Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience,

Motivation and Knowledge Gain

Irina Tal

, Longhao Zou

, Margaret Farren

and Gabriel-Miro Muntean

Faculty of Engineering and Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzen, China

Institute of Education, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

Keywords: Technology Enhanced Learning, Mulsemedia, STEM Education.

Abstract: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) subjects are generally perceived to be quite

challenging for students. Hence there are also challenges from the educators’ perspective as they need to find

a solution to improve the engagement, motivation and the academic performance of their students in these

subjects. Technology enhanced learning (TEL) methods could be the answer to these challenges. This paper

presents a study on a novel TEL method, mulsemedia, and its impact on learner experience, motivation and

learning outcome. The research study has been conducted in Ireland with postgraduate students from Dublin

City University. The results of the study demonstrated that mulsemedia can be successfully employed as a

TEL to improve the academic performance, the learning experience, the engagement and motivation of the

students. More than 70% of the participants in the study stated they have enjoyed the mulsemedia-enhanced

learning and agreed with the fact that mulsemedia is highly motivating for learning. 69.44% of the participants

stated they would want to have more mulsemedia-enhanced learning experiences.

1 INTRODUCTION

The rapid growth and development of information

and communication technologies (ICT) have enabled

the fast evolution of technology enhanced learning

(TEL), which is very likely to continue. An increasing

number of individuals, corporations, and institutions

are showing interest in TEL, mostly due to its

effectiveness and market potential: the worldwide e-

learning market is projected to be worth $325 Billion

in 2025

Although many advancements have been noted in

the context of TEL, there are many avenues for

additional improvement. The research presented in

this paper was conducted in the context of NEWTON

project

, a EU Horizon 2020 project that developed a

pan- European learning platform (NEWTELP

platform) that facilitates the delivery of STEM

subjects to learners from a variety of backgrounds:

secondary and vocational schools, third level

education, and to people with disabilities. The

Astonishing E-Learning Statistics For 2020, https://techjury.

net/stats-about/elearning/#gref

NEWTON project website, http://www.newtonproject.eu/

platform incorporates some very novel TEL methods

such as personalised virtual labs and Fab Labs, novel

adaptive and personalisation techniques and

mulsemedia. The latter is quite a novel concept, as

mulsemedia has not really being considered before as

a TEL method. The term mulsemedia – multiple

sensorial media – was introduced relatively recently

and represents a type of multimedia that involves

senses beyond audition and vision (Ghinea,

Timmerer, Lin, & Gulliver, 2014). Mulsemedia

content includes in addition to audio-visual

components, metadata to trigger stimuli for other

senses (e.g. touch, smell, taste).

This paper presents the results of a study aiming

to show the impact of this novel TEL method,

mulsemedia, on learning experience and outcome, on

learner’s motivation and engagement. The results

demonstrate that mulsemedia has potential as a TEL

method.

The remainder of this paper is organized as

follows. Section 2 presents the related work, Section

180

Tal, I., Zou, L., Farren, M. and Muntean, G.

Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience, Motivation and Knowledge Gain.

DOI: 10.5220/0009579701800187

In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2020) - Volume 2, pages 180-187

ISBN: 978-989-758-417-6

3 provides details about mulsemedia-enhanced

teaching, Section 4 outlines the research methodology

which involved a case study and its results. Section 5

draws out the conclusions of the paper.

2 RELATED WORK

In the current digital era, TEL is experiencing a fast

and complex evolution. Various technologies have

been put to use to enhance learning such as

Augmented Reality (AR)/ Virtual Reality (VR)

(Garzón, Pavón, & Baldiris, 2019; Bogusevschi,

Muntean & Muntean, 2019), game-based learning

and gamification, virtual labs and fabrication labs

(FabLabs), personalisation and adaptation techniques

applied to the learning context/content in order to suit

learner. Moreover, there are standardization efforts

that focus on the measurement of learner’s quality of

experience (QoE) when subjected to TEL (Tal,

Ibarrola, & Muntean, 2016).

Game-based learning defined as an educational

approach integrating video games with well specified

learning outcomes, has been quite intensively

researched. Games have the potential to provide

extremely engaging activities, are able to generate

strong emotions, can provide challenges, hence they

can support learning and make the learning

experience more memorable (Boyle, Connolly, &

Hainey, 2011).

Various studies have been conducted that show

game-based learning can lead to improved learner

experience, motivation, but also to an improved

academic performance (Ghergulescu & Muntean,

2012; El Mawas et al. 2018). Educational games

however need to be designed carefully, as they can

easily transform from motivators to distractors in

learning and they can lead to the learner

disengagement and frustration (Chen et al., 2019).

A very recent study demonstrated the positive

impact on students’ motivation and academic

performance/knowledge gain of a personalised

virtual lab in teaching secondary school students

chemistry concepts (Ghergulescu, Moldovan,

Muntean & Muntean, 2019). Fab Labs potential as a

TEL was also investigated and it was found that their

employment in teaching K-12 students Science can

foster students’ interest in science, reduce boredom in

the class and result in increased engagement (Togou,

Lorenzo, Cornetta, & Muntean, 2020).

While there is quite significant effort and research

in this area of TEL, there is always place for

improvement and innovation. In the context of the

NEWTON project, we have considered mulsemedia

as a potential novel TEL method. Some results on the

impact of this novel TEL method were presented in

Zou et al. (2018) and Tal et al. (2019). The focus of

the aforementioned studies was more on the learning

experience and knowledge gain. The study presented

in this paper contains new results and a new

perspective and analysis of mulsemedia as a TEL,

including educators and future educators in the study.

3 MULSEMEDIA-ENHANCED

TEACHING

Until the NEWTELP platform came into existence,

mulsemedia was not really considered as a possible

TEL method as it was used mostly in entertainment

(Covaci et al., 2018). The NEWTELP platform which

was built in the context of the NEWTON project

introduced this novelty, based on past pedagogical

experiences and theories that encouraged learning in

a multi-sensorial environment (Broadbent et al.,

2018).

Figure 1: Students learning in Mulsemedia Lab.

Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience, Motivation and Knowledge Gain

181

NEWTELP is an enhanced learning management

system that connects institutions across Europe

(primary, secondary and third level institutions) and

brings together several novel TEL methods,

mulsemedia being one of them. NEWTELP platform

was presented in more details by Tal et al. (2019).

Mulsemedia teaching content was created and made

available through the NEWTELP platform. The

mulsemedia content includes videos and metadata

that trigger the stimuli for other senses. The

mulsemedia content is delivered following a client –

server model. At client side, relevant software was

developed and deployed to control the devices

stimulating the other senses. We have created a

mulsemedia lab (see Figure 1) as part of the

NEWTON project, composed of several mulsemedia

units. Each mulsemedia unit (Figure 2) had a laptop

(the 5

item in Figure 2) to which were connected 4

devices:

1. a smell dispenser with four different aroma

cartridges that released the smell in line with

the multimedia content offered to the students,

2. an airflow device (i.e. a computer case fan that

allowed for the control of the intensity of the

airflow),

3. a haptic device (i.e. a haptic mouse with

controllable vibration that was adjusted in line

with the content streamed by the

aforementioned software deployed at the

client-side),

4. headphones (used to deliver noise free high-

quality audio to the students).

Each participant in the study was assigned a unique

user id (item 6, Figure 2) to allow for the anonymized

collection of data.

Figure 2: Mulsemedia Unit.

4 CASE STUDY

The goal of this research study was to investigate the

impact of using mulsemedia in learning on learner’s

experience, knowledge gain, and on learner’s

motivation and engagement. The intention was to

understand more about the potential of mulsemedia as

a TEL method.

Figure 3: Research methodology – workflow.

4.1 Research Methodology

The study was conducted in Dublin City University

(DCU) with 36 postgraduate students from the School

of Electronic Engineering (20) and the School of

STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies,

DCU Institute of Education (SEIGS) (16),

respectively. The latter were educators with particular

interest in TEL, hence their interest in participating in

the study.

The study meets all Ethics requirements. Prior to

carrying out the case study, the Ethics approval was

sought and obtained from the DCU Ethics Committee

and all required forms were provided to the students

(i.e. informed consent form, plain language statement

and data management plan). These documents

informed the students about the aim of the study, data

processing and analysis, data protection, etc. The

main steps followed in the methodology are described

in Figure 3 and presented in more details in the next

sections.

4.1.1 Lesson Design

After the collection of the consent forms students

were exposed to a lesson that employed mulsemedia.

The lesson design is presented in the next paragraphs.

For the engineering students that participated in the

study, the lesson was part of their normal teaching

hours, while for the education students, the lesson

was outside of their timetabled classes.

Descriptionoftheresearch

study

Collectionoftheconsentforms

Lesson=traditionalapproach+

mulsemedia‐enhancedapproach

Learningquestionnaires+

Knowledgeevaluationtest

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

182

The learning outcomes proposed for the lesson

included the following: 1) Describe the concept of

Quality of Experience (QoE) and its influencing

factors as defined by International Telecommunica-

tion Union – Telecommunication Standardization

Sector (ITU-T) 2) Critically analyze different

QoE measurement techniques such as objective

quality assessment, physiological/cognitive-based

techniques, subjective quality assessment. The

students had no prior knowledge of the content taught

in the lesson. No other pre-requisite knowledge was

required, hence the postgraduate students from

SEIGS, DCU Institute of Education were suitable

participants for the study.

The teaching material was split into two parts. A

part of the lesson was delivered using a traditional

audio-visual approach based on a Microsoft

PowerPoint presentation. The other part was

delivered in an experimental setup where mulsemedia

was employed. During the mulsemedia-enhanced part

of the lesson, students were exposed to a QoE

evaluation: they watched a series of videos enhanced

with various combinations of sensory effects (from no

effects to all effects - haptic, airflow, olfaction - in

one video). At the end of each video, they were asked

to assess the perceived quality.

The topic for the lesson was chosen by the lecturer

in charge with Performance of Data Networks

module that is delivered at master level in DCU. The

reason for selecting this topic is that it is usually

regarded by the students as quite a theoretical and

boring topic that it is hard to engage with. Moreover,

the lecturer felt that mulsemedia could really help the

students to better understand the QoE concept,

defined as "the degree of delight or annoyance of the

user of an application or service”, and how it is

influenced by user expectations and context as stated

by ITU-T (e.g. will a bad smell negatively influence

the degree of delight or annoyance; how about a

pleasant one? Does a combination of haptic, airflow,

smell provide a better experience than smell alone?).

4.1.2 Learning Questionnaires

The students were presented with two questionnaires

at the end of the lesson that required them to reflect

on their learning experience with mulsemedia, but

also on the learning process in general. The first

questionnaire was built in collaboration with

Psychopedagogy Department, University of

Bucharest, Romania. In the design of this

questionnaire, as its main focus was on the learner

QoE, we have followed the research that measured

mulsemedia QoE presented in Yuan, Ghinea, &

Muntean (2014). Their QoE measurement

questionnaire and methodology is based on ITU-T

standardization guidelines. However, the context for

the QoE measurement was not a learning context,

hence, we slightly adapted the questions. The

aforementioned standardization guidelines were

followed in validating that the number of participants

was sufficient for our study.

Table 1: Learning questionnaires.

Questionnaire 1 (a 5-point Likert scale was used for

the answers to all questions Strongly Disagree,

Disagree, Neutral, Agree and Strongly Agree)

Q11. The multisensory experience helped me to better

understand the concepts.

Q12. The multisensory experience helped me to better

assimilate the concepts.

Q13. The multi-sensorial experience did not improve

my learning experience.

Q14. The multi-sensorial experience helped me to be

more practically engaged in the learning process.

Q15. I enjoyed the multi-sensorial experience during

the class.

Q16. The multi-sensorial effects were disturbing for me

during the class.

Q17. I would like to have more classes/labs/courses

that include multi-sensorial experience.

Questionnaire 2

Question Answer/Scale

Q21. How would you

define learning?

Open question

Q22. What benefits do

technology-enhanced

systems offer the learner?

Open question

Q23. What benefits do

technology-enhanced

systems offer the teacher?

Open question

Q24. Which is your

preferred learning style?

- visual – pictures,

images, spatial

- aural – sound and music

- verbal – words, speech

and writing

- physical – body, hands

and touch

- social – learning in

groups or other people

- solitary – working alone

and using self-study

Q25. The use of

multisensorial media is

highly motivating for

learning

- Strongly Disagree

- Disagree

- Neutral

- Agree

- Strongly Agree

Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience, Motivation and Knowledge Gain

183

The second questionnaire was built specifically for

this case study that included current/future educators

interested in TEL. It aimed to measure the impact on

students’ motivation of the mulsemedia as a TEL

method, but also to get the participants in the study to

think about the advantages of TEL in general for both

parties involved in the learning process: educators

and students, respectively.

The questions in these two questionnaires that

relate to the learning process, experience, motivation

and engagement are listed in Table 1.

4.1.3 Knowledge Evaluation Test

This test was conceived by the lecturer of the

Performance of Data Networks module and its

purpose was to evaluate students’ knowledge gain at

the end of the lesson. The test comprised 8 questions

that carried equal marks (10 marks). The questions

were divided into 2 types/classes: 4 questions

assessing the students’ knowledge in material that

was taught using the traditional approach (i.e.

PowerPoint-assisted approach) and 4 questions

assessing students’ knowledge in material covered

using the mulsemedia-enhanced approach.

These questions were designed to have the same

level of difficulty and were paired per topics,

measuring the same learning outcomes. This allowed

for a fair comparison between the performance of the

students in the questions covering material taught

using the traditional PowerPoint-assisted approach vs

the students’ performance in the questions covering

material taught using mulsemedia-enhanced

approach. All tests were marked by the same lecturer.

4.2 Results Analysis

4.2.1 Learner Experience, Engagement and

Motivation

The impact of mulsemedia on learner experience,

engagement and motivation was investigated and

evaluated using the two questionnaires where the

students were asked to reflect on their learning

experience with mulsemedia, but also on the learning

process in general. The answers collected from the

students are summarised in Table 2, where, SD =

Strongly Disagree, D = Disagree, N = Neutral, A =

Agree, SA = Strongly Agree. It is important to note

that the answers to question Q25 are based on 35

filled-in questionnaires, as one of the participants in

the study did not fill in the second learning

questionnaire.

Table 2: Answers on the learner satisfaction questionnaire.

SD D N A SA

Q11 2.78% 13.89% 16.67% 58.33% 8.33%

Q12 5.56% 8.33% 22.22% 58.33% 5.56%

Q13 0 36.11% 25% 27.78% 11.11%

Q14 5.56% 11.11% 11.11% 58.33% 8.33%

Q15 5.56% 0 13.89% 61.11% 19.44%

Q16 19.44% 38.89% 22.22% 16.67% 2.78%

Q17 2.78% 11.11% 16.67% 44.44% 25%

Q25 2.86% 8.57% 17.14% 48.57% 22.85%

The overall learning experience of students was

good with 70.55% of students clearly expressing the

fact that they enjoyed the multi-sensorial experience

during the class. More than 60% of the participants in

the study stated that the mulsemedia experience

helped them to better understand and assimilate the

concepts delivered. The results presented in section

4.2.2. demonstrate that this was not only subjective

feedback from the students, but mulsemedia actually

led to an improvement in the knowledge gain – the

vast majority of the students scored better in the

questions related to the learning content taught using

mulsemedia. Moreover, 58.33% disagreed with the

fact that multi-sensorial effects were disturbing, while

22.22% were neutral to this statement.

The results also demonstrated that mulsemedia

can lead to an increased engagement of the students

with the learning content as noted by 66.66% of the

students that participated in the study. Furthermore,

the vast majority of the students (more than 70%)

agreed with the fact that mulsemedia is highly

motivating for learning.

69.44% of the students stated they would like to

have more teaching content delivered using

mulsemedia.

It is important to mention the fact that there was no

particular correlation observed between the learning

styles and the impact that mulsemedia had on the

student learning experience, engagement or

motivation.

4.2.2 Knowledge Gain

An analysis of the impact of mulsemedia on students’

knowledge gain was carried out using the knowledge

evaluation test previously described in section 4.1.3.

The test evaluated the knowledge that the students

acquired during the lesson. A comparison-based

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

184

evaluation was employed, namely comparing the

students’ performance in the questions covering

material taught using the traditional PowerPoint-

assisted approach vs the students’ performance in the

questions covering material taught using

mulsemedia-enhanced approach. For this purpose, for

each student two average marks were calculated for

the two types of questions.

The results shown that the vast majority of the

students, namely 75% scored better in the questions

covering material taught using the mulsemedia-

enhanced approach. 16.67% of the students scored

less in these questions, while the remaining 8.33%

had the same average for both types of questions. The

overall average (for all students) of the students

marks in questions covering material taught using

mulsemedia-enhanced approach was 6.42 (out of 10),

while the overall average of the students marks in

questions covering material taught using the

traditional approach was 4.71 (out of 10).

The statistical significance of the results obtained

for the two types of questions was demonstrated

through a t-test. At  = 0.05, t(5.2628), p<0.0001, the

t-test demonstrated that the average score obtained in

questions covering material taught with the

mulsemedia-enhanced approach is statistically

significantly higher than the average score obtained

in questions covering material taught using the

traditional approach. This demonstrated that

mulsemedia had a positive contribution on the

learning outcome, leading to a significant

improvement in the students’ knowledge gain.

4.2.3 TEL & Mulsemedia as a TEL Method

– Students & Educators Perspective

The second learning questionnaire comprised two

questions in particular that asked students to reflect

on the benefits of TEL from the student perspective,

but also from the perspective of an educator (see Q22

and Q23 in Table 2). The latter question was quite

valid considering that almost half of the participants

in the study were educators or educators in training

(16 postgraduate students from SEIGS, DCU Institute

of Education) and some of the engineering students

were also involved in teaching activities (teaching

assistants in the university). Hence, while they

participated in the study as students, they were well

able to express opinions about the benefits offered by

TEL in general (and mulsemedia in particular) to the

educators.

The answers to these two questions were in

general very positive, the majority of the participants

listing significant benefits brought by TEL to both

students and educators. Noteworthy is the fact that out

of 35 participants in the study that answered these

questions, only 2 were sceptical about TEL. One

engineering student stated that: “I don’t think they

[TEL systems] benefit a lot the learner, except

perhaps to help him get more focused in a course”.

However, the same participant noted in the answer

referring to the benefits brought by TEL to the

teachers that: “he [the educator] can associate stimuli

with some part of the course to make them more

enjoyable for the students”. This answer seems to be

quite clearly linked to the participant mulsemedia-

enhanced learning experience. The other participant

that was not that positive about TEL was a

postgraduate from DCU Institute of Education that

noted that TEL can be a burden (the exact word used

by the participant was “torture”) for an educator most

probably due to the extra time involved in the setup,

preparation, etc. However, the same participant saw

value in TEL from the student perspective, noting that

it could be beneficial especially for the students with

special needs.

All the other 33 participants in the students were

extremely positive in relation to TEL’s benefits from

an educator, and especially from a student

perspective. A considerable number of participants

clearly related TEL to mulsemedia noting that TEL

would “allow the teacher reinforce the learning

experience by stimulating more of the learner’s

senses” and TEL systems could bring the following

benefits to the students: “can enhance the memory by

olfaction/haptic information”, “provide the

possibility of a more realistic experience”, “a fuller

experience/more memorable experience”, “tech-

enhanced systems offer learners a hands-on, multi-

sensory learning experience”.

There were few patterns that arose from the

participants answers in relation to the benefits that

TEL provided to the learner, namely: increased

engagement (“engagement increased”, “improved

engagement”), improved learning experience

(“improve the experience and reinforce learning”,

“they [TEL systems] enable them to get more

involved in what they are doing, and consequently

enjoy more and retrieve better experience and

knowledge”, “funny and interactive”, “easier to

learn/easier to remember”) and personalization

(“more personalised”, “can be used over distance/at

learner’s own pace”). The engagement theme was

also present in the benefits that TEL provides the

educators as noted by the participants in the study:

“technology systems keep engagement high and

increases teacher moral and satisfaction”, TEL

systems are seen as “another way in which to engage

Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience, Motivation and Knowledge Gain

185

students”, “new actively engaging techniques to

motivate all learners in the classroom”. In general,

participants in the study see TEL systems as allowing

educators to “make the teaching more realistic” and

giving them more teaching possibilities.

Mulsemedia as a TEL method, through a multi-

sensorial setting, allows the educator to create a more

realistic teaching experience that is enjoyed by the

students and leads to an increase in their engagement

and motivation resulting in an improvement in their

academic performance, as indicated by the results of

our study. Moreover, 69.44% of the participants in the

study stated they would like to have more teaching

content delivered using mulsemedia, a fact that

demonstrates the students are quite ready to embrace

mulsemedia as a TEL method.

5 CONCLUSIONS

This paper presents the results of a case study carried

out with 36 postgraduate students from DCU that

were exposed to a mulsemedia-enhanced lesson. The

purpose of the study was to gain a better

understanding of the potential of mulsemedia as a

TEL method and the impact of mulsemedia on

learner’s experience, motivation and on learning

outcomes. The results of the study were very positive,

with more than 70% of the participants in the study

stating that they enjoyed the multi-sensorial

experience during the class, while 69.44% of them

expressed an eagerness to have more teaching content

delivered using mulsemedia. More than 60% of the

participants in the study stated that the mulsemedia

experience helped them to better understand and

assimilate the concepts, while the results of the

knowledge evaluation test demonstrated that

mulsemedia actually helped more than 75% of the

participants to better assimilate the taught concepts.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was supported by the NEWTON project

(http://www.newtonproject.eu/) funded under the

European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and

Innovation programme, Grant Agreement no.

688503. We would like to thank Dr. Marilena Bratu,

Department of Psychopedagogy, University of

Bucharest for her help in developing one of the

learning questionnaires used in the study.

REFERENCES

Bogusevschi, D., Muntean, C., & Muntean, G. M. (2019,

March). Teaching and learning physics using 3D virtual

learning environment: A case study of combined virtual

reality and virtual laboratory in secondary school.

In Society for Information Technology & Teacher

Education International Conference (pp. 467-474).

Association for the Advancement of Computing in

Education (AACE).

Boyle, E., Connolly, T. M., & Hainey, T. (2011). The role

of psychology in understanding the impact of computer

games. Entertainment Computing, 2(2), 69-74.

Broadbent, H. J., White, H., Mareschal, D., & Kirkham, N.

Z. (2018). Incidental learning in a multisensory

environment across childhood. Developmental science,

21(2), e12554.

Chen, S. W., Yang, C. H., Huang, K. S., & Fu, S. L. (2019).

Digital games for learning energy conservation: A

study of impacts on motivation, attention, and learning

outcomes. Innovations in Education and Teaching

International, 56(1), 66-76.

Covaci, A., Zou, L., Tal, I., Muntean, G. M., & Ghinea, G.

(2018). Is multimedia multisensorial?-a review of

mulsemedia systems. ACM Computing Surveys

(CSUR), 51(5), 1-35.

El Mawas, N., Tal, I., Moldovan, A. N., Bogusevschi, D.,

Andrews, J., Muntean, G. M., & Muntean, C. H. (2018,

March). Improving STEM Learning Experience in

Primary School by Using NEWTON Project Innovative

Technologies. In International Conference on

Computer Supported Education (CSEDU) (pp. 214-

230). Springer, Cham.

Garzón, J., Pavón, J., & Baldiris, S. (2019). Systematic

review and meta-analysis of augmented reality in

educational settings. Virtual Reality, 23(4), 447-459.

Ghergulescu, I., & Muntean, C. H. (2012). Measurement

and analysis of learner’s motivation in game-based e-

learning. In Assessment in game-based learning (pp.

355-378). Springer, New York, NY.

Ghergulescu, I., Moldovan, A. N., Muntean, C. H., &

Muntean, G. M. (2019). Atomic Structure Interactive

Personalised Virtual Lab: Results from an Evaluation

Study in Secondary Schools. In 11th International

Conference on Computer Supported Education

(CSEDU).

Ghinea, G., Timmerer, C., Lin, W., & Gulliver, S. R.

(2014). Mulsemedia: State of the art, perspectives, and

challenges. ACM Transactions on Multimedia

Computing, Communications, and Applications

(TOMM), 11(1s), 1-23.

Tal, I., Zou, L., Covaci, A., Ibarrola, E., Bratu, M., Ghinea,

G., & Muntean, G. M. (2019). Mulsemedia in

Telecommunication and Networking Education: A

Novel Teaching Approach that Improves the Learning

Process. IEEE Communications Magazine, 57(11), 60-

66.

Tal, I., Ibarrola, E., & Muntean, G. M. (2016, November).

Quality and standardization in technology-enhanced

CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

186

learning. In 2016 ITU Kaleidoscope: ICTs for a

Sustainable World (ITU WT) (pp. 1-8). IEEE.

Togou, M. A., Lorenzo, C., Cornetta, G., & Muntean, G. M.

(2020). Assessing the Effectiveness of Using Fab Lab-

Based Learning in Schools on K-12 Students' Attitude

Toward STEAM. IEEE Transactions on Education.

Yuan, Z., Ghinea, G., & Muntean, G. M. (2014). Beyond

multimedia adaptation: Quality of experience-aware

multi-sensorial media delivery. IEEE Transactions on

Multimedia, 17(1), 104-117.

Zou, L., Tal, I., Covaci, A., Ibarrola, E., Ghinea, G., &

Muntean, G. M. (2017, June). Can multisensorial media

improve learner experience?. In Proceedings of the 8th

ACM on Multimedia Systems Conference (pp. 315-

320).

Mulsemedia in Education: A Case Study on Learner Experience, Motivation and Knowledge Gain

187