Vis sammendrag
The domains of archaeology, ancient history and art history are all about context: students need to
learn how to understand and interpret perspectives on the past, making use of various types of
artefacts and environments, to e.g. understand the use of objects or the significance of historical
events. Obtaining knowledge and skills is not limited to the classroom but develops through interaction
with resources in various spaces and across time. While they can rely to some extent on material
remains, written and pictorial resources, quite a lot of knowledge remains tacit and has to be inferred
or deduced. In this sense the concept of ‘context’ is very important, but context is distinguished and
deduced at various levels, e.g. from the material and surface of single historical objects or from
complete archaeological sites. The development of this contextual awareness and analysis skills can
pose some difficulties for students, as it requires the combination and application of multidisciplinary
and interdisciplinary knowledge and skills to assess, interpret and construct various perspectives of the
past and present. Other complicating factors are constraints in time and resources. It is not always
possible or feasible to travel to archaeological sites, artefacts are not always available or accessible,
interpretation of written representations of historical events and resources is difficult, because it no
longer fits our current views and visions, or there are not sufficient lab facilities for students to engage
in practical hands-on inquiry activities. Existing educational research suggests some benefits for
teaching and learning from virtual reality (VR) and 3D models. The current advances in technology also
make this affordable. However, the use of technology in itself does not necessarily make it an effective
educational technology to enhance learning. Literature on educational theories indicate that the
technology should have a pedagogical purpose and be aligned with envisioned learning objectives,
activities, outcomes and assessment, thus supporting effective learning processes (Dron, 2023;
Januszewski & Molenda, 2008; Mayer, 2008; Mayer, 2017; Morel & Spector, 2023). Current trends in
education show the advantages of educational models that activate learners and stimulate individual
and collaborative knowledge construction (Laurillard, 2009). This together with the importance of
context in archaeology and related domains, makes the seamless learning design paradigm a feasible
approach for the design of virtual world learning scenarios. Seamless Learning Designs (SLD) facilitate
(cross-)contextual and cross-boundary learning through technology-supported learning scenario’s using
mobile and wearable devices and online technology, looking at the potential learning affordances of
each environment and opportunities to facilitate learners in making meaningful connections (‘binding’)
between them (Rusman et al., 2024). Context as understood within the Seamless learning design (SLD)
paradigm refers to mental models learners create through interaction within an environment, which
are partly influenced by the emotional state of the learner. Context is not ‘automatically’ there, but is
actively created by learners through their (inter)action within an environment and related mental
“meaning making” processes.
Research also shows the relevance of involving all stakeholders in education, both in the design of the
course as well as in learning activities. Co-design and participatory design approaches involve all
stakeholders to capture their perspectives, leading to new design insights. For example, students
involve stakeholders as part of course activities to stimulate understanding, for example in landscape
architecture, campus archaeology or archaeology community projects (Jeffra et al., 2020; Kempenaar,
2021; Kroot & Panich, 2020; Shakour et al., 2019). In education the value of involving teachers as
designers of learning material and scenarios has been acknowledged and stimulated (Garcia, 2014;
Garcia et al., 2018; Muller-Schoof et al., 2023; Persico et al., 2018). Students of the ‘High Tech High
Graduate School of Education’ even published a guide for teachers on how to involve students in
course design and class activities to improve their learning experiences and performance (Bhakta &
Meza-Ehlert, 2022).
Therefore, we organised two Spring Schools as part of the Virtual Worlds project with 20 students.
Each Spring School lasted five days. Students received literature and documentation to study
beforehand. These documents were then discussed in a world café format, introducing students to
relevant concepts. Teachers then gave lectures and workshops about virtual reality environments, 3D
documentation and models, seamless learning design and course design methodology. Next, students
worked in groups on the assignment for two days. On the last day they presented their findings. In the
first spring school, students were asked to design learning scenarios for the use of virtual worlds in
teaching archaeology. Teachers provided the learning problem and the design constraints, such as
educational level, target group and learning objectives. Students received handouts and templates
related to course design, but were given the freedom to design the learning scenario completely from
their perspectives. In the second spring school, students learned about methods to scan and document
3D objects, applied these in various environments (e.g. a church, an excavation) and made these
available in a virtual environment. At the last afternoon, students submitted an online questionnaire
about their expectations and experiences of the Spring School.
Students were quite positive about both Spring Schools. They valued the discussion with teachers and
students, experiencing other cultures and international settings. The majority found the information
they received in advance sufficient as preparation for the activity, although some participants would
have welcomed information on learning design beforehand as well. They would also have welcomed
more practical experiences with VR to assist them in designing the learning scenario.
When asked what they liked most about the Spring School, respondents indicated the international and
cultural aspects, discussion with teachers, discussing and working with fellow students and the group work;
learning about VR as an educational application, and experiences with VR environments. They were satisfied
with (practicing) the creation of 3D models and making these available in VR environments and learning
activities. The Spring School was found successful as one of the participants remarked in the online
questionnaire: “in making the students feel secure enough to brainstorm with complete strangers”.
As take-home outcomes, participants mentioned the value of designing learning scenarios, the
knowledge and application of VR in general and its application in education; the knowledge and
application of VR to archaeology; the interdisciplinary approach and possibilities for their future studies
and research; and the concept of seamless learning.
Even within the short period of time, students were able to design valuable learning scenarios
according to the seamless learning paradigm. They proposed a variety of learning activities, combining
individual and group work both in-class and out-of-class, using VR to elaborate on and apply theoretical
knowledge. Central in their designs were the didactical approaches that promoted learning processes
and stimulated active learning, such as inquiry-based and collaborative learning. They ensured that
prompts were used in their learning scenarios to direct the learning process.
Although teachers saw the benefits of students’ suggested scenarios, they were faced with practical
constraints that prevented the full implementation of the proposed scenarios. Nevertheless, the
student learning scenarios provided sufficient inspiration to adapt their current learning scenario
designs and implementations of (new elements in) virtual worlds.
