Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers & Education
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu
Integrating video-capture virtual reality technology into a physically interactive
learning environment for English learning
Jie Chi Yang a, *, Chih Hung Chen b, Ming Chang Jeng b
a
b
Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National Central University, No.300, Jungda Road, Jhongli City 320, Taiwan
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Central University, Taiwan
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 20 July 2009
Received in revised form
9 June 2010
Accepted 11 June 2010
The aim of this study is to design and develop a Physically Interactive Learning Environment, the PILE
system, by integrating video-capture virtual reality technology into a classroom. The system is designed
for elementary school level English classes where students can interact with the system through physical
movements. The system is designed to be easily established with a minimal amount of equipments that
includes a personal computer, a webcam, and a projector. The learning activities comprise six stages,
holding specific tasks and learning objectives. Each stage is designed with a distinct device. These devices,
including a conical cap, a pistol, a searchlight, a magnet, and a spray paint can, are designed to improve the
accuracy of detection as well as to increase student enjoyment during the learning process. Furthermore,
the system consists of five functional modules, such as providing an interface for teachers to incorporate
appropriate learning materials according to their specific teaching requirements. An empirical study is
conducted to examine the effects of the use of the PILE system by comparing two different types of English
learning methods with 60 second-grade students from two classes at an elementary school in Taiwan. Four
different tests are used to assess the different aspects of the system: an English learning achievement
test, a questionnaire assessing students’ learning motivation, a Short Feedback Questionnaire (SFQ), and
a teacher interview. The results of students’ English learning achievement tests show that there was a
significant difference between the pretest and the posttest in the experimental group, as well as between
the two groups in the delayed test. These results demonstrate that the system had a significantly beneficial
effect on students’ long-term learning. The results from the questionnaires on students’ learning
motivation and the SFQ reveal that the system enhanced the students’ learning motivation. The results
gained from the teacher’s interview illustrate that the teacher believed this system was beneficial in
assisting English learning. All findings collectively demonstrate that the proposed PILE system effectively
assist English learning in a classroom environment.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Applications in subject areas
Digital game-based learning
Evaluation of CAL systems
Improving classroom teaching
Interactive learning environments
Video-capture virtual reality
1. Introduction
Virtual Reality (VR) is regarded as a highly promising technology for both computer-based training and simulation; thus it has been
employed extensively to a number of applications. Its highly interactive environment allows users to become participants in a computergenerated world where they can interact with various stimuli (Antonietti & Cantoia, 2000; Burdea & Coffet, 2003; Crosier, Cobb, & Wilson,
2002; Limniou, Roberts, & Papadopoulos, 2008; Moshell & Hughes, 2002; Shin, 2002). Nowadays, most VR applications require learners to
wear devices such as Head-Mounted Displays (HMD), trackers, or sensors (Cruz-Neira, Sandin, & DeFanti, 1993; Simone, Schultheis,
Rebimbas, & Millis, 2006). However, these devices pose several disadvantages that tend to be relatively expensive, heavy, and easily
damaged (Sharples, Cobb, Moody, & Wilson, 2008). In addition, systems which do not make use of wearable devices, can only detect users’
interactions when used in combination with a blue or green backdrop (Kizony, Katz, & Weiss, 2003). Another widely available VR solution is
known as desktop VR. Desktop VR is a lower level of immersive VR that can be easily employed to many applications without the need for
special devices. Desktop VR is generally regarded as the lowest cost of all VR solutions, and it has been widely adopted in educational
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: yang@cl.ncu.edu.tw (J.C. Yang), spooky@mail2000.com.tw (C.H. Chen), jeng@cc.ncu.edu.tw (M.C. Jeng).
0360-1315/$ – see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.005
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
1347
settings accordingly (Bouras, Philopoulos, & Tsiatsos, 2001; Chen, Yang, Shen, & Jeng, 2007; Demaree, Stonebraker, Zhao, & Bao, 2005;
Lepouras, Charitos, Vassilakis, Charissi, & Halatsi, 2001; Ong & Mannan, 2004). However, the lower level of immersion may be a concern
in using desktop VR applications (Costello, 1997).
Among various VR solutions, video-capture VR provides a higher level of immersion at a low cost (Rand et al., 2005). Because of lower
prices and the increasing popularity of video cameras, many researchers have used video cameras in conjunction with computer vision
technology to develop applications. Accordingly, Video-capture VR has proven as a useful tool in the support of the development of
proficiency in physical movements of children (Hoysniemi, Hamalainen, Turkki, & Rouvi, 2005), attracting visitors’ attention and creating
curiosity at exhibition sites (Chen, Wang, & Huang, 2005), providing a novel interface for music (Blaine, 2005), and helping the rehabilitation
and treatment of patients (Weiss, Rand, Katz, & Kizony, 2004). Additionally, some game manufacturers have developed games that allow
users to physically operate interaction (e.g., Nintendo’s Wii and Sony’s EyeToy). However, the selling point of this type of games is the fun
aspect, instead of a focus on learning. Although the use of video-capture VR has increased, few applications have emerged in the domain of
language learning. None of the aforementioned systems offer learning activities that are designed with integrated learning content, nor do
they offer teachers the opportunity to incorporate appropriate learning materials into the systems. Furthermore, most of the systems require
the use of manufacturer-made customized video cameras.
Based on the above considerations, the aim of this study is to design and develop a Physically Interactive Learning Environment, the PILE
system, for English learning by utilizing video-capture VR technology. The system was designed to be applied in elementary school level
English classes with a variety of learning activities. The design included the use of webcam because of the ease of establishing it into
a classroom environment. An empirical study was also conducted to examine the effects of using the PILE system in an English class.
The remainder of this paper is structured as follows. Section 2 describes related studies on video-capture virtual reality and physical
interaction in English learning. Section 3 describes how the designed learning activities were integrated into the English classes as well as
how the physically interactive learning environment was implemented. Subsequently, the empirical study used to evaluate the system is
presented in Section 4. Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section 5.
2. Literature review
2.1. Video-capture virtual reality
Video-capture virtual reality is designed with the use of computer vision technology, which uses a video camera-based motion capture
platform (Weiss et al., 2004). A video signal is displayed via a screen, which then allows users to interact with the objects on the screen.
Video-capture VR offers several benefits, including a point of view of a realistic experience, freedom from encumbrance, intuitive and
interesting interactions and controls, opportunity to receive feedback, and the possibility for multiple users on the same system simultaneously (Kizony, Raz, Katz, Weingarden, & Weiss, 2005; Rand et al., 2005; Sun & Cheng, 2009; Weiss et al., 2004). Video-capture VR creates
mirrored images so that users can see themselves on the screen. This is different from traditional VR environments, which use HMD,
headphones, or data gloves to provide first-person point of view. Users in a video-capture VR environment do not need to rely on wearable
sensors or other additional devices which are used to stimulate the virtual environment, thus offering freedom from encumbrance.
Moreover, users can also directly interact with objects in a video-capture VR environment, which does not happen in traditional VR
environments where users interact with other objects by controlling the virtual characters (avatars) on the screen. Therefore, video-capture
VR provides a more intuitive interaction, which allows users to experience their heads, hands, or body’s natural movements when they
interact with objects on the screen. Although a haptic interface is lacking in a video-capture VR environment (Broeren, Rydmark, &
Sunnerhagen, 2004; Feintuch et al., 2006), both visual feedback and auditory feedback still can be supported. In addition, it is possible
to support multiple users in a video-capture VR environment.
Recently, video-capture VR technology has been applied in a variety of domains, such as medical rehabilitation, video games, physical
movement, art, and music. One of the applications is the VividGroup’s GX platform, which utilized webcams to capture user images on the
screen, and then used a chroma-key and blue backdrop to embed the user images on the screen in a simulated environment (Kizony et al.,
2003, 2005; Weiss et al., 2004). For example, a medical rehabilitation game in the GX platform, Soccer, allows patients to act as goalkeepers
to deflect a ball away from a goal. The purpose of designing this game was to help patients’ physical rehabilitation in a fun and motivating
way. Strong evidence was gathered from patient interviews which show that the majority were in agreement that video-capture VR
combined with a physical game-based activity helped them deal with their rehabilitation treatment. The abovementioned results
demonstrate the feasibility of applying video-capture VR to medical rehabilitation.
Video games have gradually become to be an indispensable role in children’s lives. However, the majority of these games use a mouse,
a keyboard or a joystick as the input device, which leads children to prolonged periods of time inactively while sitting in front of televisions
or computers; thus negatively impacting the children’s physical fitness (Cordes & Miller, 2000). Other video game makers have developed
game platforms that have integrated cameras, such as the EyeToy digital camera for the Sony PlayStation II, the Game Boy Camera for the
Nintendo Game Boy, and the Dreameye digital camera for the Sega Dreamcast. These platforms allow users to interact with games through
body movement, unlike previous games that only allow users to sit still using joysticks during game play. This new development
dramatically increases the level of fun. Several studies investigated the effects of using EyeToy on rehabilitation for disable elders (Rand,
Kizony, & Weiss, 2008), and patients with severe burns (Haik et al., 2006). These studies demonstrate that the video-capture VR
technology could be a challenging and motivating way for patients to immerse themselves in an alternate reality while undergoing their
treatments, thereby reducing their pain and discomfort.
In addition, various studies used video-capture VR technology in physical movement. For example, a study by Mokka, Vaatanen, Heinila,
& Valkkynen (2003) developed a virtual aerobic exercise bike by using teleconferencing, which aimed to stimulate users to do exercises that
would improve their physical fitness. Another study by Chen et al. (2005) used visual identification technology to allow visitors physically
interacting with a dummy called Shadow, which aimed at piquing visitors’ curiosity and attracting their attention to an exhibition. Other
studies used the Wizard of Oz Prototyping technique to help children develop their physical movements to allow children physically
controlling an avatar on the screen (Hoysniemi, Aula, Auvinen, Hannikainen, & Hamalainen, 2004; Hoysniemi et al., 2005). For example,
1348
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
when the player hits an object, the avatar would echo the player’s movements. In fact, the movements and reactions of the avatar were
controlled by the researchers instead of the players. The Wizard of Oz Prototyping technique was aimed at quickly collecting the relevant
information about players’ movements and to serve as a basis for the future development of interactive systems. While using this system to
do exercises, most participants achieved a standard level of healthy heart-rate. The majority of participants felt that this interaction was very
stimulating and agreed that this would be a feasible way to enhance cardiovascular functions (Hoysniemi et al., 2004).
Furthermore, several studies used a video camera with additional devices to allow users to experience actual interactions in different
types of domains, such as art and music. For example, I/O Brush, which was developed by the MIT Media Lab, is a drawing device for children
that integrates video-capture VR technology with other embedded sensors. It looks just like a common paintbrush with a wooden handle
and soft brush, but can record the color, texture, and movement through brushing surfaces on physical materials to draw the recorded data
onto a canvas using a built-in miniature video camera with lights and touch sensors (Ryokai, Marti, & Ishii, 2005). In addition, a study used
a new type of music controller as the input interface that integrates video-based interactive technology and tangible devices (Blaine, 2005).
All of the aforementioned studies demonstrate the possibilities of incorporating video-capture VR technology into the realms of interactive
entertainment and education.
2.2. Physical interaction in English learning
Teaching English as Foreign Language (EFL) in elementary schools aims to create a natural and enjoyable environment that is conducive
to language learning. It is imperative that students who are interested in studying English should possess basic communication skills, as well
as receive knowledge of the language (vocabulary and grammar structure). When teaching children a foreign language at early stage, it
should focus on attitude goals, such as facilitating children’s interest and motivation, before gradually switching to content goals, such as
language competence (Halliwell, 1992). Children hold their attentions on language learning only if the learning is interesting; therefore, in
essence, English learning activities should be designed in such a way that can arouse children’s interests (McGlothlin, 1997). Previous studies
have identified that while interest and confidence increasingly built in children, more positive impacts were on their language learning
(Cohen, 1998; Dulay & Burt, 1977; Krashen, 1981). Numerous studies have also demonstrated a significant correlation between learners’
motivation and achievement in English learning (Littlewood, 2001; Wolters, Yu, & Pintrich, 1996; Yamamori, Isoda, Hiromori, & Oxford,
2003; Yang, 1999).
Besides, many students are still taught in a teacher-centered method. The teachers always speak aloud to teach students new words or
phrases from the textbook. In such way, students might lack for chances to either controlling or interacting with computers or other
technical devices. Recently, the integration of IT technology into an English class has become more common (Samuel & Bakar, 2006). Many
teachers use computers to demonstrate teaching materials and animations or play songs to motivate students to learn.
The use of different strategies in language learning benefits language learners who have their own learning preferences (Oxford, 1990).
Asher (1966, 1969, 2000) proposed a strategy called Total Physical Response (TPR), which used physical interaction to teach language. Its
premise is that children learn new languages through language-body conversations via instructions. Using the TPR method, students can not
only learn the target language in single words and multi-word chunks via imperatives but also be imitators of teachers’ nonverbal model
(Larsen-Freeman, 2000).
Various studies have indicated that interaction through body movement helps children convey and receive messages; consequently, it
promotes language learning (Asher, 1981, 2000, 2002; Asher & Price, 1981; Marsh, 1998). Language learning through a game-based body
movement can effectively reduce learning anxiety, and achieve effective learning. When children make the correct moves in response to
instructions, children can naturally build confidence (Asher, 1977). Instead of simply sitting on a bench and listening to a teacher’s lectures,
learning through body movement significantly improves learning effectiveness (Price & Rogers, 2004). In addition, it is also beneficial for
children’s language development as physical interactions are utilized to promote vocabulary memorization in their early stage of foreign
language learning (Allen, 1983).
Many studies have applied the teaching strategy of physical movements into foreign language learning (Sano, 1986; Tomscha, 1986;
Woodruf, 1976; Zuern, 1982), for example, Russian (Asher, 1965), Japanese (Kunihira & Asher, 1965), and Spanish (Glisan, 1986; Wolfe &
Jones, 1982). The purpose of applying this kind of teaching strategy is to foster the interest and confidence of students. Additionally, the
assimilation of information and skills may be accelerated through the use of the kinesthetic sensory system. In short, integrating physical
movements into language education could be positively beneficial to students.
3. Learning activities design and system implementation
3.1. Learning activities design
As mentioned earlier, this study aimed to design an interactive learning environment that would allow students to physically interact
with virtual objects to improve their English learning. Students are not passively receiving information by the one-way of teacher-centered
learning style but are interacting within a student-centered learning environment. The proposed video-capture VR based learning environment requires no avatar to interact with objects on the screen, thus differing from traditional VR environments that require the wearing
of heavy, expensive sensors. Students can physically interact with the virtual objects on the screen in a natural manner.
The learning environment is designed to be applied in a classroom, it is important that it allows a teacher to meet the curricular
requirements and easily edit the learning materials. After several consultations with an English teacher, learning activities which matched
the curriculum were created. These learning activities were designed into six stages, which required the use of specific devices. The devices
included a conical cap, a plastic pistol, a searchlight, a magnet, and a spray paint can to further enhance the reality of the learning environment. The learner can use a specific device to manipulate virtual objects in each stage. Additionally, a specific task was designed to fulfill
a learning objective and encourage students to practice English during each stage. Table 1 summarizes the design of the learning activities
for the six stages, which include stage name, learning objective, interactive method, and language skills.
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
1349
Table 1
Learning activities design.
Stage name
Learning objective
Interactive method
Language skills
Stage 1: Identifying English letters
Stage 2: Understanding phrases
Identify and pronounce English letters
Strengthen the connections between the form, the
pronunciation, and the meaning of phrases
Strengthen the connections between the
pronunciation and meaning of phrases
Strengthen the connections between the form, the
pronunciation, and the meaning of phrases
Strengthen the connections between the form and
meaning of words
Strengthen the connections between the pronunciation
and the writing of words
Poking a balloon with a conical cap
Punching an object with a fist
Reading, speaking
Reading, listening,
speaking
Listening, speaking
Stage 3: Listening to phrases
Stage 4: Speaking phrases
Stage 5: Matching pictures with words
Stage 6: Listening and writing words
Shooting an object with a plastic pistol
Exploring a picture with a searchlight
Dragging a picture to match its
corresponding word by a magnet
Writing a word using a spray paint can
controlled by a wireless mouse
Reading, listening,
speaking
Reading
Listening, writing
3.1.1. Stage 1: identifying English lettersdpoking with a conical cap
This stage is designed to help learners identify letters of the English alphabet. The learner uses the tip of a conical cap to poke a balloon
which contains a letter of the English alphabet. The learner is then required to speak the letter in the balloon that was poked. Feedback will
appear after the vocalization. The feedback given will depend on the accuracy of learner’s pronunciation of the letter. Teachers can change
the content of each balloon according to the different teaching requirements.
3.1.2. Stage 2: understanding phrasesdpunching with a fist
This stage is aimed at strengthening the connections that learners make between the form, the pronunciation, and the meaning of
phrases. The learning content is depicted as boxing targets. If an object is hit, the corresponding phrase will appear on the screen as text with
vocalization. After this, the learner should speak the phrase followed by the vocalization.
3.1.3. Stage 3: listening to phrasesdshooting with a pistol
This stage is aimed at strengthening the connections that learners make between the pronunciation and meaning of phrases. The learner
has to listen carefully to a phrase which is vocalized by the system; the learner then has to use a plastic pistol to shoot the picture that
represents the phrase. After this, the learner should speak the phrase. If the correct answer is selected, the system then provides positive
feedback accompanied by vivid animation and sound. However, if the incorrect answer is chosen, then a red sign accompanied by an
unpleasant sound appears. It indicates that an incorrect answer was given by the learner; this provides the learner an opportunity to think
and try again.
3.1.4. Stage 4: speaking phrasesdexploring with a searchlight
This stage is aimed at strengthening the connections that learners make between the form, the pronunciation, and the meaning of
phrases. It is crucial to arouse learners’ curiosity and to create suspense when designing teaching contents or materials (Brophy, 1987).
Particularly, a means of surprise may attract learners’ attention. This task requires learners to explore a picture behind a window using
a searchlight, and to speak the phrase that represents the picture. Learners use the searchlight to move a circle of light; when the circle falls
on the window, the picture behind the window appears. To avoid any obstruction while using the searchlight, the searchlight’s illumination
and the exploration window were designed to be transparent thus giving the learner completely unobstructed interaction.
3.1.5. Stage 5: matching pictures with wordsddragging with a magnet
This stage is based around a common learning activity for English teaching in a classroom, the matching of pictures with words. The aim
is to help learners strengthen the connections they make between the form and meaning of words. This activity requires learners to use
a magnet to drag a picture towards its corresponding word, which is depicted on a railway carriage.
3.1.6. Stage 6: listening and writing wordsdwriting with a spray paint can
This stage is aimed at strengthening the connections that learners make between the pronunciation and the writing of words. Learners
use a virtual spray paint can to write the word that they have heard from the system. The virtual spray paint can is controlled by a wireless
mouse. This design allows learners to experience the sensation by pressing a spray can when they click on the mouse button, which is
similar to press the nozzle of a real spray paint can.
3.2. System implementation
The software tools used to develop the PILE system include an object-oriented programming language, Flash ActionScript 2.0, to establish
the main aspects of the system, JavaScript to integrate the websites, and Visual Basic to help establish the editing interface for teachers. The
PILE system comprises five modules: Video Capture Module, Motion Detection Module, Stage Control Module, Materials Edit Module, and
User Interface Module, as illustrated in Fig. 1.
3.2.1. Video capture module
This module encompasses the capture process that occurs between the video and the webcam. Captured video information is transferred
into digital signals, which are then shown as bitmap images on the screen. This module works in conjunction with the Motion Detection
Module to retrieve video information for further analysis.
1350
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
Fig. 1. System modules of the PILE system.
3.2.2. Motion detection module
This module analyzes the video information related to physical movements, which are acquired from the Video Capture Module. The
analysis results are provided to the Stage Control Module, enabling the system to generate corresponding messages or responses. This
detection method uses thresholds of RGB color values that are set to detect different objects, by analyzing what degree that the objects
approach the color thresholds. More specifically, the threshold is set as a range between two RGB color values, rather than being given
a fixed value.
3.2.3. Stage control module
The Stage Control Module controls and records the processes and rules of each stage; it reacts to the results that are received from the
Motion Detection Module; these results include displayed hint messages and pictures as well as the pronunciation of words or phases.
Learners may progress to the next stage once a task has been completed. They may also return to previous stages for further iterative
practice.
3.2.4. Materials edit module
This module provides functions that allow teachers to add or edit learning materials available on the PILE system. After the teacher has
edited a teaching module, the system provides corresponding pictures and templates. The same teaching module may then be edited using
the same interface. The learning materials are easily integrated within only a few simple steps. Different types of materials, such as images
and sounds, may be automatically generated according to the different teaching modules set by the teacher. Therefore, teachers may tailor
the PILE system to their specific teaching needs accommodating different levels of students.
3.2.5. User interface module
This module provides interfaces that allow students to interact with the system. It works in conjunction with the other system modules
generating the PILE system.
By combining the five modules mentioned above, the PILE system presents learning materials, receives video data from a webcam, and
allows students to physically interact with the objects in the system. Fig. 2 shows a diagram of how students use the PILE system in
a classroom. The hardware requirements include a desktop computer, a webcam, a projector, and a large screen. These equipments are
usually available for most classrooms. Teachers may also utilize personal laptops with webcams to establish the PILE system within
a classroom. Thus, it is apparent to indicate how the PILE system may be easily introduced into most classrooms. Before the class, teachers
can edit the relevant materials and teaching strategies within the system. During the class, students are physically engaged in the system for
a variety of learning activities.
Figs. 3 and 4 illustrate screenshots of each stage while learners physically interacting with the PILE system. The photo on the left side of
Fig. 3 shows a learner using a conical cap to poke a balloon during Stage 1. This type of the task is proceeded as a multiple-choice quiz. The
photo in the center of Fig. 3 shows a learner punching an object with his fist during Stage 2. The corresponding text, e.g. bake a cake, appears
on the screen, accompanied by the phrase being vocalized. If the learner does not clearly hear the vocalization and wants to hear it one more
time, he can punch the object again to practice. The photo on the right of Fig. 3 shows a learner shooting an object with a plastic pistol during
Stage 3. The learner shoots the picture corresponding to the phrase which is also vocalized by the system. If the learner does not clearly hear
the phrase or wants to hear it again, he can shoot the “sound” button and the system will vocalize the phrase in response to the learner’s
request. The learner can also shoot the “replay” button which results in the practice with a different question. To avoid learners memorizing
the answers which might occur if questions always appeared in the same order, a new question accompanied by a different picture is
randomly generated each time.
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
1351
Fig. 2. Diagram of students using the PILE system.
The photo on the left of Fig. 4 shows a learner using a searchlight to explore the picture on the screen during Stage 4. When the learner
moves a circle with the searchlight on the window, the picture behind the window appears. During the exploration process, the system
responds with a special sound effect which is designed to enable the learner to concentrate on the explored picture and to identify the
pronunciation and meaning of the corresponding phrase. The teacher then asks the learner to speak the phrase that represents the picture.
The photo in the center of Fig. 4 shows a learner using a magnet to drag a picture for matching up the corresponding word during Stage 5. For
example, the learner drags the picture on the top to match with the word “heavy” which is depicted on the bottom of a railway carriage. The
pictures and the words are randomly located at different places for each question so that learners cannot memorize the answers. The photo
on the right of Fig. 4 shows a learner using a virtual spray paint can to write a word. The learner writes the word that he has heard by using
a wireless mouse to control the can. While the button of the wireless mouse is clicked, sprays are continuously and transformed into
handwriting that appears on the screen.
4. Evaluation
To reach the aim of this study described earlier, an empirical study was conducted to examine the effects of the use of the PILE system by
comparing two different types of English learning methods in classroom settings. 60 students participated in the study, of which results
were analyzed with quantitative and qualitative approaches.
4.1. Methods
The participants in this study were the second-grade students from two different English classes at a Taiwanese elementary school. The
PILE system was integrated into one class as the experimental group, The other class acted as the control group, which was instructed by
using PowerPoint slides. There were 30 students (18 boys and 12 girls) in the experimental group, and 30 students (17 boys and 13 girls) in
the control group. The study was conducted over a period of three weeks, with a total of three 40-min classes, one class per week. Therefore,
duration of the in-class study was a total of 120 min.
The instruments used in this study included English learning achievement tests, questionnaires, and an interview. Observation recorded
students’ behavior in the classrooms was also analyzed. The study proceeded as follows:
Fig. 3. Poking a balloon with a conical cap (left), punching an object with a fist (center), shooting an object with a plastic pistol (right).
1352
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
Fig. 4. Exploring a picture with a searchlight (left), dragging a picture to match its corresponding word by a magnet (center), writing a word using a spray paint can controlled by
a wireless mouse (right).
(1) Pretest: The students were asked to take a pretest to assess their English abilities in the beginning of the study. The pretest included
five items which were made based on an English curriculum for second-grade students by the English teacher. The students’ answers
given on the pretest were coded based on the correctness to the items. In other words, if one item was correctly answered,
then the student could get one point. The total score for the pretest was five points. The students were given 10 min to complete the
pretest.
(2) System interaction: For the experimental group, the PILE system was introduced by the teacher. Proper usage of the system as well as
explanations of the tasks and learning objectives required for each stage were discussed. The teacher then demonstrated how to interact
with the system. For the control group, the learning materials were presented by using PowerPoint slides. Fig. 5 shows photos of the two
groups, experimental and control groups, during the study.
(3) Questionnaires: Two types of questionnaires were designed by using a five-point Likert scale. The first was an eight-item learning
motivation questionnaire and the second was an eight-item Short Feedback Questionnaire (SFQ). According to Kizony et al. (2003), the
SFQ is an effective assessment tool for gathering participants’ subjective responses to the VR learning experience. The SFQ measures
participants’ experiences and perceptions of the following eight aspects: feeling of enjoyment, sense of being in the environment,
success, control, perception of the environment as being realistic, comprehension of the computer feedback, perception of difficulty
while performing the task, and level of comfort during the experience.
(4) Posttest: The items assessed in the posttest were same as in the pretest. The students were given 10 min to complete the posttest.
(5) Interview: The teacher was interviewed after the completion of the study. The purpose of this interview was to explore the teacher’s
experience regarding using the PILE system in her English teaching.
(6) Delayed test: A delayed test was conducted to assess the students’ English learning achievements one week after the study. The delayed
test was composed of nine items. The students’ answers given on the delayed test were also coded based on the correctness to the items.
Thus, the total score for the delayed test was nine points.
4.2. Results
The results of the study are described in the following paragraphs which are divided into four main aspects. The aspects are English
learning achievement tests, questionnaires on students’ learning motivation, Short Feedback Questionnaire, and a teacher interview.
Fig. 5. The experimental group using the PILE system (left), and the control group using PowerPoint slides (right).
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
1353
4.2.1. English learning achievement tests
Table 2 summarizes the descriptive statistics analysis in terms of the mean score (Mean) and standard deviation (SD) of the English
learning achievement tests. Due to the fact that the sample was not large and non-normal distribution, non-parametric tests were applied to
conduct data analyses. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare students’ English learning achievements between the
pretest and posttest in the two groups respectively. The result shows that there was a significant difference between the pretest and posttest
in the experimental group (p ¼ .035 < 0.05), but the difference was not found in the control group. More specifically, these results indicate
that the experimental group made a significant progress in the English learning achievement as compared to the control group. Additionally,
the Mann–Whitney U test was performed to compare students’ English learning achievements between the two groups in the pretest,
posttest and delayed test. The results show that there were no significant differences between the two groups in both the pretest and
posttest. However, a significant difference was found between the two groups in the delayed test (p ¼ .043 < 0.05). More specifically, this
result reveals that the experimental group outperformed the control group in the delayed test. It is also worth mentioning that the
experimental group’s standard deviation was found to be lower than the control group’s, particularly shows a lower than half difference in
the delayed test.
4.2.2. Questionnaire on students’ learning motivation
Table 3 shows the results of the students’ response to the questionnaire that was conducted to assess the level of learning motivation of
the experimental and control groups. The results show that students in the experimental group rated most items higher than those in the
control group. For items 1, 2, and 3, 96.6% of the students in the experimental group responded that they liked learning English via using the
PILE system, 79.3% of the students expressed that they wanted to try to practice English on the stage, and 93.1% of the students expressed
that they thoroughly concentrated on the screen during the class. These findings show that the system stimulates student motivation
towards learning English. By contrast, only 86.7%, 66.7%, and 83.3% of the students in the control group answered accordingly.
The Mann–Whitney U test was performed to compare students’ learning motivation between the two groups. The results show that
there were significant differences between the two groups in regard to items 4, 5, 7, and 8 with p ¼ .001, 0.015, 0.005, and 0.013, respectively.
For items 4 and 5, 90% of students in the experimental group responded that they repeated the English phrases after the system had
vocalized them; 79.3% of students expressed that they actively spoke the correct answers when seeing the questions on the screen. By
contrast, in the control group, only 70% and 50% of students asserted that they spoke the phrases and correct answers accordingly. Additionally, for item 8, 89.7% of students in the experimental group responded that they wanted more questions to practice English, whereas
only 66.7% of students in the control group answered accordingly.
Interestingly, items 6 and 7 were the two items that the experimental group gave lower scores as compared to the control group.
Students in the experimental group gave item 7, in particular, a relatively low score as compared to other items. The possible reason for this
finding will be addressed later in the Discussions section.
4.2.3. Short Feedback Questionnaire (SFQ) for the PILE system
Table 4 shows students’ responses to the SFQ for the experimental group. The results show that students gave high scores to most items.
This indicates that students enjoyed the PILE system and experienced in the video-capture VR learning environment. Students commented
that they felt their English ability had improved. They also felt that the objects were easy to control by using physical movement. Students
experienced the learning environment in a way that genuinely felt like reality. They were satisfied with the feedback from the system and
felt no difficulty or discomfort via using the system.
4.2.4. Teacher interview
The teacher was interviewed during and after the study. The teacher’s opinions are useful not only in helping evaluating the PILE system,
but also in examining whether the system is suitable for English teaching and learning. The teacher’s comments are summarized as follows:
The PILE system stimulated students’ learning motivation and captured their attention. In addition to including fascinating objects in
the system, it is even more significant that students are attracted to the system while seeing their own images appearing on the screen
via video. Accordingly, they can directly interact with the objects through physical movements.
In comparison to traditional teaching methods, such as the use of CDs or PowerPoint slides, the teaching method of using the PILE
system improved students’ concentration and motivation to English learning. Students were not limited to passively receive information through one-way communication, but actively interacted with the system.
The system’s user interface is colorful, attractive, and easily understood. The vocalizations of the system are clear and taking place in
real-time. It actively facilitated English learning for the students.
The system’s feedback is very effective. Students received immediate feedback while operating the system.
The operation of the system is very easy and intuitive. Students used the system without any difficulty.
The editable interface provides more flexibility and allows the tailoring of learning materials to match different teaching requirements.
I think the PILE system will be a useful teaching tool.
Table 2
Results of the English learning achievement tests.
Experimental group (N ¼ 30)
Pretest
Posttest
Delayed test
Control group (N ¼ 30)
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
2.70
3.50
8.47
1.622
1.614
0.860
3.20
3.27
7.53
1.883
1.780
2.080
1354
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
Table 3
Results of the questionnaire on students’ learning motivation.
Control group (N ¼ 30)
Item
Experimental group
(N ¼ 30)
Mean
SD
Mean
SD
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
4.73
4.30
4.67
4.50
4.30
4.33
2.37
4.63
0.521
1.119
0.606
1.042
1.208
0.922
1.752
0.765
4.60
3.83
4.30
3.50
3.30
4.53
3.63
3.63
0.932
1.577
1.291
1.526
1.664
1.137
1.586
1.691
Did you like today’s English class?
While the student was practicing English on the stage, did you also want to try?
While the student was practicing English on the stage, did you concentrate on the screen?
Did you speak the English phrases out during the class?
When you saw the questions on the screen, did you actively speak the correct answer?
When the student responded with the right answers, did you feel happy for him?
While the student was interacting with the objects, did you want to tell him the correct answer?
Would you like more pictures and questions available to help you practice English?
4.3. Discussions
The results gathered from students’ English learning achievement tests indicate that there was a significant difference between the
pretest and posttest in the experimental group. There was also a significant difference between the two groups in the results garnered from
the delayed test. Evidence gathered from observing the students’ behavior helps interpret the results. During the class, many students
unconsciously stood up. Also, some students leaned forward on their chairs, adopted a kneeling position, and concentrated on the student
who was interacting with the PILE system. It is obvious to see students were very excited about operating the system. For example, those
who usually did not pay attention during regular classes, continuously raised their hands showing their willingness to operate the system;
even though they had already interacted with the system. The behavior outlined above, demonstrate that the PILE system can effectively
attract students’ attention. With this system, students’ English ability can be improved significantly. This improvement could be revealed
from the results of the posttest and the delayed test, particularly the long-term learning effect which is assessed in the delayed test. These
findings also echo the Dual-Coding Theory (Paivio, 1991), which suggested that more than two modes of media should be provided
collectively to learners, thus significantly improving the process of learning, and the recall and retrieval of content.
The results of the questionnaire on students’ learning motivations reveal that the PILE system positively stimulated students’ learning
motivation. This indicates that physical interaction facilitates students’ learning motivation in terms of English learning. Some students’
behavioral changes in the experimental group were observed in order to help interpret the results. For instance, a student was wearing
a towel on his head, and was lying down on his desk at the beginning of the class. When the teacher asked for a student to operate the
system, he immediately awoke and lifted his hand up, to express his willingness to operate the system. By contrast, the students in the
control group appeared to lack motivation in the class. They responded that they did not want to be selected to answer the questions.
One interesting finding revealed that students in the experimental group gave a relatively low score response to the Item 7 of the
questionnaire. Only 27.6% students expressed that they wanted to tell the correct answer to the student who was interacting with the
system. Some students were interviewed to gain understanding as to why most of them disagreed with this item. It might be due to the fact
that if the participating student failed to answer the question correctly, the rest of students would have more chances to interact with the
system. In other words, students were eager to be selected to operate the system.
The results of the responses from the SFQ show that most students had a good experience while participating in this video-capture VR
based learning environment. The possible reasons for the results were discussed with reference to students’ responses and behavioral
observation during the study. These are described according to the eight aspects of the SFQ, as in the following paragraphs:
In terms of the feeling of enjoyment aspect, most students responded that physically interacting with the PILE system was interesting and
enjoyable. The enjoyment from operating the system motivated students to be continually involved in the learning activities as well as
encouraged them to concentrate on learning. In other words, while students felt like continually taking part in the activity, they had more
opportunities to practice English.
In terms of the sense of being in the environment, the students expressed that they were highly immersed in the learning environment.
Video-capture VR provides an experience which encourages learners to feel fully immersed in the VR scenes (Rand et al., 2005). This is
definitely the case when students are able to watch their own images appearing on the screen and directly interact with the objects rather
than interacting through an avatar. Consequently, students felt that they were part of the learning environment.
In terms of the success aspect, most students expressed that they felt a sense of achievement after they successfully accomplished the
tasks. This is consistent with the results from the English learning achievement tests, indicating that students in the experimental group
Table 4
Results of the SFQ.
Aspects
Experimental group (N ¼ 16)
Mean
Feeling of enjoyment
Sense of being in the environment
Success
Control
Perception of the environment as being realistic
Comprehension of the computer feedback
Perception of difficulty while performing the task
Level of comfort during the experience
4.63
4.38
4.44
4.66
4.08
4.54
4.19
4.37
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
1355
performed better than those in the control group. Almost all students expressed that their confidence in speaking English has been
increased. Therefore, it is clear that building students’ confidence encourages them to actively participate in learning activities, and helps
them achieve success (Littlewood, 2001).
In terms of the control aspect, the students responded that there was no lag when they were manipulating the system and were able to
control the system smoothly. Students agreed that controlling the user interface with their own physical movements was easy and intuitive.
None of them found it was difficult to control the system, even during the hardest stage as using the mouse to spray the words. In regard to
video-capture VR technology, environmental lights and objects’ colors are key factors that influence the accuracy of object detection, which
causes unstable control over objects. Previous studies have applied a blue backdrop beyond users to decrease the negative influence from
lights and colors (Kizony et al., 2003). However, it is difficult to apply a blue backdrop or provide suitable lights in a regular classroom. Thus,
a few devices are facilitated to reduce the unstable control in the study.
In terms of the students’ perception of the environment as being realistic, the students expressed that they felt being part of the learning
environment in a way that reflected reality. Some specific devices were used to engage students with the learning activities, such as the
searchlight or magnet. Accompanying students’ physical movements, these devices helped promote the feeling that students were engaged
with a challenge, and highlighted the reality of the interaction. Video-capture VR technology, in combination with these devices, made the
learning environment more realistic for students.
In terms of the comprehension of the computer feedback, the students responded that they understood the meaning of the computer
feedback provided by the system. Because the system is designed for elementary school students and focused on a game-based learning
strategy, the feedback design is relatively simple and interesting. For example, the system includes sound effects and funny animations that
were designed to attract students and be easily comprehensible. Students expressed that the feedback provided by the system was very easy
to understand, and the sounds and animations surprised and encouraged them to interact with the system.
According to the students’ perception of difficulty while performing the task, most students felt that the tasks were easy to perform. In the
control group, students felt that learning materials presented in the PowerPoint slides were like an English test. By contrast, most students
in the experimental group responded that using the PILE system was like playing a game. They could perform the tasks easily through
physical movements without any pressure. Some students even responded that they enjoyed the challenge of completing the tasks in the
system.
In terms of the level of comfort during the experience, the students reported that they felt no discomfort during the experience of operating
the system. It is because for most VR systems, discomfort is a great concern that users must wear heavy helmets, digital gloves, or glasses. By
contrast, video-capture VR immerses students in the learning environment without the need of these devices. Additionally, there were no
reports of related symptoms, such as fatigue, headache, eyestrain, nausea, dizzy, or vertigo.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, a Physically Interactive Learning Environment, the PILE system, was designed for English learning. The system was
implemented by integrating video-capture VR technology into a classroom environment. Six stages of learning activities were designed.
Each stage was accompanied by a specific task, learning objective, interactive method, and language skill. The PILE system allows students to
interact with objects on the screen through physical movements, different from their previous experiences of using only a mouse and
a keyboard as input devices. The results of the empirical study show that using the PILE system significantly improved student English
learning performance. The experimental group performed better than the control group in the posttest and the delayed test by actively
participating in the PILE system as compared to a one-way instructional method using a PowerPoint display. These results demonstrate the
beneficial long-term learning effect of integrating the PILE system into an English class. The learning motivation of student has also been
significantly enhanced. Additionally, the results of the SFQ show that most students enjoyed using the PILE system to learn English, and they
found no difficulty in operating the system. Moreover, the results of the interview show that the teacher believed the system was helpful for
the students to learn English and encouraged them to actively participate in English learning. The abovementioned findings demonstrate
that the application of the proposed PILE system to an English learning classroom environment is both feasible and beneficial.
The empirical study described in this paper has shown the importance of integrating video-capture VR technology into a physically
interactive learning environment for English learning. However, it was only a short-term study. Further long-term empirical studies must be
undertaken to provide additional evidences. Another limitation of this study was that the sample consisted only of second-grade students,
which may influence the validity of the results. Therefore, further empirical studies, which include participants of higher grades, will be
needed to verify the results described in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mr. Yi-Ho Chen for assisting in the system development. The authors would also like to thank all the
subjects who participated in the study. This study was partially supported by grants (NSC 97-2628-S-008-001-MY3, NSC 98-2631-S-008001) from the National Science Council of Taiwan.
References
Allen, V. F. (1983). Techniques in teaching vocabulary. New York: Oxford University Press.
Antonietti, A., & Cantoia, M. (2000). To see a painting versus to walk in a painting: an experiment on sense-making through virtual reality. Computers & Education, 34(3–4),
213–223.
Asher, J. J. (1965). The strategy of the total physical response: an application to learning Russian. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 3, 291–300.
Asher, J. J. (1966). The learning strategy of the total physical response: a review. Modern Language Journal, 50(2), 79–84.
Asher, J. J. (1969). The total physical response approach to second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 53(1), 3–17.
Asher, J. J. (1977). Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher’s guidebook. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions.
Asher, J. J. (1981). Comprehension training: the evidence from laboratory and classroom studies. In H. Winitz (Ed.), The comprehension approach to foreign language instruction
(pp. 187–222). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
1356
J.C. Yang et al. / Computers & Education 55 (2010) 1346–1356
Asher, J. J. (2000). Learning another language through actions (6th ed.). Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions.
Asher, J. J. (2002). Brain-switching: Learning on the right side of the brain. Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Productions.
Asher, J. J., & Price, B. S. (1981). The learning strategy of the total physical response: some age differences. In S. D. Krashen, R. C. Scarcella, & M. Long (Eds.), Childadult
differences in language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Blaine, T. (2005). The Convergence of Alternate Controllers and Musical Interfaces in Interactive Entertainment. In Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on New Interfaces for
Musical Expression (NIME-05), 27–33.
Bouras, C., Philopoulos, A., & Tsiatsos, T. (2001). E-learning through distributed virtual environments. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 24, 175–199.
Broeren, J., Rydmark, M., & Sunnerhagen, K. S. (2004). Virtual reality and haptics as a training device for movement rehabilitation after stroke: a single-case study. Archives of
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85(8), 1247–1250.
Brophy, J. (1987). Synthesis of research on strategies for motivation students to learn. Educational Leadership, 45(2), 40–48.
Burdea, G., & Coffet, P. (2003). Virtual reality technology (2nd ed.). Washington: Wiley-IEEE Press.
Chen, C. H., Yang, J. C., Shen, S., & Jeng, M. C. (2007). A desktop virtual reality earth motion system in astronomy education. Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 289–304.
Chen, Y. C., Wang, C. M., & Huang, J. K. (2005). The study of vision-based interactive technology on installation arts: Example by interactive dummy. In Proceedings of
Conference on 2005IDC (International Design Congress-IASDR 2005).
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London and New York: Longman.
Cordes, C., & Miller, E. (2000). Fool’s gold: A critical look at computers in childhood. College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood.
Costello, P. J. (1997). Health and safety issues associated with virtual reality – A review of current literature. In AGOCG Technical Report Series.
Crosier, J. K., Cobb, S., & Wilson, J. R. (2002). Key lessons for the design and integration of virtual environments in secondary science. Computers & Education, 38(1–3), 77–94.
Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D. J., & DeFanti, T. A. (1993). Surround-screen projection-based virtual reality: the design and implementation of the CAVE. In Proceedings of the 20th
annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 135–142.
Demaree, D., Stonebraker, S., Zhao, W., & Bao, L. (2005). Virtual reality in introductory physics laboratories. In AIP Conference Proceedings, 790, 93–96.
Dulay, H. C., & Burt, M. K. (1977). Viewpoints on English as a second language. NY: Regents.
Feintuch, U., Raz, L., Hwang, J., Josman, N., Katz, N., Kizony, R., et al. (2006). Integrating haptic-tactile feedback into a video-capture-based virtual environment for
rehabilitation. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9(2), 129–132.
Glisan, E. W. (1986). Total physical response: a technique for teaching all skills in Spanish. Foreign Language Annals, 19(5), 419–427.
Haik, J., Tessone, A., Nota, A., Mendes, D., Raz, L., Goldan, O., et al. (2006). The use of video capture virtual reality in burn rehabilitation: the possibilities. Journal of Burn Care &
Research, 27(2), 195–197.
Halliwell, S. (1992). Teaching English in the primary classroom. New York: Longman.
Hoysniemi, J., Aula, A., Auvinen, P., Hannikainen, J., & Hamalainen, P. (2004). Shadow boxer – a physically interactive fitness game. In Proceedings of NordiCHI 2004. Tampere,
Finland: ACM Press.
Hoysniemi, J., Hamalainen, P., Turkki, L., & Rouvi, T. (2005). Children’s intuitive gestures in vision-based action games. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 44–50.
Kizony, R., Katz, N., & Weiss, P. L. (2003). Adapting an immersive virtual reality system for rehabilitation. Journal of Visualization and Computer Animation, 14(5), 261–268.
Kizony, R., Raz, L., Katz, N., Weingarden, H., & Weiss, P. L. (2005). Video-capture virtual reality system for patients with paraplegic spinal cord injury. Journal of Rehabilitation
Research and Development, 42(5), 595–607.
Krashen, S. D. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kunihira, S., & Asher, J. J. (1965). The strategy of the total physical response: an application to learning Japanese. IRAL, 3(4), 277–289.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lepouras, G., Charitos, D., Vassilakis, C., Charissi, A., & Halatsi, L. (2001). Building a VR-Museum in a museum. In Proceeding of Virtual Reality International Conference 2001,
Laval, France.
Limniou, M., Roberts, D., & Papadopoulos, N. (2008). Full immersive virtual environment CAVETM in chemistry education. Computers & Education, 51(2), 584–593.
Littlewood, W. (2001). Students’ attitudes to classroom English learning: a cross-cultural study. Language Teaching Research, 5(1), 3–28.
Marsh, V. (1998). Total physical response storytelling: a communicative approach to language learning. Learning Languages, 4(1), 24–28.
McGlothlin, J. D. (1997). A child’s first steps in language learning. The Internet TESL Journal, 3. (10).
Mokka, S., Vaatanen, A., Heinila, J., & Valkkynen, P. (2003). Fitness computer game with a bodily user interface. In Proceedings of the second international conference on
Entertainment computing (IECE 2003), 508–510.
Moshell, J. M., & Hughes, C. E. (2002). Virtual environments as a tool for academic learning. In K. M. Stanney (Ed.), Handbook of virtual environments: Design, implementation,
and applications (pp. 893–910). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Ong, S. K., & Mannan, M. A. (2004). Virtual reality simulations and animations in a web-based interactive manufacturing engineering module. Computers & Education, 43(4),
361–382.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newburry House.
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45(3), 255–287.
Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let’s get physical: the learning benefits to interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers & Education, 43(1–2), 137–151.
Rand, D., Kizony, R., Feintuch, U., Katz, N., Josman, N., Rizzo, A., et al. (2005). Comparison of two VR platforms for rehabilitation: video capture versus HMD. Presence, 14(2),
147–160.
Rand, D., Kizony, R., & Weiss, P. L. (2008). The Sony PlayStation II EyeToy: low-cost virtual reality for use in rehabilitation. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy, 32(4), 155–163.
Ryokai, K., Marti, S., & Ishii, H. (2005). Designing the world as your palette. In Proceedings of Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’05). Portland: Oregon
Convention Center.
Samuel, R. J., & Bakar, Z. A. (2006). The utilization and integration of ICT tools in promoting English language teaching and learning. International Journal of Education and
Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 2(2), 4–14.
Sano, M. (1986). How to incorporate total physical response into the English programme. ELT Journal, 40(4), 270–277.
Sharples, S., Cobb, S., Moody, A., & Wilson, J. R. (2008). Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and
projection display systems. Displays, 29(2), 58–69.
Shin, Y. S. (2002). Virtual reality simulations in web-based science education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 10(1), 18–25.
Simone, L. K., Schultheis, M. T., Rebimbas, J., & Millis, S. R. (2006). Head-mounted displays for clinical virtual reality applications: pitfalls in understanding user behavior while
using technology. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(5), 591–602.
Sun, H. M., & Cheng, W. L. (2009). The input-interface of Webcam applied in 3D virtual reality systems. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1231–1240.
Tomscha, T. (1986). Using TPR communicatively. In Paper presented at the Annual Congerence of the International Association of Teachers of English as a Foreign Language.
(ERIC ED 273133)
Weiss, P. L., Rand, D., Katz, N., & Kizony, R. (2004). Video capture virtual reality as a flexible and effective rehabilitation tool. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 1
(1), 1–12.
Wolfe, D. E., & Jones, G. (1982). Integrating total physical response strategy in a level I Spanish class. Foreign Language Annals, 15(4), 273–280.
Wolters, C. A., Yu, S. L., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual
Differences, 8(3), 211–238.
Woodruf, M. (1976). Integration of the total physical response strategy into a first-year German program: from obeying command to creating writing. In Paper presented at
the spring conference of the Texas chapter of the America Association of Teachers of German. (ERIC ED 126688).
Yamamori, K., Isoda, T., Hiromori, T., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). Using cluster analysis to uncover L2 learner differences in strategy use, will to learn, and achievement over time.
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41(4), 381–409.
Yang, N. D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners’ beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27(4), 515–535.
Zuern, G. (1982). From action to English: reality in the classroom. TEST Talk, 13(1), 92–97, ERIC EJ 258107.