Towards a Taxonomy of Virtual Reality Usage in Education: A Systematic Review
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.
KeywordsSystematic 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.
- 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
- 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 http://www.idi.ntnu.no/~krogstie/project-reports/2016/elvestad/Litteraturstudie%20-%20Endre%20Elvestad%20-2016.pdf.
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The concept of flow. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (pp. 239–263).Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- 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
- Sherman, W. R., & Craig, A. B. (2003). Understanding virtual reality—interface, application, and design. (Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments) (Vol. 12).Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- 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 http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2092/paper13.pdf.