Participate and share: Poster 
This project was informed by general constructivist theory and based heavily on the elements of culturally relevant pedagogy (CRP) developed by Gloria Ladson-Billings (1995). CRP was not only the content but also a framework that informed the project design itself in order to increase awareness of culture as a necessary design consideration, providing resources, tools, and skills to the intended audience that may be applied in all design processes. Constructivist theory encompasses the broad and universal nature of learning. Students who personally engage with content are more successful than those who only passively participate since learning happens within the context created by the learner (Lave, 1988). As the concepts of constructivism expand to more broadly inform the design of instruction to fit each learner, so expands the concept of culture to more completely advance our empathic understanding of the learner. This experience focuses on the concepts of constructivism and elements of CRP toward culture as an essential factor that contributes to the uniqueness and success of each learner.
The design process included three steps, created by the designers based on the three instructional design models. The three steps, Design Goals, Fabrication, and Opening, were created to be completed sequentially but still allow for an interactive design process, as the designers moved between steps and substeps as they progressed through the design process. These three steps and substeps created a concrete process for the design team to create the experience, divide the work between them based on the individual member’s strengths and communicate the information of each step to the team through the deliverables.
A multi-phase case study method was utilized with two phases. The first phase was a pilot phase of participants who engaged with the experience and provided feedback to the designers prior to the second phase. After this first phase, updates were made based on comments from the phase one participants. In phase two, the experience was utilized with a group of graduate students in an established class investigating the impact of their learning in a 3D VR platform.
The phase one participants were a convenience sample of adults and graduate students who were interested in 3D VR experiences and/or culturally relevant pedagogy for instructional design. The phase two participants were a purposive sample of adults in an instructional design doctoral program enrolled in a course in Spring 2022.
Surveys were utilized for both participant groups that included open-response, yes/no with open response, and Likert-scale questions. The data were collected directly after engaging with the experience. Data analysis included qualitative and quantitative methods with reflection of the data and exploration of other research to further validate the findings. All data is collected and being analyzed.
The updates completed after phase 1 included:
1. Changed the size of some of the assets to allow for more visibility of the signs around them.
2. Included elements of accessibility such as audio files and transcripts.
3. Created synchronous support for phase two participants including how to navigate the space, how to explore the exhibit, and how to use the pen features and pin items on the wall.
These updates provided a better, less technical taxing experience for phase two participants. The data from phase two is still being analyzed to understand the impact of learning.
As the understanding of human learning grows so does the acknowledgment of culture as an essential consideration in the design process. Culturally relevant instructional design promotes optimal instructional design by embracing cultural elements to create the most engaging learning experiences that lead to the most powerful learning outcomes, such as those outlined in CRP. An early and undeveloped understanding of culture, as consideration for teaching, limits its matter of importance solely to instructional practice and focuses on overcoming gaps resulting from the cultural diversity of a learning population. Culture should not be a barrier to learning that must be mitigated through the accommodation of practices and materials by instructors but, rather as a vital asset that can be capitalized upon to transform learning and empower learners. This experience was designed to engage future instructional designers in the importance of culture in design while using a 3D VR learning environment.
A better understanding of the design considerations, affordances, and impacts on learning is needed for 3D VR spaces. This study provides two important aspects to education: students’ experiences and the impact of learning in 3D VR spaces and students’ growth of culture and CRP for instructional design.
Au, K., Jordan, C. (1981). Teaching reading to Hawaiian children: Finding a culturally appropriate solution. In Trueba, H. T., Guthrie, G. P., and Au, K. (Eds.), Culture and the bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography (pp. 139–152). Newbury.
Benson, A. D. (2107). Culture, Learning, and Technology: Research and Practice. Taylor & Francis.
Carliner, S. (1998). How designers make decisions: A descriptive model of instructional design for informal learning in museums. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 11(2), 72-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1998.tb00091.x
Cazden, C., & Leggett, E. (1981). Culturally responsive education: Recommendations for achieving Lau remedies II. In H. Trueba, G. Guthrie, & K. Au (Eds.), Culture and the bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography (pp. 69-86). Newbury.
Collins, P. H. (1991). Black feminist thought. Routledge.
Cooper, J, Bettez, S., Aguilar-Valdez, J. & Carlone, H. (2011). On negotiating White science: A call for cultural relevance and critical reflexivity. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6, 941-950. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9355-1
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. The University of Chicago.
Erickson, F., & Mohatt, G. (1982). Cultural organization and participation structures in two classrooms of Indian students. In G. Spindler (Ed.), Doing the ethnography of schooling (pp. 131-174). Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.
Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher reflection. Theory Into Practice, 42(3), 195-202. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4203_5
Huang, W., Roscoe, R. D., Craig, S. D., & Johnson-Glenberg, M. C. (2021). Extending the Cognitive-Affective Theory of Learning with Media in Virtual Reality learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 0(0), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F07356331211053630
Hubs Moz://a. (n.d.). Home. https://hubs.mozilla.com/
Irvine, J. J. (1990). Black students and school failure: Policies, practices, and prescriptions. Praeger.
Jordan, C. (1985). Translating culture: From ethnographic information to educational program. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 16, 105-123.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1992). Liberatory consequences of literacy: A case of culturally relevant
instruction for African American students. The Journal of Negro Education, 61, 378-391.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163320
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609268
Milner, H. R. (2011). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy in a diverse urban classroom. Urban Review, 43, 66–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-009-0143-0
Mohatt, G., & Erickson, F. (1981). Cultural differences in teaching styles in an Odawa school: A sociolinguistic approach. In H. Trueba, G. Guthrie, & K. Au (Eds.), Culture and the bilingual classroom: Studies in classroom ethnography (pp. 105-119). Newbury.
Morrison, K. A., Robbins, H. H., & Rose, D. G. (2008). Operationalizing culturally relevant
pedagogy: A synthesis of classroom-based research. Equity & Excellence in Education, 41(4), 433-452.
Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of intelligence in the child. Routledge.
Powell, C. C. (1997). Understanding the language of diversity. Educational Technology, 37(2), l5-18.
Vendelskis, S. (2021, May 29). What is the difference between High Poly and Low Poly models in 3D modeling? ARsenal by cgtrader. https://arsenal.cgtrader.com/blog/difference-between-high-poly-and-low-poly-models
Vogt, L., Jordan, C., & Tharp, R. (1987). Explaining school failure, producing school success:
Two cases. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 276-286.
Young, P. A. (2008). The culture based model: Constructing a model of culture. Educational Technology & Society, 11(2), 107–118.
Return
Trips and Tours