Digital learning has become an inevitable trend with many benefits for students’ learning performance and motivation. However, Virtual Reality, a pervasive mode of digital learning nowadays, has incurred ambivalence among teachers over the years due to its high cost and other technical concerns. Panoramic image VR (PIVR) is a cost-efficient alternative to conventional VR in classroom settings, and is featured in this quasi-experimental research as a digital means to simulate language situations in future workplaces for a total of 106 vocational high school students majoring in auto mechanics. All student participants were divided into an experimental and a control group. The results showed that learning performance, motivation, and satisfaction were better in the experimental group than in the control group thanks to the use of PIVR. Furthermore, it was found that the learning performance of the experimental group students with medium prior knowledge was significantly better than that of the control group students of the same level of prior knowledge. However, no such difference was found for the remaining participants. It is thus inferred that PIVR-based digital learning might be more effective for students with medium prior knowledge than for those with either high or low prior knowledge.
AhmedM. (2015). The effect of Twitter on developing writing skill in English as a foreign language. Arab World English Journal, Special Issue on CALL2, 134–149.
2.
AkyuzS.YavuzF. (2015). Digital learning in EFL classrooms. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197, 766–769.
3.
AlotebiH. (2016). Enhancing the motivation of foreign language learners through blended learning. International Journal of Advanced Research in Education & Technology, 3(2), 51–55.
4.
AparicioM.BacaoF.OliveiraT. (2016). An e-learning theoretical framework. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 292–307.
5.
AtkinsonJ. W.FeatherN. T. (1966). A theory of achievement motivation. John Wiley & Sons.
6.
AusburnL. J.AusburnF. B. (2008). Effects of desktop virtual reality on learner performance and confidence in environment mastery: Opening a line of inquiry. Journal of STEM Teacher Education, 45(1), 54–87.
7.
BergerP. L. (1997). Four faces of global culture.The National Interest, 49, 23–29.
8.
BlayoneT. J.BarberW.DiGiuseppeM.ChildsE. (2017). Democratizing digital learning: Theorizing the fully online learning community model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 1–16.
9.
ChenS. Y. (2008). The effects of human factors on the use of web-based instruction. In Van SlykeC. (Ed.), Information communication technologies: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (Vol. 2, pp. 2728–2740). IGI Global.
10.
ChenS. Y.MacredieR. (2010). Web-based interaction: A review of three important human factors. International Journal of Information Management, 30(5), 379–387.
11.
ChengJ.ChenC. (2016). The crossroads of English language learners, task-based instruction, and 3D multi-user virtual learning in second life. Computers & Education, 102, 152–171.
12.
ChoiS.ClarkR. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent for learning English as a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(4), 441–466.
13.
ChuH.-C.HwangG.-J.TsaiC.-C. (2010). A knowledge engineering approach to developing Mindtools for context-aware ubiquitous learning. Computers & Education, 54(1), 289–297.
14.
ChungL. Y. (2012). Incorporating 3D-virtual reality into language learning. International Journal of Digital Content Technology and its Applications, 6(6), 249–255.
15.
CromptonH. (2015). Using context-aware ubiquitous learning to support students' understanding of geometry. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1(13), 1–11.
16.
FıratM.KılınçH.YüzerT. V. (2017). Level of intrinsic motivation of distance education students in e‐learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34, 63–70.
17.
FreinaL.OttM. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: State of the art and perspectives. Proceedings of the 11th International Scientific Conference "eLearning and Software for Education" (eLSE), 1, 133–141.
18.
GardnerR. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. Edward Arnold.
19.
GardnerR. C.LambertW. E. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Newbury House.
20.
HarleyJ.PoitrasE.JarrellA.DuffyM.LajoieS. (2016). Comparing virtual and location-based augmented reality mobile learning: Emotions and learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(3), 359–388.
21.
HoL. H.SunH.TsaiT. H. (2019). Research on 3D painting in virtual reality to improve students’ motivation of 3D animation learning. Sustainability, 11(6), 1605.
22.
HwangG. J. (2006, June). Criteria and strategies of ubiquitous learning [Paper presentation]. IEEE International Conference on Sensor Networks, Ubiquitous, and Trustworthy Computing (SUTC'06), Taichung, Taiwan. https://doi.org/10.1109/SUTC.2006.49
23.
JohnsonD. W.JohnsonR. T. (1994). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (4th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
24.
JonassenD. (2006). On the role of concepts in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(2), 177–196.
25.
KelsenB. (2016). The influence of interest and prior knowledge on EFL students’ current news article/podcast reading and listening. CALL-EJ, 17(1), 80–96. http://callej.org/journal/17-1/Kelsen2016.pdf
26.
KirkwoodJ. (1994). Construction in elementary school technology education. In WescottJ.HenakR. (Eds.), Construction in technology education (pp. 75–101). Glencoe.
27.
LeeS. M.ParkM. (2019). Reconceptualization of the context in language learning with a location-based AR app. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33, 936–959. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1602545
28.
LiuC.ChenS.ChiC.ChienK. P.LiuY.ChouT. L. (2017). The effects of clickers with different teaching strategies. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(5), 603–628.
29.
MatzenK.CohenM. F.EvansB.KopfJ.SzeliskiR. (2017). Low-cost 360 stereo photography and video capture. ACM Transactions on Graphics, 36(4), 1–12.
30.
MayerR. E.MorenoR. (2002). Animation as an aid to multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 87–97.
31.
MazzolaL. (2015). MOOCs and museums: Not such strange bedfellows. Journal of Museum Education, 40(2), 159–170.
32.
McClellandD. C.AtkinsonJ. W.ClarkR. A.LowellE. L. (1953). The achievement motive. Appleton-Century-Crofts.
33.
McKayS. L. (2018). English as an international language: What it is and what it means for pedagogy. Sage Journals, 49(1), 9–23.
34.
MontanteC. C. L. (2019). Building communities of practice in a language situated learning setting. MEXTESOL Journal, 43(4), 1–10.
35.
MorenoR. (2002). Who learns best with multiple representations? Cognitive theory implications for individual differences in multimedia learning [Paper presentation]. EDMEDIA 2002 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, 24–29 June 2002, Denver, CO, United States.
36.
NunanD. (2012). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia‐Pacific Region. TESOL, 37(4), 589–613.
37.
RheeT.PetikamL.AllenB.ChalmersA. (2017). MR360: Mixed reality rendering for 360 degrees panoramic videos. Visualization and Computer Graphics, 23(4), 1302–1311.
38.
SadikA. (2008). Digital storytelling: A meaningful technology-integrated approach for engaged student learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 487–506.
39.
SalemY.GropackS. J.CoffinD.GowinE. M. (2012). Effectiveness of a low-cost virtual reality system for children with developmental delay: A preliminary randomized single-blind controlled trial.Physiotherapy, 98(3), 189–195.
40.
SchönD. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Jossey-Bass.
41.
ShenH.YuanY.EwingR. (2015). English learning websites and digital resources from the perspective of Chinese university EFL practitioners. Cambridge University Press, 27(2), 155–176.
42.
SoleimaniE.IsmailK.MustaffaR. (2018). The acceptance of mobile assisted language learning (MALL) among post graduate ESL students in UKM. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 118(19), 457–462.
43.
SuchadaC. (2015). The impact of a social networking environment on the development of English writing skills of Thai university students [Doctoral dissertation]. School of Foreign Language, Institute of Social Technology, Suranaree University of Technology.
44.
WangM.ShenR.NovakD.PanX. (2009). The impact of mobile learning on students' learning behaviours and performance: Report from a large blended classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(4), 673–695.
45.
WidodoH. P.WoodA.GuptaD. (Eds.). (2017). Asian English language classrooms: Where theory and practice meet. Routledge.
46.
YangJ. C.ChenC. H.JengM. C. (2010). Integrating video-capture virtual reality technology into a physically interactive learning environment for English learning. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1346–1356.
47.
ZhangR.ZouD. (2020). Types, purposes, and effectiveness of state-of-the-art technologies for second and foreign language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1744666
