Instructional Design in the Metaverse Part 4 Characteristics of Success
Welcome to Part 4 of this series that proposes instructional design principles for the metaverse. Hopefully, you've read Parts 1 - 3 because we need to remember this:
Learning outcomes are expected to be equal to other media.
So what are the characteristics that predict success for an educational experience? Read on.
Characteristics of Success
By the time IDs are often introduced to learning projects, the decision to incorporate XR technologies might already be made. Yet, IDs might be tasked with evaluating choices for off-the-shelf XR experiences or do-it-yourself (DIY) projects. Both choices have possibilities and limits and this part will point out what characteristics predict that an XR solution should work for a given implementation.
IDs should complete a thorough market analysis for off-the-shelf experiences. However, learning standards and ratings have not moved from early research to implementation (Dreimane, 2020). Thus, the experiences vary in quality with some being quite poor.
On the other hand, XR experiences not tagged as educational can be successfully used for learning with careful implementation.
In a DIY project, IDs could be asked to learn 3D programming, such as Unity or Unreal. Artificial intelligence (AI) is beginning to be used for 3D development and this could assist IDs. If IDs do engage primarily in programming and building assets, there is a risk that they will take their eyes off the goal of representing the learner. An ID should be constantly asking the question,“what is the learner experiencing?” and making sure that all decisions align to the planned purpose.
In general, the research up to this point indicates these three characteristics predict a successful XR educational experience:
it saves or manipulates time
it saves money
it reduces danger (Bailenson, 2018; Ziker, Truman, & Dodds, 2021).
While having one of these characteristics is good for continuing development, having two or all three characteristics can lead to very successful full implementation. For example, an XR experience for wind turbine maintenance training would currently save time, money, and danger.
Have all three regularly and you tend to be NASA. https://accessmars.withgoogle.com/
It Saves or Manipulates Time
XR experiences can manipulate time for instruction. For instance, an experience could involve time travel, speeding up, slowing down, or pausing time.
[Editor Heather interjects: the River City Multi User Virtual Environment (MUVE) is a great example of time manipulation. Learners had to determine the cause of 3 diseases in a city on a river. This built pedagogically went where learners often struggle: determining cause in a multi-variable (READ: REAL WORLD, messy, wicked) system. The build could pause or speed up time--very helpful while waiting for bacteria to grow.
With time paused in the middle of a process, visual cues can add positively to the instruction (Clark & Mayer, 2016).
XR experiences can also reduce instructional time overall because the training can be delivered more efficiently to the learners. For example, workplace training that has been preloaded onto VR headsets can be shipped to remote workers, saving travel time.
IDs should be aware that with this characteristic, many 2D simulations can do the same time manipulation and savings for possibly lower costs.
It Saves Money
XR experiences can save money over other forms of learning. For example, it would cost a lot of money to take your learners to the Moon in real life. In XR, space travel is much cheaper.
Those unfamiliar with development trends might comment that the metaverse is not currently cheaper than other media. As of this writing, costs are dropping [Editor Heather reminds you that 1 of the 2 things I actually liked about the PwC study was the calculation that if you make a build for more than 3,000 users, it will be cheaper overall to do in XR versus e-learning] with the arrival of artificial-intelligence (AI) developed resources.
Immersive web (WebXR) options allow approximately 20 learners to join one virtual space with a web browser, no additional equipment. Development prices do rise with more complexity.
One final note: the ‘time is money’ statement does hold true here. Often, an XR experience that saves time also saves money.
It Reduces Danger
This characteristic, the metaverse reduces danger, also includes impossible activities. While Alger (2015) properly suggested that any content that was inherently 3D in the first place is ideal for XR development, XR is not limited to the real and actual. It can expand to the phantasmagorical and impossible. For instance, taking learners to look inside of an operating nuclear reactor would be dangerous in real life. This can be replicated in XR with no added danger for the learners.
IDs should remember that some environments in the metaverse can still represent psychological risk if not real danger. In the Proteus Effect, learners could change their behavior depending on what their avatar is experiencing (Praetorius, & Görlich, 2020). As a result, a learner’s avatar walking into fire might be a frightening experience even if it is physically safe. Examples of risks include claustrophobia, fear of heights, hostility, prejudices, and negative social pressures.
In all cases, IDs should keep the learner primarily in mind. If it scares a learner and it was not meant to, it should be removed from the design.
Let's take a short pause here-- we're about halfway through these articles and let's propose some questions.
Q: I know of some educational experiences that were VERY expensive to build, they cost a lot now, and they work great. Your formula would NOT necessarily predict their success.
A: The 'saving money' part is compared to the real world. So while I respect that some experiences are VERY expensive, I'm happy they work great. I just bet they are a LOT cheaper in XR than doing whatever it is in real life.
Q: Jeremy Bailenson has his DICE formula: Dangerous, Impossible, Counterproductive, and Expensive. Why should we remember your shorter "time, money, danger" version instead?
A: With all respect to Jeremy, he has a lot of advantages at getting his message out (white, male, Stanford, and so on). But I developed my list -- as best as I can tell-- simultaneously to his (my 1st publication on it is 2013). So I'm claiming co-evolution because I believe we were looking at the same pile of research up to that time. What I don't like about his list (even though yes, he's got an acronym and I don't) is that his list is counterintuitive to understand. The 4 conditions he lists are what should be present in the real world to then consider using VR. They are not 'when you should use VR'--- because if they were, how would "counterproductive" make sense? BTW, if you don't understand his use of counterproductive, watch the video I linked to his name above.
Q: But you don't have Impossible on your list?
A: I subsume the impossible inside the dangerous. Cause it is really dangerous to do the impossible. ;)
Q: OK, last question. What if an experience does not save time, does not save money, and isn't less dangerous (relatively) than the real thing?
A: Besides realizing that Parts 1-3 basically advised against even thinking to make that experience, I say "even a broken clock is right twice a day." There is always a chance, however low. These 3 guidelines are based on years of watching experiences rise and fall. Odd, surprising builds still happen and more luck to them.
I've seen more success that I can chalk up to the people present than the tech present.
Part 5 is where the real meat-and-potatoes begins for Instructional Designers. Hope you're hungry.
Part 1 was the Introduction.
Part 2 covered Theory and Scope.
Part 3 was Myths versus Reality.
Want to see my full references? Have at it.
These blog posts are simultaneously posted as LinkedIn articles here: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/instructional-design-metaverse-part-4-heather-dodds-ph-d-/
#InstructionalDesign #XR #Multimedia #Principles #Mayer #LXD #ID #InstructionalDesigner #WebXR #3D #2D #Time #Money #Danger #DICE #LearningStandards #OffTheShelf #DIY #RiverCity #MUVE #Vertigo #SeaSickness #MissionISS #AccessMars #NASA #ProteusEffect
