145/2480741.2480751

Djorgovski, S. G., Hut, P., McMillan, S., Vesperini, E., Knop, R., Farr, W., & Graham, M. J. (2010). Exploring the use of virtual worlds as a scientific research platform: The meta-institute for computational astrophysics (MICA). In Facets of virtual worlds (pp. 29–43). Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-11743-5_3

Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes? The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology , 22(2), 84–97. doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000011

Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J.-J. (2013). Pagés, & C. Martínez-Herráiz, J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical Implications and Outcomes. Computers & Education , 63, 380–392. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020

Dong, P., Ma, B., & Wang, F. (2010). Development and Evaluation of an Experiential Learning Service in 3D Virtual World. Paper presented at the Service Sciences (ICSS) 2010 International Conference. 10.1109/ICSS.2010.37

Dorf, Y. J., Belcher, J., Bessetta, M., Danziger, M., McKinney, A., & Hult, E. (2010). Technology for active learning. Materials Today , 6(12), 44–49.

dos Santos, F. R., Guetl, C., Bailey, P. H., & Harward, V. J. (2010). Dynamic virtual environment for multiple physics experiments in higher education. Paper presented at theEducation Engineering (EDUCON). 10.1109/EDUCON.2010.5492507

Dreher, C., Reiners, T., Dreher, N., & Dreher, H. (2009). 3D virtual worlds as collaborative communities enriching human endeavours: Innovative applications in e-Learning. Paper presented at the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies DEST'09.

Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual world usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6). DOI: 10:1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01263.x

Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual worlds usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology , 43(6), 949–964. http://ishbel.host.cs.standrews.ac.uk/Research/SL_Taxonomy.pdfdoi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01263.x

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 18(1), 7–22. doi:10.1007/s10956-008-9119-1

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education , 18, 7–22.

Dunsworth, Q., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Fostering multimedia learning of science: Exploring the role of an animated agent’s image. Computers & Education , 49(3), 677–690. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.010

Duran J. Villagrasa S. (2013). Teaching 3D arts using game engines for engineering and architecture.Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality (VAMR 2013) held as part of HCI International (HCII 2013) (pp. 113–121). Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-39420-1_13

Dutra, J.P. (2015). ARgos – augmented reality in Volos – Greece. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTVTw

Earnshaw, E., Chilton, N., & Palmer, I. (1997). Visualization and virtual reality on the Internet . In Earnshaw, R., & Vince, J. (Eds.), The Internet in 3D information, images and interaction (pp. 203–222). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Eccles, R. G. (1991). The performance measurement manifesto. Harvard Business Review , 69(1), 131–137.

Edirisingha, P., Nie, M., Pluciennik, M., & Young, R. (2009). Socialisation for learning at a distance in a 3‐D multi‐user virtual environment. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(3), 458–479. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00962.x

Education Commission of the States. (1995). Making quality count in undergraduate education . Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

Edwards, J. (2011). Digital frontiers media uses augmented reality to market St. Pete/Clearwater tourism with miles media. Retrieved from http://www.prweb.com/releases/2011/03/prweb5141134.htm

El Sayed, N. A. M., Zayed, H. H., & Sharawy, M. I. (2011). ARSC: Augmented reality student card – an augmented reality solution for the education field. Computers & Education , 56(4), 1045–1061. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.019

Ellis, M., Anderson, P. J., & Kibbe, S. (2014). Second Life: Simplifying and enhancing the processes of teaching and learning . In Wang, V. C. X. (Ed.), Handbook of research on education and technology in a changing society (pp. 483–503). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6046-5.ch036

eMINTS National Center. (2014). Instructional model. Retrieved from http://www.emints.org/professional-development/instructional-model/

Encyclopædia Britannica. (2015). Virtual Reality (VR) . Encyclopædia Britannica Online.

Enyedy, N., Danish, J. A., Delacruz, G., & Kumar, M. (2012). Learning physics through play in an augmented reality environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 7(3), 347–378. doi:10.1007/s11412-012-9150-3

Epic Games Inc. (2015). Unreal engine 4 [computer software]. Retrieved from https://www.unrealengine.com/

Erard, M. (2007). A boon to Second Life language schools. Retrieved from http://www.technologyreview.com/communications/18510/page1/?a=f

Erlandson, B. E., Nelson, B. C., & Wilhelmina, C. S. (2010). Collaboration modality, cognitive load, and science inquiry learning in virtual inquiry environments. Educational Technology Research and Development , 58(6), 693–710. doi:10.1007/s11423-010-9152-7

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first and second order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development , 47(4), 4761. doi:10.1007/BF02299597

Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher Technology Change: How Knowledge, Confidence, Beliefs, and Culture Intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 42(3), 255–284. doi:10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A., & York, C. (2006). Exemplary technology-using teachers: Perceptions of factors influencing success. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education , 23(2), 55–61.

Eschenbrenner, B., Nah, F. F.-H., & Siau, K. (2008). 3-D virtual worlds in education: Applications, benefits, issues, and opportunities. Journal of Database Management , 19(4), 91–110. doi:10.4018/jdm.2008100106

Estes, J. S. (2015). A call for teacher preparation programs to model integrating technology into the instructional process . In Keengwe, J. (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational technology integration and active learning (pp. 62–77). Hershey, PA: IGI. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-8363-1.ch004

EURO Quick server stats. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.warcraftrealms.com/eu_realmstats.php

Evans, C. (1995). WWW-VRML benefits? Retrieved from http://www.thinkofit.com/webconf/icde95/0038.htm

Falconer, L. (2013). Situated learning in virtual simulations: Researching the authentic dimension in virtual worlds. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 24(3), 285–300.

Falloon, G. (2010). Using avatars and virtual environments in learning: What do they have to offer? British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 108–122. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00991.x

Feng, Z., Duh, H. B.-L., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). Trends in augmented reality tracking, interaction and display: A review of ten years of ISMAR. Paper presented at the7th IEEE/ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), Cambridge, UK. 10.1109/ISMAR.2008.4637362

Floridi, L. (1999). Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology , 1(1), 33–52. doi:10.1023/A:1010018611096

Floridi, L. (2004). Open Problems in the Philosophy of Information. Metaphilosophy , 35(4), 554–582. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2004.00336.x

Floridi, L. (2005). Information ethics, its nature and scope. ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society , 35(2), 3. doi:10.1145/1111646.1111649

Floridi, L. (Ed.). (2010). The Cambridge Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics . Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511845239

Floridi, L., & Sanders, J. W. (2001). Artificial evil and the foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology , 3(1), 55–66. doi:10.1023/A:1011440125207

Fractal landscape. (2015). Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fractal_landscape&oldid=679001052

Franklin, T. (2011). Mobile learning: At the tipping point. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology , 10(4), 261–275.

Freitas R. Campos R. (2008). SMART: A system of augmented reality for teaching 2^nd grade students.Proceedings of the 22^nd British computer society conference on human-computer interaction (HCI 2008) (pp. 27-30). LiverpoolJohn Moores University, UK.

Frey, T. (n. d.). 55 Jobs of the Future. Retrieved from http://www.futuristspeaker.com/2011/11/55-jobs-of-the-future /

Friedman, T. (2005). The world is flat. Farrar, Straus and Giroux . New York: MacMillan Publishers.

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2003). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice (2^nd ed.). London; Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.

Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change . New York: Teachers College Press.

Gabriel, K., & Flake, S. (2008). Teaching unprepared students: strategies for promoting success and retention in higher education . Stylus Publishing.

Gagne, R. M. (1980). Is Educational Technology in Phase? Educational Technology , 1980, 7–14.

Gallagher, A. G., Ritter, E. M., Champion, H., Higgins, G., Fried, M. P., Moses, G., & Satava, R. M. (2005). Virtual reality simulation for the operating room: Proficiency-based training as a paradigm shift in surgical skills training. Annals of Surgery , 241(2), 364–372. doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000151982.85062.80

Gallagher, C. (2014). Minecraft in the classroom: ideas, inspiration, and student projects for teachers . Peachpit Press.

Gamage, V., Tretiakov, A., & Crump, B. (2011). Teacher perceptions of learning affordances of multi-user virtual environments. Computers & Education , 57(4), 2406–2413. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.015

Gao, F., Noh, J. J., & Koehler, M. J. (2009). Comparing role-playing activities in Second Life and face-to-face environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 20(4), 423–443.

Garb, Y. (Winter 1987). Virtual Reality, Whole Earth Review (57): 118ff.

Garcia-Zubia, J., Irurzun, J., Angulo, I., Hernandez, U., Castro, M., Sancristobal, E., . . . Ruiz-de-Garibay, J. (2010). SecondLab: A remote laboratory under Second Life. Paper presented at the Education Engineering (EDUCON). 10.1109/EDUCON.2010.5492556

Gardner, H. (2011). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences . Basic Books.

Gardner, J. W. (1964). Self-Renewal . New York: HarperCollins.

Gartner Incorporated. (2014). Gartner Technology Research. Retrieved from: http://Online.gartner.com/technology/home.jsp>

Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2008). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge/Taylor Francis.

Gay, R., Charlesworth, A., & Esen, R. (2007). Online marketing: A customer-led approach . Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gee, J. P. (2003). What videogames have to teach us about learning and literacy . New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy . Palgrave Macmillan.

Gerval, J. P., Popovici, M., Ramdani, M., El Kalai, O., Boskoff, V., & Tisseau, J. (2002). Virtual environments for children. Proceedings International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology Education (CATE), Cancun, Mexico (pp. 416-420).

Gerval J. P. Popovici M. Tisseau J. (2003). Virtual stories authoring tools for pedagogical purposes.Proceedings of IASTED International Conference on Computer and Advanced in Education. Rhodes, Greece (pp. 642-646).

Ghanbarzadeh, R., Ghapanchi, A. H., & Blumenstein, M. (2015). Characteristics of Research on the Application of Three-Dimensional Immersive Virtual Worlds in Health [Springer.]. Information Science , 213–224.

Ghanbarzadeh, R., Ghapanchi, A. H., Blumenstein, M., & Talaei-Khoei, A. (2014). A Decade of Research on the Use of Three-Dimensional Virtual Worlds in Health Care: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 16(2), e47. doi:10.2196/jmir.3097

Ghapanchi, A. H., & Aurum, A. (2011). Antecedents to IT personnel's intentions to leave: A systematic literature review. Journal of Systems and Software , 84(2), 238–249. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2010.09.022

Ghapanchi, A. H., & Ghanbarzadeh, R. (2014). 3DVWs: Three-dimensional virtual worlds to support teaching and learning activities. E-Learning Update , 47, 14–18.

Giroux, H. A. (2002). Neoliberalism, corporate culture, and the promise of higher education: The university as a democratic public sphere. Harvard Educational Review , 72(4), 425–464. doi:10.17763/haer.72.4.0515nr62324n71p1

GoAnimate. (2015). Make professional animated videos. Retrieved from http://goanimate.com/

Gomes, T., Abade, T., Campos, J. C., Harriso, M. D., & Silva, J. L. (2014). A Virtual Environment based Serious Game to Support Health Education. ICST Transactions on Ambient Systems , 1(3), e5. doi:10.4108/amsys.1.3.e5

Gordon, E., & Koo, G. (2008). Placeworlds: Using virtual worlds to foster civic engagement. Space and Culture , 11(3), 204–221. doi:10.1177/1206331208319743

Graesser, A. C. (2011). Learning, thinking, and emoting with discourse technologies. The American Psychologist , 66(8), 746–757. doi:10.1037/a0024974

Gregory, S., Scutter, S., Jacka, L., McDonald, M., Farley, H., & Newman, C. (2015). Barriers and Enablers to the Use of Virtual Worlds in Higher Education: An Exploration of Educator Perceptions, Attitudes and Experiences. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 18(1), 3–12.

Grenfell, J. (2013). Immersive Interfaces for Art Education Teaching and Learning in Virtual and Real World Learning Environments. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences , 93, 1198–1211. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.016

Grimes, G., & Bartolacci, M. (2012). Second Life: a virtual world platform for profiling online behavior for network and information security education? An initial investigation . In Bartolacci, M., & Powell, S. (Eds.), Research, practice, and educational advancements in telecommunications and networking(pp. 285–289). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0050-8.ch017

Grimes, J. M., Fleischmann, K. R., & Jaeger, P. T. (2009). Virtual guinea pigs: Ethical implications of human subjects research in virtual worlds. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 2(1).

Grimes, J. M., Fleischmann, K. R., & Jaeger, P. T. (2010). Research ethics and virtual worlds . In Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds.), Emerging Ethical Issues of Life in Virtual Worlds (pp. 73–99). Information Age Publishing.

Guérin, E., Tosan, E., & Baskurt, A. (2002). Modeling and approximation of fractal surfaces with projected IFS attractors. Emergent Nature: Patterns, Growth and Scaling in the Science (pp. 93–303). New Jersey: World Scientific.

Guimaraes, T. (2012). Industry clockspeed's impact on business innovation success factors. European Journal of Innovation Management , 14(3), 322–344. doi:10.1108/14601061111148825

Gulz, A. (2004). Benefits of virtual characters in computer based learning environments: Claims and evidence. Educational Research Review , 6, 27–54.

Häfner, P., Häfner, V., & Ovtcharova, J. (2013). Teaching Methodology for Virtual Reality Practical Course in Engineering Education. Procedia Computer Science, 25, 251-260.

Han, D., Jung, T., & Gibson, A. (2014). Dublin AR: Implementing Augmented Reality (AR) in Tourism . In Xiang, Z., & Tussyadiah, I. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 511–523). Wien, New York: Springer International Publishing.

Harris, S. R., & Gerich, E. (1996). Retiring the NSFNET backbone service: Chronicling the end of an era. ConneXiona, 10(4).

Harshman, E. M., Gilsinan, J. F., Fisher, J. E., & Yeager, F. C. (2005). Professional Ethics in a Virtual World: The Impact of the Internet on Traditional Notions of Professionalism. Journal of Business Ethics , 58(1-3), 227–236. doi:10.1007/s10551-005-1417-4

Hartholt, A., Traum, D., Marsella, S., Shapiro, A., Stratou, G., Leuski, A., . . . Gratch, J. (2013). All together now: Introducing the virtual human toolkit. Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Virtual Humans. Retrieved from http://ict.usc.edu/pubs/All%20Together%20Now.pdf

Hase, S. (2013). Learning defined learning . In Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (Eds.), Self-determined learning: Heutagogy in action . London: Bloomsbury.

Hassan, A. (2013). Perspective analysis and implications of visitor management - experiences from the Whitechapel Gallery, London. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 24(3), 410-426. doi:.10.1080/13032917.2013.797916

Hax, A. C. (2010). Reinventing your business strategy . New York: Springer.

Hedberg, J., Harper, B., & Dalgarno, B. (2002). The contribution of 3D environments to conceptual understanding. In O. J. McKerrow (Eds.), Winds of Change in the Sea of Learning: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education(Vol 1, pp. 149-158). Auckland, New Zealand: UNITEC, Institute of Technology.

Hedberg, J., & Alexander, S. (1994). Virtual reality in education: Defining researchable issues. Educational Media International , 31(4), 214–220. doi:10.1080/0952398940310402

Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review , 6(1), 27–54. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.004

Heili, J., & Michel, H. (2011, October). Do students Trained using serious games become better sales representatives? An experiment to study the performance of academic serious games. Proceedings of theEuropean Conference on Games-Based Learning.

Hemp, P. (2006). Avatar-based marketing. Harvard Business Review , 84(6), 48–57.

Henckel, A., & Lopes, C. V. (2010). Stellarsim: A plug-in architecture for scientific visualizations in virtual worlds. In Facets of Virtual environments (pp. 106–120). Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-11743-5_9

Hepburn, A. (2015). Top 10 augmented reality examples- digital buzz blog. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nXdp6l

Hepplestone, S., Holden, G., Irwin, B., Parkin, H., & Thorpe, L. (2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology , 19(2), 117–127. doi:10.1080/21567069.2011.586677

Hernández-Ramos, P. (2005). If not here, where? Understanding teachers’ use of technology in Silicon Valley schools. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 38(1), 39–64. doi:10.1080/15391523.2005.10782449

Herrera, D. R., Margitay-Becht, A., & Chagas, J. (2010). Cyber-disaporas: The Effects of Migration to Virtual Worlds . In DePretto, L., Macri, G., & Wong, C. (Eds.), Diasporas: Revisiting and Discovering(pp. 287–298). Oxford: Inter-Disciplinary Press.

Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2000). An instructional design framework for authentic learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development , 48(3), 23–48. doi:10.1007/BF02319856

Hew, K. F., & Brush, T. (2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: Current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development , 55(3), 223–252. doi:10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology , 41(1), 33–55. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00900.x

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2013). Use of Web 2.0 technologies in K-12 and higher education: The search for evidence-based practice. Educational Research Review , 9, 47–64. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2012.08.001

Hiebert, J. (1984). Children's mathematics learning: The struggle to link form and understanding. The Elementary School Journal , 84(5), 496. doi:10.1086/461380

High Fidelity. (2015). High Fidelity Inc. Retrieved from https://highfidelity.com/

Hilbelink, A. J. (2009). A measure of the effectiveness of incorporating 3-D human anatomy into an online undergraduate laboratory. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(4), 664–672. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00886.x

Himma, K. E. (2007). Foundational issues in information ethics. Library Hi Tech , 25(1), 79–94. doi:10.1108/07378830710735876

Himma, K. E., & Tavani, H. T. (Eds.). (2008). The Handbook of Information and Computer Ethics . John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9780470281819

Hislope, K. (2008). Language learning in a virtual world. The International Journal of Learning , 15(11), 51–58.

Hodge, E. M., & Collins, S. (2010). Collaborative efforts: Teaching and learning in virtual worlds. [Retrieved fromhttp://www.educause.edu/ero/article/collaborative-efforts-teaching-and-learning-virtual-worlds]. EDUCAUSE Review , 45(3), 62–63.

Holmberg, B. (2003). Distance education in essence: An overview of theory and practice in the early twenty-first century (2nd ed.). Germany: Oldenburg.

Holmberg, K., & Huvila, I. (2008). Learning together apart: Distance education in a virtual world. First Monday , 13(10). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2178/2033

Holmes, A., Signer, B., & MacLeod, A. (2011). Professional development at a distance: A mixed-method study exploring inservice teachers’ views on presence online. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education , 27(2), 76–85. doi:10.1080/21532974.2010.10784660

Holmes, J. (2007). Designing agents to support learning by explaining. Computers & Education , 48(4), 523–525. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.02.007

Hsieh, M. C., & Lin, H. C. K. (2011). A Conceptual Study for Augmented Reality E-learning System Based on Usability Evaluation. CISME , 1(8), 5–7. doi:10.5963/CISME0108002

Hsu, L. (2012). Web 3D simulation-based application in tourism education: A case study with Second Life. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education , 11(2), 113–124. doi:10.1016/j.jhlste.2012.02.013

Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S. S. (2010). Investigating learners’ attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education , 55(3), 1171–1182. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.014

Huang, H. W., Wu, C. W., & Chen, N. S. (2012). The effectiveness of using procedural scaffoldings in a paper-plus-smartphone collaborative learning context. Computers & Education , 59(2), 250–259. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.01.015

Huba, M. E., & Freed, J. E. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 13(2), 277–302.

Hullinger, J. (2015, June 28). Six innovative uses for virtual reality. The Idea Factory. Retrieved from http://theweek.com/articles/562851/6

Ibanez, M., Garcia, J., Galan, S., Maroto, D., Morillo, D., & Kloos, C. (2011). Design and Implementation of a 3D Multi-User Virtual World for Language Learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 14(4), 2–10.

İbili, E., & Şahin, S. (2013). Software design and development of an interactive 3D geomety book using augmented reality: ARGE3D. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Science and Engineering , 13(1), 1–8. doi:10.5578/fmbd.6213

Immersion (virtual reality). (2015). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Immersion_(virtual_reality)&oldid=690405136

Inman, C., Wright, V. H., & Hartman, J. A. (2010). Use of Second Life in K-12 and higher education: A review of research. Journal of Interactive Online Learning , 9(1), 44–63.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National educational technology standards for teachers (2nd ed.). Eugene, OR: Author.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2011). Technology, Coaching, and Community: Power partners for improved professional development in elementary and secondary schools. Retrieved from http://www.instructionalcoach.org/images/downloads/ISTE_Whitepaper_June_Final_Edits.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education. (2012). Digital age coaching. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-coaches

International Society for Technology in Education. (2015). Standards for teachers. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/ISTE-standards/standards-for-teachers

Jabbari, N., Sandoval, S., & Waxman, H. (2015, March). A Meta-Synthesis of Research Using Multiuser Virtual Environments (ie, Second Life) in Teacher Education. Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2015(1), 2375-2381.

Jamlan, M. (2004). Faculty opinions towards introducing e-learning at the University of Bahrain. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 5(2).

Janicki, T., & Steinberg, G. (2003). Evaluation of a computer-supported learning system. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education , 1(2), 203–223. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2003.00018.x

Janson, B. (2013). Faculty Perceptions of Instruction in Collaborative Virtual Immersive Learning Environments in Higher Education [Dissertation & Theses Collection]. Paper AAI3558390.

Jarmon, L. (2008). Pedagogy and learning in the virtual world of Second Life . In Rogers, P., Berg, G., Boettcher, J., Howard, C., Justice, L., & Schenck, K. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of distance learning (2nd ed., pp. 1610–1619). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Jarmon, L., & Sanchez, J. (2009). The educator’s coop: A model for collaboration and LSI communication research in the virtual world. The Electronic Journal of Communication , 19(1), 1–29.

Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2008). Exploration of learning in Second Life in an interdisciplinary communication course. Paper presentation at American Educational Research Association . New York: AERA.

Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2009). Virtual world teaching, experiential learning, and assessment: An interdisciplinary communication course in Second Life. Computers & Education , 53(1), 169–182. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.010

Jauregi, K., de Graaff, R., & Canto, S. (2012). Integrating Cross-Cultural Interaction through Video-Communication and Virtual Worlds in Foreign Language Teaching Programs: Burden or Added Value? Paper presented at theEuropean Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning (EuroCALL) Annual Conference.

Jayatilaka, D., Wolff, S. K., Grimwood, D. J., McKinnon, J. J., & Spackman, M. A. (2006). Crystal Explorer: A tool for displaying Hirshfeld surfaces and visualising intermolecular interactions in molecular crystals. Acta Crystallographica. Section A, Foundations of Crystallography , 62(a1), s90. doi:10.1107/S0108767306098199

Jestice, R. J., & Kahai, S. (2010). The effectiveness of virtual worlds for education: an empirical study. Paper presented at theSixteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Lima, Peru.

Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2008). 2008 Horizon report Australia-New Zealand edition. In 2008 Horizon Report Australia-New Zealand Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://wp.nmc.org/horizon-anz-2008/

Johnson, A. (2008). A nursing faculty's transition to teaching online. Nursing Education Perspectives , 29(1), 17–22.

Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., Moreno, R., & Reisslein, M. (2013). Pedagogical agent signaling of multiple visual engineering representations: The case of the young female agent. The Journal of Engineering Education , 102(2), 319–337. doi:10.1002/jee.20009

Johnson, A. M., Ozogul, G., & Reisslein, M. (2014). Supporting multimedia learning with visual signaling and animated pedagogical agent: Moderating effects of prior knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning . doi:doi:10.111/jcal.12078

Johnson, D. G. (1997). Ethics online. Communications of the ACM , 40(1), 60–65. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=242857.242875doi:10.1145/242857.242875

Johnson, D. G. (2005). Computer Ethics . In Frey, R. G., & Heath Wellman, C. (Eds.), A Companion to Applied Ethics . Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing; doi:10.1002/9780470996621.ch45

Johnson, D. G. (2009). Computer Ethics (4th ed.). Pearson.

Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Birchfield, D. A., Tolentino, L., & Koziupa, T. (2014). Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(1), 86–104. doi:10.1037/a0034008

Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report . Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus Constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research and Development , 39(3), 5–14. doi:10.1007/BF02296434

Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Jones, C. M., & Youngs, B. L. (2006). Teacher Preparation for Online Language Instruction . In Hubbard, P., & Levy, M. (Eds.), Teacher Education in CALL (pp. 267–280). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/lllt.14.22jon

Jung, T., & Han, D. (2014). Augmented reality (AR) in urban heritage tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research.

Jung, T., Chung, N., & Leue, M. (2015). The Determinants of Recommendations to Use Augmented Reality Technologies - The Case of a Korean Theme Park . Tourism Management , 49, 75–86. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2015.02.013

Kalyuga, S., & Sweller, J. (2014). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. E. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 247–262).

Kamel Boulos, M. N., Hetherington, L., & Wheeler, S. (2007). Second Life: An overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education. Health Information and Libraries Journal , 24(4), 233–245. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00733.x

Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1999). Using constructivism in technology-mediated learning: Constructing order out of the chaos in the literature. Radical Pedagogy , 1, 1–12. Retrieved from http://www.radicalpedagogy.org/radicalpedagogy/Using_Constructivism_in_Technology-Mediated_Learning__Constructing_Order_out_of_the_Chaos_in_the_Literature.html

Kapp, K., & O’Driscoll, T. (2010). Learning in 3D: adding a new dimension to enterprise learning and collaboration . Pfeiffer.

Kapp, K., & O'Driscoll, T. (2010). Learning in 3D. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Lai, K-W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: The premise, reality, and promise . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 215–230). New York: Springer.

Kastoudi, D. (2011). Using a Quest in a 3D Virtual Environment for Student Interaction and Vocabulary Acquisition in Foreign Language Learning. European Association for Computer-Assisted Language Learning . EUROCALL.

Kaufman, I., & Horton, C. (2015). Digital marketing: Integrating strategy and tactics with values: A guidebook for executives, managers & students . New York: Routledge.

Kaufmann, H., & Dünser, A. (2007). Summary of usability evaluations of an educational augmented reality application. Virtual Reality,LNCS (Vol. 4563, pp. 660–669). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-73335-5_71

Kaufmann, H., Steinbugl, K., Dunser, A., & Gluck, J. (2005). General training of spatial abilities by geometry education in augmented reality. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 8(4), 330.

Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance. The ARCS model approach . New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-1250-3

Kelton, A. J. (2008). Virtual worlds? Outlook good. EDUCAUSE Review , 43(5). Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/EDUCAUSE+Review/EDUCAUSE ReviewMagazineVolume43 /VirtualWorldsOutlookGood/163161

Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A. (2006). Making it real: Exploring the potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality (Waltham Cross) , 10(3-4), 163–174. doi:10.1007/s10055-006-0036-4

Kerbs, R. W. (2005). Social and ethical considerations in virtual worlds. The Electronic Library , 23(5), 539–546. doi:10.1108/02640470510631254

Kim, J. H., Park, S. T., Lee, H., Yuk, K. C., & Lee, H. (2001). Virtual reality simulations in physics education. Retrieved from http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/2001/2/02/index.asp

Kim, Y. (in press). Pedagogical agents. In M. Spector, et al. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Educational Technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=yanghee_kim

Kim, D., & Blankenship, R. J. (2013). Using “Second Life” as a Virtual Collaborative Tool for Preservice Teachers Seeking English for Speakers of Other Languages Endorsement. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 48(1), 19–43. doi:10.2190/EC.48.1.b

Kim M. Ryu J. (2003). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of pedagogical agent. In LassnerD.McNaughtC. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2003 (pp. 479-486). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Kim, S. H., Lee, J., & Thomas, M. K. (2012). Between purpose and method: A review of educational research on 3D virtual worlds. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 5(1), 1–18.

Kipper, G., & Rampolla, J. (2014). Augmented reality: An emerging technologies guide to AR . London: Elsevier.

Kirkpatrick, D. (1979). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Training and Development Journal , 33(6), 78–92.

Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele University, 33.

Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262113151.001.0001

Knutzen, B., & Kennedy, D. (2012). The Global Classroom Project: Learning a Second Language in a Virtual Environment. Electronic Journal of E-Learning , 10(1), 90–106.

Kolb, A.Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). The Kolb Learning Style Inventory – Version 3.1: 2005 Technical Specifications. Haygroup: Experience Based Learning Systems Inc.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Konstantinidis, A., & Tsiatsos, T. (2008). Selecting a networked virtual environment platform and the design of a collaborative e-learning environment. Paper presented at the 22nd International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications-Workshops AINAW.

Kopp, G., & Burkle, M. (2010). Using Second Life for just-in-time training: Building teaching frameworks in virtual worlds. [iJAC]. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning , 3(3), 19–25. Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/45604/article_45604.pdf

Korthagen, F. A. J. (2010). Situated learning theory and the pedagogy of teacher education: Towards an integrative view of teacher behavior and teacher learning. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies , 26(1), 98–106. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.05.001

Kotranza, A., Lind, D. S., Pugh, C. M., & Lok, B. (2009, October). Real-time in-situ visual feedback of task performance in mixed environments for learning joint psychomotorcognitive tasks. Paper presented at the8th IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), Orlando, FL.

Kotsilieris, T., & Dimopoulou, N. (2013). The evolution of e-learning in the context of 3-D virtual worlds. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning. 11(2), 147-167.

Kramer, A. D. I., Guillory, J. E., & Hancock, J. T. (2014). Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America , 111(24), 8788–8790. doi:10.1073/pnas.1320040111

Kramsch, C. (1995). The cultural component of language teaching. Language, Culture and Curriculum , 8(2), 83–93. doi:10.1080/07908319509525192

Krashen, S. D. (1987). Principles and practice in second language acquisition . London: Prentice-Hall International.

Krueger, M. W. (1991). Artificial reality (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Kuhs, T. M., Johnson, R. L., Agruso, S. A., & Monrad, D. M. (2001). Put to the test – tools and techniques for classroom assessment . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kumar, V., Venkatesan, R., & Reinartz, W. J. (2006). Knowing what to sell when to whom. Harvard Business Review , May, 131–145.

Kurzweil, D., & Marcellas, B. (2008). The faculty - instructional designer dyad. Proceedings ofWorld Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 3445-3446). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

KZero. (2013). Kzero Worldswide. Retrieved from http://www.kzero.co.uk/blog/category/education-and-academia

KZero. (2014). KZero Reports – Universe Charts. Retrieved from http://kzero.co.uk/

Lai, K.-W. (2008). ICT supporting the learning process: The premise, reality, and promise . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 215–230). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_13

Lane, H. C., Cahill, C., Foutz, S., Auerbach, D., Noren, D., Lussenhop, C., & Swartout, W. (2013). The effects of a pedagogical agent for informal science education on learner behaviors and self-efficacy . In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 309–318). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_32

Larsen-Freeman, D. (2007). Techniques and principles in language teaching (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: a framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2nd ed.). London, New York: Routledge/Falmer. doi:10.4324/9780203304846

Lave, G., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation . Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511815355

Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research , 77(4), 575–614. doi:10.3102/0034654307309921

Lee, H., Chung, N., & Jung, T. (2015). Examining the cultural differences in acceptance of mobile augmented reality: comparison of South Korea and Ireland . In Tussyadiah, I., & Inversini, A. (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 477–491). Wien: Springer International Publishing New York. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14343-9_35

Lee, K. (2012). Augmented reality in education and training. TechTrends , 56(2), 13–22. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0559-3

Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://67.192.40.213/~/media/Files/Reports/2010/PIP_Social_Media_and_Young_Adults_Report_Final_with_toplines.pdf

Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2007). Social networking websites and teens: an overview . Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.

Le, Q. T., Pedro, A., & Park, C. S. (2014). A social virtual reality based construction safety education system for experiential learning. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems , 1–20.

Lester, J. (2014). Augmented mind- The evolution of learning tools from language to immersive reality. Keynote speech presented at the 1st International Conference on e-Learning e-Education and Online Training. Bethesda, Maryland, United States.

Lester, J. C., Voerman, J. L., Towns, S. G., & Callaway, C. B. (1999). Deictic believability: Coordinated gesture, locomotion, and speech in lifelike pedagogical agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence , 13(4-5), 383–414. doi:10.1080/088395199117324

Leue, M. C., Jung, T., & Tom-Dieck, D. (2015). Google Glass Augmented Reality: Generic Learning Outcomes for Art Galleries. In I. Tussyadiah & A. Inversini (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism (pp. 463-476). Wien: Springer International Publishing.

Levien, R. E. (1972). The Emerging Technology: Instructional Uses of the Computer in Higher Education . New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Lewis, C. C., & Abdul- Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices: Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83-98.

Lewis, L. A., Koston, Z., Quartley, M., & Adsit, J. (2011). Virtual communities of practice: Bridging research and practice using Web 2.0. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 39(2), 155–161. doi:10.2190/ET.39.2.e

Lewis, W., Agarwal, R., & Sambamurthy, V. (2003). Sources of influence on beliefs about information technology use: An empirical study of knowledge workers. Management Information Systems Quarterly , 27(4), 657–678.

Liarokapis, F., Mourkoussis, N., White, M., Darcy, J., Sifniotis, M., & Petridis, P. (2004). Web 3D and augmented reality to support engineering education. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education , 3(1), 11–14.

Liarokapis, F., Petridis, P., Lister, P., & White, M. (2002). Multimedia Augmented Reality Interface for E-learning (MARIE). World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education , 1(2), 173–176.

Ligorio, M., Cesareni, D., & Schwartz, N. (2008). Collaborative virtual environments as means to increase the level of intersubjectivity in a distributed cognition system. Journal of Research on Technology in Education , 40(3), 339–357. doi:10.1080/15391523.2008.10782511

Lim, K. Y. T. (2009). The six learnings of Second Life: A framework for designing curricular interventions in-world.

Linden Lab. (2013). Infographic - 10 Years of Second Life. Retrieved from http://lindenlab.com/releases/infographic-10-years-of-second-life

Linden Lab. (2013). Infographic: 10 years of Second Life. Retrieved from http://www.lindenlab.com/releases/infographic

Linden Lab. (2013). SL10B Infographic: Ten Years of Second Life. Retrieved from http://www.lindenlab.com/releases/infographic-10-years-of-second-life

Linden Lab. (2015). Mainland Pricing and Fees. Retrieved from https://secondlife.com/land/pricing.php

Linden Research. (2011). Second Life education: The virtual learning advantage. Retrieved from http://lecs-static-secondlife-com.s3.amazonaws.com/work/SL-Edu-Brochure-010411.pdf

Lissitz, R. W., & Schafer, W. D. (2002). Assessment in educational reform: Both means and ends . Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Liu, D., Jenkins, S. A., Sanderson, P. M., Fabian, P., & Russell, W. J. (2010). Monitoring with head-mounted displays in general anesthesia: A clinical evaluation in the operating room. Society for Technology in Anesthesia , 110(4), 1032–1038.

Liu, T.-Y. (2009). A context-aware ubiquitous learning environment for language listening and speaking. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 25(6), 515–527. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00329.x

Long, M. H. (1991). Focus on form: a design feature in language teaching methodology . In de Bot, K., Ginsberg, R., & Kramsch, C. (Eds.), Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective (pp. 39–52). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:10.1075/sibil.2.07lon

Long, M. H. (1997). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition . In Ritchie, W., & Bhatia, T. (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Lopes, C. V. (2009). The massification and webification of systems’ modeling and simulation with virtual worlds. Proceedings of the 7th joint meeting of the European software engineering conference and the ACM SIGSOFT symposium on The foundations of software engineering (pp. 63–70). ACM; Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1595708

Loureiro, A., & Bettencourt, T. (2011). The Extended Classroom: Meeting students’ needs using a virtual environment. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences , 15, 2667–2672. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.167

Louvre -DNP Museum Lab. (2015). Past presentation. Retrieved from http://www.museumlab.jp/english/tech/04tech.html

Lowendahl, J. M. (2013, July 25). Hype Cycle for Education, 2013. Gartner. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=251104

Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2014). The modality principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 227–246). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Luciano, C., Banerjee, P., & DeFanti, T. (2009). Haptics-based virtual reality periodontal training simulator. Virtual Reality (Waltham Cross) , 13(2), 69–85. doi:10.1007/s10055-009-0112-7

Ludwig, C., & Reimann, C. (2005). Augmented reality: Information at focus. Cooperative Computing & Communication Laboratory, 4(1). Universitat Paderborn.

Lum, R. (2012). 10 mind-blowing augmented reality campaigns. Retrieved fromhttp://bit.ly/1kMP8AD

Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: Does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples? Applied Cognitive Psychology , 21(6), 747–764. doi:10.1002/acp.1347

Macedo A. Morgado L. (2009). Learning to teach in Second Life.Proceedings of EDEN seventh open classroom conference (pp. 120-126).

Macίas-Dίaz, A. (2008). Survey of e-business module (MN5553). St. Andrews University: St. Andrews, Scotland.

Magnenat-Thalmann, N., & Thalmann, D. (1999). Virtual reality software and technology. Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technology, Marcel Dekker, 41.

Marcelino, R., Silva, J., Gruber, V., & Bilessimo, M. (2012). 3D virtual worlds using open source platform and integrated remote experimentation. Paper presented at the 2012 9th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation (REV).

Margitay-Becht, A., & Herrera, D. R. (2008). Fun is Learning: A Case Study of Gaming as Education in Virtual Worlds . In Nygaard, C., & Holtham, C. (Eds.), Understanding Learning-centred Higher Education . Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press.

Margitay-Becht, A., & Herrera, D. R. (2013). Teaching Social Skills in Virtual Worlds: A primer for extending existing social science education to business management . In D'Agustino, S. (Ed.), Immersive Environments, Augmented Realities and Virtual Worlds: Assessing Future Trends in Education . IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2670-6.ch011

Marino, P. (2004). The art of machinima: 3D game-based filmmaking . Scottsdale: Paraglyph Press.

MarketingWeek. (2015). Online retail will drive innovation in interactive marketing. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbpjdM

Martens, R., Bastiaens, T., & Kirschner, P. A. (2007). New learning design in distance education: The impact on student perception and motivation. Distance Education , 28(1), 81–93. doi:10.1080/01587910701305327

Martin-Gutierrez, J., Saorin, J. L., Contero, M., Alcaniz, M., Perez-Lopez, D. C., & Ortega, M. (2010). Design and validation of an augmented book for spatial abilities development in engineering students. Computers & Graphics , 34(1), 77–91. doi:10.1016/j.cag.2009.11.003

Matsuda, T., Nakayama, H., & Tamada, K. (2015). Using 3D virtual reality technology in cyber ethics education: How can we really evaluate and change students' attitudes? In Human rights and ethics: concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1621-1636). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6433-3.ch089

Ma, W., Adesope, O. O., Nesbit, J. C., & Liu, Q. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(4), 901–918. doi:10.1037/a0037123

Maxwell, D., Griffith, T., & Finkelstein, N. M. (2014). Use of Virtual Worlds in the Military Services as Part of a Blended Learning Strategy . In Hale, K. S., & Stanney, K. M. (Eds.), Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation and Applications (2nd ed., pp. 959–1000). CRC Press. doi:10.1201/b17360-45

Mayer, R. E. (2005). Principles of multimedia learning based on social cues: personalization, voice, and image principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 201–212). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.014

Mayer, R. E. (2014a). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 43–71). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mayer, R. E. (2014b). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 345–370). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.017

Mayer, R. E., & DaPra, C. S. (2012). An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied , 18(3), 239–252. doi:10.1037/a0028616

Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist , 38(1), 43–52. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6

Mayer, R. E., & Pilegard, C. (2014). Principles for managing essential processing in multimedia learning: Segmenting, pre-training, and modality principles . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 316–344). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.016

Mayer, R. E., Sobko, K., & Mautone, P. D. (2003). Social cues in multimedia learning: Role of speaker’s voice. Journal of Educational Psychology , 95(2), 419–425. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.95.2.419

Mayes, R., Ku, H., Akarasriworn, C., Luebeck, J., & Korkmaz, O. (2011). Themes and strategies for transformative online instruction: A review of literature and practice. Quarterly Review of Distance Education , 12(3), 151–166.

Mazuryk, T., & Gervautz, M. (1996). Virtual reality, history, applications, technology and future, 1-72. Institute of Computer Graphics, Vienna University of Technology, Austria. Retrieved August 29, 2015 from https://www.cg.tuwien.ac.at/research/publications/1996/mazuryk-1996-VRH/TR-186-2-96-06Paper.pdf

McArthur, V., Teather, R., & Stuerzlinger, W. (2010). Comparing 3D content creation interfaces in two virtual worlds: World of Warcraft and second life. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds , 2(3), 239–258. doi:10.1386/jgvw.2.3.239_1

McElheran, K. S. (2012). Do market leaders lead in business process innovation? The case(s) of e-business adoption . Boston: Harvard Business School.

McInnes, E., & Wimpenny, P. (2008). Using Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument software to synthesize studies on older people’s views and experiences of falls prevention. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare , 6, 337–344.

McKee, H. A., & Porter, J. E. (2009). Playing a Good Game : Ethical Issues in Researching MMOGs and Virtual Worlds. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 2(1).

McKeown, L. (2007). Taking action learning online in the 3D virtual worlds of Second Life. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning , 8(3).

McLellan, H. (1996). Virtual realities. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 457-487). New York, NY, USA: Macmillan Library Reference.

McLellan, H. (2003). Virtual realities . In Jonassen, D. H., & Harris, P. (Eds.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 461–498). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Means, B., & Haertel, G. D. (2004). Using technology evaluation to enhance student learning . New York: Teachers College Press.

Medawar, P. (1969). Induction and Intuition . Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.

Mendonça, R. F., Carreira, S. M., & Sampaio, P. N. (2011). VirtualLabs@ UMa: A customizable 3D learning platform for experimental activities. Paper presented at the 2011 International Conference on Multimedia Computing and Systems (ICMCS).

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. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033

Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional design & learning theory. Retrieved from http://www.usask.ca/education/coursework/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm

Meskill, C. (1999). Computers as Tool for Sociocollaborative Language Learning . In Cameron, K. (Ed.), Computer assisted language learning (CALL): media, design and applications (pp. 141–162). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.

Meskó, B. (2008). Unique medical simulation in second life! Science Roll Blog. Retrieved from http://scienceroll.com/2008/08/17/unique-medical-simulation-in-second-life/

Messer, S., Evans, S., Cownie, M., & Dawe, C. (2012). Greenbank – A model for situated learning in Second Life. In T. Amiel & B. Wilson (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2012 (pp. 844-849). Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Meyers, C., & Jones, T. B. (1993). Promoting active learning: Strategies for the college classroom . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Michel, H. (2013, January). From Haute-Couture to Ready-to-Wear: Typology of Serious Games Implementation Strategies in Higher Education. Proceedings of theEuropean Conference on Games Based Learning (p. 386). Academic Conferences International Limited.

Milgram, P., & Kishino, F. (1994). A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans. Information and Systems. E (Norwalk, Conn.) , 77-D(12), 1321–1329.

Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1994). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum, SPIE . Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies , 2351, 282–291. doi:10.1117/12.197321

Millar, R. (1991). Why is science hard to learn? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning , 7(7), 66–74. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.1991.tb00229.x

Miller, K. F., Kelly, M., & Zhou, X. (2005). Learning mathematics in China and the United States. Handbook of mathematical cognition, 163-178.

Miller, G. A. (1956). The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review , 63(2), 81–97. doi:10.1037/h0043158

Miller, K. F., Smith, C. M., Zhu, J., & Zhang, H. (1995). Preschool origins of cross-national differences in mathematical competence: The role of number-naming systems. Psychological Science , 6(1), 56–60. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00305.x

Miller, K. F., & Stigler, J. W. (1987). Counting in Chinese: Cultural variation on a basic cognitive skill. Cognitive Development , 2(3), 279–305. doi:10.1016/S0885-2014(87)90091-8

Miller, R. (2014). The application of virtual reality in higher education distance learning. Journal of Applied Learning Technology , 4(4), 15–18.

Minocha, S., & Roberts, D. (2008). Laying the groundwork for socialisation and knowledge construction within 3-D virtual worlds. ALT-J . Research in Learning Technology , 16(3), 181–196. doi:10.1080/09687760802526699

Mishra, S. (2009). Virtual worlds. In S. Mishra (Ed.), E-Learning (pp. 110-113). New Delhi: IndiraGandhi National Open University. Retrieve from http://webserver.ignou.ac.in/institute/STRIDE_Hb8_webCD/STRIDE_Hb8_Full.pdf

Mladenovic, S., Kuvac, H., & Štula, M. (2012). Virtual learning environment . In Virtual learning environments: concepts, methodologies, tools and applications (pp. 1–16). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference; doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0011-9.ch101

MMOs.com. (2015). Retrieved from http://mmos.com/editorials/most-popular-mmorpgs-world

Mobile Marketer. (2015). Mobile augmented reality to drive $1.5B in revenue by 2015. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1nbq32r

Mohapatra, S. (2009). Business process automation . New Delhi: PHI Private Limited.

Molka-Danielsen, J., Richardson, D., Deutschmann, M., & Carter, B. (2007). Teaching and Learning Affectively within a Virtual Campus. International Journal of Networking and Virtual Organization (Special Issue: Toward Virtual Universities), 6(5), 476-498.

Molnar, A. R. (1975). Viable Goals for New Educational Technology Efforts: Science Education and the New Technological Revolution . Educational Technology , 15(9).

Molnar, A. R. (1990). Computers in education: A historical perspective of the unfinished task . T.H.E. Journal , 18(4), 80–83.

Monday, C. (2015). 5 augmented reality examples worth looking at - ignite social media. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1mN1qZD

Moore, A. H., Moore, J. F., & Fowler, S. B. (2005). Faculty development for the net generation. In D. G. Oblinger, & J. L. Oblinger (Eds.), Educating the Net Generation: Educause. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/

Moore, M. G. (1999). Monitoring and evaluation [Editorial]. American Journal of Distance Education , 13(2), 1–5. doi:10.1080/08923649909527019

Moravec, J. W. (2008). Knowmads in society 3.0 . Education Futures.

Moreno-Ger, P., Torrente, J., Hsieh, Y. G., & Lester, W. T. (2012). Usability testing for serious games: Making informed design decisions with user data. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction , 2012, 1–13. doi:10.1155/2012/369637

Moreno, R. (2005). Multimedia learning with animated pedagogical agents . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 507–524). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511816819.032

Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction , 19(2), 177–213. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI1902_02

Morin, J. E., & Franks, D. J. (2009). Why do some children have difficulty learning mathematics? Looking at language for answers. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth , 54(2), 111–118. doi:10.1080/10459880903217861

Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating variables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with limited integration. Computers & Education , 51(4), 1523–1537. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.02.003

Muller, D., Chilliischi, A., & Langer, S. (2012). Integrating immersive 3D worlds and real lab equipment for teaching mechatronics.Paper presented at the 2012 9th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation (REV).10.1109/REV.2012.6293117

Munezawa, T., Kaneita, Y., Osaki, Y., Kanda, H., Minowa, M., Suzuki, K., & Ohida, T. (2011). The association between use of mobile phones after lights out and sleep disturbances among Japanese adolescents: A nationwide cross-sectional survey. Sleep , 34(8), 1013–1020. doi:doi:10.5665/sleep.1152

Murray, M., & Tenenbaum, G. (2010). Computerized pedagogical agents as an educational means for developing physical self-efficacy and encouraging activity in youth. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 42(3), 267–283. doi:10.2190/EC.42.3.b

Najaftorkaman, M., Ghapanchi, A. H., Talaei‐Khoei, A., & Ray, P. (2014). A taxonomy of antecedents to user adoption of health information systems: A synthesis of thirty years of research. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology.

Najaftorkaman, M., Ghapanchi, A. H., Talaei-Khoei, A., & Ray, P. (2013). Recent research areas and grand challenges in electronic medical record: A literature survey approach. The International Technology Management Review , 3(1), 12–21. doi:10.2991/itmr.2013.3.1.2

National Survey of Student Engagement. (NSSE) (2014). Center for Postsecondary Research, Indiana University School of Education, Bloomington, IND. Retrieved from http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2014_Results/pdf/NSSE_2014_Annual_Results.pdf#page=8

Nelson G. (2001). Do no harm: A first measure of effectiveness in small distance education programs.Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2001: World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia, and Telecommunications. Tampere, Finland.

Nettles, K., Dziuban, C., Cioffe, D., Moskal, P., & Moskal, P. (2000). Technology and Learning: The ‘no significant difference’ phenomenon: A structural analysis of research on technology enhanced instruction . In Dziuban, C. D., & Moskal, P. D. (Eds.), Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation . Orlando: University of Central Florida.

Neuhofer, B., Buhalis, D., & Ladkin, A. (2013). A typology of technology-enhanced tourism experiences. International Journal of Tourism Research . doi:doi:10.1002/jtr.1958

New Media Consortium. (2011). The Horizon Report 2011 Edition. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2011-Horizon-Report.pdf

Nicholls, J., & Philip, R. (2012). Solo life to Second Life: The design of physical and virtual learning spaces inspired by the drama classroom. Research in Drama Education , 17(4), 583–602. doi:10.1080/13569783.2012.727628

Nikolaou, A., & Tsolakidis, C. (2012). The role of three dimensional virtual environments in the development of Personal Learning Networks. Paper presented at the 2012 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL). 10.1109/ICL.2012.6402114

Nishide, R., & Ueshima, S. (2004). Digital campus project: a” dream university” over the Internet Web. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing.

Nishide, R. (2011). Prospects for digital campus with extensive applications of virtual collaborative space. Journal of Interactive Learning Research , 22(3), 421–443.

Noorman, M. (2014). Computing and Moral Responsibility. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2014/entries/computing-responsibility/

Nordin, S. (2003). Tourism clustering and innovation- paths to economic growth and development. Ostersund . European Tourism Research Institute.

Noteborn, G., Dailey-Hebert, A., Bohle-Carbonell, K., & Gijselears, W. (2013), Essential knowledge for academic performance: Educating in the virtual world to promote active learning. Teacher and Teacher Education, 37(January), 217-234. http://authors.elsevier.com/sd/article/S0742051X1300156X

Novak-Marcincin, J., Janak, M., Barna, J., & Novakova-Marcincinova, L. (2014). Application of Virtual and Augmented Reality Technology in Education of Manufacturing Engineers. New perspectives in information systems and technologies, 2, 439-446.

O'Connor, E. A., & Sakshaug, L. E. (2009). Preparing for Second Life: Two teacher educators reflect on their initial foray into virtual teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 37(3), 259–271. doi:10.2190/ET.37.3.c

Oddcast Inc. (2015). SitePal. Retrieved from http://www.sitepal.com/

Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). (1992). Grand Challenges: High Performance Computing and Communications. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.hpcc.gov

Office of Social and Economic Data Analysis (OSEDA). (2001). Final results from the e-MINTS teacher survey . Columbia, MO: Author.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Office of Technology Assessment. (1982). Informational technology and its impact on American education, 128-133. U.S. Congress, Washington, DC.

Okimoto, H., & Heck, R. (2014). Examining the Impact of Redesigned Developmental Math Courses in Community Colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, (ahead-of-print), 1-14.

Okita, S. Y., Turkay, S., Mihwa, K., & Murai, Y. (2013). Learning by teaching with virtual peers and the effects of technological design choices on learning. Computers & Education , 63, 176–196. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.005

Olds, B. M., & Miller, R. L. (1998). An assessment matrix for evaluating engineering programs. The Journal of Engineering Education , 87(2), 173–178. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1998.tb00338.x

Oliver, M., & Carr, D. (2009). Learning in virtual worlds: Using communities of practice to explain how people learn from play. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(3), 14. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00948.x

Olson, T., Procci, K., & Bowers, C. (2011). Serious games usability testing: How to ensure proper usability, playability, and effectiveness . In Design, user experience, and usability: Theory, methods, tools, and practice (pp. 625–634). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21708-1_70

Olsson, T., & Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K. (2013). Expected User Experience of Mobile Augmented Reality Services. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 17(2), 287–304. doi:10.1007/s00779-011-0494-x

Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2013). Virtual and augmented reality applications in manufacturing . Springer Science & Business Media.

Oravec, J. A. (2003). Some influences of online distance learning on US higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education , 27(1), 89–103. doi:10.1080/03098770305628

Ota, D., Loftin, B., Saito, T., Lea, R., & Keller, J. (1995). Virtual reality in surgical education. Computers in Biology and Medicine , 25(2), 127–137. doi:10.1016/0010-4825(94)00009-F

Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2014). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2^nd ed., pp. 27-42).

Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology , 84(4), 429–434. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429

Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012). An evolutionary upgrade of cognitive load theory: Using the human motor system and collaboration to support the learning of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review , 24(1), 27–45. doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2

Panda, S., & Mishra, S. (2007). E-learning in a mega open university: Faculty attitude, barriers and motivators. Educational Media International , 44(4), 323–338. doi:10.1080/09523980701680854

Pantelidis, V. S. (1997). Virtual Reality (VR) as an instructional aid: a model for determining when to use VR. Retrieved from http://www.coe.ecu.edu/vr/vredmod.html

Pantelidis, V. S., & Auld, L. (2002). Teaching virtual reality courses online. CCAI: The Journal for the Integrated Study of Artificial Intelligence, Cognitive Science and Applied Epistemology.

Pantelidis, V.S. (2010). Reasons to use virtual reality in education and training courses and a model to determine when to use virtual reality, Themes in Science and Technology Education (Special Issue),59-70.

Pantelidis, V. (2009). Reasons to use virtual reality in education and training courses and a model to determine when to use virtual reality. Themes in Science and Technology Education , 2(1), 58–70.

Pantelidis, V. S. (1993). Virtual reality in the classroom. Educational Technology , 33(4), 23–27.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2007). Framework for 21st century learning. Retrieved from http://www.21stcenturyskills.org

Pasfield-Neofitou, S. (2011). Online domains of language use: Second language learners’ experiences of virtual community and foreignness. Language Learning & Technology , 15(2), 92–108.

Patrignani, N., & Whitehouse, D. (2014, July 30 – August 1). Slow Tech: The Bridge between Computer Ethics and Business Ethics. In K. Kimppa, D. Whitehouse, T. Kuusela, & J. Phahlamohlaka (Eds.), Proceedings of 11th IFIP TC 9 International Conference on Human Choice and Computers (HCC11 2014), Turku, Finland (Vol. 431, pp. 92–106). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-662-44208-1

Patterson, D. C., Reiniger, R. L., & Robertson, A. M. (2012). Cross-Reality Math Visualization: The subQuan System Dream Realizations. Immersive Environments, Augmented Realities, and Virtual Worlds: Assessing Future Trends in Education: Assessing Future Trends in Education, 57.

Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption of mobile handheld technologies in western Australian independent schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 29(1), 66–81. doi:doi:10.1234/ajet.v29i1.64

Penner-Wilger M. Fast L. LeFevre J. Smith-Chant B. L. Skwarchuk S. Kamawar D. Bisanz J. (2007). The foundations of numeracy: Subitizing, finger gnosia, and fine-motor ability. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1385-1390). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

Pereira, O. R. E., & Rodrigues, J. J. P. C. (2013). Survey and Analysis of Current Mobile Learning Applications and Technologies. ACM Computing Surveys, 46(2), 27:1–27:35. doi:10.1145/2543581.2543594

Petersen, C., & Toop, A. (1994). Sales Promotion in Postmodern Marketing . Aldershot: Gower Publishing Ltd.

Peterson, B. (2012). It Looks Great but How do I Know If It Fits?: an Introduction to Meta-synthesis Research. In K. Hannes, & C. Lockwood (Ed.), Synthesizing Qualitative Research: Choosing the Right Approach. John Wiley & Sons, LTD: Hoboken, NJ.

Peterson, M. (2011). Towards a Research Agenda for the Use of Three-Dimensional Virtual Worlds in Language Learning. CALICO Journal , 29(1), 67–80. doi:10.11139/cj.29.1.67-80

Petrakou, A. (2010). Interacting through avatars: Virtual worlds as a context for online education. Computers & Education , 54(4), 1020–1027. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.10.007

Petrina, S. (2007). Advanced teaching methods for the classroom . Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing. doi:10.4018/978-1-59904-337-1

Pew Internet. (2009). Internet, broadband, and cell phone statistics. Retrieved from http://www.distributedworkplace.com/DW/Research/Internet%20broadband%20and%20cell%20phone%20statistics%20-%20Pew%20Internet%20Report%20Jan%202010.pdf

Phan, V. T., & Choo, S. (2010). Interior design in augmented reality in environment. International Journal of Computers and Applications , 5(5), 16–21. doi:10.5120/912-1290

Phillips, J. J. (1996). How much is the training worth? Training & Development , 50(4), 20–24.

Phillips, J., & Berge, Z. (2009). Second Life for dental education. Journal of Dental Education , 73(11), 1260–1264.

Pierce, D. (2015, March 6). The Future of Virtual Reality is inside your smartphone, Wired, Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2015/03/future-virtual-reality-inside-smartphone/

Pink, D. H. (2006). A whole new mind: Why right-brainers will rule the future . Penguin.

Plant, E. A., Baylor, A. L., Doeer, C. E., & Rosenberg-Kima, R. (2009). Changing middle-school students’ attitudes and performance regarding engineering with computer-based social models. Computers & Education , 53(2), 209–215. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.013

Popovici, D. M., Gerval, J. P., Hamza-Lup, F., Querrec, R., Polceanu, M., Popovici, N., & Zăgan, R. (2009). 3D virtual spaces supporting engineering learning activities. International Journal of Computers, Communications & Control , IV(4), 401–414.

Powers, T. M. (2003). Real Wrongs in Virtual Communities. Ethics and Information Technology , 5(4), 191–198. doi:10.1023/B:ETIN.0000017737.56971.20

Prasolova-Forland, E. (2004). Supporting social awareness among university students in 3D CVEs: Benefits and limitations. Paper presented at the 2004 International Conference on Cyberworlds. 10.1109/CW.2004.59

Prasolova-Førland, E. (2008). Analyzing place metaphors in 3D educational collaborative virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior , 24(2), 185–204. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.009

Preexamples. (2015). Paddy Power augmented reality campaign brings the Queen’s face on £10 note to life. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1CRur13

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon , 9(5), 1–6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816

Prieto-Arranz, J. I., Juan-Garau, M., & Jacob, K. L. (2013). Re-imagining cultural identity: Transcultural and translingual communication in virtual third-space environments. Language, Culture and Curriculum , 26(1), 19–35. doi:10.1080/07908318.2012.759585

Prus, J., & Johnson, R. (1994). A critical review of student assessment options . In Bers, T. H., & Mittler, M. L. (Eds.), Assessment & Testing, Myths & Realities. New Directions for Community Colleges, 88 (pp. 69–83). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. doi:10.1002/cc.36819948811

Pulse Simulation Technology. (2008). Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q11aWO6dg2Q

Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher , 29(1), 4–15. doi:10.3102/0013189X029001004

Rachel, S., Cobcroft, R., Towers, S., Smith, J., & Bruns, A. (2006). Mobile Learning in Review: Opportunities and Challenges for Learners, Teachers, and Institutions. Proceedings of the Online Learning and Teaching (OLT) Conference 2006. doi:10.1016/S0190-9622(06)01179-0

Rawls, J. (1955). Two concepts of rules. The Philosophical Review , 64(1), 3–32. doi:10.2307/2182230

Rayport, J. F., & Jaworski, B. J. (2004). Best face forward. Harvard Business Review , 82(12), 1–12.

Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In Reigeluth, C. M. (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models - a new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 5–29). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Reinick, L. B. (1983). Mathematics and Science and Learning: A New Conception. Science , 220(4596), 477–478. doi:10.1126/science.220.4596.477

Reinsmith-Jones, K., Kibbe, S., Crayton, T., & Campbell, E. (2015). Use of Second Life in social work education: Virtual world experiences and their effect on students. Journal of Social Work Education , 51(1), 90–108.

Repenning, A., Webb, D., & Ioannidou, A. (2012). Scalable game design and the development of a checklist for getting computational thinking into public schools. Association for Computer Machinery (ACM). Retrieved from http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~ralex/papers/PDF/SIGCSE10-repenning.pdf

Reynolds, R. (2012). Ethics and practice in virtual worlds . In Sageng, J. R., Fossheim, H., & Larsen, T. M. (Eds.), The Philosophy of Computer Games (Vol. 7, pp. 143–158). Springer; doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4249-9_10

Rheingold, H. (1991). Virtual reality: The revolutionary technology of computer generated artificial worlds . New York: Simon & Schuster Publishing.

Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teaching and teacher education: Theory and practice . In Richardson, V. (Ed.), Constructivist teacher education: Building a world of new understandings (pp. 3–14). Florence, KY: Psychology Press.

Rikoon, S., Liebtag, T., Olivera-Aguilar, M., Robbins, S., & Jackson, T. (2014). A Pilot Study of Holistic Assessment and Course Placement in Community College: Findings and Recommendations.

Riva, G. (2006). Virtual reality, Encyclopaedia of Biomedical Engineering . London: John Wiley & Sons.

Robinson, D., & Garratt, C. (2000). Introducing Ethics . Totem Books.

Roblyer, M. D. (2003). Integrating educational technology into teaching (3rd ed.). NJ: Pearson Education.

Rock, D., & Schwartz, J. (2006). The neuroscience of leadership. Retrieved from http://www.strategy-business.com/article/06207?gko=6da0a

Roehl, A., Reddy, S., & Shannon, G. (2013). The flipped classroom: An opportunity to engage millennial students through active learning strategies. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences , 105(2), 44–49. doi:10.14307/JFCS105.2.12

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations . New York, NY: Free Press.

Rokeach, M. (1960). The open and closed mind . New York: Basic Books.

Roman, D. (2011, February 11). Online Game's Banker Battles Inflation. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748704132204576135931023983542

Romero-Hall, E., Watson, G. S., Papelis, Y., & Garcia, H. (2014). Nursing pain assessment and management: A 3D interactive simulation. International Journal of Designs for Learning , 5(1), 43–56.

Rosemblum, L. J., & Cross, R. A. (1997). The challenge of virtual reality . In Earnshaw, W. R., Vince, J., & Jones, H. (Eds.), Visualization & Modeling (pp. 325–399). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Rosenbaum, E., Klopfer, E., & Perry, J. (2007). On location learning: Authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 16(1), 31–45. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-9036-0

Rosenberg, A. (2010). Virtual world research ethics and the private/public distinction. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics , 3, 23–36.

Rovai, A. P. (2002). A preliminary look at the structural differences of higher education classroom communities in traditional and ALN courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 6(1), 41–56.

Rudestam, K. E., & Schoenholtz-Read, J. (2010). The flourishing of adult online education: An overview . In Rudestam, K. E., & Schoenholtz-Read, J. (Eds.), Handbook of online learning (pp. 1–18). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Rungtusanatham, M., Ellram, L. M., Siferd, S. P., & Salik, S. (2004). Toward a typology of business education in the Internet age. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education , 2(2), 101–120. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2004.00040.x

Rust, R. T., Katherine, N. L., & Valarie, A. Z. (2004). Return on marketing: Using customer equity to focus marketing strategy. Journal of Marketing , 68(1), 109–127. doi:10.1509/jmkg.68.1.109.24030

Sabourin, J. L., & Lester, J. C. (2014). Affect and engagement in game-based learning environments. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing , 5(1), 45–56. doi:10.1109/T-AFFC.2013.27

Sadler, R., & Nurmukhamedov, U. (2008, March). Second Life and task-based learning. Paper presented atCALICO annual conference, San Francisco, CA.

Sala, N. (2002a). Virtual reality in the educational environments. ProceedingsIEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies ICALT 2002, Kazan, Russia(pp. 417-419).

Sala, N. (2002b). From Virtual Reality to the Virtual Cities. ProceedingsInternational Conference on New Educational Environment, Lugano, Switzerland (pp. 21-24).

Sala, N., Metzeltin, S., & Sala, M. (2002). Applications of mathematics in the real world: territory and landscape. ProceedingsInternational Conference: The Humanistic Renaissance in Mathematics Education, Città del Mare, Sicilia, Italy(pp. 326-333).

Sala, N. (2009a). Fractal Geometry in Artificial Worlds and in Second Life. Chaos and Complexity Letters , 4(1), 23–34.

Sala, N. (2009b). Fractal Geometry and Computer Science . In Gutierrez, J. (Ed.), Selected Readings on Telecommunications and Networking (pp. 385–404). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference; doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-094-3.ch028

Sala, N. (2012). Virtual reality in architecture, in engineering and beyond . In Abu-Taieh, E., El Sheikh, A., & Jafari, M. (Eds.), Technology Engineering and Management in Aviation: Advancements and Discoveries (pp. 336–345). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference; doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-887-3.ch020

Sala, N. (2013a). Applications of Virtual Reality Technologies in Architecture and in Engineering. International Journal of Space Technology Management and Innovation , 3(2), 78–88. doi:10.4018/ijstmi.2013070104

Sala, N. (2013b). Fractals, computer science and beyond . In Orsucci, F., & Sala, N. (Eds.), Complexity science, living systems, and reflexing interfaces: new models and perspectives (pp. 268–291). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference; doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2077-3.ch014

Sala, N., & Sala, M. (2005). Virtual reality in education . In Carbonara, D. (Ed.), Technology literacy applications in learning environments (pp. 358–367). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc.doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-479-8.ch025

Saleeb, N., & Dafoulas, G. (2010). Pedagogical immigration to 3D virtual worlds: A critical review of underlying themes and their concepts. Paper presented at the 2010 International Conference on Information Society (i-Society).

Salmon, G. (2009). The future for (second) life and learning. British Journal of Educational Technology , 40(3), 13. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00967.x

Salmon, G., Nie, M., & Edirisingha, P. (2010). Developing a five-stage model of learning in Second Life. Educational Research , 52(2), 169–182. doi:10.1080/00131881.2010.482744

Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning. Review of Research in Education , 23, 1–24.

Saposnik, G., & Levin, M. (2011). Virtual reality in stroke rehabilitation a meta-analysis and implications for clinicians. Stroke , 42(5), 1380–1386. doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.605451

Satava, R. M. (1995a). Virtual reality, telesurgery, and the new world order of medicine. Computer Aided Surgery , 1(1), 12–16. doi:10.3109/10929089509106821

Satava, R. M. (1995b). Medical applications of virtual reality. Journal of Medical Systems , 19(3), 275–280. doi:10.1007/BF02257178

Satava, R. M., & Jones, S. B. (1996). Virtual reality and telemedicine: Exploring advanced concepts. Telemedicine Journal , 2(3), 195–200. doi:10.1089/tmj.1.1996.2.195

Scacchi, W., Brown, C., & Nies, K. (2012). Exploring the Potential of Virtual Worlds for Decentralized Command and Control Point of Contact. Proceedings of the 17th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS 2012). DTIC Document.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology . In Sawyer, K. (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97–118). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Schiller, S. Z., Goodrich, K., & Gupka, P. B. (2013). Let them play! Active learning in a virtual world. Information Systems Management , 30(1), 50–62. doi:10.1080/10580530.2013.739891

Schroeder, N. L., & Adesope, O. O. (2013). How does a contextually-relevant peer pedagogical agent in a learner-attenuated system-paced learning environment affect cognitive and affective outcomes? Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology , 2(2), 114–133.

Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R.B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 49(1), 1–39. doi:10.2190/EC.49.1.a

Schroeder, R. (2008). Defining virtual worlds and virtual environments. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1).

Schroeder, R. (2008). Defining Virtual Worlds and Virtual Environments. Journal of Virtual Worlds Research , 1(1). Retrieved from http://journals.tdl.org/jvwr/article/view/294

Schuemie, M. J., Van Der Straaten, P., Krijn, M., & Van Der Mast, C. A. P. G. (2001). Research on presence in virtual reality: A survey. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 4(2), 183–201. doi:10.1089/109493101300117884

Second Life. (n. d.). Retrieved from the Second Life Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life

Seo, B.-K., Kim, K., & Park, J. (2011). Augmented reality-based on-site tour guide: A study in Gyeongbokgung. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 6469, 276–285. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22819-3_28

September 21, 2015 from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/FINDINGS/special3/

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2005). Towards a Theory of Mobile Learning. Proceedings of mLearn, 1, 1–9.

Shelton, B. E., & Hedley, N. R. (2002). Using augmented reality for teaching earth-sun relationship to undergraduate geography students. Proceedings ofthe First IEEE International Augmented Reality Toolkit Workshop (pp. 1-8). Darmstadt, Germany: IEEE. 10.1109/ART.2002.1106948

Shen, Y., Ong, S. K., & Nee, A. Y. C. (2011). Vision-based hand interaction in augmented reality environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 27(6), 523–544. doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555297

Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding virtual reality. Interface, application and design. Boston, MA: Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers.

Shieh, R., Gummer, E., & Niess, M. (2008). The quality of a web-based course: Perspectives of the instructor and the students. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning , 52(6), 61–68. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0220-3

Shih, Y., & Yang, M. (2008). A Collaborative Virtual Environment for Situated Language Learning Using VEC3D. Journal of Educational Technology & Society , 11(1), 56–68.

Showcase. (2015). Shaq augmented reality. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1BgTZ5F

Sielhorst, T., Feuerstein, M., & Navab, N. (2008). Advanced medical displays: A literature review of augment reality. Journal of Display Display Technology , 4(4), 451–467. doi:10.1109/JDT.2008.2001575

Skipper, B. (2015, January 27). Greece's new finance minister Yanis Varoufakis is Valve's former Steam Market economist. International Business Times. Retrieved from http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/greeces-new-finance-minister-yanis-varoufakis-valves-former-steam-market-economist-1485336

Slater, M., & Steed, A. (2000). A virtual presence counter. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 9(5), 413–434. doi:10.1162/105474600566925

Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 6, 603–616.

Sletten Sommerseth, K. (2014). Facilitating collaborative learning in 3-D virtual worlds. A Qualitative meta study [Unpublished thesis]. Reprosentralen, University of Oslo.

Sloan Consortium. (2006). Faculty satisfaction. Needham, MA: SloanCWiki. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-c-wiki.org/wiki/index.php?title= Faculty_Satisfaction.

Smart, J., Cascio, J., & Paffendof, J. (2007). Metaverse roadmap: pathways to the 3D web. Retrieved from http://www.metaverseroadmap.org/overview

Smith-Robbins, J. (2011, December). Are virtual worlds (still) relevant in education? elearn Magazine: Education and Technology Perspective. Retrieved from http://elearnmag.acm.org/archive.cfm?aid=207847

Soares Calado, A. V., Márcio Soares, M., Campos, F., & Correia, W. (2013). Virtual reality applied to the study of the interaction between the user and the built space: A literature review. Lecture Notes in Computer Science , 8014, 345–351. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39238-2_38

Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT . In Voogt, J., & Knezek, G. (Eds.), International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 449–460). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_27

Song, H., Liu, J., & Chen, G. (2012). Tourism value chain governance- review and prospects. Journal of Travel Research , 52(1), 15–28. doi:10.1177/0047287512457264

Sotiriou, S., & Bogner, F. X. (2008). Visualizing the invisible: Augmented reality as an innovative science education scheme. Advanced Science Letters , 1(1), 114–122. doi:10.1166/asl.2008.012

Soto, V. (2013). Which instructional design models are educators using to design virtual world instruction? Merlot Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(3). Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no3/soto_0913.htm

Southern, M. (2001). The cultural study of games: More than just games. Retrieved from http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~anthonyb/itp101/articles/cultural.doc

Spencer, A. J., Buhalis, D., & Moital, M. (2012). A hierarchical model of technology adoption for small owner-managed travel firms: An organizational decision making and leadership perspective. Tourism Management , 33(5), 1195–1208. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2011.11.011

Stamford, C. (2007, April 24). Gartner says 80 percent of active Internet users will have a “Second Life” in the virtual world by the end of 2011. Gartner Newsroom. Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=503861

Stangel, C., & Pantelidis, V. S. (1997). South Greenville Elementary School virtual reality project. VR in the Schools, 2(4). Retrieved from http://www.coe.ecu.edu/vr/vrits/2-4so-gr.htm

Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Cooper, H. (2014). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems on college students’ academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology , 106(2), 331–347. doi:10.1037/a0034752

Steinberg, A. D., Bashook, P. G., Drummond, J., Ashrafi, S., & Zefran, M. (2007). Assessment of faculty perception of content validity of PerioSim©, a haptic-3-D virtual reality dental training simulator . Journal of Dental Education , 71(12), 1574–1582.

Steinkuehler, C. A. (2004). Learning in massively multiplayer online games. In Y. B. Kafai, W. A. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. S. Nixon, & F. Herrera (Eds)., Embracing diversity in the learning sciences: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS’04) (pp. 521–528). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Steinkuehler, C. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participation in a Discourse. Mind, Culture, and Activity , 12(1), 38–52. doi:10.1207/s15327884mca1301_4

Stephenson, N. (1992). Snow Crash . Random House Publishing Group.

Stiubiener, I., Barbosa, W., Kamienski, C. A., & Schweitzer, C. M. (2011). Using Virtual Worlds in distance learning environments. Paper presented at theFrontiers in Education Conference (FIE). 10.1109/FIE.2011.6142822

Stoutfoot, T. (2007) How big is Azeroth? (Pseudonym) Retrieved from http://tobolds.blogspot.com/2007/01/how-big-is-azeroth.html

Stricker, D., Pagani, A., & Zoellner, M. (2009). In-situ visualization for cultural heritage sites using novel augmented reality technologies. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/192Vg5N

Subramaniam, K. (2007). Teachers’ mindsets and the integration of computer technology. British Journal of Educational Technology , 38(6), 1056–1071. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00693.x

Suebnukarn, S., Haddawy, P., Rhienmora, P., & Gajananan, K. (2010). Haptic Virtual Reality for Skill Acquisition in Endodontics. Journal of Endodontics , 36(1), 53–55. doi:10.1016/j.joen.2009.09.020

Sugar, W., & Slagter van Tryon, P. J. (2014). Development of a virtual technology coach to support technology integration for K-12 educators. TechTrends , 58(3), 54–62. doi:10.1007/s11528-014-0752-7

Suh, Y., Shin, C., Woo, W., Dow, S., & MacIntyre, B. (2011). Enhancing and evaluating users’ social experience with a mobile phone guide applied to cultural heritage. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing , 15(6), 649–665. doi:10.1007/s00779-010-0344-2

Suslov, N. (2012). Krestianstvo SDK towards end-user mobile 3D virtual learning environment. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating through Computing, C5 2012 (pp. 9–14). doi:10.1109/C5.2012.8

Suter, W. N. (2012). Introduction to educational research: A critical thinking approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sweller, J. (2005). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19-30). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review , 22(2), 123–138. doi:10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5

Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). The split-attention effect . In Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 111–128). Springer New York. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4_9

Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction , 12(3), 185–233. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1203_1

Sydell, L. (2005). 'Virtual' Virus Sheds Light on Real-World Behavior. NPR, Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4946772

Tegos, S., Demetriadis, S., & Tsiatsos, T. (2014). A configurable conversational agent to trigger students’ productive dialogue: A pilot study in the CALL domain. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education , 24(1), 62–91. doi:10.1007/s40593-013-0007-3

Teoh, J. (2012). Pre-service teachers in second life: Potential of simulations. Journal of Educational Technology Systems , 40(4), 415–441. doi:10.2190/ET.40.4.g

The Associated Press. (2014, March 25). Facebook to buy Oculus virtual reality firm for $2B. Retrieved from http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/facebook-to-buy-oculus-virtual-reality-firm-for-zb-1,2586318

The New Media Consortium. (2007). The Horizon Report . Austin, Texas: New Media Consortium.

The Schome Community. (2007). The schome-NAGTY teen second life pilot final report: a summary of key findings and lessons learnt. Retrieved from http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/getfile.cfm?documentfileid-11344

The World Factbook. (2015). Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html

The, F. A. Cup. (2015). About the FA. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1GLcZYu

Theodoridou, K. D. (2009). Learning with Laura: Investigating the effects of a pedagogical agent on Spanish lexical acquisition (Doctoral dissertation). University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX.

Thompson, C. W. (2011). Next-Generation Virtual Worlds. IEEE Internet Computing , 15(1), 60–65. doi:10.1109/MIC.2011.15

Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second Language Use, Socialization, and Learning in Internet Interest Communities and Online Gaming. Modern Language Journal , 93, 802–821. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00974.x

Thorpe, M., Holm, J., & van den Boer, G. (2014). Discovering the decisions within your business processes using IBM blueworks live . New York: International Business Machines Corporation.

Thorsteinsson, G., & Page, T. (2008). Innovative technology education using a virtual reality learning environment, 90, 26-35. Pedagogy Studies/Pedigogika: Vilnius Pedagogical University.

Tokel, S. T., & Karitas, E. C. (2014). Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education , 10(1), 1–12.

Toon activity by level. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.wow-stats.info/pact01.html

Trahan, M. P., Adams, N. B., & Dupre, S. (2012). Virtual learning environments: Second Life MUVEs to leverage student ownership. In Virtual Learning Environments: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools and Applications (pp. 200-213). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-0011-9.ch113

Traphagan, T. W., Chiang, Y.-V., Chang, H. M., Wattanawaha, B., Lee, H., Mayrath, M. C., & Resta, P. E. (2010). Cognitive, social and teaching presence in a virtual world and a text chat. Computers & Education , 55(3), 923–936. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.04.003

Traub, D. C. (1991). Simulated world as classroom: The potential for designed learning within virtual environments . In Helsel, S. K., & Roth, J. P. (Eds.), Virtual reality: Theory, practice, and promise (pp. 111–121). Westport, CT: Meckler Publishing.

Turban, E., McLean, E. R., & Wetherbe, J. C. (2008). Information technology for management . New Jersey: John Wiley & sons, Inc.

Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynsli, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education , 46(2), 153–185. doi:10.1007/s11162-004-1598-1

Unity Technologies. (2015). Unity3D [computer software]. Retrieved from http://unity3d.com/unity/download

Vaill, P. (1996). Learning as a way of being . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

van der Meij, H. (2013). Motivating agents in software tutorials. Computers in Human Behavior , 29(3), 845–857. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.018

van Gog, T. (2014). The signaling (or cueing) principle in multimedia learning . In Mayer, R. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 263–278). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139547369.014

van Krevelen, D. W. F., & Poelman, R. (2010). A survey of augmented reality technologies, applications and limitations. The International Journal of Virtual Reality , 9(2), 1–20.

van Mulken, S., André, E., & Müller, J. (1998). The persona effect: How substantial is it? In People and computers XIII (pp. 53–66). Springer London. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-3605-7_4

VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist , 46(4), 197–221. doi:10.1080/00461520.2011.611369

VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science , 31(1), 3–62. doi:10.1080/03640210709336984

Veletsianos, G., & Russell, G. (2014). Pedagogical agents. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M.J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (4^th ed., pp. 759-769). Springer Academic. Retrieved from http://www.veletsianos.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/pedagogical_agents_synthesis_veletsianos_handbook.pdf

Veletsianos, G. (2007). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent: Considering contextual relevance and aesthetics. Journal of Educational Computing Research , 36(4), 373–377. doi:10.2190/T543-742X-033L-9877

Veletsianos, G. (2010). Contextually relevant pedagogical agents: Visual appearance, stereotypes, and first impressions and their impact on learning. Computers & Education , 55(2), 576–585. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.019

Vickerstaff, K. (2015). Implementation of technology enhanced learning pedagogy and impact on employability and learning within engineering education frameworks [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Plymouth University. Plymouth, UK.

Vincenti, G., & Braman, J. (2010). Teaching through multi-user virtual environments: applying dynamic elements to the modern classroom . Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1-61692-822-3

Vincenti, G., & Braman, J. (2011). Multi-User virtual environments for the classroom: practical approaches to teaching in virtual worlds . Hershey, PA: IGI Global; doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-545-2

Virtual reality (VR). (2015). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/technology/virtual-reality

Virtual reality. (n. d.). Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/virtualreality

Virtual reality. (n. d.). Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality

Vlahakis, V., Ioannidis, N., Karigiannis, J., Tsotros, M., Gounaris, M., Stricker, D., Gleue, T., Daehne, P., & Almeida, L. (2002). Archeoguide: An Augmented Reality Guide for Archaeological Sites. Computer Graphics in Art History and Archaeology, September/October, 52- 60.

Vong, K. (2015). How brands are using augmented reality in marketing to engage customers. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/SrBNTq

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wagner, M. (2008). Second life's popularity rests on breadth of activities. Information Week. Retrieved from http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal_tech/virtualworlds/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=210602197

Wang, T., & Zhu, Q. (2009). A software engineering education game in a 3-D online virtual environment. Paper presented at the First International Workshop on Education Technology and Computer Science ETCS'09.

Wang, Y., & Braman, J. (2009). Extending the classroom through second life. Journal of Information Systems. Special Issue: Impacts of Web 2.0 and Virtual World Technologies on IS Education, 20(2), 235-247.

Wang, Y., Dudley, A., Braman, J., & Vincenti, G. (2009). Simulating ethical dilemmas: teaching ethics through immersive virtual environments. Proceedings of the 12th IASTED International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology in Education. St. Thomas, US Virgin Islands.

Wan, G., Yeh, E., & Cheng, H. (in press). Digital Media Use by Chinese Youth and Its Impact . In Cheung, C. K. (Ed.), Media Education in China . Hong Kong, China: Springer.

Wang, C. X., Song, H., Xia, F., & Yan, Q. (2009). Integrating Second Life into an EFL program: Students’ perspectives. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange , 2(1), 1–16.

Wang, C., Calandra, B., Hibbard, S., & McDowell Lefaiver, M. (2012). Learning effects of an experimental EFL program in Second Life. Educational Technology Research and Development , 60(5), 943–961. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9259-0

Wang, F., & Burton, J. K. (2013). Second Life in education: A review of publications from its launch to 2011. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44(3), 357–371. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01334.x

Wang, F., & Shao, E. (2012). Using Second Life to Assist EFL Teaching: We Do Not Have to Sign in to the Program. Techtrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning , 56(4), 15–18. doi:10.1007/s11528-012-0582-4

Wang, G. G. (2002). Definition and Review of Virtual Prototyping. ASME Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering , 2(3), 232–236. doi:10.1115/1.1526508

Wang, L., Wang, C., & Fournier, C. (2000). Envisioning Yuan Ming Yuan (Garden of Perfect Brightness). IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications , 20(1), 10–14. doi:10.1109/38.814532

Wang, S.-K., & Hsu, H.-Y. (2010). Using the ADDIE model to design Second Life activities for online learners. TechTrends , 53(6), 76–81.

Wankel, C., & Malleck, S. (Eds.), (2009). Emerging Ethical Issues of Life in Virtual Worlds . Charlotte, NC, USA: Information Age Publishing.

Warner, T. (2012). E-coaching systems: Convenient, anytime, anywhere, and nonhuman. Performance Improvement , 51(9), 22–28. doi:10.1002/pfi.21305

Warren, S., Jones, G., & Lin, L. (2011). Usability and play testing: The often missed assessment . In Annetta, L., & Bronack, S. (Eds.), Serious educational game assessment: Practical methods and models for educational games, simulations and virtual worlds (pp. 131–147). Netherlands: Sense Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-329-7_8

Warren, S., & Lin, L. (2012). Ethical considerations for learning game, simulation, and virtual world design and development . In Yang, H. H., & Yuen, S. C.-Y. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in Virtual Worlds and Environments (Vol. 1). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-762-3.ch001

Wasilik, O., & Bolliger, D. U. (2009). Faculty satisfaction in the online environment: An institutional study. The Internet and Higher Education , 12(3-4), 173–178. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.05.001

Waters, J. (2014, October 9). Could the Oculus Rift redeem virtual reality in higher ed? Campus Technology. Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/articles/2014/10/09/could-the-oculus-rift-redeem-virtual-reality-in-higher-ed.aspx

Waters, J. K. (2009). A ‘Second Life’ for educators. The Journal , 36(1), 29–34.

Webb, D., Repenninga, A., & Koh, K. (2012, February 29-March 3). Toward an emergent theory of broadening participation in computer science education. Proceeding of the Association for Computer Machinery (ACM) Special Interest Group on Computer Science Conference (SIGCSE) (pp. 173-178). Raleigh, NC. ACM. 10.1145/2157136.2157191

Wegner, S. B., Holloway, K. C., & Garton, E. M. (1999). The effects of internet-based instruction on student learning . Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , 3(2).

Weimer, M. (2010). Inspired college teaching: A career-long resource for professional growth . Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Whitlock, L. A., McLaughlin, A. C., & Allaire, J. C. (2012). Individual differences in response to cognitive training: Using a multi-modal, attentionally demanding game-based intervention for older adults. Computers in Human Behavior , 28(4), 1091–1096. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.012

Whitton, N., & Hollins, P. (2008). Collaborative virtual gaming worlds in higher education. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology , 16(3), 221–229. doi:10.1080/09687760802526756

Wickens, C. D. (1992). Virtual reality and education. Proceedings of the 1992 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.10.1109/ICSMC.1992.271688

Wiecha, J., Heyden, R., Sternthal, E., & Merialdi, M. (2010). Learning in a virtual world: Experience with using second life for medical education. Journal of Medical Internet Research , 12(1), e1. doi:10.2196/jmir.1337

Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessments: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Wigham, C. R., & Chanier, T. (2013). A study of verbal and nonverbal communication in Second Life–the ARCHI21 experience. ReCALL , 25(01), 63–84. doi:10.1017/S0958344012000250

Wikipedia: “Fractal terrain texture” by Stevo-88 - self-made, used Adobe Photoshop for Perlin noise creation and Terragen for rendering. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons. (n. d.). Retrieved from http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Fractal_terrain_texture.jpg#mediaviewer/File:Fractal_terrain_texture.jpghttp://thejournal.com/articles/2009/01/01/a-second-life-for-educators.aspx

Wind, J., & Mahajan, V. (2001). Digital Marketing: Global Strategies from the World's Leading Experts. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002, Spring). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal , 39(1), 165–205. doi:10.3102/00028312039001165

Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality (Technical Report TR-93-9). Seattle, Washington: Human Interface Technology Laboratory, University of Washington. Retrieved from http://www.hitl.washington.edu/publications/r-93-9/

Wojciechowski, R., & Cellary, W. (2013). Evaluation of learners’ attitude toward learning in ARIES augmented reality environments. Computers & Education , 68, 570–585. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.02.014

Wong, J. N. (2010). Searching for good practice in teaching: A comparison of two subject-based professional learning communities in a secondary school in Shanghai. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 40(5), 623-639.

Woods, D. (2009). Experiential learning through real space placements undertaken in ‘virtual world’ spaces. Proceedings from Ascilite Auckland 2009.

World of Warcraft Research Assistant. (2015). Retrieved from http://www.hcii.cmu.edu/careers/2011/world-warcraft-research-assistant

World Tourism Organization (UNWTO). (2015). Understanding tourism: basic glossary. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1ki2UGS

Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 14(1), 173–207.

Wu, F., Liu, Z., Wang, J., & Zhao, Y. (2015, March). Establishment virtual maintenance environment based on VIRTOOLS to effectively enhance the sense of immersion of teaching equipment. Proceedings of the2015 International Conference on Education Technology, Management and Humanities Science (ETMHS 2015). Atlantis Press. 10.2991/etmhs-15.2015.93

Wu, H.-K., Lee, S. W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., & Liang, J.-C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education , 62, 41–49. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.024

Yalcinalp, S., Sen, N., Kocer, G., & Koroglu, F. (2012). Higher Education Student's Behaviors as Avatars in a Web based Course in Second Life. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences , 46, 4534–4538. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.291

Yang, C. C. (2004). Exploring factors affecting the adoption of mobile commerce in Singapore. Telematics and Informatics , 22(3), 257–277. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2004.11.003

Yang, H. H., & Yuen, C.-Y. S. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of Research on Practices and Outcomes in Virtual Worlds and Environments (Vol. 2). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.

Ye, E., Liu, C., & Polack-Wahl, J. A. (2007). Enhancing software engineering education using teaching aids in 3-D online virtual worlds. Frontiers in Education . FIE.

Yee, N. (2006). Motivations for play in online games. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 9(6), 772–775. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.772

Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations, and derived experiences of users of massively multi-user online graphical environments . Presence (Cambridge, Mass.) , 15(3), 309–329. doi:10.1162/pres.15.3.309

Yeh, E. (2014). Teaching culture and language through the Multiple Intelligences Film Teaching Model in the ESL/EFL classroom. Journal of Effective Teaching , 14(1), 63–79.

Yeh, E., & Kessler, G. (2015). Enhancing Linguistic and Intercultural Competencies Through the Use of Social Network Sites and Google Earth . In Keengwe, J. (Ed.), Promoting Global Literacy Skills through Technology-Infused Teaching and Learning . Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-6347-3.ch001

Yılmaz, R. M., Topu, F. B., Goktas, Y., & Coban, M. (2013). Social presence and motivation in a three-dimensional virtual world: An explanatory study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 29(6), 823–839.

Yilmaz, R., Topu, F., Goktas, Y., & Coban, M. (2013). Social presence and motivation in a three dimensional virtual world An explanatory study. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology , 29(6), 823–839.

Youngblut, C. (1998). Educational uses of virtual reality technology (IDA Document D-2128). Retrieved from http://www.sustainable-design.ie/sustain/VE_Education-D2128.pdf

Yovcheva, Z., Buhalis, D., & Gatzidis, C. (2012). Smartphone Augmented Reality Applications for Tourism. e-Review of Tourism Research (eRTR), 10(2), 63-66.

Yuen, S., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange , 4(1), 119–140.

Zech, L. K., Gause-Vega, C. L., Bray, M. H., Secules, T., & Goldman, S. R. (2000). Content-based collaborative inquiry: A professional development model for sustaining educational reform. Educational Psychologist , 35(3), 207–217. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3503_6

Zhang, H. (2013). Pedagogical Challenges of Spoken English Learning in the Second Life Virtual World: A Case Study. British Journal of Educational Technology , 44(2), 243–254. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01312.x

Zhao, H., Sun, B., Wu, H., & Hu, X. (2010). Study on building a 3D interactive virtual learning environment based on OpenSim platform. Paper presented at the2010 International Conference on Audio, Language and Image Processing. 10.1109/ICALIP.2010.5684986

Zhao, Y., Pugh, K., Sheldon, S., & Byers, J. L. (2002). Conditions for classroom technology innovations. Teachers College Record , 104(3), 482–515. doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00170

Zheng, D., Li, N., & Zhao, Y. (2008, March). Learning Chinese in Second Life Chinese language school. Paper presented atCALICO Annual Conference, San Francisco, CA.

Zheng, B., Warschauer, M., Hwang, J. K., & Collins, P. (2014). Laptop use, interactive science software, and science learning among at-Risk students. Journal of Science Education and Technology , 1(5).

Zheng, D., Young, F. M., Brewer, A. R., & Wagner, M. (2009). Attitude and self-efficacy change: English language learning in virtual worlds. CALICO Journal , 27(1), 205–231. doi:10.11139/cj.27.1.205-231

Zhong, Y., & Liu, C. (2012). User evaluation of a domain-oriented end-user design environment for building 3D virtual chemistry experiments. Paper presented at theUser Evaluation for Software Engineering Researchers (USER). 10.1109/USER.2012.6226585

Zhou, F., Duh, H. L., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). Trends in augmented reality traching, iteraction nd display: A review of ten years in ISMAR. Proceedings of the Mixed and Augmented Reality, ISMAR 7^thIEE/ACM International Symposium (pp. 193-202). Cambridge: IEEE.

Zhou, Z., Jin, X. L., Vogel, D. R., Fang, Y., & Chen, X. (2011). Individual motivations and demographic differences in social virtual world uses: An exploratory investigation in Second Life. International Journal of Information Management , 31(3), 261–271. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.07.007

Zhu, W., Owen, C., Li, H., & Lee, J.-H. (2004). Personalized in-store e-commerce with PromoPad: An augmented reality shopping assistant. Electronic Journal for E-commerce Tools and Applications , 1(3), 1–19.

Ziegler, R., Mueller, W., Fischer, G., & Göbel, M. (1995, January). A virtual reality medical training system . In Computer vision, virtual reality and robotics in medicine (pp. 282–286). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-49197-2_36

Zoller, U. (1990). Students’ misunderstandings and misconceptions in college freshman chemistry (general and organic) . Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 27(10), 1053–1065. doi:10.1002/tea.3660271011