The implementation of electronic team training, e-team training, has been used to teach teamwork skills in a wide array of industries. By using e-team training, organizations have seen the observable benefits of improved team effectiveness, faster response times, and reduction in training costs. Those learning from e-team training have reported additional benefits of improved communication skills, learning team leadership tactics, and an improved satisfaction in their training over traditional team training methods. MOOCs, massive open online course, have yet to incorporate e-team training, due to previous technologies having unscalable, limiting constraints. We reviewed literature on how utilizing e-team training in virtual worlds improves current computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) available in MOOCs, examined the constraints, and give recommendations for the best practices of moving e-team training in virtual worlds to at-scale.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlbertsonK. (2019) IISE, UL team up for innovative online training. Institute of Industrial & Systems Engineers, 51(8), 34–37.
2.
AllenC. J.StrakerR. J.MurrayC. R.HannaM. M.MeizosoJ. P.ManningR. J. …
HannayW. M. (2016). Recent advances in forward surgical team training at the U.S. army trauma training department. Military Medicine, 181(6), 553–559.
3.
BingE. G.ParhamG. P.CuevasA.FisherB.SkinnerJ.MwanahamuntuM.SullivanR. (2019). Using low-cost virtual reality simulation to build surgical capacity for cervical cancer treatment. Journal of Global Oncology, 5, 1–7.
4.
BlomJ.VermaH.LiN.SkeviA.DillenbourgP. (2013). MOOCs are more social than you believe. eLearning Papers, 33.
5.
BonkC. J.LeeM. M.ReevesT. C.ReynoldsT. H. (2015). MOOCs and Open Education Around the World. New York: Routledge.
6.
BonnerD.GilbertS.DorneichM. C.WinerE.SinatraA. M.SlavinaA.. . . HolubJ. (2016). The challenges of building intelligent tutoring systems for teams. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 60(1), 1981–1985.
7.
BuckenmyerJ. A. (2000). Using teams for class activities: Making course/classroom teams work. Journal of Education for Business, 76(2), 98.
8.
CairdJ. K. (1996). Persistent issues in the application of virtual environment systems to training. IEEE Xplore.
9.
ChanM. M.BarchinoR.Medina-MerodioJ.-A.delaRocaM.SagastumeF. (2019). MOOCs, an innovative alternative to teach first aid and emergency treatment: A practical study. Nurse Education Today, 79, 92–97.
10.
CookeN. J.SalasE.KiekelP. A.BellB. (2004). Advances in measuring team cognition. In
SalasE.FioreS. M. (Eds.), Team Cognition: Understanding the Factors that Drive Process and Performance (p. 83–106). American Psychological Association.
11.
ConverseS.Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (1993). Shared mental models in expert team decision making. Individual and Group Decision Making: Current Issues, 221, 221–46.
12.
CraigS. D.SchroederN. L. (2018). Design principles for virtual humans in educational technology environments. In Deep Comprehension (pp. 128–139). Routledge.
13.
DillenbourgP.JärveläS.FischerF. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In Technology-Enhanced Learning (pp. 3–19). Dordrecht: Springer.
14.
EncaladaW. L.CastilloS. J. L. (2017). Model to implement virtual computing labs via cloud computing services. Symmetry, 9(7), 117.
15.
FranklinS.GraesserA. (1996). Is it an agent, or just a program?: A taxonomy for autonomous agents. In International Workshop on Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages (pp. 21–35). Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg.
16.
FransenJ.WeinbergerA.KirschnerP. (2013). Team effectiveness and team development in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 9–24.
17.
FuQ. K.HwangG. J. (2018). Trends in mobile technology-supported collaborative learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2016. Computers & Education, 119, 129–143.
18.
GilbertS. B.DorneichM.WaltonJ.WinerE. (2018). Five lenses on team tutor challenges: A multidisciplinary approach. Building Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Teams: What Matters, 247.
19.
GütlC.RizzardiniR. H.ChangV.MoralesM. (2014). Attrition in MOOC: Lessons learned from drop-out students. In International workshop on learning technology for education in cloud (pp. 37–48). Springer, Cham.
20.
HanS. J.ChaeC.MackoP.ParkW.BeyerleinM. (2017). How virtual team leaders cope with creativity challenges. European Journal of Training & Development, 14(3), 261–276.
21.
HarishJ. (2013). Online education: A revolution in the making. Cadmus, 2(1), 26–38.
22.
HeinrichsW. L.YoungbloodP.HarterP. M.DevP. (2008). Simulation for team training and assessment: Case studies of online training with virtual worlds. World Journal of Surgery, 32(2), 161–170.
23.
HengP. J.EvelynW.LateefF. (2015). Simulation training for emergency teams. Education in Medicine Journal, 7(4), e39–e44.
24.
HoweJ.PuthumanaJ.HoffmanD.KowalskiR.WeldonD.MillerK.. . . RatwaniR. (2018). Development of virtual simulations for medical team training: An evaluation of key features. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care, 7(1), 261–266.
25.
JamesT. A.PageJ. S.SpragueJ. (2016). Promoting interprofessional collaboration in oncology through a teamwork skills simulation programme. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 30(4), 539–541.
26.
JonesS. P.MillerC.GibsonJ. M. E.CookJ.PriceC.WatkinsC. L. (2018). The impact of education and training interventions for nurses and other health care staff involved in the delivery of stroke care: An integrative review. Nurse Education Today, 61, 249–257.
27.
KimD. H.KimS.SongD. (2019). Can Pokémon GO catch brands? The fit effect of game characters and brands on efficacy of brand communications. Journal of Marketing Communications, 25(6), 645–660.
28.
LemattaG. J.ColemanP. B.BhattiS. A.ChiouE. K.McNeeseN. J.DemirM.CookeN. J. (2019) Developing Human-Robot Team Interdependence in a Synthetic Task Environment, The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Seattle, WA.
29.
LeitheadJ.GarbeeD. D.YuQ.RusnakV. V.KiselovV. J.ZhuL.PaigeJ. T. (2019). Examining interprofessional learning perceptions among students in a simulation-based operating room team training experience. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 33(1), 26 -31.
30.
LemattaG. J.JohnsonC. J.ChiouE. K.CookeN. J. (2019, November). Does Team Interaction Exploration Support Resilience in Human Autonomy Teaming?. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 63, No. 1, pp. 1866–1866). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
31.
MeriénA. E. R.VandeVenJ.MolB. W.HoutermanS.OeiS. G. (2010). Multidisciplinary team training in a simulation setting for acute obstetric emergencies. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 115(5), 1021–1031.
32.
MyersC.BallJ.CookeN.FreimanM.CaisseM.RodgersS.. . . McNeeseN. (2019). Autonomous intelligent agents for team training. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 34(2), 3–14.
33.
QiuK.QinT.GaoW.ShenS. (2019). Tracking 3-D motion of dynamic objects using monocular visual-inertial sensing. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 35(4), 799–816.
34.
PowerA.CoulsonK. (2015). What are OERs and MOOCs and what have they got to do with prep? British Journal of Midwifery, 23(4), 282–284.
35.
PunnarumolT. (2015). Classification of collaborative interactions in web based learning environment using KNN and local dynamic behavior. Proceedings of the Multidisciplinary Academic Conference, 1–9.
36.
RosenmanE. D.VrablikM. C.BrolliarS. M.ChipmanA. K.FernandezR. (2019). Targeted simulation-based leadership training for trauma team leaders. Western Journal of Emergency.Medicine: Integrating Emergency Care with Population Health, 20(3), 520–526.
37.
RuhlandK.PetersC. E.AndristS.BadlerJ. B.BadlerN. I.GleicherM. …
McDonnellR. (2015). A Review of Eye Gaze in Virtual Agents, Social Robotics and HCI: Behaviour Generation, User Interaction and Perception. Computer Graphics Forum, 34(6), 299–326. https://doiorg.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/10.1111/cgf.12603
38.
SalasE.KosarzyckiM. P.BurkeC. S.FioreS. M.StoneD. L. (2002). Emerging themes in distance learning research and practice: some food for thought. International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(2), 135–153.
39.
Sanz-MartínezL.ErE.Martínez-MonésA.DimitriadisY.Bote-LorenzoM. L. (2019). Creating collaborative groups in a MOOC: a homogeneous engagement grouping approach. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(11), 1107–1121.
40.
SchatzS.WrayR.Folsom-KovarikJ.NicholsonD. (2012). Adaptive perceptual training in a virtual environment. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 2472–2476.
41.
ShubeckK. T.CraigS. D.HuX. (2016). Live-action mass-casualty training and virtual world training: A comparison. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 60(1), 2103–2107.
42.
SpainR.GoldbergB.KhooshabehP.KrumD.BiroJ.LinderC.. . . PierceM. (2019). Applications of virtual environments in human factors research and practice. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 63(1), 2308–2312.
43.
SpoelstraH.van RosmalenP.HoutmansT.SloepP. (2015). Team formation instruments to enhance learner interactions in open learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 11–20.
44.
ThomsonA. (2018). Three interconnected distance learning education challenges. Community College Enterprise, 24(2), 74–77.
45.
UmorenR. A.PooreJ. A.SweigartL.RybasN.GossettE.JohnsonM. …
DasR. (2017). TeamSTEPPS virtual teams: Interactive virtual team training and practice for health professional learners. Creative Nursing, 23(3), 184–191.
46.
VerstegenD. M. L.Dailey-HebertA.FonteijnH. T. H.ClareboutG.SpruijtA. (2018). How do virtual teams collaborate in online learning tasks in a MOOC?International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 19(4), 39–55.
47.
WangW.HeL.GuoL.WuY. J. (2019). Effects of social-interactive engagement on the dropout ratio in online learning: insights from MOOC. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(6), 621–636.
Yeboah-AntwiK.Snetro-PlewmanG.WaltenspergerK. Z.HamerD. H.KambikambiC. …
MarshD. (2013). Measuring teamwork and taskwork of community-based “teams” delivering life-saving health interventions in rural Zambia: A qualitative study. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 13, 84.
