Article

Journal of Educational Technology

Education Student Systems

2018, Vol. 46(3) 329–342
! The Author(s) 2017
Perceptions of Virtual Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Reality as a Learning DOI: 10.1177/0047239517736873
journals.sagepub.com/home/ets
Tool

Jelia R. Domingo1 and Elizabeth Gates Bradley2

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to ascertain student perceptions of the use and value
of three-dimensional virtual environments. A grounded theory approach was used to
gather and examine data. Just over half of student participants reported positive
experiences. However, most experienced technical difficulties. Despite the technical
challenges of operating within the virtual space, the majority reported positive
aspects of using the virtual space, including increased meaningful social interactions
and reduced social anxiety. Overall, students reported positive experiences and value
of virtual reality, but technical difficulties demonstrate the need for adequate tech-
nology and institutional technology support.

Keywords
virtual reality, online teaching, teacher education, student perceptions

As higher education programs move increasingly to an online format, lack of

connection between students, instructors, and learners has become a challenge.
Since online courses are generally conducted in a student’s home or office, away
from fellow students in the course, it is easy for them to feel isolated and dis-
connected from their classmates, instructor, and even the course content.
Students are more motivated to learn when they have a sense of belonging in
a learning community (Hartley, Ludlow, & Duff, 2015). Learners also must

1
SUNY Empire State College, Hartsdale, NY, USA
2
SUNY Empire State College, Latham, NY, USA
Corresponding Author:
Jelia R. Domingo, SUNY Empire State College, 210 North Central Ave, Hartsdale, NY 10530, USA.
Email: jelia.domingo@esc.edu
330 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

be able to actively construct and use the information they are learning to connect
to it and retain knowledge. In exclusively online courses, this has traditionally
been done through discussion boards, which allow students to share ideas in an
asynchronous manner. Assignments that require collaboration have also been
used to support a sense of connectedness and belonging. However, three-
dimensional (3D) virtual environments have been explored during the last
decade as online faculty within many educational institutions have felt the
need to enhance the learning experience to make online courses more engaging
and provide more immersive learning experiences (Karaman & Ozen, 2016). The
purpose of this study was to ascertain student perceptions of the use and value of
the 3D virtual space.

Why 3D Virtual Environments?

Virtual worlds are computer-based simulations of objects and activities that
appear in real life (Hartley et al., 2015). Buildings, landscapes, and basically
any object that can be conceived in one’s imagination can be designed and
placed in a setting to create the sense that one is immersed in the environment
that the designer wants visitors to experience (Janssen, Tummel, Richert, &
Isenhardt, 2016). Visitors operate within the space as avatars. These avatars
can be human in form but can also be animals. Avatars can be designed with
various facial and physical features as well as clothes. The avatars can also be
given commands to run, walk, fly, and teleport to different locations within the
virtual space. Background audio contributes to a sense of being immersed in the
space (Argles, Minocha, & Burden, 2015). Additionally, photographs and videos
from other platforms such as YouTube can be streamed while in the virtual
space. Thus, instructors can customize virtual classrooms to have
content-specific information and resources continuously available in the virtual
environment (O’Connor & Domingo, 2016). The ability to create various
environments has made 3D virtual worlds useful for experiencing dangerous
or logistically impractical science labs, simulations, and medical experiments,
which online students would have great difficulty seeing and experiencing in
person (Koglbauer, 2015; Urso & Fisher, 2015). Virtual worlds have also been
used to provide virtual tours of real geographic landforms to students of various
ages (Argles et al., 2015; Kim & Ke, 2016). The ability to design complex envir-
onments makes virtual spaces ideal for providing experiential, constructivist
learning experiences (Kluge & Riley, 2008). The capacity of visitors to navigate
these spaces at their own pace and ability makes them student-centered envir-
onments in which the instructor is more of a facilitator than a distributor of
knowledge.
In addition to the capacity to move and explore, 3D virtual environments
allow visitors to communicate with each other. Since it is an online environment,
people from all over the world can meet in one place depending on when they
Domingo and Bradley 331

log-in. This makes it possible for students who live hundreds of miles apart to
come together and share the same experience online. This is different from a
discussion board or video chat in that students are actually seeing and hearing in
a shared environment, erasing distance in the virtual space, rather than each
being solely exposed to their own immediate surroundings as they sit at their
computers. This simulated environment, along with identification of one’s
avatar within that environment, contributes to a sense of presence (Stefan,
Moldoveanu, & Moldoveanu, 2014). Thus, those who collaborate within that
space have a sense of ‘‘being with’’ each other, rather than simply communicat-
ing. The sense of presence, both in the experience of the physical space as well as
in interactions with others in the space, is the key to experiencing authentic and
satisfying learning activities in the 3D virtual environment (Bulu, 2012;
Karaman & Ozen, 2016).

College and University Use of Virtual Space

A number of educational institutions have taken steps to incorporate 3D virtual
environments into their online courses. In 2008, there were already ‘‘over 100
institutions from over 18 countries’’ that had a registered presence in Second
Life (Kluge & Riley, 2008, p. 129). The current Second Life Education Directory
lists over 150 educational institutions with a presence in Second Life (Linden
Research, 2017). However, the phenomenon of abandoned college campuses in
Second Life also exists. Hogan (2015) discovered that a number were completely
abandoned, with not one user in sight in his descriptions of five such abandoned
campuses.

Challenges to Using 3D Virtual Environments

There are a number of documented challenges to using 3D virtual environments.
First, students must have sufficient computer hardware and reliable Internet
services (Kluge & Riley, 2008). Further, students may have resistance to new
technology. This is particularly true for nontraditional students as well as those
from rural areas who tend to have less experience with technology and are
somewhat fearful of new applications (Hartley et al., 2015). Technical difficul-
ties, along with the learning curve, can cause students to experience high levels of
frustration, which can interfere with students’ abilities to reap the educational
and social benefits of the virtual environment (Hartley et al., 2015).
Management challenges include signaling when the class is transitioning from
one activity to the next, making sure that all students get access to materials,
which can sometimes be difficult to locate in the online platform, and helping
students understand social norms and rules in the 3D space.
From the perspective of instructors, there are also various barriers to over-
come. Often educators do not have the robust technical skills necessary to easily
332 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

assist students who are having technical difficulties (Kluge & Riley, 2008). This is
especially problematic if the 3D virtual technology is unsupported by the insti-
tution, which is sometimes the case because of what might be considered a high
institutional cost: $1,000/set up and $295/maintenance fee for Second Life
(Hartley et al., 2015; Hogan, 2015). Teachers and students can access Second
Life for free if they use publicly available spaces (Ludlow, 2015). However, there
are also liability issues that may occur due to students’ exposure to sexual
content, violence, harassment, and disruptive participants in public virtual
spaces (Kluge & Riley, 2008). Even with the requisite skills, the development
time for a 3D virtual course is prohibitive when compared with the typical online
course (Kluge & Riley, 2008).

Open Source Virtual Environments

Educators who have desired to use virtual environments without institutional
investment have had to look for low-cost alternatives. Among these are Open
Simulator, Open Virtual Platforms, and Kitely.
OpenSimulator is a free, but complex, virtual platform that requires high level
knowledge of programming. Per the homepage, ‘‘OpenSimulator is getting more
stable over time but is still a high complex software system that can suffer vari-
ous bugs and quirks; handle with care!’’ (‘‘What is OpenSimulator,’’ 2017,
para.4). Consequently, the organization offers extensive support to those who
decide to create their own environments and utilize the platform. Still, those
educators who do not have a programming background would find the skill level
required to use this platform prohibitive.
Open Virtual Platforms offers free virtual platforms on which simulations can
be created. The models offered by the platform decrease the amount of know-
ledge and work that is necessary for development as compared to the
OpenSimulator, but still appear to require beyond novice level experience on
the part of the educator (About OVP, 2017).
Kitely is a virtual domain that provides somewhat more privacy than other
open source platforms, partially because people can build their own islands or
visit existing environments within the virtual space for a fee (Kitely Services,
2017). A colleague designed her own island, which she permitted the first author
of this study to use with her Literacy class. The colleague provided instructions
for downloading an open source viewer and accessing Kitely. The steps therein
were easily followed and the space subsequently utilized, further solidifying the
decision to utilize this environment as part of this research.

Perceptions of Virtual Environments

Past research has indicated that students in higher education courses have a
variety of reactions to the use of virtual environments. In addition to resistance
Domingo and Bradley 333

from students with inadequate technological resources and experience (Hartley

et al., 2015), research also indicates ways that student perceptions might be
influenced positively. Zeichner and Zilka (2016) examined threat and challenge
as emotional responses of preservice teachers in virtual and blended courses.
These feelings were identified as reflecting participants’ abilities to cope with
learning environments. Threat was associated with anger and disappointment,
while challenge was associated with a positive sense of engagement in the course.
The researchers found that experience within the virtual environment decreased
the sense of threat yet increased the sense of challenge by the end of the course
(Zeichner & Zilka, 2016). In other words, after gaining experience in the virtual
environment, preservice teachers were less fearful than when they were intro-
duced to the virtual environment. At the same time, they felt positively engaged
and challenged by the experience. Therefore, once initial trepidation and tech-
nical difficulties are mastered, users can have positive learning experiences.
Zeichner and Zilka (2016) have suggested that proactively and purposely
addressing students’ negative feelings during a virtual learning experience assists
in ‘‘converting negative feelings and frustration into a sense of challenge’’ (p.
16), which improves students’ attitudes toward learning, satisfaction, and
achievement.
Studies have reported additional positive perceptions of virtual environments
by users. In a survey of teachers and students who had been exposed to a mixed-
reality 3D multiuser virtual environment, many participants found it engaging
and appreciated the synchronous nature of the virtual environment (Stefan
et al., 2014). They also appreciated the verbal and nonverbal flexibility of com-
munication available. An exploratory study of preservice teachers experienced in
a virtual simulation platform found that the participants appreciated the collab-
orative nature of the experience while also noting that an emphasis on explana-
tory communication before the experience and feedback during the simulation is
necessary to enhance the virtual simulation experience (Kim & Ke, 2016). Thus,
similar to Zeichner and Zilka’s (2016) findings, frequent communication was
found to be essential to ensuring positive perceptions.

Method
A grounded theory approach was used to discover student perceptions of the use
and value of the 3D virtual space. Grounded theory is research focused on
theory generation or discovery (Creswell, 2013). It is appropriate for studies
in which the participants have experienced a process and the goal is to generate
a theory that explains or provides a framework for future practice (Cresswell,
2013). Thus, the grounded theory approach was appropriate for this investiga-
tion examining participants’ responses to the incorporation of a virtual envir-
onment into their coursework. The goal of this study is to provide a framework
for future incorporation of virtual spaces into teacher education courses.
334 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

Participants
Twenty-one students were introduced to the virtual learning environment before
the start of the course during the week-long preview time. Participants included
19 in-service and 2 preservice teachers in an online literacy course. Five of the
students were men and 16 were women. All students were over the age of 25 and
in the first semester of their final year in a Master of Arts in Teaching program.
Institutional review board approval for this study was sought and granted.
The research proposal was accepted with a waiver of consent because it would be
exempt under federal regulations.

Implementation
Detailed instructions were provided for how to download Firestorm and access
the relevant island within Kitely. These instructions, as well as more information
about virtual reality design, were also in the course for students to review. In the
same information module, students found their group assignments and the par-
ameters of the work to be completed in the virtual space and on the discussion
boards. Students were instructed to read all the materials and make the neces-
sary preparations so that they would be ready to use the virtual reality platform
when the course began. These instructions were given to them a week before the
course opened.
A training session was offered on the evening of the first day of the
semester. At that training, those who attended were shown how to operate
within the virtual space. This training period continued for approximately
two weeks, when the responses to the first discussion were due. That
2-week period consisted of meeting online with students who had difficulty
entering the space on the first day of class as well as organizing ad hoc
technical support from a more technologically advanced colleague who
owned and designed the specific island and had previously used the space
in her own teaching.
Students in the literacy class were randomly arranged into discussion groups
of four or five students each. Groups were required to meet 4 times in the virtual
meeting space prior to submitting a group response to each of the four specified
online discussion prompts. Each group had two roles assigned and those who
served in these roles rotated. One person was designated to report on the dis-
cussion board about what students had discussed in the virtual space. The
second role was a photographer who took three pictures of the group as it
met in the space. Those pictures were required to be posted on the discussion
board. The remaining members of the group had to respond to at least one other
group’s posting on the discussion board. After experiencing the process, students
were asked to dissect their experience in an essay format.
Domingo and Bradley 335

Materials
The open source viewer used for this study was Firestorm, which was created by
a nonprofit organization, the Phoenix Firestorm Project, Inc. It can be used to
access many virtual worlds including Second Life and Kitely (About The
Phoenix Firesorm Project, Inc., 2017). Second Life is open to the public.
However, Kitely is a virtual domain that provides somewhat more privacy,
partially, because people can build their own islands within the virtual space
for a fee (Kitely Services, 2017).

Data Collection
Data were collected from a two- to three-page reflection by the students on their
experience with working with virtual spaces. In this reflection, students were
asked to summarize their overall feeling about using the virtual space in the
course, identify positive and negative aspects of the experience, indicate whether
their experience with this type of technology or the technology itself might have
contributed positively or negatively to the quality of their experience, identify
other activities that might have worked well in this virtual space for the course,
and speculate about ways they might use a virtual meeting space to teach their
own content to high school students. The essays functioned as the debriefing
interview for participants, through which they provided an analysis of their
experiences (Cresswell, 2013).

Data Analysis
The essay responses were categorized according to the seven parts of the essay
prompt that students had been asked to address. Themes of students’ responses
within each category were then identified and tallied according to how many
students identified a particular idea or issue.

Results
This study of student perceptions of experiences in using the virtual space
yielded important findings. Thirty-eight percent of students had an overall nega-
tive perception of their experience. Ten percent of students reported having
mixed feelings about the experience. Fifty-two percent had an overall positive
perception of their experience, with about half of those students reporting an
evolution of their perception from negative to positive after spending more time
in the space (see Figure 1). None of the students who reported a negative overall
perception indicated that they had initially felt positive about using the space.
Thus, based on this small sample, it would appear that experience with virtual
336 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

Figure 1. Student overall feelings about using virtual space.

technology can help change negative impressions to positive, but not vice versa.
This finding concurs with Zeichner and Zilka’s (2016) findings, whose study
participants experienced lowered levels of thread and higher levels of challenge
by the end of their experience in a course using virtual environments. All stu-
dents had responses for negative aspects of the 3D virtual space (see Figure 2).
Of the negatives mentioned, 76% reported technical difficulties in using the
space. Students identified the causes of these difficulties as either having inad-
equate computer technology that did not have the memory necessary to support
Firestorm or having inadequate Internet/Wi-Fi access. One student reported
that she had to leave her home to find a location with free Wi-Fi to meet with
her group. Another reported having to get permission to use her work computer,
which created difficulty with scheduling times that would be convenient to meet
with group members after working hours.
The technical problems with the virtual environment included losing the
account and having to create a new one to sign in, being ‘‘kicked out’’ of the
space after not moving the avatar for a length of time, losing audio or speaking
ability, and not being able to move the avatar at all. One student indicated that
she had worked in the space before without incident in semesters prior but had
extreme technical issues this semester. Half of the students also reported that the
complex nature of the instructions and the amount of time it took to figure out
how to download Firestorm was a strong negative aspect of the experience.
Twenty-three percent of students critiqued the quality of the virtual space
itself. Much of this critique came from students who had experience with
Domingo and Bradley 337

Increased parcipaon

Self-expression and customizaon

Sense of presence with classmates

Beer connecons with classmates

Deeper understanding and insight into applicaons

Convenience of not traveling

Free flowing conversaon

Opportunity to collaborate

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Figure 2. Student reported positives of using virtual space.

gaming and indicated higher quality expectations from a virtual environment.

One student reported physical discomfort in the form of dizziness from looking
at the screen.
The technical malfunctions associated with using the 3D virtual technology
clearly had a major impact on students’ experiences, with 43% indicating that
the main way to improve the experience in the course would be to not use it at
all, but to instead find another platform. Of the 13 students who addressed this
portion of the prompt, 7 indicated that Google Hangouts would be the best
alternative. One student also suggested Skype. Interestingly, no one suggested
alternative virtual platforms.
Despite the technical challenges evident in operating within the virtual space,
86% reported positives for using the virtual space (see Figure 3). Four men-
tioned the positive challenge of increasing meaningful participation from more
students. Two discussed the social benefit of collaborating through a virtual
space in the form of decreased social anxiety, as compared to face-to-face inter-
actions. One student noted that

It’s in the virtual reality where there is no need for someone to put a wall up;
everybody gets to see who everybody really is or would like to be like. It also makes
it much easier for people with social anxiety issues to meet new people without
having to worry about having a panic attack or anything of that nature.
338 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

Poorer quality than video games

Distracng environment

Inadequate computer/wifi

Not user friendly

Technology glitches

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Figure 3. Student reported negatives of using virtual space.

Another student ‘‘was able to get to know the three other women in our discus-
sion group in a way that I would not have been able to if we had been writing on
the discussion board.’’ Finally, one student wrote: ‘‘I could hear the voices of my
classmates and discuss the logistics of meeting around our varied schedules,
making them more human than the names that appear on the discussion
board.’’ Cerniglia (2011) noted that building meaningful student relationships
in online courses must be done deliberately and that more creative modalities
that include audio and video can help to that end. Students’ responses definitely
support Cerniglia’s findings, and virtual reality can certainly help students build
those relationships in online settings. Two students also remarked on the sense
of being present with classmates as surprising and positive: ‘‘Seeing my group-
mates’ avatars made me feel like I was actually there with them. It’s actually
kind of strange because I know it’s not real’’ and ‘‘It’s funny to me how our self-
conscious tendencies transfer into the virtual world . . . the opportunities are end-
less, but the urge to remain true to oneself somehow remains.’’
Finally, students appeared to generally acknowledge the educational value of
using 3D virtual environments in teaching. Fifty-seven percent were able to
identify additional activities that would have been useful in their own teaching.
Seventy-two percent of the students who addressed whether and how they would
use 3D virtual environments in their own teaching were able to provide creative,
content-based applications that they had not been directly exposed to within the
context of the literacy course. Twenty-eight percent said they would never con-
sider using the technology; however, an equal percentage who could not see
themselves using the technology cited institutional, student management,
Domingo and Bradley 339

or technological barriers. The ability to control students in the space was a

major consideration for 27% of respondents, as indicated by answers such as:
‘‘ . . . in terms of establishing a regular virtual world for students to use regularly,
I would be hesitant to do so until I knew the students well enough to know that
they would actually be using it productively.’’ Another student noted that:
‘‘I need to ensure students are not going to do anything inappropriate during
the chats. I would have them sign a code of conduct form so they know to stay
on task.’’
Access to sufficiently powerful technology and Wi-Fi was a major factor for
39% of respondents. One student noted that ‘‘The only issue I foresee is that
many of my students don’t have WIFI at home.’’ Another remarked that ‘‘Since
I can’t be sure that all of my students will have access to the Internet or a
computer when they are outside of school, I couldn’t use a virtual world to
assign homework.’’These results support the research of Hartley et al. (2015),
which notes that technical difficulties can cause students to experience high levels
of frustration and interfere with students’ abilities to benefit educationally and
socially from the virtual environment.
In sum, many students found the virtual space to have valuable educational
uses. However, various and abundant technical difficulties marred the experience
in such a way that some questioned whether the use of this environment was
worth the effort. In the quest to complete the collaboration, two groups asked
for and received permission to use alternative platforms. Student comments
suggest that many like seeing each other in real time on Google Hangouts and
Skype better than their avatars. They all appreciated the opportunity to connect
with each other and gain a better understanding of the material through real-
time virtual interactions. The inclusion of diverse platforms has encouraged the
exploration of alternatives to use of the virtual 3D environment for building
community and stronger engagement with course content.

Discussion
The purpose of this study was to ascertain student perceptions of the use and
value of the 3D virtual space. Just over half of student participants reported
having a positive experience with the virtual space. However, the majority of
students experienced technical difficulties. Despite the evident technical chal-
lenges evident in operating within the virtual space, the vast majority of students
reported positive aspects of using the virtual space, including increased mean-
ingful social interactions and reduced social anxiety. Likewise, the majority of
students reported that they would consider utilizing virtual reality in their
instructional practice with their K-12 students. Overall, students reported posi-
tive experiences and value in the virtual reality, but their technical difficulties
demonstrated a need for adequate technology and institutional technology sup-
port for effective integration of virtual environments in online teaching.
340 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

In light of study findings, it is recommended that educators who desire to use

virtual environments in their teaching take a number of steps to ensure the best
possible outcome:

. Courses that include the use of virtual environments should be identified and
include system requirements for connectivity and computer memory in their
course descriptions so students are aware and can prepare to have the neces-
sary technological capacity in advance of registration.
. To address various levels of proficiency, the instructor should proactively
survey the class to discover those students who have experience and are pro-
ficient in using virtual environments. Technologically adept students should
be paired with less experienced students to assist with acclimation.
. Instructors should organize at least two nonacademic activities such as scav-
enger hunts in the space within the first few weeks of the course to ensure that
students are ready for full participation by the time they are required to meet
for a mandatory, graded activity.

The use of the strategies listed earlier are some ways to address the types of
challenges found in this study. However, beyond these measures, it is important
to continue searching for more user friendly virtual platforms. The gaming
public has become accustomed to virtual technology that can be accessed
from mobile devices and contains high-quality graphics. Ultimately, academic
use of virtual technology will be most effective when it can be downloaded as
easily as an application and requires no knowledge of programming to use. This
would require a shift in priorities in the realm of education, such that academic
institutions cease to accept that technology used in computer gaming is of higher
quality than what is offered to students. When this happens, educators from
kindergarten through higher education will feel more confident and willing to
appropriate virtual technology for the benefits that it can offer students.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication
of this article.

References
About The Phoenix Firesorm Project, Inc. (2017). Retrieved from http://www.firestorm
viewer.org/about/
Domingo and Bradley 341

Argles, T., Minocha, S., & Burden, D. (2015). Virtual field teaching has evolved: Benefits
of a 3D gaming environment. Geology Today, 31(6), 222–226.
Bulu, S. T. (2012). Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual
worlds. Computers & Education, 58(1), 154–161.
Cerniglia, E. G. (2011). Modeling best practices through online learning: Building rela-
tionships. Young Children, 66, 54–59.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five
approaches. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Hartley, M. M., Ludlow, B. L., & Duff, M. C. (2015). Second life: A 3D virtual immersive
environment for teacher preparation courses in a distance education program. Rural
Special Education Quarterly, 34(3), 21–25.
Hogan, P. (2015). We took a tour of the abandoned college campuses of Second Life.
Retrieved from http://fusion.net/story/181901/we-took-a-tour-of-the-abandoned-col-
lege-campuses-of-second-life/
Janssen, D., Tummel, C., Richert, A., & Isenhardt, I. (2016). Virtual environments in
higher education – Immersion as a key construct for learning 4.0. International Journal
of Advanced Corporate Learning, 9(2), 20–26.
Karaman, M. K., & Ozen, S. (2016). A survey of students’ experiences on collaborative
virtual learning activities based on five-stage model. Journal of Educational Technology
& Society, 19(3), 247–259.
Kim, H., & Ke, F. (2016). OpenSim-Supported Virtual Learning Environment. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 54(2), 147–172.
Kitely Services. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.kitely.com/services
Kluge, S., & Riley, L. (2008). Teaching in virtual worlds: opportunities and challenges.
Issues in Informing Science & Information Technology, 5, 127–135.
Koglbauer, I. (2015). Training for Prediction and Management of Complex and Dynamic
Flight Situations. Procedia - Social And Behavioral Scineces, 209 (The 3rd International
Conference ‘‘Education, Reflection, Development’’, 3rd–4th July 2015, 268–276.
Linden Research. (2017). Retrieved from http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Second_Life_
Education_Directory
Ludlow, B. L. (2015). Virtual reality: Emerging applications and future directions. Rural
Special Education Quarterly, 34(3), 3–10.
O’Connor, E. A., & Domingo, J. (2017). A practical guide, with theoretical underpin-
nings, for creating effective virtual reality learning environments. Journal of
Educational Technology Systems, 45(3), 343–364.
Stefan, L. I., Moldoveanu, F. F., & Moldoveanu, A. (2014). Blended learning in a mixed-
reality 3D multi-user virtual environment. Elearning & Software for Education, 1,
105–112.
Urso, P., & Fisher, L. (2015). Education technology to service a new population of
eLearners. International Journal of Childbirth Education, 30(3), 33–36.
What is OpenSimulator? (2017). Retrieved from http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Main_
Page
Zeichner, O., & Zilka, G. (2016). Feelings of challenge and treat among pre-service
teachers studying in different learning environments-virtual vs. blended courses.
Journal of Educational Technology, 13(1), 7–19.
342 Journal of Educational Technology Systems 46(3)

Author Biographies
Jelia R. Domingo is an associate professor and the Master of Arts in Teaching
Program Coordinator in the School for Graduate Studies at SUNY Empire
State College. She received her PhD in Education from Fordham University.
Before teaching at Empire State College, she served as a permanently certified
special education teacher in the New York City Public School system.
Throughout her career, she has provided support for students with a variety
of educational needs from elementary through college level. Her published work
has focused on the use of creativity in teaching exceptional students. Her current
research focus is on individualization of instruction through the incorporation of
diverse online and offline instruction delivery models for pre-service teachers.

Elizabeth Gates Bradley is an associate professor in the School for Graduate

Studies at SUNY Empire State College. Prior to teaching at Empire State
College, she worked as a school psychologist in a city school district in
Western Massachusetts. She received her PhD in school psychology from the
University of Massachusetts Amherst, and she is a licensed psychologist and a
nationally certified school psychologist. Dr. Bradley has worked with at-risk
youth in hospital, residential home, and public school settings and in the past
she has published in the area of substance use interventions and the neuropsy-
chological abilities of children. Dr. Bradley is currently conducting research in
the area of teacher training and school-based interventions for at-risk adoles-
cents, with a focus on the use of online simulations in pre-service teacher
training.