Advertisement

Best Practices in the Use of Augmented and Virtual Reality Technologies for SLA: Design, Implementation, and Feedback

  • Olga Scrivner
  • Julie Madewell
  • Cameron Buckley
  • Nitocris Perez
Chapter

Abstract

Recent advances in technology have made it possible to add immersive interactive dimensions to nearly any learning environment. This immersive technology provides students with active control and more authentic experiences; thus, helping them learn more effectively and increase their retention. In this view, these technologies seem to be an ‘ideal’ instrument for language instruction, as they combine visual, auditory, and kinesthetic learning styles. While their digital capabilities are almost limitless, their use in language learning remains limited due to technological and methodological challenges. This chapter provides methodological recommendations for the design and use of augmented and virtual technologies in language classroom settings. At the core of these recommendations is the collaborative research conducted at Indiana University which investigated the impact of mobile immersive technology for foreign language teaching and learning. Based on the findings, this chapter suggests several immersive tools and applications suited for the use in foreign language classroom (Aurasma, ThingLink, and Google Cardboard), which were evaluated by both students and instructors by means of self-assessment, technical feedback, and usage statistics.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This project is supported by Indiana University Scholarship of Teaching and Learning grants 2016–2016 and 2017–2018. We would also like to thank Indiana University Spanish & Portuguese Department, Matthew Barton and Samuel Underwood (IU Media Lab team), Ben Feld (HP Aurasma), Susan Oxnevad (ThingLink), and Todd Theriault for their support. Many thanks also to a team of graduate students from the Spanish & Portuguese department for their help with recording.

References

  1. Antigoni, P., & Panayiotis, Z. (2017). Web 2.0 in computer-assisted language learning: A research synthesis and implications for instructional design and educational practice. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(6), 704–716.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, A. S., Freeman, A., Giesinger H., Cummins, M., & Yuhnke, B. (2016). The NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2016 K-12 Edition. Austin. Available at: http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2016-nmc-cosn-horizon-report-k12-EN.pdf. Accessed 27 Feb 2018.
  3. Billinghurst, M., & Dünser, A. (2012). Augmented reality in the classroom. Computer, 45(7), 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Black, C. (2018). The dynamic classroom: engaging students in higher education. Retrieved March 7, 2018, from http://www.atwoodpublishing.com/books/230.htm.
  5. Bower, M., Howe, C., Mccredie, N, Robinson, A. & Grover, D. (2013). Augmented reality in education – Cases, places, and potentials. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 63rd annual conference international council for education media (pp. 37–41). ICEM.Google Scholar
  6. Butler-Pascoe, M. E., & Wiburg, K. M. (2003). Technology and teaching English language learners. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  7. Carmigniani, J., & Furht, B. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview. In B. Furht (Ed.), Handbook of augmented reality (pp. 3–46). New York: Springer Science & Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/I.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundation for teaching, testing, and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chun, M. (2010). Taking teaching to (performance) task: Linking pedagogical and assessment practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 42(2), 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. De Troyer, O., Kleinermann, F., & Ewais, A. (2010). Enhancing virtual reality learning environments with adaptivity: Lessons learned. In G. Leitner, M. Hitz, & A. Holzinger (Eds.), HCI in work and leisure, life and leisure (pp. 244–265). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-16607-5_16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(6), 1024–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dede, C. (1996). The evolution of distance education: Emerging technologies and distributed learning implications of new media for distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 10(2), 4–36.  https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649609526919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dionisio, J. D. N., Burns, W. G., III, & Gilbert, R. (2013). 3D virtual worlds and the metaverse: Current status and future possibilities. ACM Computing Surveys, 45(3), 34.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2480741.2480751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elliott, A. (2014, November 11). Aurasma: Augmented reality for your classroom. Available at: http://www.edudemic.com/aurasma-for-your-classroom/. Accessed 29 Oct 15.
  17. Fowler, C. (2015). Virtual reality and learning: Where is the pedagogy? British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Freina, L., & Ott, M. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in ducation: State of the art and perspectives. In the Proceedings of eLearning and Software for Education (eLSE). Bucharest.Google Scholar
  19. Jerry, T., & Aaron, C. (2010). The impact of augmented reality software with inquiry-based learning on students’ learning of kinematics graph. In 2010 2nd international conference on education technology and computer (pp. V2-1-V2-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETC.2010.5529447.
  20. Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED524515 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lange, B. S., Requejo, P., Flynn, S. M., Rizzo, A. A., Valero-Cuevas, F. J., Baker, L., & Winstein, C. (2010). The potential of virtual reality and gaming to assist successful aging with disability. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 21(2), 339–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee, J. (1999). Effectiveness of computer-based instructional simulation: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(1), 71–85.Google Scholar
  23. Lin, T., & Lan, Y. (2015). Language learning in virtual reality environments: Past, present, and future. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 486–497.Google Scholar
  24. Lin, C.-Y., Lin, C.-C., Chen, C.-J., & Huang, M.-R. (2012). Real-time interactive teaching materials for students with disabilities. In Y. Zhang (Ed.), Future communication, computing, control and management. (pp. 369–375). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-27314-8_50. Google Scholar
  25. Mantovani, F. (2001). 2 VR learning: Potential and challenges for the use of 3D environments in education and training. In G. Riva & C. Galimberti (Eds.), Towards cyberpsychology: Mind, cognitions and society in the internet age (pp. 207–226). Amsterdam: IOS Press Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/072f/fcd9bead9d3daf1fdb4468e5bba2316325fd.pdf?_ga=2.20614776.1127253653.1519877495-1590553810.1519877495. Accessed 28 Feb 2018.Google Scholar
  26. Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Mora, C. E., Añorbe-Díaz, B., & González-Marrero, A. (2017). Virtual technologies trends in education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(2), 469–486.  https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00626a.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1994). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies, Proceedings volume 2351 (pp. 282–292).Google Scholar
  28. Moeller, A. J., & Catalano, T. (2015). Foreign language teaching and learning. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 327–333). Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/teachlearnfacpub. Accessed 27 Feb 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pantelidis, V. S. (1996). Suggestions on when to use and when not to use virtual reality in education. VR in the Schools, 2(1).Google Scholar
  30. Pantelidis, V. S. (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(1–2), 59–70.Google Scholar
  31. Piovesan, S. D., Passerino, L. M, & Pereira, A. S. (2012). Virtual Reality as a tool in education. In IADIS international conference on cognition and exploratory learning in digital age. Available at: http://www.iadisportal.org/digital-library/iadis-international-conference-cognition-and-exploratory-learning-in-digital-age-celda. Accessed 1 Mar 2018.
  32. Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31–38.Google Scholar
  33. Scrivner, O., Madewell, J., Buckley, C., & Perez, N. (2016). Augmented Reality Digital Technologies (ARDT) for foreign language teaching and learning (pp. 395–398). San Francisco: Future Technologies Conference (FTC).Google Scholar
  34. Smith, A. (2015). U.S. Smartphone Use in 2015. Pew Research Center. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/. Accessed 27 Feb 2018.
  35. Thorne, S. L., Black, R. W., & Sykes, J. M. (2009). Second language use, socialization, and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern Language Journal, 93(Focus Issue), 802–821.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00974.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wigham, C. R., & Chanier, T. (2013). A study of verbal and nonverbal communication in second life: The ARCHI21 experience. ReCALL, 25(1), 63–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality (Technical Report TR-93-9). Seattle: Human Interface Technology Laboratory, University of Washington.Google Scholar
  38. Wasko, C. (2013). What teachers need to know about Augmented Reality enhanced learning environments. TechTrends, 57. (4), 17–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-013-0672-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Woolfolk, A. E. (1993). Educational psychology. Bosten: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  40. Wu, F., Liu, Z., Wang, J., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Establishment virtual maintenance environment based on VIRTOOLS to effectively enhance the sense of immersion of teaching equipment. In Proceedings of the 2015 international conference on education technology, management and humanities science. Atlantis Press, Paris.  https://doi.org/10.2991/etmhs-15.2015.93.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olga Scrivner
    • 1
  • Julie Madewell
    • 1
  • Cameron Buckley
    • 1
    • 2
  • Nitocris Perez
    • 1
  1. 1.Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA
  2. 2.Arkansas State UniversityJonesboroUSA

Personalised recommendations