Personalization in cultural heritage: the road travelled and the one ahead

Over the last 20 years, cultural heritage has been a favored domain for personalization research. For years, researchers have experimented with the cutting edge technology of the day; now, with the convergence of internet and wireless technology, and the increasing adoption of the Web as a platform for the publication of information, the visitor is able to exploit cultural heritage material before, during and after the visit, having different goals and requirements in each phase. However, cultural heritage sites have a huge amount of information to present, which must be filtered and personalized in order to enable the individual user to easily access it. Personalization of cultural heritage information requires a system that is able to model the user (e.g., interest, knowledge and other personal characteristics), as well as contextual aspects, select the most appropriate content, and deliver it in the most suitable way. It should be noted that achieving this result is extremely challenging in the case of first-time users, such as tourists who visit a cultural heritage site for the first time (and maybe the only time in their life). In addition, as tourism is a social activity, adapting to the individual is not enough because groups and communities have to be modeled and supported as well, taking into account their mutual interests, previous mutual experience, and requirements. How to model and represent the user(s) and the context of the visit and how to reason with regard to the information that is available are the challenges faced by researchers in personalization of cultural heritage. Notwithstanding the effort invested so far, a definite solution is far from being reached, mainly because new technology and new aspects of personalization are constantly being introduced. This article surveys the research in this area. Starting from the earlier systems, which presented cultural heritage information in kiosks, it summarizes the evolution of personalization techniques in museum web sites, virtual collections and mobile guides, until recent extension of cultural heritage toward the semantic and social web. The paper concludes with current challenges and points out areas where future research is needed

Updating the art history curriculum: incorporating virtual and augmented reality technologies to improve interactivity and engagement

Master's Project (M.Ed.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2017This project investigates how the art history curricula in higher education can borrow from and incorporate emerging technologies currently being used in art museums. Many art museums are using augmented reality and virtual reality technologies to transform their visitors' experiences into experiences that are interactive and engaging. Art museums have historically offered static visitor experiences, which have been mirrored in the study of art. This project explores the current state of the art history classroom in higher education, which is historically a teacher-centered learning environment and the learning effects of that environment. The project then looks at how art museums are creating visitor-centered learning environments; specifically looking at how they are using reality technologies (virtual and augmented) to transition into digitally interactive learning environments that support various learning theories. Lastly, the project examines the learning benefits of such tools to see what could (and should) be implemented into the art history curricula at the higher education level and provides a sample section of a curriculum demonstrating what that implementation could look like. Art and art history are a crucial part of our culture and being able to successfully engage with it and learn from it enables the spread of our culture through digital means and of digital culture

Conceitos e métodos para apoio ao desenvolvimento e avaliação de colaboração remota utilizando realidade aumentada

Remote Collaboration using Augmented Reality (AR) shows great potential to establish a common ground in physically distributed scenarios where team-members need to achieve a shared goal. However, most research efforts in this field have been devoted to experiment with the enabling technology and propose methods to support its development. As the field evolves, evaluation and characterization of the collaborative process become an essential, but difficult endeavor, to better understand the contributions of AR. In this thesis, we conducted a critical analysis to identify the main limitations and opportunities of the field, while situating its maturity and proposing a roadmap of important research actions. Next, a human-centered design methodology was adopted, involving industrial partners to probe how AR could support their needs during remote maintenance. These outcomes were combined with literature methods into an AR-prototype and its evaluation was performed through a user study. From this, it became clear the necessity to perform a deep reflection in order to better understand the dimensions that influence and must/should be considered in Collaborative AR. Hence, a conceptual model and a humancentered taxonomy were proposed to foster systematization of perspectives. Based on the model proposed, an evaluation framework for contextualized data gathering and analysis was developed, allowing support the design and performance of distributed evaluations in a more informed and complete manner. To instantiate this vision, the CAPTURE toolkit was created, providing an additional perspective based on selected dimensions of collaboration and pre-defined measurements to obtain “in situ” data about them, which can be analyzed using an integrated visualization dashboard. The toolkit successfully supported evaluations of several team-members during tasks of remote maintenance mediated by AR. Thus, showing its versatility and potential in eliciting a comprehensive characterization of the added value of AR in real-life situations, establishing itself as a generalpurpose solution, potentially applicable to a wider range of collaborative scenarios.Colaboração Remota utilizando Realidade Aumentada (RA) apresenta um enorme potencial para estabelecer um entendimento comum em cenários onde membros de uma equipa fisicamente distribuídos precisam de atingir um objetivo comum. No entanto, a maioria dos esforços de investigação tem-se focado nos aspetos tecnológicos, em fazer experiências e propor métodos para apoiar seu desenvolvimento. À medida que a área evolui, a avaliação e caracterização do processo colaborativo tornam-se um esforço essencial, mas difícil, para compreender as contribuições da RA. Nesta dissertação, realizámos uma análise crítica para identificar as principais limitações e oportunidades da área, ao mesmo tempo em que situámos a sua maturidade e propomos um mapa com direções de investigação importantes. De seguida, foi adotada uma metodologia de Design Centrado no Humano, envolvendo parceiros industriais de forma a compreender como a RA poderia responder às suas necessidades em manutenção remota. Estes resultados foram combinados com métodos da literatura num protótipo de RA e a sua avaliação foi realizada com um caso de estudo. Ficou então clara a necessidade de realizar uma reflexão profunda para melhor compreender as dimensões que influenciam e devem ser consideradas na RA Colaborativa. Foram então propostos um modelo conceptual e uma taxonomia centrada no ser humano para promover a sistematização de perspetivas. Com base no modelo proposto, foi desenvolvido um framework de avaliação para recolha e análise de dados contextualizados, permitindo apoiar o desenho e a realização de avaliações distribuídas de forma mais informada e completa. Para instanciar esta visão, o CAPTURE toolkit foi criado, fornecendo uma perspetiva adicional com base em dimensões de colaboração e medidas predefinidas para obter dados in situ, que podem ser analisados utilizando o painel de visualização integrado. O toolkit permitiu avaliar com sucesso vários colaboradores durante a realização de tarefas de manutenção remota apoiada por RA, permitindo mostrar a sua versatilidade e potencial em obter uma caracterização abrangente do valor acrescentado da RA em situações da vida real. Sendo assim, estabelece-se como uma solução genérica, potencialmente aplicável a uma gama diversificada de cenários colaborativos.Programa Doutoral em Engenharia Informátic

Reflections on the use of Project Wonderland as a mixed-reality environment for teaching and learning

This paper reflects on the lessons learnt from MiRTLE?a collaborative research project to create a ?mixed reality teaching and learning environment? that enables teachers and students participating in real-time mixed and online classes to interact with avatar representations of each other. The key hypothesis of the project is that avatar representations of teachers and students can help create a sense of shared presence, engendering a greater sense of community and improving student engagement in online lessons. This paper explores the technology that underpins such environments by presenting work on the use of a massively multi-user game server, based on Sun?s Project Darkstar and Project Wonderland tools, to create a shared teaching environment, illustrating the process by describing the creation of a virtual classroom. It is planned that the MiRTLE platform will be used in several trial applications ? which are described in the paper. These example applications are then used to explore some of the research issues arising from the use of virtual environments within an education environment. The research discussion initially focuses on the plans to assess this within the MiRTLE project. This includes some of the issues of designing virtual environments for teaching and learning, and how supporting pedagogical and social theories can inform this process

ReDesign: Redesigning learning through a new Learning Management System

[EN] In a world which abounds with digitally-driven changes, an orthodoxy of technology adoption and utilisation in higher education is emerging, and it is deemed critical for steering the discussions of experts for planning and implementing a digitally-enabled ecology where students and faculty members alike will benefit. Although several types of software that host educational or training content for students have been used in previous studies, the aim of this EU-funded project was to design a digitally-enabled platform that would afford culturally-driven exchanges between university students and collaboration among faculty members of the same disciplines across Europe. The platform is based on, but extends beyond, principles of standard Learning Management Systems (LMSs) and Facebook, by affording Web 2.0 tools, Augmented Reality (AR) applications, and QR codes. Further, the platform has been designed based on multiple pilot testing phases, students’ individual needs, instructors’ constructive feedback, and the tailored needs of each academic discipline. This EU-funded project is a joint effort to guide instructors and students in experiencing the curricula in different academic institutions, to guide instructors and students in understanding the affordances and contradictions of intercultural telecollaboration, and to guide students in developing a conceptual understanding of complex constructs in their discipline.European Commission funded projectAvgousti, MI.; Hadjistassou, S. (2019). ReDesign: Redesigning learning through a new Learning Management System. The EuroCALL Review. 27(1):48-63. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2019.11202OJS4863271Avgousti. M. I. (2018). Intercultural communicative competence and online exchanges: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 31(8), 819-853. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1455713Abhi, A. (2017). The role of technology in collaborative learning. Independent Education Today. https://ie-today.co.uk/Article/the-role-of-technology-in-collaborative-learningBasharina, O. (2007). An activity theory perspective on student-reported contradictions in international telecollaboration. Language, Learning and Technology, 11(2), 82-103.Belz, J. A. (2003) Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language, Learning and Technology, 7(2), 68-117.Belz, J. A., & Thorne, S. L. (Eds.). (2006). Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.Bezemer, J., & Jewitt, C. (2009) Social Semiotics. In Östman, J. O., Verschueren, J & Versluys, E. (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics: 2009 Installment. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.13.soc5Bickley, M., & Carleton, J. (2009). Students without borders. Learning & Leading with Technology, 37(3), 20-23.Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2009). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press: New York.Cummins, J., & Sayers, D. (1995). Brave new schools: Challenging cultural literacy through global learning networks. St Martin's Press.De Wit. H., & Hunter, F. (2015). The future of internationalization of higher education in Europe [Special Issue]. International Higher Education, 83. https://doi.org/10.6017/ihe.2015.83.9073Dooly, M. (2011). Divergent perceptions of telecollaborative language learning tasks: Tasks-as-workplan vs. task-as-process. Language Learning & Technology, 15(2), 69-91.Dooly, M. & Hauck, M. (2012). Researching multimodal communicative competence in video and audio telecollaborative encounters. In M. Dooly and R. O'Dowd (Eds.), Researching online interaction and exchange in foreign language education. Telecollaboration in education (3). Bern: Peter Lang Publishing Group, 135-162.Dooly, M., & O'Dowd, R. (2018). Telecollaboration in the foreign language classroom: A review of its origins and its application to language teaching practice. In M. Dooly and R. O'Dowd (Eds.), (pp.11-34). Bern: Peter Lang Publishing Group.Ducate, L., & Arnold, N. (eds.), Calling on CALL: From theory and research to new directions in foreign language teaching. San Marcos, TX: CALICO.Ertmer, P. A., Newby, T. J., Yu, J. H., Liu, W., Tomory, A., Lee, Y. M., Sendurur, E. & Sendurur, P. (2011) Facilitating students' global perspectives: Collaborating with international partners using Web 2.0 technologies. Internet and Higher Education, 14(4), 251-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.05.005European Internet Foundation: Political Leadership for Network Society. (2009). The digital world in 2025. European Internet Foundation: Political Leadership for Network Society.https://www.eifonline.org/the-digital-world-in-2025.html.European Internet Foundation: Political Leadership for Network Society. (2014). "The digital world in 2030: What place for Europe?" European Internet Foundation: Political Leadership for Network Society. https://www.eifonline.org/the-digital-world-in-2030.html.EDUCAUSE (2018). NMC Horizon Report. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2018/8/2018-nmc-horizon-report.Espinosa, L. (2015). The use of Facebook for educational purposes in EFL classrooms. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(11): 2206-2211. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0511.03Farias, M. (2007). Reading with eyes wide open: Reflections on the impact of multimodal texts on second language reading. Ikala, 22(1): 57-70Farías, M. Obilinovic, K & Orrego, R. (2007). Implications of multimodal learning model for foreign language teaching and learning. Colombian Applied Linguistics Journal, 9, 174-199. https://doi.org/10.14483/22487085.3150Gee, J. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan: New York.Gilakjani, A. P. (2011). Visual, auditory, kinaesthetic learning styles and their impacts on English language teaching. Journal of Studies in Education,2(1), 104-113. https://doi.org/10.5296/jse.v2i1.1007Gilakjani, A. P., Ismail, H. N., & Ahmadi, S. M. (2011). The effect of multimodal learning models on language teaching and learning. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 1(10), 1321-1327. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.10.1321-1327Hamper, R., & Hauck, M. (2006). Computer-mediated language learning: Making meaning in multimodal virtual learning spaces. The JALT CALL Journal, 2(2), 3-18.Hauck, M. (2007). Critical success factors in a TRIDEM exchange. ReCALL, 19(2), 202- 223. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344007000729Hauck, M. (2010). At the interface between multimodal and intercultural communicative competence. In S. Guth & F. Helm (Eds.), Telecollaboration 2.0: Language and intercultural learning in the 21 st century (pp. 219-248). Bern: Peter Lang.Kabilan, M. K., Ahmad, N., & Abidin, M. J. Z. (2010). Facebook: An online environment for learning of English in institutions of higher education? Internet and Higher Education, 13, 179-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.07.003Kress, G. R. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge. Kress, G. R. (2011). 'Partnerships in research': Multimodality and ethnography. Qualitative Research, 11 (3), 239-260. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111399836Kress, G. R., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. Oxford UK: Oxford University.Lee, L., & Markey, A. (2014). A study of learners' perceptions on online intercultural exchanges through Web 2.0 technologies. ReCALL, 26(3), 281-297. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344014000111Liaw, M. (2006). E-learning and the development of intercultural competence. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 49-64.Mabuan, R., & Ebron, G. P. (2016). Engaging ESL/EFL learners with Facebook groups. 24th Annual Korea TESOL International Conference. Sookmyung Women's University, Seoul, South Korea.Mayer, R. E., & Sims, V. K. (1994). For whom is a picture worth a thousand words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(3), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.3.389Morrison, M., Sweeney, A., & Heffernan, T. (2003). Learning styles of on-campus and offcampus marketing students: The challenge for marketing educators. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(3), 208-17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475303257520Müller-Hartmann, A. (2000). Learning how to teach intercultural communicative competence via telecollaboration: A model for language teacher education. In J., A. Belz & S. L. Thorne (Eds.), Internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education, (pp. 63-84). Heinle & Heinle.O'Dowd, R. (2018). From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: State-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 1, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1O'Dowd, R. (Ed.). (2007). Online intercultural exchange: An introduction for foreign language teachers. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690104O'Dowd, R. (2006). Telecollaboration and the development of intercultural communicative competence. Langenscheidt.O'Dowd, R. (2003). Understanding the" other side": Intercultural learning in a SpanishEnglish e-mail exchange. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 118-144.Özdemir, E. (2017). Promoting EFL learners' intercultural communication effectiveness: a focus on Facebook. CALL, 30(6), 510-528. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1325907Sadler, R., & Dooly, M. (2016). Twelve years of telecollaboration: what we have learnt. ELT Journal, 70(4), 401-413. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw041Sankey, M., Birch, D. & Gardiner, M. (2010). Engaging students through multimodal learning environments: The journey continues. In C.H. Steel, M.J. Keppell, P. Gerbic & S. Housego (Eds.), Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2010, 852-863. http://ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney10/procs/Sankey-full.pdfSchreiber, B. R. (2015). "I am what I am": Multilingual identity and digital translanguaging. Language Learning and Technology, 19(3), 69-87.Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and the future of learning. Phi Delta Kappa, 87(2) 104-111. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170508700205Solon, O. (2018, June 1). Teens are abandoning Facebook in dramatic numbers, study finds. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jun/01/facebookteens-leaving-instagram-snapchat-study-user-numbersSykes, J., Oskoz, A. & Thorne, S. L. (2008). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive environments, and mobile resources for language education. CALICO Journal, 25(3): 528-546. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v25i3.528-546Tella, S. (1991). Introducing international communications networks and electronic mail into foreign language classrooms: A case study in Finnish senior secondary schools. Yliopistopaino.Thorne, S. L. (2003). Artifacts and cultures-of-use in intercultural communication. Language Learning and Technology, 7(2), 38-67.van Lier, L. (2004). The ecology and semiotics of language learning: A sociocultural perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-7912-5Wang, C. M. (2011). Instructional design for cross-cultural online collaboration: Grouping strategies and assignment design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.968Wang, C. M. (2012). Using Facebook for cross-cultural collaboration: The experience of students from Taiwan. Educational Media International, 49(1), 63-76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2012.662625Wang, Y., & Chen, N. S. (2009). Criteria for evaluating synchronous learning management systems: Arguments from the distance language classroom. CALL, 22(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588220802613773Ware, P. D., & Kramsch, C. (2005). Toward an intercultural stance: Teaching German and English through telecollaboration. Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 190-205. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2005.00274.xWigham, C. R., & Chanier, T. (2013). A study of verbal and nonverbal communication in Second Life: The ARCHI21 experience. ReCALL, 25(1): 63-84. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344012000250Willems, J., & Bateman, D. (2011). The potentials and pitfalls of social networking sites such as Facebook in higher education contexts. In Williams, G, Statham, P., Brown N. & Cleland B. (Eds.), Changing Demands, Changing Directions. Proceedings ascilite Hobart 2011. 1329-1331.Yu, W. K., Sun, Y. C., & Chang, Y. J. (2010). When technology speaks language: an evaluation of course management systems used in a language learning context. ReCALL, 22(3), 332-355. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344010000194Zhang, M. (2015). Teaching translation with a model of multimodality. Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies, 22(1), 30-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/23306343.2015.1014081Zheng, D. (2012). Caring in the dynamics of design and languaging: Exploring second language learning in 3D virtual spaces. Language Sciences, 34(5), 543-558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2012.03.01

Learning from Digital Natives: Bridging Formal and Informal Learning. Final Report

Overview This report suggests that students are increasingly making use of a variety of etools (such as mobile phones, email, MSN, digital cameras, games consoles and social networking sites) to support their informal learning within formalised educational settings, and that they use the tools that they have available if none are provided for them. Therefore, higher education institutions should encourage the use of these tools. Aims and background This study aimed to explore how e-tools (such as mobile phones, email, MSN, digital cameras, games consoles and social networking sites) and the processes that underpin their use can support learning within educational institutions and help improve the quality of students’ experiences of learning in higher education (pgs 9-11). Methodology The study entailed: (i) desk research to identify related international research and practice and examples of integration of e-tools and learning processes in formal educational settings; (ii) a survey of 160 engineering and social work students across two contrasting Scottish universities (pre- and post-1992) – the University of Strathclyde and Glasgow Caledonian University – and follow-up interviews with eight students across the two subject areas to explore which technologies students were using for both learning and leisure activities within and outside the formal educational settings and how they would like to use such technologies to support their learning in both formal and informal settings; and (iii) interviews with eight members of staff from across the institutions and two subject areas to identify their perceptions of the educational value of the e-tools. (pgs 24-27). Key findings • Students reported making extensive use of a variety of both e-tools (such as mobile phones, email, MSN, digital cameras) and social networking tools (such as Bebo, MySpace, Wikipedia and YouTube) for informal socialisation, communication, information gathering, content creation and sharing, alongside using the institutionally provided technologies and learning environments. • Most of the students owned their own computer or had access to a sibling or parent’s computer. Many students owned a laptop but preferred not to bring it onto campus due to security concerns and because they found it too heavy to carry about. • Ownership of mobile phones was ubiquitous. • Whilst the students’ information searching literacy seemed adequate, the ability of these students to harness the power of social networking tools and informal processes for their learning was low. Staff reported using a few Web 2.0 and social software tools but they were generally less familiar with how these could be used to support learning and teaching. There were misconceptions surrounding the affordances of the tools and fears expressed about security and invasion of personal space. Considerations of the costs and the time it would take staff to develop their skills meant that there was a reluctance to take up new technologies at an institutional level. • Subject differences emerged in both staff and student perceptions as to which type of tools they would find most useful. Attitudes to Web 2.0 tools were different. Engineers were concerned with reliability, using institutional systems and inter-operability. Social workers were more flexible because they were focused on communication and professional needs. • The study concluded that digital tools, personal devices, social networking software and many of the other tools explored all have a large educational potential to support learning processing and teaching practices. Therefore, use of these tools and processes within institutions, amongst staff and students should be encouraged. • The report goes on to suggest ways in which the use of such technologies can help strengthen the links between informal and formal learning in higher education. The recommendations are grouped under four areas – pedagogical, socio-cultural, organisational and technological

Pair programming and the re-appropriation of individual tools for collaborative software development

Although pair programming is becoming more prevalent in software development, and a number of reports have been written about it [10] [13], few have addressed the manner in which pairing actually takes place [12]. Even fewer consider the methods used to manage issues such as role change or the communication of complex issues. This paper highlights the way resources designed for individuals are re-appropriated and augmented by pair programmers to facilitate collaboration. It also illustrates that pair verbalisations can augment the benefits of the collocated team, providing examples from ethnographic studies of pair programmers 'in the wild'