Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education (한국과학교육학회지)

The Korean Association for Science Education (한국과학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application and Effects of VR-Based Biology Class Reflecting Characteristics of Virtual Reality

가상현실 특성을 반영한 VR 프로그램 기반 수업 적용 및 효과

  • Received : 2020.03.16
  • Accepted : 2020.04.17
  • Published : 2020.04.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the effects of a VR(virtual reality)-based biology class on both the cognitive and affective domains by developing and applying a VR-based biology program for 6th-grade elementary school students. For this research, we developed a VR teaching material about 'digestion' reflecting virtual reality characteristics and one hundred five students in an elementary school in an urban area participated in this study and took three VR-based lessons. To examine the cognitive effects of a VR-based biology class, the study subjects were divided into two groups. The experimental group was composed of 50 individuals who participated in VR-based biology lessons, while 55 students of a control group learned through general lessons. We collected data using drawing tasks for measuring students' modeling performance level from these groups and analyzed the cognitive effect of VR-based instruction. We also recorded 21 interviews of students after the intervention, which were transcribed to verify the students' perception of cognitive and affective effects. The key results are as follows: First, we demonstrated the possibility of applying a VR program reflecting VR characteristics (manipulation, multi-sensory, and interaction). Second, we found out that a VR-based biology class significantly enhances higher levels of thinking (spatial, abstract, and reflective thinking). Third, we examined students' perceptions on this program and came to the conclusion that VR characteristics positively affected cognitive and affective domains. This study may be able to contribute to offering guidelines on how to apply VR-programs to future science education effectively.

본 연구에서는 초등학교 교과 단원 '우리 몸의 소화와 순환'을 주제로 한 가상현실 기반 수업 프로그램의 개발과 적용을 통해 학생들의 인지적·정의적 측면의 향상 효과를 검증하고자 하였다. 이 연구를 위해 서울 소재 초등학교 6학년 105명의 학생을 대상으로 3차시에 걸쳐 가상현실 프로그램을 투입하고 사전 사후 모형 수행 수준 평가지를 수집하였으며, 21명의 학생들의 인터뷰 자료를 통해서 인지적·정의적 효과에 대한 학생들의 인식을 알아보았다. 이에 대한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 가상현실의 특성을 반영한 VR 프로그램을 개발함으로써 VR 콘텐츠의 학교 수업 적용 가능성을 보였다. 투입된 가상현실 프로그램 자료는 선행연구에 기반을 둔 가상현실 특성인 '조작', '감각화', '상호작용'을 반영하여 개발되었으며, 수업 시간에 프로그램의 이러한 특성들을 반영한 수업 활동을 하였다. 둘째, 가상현실 기반 생물 수업이 학생들의 '공간적 사고', '추상적 사고', 반영적 사고'와 같은 인지적 측면에 효과가 있음을 검증하였다. 인지적인 측면의 효과를 측정하기 위한 분석틀로 '구조', '기능', '시스템 표상화', '시각화', '표지' 요인으로 구성된 과학적 모형 수행 수준 분석틀을 사용하였으며, 모형 수행 수준의 변화를 비교한 결과 모든 영역에서 실험집단과 통제집단의 유의미한 차이가 있었다. 또한 학생들의 인터뷰를 통해서 어떤 가상현실의 특성이 반영되어 인지적 효과에 영향을 주었는지에 대한 학생들의 인식을 알아보았다. 셋째, 가상현실 기반 생물 수업이 '행위유발성', '현존감', '몰입감'을 높임으로써 정의적 측면에 효과가 있음을 인터뷰 자료를 통해서 확인하였다. 본 연구는 향후 가상현실 기반 생물 수업이 교실에 효과적으로 적용될 방향을 제시하는 데 기여할 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson, A., & Weng, Z. (1999). VRDD: Applying virtual reality visualization to protein docking and design. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modelling, 17(3-4), 180-186. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1093-3263(99)00029-7
  2. Assaraf, O. B. Z., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 518-560. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20061
  3. Baek, Y. (2010). Teaching and learning in a virtual world. Seoul: Hakjisa.
  4. Bamberger, Y. M., & Davis, E. A. (2013). Middle-school science students' scientific modelling performances across content areas and within a learning progression. International Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 213-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.624133
  5. Bormann, K. (2005). Presence and the utility of audio spatialization. Presence. Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 14(3), 278-297. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474605323384645
  6. Buckley, B. C. (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. International Journal Of Science Education, 22(9), 895-935. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900416848
  7. Chang, H. Y. (2018). Students' representational competence with drawing technology across two domains of science. Science Education, 102(5), 1129-1149. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21457
  8. 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.
  9. Chien, Y. T. & Jenkins, J. (1994).Virtual Reality Assessment. A report of the Task Group on Virtual Reality to the High Performance Computing and Communications and Information Technology (HPCCIT) Subcommittee of the Information and Communications Research and Development Committee of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC).
  10. Cho, Y. H., Hong, S. Y., & Lee, J. E. (2014). An exploratory study on learner-to-leaner interaction in a 3D virtual role-play for pre-service teachers. Journal of Korean Association for Educational Information and Media, 20(1), 27-50.
  11. Choi, S. (2018) Making a good class. Seoul: Ebeelak press.
  12. Choi, S., & Kim, H. (2013). The effects of animation-based instruction using "Magic School Bus" on elementary students' level of understanding and interests on plant's structure and function. Journal of Korean Elementary Science Education, 32(4), 379-392. https://doi.org/10.15267/KESES.2013.32.4.379
  13. Choi, S., & Kim, H. (2019). Exploring the characteristics of virtual reality and its application to biology class. Biology Education, 47(3), 263-277. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2019.47.3.263
  14. Chung Dong-hun. (2017). User-based theories and practices on virtual reality. Informatization Policy, 24(1), 3-29. https://doi.org/10.22693/NIAIP.2017.24.1.003
  15. Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(4), 715-730. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715
  16. Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3‐D virtual environments?. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01038.x
  17. De Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: a review of game‐based learning. Bristol, England: JISC. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearninginnovation/gamingreport_v3.pdf
  18. Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323(5910), 66-69. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167311
  19. Dede, C., Grotzer, T. A., Kamarainen, A., & Metcalf, S. J. (2017). Virtual reality as an immersive medium for authentic simulations. Virtual, augmented, and mixed realities in education (pp. 133-156). Singapore: Springer.
  20. Dede, C., Salzman, M. C., Loftin, R. B., & Sprague, D. (1999). Multisensory immersion as a modelling environment for learning complex scientific concepts. In Feurzeig W., Roberts N. (Eds.), modelling and simulation in science and mathematics education (pp. 282-319). New York, NY: Springer.
  21. Dede, C., Salzman, M., Loftin, R. B., & Ash, K. (2000). The design of immersive virtual learning environments: Fostering deep understandings of complex scientific knowledge. In Jacobson M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds), Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 11-46). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  22. 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820500173714
  23. Dickey, M. D. (2005b). 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00477.x
  24. Dori, Y. J., & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual and physical molecular modelling: Fostering model perception and spatial understanding. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 4(1), 61-74.
  25. Forneris, S. G., & Peden‐McAlpine, C. (2007). Evaluation of a reflective learning intervention to improve critical thinking in novice nurses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 57(4), 410-421. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04120.x
  26. Fruland, R. M. (2002). Using immersive scientific visualizations for science inquiry: Co-construction of knowledge by middle and high school students. Proceeding of Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, USA.
  27. Geban, O., Askar, P., & Ozkan, I. (1992). Effects of computer simulations and problem-solving approaches on high school students. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(1), 5-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1992.9941821
  28. Gibson (1979), The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
  29. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67-82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  30. Gilbert, J. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2009). Introduction: Macro, submicro and symbolic representations and the relationship between them: Key models in chemical education. In D. Treagust (Ed.), Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 1-8). Dordrecht: Springer.
  31. Gorsky, P., & Finegold, M. (1992). Using computer simulation to restructure students' conceptions of force. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 11(2), 163-78.
  32. Ha, H., Lee, C., & Kim, H. (2018). Exploring change in properties of conceptions represented in students' modelling with smart technology and investigating instructional supports for the change. Biology Education, 46(3), 300-317. https://doi.org/10.15717/bioedu.2018.46.3.300
  33. Hahn, J. & Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical review on designing virtual reality in the teaching-learning process. Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 133-163. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.17.3.133
  34. Hansen, J. A., Barnett, M., MaKinster, J. G., & Keating, T. (2004). The impact of three-dimensional computational modelling on student understanding of astronomical concepts: A quantitative analysis. International Journal of Science Education 26(11), 1365-1378. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690420001673757
  35. Hwang, M., Kim, Y., & Cho, Y. (2014). A case study on 3d virtual role play for improving problem solving skills of elementary school pre-service teachers. Journal of Educational Technology, 30(1), 45-75. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.30.1.45
  36. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296434
  37. Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. S. (2003). Effect of knowledge integration activities on students' perception of the Earth's crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 545-565. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10096
  38. Kelton, A. J. (2007). Second life: Reaching into the virtual world for real-world learning. Educause Center for Applied Research, 2007(17), 1-13.
  39. Kennison, M. M. (2006). The evaluation of students' reflective writing for evidence of critical thinking. Nursing Education Perspectives, 27(5), 269-273.
  40. Kim, J. & Kim, Y. (1988). Instructional methods and educational technology. Seoul: Hyungseol.
  41. Kim, S., & Han, J. (2017). A study on characteristics of sound visualizationbased VR contents. Journal of the Korea Institute of the Spatial Design, 12(6), 243-252. https://doi.org/10.35216/kisd.2017.12.6.243
  42. Kim, Y. & Chung, W.(1995). An investigation of elementary school children's conceptions on the structure and function of the human body. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 15(1), 6-16.
  43. Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Can we support CSCL? Educational, social and technological affordances for learning. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL: can we support CSCL? (pp. 7-47). Heerlen, Netherlands: Open University of the Netherlands.
  44. Kolb D. (1984). The process of experiential learning. Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development (pp. 21-38). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice‐Hall.
  45. Kukkonen, J. E., Karkkainen, S., Dillon, P., & Keinonen, T. (2014). The effects of scaffolded simulation-based inquiry learning on fifth-graders' representations of the greenhouse effect. International Journal of Science Education, 36(3), 406-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.782452
  46. Larsen, C. R., Soerensen, J. L., Grantcharov, T. P., Dalsgaard, T., Schouenborg, L., Ottosen, C., & Ottesen, B. S. (2009). Effect of virtual reality training on laparoscopic surgery: randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 338: b1802. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b1802
  47. Lee, E. A. L., Wong, K. W., & Fung, C. C. (2010). How does desktop virtual reality enhance learning outcomes? A structural equation modelling approach. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1424-1442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.006
  48. Leem, J. (2001). An analytical study on the concept of virtual education and cyber education. Journal of Educational Technology, 17(3), 165-194. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.17.3.165
  49. Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia aids to problem-solving transfer. International Journal of Educational Research, 31(7), 611-623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-0355(99)00027-0
  50. McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A. & Heald, Y. (2002). Report on the educational use of games. Cambridge: Teachers Evaluating Educational Media.
  51. MacKnight, C., Dillon, A. & Richardson, J. (1991). Hypertext in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  52. 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 metaanalysis. Computers & Education, 70(2014), 29-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033
  53. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  54. Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185-198. https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369804800305
  55. Mohan, L., Chen, J., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Developing a multi-year learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 675-698. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20314
  56. Monaghan, J. M., & Clement, J. (1999). Use of a computer simulation to develop mental simulations for understanding relative motion concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21(9), 921-944. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006999290237
  57. Oh, I.(2005). Human rights education process incorporating experiential learning theory and web-based instruction. Journal of Corporate Education and Talent Research, 7(1), 75-93.
  58. Park, Y., Shim, K., Kim, H., Kim, J., Park, J., & Ryu, H. (2001). Exploring application ways of virtual reality technology in science education. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 21(4), 725-737.
  59. Pasqualotti, A., & Freitas, C. M. D. S. (2002). MAT3D: A virtual reality modelling language environment for the teaching and learning of mathematics. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(5), 409-422. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493102761022832
  60. Psotka, J. (1995). Immersive training systems: Virtual reality and education and training. Instructional Science, 23(5-6), 405-431. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00896880
  61. Rheingold, H. (1991). Virtual reality (pp. 345-47). New York: Touchstone,
  62. Rieber, L. P. (2005). Multimedia learning in games, simulations, and microworlds. In R. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 549-567). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  63. Sen, P. K., & Puri, M. L. (1971). Nonparametric methods in multivariate analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  64. Shim, K., Kim, H., Ryu, S., Kim, H., & Park, Y. (2003). The effect of biology educational material based on virtual reality technology on the knowledge achievement -The structure and function of eye-. Journal of the Korean Association for Research in Science Education, 23(1), 1-8.
  65. Slater, M. (1999). Measuring presence: A response to the Witmer and Singer presence questionnaire. Presence, 8(5), 560-565. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474699566477
  66. Sweeny, L. B., & Sterman, J. D. (2000). Bathtub dynamics: Preliminary results of a systems thinking inventory. Proceeding of International System Dynamics Conference, Bergen, Norway.
  67. Tatli, Z., & Ayas, A. (2013). Effect of a virtual chemistry laboratory on students' achievement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 159-170.
  68. Tuysuz, C. (2010). The effect of the virtual laboratory on students' achievement and attitude in chemistry. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 2(1), 37-53.
  69. Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality. Technical Publication R-93-9, Human Interface Technology Laboratory of the Washington Technology Center. Seattle: University of Washington.
  70. Won, M., Mocerino, M., Tang, K. S., Treagust, D. F., & Tasker, R. (2019). Interactive immersive virtual reality to enhance students' visualisation of complex molecules. In Schultz M., Schmid S., & Lawrie G. (Eds.), Research and practice in chemistry education (pp. 51-64). Singapore: Springer.
  71. Yim, Sun Bin. (1996). Virtual reality as a new learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology, 12(2), 189-205. https://doi.org/10.17232/KSET.12.2.189
  72. Zacharia, Z. (2003). Beliefs, attitudes, and intentions of science teachers regarding the educational use of computer simulations and inquirybased experiments in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(8), 792-823. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10112

Cited by

  1. Development and application of Scenario-based Admission Management VR contents for nursing students vol.26, pp.1, 2020, https://doi.org/10.9708/jksci.2021.26.01.209
  2. The Effects of Classes using Virtual Reality Simulations of the Hospital Environment on Knowledge of the Hospital Environment, Academic Self-efficacy, Learning Flow, Educational Satisfaction and Acade vol.28, pp.4, 2020, https://doi.org/10.7739/jkafn.2021.28.4.520