Advertisement

Lecturers’ Perceptions of Virtual Reality as a Teaching and Learning Platform

  • Zhane Solomon
  • Nurudeen Ajayi
  • Rushil RaghavjeeEmail author
  • Patrick Ndayizigamiye
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 963)

Abstract

Virtual Reality (VR) is increasingly being acknowledged as a useful platform for education. In South Africa, however, VR is mainly recognized as an entertainment platform. Hence, the potential benefits of VR and its perceived ease of use within the South African higher education setting have not been widely investigated. Therefore, using the Technology Adoption Model (TAM), this paper investigates the perceived usefulness (PU) and ease of use (PEOU) of VR by lecturers. This paper also identifies the perceived challenges to the adoption of VR as a teaching and learning platform from a higher education perspective, and suggests how those challenges may be overcome.

Keywords

Virtual Reality Higher education Lecturers 

References

  1. 1.
    Abulrub, A.H.G., Attridge, A.N., Williams, M.A.: Virtual reality in engineering education: the future of creative learning. In: 2011 Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, pp. 751–757 (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aggarwal, R., et al.: Training and simulation for patient safety. BMJ Qual. Saf. 19(Suppl. 2), i34–i43 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ayres, K.M., Mechling, L., Sansosti, F.J.: The use of mobile technologies to assist with life skills/independence of students with moderate/severe intellectual disability and/or autism spectrum disorders: considerations for the future of school psychology. Psychol. Schools 50(3), 259–271 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertrand, M., Bouchard, S.: Applying the technology acceptance model to VR with people who are favorable to its use. J. Cyber Ther. Rehab. 1(2), 200–210 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bimber, O., Fröhlich, B., Schmalstieg, D., Encarnacáo, L.M.: The virtual showcase. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 Courses, p. 3 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brooks, B.M., Rose, F.D., Attree, E.A., et al.: An evaluation of the efficacy of training people with learning disabilities in a virtual environment. Disabil. Rehab. 24(11/12), 622–626 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brunswick, N., Martin, G.N., Marzano, L.: Visuospatial superiority in developmental dyslexia: myth or reality? Learn. Individ. Differ. 20(5), 421–426 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Champion, E.: Heritage role playing-history as an interactive digital game. In: Proceedings of the Design Thinking Research Symposium, Sydney, p. 29 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chantry, J., Dunford, C.: How do computer assistive technologies enhance participation in childhood occupations for children with multiple and complex disabilities? A review of the current literature. Br. J. Occup. Ther. 73(8), 351–365 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Christopoulos, D., Mavridis, P., Andreadis, A., Karigiannis, J.N.: Using virtual environments to tell the story: the battle of thermopylae. In: VS-GAMES 2011 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications, pp. 84–91 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chuang, W.: Online virtual training environments with intelligent agents to promote social inclusion. Doctoral Dissertation, Nottingham Trent University (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dalgarno, B., Lee, M.J.: What are the learning affordances of 3D virtual environments? Br. J. Educ. Tech. 41(1), 10–32 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Davis, F.D.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13(3), 319–340 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fagan, M., Kilmon, C., Pandey, V.: Exploring the adoption of a virtual reality simulation: the role of perceived ease of use, perceived usefulness and personal innovativeness. Campus-Wide Inf. Syst. 29(2), 117–127 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Habib, L., et al.: Dyslexic students in higher education and virtual learning environments: an exploratory study. J. Comp.-Assist. Learn. 28(6), 574–584 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hamrol, A., Górski, F., Grajewski, D., Zawadzki, P.: Virtual 3D atlas of a human body: development of an educational medical software application. Proc. Comput. Sci. 25(1), 302–314 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoffman, H., Murray, M., Curlee, R., Fritchle, A.: Anatomic visualizeR: teaching and learning anatomy with virtual reality. Inf. Tech. Med. 1, 205–218 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Huang, H.M., Liaw, S.S., Lai, C.M.: Exploring learner acceptance of the use of virtual reality in medical education: a case study of desktop and projection-based display systems. Interact. Learn. Environ. 24(1), 3–19 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hunter, D., Lastowka, G.: Virtual crimes. New York Law School Law Rev. 49(1), 211–229 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jin, G., Nakayama, S.: Virtual reality game for safety education. In: 2014 Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Audio, Language and Image Processing, ICALIP, pp. 95–100 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kalay, Y.E.: Virtual learning environments. J. Inf. Tech. Constr. 9(13), 195–207 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Laister, J., Kober, S.: Social aspects of collaborative learning in virtual learning environments. In: Proceedings of the Networked Learning Conference, Sheffield, pp. 1–7 (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lopresti, F.E., Mihailidis, A., Kirsch, N.: Assistive technology for cognitive rehabilitation: state of the art. Neuropsychol. Rehabil. 14(1/2), 5–39 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Merchant, Z., Kennicutt, W., Goetz, E.: Predicting undergraduate students’ acceptance of ‘second life’ for teaching chemistry. J. Online Learn. Teach. 11(2), 233–248 (2015)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mortara, M., Catalano, C.E., Bellotti, F., Fiucci, G., Houry-Panchetti, M., Petridis, P.: Learning cultural heritage by serious games. J. Cult. Heritage 15(3), 318–325 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Muijs, D., Campbell, J., Kyriakides, L., Robinson, W.: Making the case for differentiated teacher effectiveness: an overview of research in four key areas. School Eff. School Improv. 16(1), 51–70 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Naidoo, S.: Not just fun and games: virtual reality could revolutionize everything from education to shopping (2017). http://www.seamonster.co.za/not-just-fun-games-virtual-reality-could-revolutionise-everything-from-education-to-shopping/
  28. 28.
    Ng’ambi, D., Gachago, D., Ivala, E., Bozalek, V., Watters, K.: Emerging technologies in South African higher education institutions: towards a teaching and learning practice framework. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Learning, Lisbon, p. 354 (2012)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Palter, V.N., Grantcharov, T.P.: Simulation in surgical education. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 182(11), 1191–1196 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pantelidis, V.S.: Reasons to use virtual reality in education and training courses, and a model to determine when to use virtual reality. Themes Sci. Tech. Educ. 2(1/2), 59–70 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Parsons, S., Cobb, S.: State-of-the-art of virtual reality technologies for children on the autism spectrum. Eur. J. Spec. Needs Educ. 26(3), 355–366 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Parsons, S., Mitchell, P.: The potential of virtual reality in social skills training for people with autistic spectrum disorders. J. Intell. Disabil. Res. 46(5), 430–443 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Parsons, S., Mitchell, P.: What children with autism understand about thoughts and thought bubbles. Autism 3(1), 17–38 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Reznek, M.A., Rawn, C.L., Krummel, T.M.: Evaluation of the educational effectiveness of a virtual reality intravenous insertion simulator. Acad. Emerg. Med. 9(11), 1319–1325 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rigamonti, D.D., Bryant, H.J., Bustos, O., Moore, L., Hoffman, H.M.: Implementing anatomic visualizer learning modules in anatomy education. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Visible Human Project Conference, Maryland (2000)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Rizzo, A.A., et al.: The virtual classroom: a virtual reality environment for the assessment and rehabilitation of attention deficits. CyberPsychol. Behav. 3(3), 483–499 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schaub, K.G., et al.: Ergonomic assessment of automotive assembly tasks with digital human modeling and the ‘ergonomics assessment worksheet’ (EAWS). Int. J. Hum. Factors Model. Simul. 3(3/4), 398–426 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Smith, M.D.: Virtual reality game. U.S. Patent no. 6,159,100 (2000)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sobota, B., Korecko, S., Pastornicky, P., Jacho, L.: Virtual-reality technologies in the process of handicapped school children education. In: 2016 Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications, ICETA, pp. 321–326 (2016)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Standen, P.J., Brown, D.J.: Virtual reality in the rehabilitation of people with intellectual disabilities: review. CyberPsychol. Behav. 8(3), 272–282 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Standen, P.J., Brown, D.J., Cromby, J.J.: The effective use of virtual environments in the education and rehabilitation of students with intellectual disabilities. Br. J. Educ. Tech. 32(3), 289–299 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Winn, W.: A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality. Technnical report TR-93-9, University of Washington (1993)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wu, Y., Chan, T., Jong, B., Lin, T.: A web-based virtual reality physics laboratory. In: Proceedings of the 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, p. 455 (2003)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhang, K.E., Liu, S.J.: The application of virtual reality technology in physical education teaching and training. In: 2016 Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Service Operations and Logistics and Informatics, SOLI, pp. 245–248 (2016)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Zhane Solomon
    • 1
  • Nurudeen Ajayi
    • 1
  • Rushil Raghavjee
    • 1
    Email author
  • Patrick Ndayizigamiye
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information Systems and TechnologyUniversity of Kwa Zulu NatalPietermaritzburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations