COVID-keepers: Using AR and VR in ecology field work

From Newcastle. For the world.
#DryLabsRealScience Season 3
27th October 2021
COVID Keepers: Using AR/VR for Ecology Fieldwork
Dr Heather Sugden
heather.sugden@ncl.ac.uk
@hes_1
Dr Sara Marsham
sara.marsham@ncl.ac.uk
@sara_marine
School of Natural and Environmental Sciences
@SciencesNCL
@newcastlemarine
@NCLDoveMarine

From Newcastle. For the world. 2
Importance of field teaching
o Fieldwork assumed to be essential within
biosciences teaching (e.g. Cook et al., 2006; Peasland et al.,
2019; QAA, 2019)
o Scientific basis for study of organisms and ecosystems
o Observation-based knowledge acquisition
o Analytical research skills
o Decision-making and team-work
o Provides social interactions - improves
contentment, recruitment and retention (Boyle et al.,
2007)

Importance of field teaching - Kolb’s learning cycle
Concrete
Experience
Doing phase
Reflective
Observation
Reflective phase
phase
Abstract
Conceptulisation
Preparatory
phase
Active
Experimenting
Doing phase
Scott et al., (2012)

Fieldwork and the research-teaching nexus
EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH
CONTENT
EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH
PROCESSES AND PROBLEMS
Research-led
Level 4 Marine
Practical Skills I
Research-informed
Level 5 Marine
Practical Skills II
Research-oriented
Level 5 Marine
Practical Skills II &
Marine Research and
Employability Skills
Research-based
Level 6 Marine
Research Project

The problem…
LOCKDOWN!

Development of virtual fieldwork
o Recently, virtual resources used to augment physical fieldwork
o Observation, data-gathering and problem solving using computer-generated
approaches
o Established in many disciplines (e.g. Burden et al., 2017; Morimoto & Ponton, 2019)
o Limited practice in the biosciences (Shim et al., 2003; Horodyskyj et al., 2018)
Could we create a virtual environment where we could take students ‘out’ into
the virtual field and how?????

Development of virtual fieldwork

0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
Poor Fair Good Very Good Excellent
Percentage
response
(%)
Stage 1 Stage 2
Figure 1: How useful did you find the synchronous fieldtrip?
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
Percentage
Response
(%)
Stage 1 Stage 2
Figure 2: How much progress do you think you made taking part in the
synchronous fieldwork?
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
90.00
100.00
Percentage
Response
(%)
Stage 1 Stage 2
Figure 3: The virtual fieldtrip provided a good online replacement to present-in-person teaching on the rocky shore?

-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
Number
of
Responses
Category of Response
Stage 1 (n=52) Stage 2 (n=27)
Figure 4: What did you like about the virtual fieldtrip? Sugden et al., in prep

What did our
students think?

Knowledge: The Future
Blending VR and in-person teaching to enhance experience

Knowledge: The Future

AR Trial

What did the students think?
Ease and Enjoyment
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Very
Difficult
Difficult Neutral Easy Very Easy
Number
of
responses
Figure 8: Ease Of Use (n = 18)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither
Agree or
Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
Number
of
responses
Figure 9: I enjoyed looking at 3D models using
my phone (n = 18)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
No, it was frustrating
and/or disengaging
Neutral Yes, I would like to
use Augmented
Reality applications
more often!
Number
of
responses
Figure 10: The experience was fun (n = 18)

What did the students think?
Engagement
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither
Agree or
Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
Number
of
responses
Figure 5: During the experience, I was more engaged
than usual (n = 18)
Skills
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither
Agree or
Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
Number
of
responses
Figure 6: I was able to identify the organism I
was looking at as if it was real (n = 17)
Understanding
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree Neither
Agree or
Disagree
Agree Strongly
Agree
Number
of
responses
Figure 7: The experience improved my
understanding of the taught material (n = 18)

Future considerations for virtual environments
oBetter prepare students for in-field fieldwork
o Enhance confidence and identify and tackle barriers
o Pro-active design for students with disabilities/caring responsibilities who may
find access to traditional in-field fieldwork challenging
o Broadens access to fieldwork sites (spatial/temporal/inaccessible field sites)
o Activities include active student participation
o Data collection/collaboration/analysis

From Newcastle. For the world.
Thank you for listening
Questions?
Dr Heather Sugden
heather.sugden@ncl.ac.uk
@hes_1
Dr Sara Marsham
Sara.marsham@ncl.ac.uk
@sara_marine
School of Natural and Environmental Sciences
@SciencesNCL
@newcastlemarine
@NCLDoveMarine

References
o Boyle et al. (2007). Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 31: 299–317.
o Burden et al. (2017). Immersive Learning Research Network, pp. 18–29.
o Cook et al. (2006). Area, 38: 413–20.
o Horodyskyj et al. (2018). Astrobiology, 18: 86-99.
o Morimoto & Ponton (2019). Preprints, 2019100311.
o Peasland et al. (2019). International Journal of Science Education, 41: 2369-2388.
o QAA (2019). Benchmark statement for biosciences.
o Scott et al. (2012). Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21: 11–21.
o Shim et al. (2003). Journal of Biological Education, 37: 71-74.

COVID-keepers: Using AR and VR in ecology field work

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to COVID-keepers: Using AR and VR in ecology field work

Similar to COVID-keepers: Using AR and VR in ecology field work (20)

More from Sara Marsham

More from Sara Marsham (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

COVID-keepers: Using AR and VR in ecology field work