McLellan (2004)

This book chapter provides a very good review of many issues related to virtual reality (VR). It starts from historical background and types of VR. Frankly, instead of types of VR, I would like to see the key features of VR. Types of VR can change when technology changes, but the features will be relatively stable. Actually, towards the end of the book chapter, the author mentioned about the realm of experience with two dimensions: participation (active vs. passive), and absorption vs. immersion. Those can be some features of VR. Some other features that I can find are visual effect (3D vs. 2D, dynamic vs. static), interaction with the real world, location, task, feedback from the environment ...

I really like the issues that the author quoted from Fennington and Loge (1992). The four issues are:
(1) How is learning in virtual reality different from that of a traditional educational environment?
(2) What do we know about multisensory learning that will be of value in determining the effectiveness of this technology?
(3) How are learning styles enhanced or changed by VR? and
(4) What kinds of research will be needed to assist instructional designers in developing effective VR learning environments?

These four issues give researchers some research direction. Actually, when I start think about VR, the first question came to my mind was the different between VR and other educational environment. In other words, what additional values VR can give. Frankly, from the papers, most of the benefits are similar to the benefits of simulation.

The author defined VR as " a class of computer-controlled multisensory communication technologies that allow more intuitive interactions with data and involve human senses in new ways." (p.461) I see that VR is special because of it's multisensory communication capability and it involves human senses in new ways. The multisensory communication capability can help people to practice skills in a almost real environment. But, how about new senses? I think some Second Life research also pointed out that the new identity can give students a "new start" that they don't have carry their old labels such as failure, or below average. In addition, I believe the mulitsensory capability should work in some context, but not necessarily in other context. The multisensory capability can sometimes be distraction for the learners. In other words, the sense provided should be relevant to the learning objective.

In the theoretical perspectives, I am interested in the computers-as-threater perspective and experience design perspective. I think both of them can be relevant to game/VR research because experience and engagement seems like two big "selling points" in game/VR. For example, the author quoted from Shadroff (2002) that engagement needs to be significantly different from the surrounding environment and cognitive important or relevant. So, those can be some dimension that we may measure the "engagement" in game/VR. Of course, one assumption is that engagement + good educational design will lead to educational outcomes.