Edu Theory on 3D STEM

  • Curriculum Design (“student-centered approach)
  • Technology Implementation: SAMR Model (Puentedura 2014).
    • S: Substitution, A: Augmentation ⇒ Enhancement
    • M: Modification, R: Redefinition ⇒ Transformation
  • Lessons: 5-E Lesson Plan Model (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate)
  • Platform choice: driven by curriculum content (preferred) instead of a single platform

In the framework of Cognitive Load Theory and Social Semiotics

Cognitive Load Theory (Schnotz and Kurschner)

  • intrinsic load: natural complicity (difficult) of the task
  • extraneous load: comes from the format of the instruction or task
  • germane load: mental task of integrating new info to previous knowledge (misconception issue)

semiotic resources

  • potential: prior use of a given resource
  • affordance: based on the possible use of a resource → disciplinary affordance = resource ability to connect to disciplinary info.
  • limitations:

Papers and Relevant publications

You can find many info by doing a search in google with “astronomy education VR”

  • Check the paper by Anthony Crider: Ch 4 - Astronomy Education in Virtual Worlds and Virtual Reality
  • Check this astrobites article about Astronomy Education with VR: Extended Reality in Astronomy Education/Outreach
  • At the University college Intro Astronomy level: Blanco et al. 2018, ASP Conf. 524 : Lessons Learned from Teaching Astronomy with Virtual Reality → on Moon phases and eclipses.
  • At Primary/Middle schooler: Yang et al. 2020 → Virtual Reality Applied to Astronomy Education in Primary and Middle School
  • Severson et al. 2020, BAAS 235, 202.04: Evaluating Virtual Reality as a Tool for Astronomy Education → interactivity among students in the VR classroom. Allowing student to touch SN remnant.
  • Cecotti, A Serious Game in Fully Immersive Virtual Reality for Teaching Astronomy Based on the Messier Catalog, 2022 8thm ISBN 978-1-7348995-3-5
  • Atta et al. (2022, Educ. Sci., 12, 890): Virtual Reality in Space Technology Education → applied to K-12 students. 30 students enhanced their knowledge by 50% and ~80 students by 60-100%.
  • Anthony Lelliott & Marissa Rollnick (2010) Big Ideas: A review of astronomy education research 1974–2008, International Journal of Science Education, 32:13, 1771-1799, DOI: 10.1080/09500690903214546
  • Bailey, Janelle M., and Timothy F. Slater. “A review of astronomy education research.” Astronomy Education Review 2.2 (2003): 20-45.
  • E. V. Slater, J. E. Morris & D. McKinnon (2018) Astronomy alternative conceptions in pre-adolescent students in Western Australia, International Journal of Science Education, 40:17, 2158-2180, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2018.1522014
  • Magdalena Kersting, Jackie Bondell, Rolf Steier & Mark Myers (2023) Virtual reality in astronomy education: reflecting on design principles through a dialogue between researchers and practitioners, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2023.2238871
  • Windmiller, G., Blanco, P., & Welsh, W. F. (2021). Developing Virtual Reality Activities for the Astro 101 Class and Lab. arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.01592.
  • Magdalena Kersting, Rolf Steier & Grady Venville (2021) Exploring participant engagement during an astrophysics virtual reality experience at a science festival, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 11:1, 17-34, DOI: 10.1080/21548455.2020.1857458
  • AR in physics by Vidak+ 2022 (J.Phys.Conf): vidak_2022_j._phys._conf._ser._2415_012008.pdf
  • Confirmatory factor analysis of two self-efficacy scales for astronomy understanding and robotic telescope use: https://journals.aps.org/prper/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020164
  • Trumper, R., University students' conceptions of basic astronomy concepts, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9120/35/1/301, https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9120/35/1/301
  • Bakas , C. and Mikropoulos , T. 2003 . Design of virtual environments for the comprehension of planetary phenomena based on students’ ideas . International Journal of Science Education , 25 (8) : 949 – 967 .
  • Marcelo de Paiva Guimarães, Bruno Barberi Gnecco, https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.20174
  • Hansen, John & Barnett, Michael & Makinster, Jamie & Keating, Thomas. (2004). The impact of three-dimensional computational modeling on student understanding of astronomy concepts: A qualitative analysis. International Journal of Science Education. 26. 1555-1575. 10.1080/09500690420001673766.