Canadian Academy Discover, Publish, Thrive
The concept of the metaverse, popularized by science fiction authors like Neil Stephenson, describes a shared virtual space accessed through avatars, with its portrayal in media shaping public perception. Despite its futuristic depictions, VR technology has existed for decades, undergoing cycles of hype and disillusionment. As VR becomes more accessible, its potential for educational purposes grows, aligning with Moore’s typology of educational interactions. This typology, originally designed for distance education, offers a framework to examine learner engagement with content, instructors, and peers in VR environments. Additionally, considerations for learner-self interaction and learner-environment interaction are proposed, recognizing VR’s unique impact on individual learning experiences and environmental interactions. As VR integration in education progresses, addressing issues of accessibility and equity becomes crucial to mitigate educational disparities
Learner–content interaction:
One of VR’s promises is to enhance active learning through hands-on interaction with virtual content. In educational applications, VR animates educational material with interactive tools and immersive environments, often yielding superior learning outcomes compared to traditional methods. However, research results on the effectiveness of VR vary, with some studies showing significant benefits while others report no significant differences. VR’s multisensory nature can accommodate diverse learning styles, offering personalized learning experiences. Additionally, VR environments can reduce social anxiety, enhancing focus on content delivery and fostering creativity, particularly in language learning contexts. Studies suggest that VR platforms like Second Life and OpenSimulator can improve language acquisition but may have technical limitations. Further research is needed to explore fully immersive VR systems and their alignment with real-life language use. VR lessons encourage critical engagement with course concepts, as demonstrated by integrating bioethics discussions into VR classrooms. Environmental design choices in VR can impact engagement with course content, highlighting opportunities for further exploration.
Learner–instructor interaction:
VR has proven effective as an instructional tool in certain classroom scenarios. Kindergarten and nursery school teachers trained in VR demonstrated better understanding of student feelings and perceptions compared to those trained traditionally. There’s potential in VR for simulations like bullying scenarios, aiding perspective-taking. Platforms like TeachLive enable teachers-in-training to practice classroom management with avatar students, offering critique and improvement strategies. Further exploration is needed on VR’s potential in student-teacher engagement, such as virtual field trips and personalized interactions through avatar proximity and eye contact. VR can enhance lectures by making them more targeted, while active learning can benefit from configuring avatars to be attentive and available during applied learning exercises.
Learner–learner interaction:
VR has the potential to transform interactions among learners by simulating various roles, tasks, resources, and settings. In communication classrooms, where presentations are common, VR can play a significant role in helping students overcome public-speaking anxiety and shyness. Research suggests that imagining interactions in VR settings can enhance communication efficacy and reduce anxiety, especially when combined with cognitive behavior therapy. Studies indicate that self-led VR preparations could become a valuable component of communication curriculums, fostering a more comfortable environment for students to practice presenting ideas to their peers. Furthermore, VR simulations can have implications for learner-learner interaction in various communication courses, including interpersonal, group, and organizational communication. However, there are challenges and limitations to consider, as evidenced by mixed findings regarding the effectiveness of VR interventions in promoting teamwork and collaboration. Despite these challenges, VR holds promise for enhancing empathy across social groups, particularly in intercultural communication courses. Nonetheless, there is a need for further research to better understand how VR can effectively promote empathy and reduce prejudice. Overall, the growing body of research on VR in communication education provides valuable insights for instructors seeking to leverage technology for enhancing learner interaction and learning outcomes.
Learner–self interaction:
This article expands on Moore’s (1989) model for analyzing interaction in mediated education by incorporating the intrapersonal level of learner-self interaction, alongside interactions with content, instructors, and peers in virtual reality (VR). Intrapersonal communication, defined by Stacks and Andersen (1989), involves message transmission between brain hemispheres or modules, resembling interpersonal communication and facilitating attitudinal and behavioral change. VR enables users to embody avatars, potentially influencing subsequent behaviors through the Proteus Effect. Studies indicate that embodying attractive or confident avatars can lead to corresponding behavioral changes. VR interventions, such as interacting with future selves, have shown promise in promoting positive outcomes, including increased saving behaviors and reduced self-defeating behaviors among convicted offenders. Psychological-mindedness, or self-reflection, is crucial for mental health and educational success, particularly in fostering growth mindsets. However, systemic barriers like imposter syndrome and stereotype threat complicate these dynamics, especially for marginalized groups in academia. VR-mediated self-talk interventions could help students envision educational success and transition towards growth mindsets. Culturally sustaining learning practices should consider the diverse needs and perspectives of students, incorporating input from marginalized communities. As VR continues to evolve, it presents opportunities to enhance accessibility and inclusivity in education, a topic that warrants further exploration.
Learner–environment interaction:
In exploring the educational potential of Virtual Reality (VR), it’s crucial to consider not only the interaction between learners and the technology itself but also how learners engage with the virtual environment. VR environments can provide immersive experiences, such as simulating museum or field trips, offering cost-effective and engaging opportunities for students to explore various subjects. However, while VR offers accessibility and affordability, students have expressed a desire for more social interaction during these immersive experiences. Educators should strive to integrate social engagement into VR environments to enhance the educational experience. Additionally, the physical and social aspects of educational settings play a significant role in shaping students’ perceptions and well-being. VR holds promise in surpassing logistical barriers in classroom design, with frameworks proposed to promote well-being through healthy design principles. As virtual classroom spaces are developed, it’s essential to consider how non-virtual design principles, such as optimal lighting and spatial configuration, can be applied and tested in VR environments to enhance translational efficacy.
Transcending (and reinforcing) barriers:
Educational environments must prioritize accessibility for all students, regardless of their background, health, or abilities. Virtual reality (VR) offers unique opportunities, particularly in accommodating students with mobility or communication disabilities, but its accessibility remains contingent on factors like hand controls and sensory navigation. Efforts such as Cornell University’s XR Access aim to address VR design issues, recognizing diverse accessibility needs. Instructors considering VR integration should be aware of its potential benefits and drawbacks for students, including motion sickness and cognitive effects. While VR can offer affordable alternatives to physical field trips, concerns persist about its efficacy and whether it supplements or replaces real-world experiences. Affordable VR technologies like Google Cardboard show promise in enhancing learning outcomes over time but also raise questions about socioeconomic disparities in access and resources. Addressing these challenges requires collaboration among stakeholders to ensure equity in VR’s educational use, recognizing that there’s no one-size-fits-all solution and that accessibility should always be a priority in technological advancements.
The literature and essays in this forum emphasize that VR is not just a futuristic concept but a current tool for education. Educators must consider both established and emerging needs, challenges, and opportunities associated with VR teaching. The discussions cover various levels of learner interaction and highlight the importance of incorporating self and environment into VR applications. As VR evolves, it’s crucial to adapt traditional frameworks while prioritizing accessibility and equity to address recurring challenges.
Source:
Ria J. Gualano & Scott W. Campbell (2024) Classrooms in the metaverse: educational applications and levels of learner interaction in virtual reality, Communication Education, 73:2, 212-225, DOI: 10.1080/03634523.2024.2312873