Helping Real Kids Learn Via Virtual Environments

1
Helping Real Kids LearnVia Virtual Environments

• Chris Dede
• Harvard University

2
Next Generation Interfacesfor Distributed
Interaction

• World to the DesktopAccessing distant experts
  and archives for knowledge creation, sharing, and
  mastery
• Ubiquitous ComputingWearable wireless devices
  coupled tosmart objects for distributed
  cognition
• Multi-User Virtual EnvironmentsImmersion in
  virtual contexts withdigital artifacts and
  avatar-based identities

3
What is a MUVE?

• A representational container that
  enablesmultiple simultaneous participants to
  accessvirtual spaces configured for learning.
• A place where learners represent themselves
  through graphical avatars (persona)to
  communicate with other learnersas well as with
  experts of various types.
• A learning context that provides activitiesin
  support of classroom curriculum.

4
River City
Figure 2 River water sampling

• Figure 1 Lab equipment inside the University

5
River City
Figure 3 Screen Shot of an agent giving
information. Smithsonian artifact on the right.
6
Educational Objectives

• To help students learn the skills necessaryfor
  scientific inquiry, with the emphasison
  experimental design and the typesof
  investigation in science fair projects
• To help students learn biology and ecology
  content related to national science standards
• To motivate students to learnscience content and
  inquiry skills
• To enhance students self-imageas science
  learners

7
Pedagogical Capabilitiesof Learning Technologies

• facilitating guided, reflective inquiry through
  extended projects thatgenerate complex products
• utilizing modeling and visualization as powerful
  means of bridgingbetween experience and
  abstraction
• involving students in virtualcommunities-of-pract
  ice

8
Students
9
Modeling Across the Curriculum

• IERI federal funding
• Five types of modeling tools over 3 years
• Focus on causal understanding, transfer,
  epistemology of models, modeling skills
• Longitudinal growth modelingas a research method
• Conditions for success a crucial issue

10
BioLogica (Concord Consortium)
11
Model-It (Univ. of Michigan)
12
Research Objectives

• To create and evaluate graphical Multi-User
  Virtual Environments (MUVEs)that use digitized
  museum resources
• To study how MUVE learning experiences affect
  motivation and educational outcomes for middle
  school students, particularly those in the
  bottom-third of achievement
• To examine the process needed to successfully
  integrate MUVEsin typical classroom settings

13
Research Questions - Motivation

• How do MUVE experiences affectstudents
  motivation to learn about science?
• Will students voluntarily accessthese shared
  virtual learning environmentsoutside their
  classroom setting?
• What types of content and interactiondo students
  find most interesting?

14
Research Questions - Learning

• To what extent do museum-related MUVEs aid
  students performance on assessments related to
  the districts science curriculum and to national
  science standards?
• Do students gain skills in experimental design
  that generalize to settingssuch as science fair
  projects?
• Do bilingual MUVEs aid studentsin mastering both
  languages?

15
Research on Learning Styles

• How are participants learning and motivation
  related to their individual characteristics
  (e.g., prior experience with computers, knowledge
  about and interest in science, gender, ethnicity,
  linguistic proficiency in English)?

16
Research Questions - Design

• What types of science-related knowledge and
  skills are best incorporatedinto MUVE settings?
• How are participants learning and motivation
  related to design characteristics of the MUVEs?
• What instructional design strategies generalize
  beyond this project to other uses of shared
  virtual environments in education?

17
Research on Museum Learning

• Does using museum-based MUVEs for learning
  science alter students patternsof museum usage?
• Do MUVE participants who visit Smithsonian
  science exhibits have different patterns of
  motivation and learningabout science than those
  who do not?
• Do students reactions to MUVEs suggest design
  strategies for improvingmuseums physical
  exhibits?

18
Research on Implementation

• How usable in classroom settingsare MUVEs?
• What problems with implementation and
  curriculum/assessment integrationdo teachers
  encounter?

19
Methods and Analysis

• One sixth and one seventh grade classroomin
  schools with diverse student populations,
  including many free and reduced lunch pupils
• Control classrooms arranged witha similar, but
  technology-free curriculum
• 45 students in the two experimental classes,and
  36 in the control, evenly split by gender
• The quantitative data analyzed with SAS
• Descriptive statistics, correlations and
  regression models run using a significance level
  of p

20
Data

• Qualitative and quantitative data were collected
  from students and teachers over the three-week
  implementation
• Quantitative data, pre and post intervention
• Patterns for adaptive learning survey (Midgley,
  2000)
• Content test, (modified from Tobin, 1999)
• Demographic data
• Teacher expectations of student success
• Observational data
• Pre-intervention teacher questionnaire on
  pedagogyand technology comfort
• Post-intervention teacher narratives on their
  perceptionsof the curriculum and the technology

21
Results Content and Motivation

• 6 out of 7 experimental students scoringless
  than 35 on the content pre-testimproved their
  content knowledge above that level, while only 2
  of 5 control students did so
• In one seventh grade classroom, five different
  hypotheses were chosen,with causes rangingfrom
  population density to immigrationto water
  pollution
• The experimental group, on average, hadmore
  positive changes in motivation mastery(as
  measured by the PALS assessment)than did the
  control group,controlling for collaboration and
  science interest

22
Results Student Efficacy

• Experimental group students perceived their
  academic efficacy increasing by one point (out of
  5) on average as opposed to the control groups
  decrease of .31. (significant at t3.36, p
• The control group, over the course of the study,
  increased their view that their teacher pressed
  them for understanding, while the experimental
  group decreased theirs
• This might indicate the switch from sage on the
  stage to guide on the side that this
  technology promotes,

23
Results Inquiry
24
Results Student Characteristics

• 7th grade experimental students showed
  approximately 5 points more improvementat all
  levels of content pretest scoresthan did 6th
  grade students,controlling for both technology
  interest and use
• Despite the fact that over 50 of the
  studentswere ESL, language was not a significant
  factor
• The MUVE seemed to have the most positive effects
  for students with high perceptions of their
  thoughtfulness of inquiry (TI). These students,
  on average, scored higher on the post content
  test, controlling for SES, science GPA, ethnicity
  and content pre-test score

25
Summary of Significance

• MUVEs seem quite feasible as an addition to more
  conventional kinds of computer-based instruction.
• Preliminary results indicate the MUVE is
  motivating for all students, including those of
  lower achievement.
• The MUVE seemed to have the most positive effects
  for students with high perceptions of
  thoughtfulness of inquiry.
• We found that students did perceive multi-variate
  problems in the MUVE.
• Language was not a barrier to success.
• There are some indications that the MUVE with
  embedded guidance can support students growth
  towards self-responsibility in learning.

26
So What?Why Should Teachers Care?

• enhancing motivation (challenge, curiosity,
  beauty, fantasy, fun, social recognition)
• reaching learners who dont do well in
  conventional classroom settings
• building fluency in distributed modes of
  communication and expression -- rhetoric
• rich, authentic representations(e.g.,
  MedievalWorld)

27
Evolving towardDistributed Learning

• Sophisticated Methods of Learning and Teaching
• guided construction of knowledge and meaning
• apprenticeships and mentoring
• infusion of research into teaching
• Orchestrated across classrooms, homes,
  workplaces, community settings
• On demand, just-in-time
• Collaborative
• distributed across space, time, media

28
Conditions for Successin Technological Innovation

• High-quality learning tools and materials
• Extensive professional development
• Strong technical infrastructure
• Organizational shifts to enabledeeper content,
  powerful pedagogies
• Equity in Content and Servicesas well as Access
  and Literacy
• Stakeholder Involvement

29
Systemic Reform

• Implementation
• transforming standard practices for curriculum,
  pedagogy, assessment, incentives, management and
  organization, professional development, and
  educational research
• achieving success with all students
• involving parents, employers, community,colleges,
  and schools as full partners in the educational
  process
• boundaries of system aroundthe school and the
  community

30
References

• Website http//www.virtual.gmu.edu/muvees/.
• Partners Harvard's Graduate School of Education,
  the Virtual Environments Lab at George Mason
  University, the Smithsonian's National Museum of
  American History (NMAH), and Thoughtful
  Technologies, Inc.
• Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z.,
  Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E.,
  Gheen, M., Kaplan, A., Kumar, R., Middleton, M.
  J., Nelson, J., Roeser, R., Urdan, T. (2000).
  Manual for the patterns of adaptive learning
  scales (PALS), Ann Arbor, MI University of
  Michigan.
• Tobin, Mark (1999). Improving student retention
  through the use of technology. Unpublished
  Masters thesis, Saint Xavier University.

31
What are the MUVERs investigating?

• The potential of MUVE-based museum-related
  participatory historical situations to aid
  motivation and learning in science.
• How the design characteristicsof these learning
  experiences affectstudents' motivation and
  educational outcomes.
• The extent to which museum-related MUVEs can aid
  pupils' performance on conventional assessments
  related to national science standards.
• How MUVEs aid bilingual andmulticultural
  learning.

32
What is Special about MUVEES?

• Interesting things many MUVEs lack interesting
  artifacts for interaction.The Smithsonian
  partnership affordsaccess to millions of
  artifactsand their associated histories.
• Motivational capabilities drawn from strategies
  used by the entertainment industry.
• Direct relationship to national science standards
  and other classroom activities.