|
|
ENQUIRE PROJECT DETAILS BY GENERAL PUBLIC |
| Project Details |
| Funding Scheme : | General Research Fund | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Number : | 14612119 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(English) : | Developing Pedagogic Strategies for Incorporating Interactive Learner-Immersed Video-based Virtual Reality in Learning and Teaching of Physical Geography | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(Chinese) : | 開發教學策略研究——將互動沉浸式、以視像為本的虛擬實境融入自然地理的學與教 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(English) : | Prof Jong, Morris Siu-yung | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(Chinese) : | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Department : | Department of Curriculum & Instruction | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Institution : | The Chinese University of Hong Kong | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| E-mail Address : | mjong@cuhk.edu.hk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tel : | 39436248 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Co - Investigator(s) : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Panel : | Humanities, Social Sciences | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject Area : | Education | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Exercise Year : | 2019 / 20 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fund Approved : | 611,960 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Status : | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date : | 31-3-2022 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Objectives : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract as per original application (English/Chinese): |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realisation of objectives: | The 4 project objectives were achieved. To carry out this project, we employed a design-based research (DBR) methodological approach consisting of 2 research cycles (Cycle 1 and Cycle 2) with iterative phases of Design, Enactment, Analysis, and Refinement; 1 cycle per school year). As per the original research plan, this DBR was carried out in the context of formal senior secondary geography education in Hong Kong. There were 9 participating schools at the 3 different academic bands (upper, average and lower), involving a total of 9 geography teachers and 504 secondary-4 students. >> Design LIVIE is a pedagogical framework that we proposed to leverage SVVR to enable students to conduct inquiry fieldwork-based learning in the form of virtual expeditions, with a combination of (i) in-lesson face-to-face teacher-facilitated “classwork” and (ii) off-lesson individual SVVR-supported inquiry fieldwork-based “homework” (Jong et al., 2019). EduVenture-VR is an integrated SVVR learning system that we developed to actualise the implementation of LIVIE (Jong et al., 2020a). At the outset of Cycle 1, we provided training for the teachers on LIVIE and EduVenture-VR, as well as the LIVIE materials developed for a curricular module in the formal geography curriculum in senior secondary geography education in Hong Kong. Prior to the Enactment phase of Cycle 1, to better acquaint themselves with the pedagogical operation of LIVIE, the teachers piloted experimenting on the implementation of LIVIE in their own secondary-3 classes (Jong et al., 2020a). >> Enactment X 2 In Cycle 1’s Enactment phase, in each school, the teacher implemented LIVIE to facilitate a secondary-4 class to study the curricular module. In this cycle, there were a total of 253 student participants from the 9 schools (Jong et al., 2020b). In Cycle 2’s Enactment phase, in each school, the teacher implemented LIVIE with the incorporation of the new teacher facilitation practices formulated in the Refinement phase (see below) to facilitate another secondary-4 class to study the same module. In this cycle, there were a total of 253 student participants from the 9 schools (Jong et al., 2022). In Cycle 2, in each school, we deliberately requested the teacher to select a class that was comparable with the participating class in Cycle 1, in terms of academic performance. We cross-checked that there was no significant difference (p > 0.05) between the school-based geography examination mean scores of the 2 classes respectively prior to their participation in the Enactment phases in Cycles 1 and 2. During the Enactment phases in both cycles, apart from in-class observation in each school, we conducted additional research data collection work, including teacher reflective think-aloud gathering, just-in-time and purposive student/ teacher interviews, and collection of the students’ virtual inquiry artefacts. >> Analysis X 2 In the Analysis phases in Cycles 1 and 2, in each school, we administered the knowledge test to the students. The test questions were developed in accordance with the recent public geography examination questions pertaining to the curricular module. Every test paper collected in each cycle was individually marked by 2 senior geography teachers from 2 non-participating schools; the Kappa values: 0.88 (Cycle 1) and 0.92 (Cycle 2). Moreover, in each school, in Cycles 1 and 2, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured student interviews to probe into their learning experience with LIVIE. We employed layering and interrelating approaches to analysing the collected interview data to triangulate and explain the knowledge test results. In the Analysis phase of Cycle 1, we revealed a number of problems arising from the implementation of LIVIE, impeding the students’ learning process. Some of the problems generically happened in all schools across the 3 academic bands, while the others uniquely happened in the schools at a particular academic band (Jong et al., 2022). >> Refinement Three teacher groups were formed to work on the optimisation of LIVIE by addressing the problems revealed in Cycle 1 (Jong et al., 2022). The 3 teachers at the same schools’ academic band were grouped together. We discussed the findings in Cycle 1 with each teacher group and collaborated with them to formulate possible interventions for improving/ enhancing the implementation of LIVIE in their own schools. Specifically, we aimed to derive new teacher facilitation practices for tackling the identified problems. All these newly derived practices were enacted by the teachers in the Band-1, Band-2, and Band-3 schools during the Enactment phase of Cycle 2 (Jong et al., under-review). DIFFICULTY & SOLUTION: There were a total of 9 schools participating in this project. According to the original plan, the data collection work in the second research cycle (September 2020 to July 2021) would have been conducted in 4 schools during the fall semester of 2020 and in the remaining 5 schools during the spring semester of 2021. However, due to the context of COVID-19 in Hong Kong, face-to-face teaching was suspended in September 2020, and the 4th COVID-19 wave hit in the 4th quarter of 2020. As a result, the 4 schools involved in the fall semester had to revise their entire secondary-4 geography teaching plan. Therefore, we were unable to conduct the research work in these 4 schools from September 2020 to December 2020 as planned. Consequently, we postponed the research work in these 4 schools to the fall semester of 2021. This is the reason why we applied to postpone the project completion date for 6 months, and we appreciate the approval from the RGC panel. REFERENCES: (Please refer to Pact C of this report for the full list.) Jong et al. (2019). Exploring the possibility of leveraging spherical video-based immersive virtual reality in secondary geography education. Proceedings of ICCE 2019 (pp. 709–711). APSCE. Jong et al. (2020a). Integrating interactive learner-immersed video-based virtual reality into learning and teaching of physical geography. BJET, 51(6), 2063–2078. Jong et al. (2020b). Problems in educational use of spherical video-based immersive virtual reality in practice: The LIVIE experience. Proceedings of ICCE 2020 (pp. 724–727). APSCE. Jong et al. (2022). Design-based research on harnessing spherical video-based immersive virtual reality in Geography education. AERA 2022, San Diego, USA. Jong et al. (under-review). Pedagogical adoption of SVVR in formal education: Design-based research on developing teacher-facilitating tactics in support of immersive and interactive virtual inquiry fieldwork-based learning. CAE. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of objectives addressed: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Outcome | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Major findings and research outcome: | In the Design phase of the DBR (Jong et al., 2019), in the experiment on the 9 teachers’ pilot implementation of LIVIE and the comparison with the conventional textbook-based learning approach, it was shown that LIVIE had significantly positive pedagogical effects on the upper-, average-, and lower-academic students, with small to medium effect sizes (Jong et al., 2020a). After the Enactment and Analysis phases in Cycle 1, it was revealed that a number of problems arose from the implementation of LIVIE, impeding the students’ virtual inquiry fieldwork-based learning process. Some of the problems generically happened in all schools across the 3 academic bands, while the others uniquely happened in the schools at a particular academic band. All these problems are summarised in Table 1 in the conference paper of ICCE 2020 (Jong et al., 2020b) and recapped in Appendix A in the CAE journal paper (Jong et al., under-review). Fourteen specific new teacher facilitation practices [see Table 2 in the CAE journal paper (Jong et al., under-review)] for tackling these “generic” and “unique” problems were developed in the Refinement phase in Cycle 2 and enacted by the teachers in the Band-1, Band-2, and Band-3 schools in the Enactment phase in Cycle 2. According to the quantitative analysis (and the qualitative triangulation) of comparing the students’ performance across the 3 academic bands at the Enactment phases in Cycles 1 and 2, the new teacher facilitation practices which were respectively enacted in different schools in Cycle 2 functioned to mitigate the “generic” and “unique” problems and significantly advance the pedagogical effectiveness of LIVIE, with medium to large effects (Jong et al., 2022, Jong et al., under-review). Grounded on the results of this DBR work, 5 teacher facilitation principles for optimising the process of students’ SVVR-supported virtual inquiry fieldwork-based learning were developed [as delineated in the CAE journal paper (Jong et al., under-review). Additionally, in the course this DBR study, we have gained a more thorough understanding of what and how other researchers in the same field have done. Hence, at the completion stage of this project, we further conducted a systematic critical review on the current educational use of SVVR (Jiang, Jong et al., under-review), aiming to shed light on future research directions for the field from more comprehensive and broader perspectives. REFERENCES: (Please also refer to Pact C of this report for the full list.) Jong et al. (2019). ICCE 2019. Jong et al. (2020a). BJET. Jong et al. (2020b). ICCE 2020. Jong et al. (2022). AERA 2022. Jong et al. (under-review). CAE. Jiang, Jong et al. (under-review). BJET. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Potential for further development of the research and the proposed course of action: |
This research underlines the crucial role of teacher facilitation in SVVR-supported learning, which has been largely neglected in the field. It offers researchers and educational practitioners both scholarly and practical insights into exploiting the educational use of SVVR in formal schooling and advancing its pedagogical effectiveness through teacher-facilitating support. Although this DBR focused on secondary geography education, the developed principles and practices of teacher facilitation have broader implications for the future application of SVVR in other subject domains across K-12 and higher education. These principles and practices provide insights into how SVVR can be further adopted in subjects like language, geology, biology, history, natural science, social work, medicine, construction management, and more, where immersive learning is deemed vital. Further research is needed to enhance our understanding of the effective integration of SVVR-supported learning in various formal educational settings of different discipline fields. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Layman's Summary of Completion Report: | The use of technology in education has become increasingly important since the 21st century, with a focus on constructivist approaches that emphasise active student learning and the supportive role of teachers. However, research on the use of spherical video-based virtual reality (SVVR) in formal K-12 education has been limited, particularly in regard to the facilitating role of teachers. This study aimed to fill this gap by developing teacher-facilitating tactics for SVVR-supported virtual inquiry fieldwork-based learning through a design-based research approach. It resulted in the construction of a pedagogical framework and teacher-facilitating principles and practices for harnessing SVVR in inquiry learning. This research offers insights for researchers on leveraging SVVR in education and for practitioners seeking to implement SVVR-supported learning in their classrooms. The principles and practices developed in the study have broad implications for the use of SVVR in other subject domains and educational contexts, where immersive and interactive pedagogies are valued. In a nutshell, the work provides the field with both scholarly and practical insights into exploiting the educational use of SVVR in formal schooling and advancing its pedagogical effectiveness through teacher-facilitating support. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Output | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peer-reviewed journal publication(s) arising directly from this research project : (* denotes the corresponding author) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recognized international conference(s) in which paper(s) related to this research project was/were delivered : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other impact (e.g. award of patents or prizes, collaboration with other research institutions, technology transfer, etc.): |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SCREEN ID: SCRRM00542 |