Towards a Taxonomy of Virtual Reality Usage in Education: A Systematic Review

Part of the Progress in IS book series (PROIS)


Virtual reality market is undergoing a rapid extension and continually evolves with technological advancements. Today it is populated with solutions which are complex in terms of interaction and graphics. One such example is applications for educational purposes, a distinct class of VR solutions, development of which implies consideration of multiple disciplines. However, there is still no standard general-purposes classification of those solutions. Different interested parties develop separate and mosaic categorizations based on their field, audience and purposes. This paper reviews reported classification schemes of using virtual reality for learning and summarizes them towards a taxonomy. It tries to implement a multidisciplinary approach, without focusing on one particular aspect, but rather integrating prospects from such fields as human-computer interaction, pedagogy, psychology, and technology. The paper provides a brief overview of existing veins of VR research on education and training as well as proposes relevant research directions.


Systematic review Virtual reality Learning Educational technology Classification 



The results are based on the works within the project “D-Masterguide” which was funded under the project reference 01PZ16010F by the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung within the subsection “Digitale Medien in der beruflichen Bildung”. The authors would like to express their gratitude as well to the European Social Fund (ESF) by the European Union for co-funding.


  1. Anderson, P. L., Zimand, E., Hodges, L. F., & Rothbaum, B. O. (2005). Cognitive behavioral therapy for public-speaking anxiety using virtual reality for exposure. Depression and Anxiety, 22(3), 156–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ángel Rueda, C. J., Valdés Godínes, J. C., & Rudman, P. D. (2018). Categorizing the educational affordances of 3-dimensional immersive digital environments. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 17, 83–112.Google Scholar
  3. Boletsis, C. (2017). The new era of virtual reality locomotion: A systematic literature review of techniques and a proposed typology. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 1(4), 24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Drachsler, H., & Kirschner, P. A. (2012). Learner characteristics. Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 1743–1745). US, Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan, I., Miller, A., & Jiang, S. (2012). A taxonomy of virtual worlds usage in education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(6), 949–964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elvestad, E. O. (2016). Evidence of learning in virtual reality. Department of Computer Science. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Retrieved April 9, 2019 from
  8. Fowler, C. (2015). Virtual reality and learning: Where is the pedagogy? British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Girvan, C. (2018). What is a virtual world? Definition and classification. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1087–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Greenwald, S. W., Wang, Z., Funk, M., & Maes, P. (2017, June). Investigating social presence and communication with embodied avatars in room-scale virtual reality. In International Conference on Immersive Learning (pp. 75–90). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010). Use of three-dimensional (3-D) immersive virtual worlds in K-12 and higher education settings: A review of the research. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hou, L., Chi, H. L., Tarng, W., Chai, J., Panuwatwanich, K., & Wang, X. (2017). A framework of innovative learning for skill development in complex operational tasks. Automation in Construction, 83(January), 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Izard, S. G., Juanes, J. A., García Peñalvo, F. J., Estella, J. M. G., Ledesma, M. J. S., & Ruisoto, P. (2018). Virtual reality as an educational and training tool for medicine. Journal of Medical Systems, 42(3), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jensen, L., & Konradsen, F. (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Education and Information Technologies, 23(4), 1515–1529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kavanagh, S., Luxton-Reilly, A., Wuensche, B., & Plimmer, B. (2017). A systematic review of virtual reality in education. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 10(2), 85–119.Google Scholar
  16. Kavanagh, S., Luxton-reilly, A., Wüensche, B., & Plimmer, B. (2016). Creating 360° educational video: A case study. In OzCHI ’16 Proceedings of the 28th Australian Conference on Computer-Human Interaction (pp. 34–39).Google Scholar
  17. Kinzie, M. B., Sullivan, H. J., & Berdel, R. L. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 299–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Li, X., Yi, W., Chi, H. L., Wang, X., & Chan, A. P. C. (2018). A critical review of virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) applications in construction safety. Automation in Construction, 86(November), 150–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mellet-d’Huart, D. (2009). Virtual reality for training and lifelong learning. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 2(1–2), 185–224.Google Scholar
  20. Menin, A., Torchelsen, R., & Nedel, L. (2018). An analysis of VR technology used in immersive simulations with a serious game perspective. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 38(2), 57–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mikropoulos, T. A., & Bellou, J. (2010). The unique features of educational virtual environments. Teaching and learning with technology: Beyond constructivism (pp. 249–258).Google Scholar
  23. Mikropoulos, T. A., & Natsis, A. (2011). Educational virtual environments: A ten-year review of empirical research (1999–2009). Computers & Education, 56(3), 769–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nabiyouni, M., Saktheeswaran, A., Bowman, D. A., & Karanth, A. (2015). Comparing the performance of natural, semi-natural, and non-natural locomotion techniques in virtual reality. In 2015 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI) (pp. 3–10).Google Scholar
  25. Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The concept of flow. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 239–263).Google Scholar
  26. Nowak, K., & Biocca, F. (2001). Understanding the influence of agency and anthropomorphism on copresence, social presence and physical presence with virtual humans. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12(5), 481–494.Google Scholar
  27. Onyesolu, M. O., Nwasor, V. C., Ositanwosu, O. E., & Iwegbuna, O. N. (2013). Pedagogy: Instructivism to socio-constructivism through virtual reality. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 4(9), 40–47.Google Scholar
  28. Potkonjak, V., Gardner, M., Callaghan, V., Mattila, P., Guetl, C., Petrović, V. M., et al. (2016). Virtual laboratories for education in science, technology, and engineering: A review. Computers & Education, 95, 309–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schmeil, A., & Eppler, M. J. (2008). Collaboration patterns for knowledge sharing and integration in second life: A classification of virtual 3D group interaction scripts. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Knowledge Management Iknow, Best Paper Selection, 14(3), 1.Google Scholar
  30. Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding virtual reality—interface, application, and design. (Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments) (Vol. 12).Google Scholar
  31. Suh, A., & Prophet, J. (2018). The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 86, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Vom Brocke, J., Simons, A., Niehaves, B., Niehaves, B., Reimer, K., Plattfaut, R., & Cleven, A. (2009). Reconstructing the giant: On the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. In Ecis (Vol. 9, pp. 2206–2217).Google Scholar
  33. Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2010). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a review. Mis Q, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.Google Scholar
  34. Weise, M., & Zender, R. (2017). Interaction techniques in VR learning environments interaktionstechniken in VR-Lernwelten. In Proceedings of DeLFI and GMW Workshops 2017. Chemnitz. Retrieved April 9, 2019 from
  35. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AWS-Institute for Digitized Products and ProcessesSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations