PILOT STUDY - EFFECT OF MIXED MEDIA

VISUALIZATION ON LEARNER PERCEPTIONS

AND OUTCOMES

Dr James Birt & Dr Dirk Hovorka

Bond University & The University of SydneyPaper Download @ http://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/8097

Study Overview

• Mixed media visualisation effect learner’s perspective

• Evaluation 3D printed, VR & 2D media

• Focus domains which rely on visualization & manipulation

Introduction & Rationale

• 3D Vis. shape, rotation & 3D assembly (Sternberg 1990)

• Visualisation use +’ve improvements learning outcomes

(Mayer 2005)

• Low & high spatial learners (Höffler 2010)

• No particular media/method necessary for learning (Kozma

1991;1994)

ButBoth media/method incorporated in

curriculum can influence learning

Literature Inconsistency

• Typical study focus on single media (virtual)

representation as a silver bullet (Huk 2006)

But

Multi-modal instruction (Mayer 2005)

Design guidelines (Samaras et al. 2006)

Haptic feedback (Freitas & Neumann 2009)

Appropriate media affordance factors (Dalgarno &

Lee 2010)

…

Research Questions

“How do learners perceive the

comparative capabilities of

visualization media to support

learning?”

“Do learners preferences for

visualization technologies change with

task or over time?”

Visualisation Media

2D, 3D Print & VR

Integration method -

model in OBJ or STL format

Virtual Reality Technologies

Unity 3D & Oculus Rift

scene view

game view

project assets

object details

scene objects

• unity3d.com/

• cross-platform creation

system

• 2D/3D visualisations

• includes game engine,

programming IDE (C#,

Javascript)

• developer.oculusvr.com/

• OculusUnityIntegration

package

• OVRPlayerController

1st Person Interactive

Camera

Study Design & Methodology

• Pilot Study 12 Week course

• 1st year undergraduate media and design course

• 6X dual coded media condition interventions

• Qualitative Research

• Learning journals & Stimuli Questions

• Students Reflected on learning objectives & media

• NVIVO Coding

Stimuli Questions & Objectives

1. Which media form(s) engaged you & what aspect(s) made it

engaging?

2. Which media form(s) did you find most “sticky” in your understanding

of the objective & why?

3. Discuss differences in media form & limitations

4. For the purpose of demonstrating the objective to a design team,

which media would you use & why?

ObjectiveApplied Media

2D VR Print

Geometry construction Y Y

Curved surfaces Y Y

Material shaders Y Y

Texture mapping Y Y

Lighting theory Y Y

Level of Detail Y Y

Results - RQ1: “How do learners perceive the comparative

capabilities of visualization media to support learning?”

• No one technology clearly preferred or abandoned - students found

principles learned through one media reinforced by the other

• Students commented that each media provided different experiences,

convergences & the ability to be conceptually creative

• Common theme summarised in the statement

• A second theme emerged: coded criteria: accessibility, useability,

manipulability, navigability, visibility, communication & creativity

“during the term it became increasingly apparent that although each

representation has its own strengths and weaknesses, in conjunction

they all contribute to a more effective blended learning experience”

Summary of applied media condition perceptions : Although students placed high learning

value on accessibility and useability, there was strong appreciation for the ability of the

technologies to navigate, manipulate and be creative with information via the technologies

2D Image Projection 3D Printed 3D Virtual Reality

Accessibility P: available

anywhere

N: Time consuming;

not readily available

N: not readily available

Useability P: no additional

learning required to

use

P: feels natural like real

life

N: creates motion sickness;

requires extra training

Manipulability N: manipulation not

authentic

P: can handle as real

object

M: change aspects but no

tactile, haptic feedback

Navigability N: static, lacks

interaction

M: aids spatial

awareness but can’t

navigate internally

P: real-time internal navigation

and spatial awareness

Visibility M: many aspects

available but interior

is not visible, lacks

depth

P: enables connection

between real and

virtual environment

P: defect visualisation and

classification and aspects

available

Communication P: simple with rapid

versioning

M: physical model aids

communication but

slow to manufacture

P: good for demonstration

CreativityP: bringing to life;

not limited to real

life

M: making physical

reality but limited to

physical objects

P: real-time interaction and

modification improves creative

process not limited to real life

RQ2: “Do learners preferences for visualization technologies

change with task or over time?”

• Many students expressed early preferences for specific technologies

but over time their perceptions shifted

• Some recognised that each media allows unique insights &

something to enrich the experience 2D assists with initial concept;

print best shows accuracy; VR allows immersion

• There was broad recognition that all representations have both

advantages & limitations

• Some students recognized the synergy among the technologies

• Many students noted that they had initial preferences based on

novelty or excitement over time they came to appreciate more

“mundane” technologies because they were reliable, available & of

greater perceived learning value

Study Limitations

• Exploratory research based on convenience sample

• Examples media selections were limited by the required subject

content & time required to prepare visualizations for the students to

experience

• 3D printed objects limited to PLA plastic only in multiple colours

• VR technical limitations - moving around & through the object - no

rotation, scale, moving of object (lack of manipulation) & low

resolution (OR Ver. 1)

• Not all students used VR system experienced motion sickness

• Some learners confused 2D projection with the modelling tool &

spoke about 2D being interactive required journal data to be

interpreted by the researchers

Conclusions & Future Work

• Exploratory work discover technologies & lessons for comparative

presentation of material using mixed media

• Extend the study into a wider variety of disciplines

• Correlate student perceptions against student results

• Examine causative relationships inform pedagogy

• Improve VR system increase: manipulation & resolution

• Determine if the technology enables a community of inquiry

• Final Point teaching & learning is NOT about the technology:

“… the real thing that helped me this week was not the visualisation of

the product through physical or virtual aids but the time in observing

them and chatting with others … [the educator] should possibly

consider ""chat"" as one of the options …”