Designing Virtual Laboratories

Decarboxylation Reactions, Vacuum Distillation and Virus Identification by PCR

in the Lablife3D Second Life Laboratory

Tuomas Kangasniemi

, Sebastian Olkinuora

, Pekka Joensuu

, Olli Natri

, Pekka Qvist

Martti Ketola

, Jaana Brusin

, Hanna Virtanen

, Marko Närhi

, Reija Jokela

, Eero Palomäki

Hannu Tiitu

, and Katrina Nordström

Department of Chemistry, Aalto University School of Chemical Technology, Kemistintie 1, 02150 Espoo, Finland

Department of Biotechnology and Chemical Technology, Aalto University School of Chemical Technology,

Kemistintie 1, 02150 Espoo, Finland

Metaverstas Ltd., Löytänänkatu 2 C 16, 20540 Turku, Finland

Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Aalto University School of Science,

Otaniementie 17, 02150 Espoo, Finland

Department of Mathematics and Systems Analysis, Aalto University School of Science,

Otakaari 1 M, 02150 Espoo, Finland

Keywords: Virtual Worlds, Virtual Laboratory, Laboratory Simulation, Second Life, Engaged Learning, Usability

Testing, Heuristic Evaluation, Design Process, Student Evaluation, Lablife3D, Decarboxylation, Vacuum

Distillation, Enterovirus, Reverse Transcriptase PCR, Organic Chemistry, Molecular Biology.

Abstract: Practical skills are one of the core competencies in technology, engineering and the natural sciences.

However, the busy curriculum in many universities lacks space and time for the learning-by-doing

experience to mature. Therefore, we have designed and implemented a virtual laboratory, LabLife3D, to

Second Life, to bridge the gap between theory and practice. To date, we have designed five virtual

laboratory exercises in the biological sciences and chemistry there: a virus isolation experiment, a laboratory

safety tutorial, organic chemistry simulations on (a) decarboxylation reactions and (b) vacuum distillation,

and a molecular biology simulation on identifying a virus with polymerase chain reaction (PCR). This paper

presents their design process and outlines their contents. General design objectives in virtual laboratories are

also discussed, along with laboratory simulations in Second Life by other groups. All the exercises have

been designed in accordance with content-specific learning goals and outcomes, which are discussed. In

addition to creation of contents, we have also recently studied the usability of our simulations and conducted

a student assessment. Preliminary results of the student assessment are presented.

1 MOTIVATION

Three-dimensional (3D) virtual worlds represent

recent developments in information technology and

they will undoubtedly become significant learning

spaces for future student generations, the so-called

“Millennials” or “Digital Natives”. Evidently,

though, virtual worlds have not gained as much

attention in university education as have other

professional computer applications, the social media

or user-generated encyclopaedias. Moreover, 3D

worlds are often not recognized as a specific entity.

Rather, they are often referred to as only a part of e-

learning, which has caused some of the interest in

the more exciting applications of 3D virtual worlds

to stagnate.

3D virtual worlds and other virtual learning

spaces are best understood as an alternative, not a

replacement, to face-to-face communication and

traditional teaching methods. They have many

significant advantages compared to solely real-life

learning spaces, some of which include the

following:

1. Virtual worlds are extremely flexible, allowing

661

Kangasniemi T., Olkinuora S., Joensuu P., Natri O., Qvist P., Ketola M., Brusin J., Virtanen H., Närhi M., Jokela R., Palomäki E., Tiitu H. and Nordström

K..

Designing Virtual Laboratories - Decarboxylation Reactions, Vacuum Distillation and Virus Identiﬁcation by PCR in the Lablife3D Second Life Laboratory.

DOI: 10.5220/0004353606610672

In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU-2013), pages 661-672

ISBN: 978-989-8565-53-2

 2013 SCITEPRESS (Science and Technology Publications, Lda.)

buildings and equipment to be placed, modified,

expanded, and moved as needed.

2. Virtual worlds can be accessed at any time, and

without real-life risks such as biological or

chemical hazards.

3. Virtual worlds have low cost of operation and no

cost at all for failed experiments. Furthermore,

they allow repeating and rerunning the exercises,

an important part of learning, for free.

Consequently, thousands of educators are

currently exploring and using virtual worlds, of

which Second Life has received most attention.

Hundreds of colleges and universities, including

Aalto University, have purchased and developed

their own private islands in Second Life. It is a

multi-user virtual environment developed by Linden

Lab, mimicking real-life situations, with users

represented by 3D characters called avatars.

2 BACKGROUND

2.1 General Advantages and

Dis-advantages of Virtual

Worlds in Education

The advantages and disadvantages of virtual worlds

as means of education have been explored over a

couple of decades. The most noteworthy advantages

of virtual worlds in general, and of Second Life in

particular, are listed above, namely flexibility of

construction, freedom from real-life hazards, and

low cost of operation and repeated exercises (e.g.

Eschenbrenner et al., 2008; Holmberg and Huvila

2008; Palomäki, 2009). Information technology also

helps adjusting the teacher to student ratio (Daniel,

2008), albeit this benefit is not exclusive to virtual

worlds. Furthermore, virtual worlds have been

proven to promote engaged learning, as discussed

below.

Some of the disadvantages mentioned include the

time needed to learn the use of the virtual world,

high cost of development, technical issues such as

frequent updates and out-of-date hardware, as well

as attitudes towards such learning spaces, e.g.

students or faculty not taking the virtual world

seriously (e.g. Warburton, 2009; Palomäki, 2009;

Inman et al., 2010). Moreover, according to

Warburton, Second Life may be an isolating

experience, since other users are not as easily found

as in e.g. Facebook. In many ways this is an

unfortunate truth, as at almost any moment of time,

in almost any of its educational milieus, Second Life

is empty; there is nobody around. The feeling of an

eerie silence can easily discourage a newcomer.

2.2 Engaged Learning Promoted by

Virtual Worlds

Engaged learning can be defined as commitment to a

significant, in-depth, lifelong learning process,

which extends beyond the classroom. Engaged

learning is an integral part of all learning tools,

verbal, digital, visual or emotional, which are used

to increase personal and group commitment,

regardless of prior success or talent thereof. Students

learn in an environment that favours activity and

experience and fosters immediate engagement

(Biggs, 1999).

Virtual worlds in education have been shown to

lead to increased engagement (Palomäki 2009).

Brain activity has also been measured for tasks

performed in real as well as in virtual reality

environments (Mikropoulos, 2001). Findings have

also demonstrated that subject are more attentive,

responsive, and utilize less mental effort in the

virtual world, demonstrating that knowledge transfer

of information gained in one world to the other

world is possible. Moreover, students have been

reported to be more engaged in learning tasks and to

spend more time thinking and discussing the subject

material (Mason, 2007). Immersion into another

world has also been noted and engaging in learning

in the first person, which is more interactive and

experiential (Richter et al., 2007). Moreover,

previous studies have shown that as learners are

allowed to interact with information in the first

person, this facilitates constructivist-based learning

activities (Dickey, 2005).

Furthermore, the interaction with virtual objects

can be helpful in developing a stronger conceptual

understanding, depending on the content.

Engagement experiences are also present and by

using virtual worlds as the learning environments

enthusiasm for learning can increase. It has also

been documented that the 3D virtual worlds

facilitate the visualization of difficult content and

offer tools for learning challenging concepts (Barab

et al., 2000). The benefits of Second Life, in

particular, include providing “a social laboratory

where role-playing, simulations, exploration, and

experimentation can be tried out in a relatively risk-

free environment” (Graves, 2008).

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

662

2.3 Lablife3D: The Second Life Project

of Aalto University

Practical skills are one of the core competencies in

technology, engineering and the natural sciences.

However, current laboratory courses are burdened

by heavy expenses for modern and safe equipment

and reagents, large course sizes and even waiting

lists to the courses. Although learning-by-doing is

the ultimate goal of practical laboratory classes and

hands-on experimentation, the curriculum of many

higher education institutions lacks space and time

for the learning experience to mature. Many students

pass classes with only superficial learning without

developing deep learning where theory connects

with practice. Accordingly, we have designed and

implemented a virtual laboratory, LabLife3D, to

bridge the gap between theory and practice. This is a

pioneering project in the use of Second Life in the

Finnish University setting. LabLife3D is housed in

the Aalto Archipelago in Second Life virtual world.

For more, see the home page of our project at

https://sites.google.com/site/lablife3d/

To date, we have designed five laboratory

“practicals” (Table 1). The virtual laboratory

building, LabLife3D, was completed in late 2010,

along with the first two exercises: a virus isolation

simulation and an organic chemistry laboratory

safety tutorial. The details of this development

process, along with general considerations such as

building the LabLife3D team, have been presented

previously (Palomäki et al., 2010; Palomäki et al.

2011; Nordström et al., 2010). Later in 2011 and

2012, two further laboratory simulations were

designed (Kangasniemi, 2012; Olkinuora, 2012). In

addition, the design of a fifth practical, an organic

chemistry simulation, has been completed, although

its implementation has only recently begun. Similar

to traditional laboratory classes, all the virtual

exercises have been designed in accordance with

learning goals and outcomes as described below.

Besides creation of contents, we have also recently

studied the pedagogical aspects of Second Life,

namely with reference to the role of the teacher as a

facilitator of group work and the responses of

students to different ways of teacher facilitation.

Currently, in addition to the use of the

simulations in microbiology and organic chemistry

courses, the LabLife3D team is also collaborating

with language teachers at Aalto University. The

virtual laboratory is used as a teaching and learning

platform for Swedish terminology of biotechnology

and chemistry, helping the students in the challenge

that multiple languages pose to them (Palomäki and

Nordbäck 2012), as Swedish is the 2

official

language in Finland, and a compulsory language

requirement in all university degrees.

2.4 The Other Existing Science-related

Learning Environments in Second

Life

Although Second Life has received considerable

interest as a medium for academic education,

relatively few of the numerous learning

environments can be considered to represent actual

simulations. Most of these settings mediate

information only via passive elements, such as static

3D objects, sound and video. At best, they may

include a chat conversation with an automated avatar

possessing an artificial intelligence of some

elementary kind. Active user participation, requiring

decision-making or completing a set of tasks, is

generally absent. These passive settings may be

called 1

generation SL learning environments.

The simulation-type environments, or 2

generation environments, can be readily classified in

two distinct categories: ready-to-use simulations and

teacher-initialized ones. As the name suggests, the

teacher-initialized simulations are not executable to

anyone at any time, but they can be participated only

at scheduled times. They are most common in

Table 1: The laboratory exercises within LabLife3D.

Theme Status References

Virus isolation

Operational from Dec 2010

Palomäki et al. 2010;

Palomäki et al. 2011;

Nordström et al. 2010

2 Laboratory safety tutorial Operational from Dec 2010 same as above

3 Decarboxylation reactions Operational from Oct 2012 Kangasniemi 2012

4 Virus identification by RT-PCR (*) Operational from Jan 2013 Olkinuora 2012

5 Vacuum distillation Design ready, implementing - -

(*) RT-PCR = Reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction

DesigningVirtualLaboratories-DecarboxylationReactions,VacuumDistillationandVirusIdentificationbyPCRinthe

Lablife3DSecondLifeLaboratory

663

medicine, nursing and related fields, and they

frequently engage multiple users in different roles

communicating with each other. On the other hand,

in the ready-to-use simulations, the user interacts

only with the computer. This approach seems more

typical to the laboratory simulations of natural

sciences such as chemistry and biology.

(Kangasniemi, 2012).

While constructing the Aalto University Second

Life exercises we have been able to visit other

Second Life laboratory simulations (Table 2). Many

of the existing settings have allowed us to learn and

experiment further in our own development

activities.

2.5 General Design Objectives in

Virtual Laboratories

Clearly, careful design of the content and the

functions of virtual laboratories is essential to their

success. The characteristics of an effective virtual

laboratory for engineering students as described by

Arango, Chang, Esche and Chassapis (2007) and

Quinn (2005) have been summarized by Olkinuora

(2012) as follows:

1. Context: The virtual laboratory should present a

framework familiar to the students.

2. Realism: Clear connection between reality and

the simplified model of the virtual laboratory.

3. A goal clear enough toward which to pursue.

4. No futile actions: The actions the students take

should affect the outcome.

5. Exploratory feel: Enough possible alternatives

and the possibility to explore their mutual

relationships.

6. A slight degree of randomness to maintain

curiosity.

7. Appropriate challenge: Not too easy but, not too

difficult.

8. Appropriate feedback.

9. Relevance to other studies.

10. Visual appeal.

This list can be extended with avoiding cognitive

overload, and the possibility of making actual errors

without triggering an immediate response, in

addition to the possibility of mere alternatives. Some

of the above named properties are clearly

complementary and can be implemented at the same

time. On the other hand, others may partly contradict

each other, as it is with exploratory potential and

adequate randomness versus the need for no futile

actions. Thus, the design process will involve

compromises between the objectives.

Numerous experimental studies on different

types of virtual learning have been conducted, with

many of them reporting positive results but some

also taking a critical stance towards the final

outcomes (for review, see Mikropoulos and Natsis

2010, and Strangman et al., 2003). Although some

of the studies relate to simulated laboratories (e.g.

the 2D laboratory of Josephsen and Kristensen

2006), only very few of them refer specifically to

virtual laboratories in Second Life.

The exception are The exception are Cobb,

Heaney, Corcoran and Henderson-Begg (2009) who

studied the educational performance of a virtual

biotechnology laboratory, the UEL Lab (Table 2), in

Second Life for learning the polymerase chain

reaction (PCR) task (N = 85). Their results indicated

Table 2: A list of existing laboratory simulations in Second Life (not including those in Table 1).

Organization Theme Location in SL (*)

Leicester U. Molecular biology Media%20Zoo/74/189/32

Imperial College London Respiratory medicine Imperial%20College%20London/185/47/27

Monash U. Manufacture of drug tablets Pharmatopia/108/111/29

U. of Queensland Mathematics in pharmacology Pharmatopia/108/111/29

U. of Nottingham Mass spectroscopy University%20of%20Nottingham/176/130/26

U. of East London Molecular biology UEL%20HABitat/200/207/26

Keuda Vocational College Mashing in a brewery Edufinland%20IV/82/227/24

Florida Inst. of Tech. (**) Physical chemistry ACS/151/10/89

U. of Calgary (***) Molecular biology LINDSAY%20Virtual%20Medicine/187/194/29

Texas Wesleyan U. (****) Biology Genome/75/212/36

(*) All the SL locators are preceded by http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/

(**) The link and the simulation used in November 2011. Currently not online or closed to the public.

(***) Possible technical issues. The authors were unable to make the simulation work.

(****) A borderline case. Includes only limited elements of simulation.

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

664

that using Second Life did not significantly

contribute to the learning outcomes. On the other

hand, they did report that the Second Life test group

performed better than the control group both before

the experiment and after it. Hence, the conclusions

are somewhat conflicting.

3 CONSTRUCTING THE AALTO

UNIVERSITY LABORATORY

SIMULATIONS

3.1 Desired Learning Outcomes of the

Original Lablife3d Platform

When we first began to explore Second Life as a

tool for teaching and learning biotechnology and

chemistry, we focused on creating the actual space,

the virtual building, LabLife3D. The primary

learning outcomes that we wished to achieve all

emphasized the promotion of deep learning via

connecting scientific theory with practice. As a

result of our earlier work, we created a microbiology

exercise which allows the user to become familiar

with working with viruses at a general level (Table

1). In addition, students could become familiar with

the specific requirements for working in a clean

room in addition to specialized culture techniques

needed to grow viruses, which we are not able to

carry out in a normal student laboratory.

Moreover, the focus of the original chemistry

laboratory was on laboratory safety, which students

could familiarize themselves with before the real-life

practical class. In this setting, students learn to take

into account sufficient number of safety features;

protective clothing, correct cleaning of chemical

spills etc.

More recently, however, we have become aware

of a need to develop further our 3D experiments.

Namely, it has been our objective to expand the

experiments to better mimic the kinds of exercises

that students typically carry out in the laboratory,

where students also will need to make choices of

which some also may lead to mistakes. Accordingly,

we have designed a complete chemistry experiment

on decarboxylation reactions (section 3.2) and a

vacuum distillation experiment (section 3.3). In

addition, in our first efforts to create experiments

into Second Life, the microbiology practical on virus

isolation was very focused on creating the

appropriate laboratory spaces and becoming familiar

with design of 3D worlds. It did, however, not offer

a complete practical laboratory experiment.

Consequently, we have recently added an

experimental scenario, a molecular biology

experiment, to our original virus exercise, as

described in more detail below (section 3.4).

3.2 The Organic Chemistry Simulation

on Decarboxylation Reactions

3.2.1 Learning Objectives, Content and

Functions

Unlike the microbiology simulation and the

laboratory safety tutorial built previously, the

organic chemistry simulation (Kangasniemi, 2012)

is not a strict laboratory practice exercise. Instead, it

mimics experimental research at a more general

level, with the main focus on teaching scientific

reasoning based on empirical results.

In the simulation, the task of the student is to

compare the reactivity of different carboxylic acids

towards decarboxylation and decarbonylation and to

deduce the theoretical explanation for the

observations. The reaction variables (temperature,

time, catalyst and solvent in addition to the acid

substrate) are freely selectable from the alternatives

given. The simulation is controlled by clicking on

the chemical containers and instruments, such as the

synthesis station and a balance, in the laboratory 3D

space. In addition, there is a control panel for

general functions such as “Start” and “Exit”.

Instructions to the student are given in the HUD (see

Figure 1).

3.2.2 Design Objectives and Process

During the design process, there were four matters

of special concern. First, it was important that the

simulation should not be too straightforward to pass:

instead of being a demonstration, it should include

alternative outcomes or the possibility of making

true errors, or both. Although the organic chemistry

simulation does not include the possibility of explicit

errors, the array of different setup combinations, and

hence reaction outcomes, is large (180 combinations

in total). Moreover, the simulation leaves the

planning of the research program to the student. All

different reaction combinations are selectable, but it

is not fruitful for the student to change the

parameters without really thinking about the

consequences.

Second, we analyzed the features of scenarios

created by other groups (Table 2). From the usability

point of view, the most important observation

concerned the user interface in general. All the

DesigningVirtualLaboratories-DecarboxylationReactions,VacuumDistillationandVirusIdentificationbyPCRinthe

Lablife3DSecondLifeLaboratory

665

Figure 1: Screenshot: The organic chemistry simulation on decarboxylation reactions. HUD window on the left.

existing simulations require the use of the technical

elements of Second Life, such as notecards,

inventory, chat and the multiple choice popup

windows. Some simulations rely on them heavily.

However, in our experience, these elements

frequently confuse the beginner. Therefore, it

appears that it may be more beneficial to encode the

operations to the more intuitively understood 3D

space whenever possible, and leave the use of the

technical elements to the minimum – even if this

slightly decreases photographic realism.

Other very useful examples were the control

panel designed by Florida Institute of Technology

(Table 2) and the precise instructions given by the

HUD, as used in the University of Leicester’s virtual

laboratory (Table 2). The possibility of the

simulation happening in real time instead of

symbolic time is also interesting, as presented in the

SL Chemistry Lab of FIT (Table 2). However, due

to the long reaction times in the present experiment,

the dimension of time was not included in the

simulation.

Third, wherever possible, our organic chemistry

simulation gives the student real experimental data

from the literature instead of extrapolations. This

proved to be, in fact, by far the hardest part of the

whole design. While suitable data for the experiment

could be found from the literature, finding a

complete set of results, encompassing all the

combinations of every acid substrate, every

temperature, etc., turned out to be impossible.

Therefore the alternatives had to be chosen carefully

to maximize both the presence of real data points as

well as to ensure the reliability of the extrapolations.

Finally, we decided to add the element of random

experimental variation (1 to 5 %-points) to all

measurements the student makes in the simulation.

3.3 The Organic Chemistry Simulation

on Vacuum Distillation

3.3.1 Learning Objectives, Content and

Functions

At the present time work is on-going on modelling a

vacuum distillation in a laboratory setting. In

contrast to the previous organic chemistry

simulation (section 3.2), the newer one mimics the

hands-on actions and operations in the laboratory

very closely.

Vacuum distillation was chosen as the topic of

the simulation for a three main reasons. First,

vacuum distillation is an actual exercise taught at

Aalto University organic chemistry laboratory

courses. Moreover, building and operating the

system in real life is quite a complicated task for the

first-timer, involving even slight risks such as water

spills and broken distillation pieces (expensive).

Therefore, learning the process first with a detailed

3D simulation should offer substantial help. Finally,

there is a possibility of making a wide range of

mistakes in the simulation, giving a sense of realism.

The simulation is divided into three phases. First,

the glass apparatus is assembled by clicking on the

pieces on the table. In the next phase, the student

connects the hoses for cooling water and suction.

Here, all possible flawed connections are possible

without triggering an immediate notice, but the

configuration is checked by requiring the student to

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

666

turn on the cooling water before proceeding. Almost

all errors lead to water spill and reset. The final

phase, heating and distilling, happens within a

dimension of time. In this phase, a number of

switches are operable: the heating plate, the pump

and its valves, the 3-way joint, and the manometer

valve. If the system is correctly assembled, boiling

will commence once the oil bath is hot enough. The

simulation will end after enough distillate has been

collected.

3.3.2 Design Objectives and Process

The design objective was to make the simulation as

realistic as reasonable and possible, with maximum

freedom to control the switches in real time and in a

free order. However, some compromises had to be

made in order to limit the array of erroneous

alternatives. Checking the hose connections by

requiring the cooling water to be turned on first was

one such limitation, fitting well to the storyline of

the exercise. The level of modelling the physical

state of the distillation system was also constrained

to a certain extent. Temperature and time are

modelled in a continuous manner, with the time-

profiles of temperature being based on real

measurements. However, pressure and the rate of

collecting the distillate are modelled simply as

on/off variables.

During the design process, it was found that

pseudocode, comprising of

if, else and while

clauses, was a convenient way to express some

critical parts of the simulation to the programmers.

The basic setup was described in natural language,

though. To familiarize themselves with the topic, the

programmers also followed and recorded a real-life

vacuum distillation exercise.

3.4 The Molecular Biology Simulation

on Identifying a Virus with Reverse

Transcriptase PCR

3.4.1 Learning Objectives, Content

and Functions

The primary learning outcome of the molecular

biology simulation (Olkinuora, 2012) is to give the

student the opportunity to learn the process of

identifying a virus from a human cell sample. The

virus being studied is an enterovirus, identified in

accordance to standard scientific methodology,

based on a specific enterovirus protein known as

VP1. Another aim is to encourage critical thinking

of the choice of methodology and the reactions

thereof. Many phases in molecular biology exercises

are embedded into chemical reactions and the aim is

therefore to deepen the students understanding of the

intricate relationship between biology and

chemistry.

Upon entering the laboratory an introduction and

short instructions are given for performing the task.

Avatars will wear appropriate clothing: lab coat and

gloves. The objects mentioned below work by

clicking on them. The task begins with extracting

RNA from a sample of virus from a host cell culture

(Figure 2). Buffer is added, incubation and

centrifugation are performed, and a DNA-

decomposing enzyme, DNase, is added to recover

pure viral RNA after a series of extractions and

centrifugations. The polymerase chain reaction

(PCR) is then performed, followed by

electrophoresis to visualize the sample and to verify

that the experiment is proceeding as planned. In each

of the aforementioned steps, the student must choose

the correct process conditions such as the amounts

of chemicals and temperature cycles for PCR. This

requires the student to familiarize himself/herself

with the principles that form the basis of the

operations. At some points a text may appear which

will highlight the reason for the choices that need to

be made.

Having verified the success this far, the sample is

sequenced. As most laboratories outsource

sequencing these days, no sequencing scenario was

designed and the correct RNA sequence is delivered

to the student, provided that the extraction of the

RNA has been successfully performed. In the final

phase, the student submits the sequence of the virus

to a real-life online gene database, BLAST

(http://blast.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) to search for a match.

At the end the student gets a printout of all the

steps done and is asked to write a report on the

exercise for the teacher. It shows what happened to

each object in each step, and the student can reflect

on what was actually done in the laboratory. This

reflection enhances the learning especially if

mistakes had been made, as then it is very important

that the student understands what the correct choice

would have been and why.

3.4.2 Design Objectives and Process

The objectives in designing the user interface and

the general structure of the molecular biology

simulation were similar to those of the

decarboxylation experiment (section 3.2), although

the content and the desired learning outcomes were

different. That is, the simulation is not too simple to

DesigningVirtualLaboratories-DecarboxylationReactions,VacuumDistillationandVirusIdentificationbyPCRinthe

Lablife3DSecondLifeLaboratory

667

Figure 2: Screenshot: The molecular biology simulation. HUD window on the upper left.

pass, its active elements are embedded to the 3D

space if possible, it uses real data, and adds random

experimental variation. In addition, as already noted,

there is a possibility of making real mistakes without

receiving immediate notice. It was also decided that

the actions taken in the virtual laboratory should

include some simplification to avoid cognitive

overload (e.g., not all details of pipetting modelled).

The content of the simulation was presented to the

programmers with the help of a flowchart,

representing the state of the virtual objects.

4 USER INTERFACE TESTING:

TECHNICAL AND

PEDAGOGICAL VIEWPOINTS

4.1 Usability Testing: Heuristic User

Interface Evaluation

As part of our aims to develop sophisticated

laboratory experiments in Second Life, a formal

usability test was conducted on the user interface of

the organic chemistry experiment (section 3.2) in

addition to normal troubleshooting. The test was

designed and conducted by personnel not otherwise

involved with the simulation (Tiitu, unpublished).

The test method used was the heuristic

evaluation (Nielsen, 1994). Its benefits are the

relative speed and ease of carrying out the test, while

being able to effectively find both small and large

usability issues. Three evaluators completed the test,

all of them having little prior experience with

Second Life. The test was performed in two separate

sessions about two and half hours each. The

evaluators began with getting familiar with SL,

followed by performing the experiment individually

and making notes on the usability issues. Finally a

subjective assessment was given on the severity of

the problems found. An instructor not contributing

to the evaluation was present.

Evaluators were given a list of general points of

focus called heuristics, to help them to recognize and

categorize the possible shortcomings. The heuristics

were divided in two sets: (1) technical and (2)

pedagogical usability. In the following, the emphasis

is on the technical usability, referring to the

technical properties of the user interface and the

ability of the evaluator to use the programs. The

heuristics of technical usability used were modified

from the original Nielsen’s (2005) heuristics for

evaluating specifically e-learning environments

(Sampola, 2008).

1. Is the status of the system visible?

2. Is the language understandable to each user?

3. Does the user have an appropriate freedom to

control navigation and operations? Is navigation

simple enough?

4. Is the system logical and standardized?

5. Can mistakes be prevented? Are the error

messages understandable?

6. Can objects and functions be readily identified,

rather than requiring memorizing?

7. How much flexibility to modify the user

interface there is available?

8. Is time spent efficiently?

9. Is the design aesthetically pleasing and/or

minimalistic?

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

668

10. Is appropriate guidance available? In what

format is it displayed?

The technical usability issues found were related

to both the experiment in particular and to Second

Life in general. Examples include virtual buttons not

registering the click in some instances,

inconsistencies in the instructions given by HUD,

Second Life icons overlaying the HUD, and users

knowing not how to e.g. zoom in the view in SL.

Besides identifying actual usability issues, our

goal was to construct a more general checklist for

performing similar tests in future. The list includes

the setup of test session as stated above, plus

practical notions, of which probably the most

important is making sure beforehand that the

computers and programs work well. A convenient

size for the test group is three to five persons. This

way some 50 % to 80 % of the existing usability

issues can be found (Nielsen, 1993).

4.2 Preliminary Results of Student

Assessment

Both the organic chemistry experiment on

decarboxylation (section 3.2) and the molecular

biology experiment (section 3.4) were assessed as

course exercises by groups of 1

to 3

year

engineering students, who filled in anonymous

feedback forms. However, at this time, analysis of

the data is on-going and a preliminary summary is

presented below.

Each exercise session was facilitated by a teacher

with background in the core subject and experience

in using Second Life. The feedback forms were

SL designers as part of two on-going M.Sc. theses

(Brusin and Virtanen). The same individuals also

monitored the teacher–student interactions in each

group. At this time, no comparative studies between

the test groups and a control group were carried out.

Organic chemistry exercises were performed in four

groups (two simultaneous groups at two times). A

marked difference was noted between the two time

slots. The students in Monday groups (N = 13) felt,

in general, that the experiment was reasonably

interesting and supported previous knowledge to

some extent. They also felt actually having learned

something new and said that they understood the

scientific objectives. However, the students stated

that it was possible to pass the simulation without

really thinking much (Table 3).

On the contrary, the Friday groups (N = 16) were

much more critical. About half of the students

reported they were not interested at all in the

exercise, did not grasp its purpose and felt they did

not learn anything. Moreover, unlike the previous

group, they admitted actually exploiting the

possibility to pass the task mechanically without

thought (Table 3). The notes made by the observers

support these differences. The fact that the Monday

group had better IT skills and more prior experience

with virtual worlds should explain some of these

differences. In addition, the Monday group was, on

average, more advanced in their studies. In student

life, the day of the week (Monday vs. Friday) may

have a role to play, too!

Overall, 97 % of the students replied that the

most convenient way to interact with the teacher was

face-to-face discussion, instead via their avatar.

In contrast to the rather mixed feedback from the

organic chemistry exercise, the student response

from the molecular biology exercise was

unanimously positive, even though the students were

no more familiar with virtual worlds. An updated

version of the feedback questionnaire was used,

though. The exercise was conducted in two

simultaneous groups of 10 students each as part of a

year microbiology course. The students reported

they had clearly understood the assignment and also

most of the actions taken during exercise. A majority

thought having learned something new, albeit not

very much. The level of scientific challenge was

considered appropriate (Table 4).

Table 3: Key figures from the student assessment of the organic chemistry experiment.

Question (option A / B / C) Monday Groups Friday Groups

A B C A B C

Experience with virtual worlds (none / some / much) 31% 54% 15% 63% 25% 13%

Desired outcome understood? (no / in part / completely) 0% 54% 46% 47% 53% 0%

How much did you learn? (nothing / some / much) 8% 85% 8% 56% 44% 0%

Supported previous knowledge? (no / slightly / well) 15% 85% 0% 56% 44% 0%

Possible to pass without thought? (no / yes, chose not / yes, did so) 15% 77% 8% 0% 31% 69%

Change of attitude during exercise (negative / none / positive) 8% 54% 38% 6% 69% 25%

DesigningVirtualLaboratories-DecarboxylationReactions,VacuumDistillationandVirusIdentificationbyPCRinthe

Lablife3DSecondLifeLaboratory

669

Table 4: Key figures from the student assessment of the molecular biology experiment.

Assertion Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree

I am familiar with virtual worlds. 45% 35% 5% 15%

I understood the assignment. 0% 0% 30% 70%

I learned new things. 0% 5% 75% 20%

I understood all the actions taken in the exercise. 0% 15% 70% 15%

The difficulty level was appropriate. 0% 15% 35% 50%

My attitude changed more positive during the exercise. 5% 16% 63% 16%

It therefore appears that the molecular biology

simulation was either better designed from the

pedagogical point of view, or better connected to the

course contents than the organic chemistry

simulation was – or both. The scientific content of

the latter may have been too difficult, and the

structure of the simulation too straightforward.

However, the difference may not be entirely due

to the content of the simulations themselves.

Although both exercises were voluntary, giving

extra points to the exam, the inclusion of the

molecular biology exercise was announced at the

very beginning of the course, with an essay as an

alternative. For the organic chemistry course, the SL

exercise was just an extra. The former setup may

have helped the students take the exercise more

seriously, as part of the learning outcomes of the

whole course, instead of thinking it just as means of

collecting a point to the exam.

4.3 Evaluation of the Teacher’s Role

We are also currently studying the role of the teacher

as a facilitator of student learning in Second Life.

Notably, to our knowledge, there are no previous

systematic studies on what the role of the teacher

should be. We are therefore in the process of

elucidating if teacher roles as facilitators differ from

roles that have been studied in context of problem

based learning (Kolmos et al., 2008).

Our preliminary observations suggest that the

role of the teacher as a facilitator for a Second Life

experiment may not as be as important as e.g. the

design of the virtual exercise and student motivation.

In the molecular biology exercise, students

responded quite similarly in both groups, even

though the teachers had a distinctly different style,

the other instructing in a more active and

authoritarian manner, and the other leaving much

more time for independent work. In the organic

chemistry exercise, the teachers’ styles did not differ

much from each other, and thus no significant

comparison could be made.

5 CONCLUSIONS

The aim of our virtual biology laboratory

experiments is to mimic the work of a real-world

scientist in the fields of chemistry and molecular

biology and thus support linking theory with

practice. Moreover, we wish to provide students

with tools that may deepen the learning process as

an additional tool to learning in the real-life wet-lab.

From the learning outcomes recognized in virtual

teaching laboratories by Strangman et al. (2003),

content area knowledge and conceptual change

could be expected to be an outcome of the virtual

world experiments that we have designed.

Contrary to Helmer (2007), who argues that too

much similarity with the real world might be seen as

distracting and disadvantageous for learning, we feel

that a high degree of photographic realism adds to

student motivation to use virtual tools for learning.

Our experience with students suggests that sufficient

freedom of operation is probably very important,

too. A simulation too straightforward to pass does

not provoke the necessity to think one’s actions.

As stated by Josephsen and Kristensen (2006),

real life student laboratories may actually place too

much emphasis on procedural tasks which possibly

lead to a cognitive overload for the learner and

therefore may even hinder the learning process. In

order to overcome such drawbacks, we have

specifically worked on minimizing the attention to

detail and focusing on the order of steps and the

interpretation of data.

Furthermore, the experiments should have a

clearly defined goal and the goal should link theory

to practice and to scientific research methodology.

Our experience implies, too, that the exercises

should be clearly tied to a context, meaning not only

a connection to the theoretical course matter but also

having a sensible function as a part of the course.

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

670

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This study has been supported by a grant from the

Finnish Technology Industries Foundation.

The contribution to LabLife3D by the following

individuals is acknowledged: Päivi Korpelainen,

Elina Kähkönen, Jari Vepsäläinen, Marianne

Hemminki, and Outi Tarakkamäki.

REFERENCES

Arango, F., Chang, C., Esche, S. K. and Chassapis, C.

(2007). A Scenario for Collaborative Learning in

Virtual Engineering Laboratories. In 37th ASEE/IEEE

Frontiers in Education Conference (pp. F3G-7 to

F3G-12). doi:10.1109/FIE.2007.4417818.

Barab, S. A., Hay, K. A., Squire, K., Barnett, K., Schmidt,

R., Karrigan, K., Yamagata-Lynch, L. and Johnson, C.

(2000). Virtual Solar System Project: Learning

Through a Technology-Rich, Inquiry-Based,

Participatory Learning Environment. Journal of

Science Education and Technology, 9, 7–25.

doi:10.1023/A:1009416822783.

Biggs, J. (1999). “What the student does for enhanced

learning”, Higher Education Research and

Development, 18, 57–75.

doi:10.1080/0729436990180105.

Cobb, S., Heaney, R., Corcoran, O. and Henderson-Begg,

S. (2009). The Learning Gains and Student

Perceptions of a Second Life Virtual Lab. Bioscience

Education, 13, article 5. doi:10.3108/beej.13.5.

Daniel, C. (2008). The Educational Attributes of Some of

the World’s “top 50” Universities: A Discussion

Paper. Perth: University of Western Australia.

Dickey, M. D. (2005). Three-Dimensional Virtual Worlds

and Distance Learning: Two Case Studies of Active

Worlds as a Medium for Distance Education. British

Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 439–451.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00477.x.

Eschenbrenner, B., Nah, F. and Siau, K. (2008). 3-D

virtual worlds in education: Applications, benefits,

issues, and opportunities. Journal of Database

Management, 19, 91–110.

Graves, L. (2008, January 10). A Second Life for Higher

Ed. US News & World Report 14(2), 49–50.

http://www.usnews.com/education/online-education/

articles/2008/01/10/a-second-life-for-higher-ed

(retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Helmer, J. (2007). Second Life and Virtual Worlds.

No place: Learning Light Limited. http://www.

norfolkelearningforum.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/

2009/04/virtual-worlds_ll_oct_2007.pdf (retrieved 9

Nov 2012).

Holmberg, K. & Huvila, I. (2008). Learning together

apart: Distance education in a virtual world. First

Monday, vol. 13. http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/

bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2178/2033

(retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Inman, C., Wright, V. H. and Hartman, J. A. (2010). Use

of Second Life in K-12 and Higher Education: A

Review of Research. Journal of Interactive Online

Learning, 9, 44–63.

http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/9.1.3.pdf.

Josephsen, J. and Kristensen, A. K. (2006). Simulation of

laboratory assignments to support students’ learning of

introductory inorganic chemistry. Chemistry

Education Research and Practice, 7, 266–279.

doi:10.1039/B6RP90013E.

Kangasniemi, T. (2012). A new environment for chemical

education: The decarboxylation reactions of fatty

acids and experimenting with them in a 3D virtual

laboratory built in Second Life [title from abstract in

English; text is in Finnish]. M.Sc. (Tech.) Thesis.

Espoo: Aalto University School of Chemical

Technology.

Kolmos, A., Du, X., Holgaard, J. and Jensen L.-P. (2008).

Facilitation in a PBL environment. Aalborg: Aalborg

University. ISBN 978-87-991994-8-8.

Mason, H. (2007). Experiential Education in Second Life.

In Proceedings of the Second Life Education

Workshop 2007 (pp. 14–18). http://

www.simteach.com/

slccedu07proceedings.pdf (retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Mikropoulos, T. A. (2001). Brain Activity on Navigation

in Virtual Environments. Journal of Educational

Computing Research, 24, 1–12.

doi:10.2190/D1W3-Y15D-4UDW-L6C9.

Mikropoulos, T., A. and Natsis, A. (2010). Educational

virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical

research (1999–2009). Computers & Education, 56,

769–780. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.020.

Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Boston, MA:

Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-518406-9.

Nielsen, J. (1994). Heuristic Evaluation. In Nielsen, J. and

Mack, R. L. (eds.), Usability Inspection Methods. New

York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 0-471-01877-5.

Nielsen, J. (2005, January 1). 10 Usability Heuristics.

Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox. http://www.nngroup.com/

articles/ten-usability-heuristics/ (retrieved 4 Feb

2013).

Nordström, K., Qvist, P., Natri, O., Närhi, M., Kähkönen,

E., Palomäki, E., Joensuu, P., Jokela, R., Hemminki,

M., Korpelainen, P. and Vepsäläinen, J. (2010).

LabLife3D: A New Concept for Learning and

Teaching Biotechnology and Chemistry in the 21

Century Aalto University. In Myller, E. (ed.),

ReflekTori 2010 – Symposium of Engineering

Education, December 9–10, 2010 (pp. 106–108).

Espoo: Aalto University. ISBN 978-952-60-3478-2

(PDF). https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/bitstream/handle/

123456789/4901/urn100353.pdf (retrieved 9 Nov

2012).

Olkinuora, S. (2012). Design of a Molecular Biology

Laboratory in Second Life. M.Sc. (Tech.) Thesis.

Espoo: Aalto University School of Chemical

Technology.

DesigningVirtualLaboratories-DecarboxylationReactions,VacuumDistillationandVirusIdentificationbyPCRinthe

Lablife3DSecondLifeLaboratory

671

Palomäki, E. (2009). Applying 3D Virtual Worlds to

Higher Education. M.Sc. (Tech.) Thesis. Espoo:

Helsinki University of Technology, Faculty of

Information and Natural Sciences.

Palomäki, E., Natri, O., Joensuu, P., Närhi, M., Kähkönen,

E., Jokela, R., Hemminki, M., Korpelainen, P.,

Vepsäläinen, J. and Nordström, K. (2010). LabLife3D:

Teaching biotechnology and chemistry to engineering

students by using Second Life. In Joint International

IGIP-SEFI Annual Conference 2010 19

–22

September 2010, Trnava, Slovakia (paper ID 2376).

http://www.sefi.be/wp-content/papers2010/papers/

2376.pdf (retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Palomäki, E. and Nordbäck, E. (2012). Bringing

Playfulness and Engagement to Language Training

Using Virtual Worlds: Student Experiences, Results,

and Best Practices from a Virtual Language Course. A

paper presented at 2

Global Conference on

Experiential Learning in Virtual Worlds, Prague,

Czech Republic, April 12–14.

Palomäki, E., Qvist, P., Natri, O., Joensuu, P., Närhi, M.,

Kähkönen, E., Jokela, R., Hemminki, M.,

Korpelainen, P., Vepsäläinen, J. and Nordström, K.

(2011). LabLife3D: Teaching Biotechnology and

Chemistry to Engineering Students by Using Second

Life. In Ruokamo, H. et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the

4th International Network-Based Education 2011

Conference (pp. 124–131). Rovaniemi: University of

Lapland. ISBN 978-952-484-475-8 (PDF).

http://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/73919/

NBE_2011_conference.pdf (retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Quinn, C. (2005, August 18). Soapbox: Making Learning

Fun. Gamasutra. http://www.gamasutra.com/view/

feature/2375/soapbox_making_learning_fun.php

(retrieved 9 Nov 2012).

Richter, J., Anderson-Inman, L. and Frisbee, M. (2007).

Critical Engagement of Teachers in Second Life:

Progress in the SaLamander Project”. In Proceedings

of the Second Life Education Workshop 2007 (pp. 19–

26). http://www.simteach.com/

slccedu07proceedings.pdf (retrieved 4 Feb 2013).

Sampola, P. (2008). The development of the user-centric

usability evaluation method adapted to the evaluation

of Virtual Learning Environments [title from abstract

in English; text is in Finnish]. PhD Thesis. Vaasa:

University of Vaasa. ISBN 978-952-476-234-2.

Strangman, N., Hall, T. and Meyer, A. (2003). Virtual

Reality and Computer Simulations and the

Implications for UDL Implementation: Curriculum

Enhancements Report. No place: National Center on

Accessing the General Curriculum [NCAC].

http://aim.cast.org/sites/.

aim.cast.org/files/VR_UDL.pdf (retrieved 4 Feb 2013)

Warburton, S. (2009). Second Life in higher education:

Assessing the potential for and the barriers to

deploying virtual worlds in learning and teaching.

British Journal of Educational Technology, 40, 414–

426. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00952.x.

CSEDU2013-5thInternationalConferenceonComputerSupportedEducation

672