ImPres: An Immersive 3D Presentation Framework for Mixed Reality Enhanced Learning

2021 ◽  
pp. 28-39
Author(s):  
Benedikt Hensen ◽  
Lukas Liß ◽  
Ralf Klamma
2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Frost ◽  
Lori Delaney ◽  
Robert Fitzgerald

The aim of this study was to explore the contemporary application, inclusive of advantages and challenges, of mixed reality (MR) technology in the education of nursing students and, its contribution to enhanced learning. A descriptive evaluation design was undertaken to explore the learning experience of second year students enrolled in a 3 year Bachelor of Nursing programme. One hundred per cent of the students stated that the experience assisted them in their learning. The key themes of engagement in learning, and developing clinical judgement emerged from students’ responses, and demonstrated ways in which students felt MR enhanced their learning. This emerging technology has the potential to assist in enhancing clinical judgement and developing skills in noticing physical cues in patients. The implementation of MR may also enhance student motivation and engagement with learning.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Betül Czerkawski ◽  
Margherita Berti

Recent years have seen a growing interest in augmented reality (AR) technologies due to their potential for simulating real-life situations and creating authentic learning tasks. Studies have shown that AR enables engaging and interactive learning experiences (e.g. Bressler and Bodzin 2013; Klopfer and Sheldon 2010) and can benefit student learning (e.g. Bonner and Reinders 2018; Siegle 2019). However, although research in AR for education is not scarce, educators often do not have a learning experience design (LXD) approach that is supported by the recent findings of learning sciences and instructional design models. To bridge this gap, the present study introduces an AR-learning prototype developed by using SAM I (Successive Approximation Model I), and the Threshold Concepts Framework, employed for meaningful integration of AR into the learning process. A pre-survey and a post-survey method were utilised in the data gathering process to gauge students’ experience with the AR module. The findings show that the majority of students have not had educational experiences with AR prior to the study, and they struggled to find ways to incorporate this technology into their content areas in a meaningful way. Nonetheless, participants realised the value of AR and stated that they most likely would use this technology in the future. Based on the findings, the authors present a set of suggestions for instructors and LXDs, and provide recommendations for future research. This article is part of the special collection: Mobile Mixed Reality Enhanced Learning edited by Thom Cochrane, James Birt, Helen Farley, Vickel Narayan and Fiona Smart. More papers from this collection can be found here.


Author(s):  
James Birt ◽  
Emma Moore ◽  
Michael Cowling

There is growing evidence that the use of simulation in teaching is a key means of improving learning, skills, and outcomes, particularly for practical skills. In the health sciences, the use of high-fidelity task trainers has been shown to be ideal for reducing cognitive load and leading to enhanced learning outcomes. However, how do we make these task trainers available to students studying at a distance? To answer this question, this paper presents results from the implementation and sustained testing of a mobile mixed reality intervention in an Australian distance paramedic science classroom. The context of this mobile mixed reality simulation study, provided through a user-supplied mobile phone incorporating 3D printing, virtual reality, and augmented reality, is skills acquisition in airways management, focusing on direct laryngoscopy with foreign body removal. The intervention aims to assist distance education learners in practising skills prior to attending mandatory residential schools, building a baseline equality between those students who study face to face and those at a distance. Outcomes from the study showed statistically significant improvements in the use of the simulation across several key performance indicators in the distance learners, but also demonstrated problems to overcome in the pedagogical method.


Author(s):  
Jacqueline A. Towson ◽  
Matthew S. Taylor ◽  
Diana L. Abarca ◽  
Claire Donehower Paul ◽  
Faith Ezekiel-Wilder

Purpose Communication between allied health professionals, teachers, and family members is a critical skill when addressing and providing for the individual needs of patients. Graduate students in speech-language pathology programs often have limited opportunities to practice these skills prior to or during externship placements. The purpose of this study was to research a mixed reality simulator as a viable option for speech-language pathology graduate students to practice interprofessional communication (IPC) skills delivering diagnostic information to different stakeholders compared to traditional role-play scenarios. Method Eighty graduate students ( N = 80) completing their third semester in one speech-language pathology program were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: mixed-reality simulation with and without coaching or role play with and without coaching. Data were collected on students' self-efficacy, IPC skills pre- and postintervention, and perceptions of the intervention. Results The students in the two coaching groups scored significantly higher than the students in the noncoaching groups on observed IPC skills. There were no significant differences in students' self-efficacy. Students' responses on social validity measures showed both interventions, including coaching, were acceptable and feasible. Conclusions Findings indicated that coaching paired with either mixed-reality simulation or role play are viable methods to target improvement of IPC skills for graduate students in speech-language pathology. These findings are particularly relevant given the recent approval for students to obtain clinical hours in simulated environments.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Mensink ◽  
Scott R. Hinze ◽  
Mark R. Lewis ◽  
Kirk Weishaar

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henry L. Roediger ◽  
Mark A. McDaniel ◽  
Kathleen B. McDermott ◽  
Pooja K. Agarwal

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document