Abstract:

In early 2022, the University of Sunderland purchased a 6 metre cylinder equipped with 360 degree immersive project and surround sound, named the “Igloo” to prepare students with skills for the world of work. During 2022 eight groups of eight students each set out on projects [1] giving them real world experience which highlighted a number of findings around perception, communication and also feeling a sense of presence.
Literature related to learning in an immersive environment is emerging and questions are being asked if higher levels of perceived presence is hindering the student from learning. A “well-crafted virtual world could change our emotional state and make us feel anxiety, happiness, or sadness” [2]. From observing how students worked collaboratively within the immersive space and being able to move independently within the environment a number of questions were raised. “How will a student learn if they have motion sickness”, “how can cognitive overload be avoided as students learn new content whilst learning to use this latest technology” and “will the students be motivated and engaged and feel the realism of the 360 degree learning environment where the ceiling and floor have no projection and students shadows can be seen at times”.
Literature related to these questions highlighted research on the sense of immersion [3] as well as a sense of presence [4] but recent results have led to some interesting questions that should be followed by future work around the interaction in the sense of presence experience by users [5]. It has also been noted that “we know little about how students interact with and react to this novel learning environment which is very different from traditional classroom learning [6]. Some findings have shown that immersive VR has led to cognitive overload and some researchers have concluded that this leads to higher levels of presence but less learning [7]. There is also the question of sickness caused by using this technology which can also stop the student from learning.
This paper will review recent literature, highlight gaps and where further research is needed as well as discussing findings and observations of the students learning whilst they use the “Igloo”.

References:
[1] www.igloovision.com/Documents/University of Sunderland_Case study.pdf
[2] M.A.A Guitierrez, F. Vexo and D. Thalmann (2008), “Stepping Into Virtual Reality”, London, UK.: Springer.
[3] Y. Kim et al. (2020), “A systematic review of virtual reality system from the perspective of user experience”, International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 36(10) pp893-910.
[4] E. Pedrolo et al. (2018), “Characteristics, usability, and users experience of a system combining cognitive and physical therapy in a virtual environment: Positive bike”, Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), vol.18 pp.1-16.
[5] A. Goncalves et al. (2022), “Evaluation of a low-cost virtual reality surround-screen projection system”, IEEE Transaction on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol.28, no.12.
[6] S.W-Y. Lee et al. (2022), “Do curios students learn more science in an immersive virtual environment? Exploring the impact of advanced organizers and epistemic curiosity”, Computers and Education 182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104456.
[7] G. Makransky and G.B Petersen (2021), “The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research based model of learning in immersive virtual reality”, Educational Psychology Review, pp1-22.

Keywords:

Immersive learning, cognitive overload, immersion, presence.