As students advance into higher grades, the number of students that feel engaged decreases from 75% to 34%. Ross Brenneman, the assistant editor at Education Week Teacher, explains how Gallup, an analytics and advice firm, surveyed 1 million US students on their engagement in school. They found that with every passing grade, more students believe that they aren’t engaged with their education and school environment (Brenneman 1). This is significant because it leads to a flawed perception of their own education, with no knowledge of the education’s purpose. The stimulus material “Social Media and The Movement of Ideas” by Edward Kessler explains how the recent rise of social networks leads to an increase in the efficiency of the movement of ideas. These social networks refer “to the use of ‘web-based and mobile technologies to turn communication into an interactive dialogue” (Kessler 1). This social network can be contextualized as VR devices, which treat educational communication as an interaction between students and their learning, consequently leading to higher engagement. The use of VR is further analyzed by Jane McGonigal in her TED talk “Gaming Can Make a Better World.” Using the example of climate change to convey her message, McGonigal explains how gaming through augmented devices can be used to help individuals understand and solve complex real-world problems (McGonigal). This technology can be applied to academics by subjecting students to a type of game that enhances their learning. There have already been debates on introducing VR into educational settings, as many opponents of the idea explain that it is costly and not effective enough to overtake traditional teaching methods. Currently, educators predominantly use traditional methods of teaching: textbooks and lectures. As social networks increasingly become integrated into our society, changing curriculums by embedding social networks is a question to be considered. As such, VR devices can benefit students’ education and learning abilities by making them more engaged with their learning process, which can be better than current teaching methods.
In contemporary society, students are accustomed to receiving information through interactive learning environments due to the rise of social media. Their knowledge of news and education outside of the classroom comes from informal experiences such as posts and videos on platforms such as Snapchat or Instagram. In contrast, according to Elliot Hu-Au and Joey J. Lee, a doctoral student and a lecture professor, respectively, of Columbia University, students’ education in a classroom setting comes from “transmissionist methods such as lectures, leading to passive, disengaged students”(Hu-Au and Lee 2). Because students are more accustomed to interactive learning environments, school environments are boring, leading to disengagement. A study conducted by Dorothy Lucardie, a researcher and administrator of adult education, found that in a learning environment “fun and enjoyment did provide a great motivator for participation and learning” and that it aided in a “greater absorption of the learning content” (Lucardie 6). This study shows that disengaged students who take no interest in class education, have lower absorption of content, thus leading to a worse overall learning experience. Also, an increase in student disengagement leads to “many unfavourable behaviours hindering student success, including dissatisfaction, negative experience, and dropping out of school”(Hu-Au and Lee 4). The introduction of VR to educational facilities can “provide an opportunity to boost student engagement”(Hu-Au and Lee 4). VR allows a student to have hands-on experience with all types of situations. This experience likely is new to many students, encouraging them to stay engaged with VR. Student disengagement is clearly linked to lower learning capabilities and because VR boosts student engagement, VR should be implemented into educational facilities.
Already many facilities such as The Arlington Science Focus School in Arlington, VA; the Gaelscoil Eoghain Ui Thuairisc school in Carlow, Ireland; the Drury University in Springfield, MO; and many others are seeing the advantages of education through VR implementation. They have found that the introduction of VR into educational institutes beneficially affected the way students understood a concept. Marianne Stenger, a journalist from the online education provider OpenColleges, claims that it allows students to “learn from realistic scenarios without the risk of practicing an unfamiliar skill in an uncontrolled real-life situation”(Stenger 3). It also makes it possible to simulate environments. A common misconception is that VR is used only for video games, however, according to Stephen Babcock, the Market Editor for Technical.ly Baltimore, its “increased accessibility also presents an opportunity to use virtual reality in fields beyond” these game environments (Babcock 1). This simulation can range from environments as small as the inside of a biological cell to as big as space. This immersion creates educational settings where students are engaged and are able to experience situations personally. This personal experience also holds many opportunities for students “to construct their own knowledge from meaningful experiences”(Hu-Au and Lee 5). Similarly, VR helps students make connections that they could not have seen before because VR allows one to “construct visual and manipulable objects” making learning easier (Hu-Au and Lee 5). The explicit education that comes from VR education in a class environment provides a foundation to the implicit education that a student can form on his or her own through the connections he or she makes. A student can form connections faster through practice and improve academically when using VR as a learning tool. These connections and VR implementation are seen more in higher educational facilities and serve as a model to lower educational facilities.
In medical schools, VR is being used as a training and informational guide on dealing with medical situations. The aspect of surgical training is one of the primary uses of VR in these facilities. According to Lan Li and his colleagues, collaborators of the National Center for Biotechnology Information, before VR was introduced into medical facilities, the only way junior doctors could receive medical training was by being in a real operating room under the supervision of experienced surgeons. However, this approach took too much time and was costly (Li et al 2). Additionally, as medical practices evolved and became more complicated, “sole observation was no longer enough for acquiring certain skills and special techniques”(Li et al 2). With the introduction of VR, surgical trainees are able to partake in such surgeries. These simulated surgeries are more interactive, with the abilities to zoom and label objects, and more hands on. VR allows the trainee to have prior experience with surgery so that when performed on a patient, they are experienced and not a hazard to the patient’s health. A possible counterargument to this is that VR programs to train surgical trainees aren’t precise enough to be considered as real training. However, the opposite is actually true. Li and his colleagues state that “VR simulations are more realistic due to very intuitive anatomic structures exhibited in the 3D graphics”(Li et al 2). Due to VR being more realistic, it can serve as a better tool than traditional methods of teaching. This implementation of VR in medical schools shows how in higher educational facilities, VR presents beneficial opportunities and thus should be considered for preliminary facilities such as high schools. As mentioned before, the older the student gets, the less likely that they are engaged (Brenneman 1).
Implementation of VR in high schools will present younger students with the opportunity to expose themselves to educational opportunities. Having hands-on exposure to a certain field earlier on helps the student to understand the subject better and helps in creating a strong base by making it easier to understand the concept. This exposure will make students more engaged, leading to higher absorption and understanding of the content. An example of how VR could be beneficially implemented into lower educational facilities is through the subject of history.
With VR implementation, history becomes more interactive. Professors and teachers would be able to create programs in VR that would allow their students to become indirect eyewitnesses to events encompassed by VR. Although the students wouldn’t actually be partaking in the historical event, the instructor could simulate that environment and make them feel like they are truly present. This is expanded upon by Arthur Schlesinger, a specialist in American history and a public intellectual, in his book The Historian and the World of the Twentieth Century. He explains how eyewitness historians are more credible than normal historians because they are able to feel the emotions that took place at that time and are able to document events without making connections to other events (Schlesinger 10). Additionally, Brooke Donald, an editor of Stanford University’s News Communications, supports Schlesinger by explaining how Abby Reisman, a head curriculum designer and doctoral student at Harvard, states that embedding historical context into activities by means of first-person experiences leads to better recall (Donald 2). Students who become eyewitnesses to an event automatically learn much more than students who listen to lectures because the students become much more engaged and are able to experience the event as if they were a part of it. This engagement of history, through VR implementation, proves that it is beneficial in changing the way how students obtain information and learn.
While looking at the beneficial effects of implementing a social network in education, one must also consider the negative aspects. Social networks such as VR have been under development for many years. Gershon Dublon, professor of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) Media Lab, and Joseph A. Paradiso, an electrical engineer also at MIT’s Media Lab, explain how this does not mean that networks are perfect. Existing devices that augment our reality such as “Google Glass, tend to act as third-party agents on our shoulders, suggesting contextually relevant information to their wearer” augmenting situations (Dublon and Paradiso 6). This augmentation can be used for educational purposes but networks such as Google Glass “are often disruptive, even annoying, in a way that our sensory systems would never be”(Dublon and Paradiso 6). If the purpose of VR is to make students more engaged, then disruptive functions would defeat it. They would distract the student away from the primary goal and lead to disengagement. This problem is easy to combat, however. Educational leaders should create programs that aren’t disruptive. For example, if a student is in a surgical training VR simulator, and ads that contain sites to buy medical tools were to show up, they would distract the student from the simulator ultimately causing them to make a mistake. Although this mistake wouldn’t have outside effects due to the nature of VR that “allows students control over their learning in a consequence-free, explorative manner”(Hu-Au and Lee 5), it would distract the student leading to an overall decrease in understanding of the content being shown. A designer could design the simulator to not show any ads or disruptive tools or minimize the effect of them by minimizing their disruptiveness.
Another limitation that comes up frequently when debating the implementation of VR into educational facilities is cost. VR technology can be expensive, with the highest quality being as pricey as $50,000. However, the reality is that many VR kits don’t cost a substantial amount. In general, plastic and cardboard models carry out the same task as the higher quality models. According to Russell Holly, an expert on virtual reality devices, “in most apps it’s nearly impossible to tell the difference between the [lower and higher quality] implementations”(Holly 2). This means that the differences between a low-quality and a high-quality VR headset are negligible and that both carry out its purpose. They would still allow students to become more engaged with the material. These lower-quality headsets can be implemented into schools’ curriculums without being too costly. If an underfinanced public school wants to introduce virtual reality into their classrooms, they would easily be able to, by opting for the cheaper VR headset as the user experience is not compromised.
2019-5-3-1556852903