Haptics, VR, and Ubiquitous Learning

Haptics refer to the study of touch and human interaction with the external environment through touch (Minogue and Jones, 2006). It has been shown from previous researches that "active manipulation of both real and virtual objects and events potentially leads to a more complete understanding of them" (p 341). However, there has not been extensive research on "the efficacy of haptically augmented instruction" in education. Can one learn mathematics by touch? To further extend this line of research, can one learn mathematics by smell, feeling, art (music), etc.? These are important questions to consider as educators are well aware that students learn using different methods.

The Ambient Wood project (Rogers et al, 2005) reminds me of a similar project that was done for the Museum of Anthropology at UBC. One of the student projects at BCIT was to design and implement a mobile device which a visitor at the museum can carry around, and at certain spots, the device can be activated to show relevant information or a movie clip related to the specific spot. I am not sure how successful this project is but it seems that the Ambient Wood project provides the students with a platform where they can integrate the knowledge from the PDA’s with their reflective thinking and further discuss with other students. Ubiquitous computing is not new, but what I find interesting and innovative is the integration to social learning. Individual learning on different computing platforms have not worked because it is too isolated for us social beings. It is the same for courses I find from this program, i.e. what sets it apart from other distance ed. Programs is the social dimension that we can all interact and learn from one another.

There has already been a number of discussions on how iPhone can be used in education (E.g. http://www.learning2007.com/iphone1). Classroom Response System (CRS) that makes use of proprietary "clickers" or generic Bluetooth device (http://www.skylight.science.ubc.ca/node/25) are being used and researched in many institutions. One of the projects I envision is to use a GPS enabled multimedia cell phone that allows learning to take place anytime anywhere in different contexts, even at different parts of the city, or even any parts of the world on a larger scale – this is yet another potential use of WILD (Wireless Internet Learning Device) (Roschelle, 2003). As learners find themselves in different locations / contexts, different learning contents are “pushed” to their cell phone to reinforce their learning. Learners can also record and upload their new learning experiences in a central repository to help other learners learn in an cooperative virtual environment. I foresee that lots of research areas can come out from this area: who are the users, what level / types of learning is best achieved with this technology, what kind of infrastructure, backend / frontend, user interface, database, etc.

As an example, learning math should not be confined in the classroom devoid of any context or application. As students learn their principles of mathematics in the classroom, their learning can be continuous whether in the accountant's office, during checkout at a supermarket, or even in the skytrain as the train moves at different velocities, etc. Learners can also contribute their learning experiences as they gain insights on how their understanding of mathematics help them in new contexts which then can be uploaded for other learners. If one thinks of how different vendors want to push a coupon when one passes by a coffee shop, one can think of learning can similarly be pushed to a learner in different locations or contexts.

Extending the concept of learning in a physical world to a virtual world has been another exciting area of research especially when one thinks of cognition is the interaction between a person and its environment (Winn, 2003). Can a virtual environment provide a similar, if not better, environment for the learner? Cognition first occurs with the entire body, not just the brain. This level of interaction is called “embodiment”. The environment should be understood in two ways. The first is called “Umwelt”. The premise is that since "all knowledge is constructed by the student and that every student's understanding of the environment is idiosyncartic", it follows that "there can be no objective, fixed standard against which to access what a person knows" (p12). How a student behaves in a learning environment is completely unpredictable since each student’s experience is different. This level of interaction is called “embeddedness”. On the other hand, an artificial environment is completely predictable based on a student’s input. By viewing that the students are coupled in a learning environment rather than embedded (passively) in it allows one to see the dynamic adaptation of the student to the environment. This level of interaction is called “adaptation”. This can be powerful through the “presence” created by the artificial environment and the student’s being “confronted by compelling evidences that can neither be predicted from nor explained by their current conceptions” (p 16). Thus “cognition is embodied in physical activity, that this activity is embedded in a learning environment, and that learning is the result of adaptation of the learner to the environment and the environment to the learner. The conceptual framework assumes that embodiment, embeddedness, and adaptation are completely interdependent.”

References:

Minogue, J. & Jones, M.G. (2006). Haptics in education: Exploring an untapped sensory modality. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 317-348.

Rogers, Y., Price, S., Randell,C., Stanton, D, Weal, M., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2005). Ubi-learning integrates indoor and outdoor experiences. Communications of the ACM, 49(1), 55-61.

Roschelle, J. (2003). Unlocking the learning value of wireless mobile devices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(3), pp. 260-272.

Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114.