Field trips are often used in higher education as a practical learning tool. They are not always accessible for all students due to limited financial and organisational resources. A 360- degree virtual tour could be an alternative for field trips. However, there are limited to no design principles for the development of a virtual tour. This paper describes the exploration of the design considerations and decisions for developing a virtual tour and the possible impact on the learning outcomes. A virtual tour has been developed via a design-based approach involving preliminary research, development and prototyping phase, and evaluation phase. The exploration resulted into three main design clusters that require decision making; camera, system and storytelling. The impact of the decisions on the learning outcome need to be further researched via design experiments. Ultimately, design principles need to be formulated to make proper design requirements for a straightforward decision process.
Pages:
13
Affiliations:
Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Keywords:
360-degree
virtual tour
field trip
design elements
design decisions
design considerations
Engineering education
CDIO Standard 6
CDIO Standard 7
CDIO Standard 8
Year:
2018
Reference:
Abras, C., Maloney-Krichmar, D., & Preece, J. (2004). User-centered design. Berkshire Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction, 2, 445–456.:
Bessa, M., Melo, M., Narciso, D., Barbosa, L., & Vasconcelos-Raposo, J. (2016). Does 3D 360 video enhance user’s VR experience? In Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction (pp. 1–4).:
Bowman, D. A., Hodges, L. F., Allison, D., & Wineman, J. (1999). The Educational Value of an Information-Rich Virtual Environment. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8(3), 317–331.:
Brame, C. J. (2015). Effective Educational Videos. Vanderbuilt University Center for Teaching.:
Brown, A., Sheikh, A., Evans, M., & Watson, Z. (2016). Directing attention in 360-degree video. In IBC 2016 Conference.:
Costa, N., & Melotti, M. (2012). Digital Media in Archaeological Areas, Virtual Reality, Authenticity and Hyper-Tourist Gaze. Sociology Mind, 2(1), 53–60.:
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User Acceptance of Computer Technology: A Comparison of Two Theoretical Models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.:
Disinger, J. F. (1984). Field Instruction in School Settings. ERIC Clearinghous:
Fisher, J. A. (2001). The demise of fieldwork as an integral part of science education in United Kingdom schools : a victim of cultural change and political pressure ? Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 9(1), 75–96.:
Fonseca, D., & Kraus, M. (2016). A comparison of head-mounted and hand-held displays for 360° videos with focus on attitude and behavior change. In Proceedings of the 20th International Academic Mindtrek Conference (pp. 287–296).:
Grant, L., Heirich, M., Martin, S. S., & Eck, E. Van. (1981). The Detroit Tours: Experiential Learning within the Framework of a Large Lecture Course. Source: Teaching Sociology, 9(1), 15–29.:
Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of mooc videos. In Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning@ scale conference (pp. 41–50).:
Gutiérrez, F., Pierce, J., Vergara, V., Coulter, R., Saland, L., Caudell, T. P., … Alverson, D. C. (2007). The effect of degree of immersion upon learning performance in virtual reality simulations for medical education. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality, 15, 155–160.:
Hall, R. R. (2001). Prototyping for usability of new technology. Int. J. Human-Computer Proceedings of the 14th International CDIO Conference, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Kanazawa, Japan, June 28 – July 2, 2018. Studies, 55, 485–501.:
Hubona, G. S., Wheeler, P. N., Shirah, G. W., & Brandt, M. (1994). The Relative Contributions of Stereo, Lighting and Background Scenes in Promoting 3D Depth Visualization 1. Forthcoming in ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.:
Jan, D., Roque, A., Leuski, A., Morie, J., & Traum, D. (2009). A virtual tour guide for virtual worlds. International Workshop on Intelligent Virtual Agents, (Springer Berlin Heidelberg), 372–378.:
Jones, G., & Christal, M. (2002). The Future of Virtual Museums: On-Line, Immersive, 3D Environments. Created Realities Group, 4, 1–12.:
Kothari, C., Kumar, R., & Uusitalo, O. (2014). Research Methodology. New Age International:
Krepel, W. J., & DuVall, C. R. (1981). Field Trips: A Guide for Planning and Conducting Educational Experiences. Analysis and Action Series.:
Lacina, J. G. (2004). Designing a Virtual Field Trip. Childhood Education, 80(4), 221–222.:
Lukesh, S. S. (1994). Imaging the Past: Electronic Imaging and Computer Graphics in Museums and Archaeology, a Conference at the British Museum. London.:
Maniar, N., Bennett, E., Hand, S., & Allan, G. (2008). The effect of mobile phone screen size on video based learning. Journal of Software, 3(4), 51–61.:
Mayer, R. E. (2008). Applying the Science of Learning : Evidence- Based Principles for the Design of Multimedia Instruction. American Psychologist, 63(8), 760–769.:
Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A cognitive theory of multimedia learning: Implications for design principles. Annual Meeting of the ACM SIGCHI, 1–10.:
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 117–125.:
Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1097–1119.:
Pausch, R., Proffitt, D., & Williams, G. (1997). Quantifying immersion in virtual reality. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, 13–18.:
Procter, L. (2012). What is it about Field Trips? Praxis, Pedagogy and Presence in Virtual Environments. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 980–989.:
Riva, G., Lewis, C. H., & Griffin, M. J. (1997). Human Factors Consideration in Clinical Applications of Virtual Reality. Virtual Reality in Neuro - Psycho - Physiology, 35–58.:
Sharma, K., Jermann, P., & Dillenbourg, P. (2015). Displaying teacher’s gaze in a MOOC: Effects on students’ video navigation patterns. Design for Teaching and Learning in a Networked World, 325–338.:
Slater, M. (2003). A Note on Presence Terminology. Emotion, 3, 1–5.:
Tse, A., Jennett, C., Moore, J., Watson, Z., Rigby, J., & Cox, A. L. (2017). Was I There? In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2967–2974).:
Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., & Betrancourt, M. (2002). Animation: can it facilitate? Int. J. Human-Computer Studies Schnotz & Kulhavy, 57, 247–262.:
van den Akker, J., Bannan, B., Kelly, A. E., Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2013). Educational Design Research Educational Design Research.:
Västfjäll, D. (2003). The Subjective Sense of Presence, Emotion Recognition, and Experienced Emotions in Auditory Virtual Environments. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6(2), 181–188.:
Wright, M. C. (2000). Getting more out of less: The benefits of short-term experiential learning in undergraduate sociology courses. American Sociological Association, 28(2), 116–126.:
Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O., & Nunamaker, J. F. (2006). Instructional video in elearning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management, 43, 15–27.:
Zhang, X., Jiang, S., Ordóñez de Pablos, P., Lytras, M. D., & Sun, Y. (2017). How virtual reality affects perceived learning effectiveness: a task–technology fit perspective. Behaviour and Information Technology, 36(5), 548–556.:
on January 21, 2019 - 15:13 Tyrone Machado
Conceive
Design
Implement
Operate
