Dr. Brian M. Slator, Computer Science Department North Dakota State University Immersive Role-based Environments for Education

NDSU WWWIC World Wide Web Instructional Committee WWWIC’s virtual worlds research supported by NSF grants DUE , EAR , DUE , ITR and EPSCoR WWWIC faculty supported by large teams of undergraduate and graduate students. Paul JuellDonald Schwert Phillip McCleanBrian Slator Bernhardt Saini-EidukatAlan White Jeff Clark

MultiUser Exploration Spatially-oriented virtual worlds Practical planning and decision making Educational Role-playing Games “Learning-by-doing” Experiences

Problem solving Scientific method Real-world content Mature thinking

Balancing Pedagogy with Play Games have the capacity to engage! Powerful mechanisms for instruction Illustrate real-world content and structure Promote strategic maturity (“learning not the law, but learning to think like a lawyer”)

Design Principles Game-like Spatially oriented Goal-oriented Immersive Role-based Exploratory Interactive Multi-user Learn-by-doing

Technical Approach Networked, internet based, client-server simulation UNIX-based MOO (Multi-User Dungeon, Object Oriented) Java-based clients (text version - telnet based; graphical versions)

The Projects l The Virtual Cell l Dollar Bay l Like-a-Fishhook Village l Digital Archive for Archaeology l Others l The Geology Explorer

The Geology Explorer

Similar to Earth, but opposite the Sun You are a Geologist and you “land” on Oit to undertake exploration Authentic Geoscience goals - e.g., to locate, identify, and report valuable minerals Planet Oit

The Virtual Cell

Work in Progress

1869 Town of Blackwood established Spring: begin historical simulation Fall: Railroad Arrives Silver is discovered in the hills Nov-Dec: the Great White Ruin begins Spring: Flood, Blackwood simulation ends.

Virtual Archaeologist a)exploration of a spatially oriented, authentic virtual world; b)practical, field-based decision making; c)critical thinking for scientific problem solving; d)and time-travel An immersive multi-user 3D virtual environment that faithfully reproduces an archeological site, Fort Berthold/Like-A-Fishhook Village (FB/LF), which supports:

Immersive Virtual Environments Simulated environment using LambdaMOO (enCore version 3.0, UT Dallas, Haynes & Holmevik) Multiple interface(s) to the SAME simulation Hosted on the internet, browser accessible Multi-user, embedded objects, spatial navigation Implemented support for “story points” (for embedded historical and/or fictional narrative) Support humanities student writing project

1. Atmosphere Agents provide “color”, entertainment and activity 2. Infrastructure Agents contribute in “meaningful” ways to game-play 3. Tutoring Agents “over the shoulder” monitoring and remediation Agents are needed:

Students can join from any remote location They can log in at any time of day or night Human tutors cannot be available at all times to help Students can become discouraged or “lost” in the world and not know why In Virtual Environments: Tutors are Needed

Rejects the notion of standardized multiple choice tests Pre-game narrative-based survey short problem-solving stories students record their impressions and questions Similar post-game survey with different but analogous scenarios Surveys analyzed for improvement in problem-solving Assessment Qualitative

Assessment by Scenarios Assess computer literacy PreTest: Present scenario, students propose course of action or solution Engage in learning experience Control vs Virtual PostTest: Present similar scenario, student response Analysis of assessment data

The Geology Explorer: Assessment Protocol Pre-course Assessment: 400+ students Computer Literacy Assessment: (244 volunteers) Divide by Computer Literacy and Geology Lab Experience Geomagnetic (Alternative) Group: (122 students) Geology Explorer Geology Explorer Treatment Group: (122 students) Non-Participant Control Non-Participant ControlGroup: (150 students, approx.) Completed Completed (78 students) Non- completed Non- completed (44 students) Completed Completed (95 students) Non- completed Non- completed (27 students) Post-course Assessment: 368 students Example: Fall, 1998

A sample scenario: Manitoba Fishing You are in northern Manitoba on a fishing trip. Fishing has been good. At dawn on the day of your departure, you cut across country to a remote bay and have more good luck: you catch your limit of walleye. On the way back to the lodge, you stumble across a heavy, moss- covered rock on the shoreline, flipping it over. Looking down, you see the underside of the rock shining with a brilliant metallic yellow. You pick up the rock and lug it back to the lodge. At the airport luggage check-in, the baggage agent notes that you are 20 kg overweight exactly the weight of the rock that you found. He says, "It's okay to ship rocks back to the States, eh, but at $15 per kilogram, eh, you're going to owe $300!" As a geologist, what do you do? Please respond to the following: 1. List the questions you would ask yourself, giving reasons behind asking those particular questions: 2. List the factors that you would consider in making your final decision:

Scoring protocol for scenario assessment. 1) General Problem Solving: 60 points Scoring consisted of three sections worth 20 points each. With 60 points possible this category is weighted highest because it deals with students’ ability to approach, manipulate, and make conclusions on a problem scientifically. The three sections included: * Form Hypothesis: 0-20 points based on the strength of questions and strategies for solving the scenario. Hypotheses were judged on how well they fit the problem and their testability * Making specific tests: points awarded for listing diagnostic tests on the following scale. Points were compounded with a maximum of 20: 8 points for first correct test 7 points for second correct test 5 points for third correct test 3 points for naming a test unsuitable for the situation * Conclusions based on evidence/theory: 0-20 points based on the strength and reasoning of conclusions 2) Specific Information: points Divided into several elements each worth five or ten (most important to solving problem) points. Naming a test was given 2/5 credit while giving actual mineral properties was given full credit for the element (such as “quartz should scratch glass, but not diamond”). Examples of elements are: hardness, cleavage, taste, soluability. 3) Expert Knowledge: 5-10 points Points awarded in this category were for other expert geologic or specific knowledge. Points were based on the usefulness of the information in helping resolve the problem. Examples of useful knowledge receiving points in this category are knowing: the value of gold per ounce locations where diamonds are found presence of artifacts in specific regions

Good response (scores: points) If this happened to me I would note that the rock is very heavy so it could be gold. I would then try and press something hard into the rock because I know solid gold has a very soft texture. If I could not decide whether or not it was gold I would bring it somewhere that I could find out for sure like a geologist that could help me out. I don’t think I would pay $360 for the rock unless I was absolutely positive. Poor response (scores: 0-30 points) I would probably do some research to find out what kind of rock it is. If it is a very valuable rock, I would pay the $360. Otherwise, I would probably get rid of it. If I didn’t have time to do research I would have it shipped to me by mail. I would definitely wonder what kind of rock it was. I would study the characteristics and look them up in my geology book. I would for sure make smart decisions on how I could keep it in my possession.

Mean Post-Intervention Scenario Scores for 1998 Geology Explorer - NDSU Physical Geology Students GraderGraderGrader GroupNo.OneTwoThree Alternate a27.0a42.6a Control a25.5a44.5a Planet Oit b35.4b53.4b Within any column, any two means followed by the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05 using Duncan’s multiple range mean separation test.

Learning Style Patterns we noticed: analytical approach: frequent reference to on-line help, conducting sequences of experiments, deliberative: many experiments pattern-matching approach: exploring far and wide in search of their goals: many movements “brute force” approach: simply visiting location after location and identifying everything: many reports

Learning Style A wide range of approaches are supported Questions: Are some of the “pattern matchers” really “curious explorers? Are some of the “pattern matchers” really “curious explorers? Is there such a thing as TOO much experimentation? Is there such a thing as TOO much experimentation? Will software tutors effect what we’re seeing? Will software tutors effect what we’re seeing? How can the game encourage a more analytical approach? How can the game encourage a more analytical approach? Are students “gaming” the system? Are students “gaming” the system?

Advantages of Virtual Worlds Collapse virtual time and distance Allow physical or practical impossibilities Participate from anywhere Interact with other users, virtual artifacts, and software agents Multi-user collaborations and competitive play

To visit WWWIC Projects: Choose the project you want to view from the list at the left

" DANA is intended to be a cross-platform information retrieval system for web-based multimedia utilized in anthropological research. " Ultimately, the goal of the DANA project is to create a network of distributed, federated databases containing research quality digitized 3D models, photographs, and video of archaeological and cultural data. " To the user seeking to access a broad variety of data, the client application will seem as though it is a user-friendly interface to a single online database. In actually, the user will be conducting searchers across a wide variety of databases located across the globe. Digital Archive Network for Anthropology (DANA) DANA is a recent advance!