2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds

Towards Parallel Educational Worlds

Carlos Delgado Kloos, Carmen Fernández-Panadero,Mª Blanca Ibáñez, Mario Muñoz, Abelardo Pardo

Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

www.it.uc3m.es/cdk

www.emadridnet.org

Outline

1. Introduction

2. Linking physical and virtual worlds

3. Learning objects in physical and virtual worlds

4. Assessment in physical and virtual worlds

5. Learning activities in physical and virtual worlds

6. Conclusions

EDUCON, 2011-04-04

2

Amman, Jordan

1. Introduction

Educational material and activities are being digitized

Technology is now offering possibilities to mix physical and digital elements with a finer granularity then in blended learning

Learning descriptions (specifications and standards) too web-oriented still not adapted to the new mixed possibilities

How to define learning processes in an abstract way, leaving the concrete details of enactment open

Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04

3

Example: Augmented Reality

Superimposition of text, images or 3D models


4

Example: Virtual Reality

3D modelling of the real world, imaginary, augmented, or mediated worlds


5

Learning in the Physical World

ActorsLearners InstructorsCo-learners

ContentEducational material (documents, images, videos)Tangibles

ContextEnvironment (class, etc.)


6

Moving Elements to the Virtual

Educational material (Content)Documents ImagesVideos

Personal information (Actors)Personal dataRelationships (social graph)Presence infoActivities…


7

From III via WWW to GGG

Amman, Jordan

8

III

WWW

GGG

EDUCON, 2011-04-04

WWW (World Wide Web):Images of Documents

Amman, Jordan

9

Works without electricityBurnable to make fire

Perfectly copiableSearchable

EDUCON, 2011-04-04

GGG (Giant Global Graph):Images of Persons

Amman, Jordan

10

EDUCON, 2011-04-04

Actors:Parallel Identities


11

Environment


12

Parallel Worlds


13

Real, physical

Virtual, digital

Milgram’s Continuum

Paul Milgram, H. Takemura, A. Utsumi, F. Kishino: Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. SPIE, vol. 2351, pp. 282-292 (1994)

etclab.mie.utoronto.ca/publication/1994/Milgram_Takemura_SPIE1994.pdf


14

4. How to link these worlds?


15

Real, physical

Virtual, digital

How to LinkPhysical and Virtual Worlds?

Geo-location

Graphic tags: QR, LLA codes, etc.

Electronic tags: RFID, NFC

Recognition in the visible, IR, or ultrasound spectrum

2D or 3D projections

Holography


16

Geo-location

Global Positioning System (GPS)For positionWorks only in the open

Internal compassFor direction


17

Text Tags

TextGeographical coordinatesContext infoURL


18

Graphic Tags

Several StandardsQR codesLLA markersAR markers

Readable content TextBusiness card infoPositioning infoURL


19

Electronic Tags

RFID (Radio Frequency Identification)BluetoothNFC (Near Field Communications)Bluetooth Low Energy

Readable and writable contentPaymentTracking


20

Recognition

Visible spectrumCamspace

Infrared spectrumNintendo Wii

Ultrasound spectrumSensitive objects

CombinationMicrosoft Kinect


21

Holography

3D light field scattered by an objectis registered and then reconstructed

E.g. Holoviziogenerates all the light beams to make

the 3D view of the displayed objectvisible in the whole field of view

Views from different perspectivesNo goggles neededVideo possible


22

Learning Object (LO): “any entity, digital or non-digital, that may be used

for learning, education or training” (IEEE) “any digital resource that can be reused to support

learning” (D. Wiley)

3. Learning Objectsin Physical and Virtual Worlds


23

Learning Objectsin Physical and Virtual Worlds

Digital Learning Objects Easy to copy Easy to share Easy to reuse

Physical Learning Objects Can be touched Have a weight Have a location


24

Learning objects

Revival of physical learning objects

Tangible interfaces

Mixed objects

Virtual objects in 3D worlds

Location and physical propertieshave to be taken into consideration


25

4. Assessmentin Physical and Virtual Worlds

Multiple Choice testsfilled out by hand

Multiple Choice testsresponded with a computer

Gymkhanasin the physical world

Gymkhanasin the augmented physical world

Gymkhanasin a virtual world


26

Assessmentin Physical and Virtual Worlds

Multiple Choice by hand Actors: Physical, Content: Physical, Context: Insensitive

Multiple Choice by computer Actors: Physical, Content: Virtual, Context: Insensitive

Gymkhanas in the physical world Actors: Physical, Content: Physical, Context: Sensitive

Gymkhanas in the augmented physical world Actors: Physical, Content: Physical/Virtual, Context:

Sensitive

Gymkhanas in a virtual world Actors: Virtual, Content: Virtual, Context: Sensitive


27

Assessmentin Physical and Virtual Worlds

MultipleChoice (in any way) Context insensitive Simple interaction

(choose and write) Assessment of

knowledge

Gymkhana (in any world) Context sensitive Rich interaction

(complex manipulation) Assessment of

knowledge, skills, and competences


28


29

Specification in IMS QTI <questestinterop>

<qticomment>Simple T/F multiple-choice.Radio.Response</qticomment> <item ident="IMS_V01_I_BasicExample001”> <presentation label="BasicExample001”> <flow> <material><mattext>Paris is the Capital of France</mattext> </material> <response_lid ident="TF01" rcardinality="Single" rtiming="No"> <render_choice> <flow_label> <response_label ident="T"> <material><mattext>Agree</mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident="F"> <material><mattext>Disagree</mattext></material> </response_label> </flow_label> </render_choice> </response_lid> </flow> </presentation> … <resprocessing>…</resprocessing> <itemfeedback>…</itemfeedback> </item></questestinterop>

Location and Context in Assessments

Location parameter becomes important

Rich interaction increases expressiveness

There should be a smooth way to enhancesimple Multiple Choice tests torich gymkhanas in any kind of world

This smooth transition should besupported by adequate specification formats


30

5. Learning Activitiesin Physical and Virtual Worlds

Coreography of activities

Educational Mark-Up Languages (EMLs)

IMS LD (Learning Design), LAMS, etc.


31

Learning Activitiesin Physical and Virtual Worlds

The same unit of learning should able to be enactedin several different “pure” settings:Real world:

learners: real persons, LOs: tangible objects, environment: physical rooms

Web-based setting: learners (represented by): login ids, LOs: SCORM-based

digital resources, environment: web pages

3D virtual world: learners (represented by): avatars, LOs: entities in 3D

virtual worlds, environment: 3D virtual worlds


32

Learning Activitiesin Physical and Virtual Worlds

But also in “mixed” settings:Augmented reality:

learners: real persons LOs: physical objects with virtual complements environment: physical world

Augmented virtuality: learners: avatars LOs: virtual objects with possibly complements from the

real world environment: 3D virtual mirror world (with natural or

distorted dimensions) or imaginary world


33

6. Conclusions

Need for a setting-independent description of the learning scenarioDefine first (abstractly), then enact in different

settings

Mixed interrelated scenarios

Standards and specifications need to beadapted to the new possibilities

Content can become context


34

Conclusions

The “location” parameter becomes relevantThe internet implied the death of distance, now back

Several levels of abstraction neededPosition-orientedConceptualLike levels in maps


35

2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds

Documents

Transcript of 2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds