VR in the Schools, 2-3; Brown; virtual reality

VR in the Schools, 2-3; Brown; virtual reality

Virtual Reality and Education Laboratory East Carolina University Greenville, North Carolina USA

Volume 2, Number 3, December 1996

A VIRTUAL LASER PHYSICS LABORATORY David J. Brown, Tassos A. Mikropoulos, and Steven J. Kerr [email protected] [email protected]

1. BACKGROUND: VIRART (The Virtual Reality Applications Research Team) is based in the Department of Manufacturing Engineering and Operations Management, at the University of Nottingham, England. Over the past five years VIRART has worked with research teams throughout Europe, developing industrial and educational applications of VR as well as carrying out fundamental research into the health and safety implications of the use of head mounted displays. In terms of educational applications, our team has concentrated its efforts in developing a methodology for the use of the technology in special needs teaching. This five-step approach seeks to: (i) embed the development of virtual learning environments in contemporary educational theory, (ii) empower users and their carers to participate successfully in shaping and defining the education and rehabilitative applications developed, (iii) design and execute a continual program of testing and use these results to refine our virtual learning environments, (iv) consider the ethical issues surrounding the involvement of people with disabilities in research and development as à priori, and (v) develop a curriculum for use of these educational virtual learning environments in special classrooms today. Applying this research methodology VIRART has developed applications to teach basic life and communicational skills to students with severe learning difficulties, constructed virtual environments suited to the needs of autistic students, and are developing virtual environments to teach health education and tenants rights to young adults with moderate learning difficulties (Brown and Wilson, 1995). This work continues apace and is complemented by a testing program carried out in conjunction with the Department of Learning Disabilities, also at the University of Nottingham, which showed that the use of such teaching material could encourage self directed activity in this group file:///C|/Users/tassos/Desktop/2-3brown.htm[16/1/2011 8:18:19 μμ]


of students and that basic life skills learnt in a virtual environment could transfer successfully to a real world ability (Cromby et al, 1996). VIRART has also worked with the Department of Primary Education at the University of Ioannina over the last two years to develop a suite of virtual learning environments to teach the principles of laser physics to high school and undergraduate students. It has been reported that many students fail to understand fully the physical activity that occurs at an atomic level during the production and application of laser light. Just as we had previously employed virtual environments to help special students to access and learn from a series of environments they couldn’t access in real life, we envisaged that we could similarly employ them to allow mainstream students to work and learn in their own atomic laboratory. There are certainly precedents to back up such an approach in mainstream education. Dede and colleagues (1994) have described the design of virtual environments to help teach Newtonian mechanics and dynamics. Some of the other notable examples include modeling the eutrophication in lakes to allow students to develop their own virtual environment that they can inhabit, and from which understand the population dynamics in the lake they have created (Mikropoulos et al, 1994). In Sheffield, England, a virtual learning environment has been constructed to allow students to visit the site of a villa in ancient Greece. This allows students to enter the building and live history visually and interactively rather than just reading about it (Grove, 1996). A close neighbour; the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, also at the University of Nottingham, has pioneered the development of the first virtual school of molecular sciences using the world wide web and the Internet. Course leaders will be able to transmit molecular information to students across the Internet (Murray-Rust, 1996). Many other writers (including Bricken, 1992; Helsel, 1992; McLellan, 1991, Stuart and Thomas, 1993; and Byrne and Furness, 1994) have reported on or suggested new educational applications for VR systems. Notably, Bricken displays a mathematical bent in applying the virtual education approach to teaching the principles of algebra.

2.EDUCATIONAL THEORY: Given encouragement by the use of VR systems in these educational applications, our team sought to embed the development of virtual learning environments (VE) in contemporary educational theory: (i) Self directed activity: The use of VE in education may encourage self directed learning in the student. Bruner (1968), Vygotskii (1978) and Piaget (see Wood, 1988) have emphasized the importance of self directed activity in their theories. (ii) Motivational: Stuart and Thomas (1993) believe that whereas the age of television has bred passive and disengaged students with short attention spans, the use of VE may be able to captivate students’ attention and foster their active involvement in their own education. (iii) The Role of Play: The role of play is given high importance in developmental theories of education. Vigotskii (1978) emphasizes the importance of play in liberating children from constraints, whilst Bruner (1968) describes how play allows the systematic uncoupling of means from ends. VE allow students to play in a myriad of settings, to let their imaginations run riot in a vast array of ‘off the shelf environments’ or to create their own environments and characters which they can themselves become. (iv) Natural semantics: The qualities of virtual objects can be discovered by direct interaction with them (Bricken, 1991). This method of teaching bypasses the traditional learning of an abstract symbol system, which is then used to describe the real world, and passes straight into direct experiential education. (v) Shared experience: Bruner (1968) has drawn attention to the social context out of which skills develop. The importance of the role of instruction has been developed by Vigotskii (1978) in his concept of the ‘zone of proximal development’ defined as the distance between a child’s actual development as determined by independent problem file:///C|/Users/tassos/Desktop/2-3brown.htm[16/1/2011 8:18:19 μμ]


solving and the higher level of ‘potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.’ Both desktop and networked headset-based systems offer this facility for shared development. (vi) Equalizer of physical abilities: Provided that a student can operate some type of input device, from a standard mouse through to perhaps a head switch, then they can navigate through and interact with environments they may be restricted from doing so in real life, helping to fill in these experiential gaps in their education. VIRART, in conjunction with the National Council for Education Technology in the UK, are nearing the completion of a one year study to assess the usability of a range of input devices by students with physical impairments (Brown, 1996). (vii) Safe space: VE can offer a safe space in which to practice skills that are dangerous and risky to do so in real life. Problems can be encountered and consequences demonstrated without exposing the student to any real danger. A range of strategies to deal which such situations can also be developed with the student within the VE. Technology based educational systems are obviously not new, and indeed we are in the fourth generation of computer assisted learning (CAL). It is based on constructivism, seeks “empty technologies” or open learning environments, and proposes VR as a tool (Winn, 1993). Knowledge can be constructed through the interaction with virtual environments, since knowledge is not symbolic and learning is directly connected with the interaction with real or artificial environments. Papert (1991) uses the term “constructionism” to describe knowledge construction coming from the physical interaction with objects in the real world. We believe that VR allows such “physical” interactions. The role of constructivist principles of education in the design and use of virtual learning environments are appropriately central to the work of our team. Constructivism involves two main assumptions; the first is that knowledge is constructed through social negotiation and the second that reality is partly subjective. For constructivists (Bricken, 1992; McKellan, 1991; Winn, 1993) the learner is the focus of any learning environment. Knowledge is constructed through collaboration, discussions with teachers and carers, self assessment, and reflection. Jonassen (1994) outlines a set of principles to guide the design of educational experiences within constructivist principles, and these are considered integral to the design and subsequent use of our virtual learning environments. Cognitive psychology is the study of the ways in which humans learn. Men and women are not passive receivers of environmental stimuli, but play active roles in the learning process. The human mind is considered as a computer in cognitive psychology and is central to the design of Human Computer Interaction Systems (HCI). Thus, the design of such systems tries to improve the cognitive state of their users. Recent work proposes a new point of view, seeing computers as sensory artifacts and perceptual enhancers, and not as cognitive artifacts. We cannot help people to think better, but we can allow them to experience more. HCI design is consequently a matter of Sensory Ergonomics (Waterworth, 1995). We believe that VR supports the learning process in its first stage, the choice and the reception of information, as well as the students’ active participation in the educational process. VR acts as an experience enhancer and exploits the phenomenon of synaesthesia through which humans experience phenomena via their various senses. The user exists in an electronically generated three dimensional environment, and experiences several degrees of freedom, including complete freedom in navigation, the detection of information received through multiple sensorial channels, and the ability to configure their own environment. Although our approach to the design of virtual learning environments for mainstream education does not strictly follow any particular pedagogic theory it does adhere to contructionism.

3. VR AND LASERS: If we look at the recommendations for the use of VR in education as proposed by Stuart and Thomas (1991), there is obvious support for using virtual learning environments to help elucidate the principles of laser physics. Notably the second point in their list of when to use VR in education provides support for this application:

file:///C|/Users/tassos/Desktop/2-3brown.htm[16/1/2011 8:18:19 μμ]


‘Use cyberspace in education to: (ii) Explore real things that, without alterations of scale in size and time, could not otherwise be effectively examined. but also the first, third, and seventh points in this list lend support to and give insights into using VR as a tool to teach LASER physics: (i) Explore existing places and things that students would not otherwise have access to. (iii) Create places and things with altered qualities. (vii) Create and manipulate abstract conceptual representatives, like data structure and mathematical functions. Evidence also exists that many high school and undergraduate students experience difficulties in comprehending the complexities of laser physics. Many simply memorize equations without understanding the principles that underpin their meaning. It was felt that a series of virtual learning environments could provide a microscopic keyhole at an atomic level. Students could then manipulate the system dynamics, such as energy levels, and learn by their own hand how laser light is produced as well as more subtle principles, such as how spontaneous emission occurs as opposed to stimulated emission. In this way they will each possess their own atomic laboratory and work at size levels impossible to see in real life. The project was broken down into distinct modules so that each of the principles of laser physics could be considered in turn. These were: (i) The nature of laser light itself, in which the duality of light is demonstrated: light simultaneously as a wave and as particles, together with the phenomenon of the user traveling at the speed of light to chase and observe a photon. The student is invited to switch on the laser at the power source and observe the beam of light refracted onto the holographic plate to form the hologram. The student can then fly into the laser to investigate the nature of light. It can be observed that the laser is made from smaller streams of light, grouped closely together. By then pressing a function key another level of detail is revealed to show the wave characteristics of the laser. Close to the source the waves are spherical, but as one moves further away from the source the waves become transverse electromagnetic waves (figure 1). There are wave fronts positioned at sections of the laser to highlight that waves are formed from vibrating particles.



Figure 1: Holography (left) and plane and spherical electromagnetic waves (right).

(ii) The spontaneous emission of light in which the user moves through an electronic cloud, gradually going deeper inside the cloud until a neon atom in its ground state is observed. In order for a photon to be released, we need to provide some external energy into the system in order to excite an electron to a higher energy level (figure 2).



Figure 2: Electron excitation.

As the electron falls to the lower energy level once more a photon is released. In order for the student to witness and participate in this event, they are provided with three different guns, red, blue, and green. The student selects a gun to fire energy of different levels into the atom and observes that the electron is excited to a higher energy level. If a gun of higher power is selected, the electron will jump to a higher energy level and its correspondingly larger fall will



cause an electron of higher energy to be emitted. This gradation is indicated by the colour of the gun and the photon released. After the student has carried out the experiment to simulate spontaneous emission, they can then interact with the equation box which, when activated, will list the equations and graphs that describe this type of emission (figure 3).





Figure 3: Representation of the spontaneous emission of light.

These are the modules for which, at the moment, we have constructed virtual learning environments. We now plan to extend the modules taught using this technique to include sections covering stimulated emission of light, laser systems and pumping mechanisms, laser resonators and laser cavities and a module in which the student will actually build a laser in the virtual environment. These prototype virtual learning environments will also be tested within an educational setting in a number of case studies carried out in Greece and the UK. These studies should provide us with useful feedback on the content of these environments and how this can be improved, together with information on how they are used. We would wish to encourage their use to construct knowledge rather than just reproduce it, to focus on reflective practice and in the support of collaborative constructions of knowledge. In short, these studies should not only refine the content of the virtual learning environments designed to teach laser physics but also help us define a curriculum and methodology for their use.

4 SUMMARY The main objective of this study is the experience enhancement of the users working in virtual learning environments. This concerns both the experiences they gain from the free navigation and interaction opportunities afforded to them and the experiences gained from the understanding of basic laser principles.

5 REFERENCES: Bricken, Meredith S. “Virtual reality learning environments: potential and challenges.” Computer Graphics Magazine, vol. 25, no. 3 (July 1991) p. 178-184. Bricken, Meredith S., and Byrne, Chris M. “Summer students in virtual reality: A pilot study on educational applications of VR technology.” HIT Lab Technical Report R-92-1. Seattle, Washington: Human Interface Technology Laboratory, University of Washington, 1992. Brown, D., and Wilson, J. “LIVE: Learning in Virtual Environments.” Ability, vol. 15 (1995), p. 24-25. Brown, D. “Initial recommendations on input and navigation device usability for students with learning and motor skills difficulties.” VIRART/96/139. Internal Report. 1996. Bruner, Jerome Seymour. Processes of cognitive growth: infancy. Worcester, Massachusetts: Clark University Press, 1968. Byrne, Chris, and Furness, T., III. “Virtual Reality and Education.” In J. Wright and D. Benzie (eds.) Proceedings of the IFIP W63.5 International Working Conference on Exploring a New Partnership: Children, Teachers, and Technology. (A58) Amsterdam: Elsevier, North-Holland, 1994. Cromby, John, et al. “Successful transfer to the real world of skills practised in a virtual environment by students with severe learning difficulties.” In Proceedings. of 1st European Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies. Maidenhead, Berkshire, United Kingdom, July 1996. p. 103-107. Dede, C. et al (1994). “The design of artificial realities to improve learning Newtonian mechanics.” In Proceedings. of the East-West International Conference on Multimedia, Hypermedia, and Virtual Reality. Moscow, September. 1994, p. 14-16. file:///C|/Users/tassos/Desktop/2-3brown.htm[16/1/2011 8:18:19 μμ]


Grove, J. “VR and history - some findings and thoughts.” VR in the Schools, vol. 2 , no. 1 (June 1996), p. 3-9. Helsel, Sandra. “Virtual reality and education.” Educational Technology, vol. 32 (May 1992), p. 38-42. Jonassen, David H. “Thinking technology: toward a constructivist design model.” Education Technology, vol. 34, no. 4 (1994), p. 34-37. McLellan, Hilary. “Virtual environments and situated learning.” Multimedia Review, vol 2, no. 3 (Fall 1991), p. 3037. Mikropoulos, Tassos., Katsiikis, A., and Chalkidis, A.. “Virtual environments for environmental education.” In Proceedings. ED-MEDIA 95, World Conference on Educational Multimedia & Hypermedia. Graz, Austria. Murray-Rust, P. “Virtually at university”. The Evening Post, Nottingham, England, October 25. Papert, Seymour. “Situating constructionism”. In Idit Harel & Seymour Papert, (eds.) Constructionism: research reports and essays, 1985-1990. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Co., 1991. Piaget, Jean. The psychology of intelligence. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1950. Stuart, Rory, and Thomas, John C. “The implications of education in cyberspace.” Multimedia Review, vol. 2, no. 2 (Summer 1991), p. 17-27. Vygotskii, L. S. Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978. Waterworth, J. A. “HCI design as sensory ergonomics: creating synaesthetic media.” In B. Dahlbom Kämmerer, et al., (eds.) IRIS-18: Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, Gothenburg Studies in Informatics, Report No. 7. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg, 1995. p. 743-753. Winn, W. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of VR. Report No: TR-93-9. Seattle, Washington: Human Interface Technology Lab, 1993. Dr. David J. Brown is Senior Educational Applications and Research Coordinator, Department of Engineering and Operations Management, VIRART, The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, England, NG7 2RD. Tel: 0115-951-4040 Fax: 0115-951-4000 Dr. Tassos Mikropoulos is a physicist in the Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Doboli 30, 45110, Ioannina, Greece. Telephone: 0030651-42723 Fax: 0030-651-40674 Steven J. Kerr is a software engineer VIRART, The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, England, NG7 2RD.

Copyright © 1996 by the Virtual Reality and Education Laboratory, East Carolina University

Back to VREL Publications page



Last Modified January 24, 1998
