Breaking Down Barriers to Learning with Stereoscopic 3D Technology: Comparison of Google Cardboard, Red‐Cyan Anaglyphs & Glasses‐Free 3D
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION We previously developed a free‐to‐download 3D virtual reality (VR) anatomical quiz app (VRBR https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ca.MacAnatomy.VRBR2 ) and provided it to 850 undergraduate anatomy and physiology students in Sept 2018, along with the required Google Cardboard headsets. The app utilized Google Cardboard to allow for an inexpensive VR viewing experience of digitally‐pinned side‐by‐side (SBS) stereo pairs from David L. Bassett’s A Stereoscopic Atlas of Human Anatomy . Survey data was collected to determine how students used this new technology as a self‐test in their learning. Students expressed multiple barriers to using the app, including: the quiz questions were separate from the 3D images (31%), the app was too large (20%), students felt nauseated (19%), or the app was incompatible with their smartphone (8%). These issues led to much lower student usage than expected. Bottom line: it doesn’t matter how effective a new technology may be for learning, if students won’t use it in the first place. The PURPOSE of our study was to evaluate if student usage increases when barriers to use are removed by using alternate 3D viewing formats. We chose to compare red‐cyan anaglyphs to SBS stereo pairs because anaglyphs could address several of the concerns expressed by students. METHODS Digitally labeled anaglyphs were hosted on the learning management system (LMS) used by the university. Student usage of the anaglyphs was tracked over the first semester of the 2019–20 year and compared to the usage of the SBS stereo pairs over the first semester of the 2018–19 year. Student usage was determined from the number of quiz submissions on the university’s LMS at 3 time points during the term. Statistical analysis was performed with Graphpad Prism. RESULTS Between the start of term and the start of the midterm recess (5 wks) the anaglyph study aid increased usage by 82% over the prior year using SBS stereo pairs. Prior to the practice practical exam at midterm, the anaglyph study aid usage was 138% greater than SBS stereo pairs. The average number of quiz submissions per week using the anaglyphs vs SBS stereo pairs increased by 135% (n=3, one‐tailed student t‐test, p<0.02). CONCLUSION Our results demonstrate that red‐cyan anaglyphs are more readily used by students to view 3D images in a self‐study application compared to SBS stereo pairs on Google Cardboard. This suggests that students are more willing to utilize a new technology when the barriers to use are minimized. Although the use of anaglyphs increased the number of quiz submissions, the red‐cyan format distorts colors, introducing a new barrier to use. It is likely that a 3D format that also removes this new barrier would increase the use of the study aid even further. We plan to test this hypothesis by comparing anaglyphs to images presented on a glasses‐free 3D display (Alioscopy http://www.alioscopy.com/en/3Ddisplays.php ). Qualitative data on the ease of use as well as quantitative data on quiz performance will be compared.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».