Web-based Virtual Reality development in classroom: From learner's perspectives
- 1. Vinh T. Nguyen, Rebecca Hite, Tommy Dang. PhD student, Graduate Assistant, Texas Tech University, USA December 12, 2018, Taichung, Taiwan Web-based Virtual Reality development in classroom: From learner's perspectives
- 2. CONTENT 1. Introduction 2. Related work 3. Methodology 4. Results 5. Lesson learned and challenges 6. Conclusion and Future work
- 3. INTRODUCTION
- 5. INTRODUCTION From learning perspective: a need to identify aspects of framework not only allow users to create their own VR contents But also to experience and share with peers From teaching perspective: a need to have guidelines for selecting a suitable framework for students to use
- 6. INTRODUCTION 1. Which WebVR framework is preferred by students for first-hand VR development? 2. To what extent do these frameworks meet student’s expectations to fulfill their tasks? 3. What is the minimum required level of programming skill? 4. What are the drawbacks and challenges for students to use these framework?
- 7. RELATED WORK 1. Miyata et al. study where students collaboratively (via group- work) designed a VR application. 2. Ha ̈fner et al. involved a 3-year industrial VR project, focusing on collaboration. 3. Takala et al. more in-depth study in sharing teaching VR experience over 5 years. 4. And more…but mostly focus on a chosen framework/software/hardware by instructor that make it difficult to replicate (i.e., software and hardware constraints, learn 3D skills).
- 8. RELATED WORK Challenges for research 1. Time limitation 2. Little programming skills for VR (coming from different fields) 3. No prior knowledge about 3D modelling.
- 9. METHODOLOGY STUDY DESIGN 1. Introduction to VR and AR 2. Short presentation by students 3. Sample project 4. Online discussion forum 5. Teaching assistant involved. Project: Create a “dream house”
- 10. METHODOLOGY PROJECT ASSESSMENT 1. Create a simple model from basic shapes 2. Work with external 3d models 3. Interactions with 3d models in the scene. Project duration: 1 months.
- 11. METHODOLOGY STUDY ASSESSMENT 1. Proposed 10 survey questions via Google Form 2. Question validity: defined and revised by TA and 2 faculty. 3. Question reliability: to maintain all responses are within the range of possible answers.
- 12. METHODOLOGY CASE STUDY 1. Participants: 38 (33 undergraduates, 5 graduates). 2. Project description: Create a dream human-scale house in which users can interact with some objects in the scene. Learners are free to use any type of software/library to fulfill the project requirements 3. Project requirements: Able to share experience with multiple users with ease (e.g., smartphone, laptop, tablet…).
- 13. RESULTS Project results: 37 dream- house out. Example
- 14. RESULT
- 15. RESULT
- 16. RESULT
- 17. RESULT
- 18. RESULT
- 19. RESULT
- 20. RESULT
- 21. RESULT
- 22. RESULT
- 23. RESULT
- 24. LESSONS LEARNED AND CHALLENGES 1. ThreeJs is a good starting point to understand how 3d objects is constructed and rendered 2. But A-Frame library is a good option to begin with from scratch. 3. A trade-off between web performance and fidelity 4. Some tips/tricks can be used for interactions
- 25. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Short presentations by students are important to increase motivation and explore available resources. 2. For those who are new in programming, a “skeleton” project should be provided. 3. Online discussion forum available and a TA should be involved. 4. A-frame library is recommended for WebVR
- 26. CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK 1. 37 dream-house out indicates that learners are able to put their hand-on experience with WebVR within 2 weeks on average. 2. Future work focus on how students can leverage existing knowledge from WebVR to work on more sophisticated task
- 27. THANK YOU VERY MUCH