(Copy)The Steroids of Learning: VFTs and Augmented Reality

The beauty of Virtual Field Trips (VFTs) and virtual/augmented reality are they can engage a wider community beyond the usual teacher-students interactions. Driver et al. (1994) note that in a constructivist science classroom knowledge and understanding is a dialogic process that happens when learners discuss shared problems and activities. A wider community could better facilitate this dialogic process, but Falk and Storsdieck (2010) found the self-perceived roles and identities of adults played an important role in how they participated in the learning community. In their interview with four different parents, they discovered that there were various motivations for them to complete science-related activities during their leisure time: to be a good parent, to satisfy their own curiosity or to reinforce their persona as smart because they are “closer to a scientist than a regular person” (Falk & Storsdieck, 2010, p. 200). Parents who visit the museum to learn along with their children are more likely to engage in discussion about what they see and do than others. One of the parents interviewed was unsure if his children had learnt anything, which could mean that he did not ask questions to check their understanding (Falk & Storsdieck, 2010). Despite their role, parents may not know how to start the dialogic process with their children and this is their leisure time, so they may not have the time to prepare for the outing as a teacher would be expected to. Teachers must visit the exhibit beforehand, prepare students by previewing keywords and perhaps engaging in relevant experiments and prepare a post-visit activity based on student discussion. There are times when field trips cannot happen and must be replaced with VFTs or other technology, but do they have a function outside of being a replacement? Rintala (1998) states that technology should be treated as a way for students to experiment, rather than as replacement for a real field trip (Spicer & Stratford, 2001). Spicer and Stratford (2001) suggest that VFTs be used alongside real field trips, for example, as preparation for field work.Questions:

What kind of preparations do you make for in-person field trips?
For those of you who have used VFTs, could you share your experience? What would you repeat? What adjustments (if any) would you make?
If you used a VFT when your school was in virtual learning mode (no in-person classes), how did you engage your students in discussion? I’m especially interested in hearing from lower primary teachers because online discussions for the younger students often require assistance from an adult or parent at home.

While I enjoyed the video and explanations the presenter gave to the learners’ queries, I wonder how engaging a 40-minute video would be to most students? What are they doing to make those connections between their mind, body and learning? This connection would have to be made after the video, but unless people take the time to find activities to make these connections, the actions are not embedded into the video environment. I find Exploratorium to be more accessible and engaging because it provides demo videos, questions, activities and explanations so interested parents could step in and interact with their children in such a way to promote the dialogic learning process.

References

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Scott, P., & Mortimer, E. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.

Falk, J. & Storksdieck, M. (2010). Science learning in a leisure setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 194-212.Spicer, J., & Stratford, J. (2001). Student perceptions of a virtual field trip to replace a real field trip. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 17, 345-354.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply