It's Ironic 2

Educational VR: The Irony of it All

The stout and trendy presence of virtual reality these days leaves me with a hefty sense of irony. (Please look at last week's post for the intorduction to this series.) I am struck by the incongruity of the past and the future colliding in an uncomfortable way. I am describing something we’ve seen before—when we were pushing for 3D visualization tools in the classroom from 2010 through 2015. Virtual reality is all the rage today, but in the past, things didn’t look quite so bright. Though the technologies are really quite similar, something has changed. Here's my second effort at ironic sentiment: 

Complaint: 3D costs too much. 

Educator response to 3D (5 years ago): “We can’t afford this.” “How do you expect teachers to buy this for each classroom?” “This just isn’t sustainable, sorry.”

Educator response to VR (today), even though VR costs much more, per student: “Wow, this is so sexy!” “Where can I get more?” "I'll find a way."

It's Ironic Intro

Educational VR: The Irony of it All

I recall the hall of fame release by the Byrds in 1965, a song that rhythmically and hauntingly chanted:

To everything (turn, turn, turn) There is a season (turn, turn, turn) And a time to every purpose, under heaven…A time to build up, a time to break downA time to dance, a time to mournA time to cast away stones, a time to gather stones together…

This song aptly describes some of the emotions I experience while scouting VR at conferences. I am always struck by the incongruity of the past and the future colliding in an uncomfortable way.

I am describing something we’ve seen before—when we were pushing for 3D visualization tools in the classroom from 2010 through 2015. I know this arena well, having led one of the largest and most successful 3D implementations in U.S. schools, working closely with stalwart companies like Texas Instruments. Virtual reality is all the rage today, but in the past, things didn’t look quite so bright. Though the technologies are really quite similar, something has changed. We’ve morphed, as the Byrds would suggest, from a time of breaking down, to a period of building up. What happened? Over the next few posts, let me explain using a few juxtaposed examples. Here's my first example:

Complaint: These 3D glasses are just too heavy and uncomfortable for students.

Educator response to 3D (5 years ago): “They don’t fit the heads of children.” “They don’t work well for children wearing glasses.” “These just won’t work, sorry.”

Educator response to VR (today), even though glasses are heavier and more constraining: “Wow, isn’t this amazing!” “Can I try them on?” “How can I get more for my classroom?”

Isn't it ironic...?

 

Reality Check Conclusion

Let's pause and reflect on this series. I suppose, if you see the world pessimistically, the last four posts suggest that the penetration rate for VR as an emerging technology in education is far below the hype levels we all hear about; and if you view the world with rose-colored glasses, you might instead see this as a fertile market. [Shaping the Future] The bottom line problems with VR in education are well understood by educators. [Active] To educators, current VR experiences:

• cover very little of the written school curriculum
• are not easily managed in the classroom
• haven’t learned from the experiences and failures of the 3D in education movement of the last decade
• haven’t yet convinced teachers of their instructional merit

No, until virtual reality experiences can offer all of the requisite 4Es of education (engaging, effective, efficient, and easy to manage), we have a long way to go. [Immersive] —Len Scrogan

Remember, I have deliberately embedded words of hope throughout this series, as seen in the top paragraph, in [bracketed italics]. These are expressions that literally shout the promise and potential of virtual reality, while counterbalancing any bad news.  These words are not just taken magically from the air, but consist of actual text snatched from the VR-related exhibit hall booths and sales literature at a recent ed-tech conference, ‘designer’ phraseology that help sell VR to tech-hungry educators. 

Reality Check (4)

Little or No Change. In my undergraduate classes at the University of Colorado-Denver I started a process of surveying each incoming cohort about their experience with virtual reality. [Building imagination] The findings thus far from my first two semesters clearly align with my experience interviewing past cohorts and knowledge of in-practice teachers, as well. Here are my current findings:

• 42% of UCD students have tried VR, which is up from 35.7% last year. Of course, that means 58% had never used it, prior to taking my classes.
• Only 3.5% of my students have used virtual reality in an way associated with their university coursework. What happened to the energy of virtual reality in the educational marketplace? It’s dismal.
• And, oh yeah, about 15.8% of my students get uncomfortably ill when viewing virtual reality. That makes sense, supported by worldwide vision health research. [Education that WOWS]

Remember, in order to keep our blog readers from falling off the feared precipice of despair, I have deliberately embedded words of hope throughout this series, as seen in the top paragraph, in [bracketed italics]. These are expressions that literally shout the promise and potential of virtual reality, while counterbalancing the bad news.  These words are not just taken magically from the air, but consist of actual text snatched from the VR-related exhibit hall booths and sales literature at a recent ed-tech conference, ‘designer’ phraseology that help sell VR to tech-hungry educators. 

Reality Check (3)

Is VR truly popular in classrooms these days? [Pivotal] Unfortunately, I am seeing too few yeses and too many noes in the conversation. In the recent months, here is even more insightful data I have been wrestling with:

No More? Has Google conquered the education world, claiming more than 2 million Google Expedition users worldwide? [Enables exploration] Sounds like real penetration of the ed market, doesn’t it? Not really. First, their actual penetration rate is miniscule. UNICEF estimated there are 650 million children of primary age in the world, and nearly double that if you include secondary students. Based on these assumptions, Google has only reached 0.003 (less than a third of 1 percent) of elementary students worldwide, and only 0.0015 of all students, both primary and secondary. Second, “having used” (just once or a few times) is much different in schools than “are using” (daily, weekly, monthly, frequently). Sounds like hype, doesn’t it? You bet.

Only a Bit More. Google conquers the U.K. is what some people say, with over a half million students having used their singular Google Expeditions platform. [Builds understanding] But if you assume in excess of 10 million students in the U.K. at minimum, that converts into a 0.05 penetration rate. (And, of course, we must still own the “having used” versus “are using” verbiage.) Translated, more than 95% of UK students have not used Google Expeditions. Oh well.

Remember, in order to keep our blog readers from falling off the feared precipice of despair, I have deliberately embedded words of hope throughout this series, as seen in the top paragraph, in [bracketed italics]. These are expressions that literally shout the promise and potential of virtual reality, while counterbalancing the bad news.  These words are not just taken magically from the air, but consist of actual text snatched from the VR-related exhibit hall booths and sales literature at a recent ed-tech conference, ‘designer’ phraseology that help sell VR to tech-hungry educators. 

Reality Check (2)

So, let’s start our VR reality check, which is based on a recent avalanche of data points occurring in schools, not in the artificially glorified environments of conferences and expo halls. [Democratizing education]

Is VR very popular in classrooms? [Pivotal] Unfortunately, I am seeing too few yeses and too many noes in the conversation. In the recent months, here is a flood of feedback about VR I have been receiving from educators or some of the insightful data I have come across:

No Show. One educator I spoke with told me how their school leaders, excited by the educational possibilities of using virtual reality in their public school classrooms, offered a dedicated break-out session on VR on their first “professional development day” for teachers. [Learning] Not one teacher attended the VR session. No one. [Revolutionary]

No Go. In another public school, an elementary school, a district-level tech expert visited the school to offer a VR workshop (that, in this case, teachers were required to attend). [Transporting] According to one attendee, most teachers present at this workshop felt it wasn’t something immediately useful for them. Fast forward three months. Not a single teacher had taken up this technology in their classrooms. No takers. None. Zilch. [Impactful]

No Time. Laura Tickle, a K-5 technology coordinator at Ben Franklin Academy, a high-performing Charter school in Colorado, reported that “’zero’ teachers are using VR currently.” [Exciting] When asked to explain why, she responded: “Time would be the main issue with not using VR.” Teachers have so little of it. She added “and we do not have any equipment for it.” [A real turn-on]

No Priority. Joy Vigil, a middle school technology coach at a respected Colorado magnet school, The Academy of Charter Schools, noted that teachers at her school are also not yet using VR in instruction. [Illustrious] She explained, “This is due to lack of equipment and training”. And when schools don’t buy—and don’t train—it’s simply a technology that is not high up on their priority scale. [Powerful]

Remember, in order to keep our blog readers from falling off the feared precipice of despair, I have deliberately embedded words of hope throughout this series, as seen in the top paragraph, in [bracketed italics]. These are expressions that literally shout the promise and potential of virtual reality, while counterbalancing the bad news.  These words are not just taken magically from the air, but consist of actual text snatched from the VR-related exhibit hall booths and sales literature at a recent ed-tech conference, ‘designer’ phraseology that help sell VR to tech-hungry educators. 

Reality Check (1)

There is so much hype surrounding VR in education nowadays, it seems particularly wise to stop and do a reality check, at least once in a great while. [Enticing]

Although I am personally quite bullish on VR, this will not be another one of those cheerleading series about the potential of VR in education. [Amazing] No, what I am about to report may prove downright depressing. [Inspiring]

Thus, in order to keep our blog readers from falling off the feared precipice of despair, I have deliberately embedded words of hope throughout this series, as seen in the very first paragraph above, in [bracketed italics]. These are expressions that literally shout the promise and potential of virtual reality, while counterbalancing the bad news. [Elevating] These words are not just taken magically from the air, but consist of actual text snatched from the VR-related exhibit hall booths and sales literature at a recent ed-tech conference, ‘designer’ phraseology that help sell VR to tech-hungry educators. [Engaging]

Our in depth reality check begins next week!

A Researcher's Reveal

I was recently interviewed by a researcher from a respected think tank and consultancy group about the newest trends in educational VR. I am sure that my interview slid in at the end of their interviewing process, because the researcher uncharacteristically revealed some of her preliminary findings culled from other interviews.

The first reveal is that, at least in higher education, many educators don’t really know how to fit VR within any curriculum or how to use it for educational impact. 

A second reveal is that most of her higher-ed interviewees pointed to K-12 educators as doing much more with VR than they were in their own universities. 

Both reveals are not a surprise whatsoever. In a recent article, I cited a 2017 survey by Pearson that came to the same conclusion as the first reveal shown above. But I would disagree with the second reveal. I find contrarily that the effective use of VR in K-12 schools is statistically exaggerated. 

Fluent Words

One trend I have noticed, from China to the U.S., is the growing use of virtual reality to improve conversational and situational fluency in world language acquisition. Take a look at Fluent Worlds.

Actual Reality

Actual Reality is basically a new type of XR. 

This Actual Reality video, courtesy of Green.TV has gone viral, plus it’s popular with educators. Take a look. It’s good to laugh at ourselves, at least sometimes.

Actual Reality from Len Scrogan on Vimeo.

Stuck at First Base

Are you stranded on First Base?

Everywhere I go, teachers are stuck at first base: using VR for virtual field tips, like this one: Project Pakistan. 

This is certainly a very nice experience, but I can’t wait until educators move on to second base, using interactive simulations to teach rigorous topics (see SuperChem VR) or third base, where students begin to create their own VR content. But it’s also possible to hit a four-bagger, a home run, when kids create their own VRhardware.

SImple VR Creation

One of the most under-emphasized areas in the booming field of virtual reality involves user-generated content. I’ve noticed at many tech conferences that a keen interest for student-created content options is resonating at an all-time high, especially for folks in higher education.

Enter WhooshVR. These folks are chiefly known for Whoosh3D, a 3D-enabled 9H tempered glass screen protector which comes with its own app.  Whoosh3D enables a conventional smartphone or tablet device to create, convert, stream, and display 2D and stereo 3D content, in a glasses-free format.  But WhooshVR is a pleasant addition to their platform, something I see as having high potential in the education market.

Basically, WhooshVR is an app that enables a conventional phone to capture a

2D photo with a single click, convert it to 3D VR format, and create tilt-view VR photos and video, whereby the edges of the frame expand beyond one’s peripheral vision. Its current photo capture constraint is 140 degree FOV with a phone’s camera and 180 degrees with a fisheye lens.  Interestingly, all photo capture is via a single photo shot; I do not need to rotate the phone or exhibit socially awkward photo capture behaviors, thank goodness. According to Simon Gemayel, CEO of 3DVT: “We're changing the face of  VR content by shifting people from being content consumers to “content creators” simply by using their phone – the camera we all carry around in our pocket – and using it in a way which is natural to human behavior; photo capture with a single click.” He gleams:   “This is a powerful change in paradigm.  Never before has 3D and VR3D been so simple, so affordable, and so accessible. “

The introductory app is free, yet basic. Users can upgrade for additional features, such as the ability to capture 180 and 360 without a fisheye lens; and to access virtually any photo from their device’s own photo and video libraries.  The upsell version will also allow users to access VR and 3D content on YouTube.

From the perspective of the consumer, I see this as a low-cost and non-complicated way to capture 3D pictures and video, enjoying the ability to click through a mass of images using my VR headgear or the auto-stereo display. I can print what I see on a either a color printer or 3D printer and can email or post my images from the app. From an educator’s perspective, I like the hands-free use, enabled through gaze control on an onscreen dashboard. The intuitive dashboard allows immediate depth editing, zooming, and quick visual tweaking. In my way of thinking, it provides an easy way for the youngest children, or beginning students at higher levels, to jump right into the fray, using a tool I consider a valuable precursor to more sophisticated and time-consuming content generation tools. 

"Majoring in VR"

Across the U.S., we are seeing the growing frequency of private programs (NYTedu and the Academy of VR) designed to teach students to design VR. Then it should be no large surprise  that now we have a college in Florida offering a full major in VR design and creation: Ringling College.

What it takes

What does it take to make VR projects successful?

What does it take to get muscular with your VR project?
I have found that the following combined strategies can beat down the failure phenomenon. In successful implementations, your project or venture will likely evidence:

• A respected champion (teacher, principal, or district administrator)
• A clear and sustained plan for scaling the innovation
• Attention density, an instructional focus that is consistent and stable over time. (See (Rock, D., and Schwartz, J. (2009) The Neuroscience of Leadership; and Olivero, Bane, Kopelman (1997)
• Unyielding systematization of the innovation within the culture and curriculum of the school. (It’s not just a fun add-on, but a both a required and culturally acceptable methodology.)
• A plan for minimizing the predictable organizational entropy associated with any innovation: loss of key staff, equipment obsolescence, technical difficulties, newly competing priorities, ongoing training, and curricular systematization, to name a few)
• Constant evaluation, continuous improvement, and evidencing of results. (We value only what we measure, what works.)

T

Why Technology Fails

Imagine this Dr. Jekyll/Mr. Hyde scenario occurring in a pilot project implementing VR in an educational setting:

After completing a twelve- month pilot project in a dozen schools in this European capitol, the final results were in. Kids loved the technology and felt it improved their learning and even the relevance of the curriculum itself. Yet teachers appeared consistently resistant to the technology: they could not envision its use and did not want to continue to use it.

Of course, this is a true story. Why does this happen?  And most importantly, when teachers are way out of step with where the kids are at, what can we do about it? Read our next series of posts to understand this unfortunate paradox and how we can deal with it.

Why Projects Fail

Why do VR projects sometimes fail?

Research shows that teachers are a volunteeristic and idiosyncratic lot. Teaching itself is a volunteeristic and idiosyncratic profession. Teachers will tackle innovation only if they want to, and stay with it only if the technology suits their style and preferences. You can’t expect much else. So what happened in the previously posted scenario unfortunately sounds about right. It’s for these reasons that it’s always a tough proposition to implement technology innovation in educational settings. Only highly creative, intrinsically motivated, or curiously inventive teachers break out of this pattern. And a few creative teachers will not create overwhelming scalability for exciting VR products or solutions.

Why don’t more teachers kick in?

Even if a given technology is popular with young people, most teachers tend to put themselves in lanes of instructional practice and habit, and it becomes stubbornly difficult to move them into other lanes. For example, three teachers may show an interest, but many other teachers do not—and won’t—because they feel the implementing teachers have this innovation ‘covered’. In schools and universities, time is a limited commodity for teachers. Any time that would be taken to implement a technology would clearly complete with the taut limits of volunteerism and the narrowed preferences or idiosyncrasies of teachers. And, sometimes, pushing for technology innovation may take on a “mean-spirited” twist. For example, in some school districts or universities, a technology using teacher/professor may be viewed as a technology or innovation diva (in the negative sense of the word) —an attention hog—and they can be mocked or avoided by other ‘normalized’ educators. “Not for us,” they cry!

More Smart People

VR in Education has a lot of smart people doing interesting work. For example, these two experts are exploring the promise and potential of VR in education, demonstrating some quite successful implementations. Take a look at the links  below.

Julian McCrea of the Virtual Film School 

Grace Lau of the Global Nomads Group. 

VR and 3D Innovation

There is one thing for certain these days: there are a lot of smart people working in the VR field. many of them considering its wisest application within education practice. Smart people like:

Max Orozco, co-founder of Lumeum VR, who is dedicated to “bringing VR to those who need it the most” (such as those with limited mobility and the elderly).

Darius Clarke, a VR instructor, who once told me he aims to give youth nothing less than "x-ray vision and fantasy vision” through VR. An interesting perspective, isn't it?

John Rupkalvis, the well-travelled stereo and VR expert, is also bullish on the possibilities for VR in education: “Having conducted numerous tutorials at a variety of educational institutions, including colleges, universities, trade schools, and even K-12 schools, I have gained an appreciation for the numerous ways that complex concepts may be conveyed with clarity through the use of stereoscopic 3D, including virtual reality, augmented reality, and mixed reality systems.”

zSpace Laptop

Have you heard? The New zSpace AR/VR Laptop?

zSpace has outdone themselves with their new AR/VR-capable laptop (VR defined here as 3D), now in growing use in the Atlanta Public Schools. See the laptop’s specs here.

NSA 3D Convention

Readers should be aware of the upcoming 3D-Con 2019 convention, an effort supported by the National Stereoscopic Association Convention , being held in Akron (OH), July 30-August 5, 2019.  I have attended one of these conferences, and they are quite interesting, from the perspective of legacy 3D and moving forward into its VR future.