phi 103 week 3 assignment

docx

School

Ashford University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

103

Subject

Philosophy

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by JudgeWombat1051

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING Is Virtual Reality more effective in training? University of Arizona Global Campus PHI 103: Informal Logic Dr. Brandon Wiese 18 April 2022

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING Is Virtual Reality more effective in training? With all the different companies and trade schools out there, breaking down the benefits between conventual learning and virtual learning is greatly debated. Would it be more beneficial utilizing virtual training to have a more well-equipped employee or tradesman? The focus of this paper will be to point out the cost of virtual learning out way the benefits and if training virtually produces a better understanding of knowledge compared to conventual. The primary question for this topic is whether using virtual reality is more effective in training than conventual learning. In this paper, both sides of the argument will be analyzed and discussed for the reasoning behind them. Presentation of an Argument Recently there have been countless studies performed on utilizing virtual reality and if this type of technology is beneficial to learning. Throughout history, students that studied in a simulation on average outperformed their counterparts by 66% (Hamilton, 2020). Another study performed at Sheppard AFB in 2020 with approximately 60 students, was broken into two control groups with one going through a conventual course and the other through virtual reality- based training. Although test scores were the same, the 30 students that went through virtual reality finished 46% faster with a higher level of competency in all tasks. The primary argument represented in standard form is: Premise 1: Training in Virtual reality allows for increased knowledge and skills by being capable of practicing procedures and tasks repeatedly to become more confident in them.

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING Premise 2: Following the learning pyramid model on active learning, the average retention of knowledge and skills learned are increased to around 75%. Whereas conventional lecture learning only has a 5% retention of knowledge. Premise 3: Virtual Reality provides a safe environment for practicing with a fallible run- through to learn from mistakes. Premise 4: Reduced wear and tear on high-value components and equipment that is used for conventual training, by offering each component virtually. Premise 5: High-end Virtual Reality headsets can track everything from eye movements to gestures, providing sound analytics to prove that students are performing tasks and procedures accurately. Conclusion: Therefore, training students in virtual reality is more effective and can have more benefits than conventual training. Evaluation of the quality of the reasoning The reasoning presented within this argument is sound as every article leans more toward the implementation of virtual learning. Being capable of knowing what the student is reading within the environment and scoring the level of comprehension provides strong data on its viability. Providing a safe environment to practice dangerous tasks at any location digitally without actually having the physical equipment present. Because this involves all your senses and you’re actively performing the task this creates an environment of active learning. Without this, students would only retain a small percentage of the information given and only be able to practice on physical equipment that is more dangerous and taking the chance of putting them in harm’s way while learning.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING Presentation of an Opposing Argument When opposing training in virtual reality. The statement “you can’t replace hands-on” is asked quite frequently. With opposing arguments that the alternative put in place may not have been practically or vocationally equivalent (Dickinson, 2021). One of the largest opposing aspects of utilizing virtual reality is the high up-front cost, not only for the equipment but the development of the content that will be delivered (Day, N.D.). Looking at Sheppard AFB with the start of implementation of virtual reality into the curriculum has had an upward cost of millions between the cost of equipment and the development of the course material. With all these arguments the standard format of the argument would be: Premise 1: Upfront cost for hardware to meet the needs is costly, with having to upgrade as technology and the demand changes. Premise 2: Cost for development of course material to meet the needs could range from $20,000 all the way to millions depending on the level of complexity of the environment. Premise 3: The process to make changes and upgrade the finished software years later to meet changing needs, might not always be an easy or cost-efficient task. Conclusion: Therefore, using virtual reality could not be possible by the sheer up-front cost to get it developed and started. Evaluation of the quality of the reasoning When evaluating the opposing side of utilizing virtual reality for learning. The premises are all valid and strong as not every institution would be capable of upfronting the cost to use this

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING type of technology for immersive academics. Although the premises are strong and valid, there are not a lot of adequate sources to back it for this type of training, besides its share cost. A missing premise would be if the training delivered in virtual reality did not amount to the conventional training. For institutions to provide funding to get started it might also not be feasible altogether. Evaluation of Arguments in Non-Scholarly and Scholarly Sources The Scholarly sources backed the benefits and the cons of using this type of technology within the classroom. However, as this type of teaching becomes more mainstream the use of virtual reality will far outweigh conventual methods of training. Although most articles are leaning toward the use of using virtual reality, its application of it is still a challenge to implement. Conclusion: With the ever-evolving technology in this area, the use and needs are becoming more prevalent on the benefits. As more studies are performed and increased functions within the hardware, allows for better analytics on comprehension. Although both arguments are valid and sound, time will dictate the long-term feasibility of this technology within a classroom environment.

IS VIRTUAL REALITY MORE EFFECTIVE IN TRAINING References: Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E. et al. (July 2020) Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: a systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design. Retrieved from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2 Dickinson, Jim (July 2021) You can’t replace hands-on experience with booksmarts and box sets. Retrieved from: https://wonkhe.com/blogs/you-cant-replace-hands-on-experience- with-booksmarts-and-box-sets/ Day, Nick (N.D.) Virtual Reality Training: Pros and Cons. Retrieved from: https://roundtablelearning.com/virtual-reality-training-pros-and-cons/

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

phi 103 week 3 assignment

Related Documents