| Literature DB >> 35992421 |
Tao Xie1, Ling Zhang1, Geping Liu1.
Abstract
Preservice teachers' preparedness, perception, and affect toward certain technology systems influence the student acquisition of science knowledge, process skills, teaching innovation, and willingness to use technology in their classroom. The purpose of this study was to explore teachers' affective responses to a virtual reality-enabled scientific experiment (VaSE) system. Fifty-one preservice teachers majoring in educational technology participated in the study. They were divided into two groups, and their reactions were measured separately on two occasions. The first occasion used a standard system following the principle of Donald Norman's affective design model (ADM). The VaSE system was then revised with a strict version of ADM before the participants' reactions were measured for a second time. The positive and negative affect scale (PANAS) was utilized for affective state evaluation. Semi-structured interviews that focused on affective experiences were organized using an ADM framework and conducted immediately after the participants used VaSE. The results indicated that the positive affect experienced by the preservice teachers was significantly enhanced, and the negative affect was significantly weakened. Academic level, gender, and prior experience were important random effect factors that impacted the affective experience. It was also revealed that participants were more likely to be affected by immersion and interactivity in terms of enhancing positive affect and were more likely to be affected by behavioral layer elements in terms of weakening negative affect. A conclusion has been drawn to provide theoretical and practical suggestions for training preservice teachers in ways that improve their ability to integrate technology into the classroom.Entities:
Keywords: affective design model; affective state; educational technology; preservice teachers; scientific experiment; virtual reality
Year: 2022 PMID: 35992421 PMCID: PMC9389293 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.929270
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
Figure 1The developed VaSE system.
Two-occasion configurations of VaSE.
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Visceral layer | Create tables, ammeters, light bulbs, batteries, switches, and wire models just as people do in a real laboratory. | Improve the reality of the models. Modify the |
| Behavioral layer | Participants are able to use handles to | Reduce the difficulty of circuit connection. The distance between endpoints within a predefined value will be automatically connected. Reduce the number of false touch operations (i.e., multiple selections and wrong selections). |
| Reflective layer | When connected correctly, the light bulbs will glow, and the readings of the ammeters will change; when the student fails to connect, the system will provide text feedback. | When the student has made no action with the experiment for more than 3 min, the system prompts them to complete the next operation; when the student makes 3 consecutive errors, the system explains the error and shows the correct operation to the student. When the student succeeds, the system will display an animated prompt (e.g., “Awesome” or “Great”). |
Statistics of the affective states.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| PA | 3.93 | 1.041 | 4.12 | 0.904 |
| NA | 2.03 | 1.107 | 1.68 | 0.871 |
Results of the multilevel linear model.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| Intercept | 7.663 | 11.827 | 0.000 | 0.821 | 1.188 | 0.236 |
| Occasion 1 vs. Occasion 2 | −0.567 | −5.104 | 0.000 | 0.589 | 4.972 | 0.000 |
| Academic level | −1.125 | −6.346 | 0.000 | 0.329 | 1.733 | 0.084 |
| Gender | −0.572 | −1.897 | 0.058 | −0.572 | −1.780 | 0.076 |
| Prior experience | −0.626 | −4.074 | 0.000 | 0.362 | 2.208 | 0.028 |
| Academic level * prior experience | 0.194 | 4.481 | 0.000 | −0.122 | −2.646 | 0.008 |
| Academic level | 0.246 | 2.701 | 0.007 | 0.129 | 1.329 | 0.185 |
Significant at p < 0.05,
significant at p < 0.001.
Factors that linked to affective experience.
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Visceral layer | Strong Environmental immersion | 13 | 22 | The experimental equipment is floating in the air, and there is no sense of gravity | 5 | 34 |
| high environmental reality | 8 | The “connected” status of the node is not obvious | 9 | |||
| beautiful environmental presentation | 1 | The experimental component is not within the first line of sight | 2 | |||
| The laboratory layout is complicated | 3 | |||||
| “Wire” is low in realism | 15 | |||||
| Behavioral layer | Strong system interaction | 10 | 16 | Low accuracy of selecting experimental components and high false touch rate | 17 | 39 |
| Complete system functions | 3 | Difficulty in circuit connection | 18 | |||
| Realization of operations that cannot be accessible in the real world | 3 | Complicated handle operation | 2 | |||
| The experimental components are difficult to control | 2 | |||||
| Reflective layer | No worry about the loss of experimental equipment | 4 | 12 | No guidance and feedback when the operation is difficult | 1 | 9 |
| A sense of accomplishment and satisfaction | 1 | No obvious error prompt | 7 | |||
| Novelty | 7 | Weak time concept and low sense of security | 1 | |||