he Virtual Playground: an Educational Virtual Reality Environment for Evaluating Interactivity and Conceptual Learning



The examples presented here represent a very small view of the data that has
been collected and the subsequent issues that emerge. A host of factors can
influence learning, especially in sensory rich environments such as immersive
virtual environments. Thus, further work is required before we can explain the
elements that comprise the complex relationship between the learner, the tool
(VE) and the learning objective, and derive more precise evidence of
cognitive outcomes. Nevertheless, as the potential of immersive virtual reality
for conceptual learning remains high and its deployment in public spaces
continues to increase, study must continue if we are to acquire a deeper
understanding of what constitutes learning within virtual environments.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank all the children that participated in the studies and their parents, as
well as the educators and researchers that volunteered to help with the design of the learning
content, the long recruitment process, and the validation of observations and interpretations.
Special thanks are due to Maria Mplouna, mathematics teacher, for the time, enthusiasm, and
expertise that she has offered to this project and to Alexandre Mangon-Olivier, Dimitris
Christopoulos, and George Drettakis for modeling, animation and technical guidance
concerning the implementation of the virtual environment. The studies for this research have
been approved by the UCL Committee on the Ethics of Non-NHS Human Research, Study
No. 0171/001.

References

1. Winn, W., Windschitl, M., Fruland, R., & Lee, Y. (2002). When does immersion in a
virtual environment help students construct understanding?
In Proceedings of
International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Seattle, Washington, USA, pp. 497-
503.

2. Waterworth, E. L., & Waterworth, J. A. (2000). Presence and Absence in Educational
VR: The Role of Perceptual Seduction in Conceptual Learning.
Themes in Education,
1
(1), 7-38.

3. Jelfs, A., & Whitelock, D. (2000). The notion of presence in virtual learning
environments: what makes the environment “real”.
British Journal of Educational
Technology, 31
(2), 145-152.

4. Arthur, E., Hancock, P. A., & Telke, S. (1996). Navigation in virtual environments. In
Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, Orlando, FL,
USA, pp. 77-85.

26



More intriguing information

1. Response speeds of direct and securitized real estate to shocks in the fundamentals
2. MULTIPLE COMPARISONS WITH THE BEST: BAYESIAN PRECISION MEASURES OF EFFICIENCY RANKINGS
3. Climate change, mitigation and adaptation: the case of the Murray–Darling Basin in Australia
4. Giant intra-abdominal hydatid cysts with multivisceral locations
5. Public-Private Partnerships in Urban Development in the United States
6. Skills, Partnerships and Tenancy in Sri Lankan Rice Farms
7. Gender stereotyping and wage discrimination among Italian graduates
8. The Clustering of Financial Services in London*
9. Program Semantics and Classical Logic
10. On the estimation of hospital cost: the approach
11. Non Linear Contracting and Endogenous Buyer Power between Manufacturers and Retailers: Empirical Evidence on Food Retailing in France
12. Income Growth and Mobility of Rural Households in Kenya: Role of Education and Historical Patterns in Poverty Reduction
13. The name is absent
14. The name is absent
15. EU enlargement and environmental policy
16. Globalization and the benefits of trade
17. Proceedings from the ECFIN Workshop "The budgetary implications of structural reforms" - Brussels, 2 December 2005
18. HEDONIC PRICES IN THE MALTING BARLEY MARKET
19. The name is absent
20. Julkinen T&K-rahoitus ja sen vaikutus yrityksiin - Analyysi metalli- ja elektroniikkateollisuudesta