ED012-03
A framework to support the classification of virtual reality experiences in environmental education

Tuesday, 8 December 2020: 19:11
Virtual
Kyra Selina Hagge1, Gavin Gleasman2, Rui Wu3, D. Matthew Boyer4, Kelly Lazar2 and Stephen M Moysey5, (1)East Carolina University, Department of Coastal Studies, Greenville, NC, United States, (2)Clemson University, Environmental Engineering and Earth Sciences, Clemson, SC, United States, (3)East Carolina University, Department of Computer Science, Greenville, NC, United States, (4)Clemson University, Eugene T. Moore School of Education, Clemson, SC, United States, (5)East Carolina University, Department of Geological Sciences, Greenville, NC, United States
Abstract:
Individual studies of virtual reality (VR) experiences have shown that this technology can support knowledge transfer, empathy, and behavioral change in users. These results suggest that VR experiences can be a powerful tool for formal and informal approaches to environmental education and promote pro-environmental behaviors. The definition of a “VR experience”, however, ranges widely from 360-degree video to fully immersive and interactive virtual worlds; i.e., not every experience provides the same affordances needed to support different types of affective, cognitive, or psychomotor learning outcomes. There is currently no overarching classification scheme to compare different types of experiences that can be used to guide the development or selection of VR tools for use in environmental education curricula. We address this gap by developing a framework that can be used to describe VR experiences using metrics based on three main affordances: presence, interactivity, and accessibility. Presence denotes to the user’s feeling of being within the simulation. Interactivity is the degree of interaction possible as enabled by the technology, while accessibility encapsulates technical requirements, user representation within the experience design, and pedagogical validity/practicality. Based on these three categories of affordances, we have designed a series of guiding questions that allow for an objective comparison and classification of VR experiences based on the capabilities they provide. This is a necessary first step toward developing overarching frameworks that link the affordances of VR experiences to desired learning and behavioral outcomes. After answering the questions, the user ends up with a visual representation of their classified experience and its shape can be compared to that of other experiences to evaluate the experiences’ learning outcomes. Understanding how a particular VR experience can be applied is vital in navigating this relatively new technology in a meaningful way. Furthermore, this framework can help to inform future VR development efforts as well as to enable curriculum designers to more readily identify the characteristics of an experience they wish to include in a learning activity.