Reflection and Limitations

This section will discuss the author’s reflections around the project and discuss limitations.

6.4.1 Steep Learning Curve

Through this project, I have had a pretty steep learning curve. I had a little experience with game development from LibGDX [75] from a previous software architecture course, but no experience with Unity and VR development. Therefore, I went through an intensive

6.4 Reflection and Limitations learning process. The documentation for VR development is quite limited. It could have been easier to learn the basics by using SteamVR, but since I wanted to develop for the Oculus Quest, I had to use less documented SDKs. As I discussed in section 3.3, the Oculus Unity Learn course proved to be very helpful for building a good foundation. I did not have much prior experience with deep learning either. I had taken a few introductory AI courses, but not for deep learning. Therefore, it was highly time-consuming to create learning materials that could convey the topic in a meaningful way, as I discussed in section 4.3.4. One advantage of not knowing the topic too well was that I then ended up being a perfect fit for the target audience, which could have been beneficial for the learning materials’ contents, sequence, and structure. This is particularly useful for future work when the text panels are going to be replaced.

Considering my prior experience with VR and AI, I am very satisfied with what I achieved through the project. Working with a maturing technology, where standards are not yet set, and the documentation is lacking is complicated. However, it has been a valuable lesson that has prepared me for my future as a software developer. My experiences from the project have also taught me what I would do differently if I had to start over. With more prior experience with VR development, I would have had enough time to design and implement an even better solution.

6.4.2 Resource-Intensive Development

Before I gained the experience, it was harder to know what is possible for a single person to develop for VR. Therefore, I spent much of the time just playing around with Unity and the other tools before figuring out how I could efficiently develop for VR. The amount of work needed to develop something new for VR is quite high. In most cases, it would require a dedicated team of content creators, designers, and developers to create something that is well-functional and pleasing to look at. Objects in the virtual world need to be modeled, animated, scripted, made into prefabs, textures must be made, the audio needs to be added, lights must be added, and everything needs to be optimized. Through development, I had to narrow down my scope and focus on what was essential for developing a functional prototype. The decision to use only pre-existing assets, utilizing SDKs for interactions, and creating highly reusable prefabs gives room for one person to create loads of content.

If I had to start over, I would try to cooperate with designers and content creators so that I could focus more on the software development part of the project to develop better tasks, visualizations, other interactions and focus more on optimization. I wanted this to be my main focus through the project, but I still had to put in large amounts of effort in finding free assets, animating them, and creating learning materials. It was also challenging to come up with new ideas and designing meaningful tasks and learning materials since I had to think in a different way to design for VR. Therefore, I would have benefited from cooperating with others. However, I still feel that my dedication to the project has led to some interesting results considering how VR can be used to teach AI, and potentially other STEM-courses.

6.4.3 Scope and Lessons Learned

I feel like I have learned a lesson in the scientific process as well. Finding the relevant literature for an unexplored topic was difficult at first, but as I gained experience, I found more efficient ways of conducting the work. Reaching out to users for evaluation during a global pandemic is challenging and was somewhat a setback for the project. This was discussed through section 3.4.2. I think my idea of reaching out on Reddit led to some interesting results, and I am impressed seeing how random people in online communities are willing to help. Even though the video evaluation had its weaknesses, it also led to some interesting results, and it proved to be an efficient way of gathering feedback. In retrospect, I see that the questionnaires I distributed could have been further improved.

The questionnaire used for the video evaluation, two months after the online user tests, was drastically improved in comparison. The questionnaire could be further improved by balancing the amount of negative and positive statements more. The scientific work conducted through this project has been a valuable experience that has taught me to work in a highly independent and structured way.

The amount of curriculum I attempted to convey throughout the application was quite high.

When I realized that much effort would be needed to convey backpropagation, I consid-ered scoping down the project to focus more on improving what was already developed.

However, by doing so, I thought the end-user would feel the application would be too nar-row to give an introduction to deep learning. Therefore, I realized that it is important to make the user test participants aware that the application is a prototype, rather than expect-ing a final product. Doexpect-ing so can generate feedback that is highly valuable for the people continuing to work on the project. I realized during the online user tests that some users had high expectations for the application. Most users had a high focus on the number of text panels in the application, which obviously was valuable feedback. However, since this feedback was expected, I realized that it would better be covered through statements in the questionnaire. The video questionnaire covered this through two statements about what they thought about the current amount of text and what they would think about replacing text with more immersive content. I discussed the first questionnaire with my supervisor, but I could have benefited from discussing it with others in pedagogical studies or people with VR development experience.

Furthermore, when I started with the project, I had problems seeing how VR could be a useful tool for conveying the topic. My skepticism changed through the project as I saw the potential for applying 3D-visualization and tested state-of-the-art VR content. Also, I had not yet personally experienced VR being applied as a tool for learning in higher education in a meaningful way. I also thought the respondents of the video questionnaire would be less positive to the context of applying VR, but they were more positive than I expected.

Therefore, after seeing what was achievable through this project, I genuinely believe that the concept of an ”educational escape room in VR” and splitting topics into separate rooms can become a great learning methodology. Also, I believe that standalone VR is the way to go for applying VR in education. Tethered HMDs would require dedicated rooms and a cumbersome set up. However, after seeing how little effort was required for setting up Oculus Quests for multiple users in Phase 1, I believe that standalone VR is the best way to apply VR in a course.

Chapter 7