Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Association for Educational Communications and Technology International Conference, California, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, 30 Eylül - 02 Kasım 2013, (Özet Bildiri)
Research Problem: In recent years, virtual worlds with 3D media features, synchronous and asynchronous interaction have greatly interested educational researchers. Various virtual world platforms, which help users to create 3D environments, have been and are being developed and marketed (Jacka & Ellis, 2011). At present, nearly 90 virtual world applications exist (Kzero, 2011). Although such characteristics as providing life-like 3D environments, using avatars, and communicating with other users are common in 3D virtual world platforms, platforms may differ in accordance with their purpose. Up to now in classification studies, specifications inherent to 3D virtual worlds (Warburton, 2009), software and training tools of 3D virtual worlds (Dickey, 2005), learning/teaching activities conducted in 3D virtual worlds (Richter, 2010), and learning materials associated with 3D worlds (Richter, Anderson-Inman, & Frisbee, 2007) have been examined. Despite the scope of this research, the relevant literature lacks studies that discuss the potential uses of virtual worlds as an educational medium, and which provide a thorough classification for assessing all of the specifications of virtual world applications in an educational context. Thus, in the present study, the goal was to develop a criteria list that may help instructional designers, developers, and educators to evaluate all virtual world applications for educational purposes. The Development of the Criteria List : In the construction process of criteria list, the phases of literature review, heuristic investigation, eliciting expert opinions followed by revisions, and administering a questionnaire were followed. The researchers in this study also made use of the literature on virtual worlds to form categories for the criteria list. Using the heuristic approach, the researchers wrote items and revised the categories of the criteria list based on their experiences and observations of virtual worlds. The criteria list in this study was first reviewed by internal faculty members, who had expertise in Instructional Technology and virtual worlds. Following a face-to-face discussion with those experts, the criteria list was revised with regard to wording issues.The revised criteria list was then sent to four different experts with one, two, three, and 15 years of experience to elicit their opinions. They were requested to evaluate items in the list as unimportant, a bit important, normal, important, and very important. They were also asked to offer elaborated opinions, if they had any. Then the criteria list was again sent to the internal experts, whose opinions were acknowledged at the beginning of the study. Implementation of the Criteria List as a Questionnaire : The reorganized criteria list was converted into an electronic format and sent to 103 undergraduate Computer Education and Instructional Technology students: 46 females and 57 males. The purpose of the questionnaire was to assess the importance of the items presented in the criteria list from the perspectives of users and designers. All of the students participating in the study had been working on the design of a 3D virtual world for about one year. The students were required to evaluate the items in the criteria list by choosing the level of importance that they thought was appropriate for the items. According to students opininons items of criteria list were revised. The last categories in the criteria list are as follows; 1. Technical Specifications 1.1. System Features 1.2. Usability 1.3. Multimedia Tools 1.4. Software Tools 1.5. Security 1.6. Cost 2. Interaction Specifications 2.1. Avatars 2.2. Activities 2.3. Communication Tools 3. Educational Specifications 3.1. Learning Environments 3.2. Learning/Teaching Activities Conclusion: Criteria lists help vendors and users to compare the appropriateness and effectiveness of different programs and technologies for learning and teaching activities (Tergan, 1998). Based on the selected features or technology components, various groups of different kinds of features, such as technical specifications, instructional purposes, activities, or the target audience, can be found in criteria lists (Bronstein, 2007). In this study, the criteria list developed for 3D virtual worlds should fill this need for those who wish to find the most appropriate virtual world platform to be used for their own specific educational purposes. The criteria list is supposed to be helpful for the comparison and evaluation of virtual world platforms in terms of system specifications, usability, multimedia tools, software tools, security, cost, avatars, activities, communication tools, learning environments, and learning/teaching activities.