Using 3d Hologram in Distance Education

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 56 - 68, 01.06.2020

Güray Tonguç , Dr. Öğr. Üyesi Betül Özaydın Özkara

Öz

In a last few decades the use of rich content web pages, where interaction is important, has become very common. Although the interaction is important, it’s known that there are difficulties in practice, as a result, students feel loneliness, tend to drop out of distance education. In this study, the use of three-dimensional holographic materials as distance education course material was proposed to avoid the situation mentioned above. The current use cases of two/three dimensional hologram technologies with distance education have been put forward and it has been tried to determine the integration of these two technologies, what might be done later in order to increase productivity in education. By integrating three-dimensional hologram technology in distance education in the following years, it’s considered that students who are in a different space will be more interested in the lessons, interact more with other students and instructors, increase their satisfaction with education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

interaction, hologram, learning technology, interactive learning environment, -learning

Kaynakça

• Adobe Systems Incorporated. (2016). Adobe Connect bandwidth calculation. Retrieved from https://helpx.adobe.com/adobe-connect/kb/connect-bandwidth-calculation.html Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. Moore M.G. and Anderson W.G (Eds.), Handbook of distance education, pp.129-144. New Jersey. Anderson, T. and Garrison, D. R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education: Institutional responses for quality outcomes, pp.7-112, Madison. Aslan, R., and Erdoğan, S. (2017). 21. Yüzyılda hekimlik eğitimi: Sanal gerçeklik, artırılmış gerçeklik, hologram. Kocatepe Veteriner Dergisi, 10 (3), pp.204–212. Augar, N., Raitman, R., and Zhou, W. (2004). Teaching and learning online with wikis. R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer and R. Phillips (Eds.), 21st ASCILITE Conference: Beyond the Comfort Zone, pp. 95-104, Western Australia. Baxter, M. (2013). Virtual reality comes to Ohio Credit Union. Retrieved from http://www.cutimes.com/2013/07/24/virtual-reality-comes-to-ohio-credit-union. Beichner, S. (1995). Fen ve mühendislik için Fizik. Palme Yayıncılık. Chang, S. H. H., and Smith, R. A. (2008). Effectiveness of personal interaction in a learner-centered paradigm distance education class based on student satisfaction. Journal of research on technology in education, 40 (4), pp.407-426. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2008.10782514 Chou, C., Peng, H., and Chang, C. Y. (2010). The technical framework of interactive functions for course-management systems: Students’ perceptions, uses, and evaluations. Computers & Education, 55(3), pp.1004-1017. Çevik, V., Bardakcı, S., and Kılıçer, K. (2016). Öğrenme ve öğretmede holografik görüntüleme. A. İşman, H. F. Odabaşı and B. Akkoyunlu (Eds.), Eğitim Teknolojileri Okumaları 2016, pp.439–462. Ankara. Retrieved from http://tojet.net/e-book/eto_2016.pdf Dağhan, G. and Seferoğlu, S. S. (2012). BÖTE lisansüstü öğrencilerinin uzaktan eğitime ilişkin tercihlerinin konjont analizi tekniğiyle incelenmesi. Ege Eğitim Dergisi, 13 (2), pp.13-32. Demirbilek, R. (2009). Holografi. İstanbul, Turkey, Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi, Retrieved from http://www.yildiz.edu.tr/~oscg/dersnotlari/holografi/D1.pdf Foshay, R. and Bergeron, C. (2000). Web-based education: A reality check. Tech Trends, 44 (5), pp.16-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02818231 Gallo, P. (2014). Michael Jackson hologram rocks billboard music awards: Watch & go behind the scenes. Billboard. Retrieved from http://www.billboard.com/articles/events/bbma-2014/6092040/michael-jackson-hologram-billboard-music-awards Holocube. (2016a). Holocube HC10. Holocube. Retrieved from http://www.holocube.eu/products/holocube-hc10/ Holocube. (2016b). Holocube HC70. Holocube. Retrieved from http://www.holocube.eu/products/holocube-hc70v/ Jones, A., McDowall, I., Yamada, H., Bolas, M. and Debevec, P. (2007). Rendering for an interactive 360° light field display. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 26 (3), pp.40. http://doi.org/10.1145/1276377.1276427 Karataş, S., Üstündağ, M. T. and Güneş, E. (2009). Parmaklar klavyede, peki ya zihinler nerede? E-Öğrenmede etkileşim. 9 Th International Educational Technology Conference (IETC2009). pp.745-750. Ankara. http://www.iet-c.net/publication_folder/ietc/ietc2009.pdf Kauffman, H. (2015). A review of predictive factors of student success in and satisfaction with online learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23. http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26507 Kearsley, G. (2000). Online education: Learning and teaching in cyberspace. Wadsworth Publishing, USA. Kunz, B. (2010). Why Apple will turn to holograms. Bloomberg. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-07/why-apple-will-turn-to-holograms Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Belland, B. R. and Schroder, K. E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), pp.16-39. Kuo, Y. C., Walker, A. E., Schroder, K. E. and Belland, B. R. (2014). Interaction, internet self-efficacy, and self-regulated learning as predictors of student satisfaction in online education courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 20, pp.35-50. Mehta, N. (2011). Applied physics for engineers. PHI Learning Private Limited, New Delhi. Meyer, K. A. (2014). Quality in distance education: Focus on on-line learning. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. Washington. Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), pp.1-7. doi: 10.1080/08923648909526659 Moore, M. G. and Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning (What’s New in Education). Cengage Learning, Wadsworth. Muilenburg, L. Y. and Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance education, 26(1), pp.29-48. doi: 10.1080/01587910500081269 Musion Turkey. (2014). Pyrobox. Musion Turkey. Retrieved from http://musion.com.tr. Nandi, D., Hamilton, M. and Harland, J. (2015). What factors impact student–content interaction in fully online Courses. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 7(7), pp.28-35. doi: 10.5815/ijmecs.2015.07.04. Navarro, P. and Shoemaker, J. (2000). Performance and perceptions of distance learners in cyberspace. The American Journal of Distance Education. 14(2), pp.15-35. doi: 10.1080/08923640009527052 Northrup, P. (2001). A framework for designing interactivity into web-based instruction. Educational Technology, 41 (2), pp.31–39. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/44428657 Ochiai, Y., Kumagai, K., Hoshi, T., Rekimoto, J., Hasegawa, S. and Hayasaki, Y. (2016). Fairy lights in femtoseconds: aerial and volumetric graphics rendered by focused femtosecond laser combined with computational holographic fields. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 35(2). https://doi.org/10.1145/2850414 Parsad, B. and Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07. US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, Washington. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2009/2009044.pdf Rao, S. M. and Krishnan, V. (2015). Distance education. Fourth International Conference on Higher Education: Special Emphasis on Management Education, Nitte University, India, pp.29-30. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2600957 Rumble, G. (2001). Re-inventing distance education, 1971–2001. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 20, pp.31–43. doi: 10.1080/02601370010008246 Samuel, A. (2015). Faculty perception of “Presence” in the online environment. Adult Education Research Conference, Manhattan. Retrieved from http://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2015/papers/47 Summers J.J., Waigandt A. and Whittaker T.A. (2005). A comparison of student achievement and satisfaction in an online versus a traditional face-to-face statistics class. Innovative Higher Education, 29(3), pp.233-250. Strachota, E. (2006). The use of survey research to measure student satisfaction in online courses. Midwest Research to Practice Conference in Adult Continuing and Community Education, University of Missouri-St. Louis. Thomas, M. J. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18 (3), pp.351-366. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.03800.x Vrasidas, C. and Mc lsaac, M. S. (1999). Factors influence interaction in an online course. The American Journal of Distance Education, 13 (3), pp.22-36. doi: 10.1080/08923649909527033 Willging, P. A. and Johnson, S. D. (2009). Factors that influence students' decision to dropout of online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13 (3), pp.115-127. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ862360 Zhang, D. (2005). Interactive multimedia-based e-learning: A study of effectiveness. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19 (3), pp.149–162. doi: 10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_3 Zhang, D., Zhao, J. L., Zhou, L. and Nunamaker Jr, J. F. (2004). Can e-learning replace classroom learning?. Communications of the ACM, 47 (5), pp.75-79. doi: 10.1145/986213.986216.