eXtended Reality (XR): The New World of Human/Machine Interaction
Wednesday, October 31 | 9:45am – 10:30am MT |
Session Type: Breakout Session
Delivery Format: Interactive Presentation
eXtended reality (XR) technologies present opportunities to advance the higher education mission and prepare students for a new world of human/machine interaction. In this interactive session, we will explore what is being done today and what is possible in four key areas of XR: use, technology, content development, and gamification.
Outcomes:
*Identify best-of-class tools and methods available for the design and support of XR in higher ed
* Explain to campus stakeholders the potential of XR to support pedagogy, research, and student success
* Understand the areas of focus of our growing XR community of practice and how you can participate
Zoom, Teams, Skype, and FaceTime all became daily fixtures, and many of us quickly became fatigued by seeing our colleagues, students and far-away loved ones almost exclusively in 2D. Most video conferencing solutions were not designed to be online classrooms. what is missing from the current video platforms that could improve online teaching: tools to better facilitate student interactions, including enhanced polling and quizzing features, group work tools, and more.
While universities continue to increase in-person and HyFlex courses, hoping to soon see campuses return to normalcy, there is mounting evidence that the increased interest in digital tools for teaching and learning will persist even after the pandemic.
We should move beyond 2D solutions and take advantage of what extended reality (XR) and virtual reality (VR) have to offer us.
Professor Courtney Cogburn created the 1,000 Cut Journey, an immersive VR research project that allows participants to embody an avatar that experiences various forms of racism. Professor Shantanu Lal has implemented VR headsets for pediatric dentistry patients who become anxious during procedures. At Columbia Engineering, professor Steven Feiner’s Computer Graphics and User Interfaces Lab explores the design and development of 2D and 3D user interfaces for a broad range of applications and devices. Professor Letty Moss-Salentijn is working with Feiner’s lab to create dental training simulations to guide dental students through the process of nerve block injection. Faculty, students and staff at Columbia’s Media Center for Art History have created hundreds of virtual reality panoramas of archaeology projects and fieldwork that are available on the Art Atlas platform.
In spring 2020, a group of Columbia students began to build “LionCraft,” a recreation of Columbia’s Morningside campus in Minecraft. Even though students were spread out around the world, they still found creative and fun ways to run into each other on campus, in an immersive online format.
For the purpose of this chapter, Cross Reality or XR refers to technologies and applications that involve combinations of mixed reality (MR), augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and virtual worlds (VWs). These are technologies that connect computer technology (such as informational overlays) to the physical world for the purposes of augmenting or extending experiences beyond the real. Especially relevant to the definition of XR is the fact that this term encompasses a wide range of options for delivering learning experiences, from minimal technology and episodic experiences to deep immersion and persistent platforms. The preponderance of different terms for slightly different technologies indicate that this is a growth area within the field. Here we provide a few definitions of these technologies.
MR—Mixed reality refers to a blend of technologies used to influence the human perception of an experience. Motion sensors, body tracking, and eye tracking interplay with overlaid technology to give a rich and full version of reality displayed to the user. For example, technology could add sound or additional graphics to an experience in real time. Examples include the Magic Leap One and Microsoft HoloLens 2.0. MR and XR are often used interchangeably.
AR—Augmented reality refers to technology systems that overlay information onto the real world, but the technology might not allow for real-time feedback. As such, AR experiences can move or animate, but they might not interact with changes in depth of view or external light conditions. Currently, AR is considered the first generation of the newer and more interactive MR experiences.
VR—Virtual reality, as a technological product, traces its history to approximately 1960 and tends to encompass user experiences that are visually and auditorily different from the real world. Indeed, the real world is often blocked from interacting with the virtual one. Headsets, headphones, haptics, and haptic clothing might purposely cut off all input except that which is virtual. In general, VR is a widely recognizable term, often found in gaming and workplace training, where learners need to be transported to a different time and place. VR experiences in STEM often consist of virtual labs or short virtual field trips.
VW—Virtual worlds are frequently considered a subset of VR with the difference that VWs are inherently social and collaborative; VWs frequently contain multiple simultaneous users, while VRs are often solo experiences. Another discrimination between virtual reality and virtual worlds is the persistence of the virtual space. VR tends to be episodic, with the learner in the virtual experience for a few minutes and the reality created within the experience ends when the learner experience ends. VWs are persistent in that the worlds continue to exist on computer servers whether or not there are active avatars within the virtual space (Bell 2008). This discrimination between VR and VW, however, is dissolving. VR experiences can be created to exist for days, and some users have been known to wear headsets for extended periods of time. Additionally, more and more VR experiences are being designed to be for game play, socialization, or mental relaxation. The IEEE VR 2020 online conference and the Educators in VR International Summit 2020 offered participants opportunities to experience conference presentations in virtual rooms as avatars while interacting with presenters and conference attendees (see Sect. 2.5 for more information).
CVEs—Collaborative virtual environments are communication systems in which multiple interactants share the same three-dimensional digital space despite occupying remote physical locations (Yee and Bailenson 2006).
Embodiment—Embodiment is defined by Lindgren and Johnson-Glenberg (2013) as the enactment of knowledge and concepts through the activity of our bodies within an MR (mixed reality) and physical environment
Human-Centered Design philosophy that involves putting human needs, capabilities, and behavior first (Jerald 2018: 15). XR provides the opportunity to experience just-in-time immersive, experiential learning that uses concrete yet exploratory experiences involving senses that result in lasting memories. Here we discuss opportunities for social applications with XR.
XR learner activities are usually created for individual use, which may or may not need to be simultaneously experienced as a class together at the same time or place with the instructor. Activities can be designed into instruction with VR headsets, high-resolution screens, smartphones, or other solo technological devices for use inside and outside of the classroom.
Do we address the challenges in the grant proposal?
some learners will be held back from full XR activity by visual, physical, and social abilities such as stroke, vertigo, epilepsy, or age-related reaction time. It should also be noted that the encompassing nature of VR headsets might create some discomfort or danger for any learners as they can no longer fully see and control their body and body space.
The terms ‘extended reality’ or ‘cross reality’ refer to “technologies and applications that involve combinations of mixed reality (MR), augmented reality (AR), virtual reality (VR), and virtual worlds (VWs)” (Ziker, Truman, & Dodds, 2021, p. 56). Immersive learning definitions draw from Milgram and Kishino’s key taxonomy (1994) emphasizing the continuum of experiences that range from where a computer adds to a learner’s reality with overlays of information, or a computer experientially transports a learner to a different place and time by manipulating sight and sound.
VR Design Model
three different design models (see Figure 3): the ADDIE Design Model (Branson, 1978), Design Thinking (Brown & Wyatt, 2010) from user experience (UX), and the 3D Learning Experience Design Model (Kapp & O’Driscoll, 2009).
Serrat (2008) defines storytelling as “the vivid description of ideas, beliefs, personal experiences, and life-lessons through stories or narratives that evoke powerful emotions and insights” (p.1).
The foundational theory for most XR experiences is experiential learning theory. In cases where users create within XR, constructivist learning theory also applies.
XR experiences can include a story arc (See Appendix D), a tutorial of user affordances, intentional user actions, and place the user into first or third person experiences (Spillers, 2020).
What is happening with virtual and augmented reality in higher education?
This week the Forum will explore that question with two authors of a new report, iLRN‘s State of XR 2021. Maya Georgieva and Emory Craig, founders and principals of Digital Bodies, are world experts in Extended Reality. They have also been brilliant and in-demand Forum guests in 2020, 2019, and 2018.
Here’s a deeper analysis I published recently on how much Facebook likely spends and expects to make from XR, given such a low entry price for Quest2.
2022+: Establish a Growing Ecosystem
Facebook needs developers[…developers, developers…] to make the content that attracts and retains customers. They reportedly haven’t treated some VR developers very well so far, including strong-arming, competing with, and sometimes blocking eager developers from the platform.
What do you think is the current status of XR experiences? Are most of them accessible?
As with all technology, XR is evolving. The current status in terms of accessibility is that more folks need to be educated about accessibility in the VR space. In general, most experiences are not accessible, yet.
My current research with VEIL (Virtual Experience Interaction Lab https://www.veilab.org/) involves examining Design Patterns in VR. My future work involves research into inclusive and accessible XR. In addition, I am working on a book that will be related to XR and spatial computing.
Lischer-Katz, Z., & Clark, J. (2021). Institutional Factors Shaping XR Technology Accessibility Policy & Practice in Academic Libraries. Survey. The EDUCAUSE XR (Extended Reality) Community Group Listserv <XR@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>. https://uarizona.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1Ya9id4uCXoktLv
participate in a survey is being sent out to those responsible for managing and providing XR technologies in academic libraries. This survey is part of a study titled “Institutional Factors Shaping XR Technology Accessibility Policy & Practice in Academic Libraries.” The principal investigator (PI) is Dr. Zack Lischer-Katz, PhD (Assistant Professor, School of Information, University of Arizona) and the co-principal investigator (Co-PI) is Jasmine Clark (Digital Scholarship Librarian, Temple University).
An Institutional Review Board (IRB) responsible for human subjects research at The University of Arizona reviewed this research project and found it to be acceptable, according to applicable state and federal regulations and University policies designed to protect the rights and welfare of participants in research
Please feel free to share this survey widely with colleagues.
Introduction
Over the past five years, many academic libraries have begun systematically integrating innovative technologies, including virtual reality (VR) and other “XR” technologies, into their spaces and services. Even though schools, libraries, and the library profession all stress equitable access to information and technology for all community members, accessibility – understood in terms of the design of spaces, services, and technologies to support users with disabilities – is rarely given sufficient consideration when it comes to the design, implementation, and administration of XR technology programs. Because XR technologies engage the body and multiple senses they show great potential for providing enhanced means for disabled users to access information resources; however, without accessibility policies in place, the embodied aspects of XR technologies can create new barriers (e.g., chairs and other furniture that cannot be adapted, controllers that cannot be adjusted for different degrees of dexterity, etc.)
Purpose of the study
The purpose of this study is to develop new understanding about the current landscape of accessibility policies and practices for XRtechnology programs and to understand the barriers to adoption of XR accessibility policies and practices.
The main research objective is to understand what policies and practices are currently in place in academic libraries and their level of development, the existing beliefs and knowledge of library staff and administrators involved with XR technology programs and spaces, and the institutional factors that shape the adoption of accessibility policies for XR technology programs.
The survey will be open from February 1, 2021 to April 30, 2021. More information regarding confidentiality and consent can be found at the beginning of the survey.
