• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds
 

2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds

on

  • 576 views

2011 04-04

2011 04-04
(educon2011)
emadrid
cdkloos
uc3m
towards parallel educational worlds

Statistics

Views

Total Views
576
Views on SlideShare
486
Embed Views
90

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

2 Embeds 90

http://www.emadridnet.org 86
http://www.gast.it.uc3m.es 4

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds 2011 04-04 (educon2011) emadrid cdkloos uc3m towards parallel educational worlds Presentation Transcript

    • Towards Parallel Educational Worlds Carlos Delgado Kloos , Carmen Fernández-Panadero, Mª Blanca Ibáñez, Mario Muñoz, Abelardo Pardo Universidad Carlos III de Madrid www.it.uc3m.es/cdk www.emadridnet.org
    • Outline
      • 1. Introduction
      • 2. Linking physical and virtual worlds
      • 3. Learning objects in physical and virtual worlds
      • 4. Assessment in physical and virtual worlds
      • 5. Learning activities in physical and virtual worlds
      • 6. Conclusions
      EDUCON, 2011-04-04 Amman, Jordan
    • 1. Introduction
      • Educational material and activities are being digitized
      • Technology is now offering possibilities to mix physical and digital elements with a finer granularity then in blended learning
      • Learning descriptions (specifications and standards)
        • too web-oriented
        • still not adapted to the new mixed possibilities
      • How to define learning processes in an abstract way, leaving the concrete details of enactment open
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Example: Augmented Reality
      • Superimposition of text, images or 3D models
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Example: Virtual Reality
      • 3D modelling of the real world, imaginary, augmented, or mediated worlds
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Learning in the Physical World
      • Actors
        • Learners
        • Instructors
        • Co-learners
      • Content
        • Educational material (documents, images, videos)
        • Tangibles
      • Context
        • Environment (class, etc.)
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Moving Elements to the Virtual
      • Educational material ( Content )
        • Documents
        • Images
        • Videos
      • Personal information ( Actors )
        • Personal data
        • Relationships (social graph)
        • Presence info
        • Activities
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • From III via WWW to GGG Amman, Jordan III WWW GGG EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • WWW (World Wide Web): Images of Documents Amman, Jordan Works without electricity Burnable to make fire Perfectly copiable Searchable EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • GGG (Giant Global Graph): Images of Persons Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Actors : Parallel Identities Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Environment Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Parallel Worlds Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04 Real, physical Virtual, digital
    • Milgram’s Continuum
      • Paul Milgram, H. Takemura, A. Utsumi, F. Kishino: Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum . SPIE, vol. 2351, pp. 282-292 (1994)
      • etclab.mie.utoronto.ca/publication/1994/Milgram_Takemura_SPIE1994.pdf
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • 4. How to link these worlds? Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04 Real, physical Virtual, digital
    • How to Link Physical and Virtual Worlds?
      • Geo-location
      • Graphic tags: QR, LLA codes, etc.
      • Electronic tags: RFID, NFC
      • Recognition in the visible, IR, or ultrasound spectrum
      • 2D or 3D projections
      • Holography
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Geo-location
      • Global Positioning System (GPS)
        • For position
        • Works only in the open
      • Internal compass
        • For direction
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Text Tags
      • Text
        • Geographical coordinates
        • Context info
        • URL
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Graphic Tags
      • Several Standards
        • QR codes
        • LLA markers
        • AR markers
      • Readable content
        • Text
        • Business card info
        • Positioning info
        • URL
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Electronic Tags
      • RFID (Radio Frequency Identification)
        • Bluetooth
        • NFC (Near Field Communications)
        • Bluetooth Low Energy
      • Readable and writable content
        • Payment
        • Tracking
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Recognition
      • Visible spectrum
        • Camspace
      • Infrared spectrum
        • Nintendo Wii
      • Ultrasound spectrum
        • Sensitive objects
      • Combination
        • Microsoft Kinect
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Holography
      • 3D light field scattered by an object is registered and then reconstructed
      • E.g. Holovizio
        • generates all the light beams to make the 3D view of the displayed object visible in the whole field of view
        • Views from different perspectives
        • No goggles needed
        • Video possible
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
      • Learning Object (LO):
        • “ any entity, digital or non-digital , that may be used for learning, education or training” (IEEE)
        • “ any digital resource that can be reused to support learning ” (D. Wiley)
      3. Learning Objects in Physical and Virtual Worlds Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Learning Objects in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • Digital Learning Objects
        • Easy to copy
        • Easy to share
        • Easy to reuse
      • Physical Learning Objects
        • Can be touched
        • Have a weight
        • Have a location
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Learning objects
      • Revival of physical learning objects
      • Tangible interfaces
      • Mixed objects
      • Virtual objects in 3D worlds
      • Location and physical properties have to be taken into consideration
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • 4. Assessment in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • Multiple Choice tests filled out by hand
      • Multiple Choice tests responded with a computer
      • Gymkhanas in the physical world
      • Gymkhanas in the augmented physical world
      • Gymkhanas in a virtual world
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Assessment in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • Multiple Choice by hand
        • Actors: Physical , Content: Physical , Context: Insensitive
      • Multiple Choice by computer
        • Actors: Physical , Content: Virtual , Context: Insensitive
      • Gymkhanas in the physical world
        • Actors: Physical , Content: Physical , Context: Sensitive
      • Gymkhanas in the augmented physical world
        • Actors: Physical , Content: Physical / Virtual , Context: Sensitive
      • Gymkhanas in a virtual world
        • Actors: Virtual , Content: Virtual , Context: Sensitive
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Assessment in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • MultipleChoice (in any way)
        • Context insensitive
        • Simple interaction (choose and write)
        • Assessment of knowledge
      • Gymkhana (in any world)
        • Context sensitive
        • Rich interaction (complex manipulation)
        • Assessment of knowledge, skills, and competences
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Specification in IMS QTI
      • <questestinterop> <qticomment>Simple T/F multiple-choice.Radio.Response</qticomment> <item ident=&quot;IMS_V01_I_BasicExample001”> <presentation label=&quot;BasicExample001”> <flow> <material><mattext>Paris is the Capital of France</mattext> </material> <response_lid ident=&quot;TF01&quot; rcardinality=&quot;Single&quot; rtiming=&quot;No&quot;> <render_choice> <flow_label> <response_label ident=&quot;T&quot;> <material><mattext>Agree</mattext></material> </response_label> <response_label ident=&quot;F&quot;> <material><mattext>Disagree</mattext></material> </response_label> </flow_label> </render_choice> </response_lid> </flow> </presentation> … <resprocessing>…</resprocessing> <itemfeedback>…</itemfeedback> </item> </questestinterop>
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Location and Context in Assessments
      • Location parameter becomes important
      • Rich interaction increases expressiveness
      • There should be a smooth way to enhance simple Multiple Choice tests to rich gymkhanas in any kind of world
      • This smooth transition should be supported by adequate specification formats
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • 5. Learning Activities in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • Coreography of activities
      • Educational Mark-Up Languages (EMLs)
      • IMS LD (Learning Design), LAMS, etc.
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Learning Activities in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • The same unit of learning should able to be enacted in several different “pure” settings:
        • Real world:
          • learners: real persons, LOs: tangible objects, environment: physical rooms
        • Web-based setting:
          • learners (represented by): login ids, LOs: SCORM-based digital resources, environment: web pages
        • 3D virtual world:
          • learners (represented by): avatars, LOs: entities in 3D virtual worlds, environment: 3D virtual worlds
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Learning Activities in Physical and Virtual Worlds
      • But also in “mixed” settings:
        • Augmented reality:
          • learners: real persons
          • LOs: physical objects with virtual complements
          • environment: physical world
        • Augmented virtuality:
          • learners: avatars
          • LOs: virtual objects with possibly complements from the real world
          • environment: 3D virtual mirror world (with natural or distorted dimensions) or imaginary world
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • 6. Conclusions
      • Need for a setting-independent description of the learning scenario
        • Define first (abstractly), then enact in different settings
      • Mixed interrelated scenarios
      • Standards and specifications need to be adapted to the new possibilities
      • Content can become context
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04
    • Conclusions
      • The “ location ” parameter becomes relevant
        • The internet implied the death of distance, now back
      • Several levels of abstraction needed
        • Position-oriented
        • Conceptual
        • Like levels in maps
      Amman, Jordan EDUCON, 2011-04-04