THE LEARN ABILITY OF VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT TRAINING (VET) Ima Shanaz Binti Wahidin Nur Muizz Mohamed Fakulti

Teknologi dan Sains Salleh Informasi Fakulti Teknologi dan Sains Kolej Universiti Islam Informasi Antarabangsa Selangor, Kolej Universiti Islam Bangi, Selangor Antarabangsa Selangor, snowqueen_2509@yahoo.com Bangi, Selangor muizz.salleh@gmail.com Abstract Virtual Environment Training (VET) is a virtual world that makes the user feel that they are being there. It enables user to experience the environment without having to take any risks by interacting with the computer in real time. VET is a non-immersive desktop application. It allows user to walk-through the environment and explores the environment freely. It is integrated with multimedia elements such as realistic graphic 3D environment, audio, video, text and animation. Within the environment, the users will be provided with some information that might be useful for the training that covers the topic of one module of the course. At the end of the training, there will be an evaluation session to evaluate the learn ability of VET among TM Trainees. Abdul Nasir Zulkifli Fakulti Teknologi dan Sains Maklumat, Universiti Utara Malaysia. Sintok, Kedah nasirzul@uum.edu.my

1.0 Introduction According to Wikipedia, Virtual Environment is a computer-based simulated environment intended for its users to inhabit and interact via avatars. This habitation usually is represented in the form of two or three-dimensional graphical representations of humanoids (or other graphical or text-based avatars).(Oliviera et al., 2000). Virtual Environments (VEs) have many potential applications, including education, training, design and prototyping, entertainment, rehabilitation, and research. The utility of VEs for many applications increases that spatial judgments are similar in the VEs as in the real world.(Betty, Creem-Regehr, & B.Thompson., 2006) The effectiveness of a VE might be defined in terms of enhancement of task performance, effectiveness of training, improvement of data comprehension and so on. (Micheal Meehan, 2002).VE can bring simulation-based training environments closer to real-life experience.(Jeff Rickel, 1995). Virtual environments have been increasingly used for a variety of contexts: teaching in the lab, informal learning, distance learning, business, and ecommerce to name a few.(Selim & Elif, 2004). 3D in contrast to 2D computer graphics are graphics that use a three-dimensional representation of geometric data that is stored in the computer for the purposes of performing calculations and rendering 2D images. Such images may be for later display or for real-time viewing.(Bowman, Johnson, & Hodges, 2001) has carried out systematic research about 3D interaction techniques in the context of virtual reality systems. He and his colleagues have suggested that general 3D tasks in virtual environments can be viewed as compositions of more primitive tasks, such as object selection, object manipulation, navigation and system control. (Singhall and Zyda, 1999) has been studied some benefits of 3D that can be discerned:

Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010

697

A shared sense and understanding of the space, i.e. the trainee have an illusion of being located in the same space with other users and with objects or models. Those objects not only provide a visual representation of information, but also a meaningful, shared context for co -operation, since they can be observed from multiple and flexible viewpoints. In fact, the space might be formed from nothing but information. A shared sense of being the person through their avatars. This allows user to be aware of himself/herself in their activities since both direct and indirect awareness modes are supported. A shared sense of time, i.e. ability to observe and react correctly to the activities of others in real -time when the activity takes place. A way to share objects and models in the space, and respectively gain mutual understanding of work activities. It should be noticed that the way to share complements the sense of space and the way to communicate by providing means to modify the objects and work upon them.

3D Virtual Environment Training for TM Trainee is a PC-based, non-immersive VR system that allow user to view and interact with the computer. It provides a user-friendly 3D virtual environment that is integrated with multimedia elements such as audio, video, text, graphic and animation. The training consist of the courses that are involved the highly cost equipment and devices that are very limited to be use frequently. The training syllabus will be covered all the topics listed in the course. The user can interact with the model in real-time environment by using the functions provided. The functions includes rotating the object, view the object in different angle, walk-through and freeplay.

2.0 Objective This study aims to investigate the following: Question Method

Focus

What are the advantages To study the development of Virtual Environment Literature Review of Virtual Environment Training compared to Training. normal training? What are the features To understand the required to develop the Literature Review differences of Virtual Virtual Environment Environment Training and Training? normal training. How to develop the Methodology To develop the prototype of Virtual Environment VET. Training? How does the learn ability To conduct the learn ability of Virtual Environment Evaluation study of the VET among Training affects the trainees. trainees? Table 2.1 : Research Question Table The objectives of the study are:

Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010

698

To study the development of Virtual Environment Training. To identify the differences between Virtual Environment Training compared to normal training. To develop a prototype of an effective Desktop Virtual Environment for Training. To determine the learn ability of Virtual Environment Training for training individuals in a safe and vigilant manner.

3.0 Literature Review Virtual environment is a computer generated three dimensional model, where participant can interact intuitively in real time with the environment or objects within it and to some extent have a feeling of actually being there(John R.Wilson, 1998). To produce a real environment in every single aspect would demand incredible computational and graphics performance (Kalawsky, 1993). It is likely to be some time before this level of performance become available. Therefore, virtual environments typically represent a simplification of reality(S.P.Smith & D.J.Duke, 2000). This simplification can be in the presented sensory information (e.g., vision and audio and etc) and in the level of interaction provided. The appearance and behavior of objects give strong cues to interaction in an environment and are therefore associated to usability issues (S.P Smith, D.J Duke, & J.S Willians, 2000). 3D in contrast to 2D computer graphics are graphics that use a three-dimensional representation of geometric data that is stored in the computer for the purposes of performing calculations and rendering 2D images. Such images may be for later display or for real-time viewing (Bowman, Johnson, & Hodges, 2001) has carried out systematic research about 3D interaction techniques in the context of virtual reality systems. He and his colleagues have suggested that general 3D tasks in virtual environments can be viewed as compositions of more primitive tasks, such as object selection, object manipulation, navigation and system control. Some benefits of 3D that has been discerned: A shared sense and understanding of the space, i.e. the trainee have an illusion of being located in the same space with other users and with objects or models. Those objects not only provide a visual representation of information, but also a meaningful, shared context for co -operation, since they can be observed from multiple and flexible viewpoints. In fact, the space might be formed from nothing but information. A shared sense of being the person through their avatars. This allows user to be aware of himself/herself in their activities since both direct and indirect awareness modes are supported. A shared sense of time, i.e. ability to observe and react correctly to the activities of others in real -time when the activity takes place. A way to share objects and models in the space, and respectively gain mutual understanding of work activities. It should be noticed that the way to share complements the sense of space and the way to communicate by providing means to modify the objects and work upon them. To insert multimedia design in VE, there are three issues that concern multimedia specifically: Matching the media to the message, by selecting and integrating media so the user comprehends the information content effectively.
Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010 699

Managing users attention so key items in the content are noticed and understood and the user follows the message thread across several media. Navigation and interaction so the user can access, play and interact with media in an engaging and predictable manner.

4.0 Methodology 4.1 Usability Evaluation Usability evaluation is conducted to get the feedback or respond from the user. This study used the Summative evaluation that occurred after the prototype development stage. The evaluation for VSTE was conducted to thirty respondents that have been given an ample time to learn and use the prototype. Before the training process begins, a short brief has been given to them as to make sure the process is executed in a proper way. After the process of learning, each of respondents gave feedback through the questionnaire given as in Appendix B. 4.2 Instrument for User Evaluation User evaluation was conducted to determine users perception on the usability aspect of Virtual Streamyx Training Environment. The instruments was adapted from (J.Nielsen, 1994. ) and (Lin et al., 1997 ). The instruments evaluate on three dimensions: Learnability, Perceived Ease of Use and Outcome/Future Use. A set of questionnaire that comprises the General Information and these three dimensions has been conducted on thirty respondents. General Information section is to gather some general background of respondent. Learnability section measures the capability of learning VSTE. Two others section, Perceived Ease Use measures the degree to which a person believes that using this application would be free of effort while Outcome/Future Use is the degree of user willingness to use this prototype in the future. A 5-point Likert scale has been applied in the questionnaire anchored by 1- Strongly Disagree and 5-Strongly Agree. 5.0 Data Analysis The respondent has been divided into two groups, TM trainer and Not a TM Trainer. The purpose is to show the category of expert and novice. The terminology of validation adapted from (Balci, 1994) is defined as involves substantiating that the model, within its domain of applicability, behaves with satisfactory accuracy consistent with objective governing its use. It relates to the comparison of model behavior with system behavior. According to (U.S Department of Defense, 1996), validation refers to the process of determining the degree to which a model is an accurate representation of the real world from the perspective of the intended use of the model. In general, reliability is the ability of a person or system to perform and maintain its functions in routine circumstances, as well as hostile or unexpected circumstances (Wikipedia, 2008). Cronbach Alpha has been chosen to measure reliability instrument in this study. It expressed on scale from zero (very unreliable) to one (extremely reliable) (J.Kirakowski). SPSS version 13 has been used to calculate the data to determine the reliability of the prototype Measure Number of items Cronbach Alpha Learnability 8 0.820 Perceived Ease of Use 6 0.862 Outcome/Future Use 5 0.847 Table 5.1 : Cronbach Alpha Values for All Dimensions

Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010

700

Table 5.1 presents the Cronbach alpha value for each dimension: Learnability, Perceived Ease of Use and Outcome/ Future Use. From the table, it shows that these three dimensions have an alpha value greater than 0.7. These measures satisfy the internal reliability criterion. Measure Number of items Cronbach Alpha Learnability 8 0.820 Perceived Ease of Use 6 0.862 Outcome/Future Use 5 0.847 Table 5.2: Descriptive Statistics for All Measures Above is the descriptive statistics for all measures presented in Table 5.2. A one-way ChiSquare test of homogeneity was conducted on the responses for all items. As shown in Table 5.2, the results are positive with p-values significant at 0.01 for Learnability, Perceived Ease of Use and Outcome/Future Use. Item Mean LEARNABILITY 1. It was easy to learn to use VSTE. 3.6667 2. The information provided by VSTE was easy to 3.6000 understand. 3. The information provided in VSTE helped me in 3.6000 training process. 4. It provides clarity of wording. 3.4333 5. Data grouping is reasonable for easy training. 3.6000 6. The ordering of information is logical. 7. The command names are meaningful. 8. It provides no-penalty training. PERCEIVED EASE OF USE 1. Learning to operate VSTE would be easy for me. 2. I would find it is easy to get VSTE to what I want it to do. 2. My interaction with VSTE would be clear and understandable. 4. I would find VSTE to be flexible to interact with. 5. It would be easy for me to become skillful as using VSTE. 6. I would find VSTE is easy to use. OUTCOME/FUTURE USE 1. I was able to complete my training quickly using VSTE. 2. I could effectively complete my training using VSTE. 3. I was able to efficiently complete the training using VSTE 4. I believe I could become productive quickly 3.7667 3.6000 3.6667 3.8000 3.5333 3.4333 3.5000 3.2333 3.8000 3.7333 3.5333 3.7000 3.4000 Std.Deviation 0.80230 0.89443

0.62146 0.77385 0.56324 0.72793 0.894430 0.84418 0.88668 0.97320 0.77385 0.86103 0.93526 0.76112 0.78492 0.68145 0.65126 0.96847

Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010

701

using VSTE. 5. From my current experience with using VSTE, I 3.5333 0.93710 think I would use it regularly. Table 5.3: Descriptive Statistics for All Items Table 5.3 shows the descriptive statistics for all items. All of the items indicate that respondents are neutral towards VSTE. However, based on the mean value, the respondents agreed with all items. Overall of the result indicate VSTE has a good usability. Measure Group N Mean Std.Dev iation Std. Error Mean 0.2078 0.1877 0.2379 0.2110 t Df Sig.

Learn Trainer 12 3.7083 0.7197 0.4859 28 0.4824 ability Trainee 18 3.5555 0.7964 0.501 24.963 Perceived Trainer 12 3.5417 0.8240 -0.049 28 0.6072 Ease Of Trainee 18 3.5556 0.8954 -0.364 24.4217 Use Outcome / Trainer 12 3.6333 0.7196 0.2077 0.0146 28 0.2838 Future Use Trainee 18 3.5444 0.8466 0.1995 0.4022 24.9504 Table 5.4: Mean, Standard Deviation and Paired t-test for All Measures Table 5.4 shows the means, standard deviations and paired t-test for all measures. Based on the paired t-test, as the significance values are less than 0.05 (S.J.Coakes, 2005), there was no significant difference between novice and expert groups for all measures. 6.0 Conclusion As the conclusion, VET is a virtual world that enables the trainee to experience the operation involved without having to be at the exact place. Based on the methodology proposed, hopefully this VET can be developed within the period of time with the guidance of scope and objective that have been stated above. The expectation of this project is to fulfill the requirements and needs of the users as well as achieving the goals and objective by developing an effective VET that can be applied to TM Company as soon as it finished. 7.0 References Barbieri, T., Garzotto, F., Beltrame, G., Ceresoli, L., Gritti, M., & Misani, D. (2001). From Dust to Stardust: a Collaborative 3D Virtual Museum of Computer Science. Proceedings ICHIM, 1, 341345. Betty, J. M., Creem-Regehr, S. H., & B.Thompson., W. (2006). The Influence of Feedback on Egocentric Distance Judgements in Real and Virtual Environments. Bowman, D., Johnson, D., & Hodges, L. (2001). Testbed evaluation of virtual environment interaction techniques,. Card, S., J.Mackinlay., & B.Shneiderman. (1999). Information Visualization: Using Vision to Think. Charvat, J. (2003). Project Management Methodologies: Selecting, implementing and supporting methodologies and process for projects: John Wiley & Sons,Inc. Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Di Blas, N., Hazan, S., & Paolini, P. (2003). The SEE experience. Edutainment in 3D virtual worlds.
Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010 702

Di Blas, N., Paolini, P., & Poggi, C. (2005). A Virtual Museum where student can learn. F.Polys., N., & A.Bowman, D. (2004). Desktop Information Rich Virtual Environments: Challenges and Techniques. F.Polys., N., Kim., S., & A.Bowman, D. (2005). Effects of Information Layout, Screen Size, and Field of View on User Performance in Information-Rich Virtual Environments. Gianpaolo U, C., John T, E., & J, R. E. (2000). Techniques for Handling Video Virtual Environments. Hosseini., M., & Nicolas D, G. (2001). Collaborative Virtual Environments for Training. Jeff Rickel, W. L. J. (1995). Steve:An Animated Pegagogical Agent for Procedural Training in Virtual Environments. Jeffry L, W., Lonnies D, B., & Kevin C, D. (2004). System Analysis and Design Method: Mc Graw Hill. McConnell, S. C. (1995-2001). Rapid Application Development - Development Methodology (RAD). Retrieved January 28, 2008, from http://www.credata.com/research/rad.html Micheal Meehan, B. I., Mary Whitton, Frederick P.Brooks, JR,. (2002). Physiological Measures of Presence in Stressful Virtual Environments. Oliviera, J. C., Shirmohammad, Hosseini, S. M., Cordea, M., Geroganas, N. D., Petriu, E., et al. (2000). Virtual Theater for Industrial Training: A Collaborative Virtual Environment. Paolini, P., Barbieri, T., Loiudice, P., Alonzo, F., Gaia, G., & Zanti, M. (1999). Visiting a Museum together: How to share a visit to a virtual world. Schlager, M. S. (1994). An Approach For Designing Virtual Environment Training Systems. Selim, B., & Elif, A. (2004). Creating Virtual Environment in a Multidisciplinary Classroom. Stiles, R., McCarthly, L., & Pontecorvo, M. (1995). Training Studio: A virtual environment for training. Wikimedia Corporation, I., US. (2008). Methodology. Retrieved January 28, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methodology

Proceedings of Regional Conference on Knowledge Integration in ICT 2010

703