VR IN THE CLASSROOM 1

VR in the Classroom:

Does Purposeful Use Increase Student Learning and Retention?

Emily M. Atkins

University of West Georgia

VR IN THE CLASSROOM 2

VR in the Classroom: Does Purposeful Use Increase Student Learning and Retention?

Virtual reality (VR) is a technology tool that is quickly entering classrooms. Students of

all ages and abilities are getting the opportunity visit placed they never could have before, look at

images in a whole new way, and gain clear understanding of previously complicated materials.

VR is a computer based, 3 dimensional experience that allows its uses to interact in a seemingly

real way with images or a virtual environment. But, does the use of VR in an elementary

classroom increase student retention and learning or is it simply something “cool” for the

students to look at?

Statement of the Problem

Many studies have been done on the usefulness of VR in the classroom and its ability to

increase engagement amongst students. Significantly less information is given on if using VR in

the classroom actually contributes to increase student learning and the students making better

grades. After the initial shock and awe of VR, we need to know if it actually helps students

perform better on assessments. There is even less information on VR’s ability to increase

student retention of information. It would be helpful to know if using VR can create a strong

memory that helps students recall information later down the road. Can the use of VR create a

lasting impressions that help with content retention? It is also important to look at the age of

students studied, there is plentiful information on VR’s use with college aged students, this study

will be looking at elementary school students. Looking at the data on VR’s ability increase

learning and retention is critical because if VR does not contribute to higher student learning and

retention it may not be as useful and worthwhile in the classroom as we think. While we can all
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 3

agree on its ability to create higher student engagement; the jury is still out on its ability to assist

in actual student achievement in an elementary classroom setting.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study will be to look at the correlation between purposeful use of VR

in the elementary classroom and student learning and retention. While engagement is critical,

student learning should be at the forefront of an educators mind when choosing what kind of

technology should be included in their lessons. We will see if VR can not only increase student

engagement but also help to increase student learning and their retention of that knowledge over

time.

Research Question and Hypothesis

For the purpose of this study, the following question was addressed:

Is the purposeful use of virtual reality associated with increased achievement

scores on the Cobb County Quarter 2 Science Assessment in 3rd grade students?

Is the purposeful use of virtual reality associated with increased retention scores

on the Cobb County Quarter 2 Science Assessment in 3rd grade students when

given 1 month later?

As part of this study, investigation included one research hypothesis:

The use of VR in the elementary classroom will be associated with higher student

scores on the Cobb County Quarter 2 Science Assessment.

VR IN THE CLASSROOM 4

The use of VR in the elementary classroom will slightly increase student retention

after 1 month.

Definition of Key Terms

1. Virtual Reality (VR)- an immersive technology that allows its users to interact with

images. In this study we will be using Google Expeditions and Google Cardboard as

our VR technology platform.

2. Retention- a student’s ability to remember information well after the material has

been presented.

This study will be using a mixed method of study. Quantitative data will be used

when looking at numerical assessment data. Qualitative data will be used when looking

at student behavior and perspective toward virtual reality and if they feel VR was key to

their learning and retention.

Theoretical Framework

The theory that will be guiding this study is the Multimedia Learning Theory. The

Multimedia Learning Theory is based on the understanding that cogitative learning happens

through two channels, auditory and visual. The theory states that, “people learn more deeply

from words and pictures than from words alone” (Mayer, 2009, p. 47). I feel that adding the

visual aspect of VR to an already auditory lesson should increase student learning and retention

because information will be stored and processed in two channels rather than just one.

Literature Review
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 5

The literature reviewed for this study focuses one of the most used forms of virtual reality

and the reasons and benefits surrounding it, including the VR the study will use; virtual field

trips. Literature will also focus on the preliminary research done to connect VR and the

Multimedia Learning Theory.

Virtual Reality

Perhaps the most notorious way of using VR in any level classroom is for that of the

virtual field trip. “It’s one thing for a U.S. student to read about distant and exotic lands…but

it’s quite another for them to experience landmarks first-hand with VR.” (Buzzell, 2018, p.33)

Buzzell feels these field trips offer “a deeper and enhanced learning experience that cements

basic knowledge and facilitates deeper cultural understanding and global awareness.”(2018).

While Buzzell writes about the benefits of the virtual field trip, he lacks data show just how

much enhancement is brought to the learning experience.

Clark, Hosticka, Schriver, & Beldell (2002) build on this assessment of virtual field trips

by discussing both the benefits and limitations of virtual field trips. Amongst the advantages,

they mention that virtual field trips offer students of all needs and ability levels the opportunity

to meet the objectives of the curriculum. They also offer students the option of “repeat visitation

to the site for continued study” (Clark et al, 2002, p.3) and “allowing students to take a closer

look at areas”(Clarke et al, 2002, p.3 ) are two further benefits to virtual field trips over actual

field trips. Students can also come back to their virtual field trip for assessment purposes which

would offer visual reminders of content studied (Clark et al. 2002). But if the repeat visits and

ability to take a closer look link to student achievement and learning is unclear. Clark et al

(2002) also mentions the limitations of this virtual field trips. They note that care must be taken

with curriculum. There must be a designer with strong content knowledge and “appropriate
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 6

pedagogy for the field trip.” (Clark et al, 2002, p.4) and the trip must meet the objectives of the

curriculum. So, the VR access alone cannot make for a successful and useful virtual field trip.

There must be embedded curriculum that meets the needs of the students and enhances the VR

experience as well.

Woerner (1999) offers a similar stance on virtual field trips. He notes why teacher might

choose a virtual field trip; including promoting increased learning, providing input in a variety of

sensory modes, the need for concrete experience, and increased motivation of the students. He

also notes that if offers teacher a new environment in which to observe their students. This new

environment may cause a change in student attitudes toward the subject, in Woerner’s case,

science. Similar to Clark, Woerner (1999) also mentions features that make an effective virtual

field trip. These trips must have clear and specific objectives, must be integral part in classroom

learning, must have a pre-trip orientation, a navigator to guide student, and a follow up post-trip

(Woerner. 1999). Once again, we see the need for more than just the VR component but a rich

driving curriculum to support the VR experience.

While VR’s virtual field trips will be the basis of our study, VR is used in many ways for

the purpose of education. In the subject of science, VR is often used take a closer look at

difficult science topics. For example, VR offers medical students the opportunity to see the

workings of a heart without having to dissect a real heart. (Westwood. 2016). In primary grades,

VR animation is used to help make information, like the alphabet, stick by tapping “into different

learning modalities” and getting student excited (Pierce. 2018. p.5).

Parong & Mayer (2018) come closest to linking student learning and the use of VR.

Their study with college science students consists of two experiments. One experiment which

has one group of students watch a VR simulation and the other use a PowerPoint to relay the
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 7

same information. Their study showed that “a PowerPoint slide may be more effective for

teaching scientific information than an equivalent lesson in an immersive virtual reality

environment.” and “that a conversion of multimedia lessons into virtual reality may not yet be

warrented” (Parong & Mayer. 2018. p.1). However, they conclude that although data doesn’t

show VR as being more effective it is worthwhile to examine adding VR to lessons because of

the interest and motivation increase in the classroom (Parong & Mayer. 2018).

While there are clear benefits to the use of VR in the classroom such as engagement and

widening of the students’ worlds. In fact, a study by Kavanagh, Luxton-Reilly, Wuensche, &

Plimmer (2017, p. 85) states that majority of VR is used to “increase the intrinsic motivation of

students.” It is unclear if all these things, while useful in their own right, lead to student learning

and retention.

Multimedia Learning Theory

Parong and Mayer use the Multimedia Learning Theory for the basis of their study and

outcome. While they feel that VR cannot replace auditory learning media, it’s supplementation

within existing auditory learning could increase student learning. They site the Dual Coding

Theory of Multimedia Learning which states that information is more likely to be remembered

when it is presented both in words and pictures (Parong & Mayer. 2018). VR can meet the needs

of the pictures portion of Duel Coding. Using VR alone only meets the needs of the visual part

of the Duel Coding Theory. There needs to be an additional auditory component to meet the

needs of the Duel Coding Theory. Therefore, the VR experience alone will not increase student

learning, but when paired with the already prepared PowerPoint student learning can be

increased. Parong and Mayer (2018) study focuses on college students, this student will focus on
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 8

elementary student to see if they principles are the same with different aged students, especially

those who have not completely grasped reading.

Methods

This study will be conducted as a mixed methods study. The study will be looking at the

quantitative data of the achievement tests given to students three different occasions throughout

the survey. Qualitative data will be collected through study surveys asking students their

thoughts on what successful teaching practices were.

This is a causal-comparative study, two groups of students will be used and we will be

altering one variable. One group will be given lessons through teacher lecture assisted by a

PowerPoint presentation. A second group will be given the same lecture and PowerPoint

presentation, but in addition to the lecture and PowerPoint students will get to experience a

variety of VR experiences on the topic. It will be impossible to know for sure if the use of VR

effects the student learning or retention but we will be able to see if there is some association

between VR, student learning, and retention.

Sample

The intended sample would be two similar classrooms of 3rd grade students. These

students will be between the ages of 7-8 years old. The ideal sample for this study would be two

classrooms of students with at least 20 students in each class with a similar mix of races and

ethnicities. The ideal sample would also have equal number of girls and boys. The preferred

sample group would contain all students that are considered part of the general education

population. The sample group will come from King Springs Elementary in Smyrna, Georgia.

This will be a sampling of convenience since the classes are already made up by administration
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 9

and would be difficult to rearrange. All 9 third grade classes at King Springs will be looked at

and the two most similar classrooms that meet the above criteria will be picked for the study.

Permission slips will be send home with the two groups of students who will participate in the

study. No students will be excluded unless they have missed instruction due to being absent.

Instrument

Two instruments will be used to collect data for the study. First, we will use an

achievement test, which will be developed by the researcher, given to students as a pre-test, post-

test, and again a month after the post-test. The pre-test will show what the student’s background

knowledge of the topic before instruction. The post-test will be given to show if there was any

increase in student achievement after instruction. The final administration of this assessment

will fall one month after the post-test to measure retention of the material.

The second instrument will be a student survey, also developed by the researcher. The

student survey will ask students their attitude toward the lessons and VR. It will ask students

about what was memorable to them during instruction and what the students felt helped them

learn and retain information.

Data Analysis

This study will look at two groups of students. The independent variable is the use of

VR. While both groups of students will be given a lecture supported by a PowerPoint

presentation, only one group will also be using VR along with the lecture and PowerPoint. The

null hypothesis is that there is no relationship between students learning and retention and VR.
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 10

Quantitative data: Quantitative data will be collected through finding the mean of each

students’ achievement test; pre-test, post-test, and month later test. Then, these scores will be

looked at for growth or lack of growth in the individual means over the three assessments.

Descriptive analyses: A cross-tabulation chart will be used to collect and analyze the

data from the three sets of assessments, over both groups, for easy comparison.

Qualitative data: Qualitative data will be gather through the answers on the student

surveys. Data will be analyzed by looking for common themes among student answers.

Particularly looking for a connection between what the students remember from the lessons and

how VR assisted them in learning and retention. Validity can in insured by having an outside

person proctor the surveys with students.

Scholarly Significance and Limitations

The data collected from this study will have practical significance in the elementary

classroom. Today’s elementary classroom is focusing a lot of it’s time and money to the

integration of technology in the classroom. The results from this study would help educators

decide if the purchase of VR hardware and software is a necessary expense. The theoretical

significance of this study would deal with the implications of the Dual Coding and Multimedia

Learning Theory. The results of the study could change the validity of these theories and its

application in the world of VR.

There are some limitations to this study. The study has a sample of convenience and is

only looking at two classrooms of students being taught by one teacher. A larger study using a

variety of educators and student population would further verify or negate the results of this

study.
VR IN THE CLASSROOM 11

References

Buzzell, J. (2018). The Impact of Ar/Vr in the Classroom. Training, 55(5), 33.

Clark, K. F., Hosticka, A., Schriver, M., & Bedell, J. (2002). Computer Based Virtual Field

Trips.

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.

Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press.

Parong, J. & Mayer, R. E. (2018, January 25). Learning Science in Immersive Virtual Reality.

Journal of Educational Psychology. Advanced online publication.

Pierce, D. (2018). VIRTUAL REALITY CHECK! (cover story). T H E Journal, 45(2), 14–18.

Westwood, J. D. (2016). Medicine Meets Virtual Reality 22 : NextMed / MMVR22. Amsterdam,

Netherlands: IOS Press.

Woerner, J. J. (1999). Virtual Field Trips in the Earth Science Classroom.

VR IN THE CLASSROOM 12