Perceived Effectiveness of Science Inquiry in the 3D Virtual World
Tao Xie 1
,  
Fan Zhang 2
,  
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
College of Computer and Information Science, Southwest University, Chongqing, CHINA
2
School of Economics and Finance, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi An, Shaan Xi, CHINA
3
Office of Educational Administration, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing, CHINA
Online publish date: 2017-08-23
Publish date: 2017-08-23
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2017;13(8):5871–5881
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Many researchers claim that inquiry-based learning offers proper solutions to engage students in the 3D virtual world (3DVW), while little literature has reported how to conduct inquiry-based learning and to what extent it influences learning in this world. This study investigates the perceived effectiveness when students exhibit in the inquiry-based learning compared with the standard learning in the 3DVW. Forty-eight students voluntarily participate in the experiment. Half of them learn in the inquiry-based environment, and the other half learn in the standard environment. The effectiveness is measured by the perceived experience and perceived knowledge gains. The data is analyzed by combining the quantitative with qualitative approaches. The results show students who exhibit in the inquiry-based environment perceive more effectiveness than those who don’t. Also, the reasons why students perceive in the way are obtained. This study indicates the inquiry-based learning conducted in the 3DVW can effectively enhance learning.
 
REFERENCES (37)
1.
Beaumont, C., Savin-Baden, M., Conradi, E., & Poulton, T. (2014). Evaluating a Second Life Problem-Based Learning (PBL) demonstrator project: what can we learn? Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 125-141. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.641681.
 
2.
Berns, A., Gonzalez-Pardo, A., & Camacho, D. (2013). Game-like language learning in 3-D virtual environments. Computers & Education, 60(1), 210-220. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.001.
 
3.
Bosch-Sijtsema, P. M., & Haapamäki, J. (2014). Perceived enablers of 3D virtual environments for virtual team learning and innovation. Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 395-401. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.035.
 
4.
Callaghan, M. J., McCusker, K., Losada, J. L., Harkin, J., & Wilson, S. (2013). Using game-based learning in virtual worlds to teach electronic and electrical engineering. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 9(1), 575-584. doi:10.1109/TII.2012.2221133.
 
5.
Cano, M. B., Perry, P., Ashman, R., & Waite, K. (2017). The influence of image interactivity upon user engagement when using mobile touch screens. Computers in Human Behavior. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.042.
 
6.
Chau, M., Wong, A., Wang, M., Lai, S., Chan, K. W., Li, T. M., . . . Sung, W.-k. (2013). Using 3D virtual environments to facilitate students in constructivist learning. Decision Support Systems, 56, 115-121. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2013.05.009.
 
7.
Cheung, R., & Vogel, D. (2013). Predicting user acceptance of collaborative technologies: An extension of the technology acceptance model for e-learning. Computers & Education, 63, 160-175. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.003.
 
8.
Craig, A. B., Brown, E. R., Upright, J., & DeRosier, M. E. (2016). Enhancing children’s social emotional functioning through virtual game-based delivery of social skills training. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 25(3), 959-968. doi:10.1007/s10826-015-0274-8.
 
9.
Cruz-Benito, J., Therón, R., García-Peñalvo, F. J., & Lucas, E. P. (2015). Discovering usage behaviors and engagement in an Educational Virtual World. Computers in Human Behavior, 47, 18-25. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.028.
 
10.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly, 319-340. doi:10.2307/249008.
 
11.
Dmitriyev, V., & Daineko, Y. (2015). Implementing Physics Virtual Laboratory in 3D: An Example of Atwood Machine. 2015 Twelve International Conference on Electronics Computer and Computation (Icecco), 116-120. doi:10.1109/ICECCO.2015.7416891.
 
12.
DomíNguez, A., Saenz-De-Navarrete, J., De-Marcos, L., FernáNdez-Sanz, L., PagéS, C., & MartíNez-HerráIz, J.-J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63, 380-392. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020.
 
13.
Dong, B., & Lv, L. (2017). The Development of Research on Small Class Teaching in China Life in Schools and Classrooms (pp. 71-83): Springer. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-3654-5_5.
 
14.
Fraser, B. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Giddings, G. J. (1993). Development and cross‐national validation of a laboratory classroom environment instrument for senior high school science. Science Education, 77(1), 1-24. doi:10.1002/sce.3730770102.
 
15.
Grissom, J. A., Loeb, S., & Mitani, H. (2015). Principal time management skills: Explaining patterns in principals’ time use, job stress, and perceived effectiveness. Journal of Educational Administration, 53(6), 773-793. doi:10.1108/JEA-09-2014-0117.
 
16.
Hsu, C.-L., & Liao, Y.-C. (2014). Exploring the linkages between perceived information accessibility and microblog stickiness: The moderating role of a sense of community. Information & Management, 51(7), 833-844. doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.005.
 
17.
Hwang, G.-J., Chiu, L.-Y., & Chen, C.-H. (2015). A contextual game-based learning approach to improving students' inquiry-based learning performance in social studies courses. Computers & Education, 81, 13-25. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.09.006.
 
18.
Hyman, J. A., Moser, M. T., & Segala, L. N. (2014). Electronic reading and digital library technologies: understanding learner expectation and usage intent for mobile learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(1), 35-52. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9330-5.
 
19.
Jarmon, L., Traphagan, T., Mayrath, M., & Trivedi, A. (2009). Virtual world teaching, experiential learning, and assessment: An interdisciplinary communication course in Second Life. Computers & Education, 53(1), 169-182. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.010.
 
20.
Kahai, S., Jestire, R., & Huang, R. (2013). Effects of transformational and transactional leadership on cognitive effort and outcomes during collaborative learning within a virtual world. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(6), 969-985. doi:10.1111/bjet.1215.
 
21.
Karahanna, E., & Straub, D. W. (1999). The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use. Information & Management, 35(4), 237-250. doi:10.1016/S0378-7206(98)00096-2.
 
22.
Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010b). A multi‐user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56-68. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01036.x.
 
23.
Kogan, M., & Laursen, S. L. (2014). Assessing long-term effects of inquiry-based learning: A case study from college mathematics. Innovative higher education, 39(3), 183-199. doi:10.1007/s10755-013-9269-9.
 
24.
Liaw, S.-S., & Huang, H.-M. (2013). Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Computers & Education, 60(1), 14-24. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.015.
 
25.
Lowerison, G., Sclater, J., Schmid, R. F., & Abrami, P. C. (2006). Student perceived effectiveness of computer technology use in post-secondary classrooms. Computers & Education, 47(4), 465-489. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2004.10.014.
 
26.
Maiti, A., Maxwell, A. D., Kist, A. A., & Orwin, L. (2015). Joining the game and the experiment in peer-to-peer remote laboratories for STEM education. Paper presented at the Experiment@ International Conference (exp. at'15), 2015 3rd. doi: 10.1109/EXPAT.2015.7463268.
 
27.
Moore, R. W., & Foy, R. L. H. (1997). The scientific attitude inventory: A revision (SAI II). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 327-336. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199704)34:4<327::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-T.
 
28.
Nelson, B. C., & Ketelhut, D. J. (2007). Scientific inquiry in educational multi-user virtual environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 265-283. doi:10.1007/s10648-007-9048-1.
 
29.
Nelson, B. C., & Ketelhut, D. J. (2008). Exploring embedded guidance and self-efficacy in educational multi-user virtual environments. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(4), 413-427. doi:10.1007/s11412-008-9049-1.
 
30.
Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., De Jong, T., Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., . . . Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational research review, 14, 47-61. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003.
 
31.
Postiglione, G. A. (2015). Research universities for national rejuvenation and global influence: China’s search for a balanced model. Higher Education, 70(2), 235-250. doi:10.1007/s10734-014-9838-6.
 
32.
Pratt, H. (2013). The NSTA Reader's Guide to a Framework for K-12 Science: NSTA Press.
 
33.
Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Computers & Education, 59(1), 82-94. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.11.010.
 
34.
Winkelmann, K., Scott, M., & Wong, D. (2014). A study of high school students’ performance of a chemistry experiment within the virtual world of second life. Journal of Chemical Education, 91(9), 1432-1438. doi:10.1021/ed500009e.
 
35.
Xie, T., & Luo, L. (2017). Impact of Prompting Agents on Task Completion in the Virtual World. Inernational Journal of Online Engineering. Accepted.
 
36.
Yang, C.-c., & Brown, B. B. (2015). Factors involved in associations between Facebook use and college adjustment: Social competence, perceived usefulness, and use patterns. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 245-253. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.015.
 
37.
Yilmaz, R. M., Baydas, O., Karakus, T., & Goktas, Y. (2015). An examination of interactions in a three-dimensional virtual world. Computers & Education, 88, 256-267. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.06.002.
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215