Community reviews for NYT VR - New York Times

I think this is a wonderful aid to whatever subject is being taught. It does not provide much depth instruction, however, it does get the students engaged and takes what they're learning closer to a real-world level.

Overall, this was a strong product. The videos were well done and engaging. However, they are better fit for students in higher grade levels. The quality of the videos is what one would expect from the New York Times. If you are prone to motion sickness though, this tool is quite hard to use. I can only use it for a short period of time. Be aware that students who can get headaches, or cannot handle quick stimulation will not be able to enjoy the full experience of VR.Lots of good VR videos though on historical events that could be used in Social Studies Lessons.

I think this app is great for the classroom. During units that feature different places/ experiences, this app could be used to show the students what it's like in that said place. In addition to this, I found the app to be fun and interactive. Students enjoy being able to see through the eyes of someone else and can learn from the experiences of others.

I love this product as a teaching tool. It is so neat to show the kids places that they may never have the chance to go. The only thing I would change is making it more interactive.

I used the NYTimes Op-Docs application, which is set up easily by entering your phone number; this then sends a small link to your phone which sets up the application. The application itself looks like a multimedia version of a newspaper, with various video article experiences on assorted topics. The first experience I chose was entitled “Notes on Blindness” which is described as such: After he went blind, John Hull used sound to rediscover our rich sensory universe.” I had trouble seeing some of the text and it was hard to align and keep on my face, although at least some of these issues were part of the “blindness” experience. Also, light seemed to drown out a lot of the definition of the picture. A better viewer with appropriate adjustment and size controls might help to alleviate this issues. The video consists of a “blind man” experience where you can view a dim, neon lit image of a field with a few massive trees in the background. The narrator speaks to you and explains how sound and dim images help assist the blind in basic everyday tasks of movement and identification. It was certainly an immersive experience, and emulated the experience of blindness in an illuminating fashion, although the cardboard technology itself did not permit me to enjoy it fully. Next, I watched “Policing in Flint“: a video detailing the everyday experiences of police officers in a depressed American industrial town. The experience is kind of like a documentary. It starts out with the customary title scenes. Once again, I had trouble with the lighting. The first shot is intentionally dark to show the struggles of police officers trying to identify and analyze difficult situations, however, I could make out very little in the image to navigate the initial scenes. I turned up the brightness of my Iphone and it helped a bit. The video follows police officers as they traverse the dangerous territory of Flint. Both of these experiences were great in their ability to transport the student to a foreign location, as well as in their ability to experience someone else’s reality. Finally, I watched “Meditation Journeys: Meditate by the Ocean:”. This video was the most successful, because it utilized bright colors and scenery of the ocean. It was easy and relaxing to watch and you can look at a full panoramic of the scene given. It also includes narration by an expert at meditation, as he gives you tips and tricks on how to relax to the fullest extent. The NY Time Op Ed is an imperfect application for some of the articles and experiences, but many of these problems could be alleviated by having a quality VR Headset. The interactive and immersive character of the program absolutely can be used for various types of students and learning scenarios. I am excited to see where this app and the technology moves into the future, despite some of my reservations about the quality of the actual videos.

I like almost everything about the opportunity that the app affords my students; however, the success of implementation will depend upon the way the app reacts with various devices (and the presumption is that students have their own smartphones to use). Many of my students use iOS, but I am using my Samsung Android. Other users have commented on the differences between the two. The Gallery provides other types of videos to use to support content or invite students to discover topics and content that could drive independent projects. All of these could be possible writing topics or food for further investigation. Furthermore, the TIMES continues to produce VR experiences. Some students may be deterred by the motion, as has been sited by other reviewers. Additionally, the instructions for use are the responsibility of the teacher initially. Having said that, the kids will be able to quickly operate the device independently. The content of any videos could also be used to discuss the types of media literacy questions that are encouraged by National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), such as: What is the purpose of this message? Who constructed it? What voices are represented? What voices are missing?