Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation

Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

Lahcen Oubahssi and Claudine Piau-Toffolon

LIUM Laboratory, EA 4023, UBL, Le Mans University,

72085, Le Mans, France

Keywords: Virtual Learning Environments, Pedagogical Scenario, Educational Simulation, Orientation Skills.

Abstract: Virtual Reality (VR) is an interesting technology in the context of learning especially for learners with

learning disabilities. The design of virtual learning environments (VLEs) is a complex task due to the

interdisciplinarity intrinsic to VR and its cognitive aspects. This research work identifies some limitations

with existing solutions and studies the design and operationalization of learning situations in the form of

scenario models. It takes place in the context of LUSI (Learning Units for School Inclusion) classes and

involves a specific learning situation of acquisition of orientation skills. We propose a solution based on

virtual reality technology to enhance traditional learning and provide trainers with an educational toolkit,

thus allowing them to recreate virtual reality scenarios and assess the learners’ progress for learning

orientation skills.

1 INTRODUCTION

We present in this article a research work that took

part of the ARVAD project (ARVAD, 2017). The

aim of this project is to propose a solution based on

virtual reality to enhance the traditional learning to

acquire orientation skills in the LUSI (Local Units

for School Inclusion) classes. These units

accommodate pupils with cognitive or mental health

difficulties, with the main objective of schooling, the

development of adult autonomy and a sustainable

socio-professional integration in society. The daily

activity of orientation skills presents a real obstacle

for these learners. Different pedagogical approaches

are used: from learning how to read a map in class to

real orientation skills in an urban environment. As

part of this research project, we worked with the

LUSI class of twelve learners aged 16-18 (only nine

could participate to the experiment). Their major

difficulty is managing their stress, which can be

caused by several factors, including the crowd, the

noise, the delay of the bus, their own delay or the

forgetting of the transport card. Our objective is to

provide solutions to this problem of autonomy of the

orientation skills by using the techniques of virtual

reality.

For the learners of LUSI class, we distinguish

two types of disorders, cognitive (Lahav et al., 2002)

and psychosocial (ASH02, 2011) (De Gasparo and

Van Belleghel, 2012). From the point of view of

behaviour, they succeed in adapting to places; to the

people they meet by having the proper attitude. On

the other hand, they have no introspection activity

and they have major difficulty explaining why they

are doing this or that action. The identified cognitive

problems are located on four domains: memory,

sense of time, reasoning and the space notion. The

identified psychosocial problems are located on

three domains: attention, motivation and self-esteem.

Several research studies have studied the issues

related to the assessment and rehabilitation of these

disorders. (Sehaba and Hussaan, 2013) cited some

examples that are based on clinical tests, and deal

with different cognitive functions, such as working

memory (Diamond and Goldman-Rakic, 1989),

attention (Manly et al., 2001), auditory perception

(Mody et al., 1997), oral and written language

(Broomfield and Dodd, 2004).

The evolution of computer science has led to the

development of several digital solutions for

cognitive and linguistic remediation. (Botella et al.,

2000) (Campos et al., 2004) (Conde et al., 2009)

(Parfitt and Nguyen, 1998) (Sehaba et al., 2005)

(Sehaba and Hussaan, 2013) noted that these

Oubahssi, L. and Piau-Toffolon, C.

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class.

DOI: 10.5220/0006673800470058

In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2018), pages 47-58

ISBN: 978-989-758-291-2

systems have the advantage of being more flexible

and easily accessible. However, most of these

systems do not adapt to the specificities and needs of

each user. The emergence of virtual reality in

computer sciences offers new experiences to users

along with more powerful interaction and immersion

possibilities. These possibilities are of great interest

in the learning domain because they allow the

creation of original and dynamic learning situations

detached from the constraints that can exist during

real training (danger, cost, uncertainty) and bringing

specific advantages (enrichment of situations,

replay, etc.) (Barot et al., 2013) (Barot et al., 2013)

(Carpentier and Lourdeau, 2014) (Lourdeaux et al.,

2002) (Mikropoulos and Natsis, 2011). All these

learning systems using virtual reality techniques can

be grouped under the acronym 3D-VLEs (Virtual

Learning Environments) (Fowler, 2014).

The research trends towards this type of

environment have an influence on the teachers’

practices and responsibilities in defining new

pedagogical strategies within this type of training

units. In our work, we address the issues of

designing and operationalizing pedagogical

situations enhanced by VR environments in an

engineering approach based on scenario models. We

aim at giving teachers the opportunity to freely

design computational scenarios by providing them

with tools dedicated to the design, reuse and

adaptation of each scenario to new pedagogical

situation if needed. The initial proposal of this

research effort has been discussed in (Chaabouni et

al., 2015) (Oubahssi et al., 2013) (Tadjine et al.,

2016).

This paper is structured as follows: the next

section will present related research works on virtual

reality and instructional design, we focus on

educational scenario model design. We present in

section 2 the context and objectives of our project

and the main stages of the design of the orientation

skills process. Our proposal is presented in section 3.

A discussion is made in section 4 on results of the

pilot study we carried out to verify the usability of

the developed environment (Nielsen, 1993). We

draw a conclusion and present our research

perspectives in the last section.

2 VIRTUAL REALITY AND

LEARNING SCENARIOS

The 3D-VLEs (Virtual Learning Environments) are

used in many domains including educational

settings. The VLEs design is a task that poses new

technical difficulties, induced by the

interdisciplinary intrinsic to the VR (graphic

computer, haptic devices, distribution, etc.) and

cognitive aspects (respect of the learned task

characteristics, transfer of learning to the real world,

etc.) (Bossard et al., 2008) (Marion et al., 2009)

(Sehaba and Hussaan, 2013). Therefore, the design

and integration of VLEs into learning are complex

and costly process. The description of the

pedagogical simulations must take into account the

specificities of this environment (its structure and its

dynamics) in order to describe precisely the

operationalization and the control of the activities in

the environment. We also note that the simple fact of

using virtual reality is not enough to motivate the

learners, just as aesthetic fidelity is not a guarantee

of pedagogical effectiveness. Tools by themselves

do not teach; appropriate theories and/or models to

guide the design and development of this technology

are needed (Chen, 2006). We might consider both

didactic situations and scenario model.

We analyzed the various research works that

studying the question of scenario model design in

VLEs. (Carpentier and Lourdeaux, 2014) and (Barot

et al. 2013) propose a model based on a centralized

and indirect control of an emergent simulation from

learning scenario content model. In this model, the

environment is populated with autonomous virtual

characters and the user is free from his/her actions.

Learning scenario design is realized in two steps:

dynamic objectives are determined from the user

activity, and then a learning scenario is generated by

these objectives and implemented through

simulation adjustments. (Trinh et al., 2010) proposed

models allowing the explicitation of knowledge for

agents that populate virtual environments. This

knowledge relates to the structure and the dynamic

of the environment as well as the procedures that

teams can perform. (Sehaba and Hussaan, 2013)

propose a serious adaptive game for the evaluation

and rehabilitation of cognitive disorders; their

system makes it possible to personalize the course of

games to each patient according to their capacities

and competences. The architecture of the system

organizes the knowledge in three layers: domain

concepts, pedagogical resources and game resources.

The main objective of this work is to reuse this

architecture in different fields of applications and

different serious games. (Marion et al. 2009)

propose a learning scenario model that describes

machine-readable educational activities in a virtual

environment, in a generic way in terms of learning

domain, type of task to carry out and learning

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

strategy. The author uses a virtual environment

meta-model that provides an abstract representation

of virtual environments to allow its model to be both

generic and machine-readable. (Chen and Teh,

2013) propose an analysis that focuses on the

improvement of a pedagogical design model of

virtual environments using formative research. This

later model initially proposed by (Chen, Toh and

Wan, 2004), allows to formatively develop and to

evaluate simulations on a non-immersive virtual

system. The analysis produced a five-level model to

improve the pedagogical design of virtual

environment.

These research works overcome some limits

identified in (Carpentier and Lourdeaux, 2014) that

are related to the limited reactivity of the system or

pedagogical control of the adaptation approaches.

The models proposed improve the way to explicit

knowledge (Carpentier and Lourdeaux, 2014) (Trinh

et al. 2010) or the pedagogical design of virtual

environment (Chen and The, 2013) or permit the

personalization of the course (Sehaba and Hussaan,

2013). To overcome the lack of dynamic of the

pedagogical scenario design, some works

(Carpentier and Lourdeaux, 2014) (Trinh et al.,

2010) embed virtual agents in the virtual

environment. But these works still limit the use of

the virtual environment to predefined knowledge

and learning activities. In (Carpentier et al. 2014),

experts can enter their own model in a graphical

editor that relies on a formal representation directly

interpretable by computer systems. The meta-model

approach developed by (Marion et al. 2009) also

permits to experts to generate their virtual

environment. But, despite these interesting

approaches, they do not address in particular, the

problem of the definition and adaptation of scenario

models directly by the trainers according to the

pedagogical situations they might encounter.

Trainers can still not adapt by themselves the

pedagogical scenario according to the learner

profiles and enable a gradual learning process. Our

main concern is to propose solutions to trainers to

help representing scenario according to their own

pedagogical needs in new environments such as

those dedicated to virtual reality. As part of this

research, we study the design and operationalization

of several learning situations in a virtual reality

environment. We are particularly interested in

learning design activities by means of scenarios

models, by the teachers themselves, to enable them

to design learning situations in virtual reality

environments to ensure the achievement of their

educational objectives. Last but not least, it is

important to take note that the implementation of

these scenarios always requires an extra effort in

order to meet different technical and pedagogical

constraints required by this type of environment.

3 THE ARVAD PROJECT

3.1 Proposition of a Learning Scenario

Model

Financed by Agglomeration of Laval, the ARVAD

project was conducted in collaboration with the

INSH laboratory, the IEIAH (Technology Enhanced

Learning (TEL) Engineering research team) of the

LIUM laboratory and the Robert Buron High School

in Laval (France).

The aim of this research project is to propose a

solution implemented in virtual reality environment

to enhance the traditional learning to acquire

orientation skills in the LUSI classes. Our goal is to

facilitate this learning through digital, and to provide

trainers of the LUSI classes with an educational

toolkit, allowing them to recreate virtual reality

scenarios and to assess the learner’s progress. We

used a constructivist teaching approach based on

problem situations, and a virtual reality environment

to develop automation that can be latter exploited in

a context of orientation skill acquisition. The

challenge of this research project relies on the

interest of digital technologies in the learning for

young people with cognitive disabilities. As stated

by (Martin-Guttiérrez et al., 2017) younger students

have always lived surrounded with technologies and

are digital natives (Prensky, 2001) but relationships

between technology and learning are not evident and

virtual technologies are not an exception to this. But

an investigation by (Mikropoulos et al., 1998) found

that students had a favourable attitude towards these

technologies in the educational process. Studies in

the scientific literature linking virtual technologies

with improvements in particular in students’ social

and collaborative skills (Kaufman et al., 2005) and

students’ psychomotor and cognitive skills (Feng,

Duh and Billinghurst, 2008) permit us to suppose

that the use of tablets, smartphones or video games

in their daily life, and the attraction they show for all

these devices suggest that virtual technologies can

be beneficial for both learning and autonomy

development.

In order to achieve our objectives, we adopt an

iterative and participative approach: analysing and

modelling existing learning situations, developing a

functional demonstrator and testing the usability and

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

Figure 1: High School Category – Progress of activity 1 (Table 1).

relevance of the demonstrator in real situations.

Users took part of the design process and allowed

the design of the prototype to evolve at each

iteration. During the analysis phase, we tested the

technical acceptance of virtual reality environments

through the manipulation by the LUSI class learners

of two well-known 3D video games based on

displacement situations using a joystick. This test

proved that learners were very comfortable with

these environments and associated peripherals. In

order to define the practices and put them into

perspective with the theories and methods of

learning adapted to the target audience, we observed

for a period of three months in the LUSI class the

different pedagogical situations. Based on this study,

we proposed pedagogical models to be implemented

in the future virtual environment.

These models may offer the possibility to

trainers to define their own scenarios according to

the learner’s profile and the pedagogical situation

3.2 Example of a Learning Scenario

The learners of the LUSI class are asked to carry out

various educational activities related to orientation

skills so that they could develop more autonomy in

their personal and professional lives. While doing

so, an observation is being made on a number of

activities, as illustrated in Table 1. The activities

being carried out can be characterized with different

variables and parameters characterising in

accordance with the needs of the teaching staff of

the LUSI class. For instance, an activity “work stress

management” can be adjusted with the variation of

the level of stress by adding “noise” as parameter

(Table 2). Thanks to the observation process, we are

able to propose a version of a model of scenarios (as

illustrated in Fig.1), which leads us to propose a

conceptual model of different pedagogical scenarios

based on the needs of the referring teacher. Fig. 1

illustrates the course of the learning situation related

to Activity 1, beginning with Activity 0 (Table 1).

The objective of this activity is to locate different

places on a map. The pedagogical strategy being

used in this example is to work individually, and

afterwards collectively for the correction.

Thus far, we note that, the main characteristic of the

given scenarios is that they are adaptable to the

learners' progress (suggesting an itinerary to be

followed first with visual and / or audible indications

or without indication, adding noises from

environments, etc.). In the suggested scenarios, the

general objective of having learners move

independently while managing stress with a map and

benchmarks in the environment is fulfilled. In the

meantime, we have identified several intermediate

objectives that allow for a gradual learning towards

this general objective (Fig. 2). Each intermediate

objective is composed of a pedagogical sequence,

which is divided into activities. The sequences are

independent of one another because they do not

respond to the same intermediate objectives.

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

Table 1: Extract of the various orientation skills activities

achieved in LUSI class.

Activities Objectives Variables

High School Category

Act.1 Locate places in

h school

Type of maps

Act.2 Identify places in

high school (with

colours)

No variable, only

the map with

many indices is

use

City Category

Act.1 Locate on a city

No variable

Act.2 Locate important

places with a grid

Search strategy

with imposed

Table 2: Example of variables in orientation skills

activities.

Noise Timer Obstacle

With/

Without

Display (Yes/No)

Duration

(

Limited/Unlimited

)

Present/Absent

The set of these sequences constitutes a group of

activities. The teacher assigns a specific sequence to

one or more learners depending on their competency

levels on orientation skills. In our study, we

distinguish two groupings of learners according to

two competence levels:

 Group 1: is the grouping of learners with a low

level of competence on orientation skills. For

example, group 1 always starts activities with a

simplified map because they have difficulty

moving on a complex map (with a lot of path

choices).

 Group 2: is the grouping of learners with an

average level of competence on orientation

skills. For example, group 2 always begins

activities with a complex map because we

consider that they are able to move with a

simple map.

We found that for the same objective, the teacher

does not evaluate the same competency. For the

same objective, the same activity may be used,

but with lower or higher level of requirements

according to the handicap and education level. For

the same objective, activities of different (gradual)

levels may be used.

To evaluate the learner progress, a scale is used by

the teacher according to the academic evaluation

system (acquired, being acquired, almost acquired,

not acquired). This makes it possible to locate them

in relation to their competence booklet. Fig. 3

illustrates an example of a learner's pedagogical path

with the different adaptations (change of activities,

adaptation of objectives, etc.).

Figure 2: Progress of Activity 1 (Table 1).

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

Figure 3: The progression of a learning path with a complex map.

3.3 The 3D Environment

Following this analysis and modelling of existing

pedagogical situations, we proposed a set of

specifications summarizing the main one of a virtual

reality environment to adapt specified needs and

scenarios. This allowed the development of a virtual

environment enabling the pedagogical team to

define orientation skills scenarios and learners to

carry out the activities related to the objectives set.

For these activities, the learner has a joystick, a

synchronized tablet displaying a 2D map, and visual

indices (images or texts) (Fig. 4). We developed a

non-immersive virtual reality environment in the

form of a window into a virtual world displayed on a

computer monitor and the interaction made via a

mouse or a joystick.

To set up the orientation skills activities, the teacher

uses a configuration interface communicating with

the ARVAD execution environment. This interface

permits:

 Management and configuration of the travel

plans;

 Management of learners or group of learners, set

up of activities according to learning profile and

pedagogical progression;

 Analysis of the results of the activities achieved;

 Management of the learner's accounts.

Figure 4: 3D Environment Screenshot.

As shown in Fig. 5, the ARVAD execution

environment uses a model of orientation skills

scenario and the 3D environment (a labyrinth). A

server is dedicated to the management of data and

resources. An instance of the 3D orientation skills

scenario model is generated through the setting up

of the activities generating a scenario for a learner

or a group of learners.

The environment includes two main parts. The

first one is dedicated to the learner, playing the

scenario defined by the trainers. The second part

(not developed at this time) will allow the teacher to

set pedagogical scenarios according to the learner's

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

Figure 5: ARVAD Software Architecture.

profiles and their pedagogical progression and save

the results to track the progress of these learners.

The virtual environment has been developed with

the cross-platform game engine Unity as a desktop

version, where the user navigates using a joystick,

related to a tablet. The design of the scenes did not

try to provide authentic situations but only one close

to the reality. Data of the various games play by

each learner are recorded in databases.

Fig. 6 depicts the software architecture of the

ARVAD environment. It is composed of two

functionalities modules, a teacher’s module and a

learner’s module.

The teacher module is composed of the following

functionalities:

 Mapping map:

Permits to

set up or to

associate a map to an orientation skills

activity.

 Managing orientation skills activities:

Permits to c

reate to set or to delete an

orientation skills activity. Teacher can

generate new orientation skills scenario.

 Managing tracks/indicators:

Permits to

visualize the different activities achieved by

learners or group of learners for a period of

time selected. Some indicators may be:

date, learner code, number of activities

achieved by a learner, distance travelled (by

activity), success or not of an activity. The

teacher can export the results.

 Managing learner sessions:

Permits to

reate, to modify or to remove a learner

profile, and to define activities for learners

or group of learners.

Figure 6: The two main parts of the ARVAD

Environment.

The learner module is composed of the following

functionalities:



Asking for help:

Permits to the learner to

access to the help at any moment in the game by

clicking. Different types of aid are given

according to the teachers’ settings.



Reading of the instructions:

To achieve the

activity, the learner can hear or read the

indication (according to the teachers’ settings).



Moving into the environment:

Permits to

achieve the activity. The learner uses the

joystick to move around in the environment.

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

 Visualizing the map: Permits to the learner

to visualize his/her orientation plan and

gets his position in the environment.

 Restarting the activity: Permits to the

learner to restart his activity from the

beginning. The last attempt is recorded.

 Pause/Exit: Permits to the learner to take a

break at any moment. This pause is not

taken into account when the activity is

timed.

4 PILOT STUDY

4.1 User Story

This pilot study was realized with nine learners

(aged between 15 and 18) from the LUSI class at the

Laval Robert Buron high school, France. With the

pedagogical team, we organized the learners into

two groups according to the abilities and skills of

each one. Table 3 shows an overview of the profiles

of each group.

Table 3: Learner’s group profile of the pilot study.

Grou

Size Ca

acities and Skills

1 4 Difficult access to reading or very

difficult understanding of

instructions. Use of

icto

rams.

5 Easy access to write and

understand a sim

le instruction

We conducted the pilot study in order to assess

the feasibility and the usability of the proposed

system. We defined a set of objectives to evaluate if

the functionalities and modalities of interactions

(Table 4):

 Are well adapted to the LUSI classes learners;

 Allow one or more skills to be easily worked;

 Allow one or more skills to be easily evaluated.

The scope of the experiment does not still permit to

evaluate the effectiveness of the pedagogical

approach.

Table 4: List of the pilot study objectives.

O1 The learner gets to locate easily on the map

(tablet)

O2 The learner is able to move easily in the

virtual environment

O3 The learner can easily visualize the indices

(

ima

icto

ram

)

O4 The learner manages to make the global link

between the tablet and the virtual

environment

05 The learner is able to move with visual aid in

the virtual environment

O6 The learner is able to make the link between

the positioning in the 3D environment and the

positioning on the tablet (know how to

lement

)

4.2 Method and Protocol

The aim of the pilot study is to evaluate qualitatively

the feasibility of the pedagogical approach and some

aspects of the usability of the virtual environment.

We empirically verify usability criteria of the

environment such as learnability, efficiency,

memorability, errors or satisfaction (Nielsen, 1993).

According to the model of (Dillon and Morris, 1996)

we evaluate the concept of attitude, mainly the

concept of perception of the user. To do so, we

observed how the perception of content on the

screen (visibility, display, texture) was perceptible,

the perception of the contents on the shelf and the

link between the tablet and the main screen. We

defined a protocol based on two learning groups

(Group 1 and 2) and four steps: pre-test, test, post-

test and results analysis. Fig. 7 proposes an activity

diagram of the pilot study process.

During the first step, the pedagogical team organized

learners in two groups (Table 3), prepared an

orientation map (on paper), the activities to be

realized (duration, objective) and defined evaluation

criteria (according to the skills to be tested for each

group). The teacher then worked the orientation

activity with the learners of the two groups (paper

based map). For the post-test phase, an evaluation

grid has been developed by researchers and a

questionnaire for learners according to the

experiment objectives to evaluate the virtual

environment during the learner’s activities (Table 4).

The map and the learning game scenario model were

operationalized on the tablet and in the prototype of

the virtual environment. In the second step (test),

each group of learners plays their learning game

scenario in the virtual environment. During each

game session, the research team observes the

learners' activities and notes their observations on

the evaluation grid. For each objective (Table 4) we

evaluate if the learner was able to achieve it. In the

third step, the researchers submit a questionnaire to

the two groups of learners. The objective of this

questionnaire is to have a learner’s feedback on the

realised activities. The questionnaire was submitted

by oral and the research team recorded answers.

Finally, in a last step, the researchers conducted an

analysis of the results and defined the improvements

elements to the virtual environment.

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

During the test step, each group realized 3 sets of

scenarios of the same activity (moving from point A

to point B) but with a different variant depending on

the group (with visual aid for Group 1 and with

textual indications in Group 2). The skills to be

evaluated were not the same for the two groups.

Figure 7: Activity Diagram of the Pilot Study Process.

For example, among the skills to be assessed for

Group 1, we can cite:

 I know how to go from a point A to a point B on

the tablet map without indices.

 I know how to go from a point A to a point B

using the visual aid in the virtual environment.

Each learner was asked individually to study the

map on a tablet, which is the reproduction of the one

that was played in class. Then he/she explains what

he/she should do, before realizing his/her activities

in the virtual environment. At any moment they

could get help (by asking directly to the project team

members conducting the experiment) or by clicking

with the joystick to spot on the map of the tablet

where they were located in the environment. The

time (in seconds) and distance covered (in meters)

were recorded in order to evaluate the efficiency

according to the mode of use.

Three series of displacement (scenarios) per

learner were proposed (Table 5). The project team

monitored the process, observed the learner's

activities and questioned the learner at the end of the

session on the basis of the planned questionnaire and

noted observations on the evaluation grid.

Table 5: Displacement series for the two groups of

learners.

Series Description

1 Same departure and arrival point of the

aper map

2 A new departure and arrival point with

indications

3 A new departure and arrival point without

indications

4.3 Results and Discussions

The analysis of the results from the post-test

questionnaire submitted to the learners and the

evaluation grid completed during the test (results

presented for Group 1 in Table 6, Table 7 and Fig. 8,

Fig. 9), made it possible to verify some of the

usability criteria. The feasibility of the approach was

validated as learners of the two groups were able to

move in the virtual environment and achieved a

series of activities (no abandonment). Only one

learner (learner 4) unfamiliar with the joystick had

some difficulties during the series (can be observed

through the travel time recorded). They were all able

to easily locate themselves on the map in the tablet

(tracing the requested itinerary). Objectives O1 to

O3 in Table 4 were satisfied. Some of them had

more difficulties to understand and use the link

between the tablet and the virtual environment (O4,

O6 in Table 4, Table 7). Those who did not use the

link with the tablet and the help proposed (by

clicking with the joystick), randomly explored the

environment for the first attempt in search of the

arrival point. Then they used their memory to locate

objects to achieve the series of displacement, thus

the time taken to complete the activity or the

covered distance in the two first series was greater,

in a ratio of 1 to 3 for the time in the case of learner

4 of the Group 1.

The time taken to complete the activity and the

covered distance was variable according to the

learners without being directly linked to the different

types of help proposed. Objective O5 seems more

difficult to achieve. We still noted in series 3

(changed start and arrival points - no indices

provided in the virtual environment) that time and

covered distance was greater for the two groups (see

results Table 6, Fig. 8, Fig.9 for Group 1- except for

learner 2 and 4). We observed that Learner 2 used

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

systematically the aid provided in the environment

but the results (in terms of distance and time) were

not better than the others (except for the last series).

Table 6: Results of Group 1.

Learner Activit

Distance Time Hel

1 1

31.2

25.9

51.5

133

2 1

30.8

25.8

21.3

3 1

36.1

21.7

53.9

122

4 1

32.1

24.9

28.4

143

103

127

Figure 8: Results of Group 1: Distance travelled (in

meters).

Figure 9: Results of Group1: Time of travel (in seconds).

The first two series permit to verify the usability of

the prototype and the skill (I know how to go from a

point A to a point B using the visual aid in the

virtual environment). In the last series, despite

change with the points of departure and arrival, the

indices permit the learners to locate themselves in

the environment. Learners used more internal skills

instead of exploiting the link between the map on the

tablet and the environment. Group 2 presented

results rather similar as Group 1.

Table 7: Results of Group 1 by objectives for each series

of activities.

Lea

rner

Seri

O1 O2

O3 O4/O6 O7

A few

4 1

A few

5 CONCLUSION AND

PERSPECTIVES

VLEs based on virtual reality techniques proved to

be efficient in learning but some limits have been

identified, as they do not always permit teachers to

adapt the learning situation to the learner’s paths.

The aim of this work was to propose a learning

environment exploiting virtual reality and scenario-

based models that could be adapted by teachers to

learning situations in the context of learners with

cognitive disabilities. We have developed our own

environment rather than reusing existing

environments that would have provided better visual

feedback but would not have allowed us to develop

our adaptable scenario models. The solution

produced is authentic but in a simplified reality that

can be complicated according to the learner’s

learning profile and promotes repetition which is an

important learning spring for this learner audience.

The effort to provide operationalization (machine-

readable model) still remains semi-automatic to

deploy a new scenario, the teacher having to

parameterize variables in text files. The

experimentation based on qualitative evaluation

validated the feasibility and usability of the

pedagogical approach implemented in the virtual

environment. The main improvements relate to the

teacher part, to permit the adaptation of learning

scenario to the learners and enable their monitoring.

It remains to develop an editor that will facilitate the

design or simple parameterization of scenarios in

different environments (simple labyrinths or city in

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

3D) and the follow-up of the different paths by the

teachers and in a reflexive way by the learners

(applicable to several environments, regardless of

the domain or type of simulation to be played).

Future experiments should evaluate interfaces and

usability on the part of the teacher and the

effectiveness of pedagogical approach. We will also

need to address the follow-up of learners and the

adaptation of scenarios by teachers according to

profiles and learning situations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This work was funded by Agglomeration-Laval

(France). We want to thank all partners of this

project. We would also like to thank especially the

learners and teachers for their full support and key

contributions: the Laval Robert Buron high school,

France.

REFERENCES

ARVAD,. 2017. Project Web site. http://www-lium.univ-

lemans.fr/~oubahssi/ARVAD/

ASH02., 2011. Troubles des fonctions cognitives – pistes

pédagogiques. Enseigner - Aux élèves en situation de

handicap - En unité d'enseignement -

http://ash.ia02.ac-

amiens.fr/IMG/article_PDF/Troubles-des-fonctions-

cognitives-pistes-pdagogiques_a220.pdf.

Barot, C., Lourdeaux, D., Lenne, D., 2013. Using planning

to predict and influence autonomous agents behaviour

in a virtual environment for training. In Cognitive

Informatics & Cognitive Computing (ICCI*CC), 2013,

12th IEEE International Conference . pp. 274-281.

Barot, C., Lourdeaux, D., Burkhardt, J-M., Amokrane, K.,

Lenne, D., 2013. V3S : A Virtual Environment for

Risk-Management Training Based on Human-Activity

Models. In Presence, Teleoperators and Virtual

Environments, 22(1) :1–19.

Bossard, C., Kermarrec, G., Buche, C., Tisseau, J., 2018.

Transfer of learning in virtual environments : a new

challenge ?. In Virtual Reality September 2008,

Volume 12, Issue 3, pp 151–161 Virtual Reality...

Botella, C., Banos, R., Villa, H., Perpina, C.,

Garciapalacios, A., 2000. Virtual reality in the

treatment of claustrophobic fear: A controlled,

multiple-baseline design. Behavior Therapy, vol.31,

2000, pp. 583-595.

Broomfield, J., Dodd, B., 2004. Children with speech and

language disability: caseload characteristics. In

International Journal of Language & Communication

Disorders, 39 3: 303-324. 2004.

Campos, E., Granados, A., Jiménez, S., Garrido, J., 2004.

Tutor Informatico: Increasing the Selfteaching in

Down Syndrome People, Computers Helping People

with Special Needs, 2004, pp. 629–629.

Carpentier, K., Lourdeaux, D., 2014. Generation of

learning situations according to the learner’s profile

within a virtual environment. In Agents and Artificial

Intelligence, number 449 in Communications in

Computer and Information Science, 2014, pp. 245–

260.

Chaabouni, M., Piau-Toffolon, C., Laroussi, M., Choquet,

C., 2015. Indexing learning scenarios by the most

adapted contexts : An approach based on the

observation of scenario progress in session. In the 15th

IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning

Technologies – ICALT 2015, Hualien (Taiwan), pp.39-

43, 6-9 July 2015.

Chen, C. J., Toh, S. C., Wan, M. F., 2004. The theoretical

framework for designing desktop virtual reality-based

learning environments. Journal of Interactive

Learning Research , 15 (2), 2004, pp.147-167.

Chen C. J., 2006. The design, development and evaluation

of a virtual reality based learning environment.

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology,

2006, 22(1), pp. 39-63.

Chen, C.J ., Teh, C.S ., 2013. Enhancing an instructional

design model for virtual reality based learning.

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.

Conde, A., De Ipiña, K., Larrañaga, M., Garay-Vitoria, N.,

Irigoyen, E., Ezeiza, A., Rubio J., 2009.

LAGUNTXO: a rule-based intelligent tutoring system

oriented to people with intellectual disabilities. In:

Lytras M.D. et al. (eds) Visioning and Engineering the

Knowledge Society. A Web Science Perspective. WSKS

2009. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5736.

Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

De Gasparo, S., Van Belleghel, L., 2012. L’ergonomie

face aux nouveaux troubles du travail: le retour du

sujet dans l’intervention, in Hubault (coord.). Actes du

séminaire de Paris 1 du 11, 12 et 13 juin 2012.

Persistances et évolutions : les nouveaux contours de

l’ergonomie. Toulouse, Octarès.

Diamond, A., Goldman-Rakic, P.S., 1989. Comparison of

human infants and rhesus monkeys on Piagets AB

task: Evidence for dependence on dorsolateral

prefrontal cortex. Experimental Brain Research, vol.

74, 1989, pp. 24–40.

Dillon, A., Morris, M.; 1996. User acceptance of

information technology : theories and models. Annual

Review of Information Science and Technology, 1996,

pp. 3-32.

Feng, Z., Duh, H. B.L., Billinghurst, M., 2008. Trends in

augmented reality tracking, interaction and display: A

review of ten years of ISMAR. In the7th IEEE/ACM

international symposium on mixed and augmented

reality (ISMAR), 2008, Cambridge, UK. doi:

10.1109/ISMAR.2008.4637362.

Fowler, C., 2014. Virtual Reality and Learning: Where is

the Pedagogy?. British Journal of Educational

Technology, 46, 2, 2014.

Gutiérrez, J. M., Domínguez, M. G., González, C. R.,

2015. Using 3D Virtual Technologies to Train Spatial

Virtual Learning Environment Design in the Context of Orientation Skills Acquisition for LUSI Class

Skills. in Engineering. International Journal of

Engineering Education 31(1), 323-334.

Kaufmann, H., Steinbugl, K., Dunser, A. Gluck, J., 2005.

General training of spatial abilities by geometry

education in augmented reality. Cyberpsychology &

Behavior, 2005, 8(4), 330.

Lahav, O., Mioduser, D., 2002. Multisensory virtual

environment for supporting blind persons’ acquisition

of spatial cognitive mapping, orientation, and mobility

skills.. In Proceedings of the 4th Conf Disability,

Virtual Reality & Assoc. Tech., Veszprém, Hungary,

pp 213-220

Lourdeaux, D., Fuchs, P., Burkhardt, J-M, Bernard, F.,

2002. Relevance of an intelligent tutorial agent for

virtual reality training systems. Int. Journal of

Continuous Engineering and Life-Long Learning,

2002, 2 (1-4), pp. 214 - 230.

Manly, T., Anderson, V., Nimmo-Smith, I., 2001. The

differential assessment of children attention: The Test

of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch),

normative sample and ADHD performance. Journal of

Child Psychology and Psychiatry, vol. 42, Nov. 2001,

pp. 1065-1081.

Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., Vojt, G., 2010. Are digital

natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of

digital technologies. Computers & Education, 2011,

56, pp. 429-440..

Marion, N., Querrec, R., Chevaillier, P., 2009. Integrating

knowledge from virtual reality environments to

learning scenario models-A meta-modeling approach.

INSTICC International conference of Computer

Supported Education, 2009, pp. 254–259.

Martín-Gutiérrez, J., Mora, CE., Añorbe-Díaz, B.,

González-Marrero A., 2017. Virtual Technologies

Trends in Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,

Science and Technology Education. 2017;13(2):469-

86. doi: 10.12973/eurasia.2017.00626a.

Mikropoulos, T., Chalkidis, A., Katskikis, A., Emvalotis,

A., 1998. Students’attitudes towards educational

virtual environments. Education and Information

Technologies, 1998, 3(2), pp. 137-148.

Mikropoulos, T.A., Natsis, A., 2011. Educational virtual

environments: A ten-year review of empirical research

(1999-2009). Computers & Education, 56 (2011), pp.

769-780.

Mody, M., Studdert-Kennedy, M., Brady, S., 1997.

Speech perception deficits in poor readers: auditory

processing or phonological coding?. Journal of

experimental child psychology, vol. 64, Feb. 1997, pp.

199-231.

Nielsen, J., 1993. Usability Engineering. The book,

Boston, Academic Press.

Oubahssi, L., Piau-Toffolon, C., Clayer, J.P., Kammoun,

F., 2013. Design and operationalization of patterns:

Case of a training situation of personal assistance for

public in professional integration. Int. Conf. on

Software Technologies (ICSOFT 2013),

Reykjavik(iceland), 29-31 July 2013, p.488-495.

Parfitt, L., Jo, J., Nguyen, A., 1998. Multimedia in

Distance Learning for Tertiary Students With Special

Needs. ASCILITE, Australasian Society for Computers

in Learning in Tary Education, 1998, pp. 561–569.

Prensky, M., 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants.

On the Horizon, 2001, 9(5), pp. 1–6.

doi:10.1108/10748120110424816.

Sehaba, K., Estraillier, P., Lambert, D., 2005. Interactive

Educational Games for Autistic Children with Agent-

Based System. 4

International Conference on

Entertainment Computing (ICEC’05), number 3711 in

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pp. 422–

432, Springer. September 2005, Sanda, Japan.

Sehaba, K., Hussaan, A.M., 2013. Adaptive serious game

for the re-education of cognitive disorders. AMSE

Journals, Advances in modeling, series Modelling C

(Special issue on Handicap) 73(3): 148-159.

Tadjine, Z., Oubahssi, L., Piau-Toffolon, C., Iksal, S.,

2016. A process using ontology to automate the

operationalization of pattern-based learning scenarios.

Scientific Book Chapter In Communications in

Computer and Information Science (CCIS), edited by

Springer-Verlag, 2016, pp. 444-461.

Trinh, T.-H., Querrec, R., Loor, P. D., Chevaillier, P.,

2010. Ensuring semantic spatial constraints in virtual

environments using UML/OCL. In VRST’2010 Proc.

of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and

technology, 2010, pp. 219-226.

CSEDU 2018 - 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education