The future of virtual environments is evident in many fields but is just emerging in the field of teacher education. In this article, the authors provide a summary of the evolution of simulation in the field of teacher education and three factors that need to be considered as these environments further develop. The authors provide a specific example of the work at two universities that use a specific virtual environment, TLE TeachLivE™, in teacher education. This environment is already being used in teacher preparation at 32 universities to collaboratively find ways to enhance teacher practice while using a standardized tool often found in medicine, business and military training, and virtual simulation.
AndreasenJ. B.HaciomerogluE. S. (2009, September). Teacher training in virtual environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Atlanta, GA.
BrandG. A. (1998). What research says: Training teachers for using technology. Journal of Staff Development, 19, 10-13.
4.
BrophyJ. E.GoodT. L. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 328-375). New York, NY: McMillan.
5.
ClarkeL. (2013). Virtual learning environments in teacher education: A journal, a journey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 22, 121-131.
6.
CobbS. (2007). Virtual environments supporting learning and communication in special needs education. Topics in Language Disorders, 27, 211-225.
7.
DarlingM.ParryC.MooreJ. (2005). Learning in the thick of it. Harvard Business Review, 83, 84-92.
8.
DedeC. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323, 66-69.
9.
DeKanterN. (2005). Gaming redefines interactivity for learning. TechTrends, 49, 26-32.
10.
DiekerL.GrilloK.RamlakanN. (2011). New technology and virtual environments: The impact of a summer camp on gifted students interested in STEM careers. Gifted Education International, 28(1), 96-106. doi: 10.1177/0261429411427647
11.
DiekerL. A.HynesM.HughesC.SmithE. (2008). Implications of mixed reality and simulation technologies on special education and teacher preparation. Focus on Exceptional Children, 40, 1-20.
12.
DiekerL. A.Monda-AmayaL. E. (1995). Reflective teaching: A process for analyzing journals of preservice educators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 18, 240-252.
13.
FischlerR. (2007). SimTeacher.com: An online simulation tool for teacher education. Techtrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning, 51, 44-47.
14.
GonzalezT. (2011). Training professional school counseling students to facilitate a classroom guidance lesson and strengthen classroom management skills using a mixed reality environment (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando.
15.
GoodT. L.BrophyJ. E. (1986). Teacher-effects results educational psychology: A realistic approach (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
16.
HolmanP.DevaneT.CadyS. (Eds.). (2007). Change handbook: The definitive resource on today’s best methods for engaging whole systems (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
17.
HughesC. E.StapletonC. B.HughesD. E.SmithE. M. (2005). Mixed reality in education, entertainment, and training. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 25, 24-30.
18.
Institute of Defense Analyses. (1999). Foundations of the after action review process. Alexandria, VA: Author.
19.
JacksonP. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
20.
JohnsonL.SmithR.WillisH.LevineA.HaywoodK. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.
21.
KantorR. J.WaddingtonT.OsgoodR. E. (2000). Fostering the suspension of disbelief: The role of authenticity in goal-based scenarios. Interactive Learning Environments, 8, 211-227.
22.
KimD.BlankenshipR. J. (2013). Using “second life” as a virtual collaborative tool for preservice teachers seeking English for speakers of other languages endorsement. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48, 19-43.
23.
KlopferE.YoonS. (2005). Developing games and simulations for today and tomorrow’s tech savvy youth. TechTrends, 49, 33-42.
24.
KnutzenB.KennedyD. (2012). The global classroom project: Learning a second language in a virtual environment. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 10, 90-106.
25.
LimniouM.RobertsD.PapadopoulosN. (2008). Full immersive virtual environment CAVE™ in chemistry education. Computers & Education, 51, 584-593.
26.
LopezA. (2013). Examining potential teacher bias of Hispanic males with emotional disturbances in virtual settings (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando.
27.
LuL. (2011). Art education avatars in action: Preparing art teachers for learning and teaching in a virtual age (for Special issue Digital Games and Simulations in Teacher Preparation). Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19, 287-301.
28.
MapesD. P.TonnerP.HughesC. E. (2011). Geppetto: An environment for the efficient control and transmission of digital puppetry. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6774, 270-278.
29.
MasonR. B. (2011). Student engagement with and participation in, an e-Forum. Educational Technology & Society, 14, 258-268.
30.
McPhersonR.Tyler-WoodT.McEnturff EllisonA.PeakP. (2011). Using a computerized classroom simulation to prepare pre-service teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 19, 93-110.
31.
Mercier SmithJ. L.FienH.BasarabaD.TraversP. (2009). Planning, evaluating, and improving tiers of support in beginning reading. Teaching Exceptional Children, 41, 16-22.
32.
MullenL.BeilkeJ.BrooksN. (2007). Redefining field experiences: Virtual environments in teacher education. International Journal of Social Sciences, 2, 22-28.
33.
MyersC.ReierS.Lignugaris/KraftB. (2010, November). The use of practice in a virtual classroom to improve fidelity of implementation of discrete trial teaching in public school classrooms. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teach Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, St. Louis, MO.
34.
ParryC.PiresM.Sparkes-GuberH. (2007, pp. 484-489). Action review cycle (ARC) and the after action review (AAR) meeting. In HolmanP.DevaneT.CadyS. (Eds.), The change handbook. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
35.
RockM. L.GreggM.TheadB. K.AckerS. E.GableR. A.ZigmondN. (2009). Can you hear me now? Evaluation of an online wireless technology to provide real-time feedback to special education teachers-in- training. Teacher Education and Special Education, 32, 64-82.
36.
RodriguezJ. (2011, November). Comparison of feedback methods for pre-service teachers delivering mathematics lessons in the TeachME™ Lab. Paper presented at Council for Exceptional Children, Teacher Education Division, Austin, TX.
37.
RosenshineB.MeisterC. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, 49, 26-33.
38.
RosenshineB.StevensR. J. (1986). Teaching functions. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 376-391). New York, NY: McMillan.
39.
SchonD. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
40.
Vince-GarlandK.VasquezE.IIIPearlC. (2012). Efficacy of individualized coaching in a virtual reality classroom for increasing teachers’ fidelity of implementation of discrete trial teaching. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 47, 502-515.
41.
WalkerZ. (2012). Providing coaching on employability skills for students with intellectual disabilities in a virtual environment (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando.
42.
WinnW. (1993). A conceptual basis for educational applications of virtual reality (HITLab Tech Report R-93-9). Seattle: University of Washington, Human Interface Technology Laboratory.
43.
WinnW. (2002). Current trends in educational technology research: The study of learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 331-351.
