Spatial reality in education – approaches from innovation experiences in Singapore

1.1 Virtual reality, augmented reality, and spatial reality

Schroeder defined Virtual Reality (VR) as “A computer-generated display that allows or compels the user (or users) to have a sense of being present in an environment other than the one they are actually in and to interact with that environment” (Kardong-Edgren et al., 2019; Schroeder, 1996), while Milgram et al. (1995) defined Augmented Reality (VR) as “A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum”. Since then, there have been many advancements being made for both technologies. Thus, there are no universally accepted definitions for both VR and AR (Kardong-Edgren et al., 2019; Laato et al., 2024).

Spatial Reality (SR) is a concept that encompasses VR, AR, and other related technologies. While both VR and AR can be immersive (Czok et al., 2023), SR offers a 3D optical experience that seamlessly blends the physical and digital worlds. It is a novel technology that has gained significant traction in recent years, particularly in the realm of education, because of its ability to create immersive and interactive learning environments.

Even though there are no consensus in the definitions of the various terminologies in SR technologies (Laato et al., 2024), the authors provided a list of technical terms, their associated abbreviations, and their general descriptions relevant to this article in Table 1.

3.1 SR in chemistry education

In the field of chemistry education, chemistry educators have described in various literatures how they designed or incorporated SL educational tools (Koscielniak, 2021). For instance, van Dinther et al. (2023) described how they designed three animated immersive virtual reality (IVR) experience using the three characteristics of MCE (Westbroek et al., 2005) as a guiding principle. Two animated IVR – acid-base concepts for high school students, and the same concepts for undergraduate students – were designed by VR professionals with van Dinther guiding these professionals in designing the lesson. The third IVR is a 360° IVR experience targeting high school students learning about salt and their impact on aquatic animals in high salinity ponds, were created by van Dinther and another educator. The authors found that all three IVR were positively received by students, and the researchers concluded that through IVR with MCE, students felt more motivated in learning chemistry, and understood the chemical concepts better (van Dinther et al., 2023). In another study, Gao et al. (2023) described designing an AR mobile app for teaching the process of continuous distillation. The features in the app include the ability for the app user to simulate the process of operating the apparatus for continuous distillation, observe how liquids and vapors flow in the distillation column, as well as allowing users to zoom in and rotate the apparatus to see the process in various perspectives. The mobile app also makes use of advanced algorithms and calculations to provide real time and accurate simulations of the continuous distillation process (Gao et al., 2023). The results of the study indicated that the app helped students to understand the process of continuous distillation. Students’ perception of the app was also positive as it was easy to navigate, stimulated their interests in the subject, as well as provided them with enhanced understanding of the basic concepts of the continuous distillation process (Gao et al., 2023). Finally, Frevert and Di Fuccia (2020) shared their experience on how they created two VR projects for teaching various chemistry concepts: (1) Dead Herring, and (2) Virus Experiences for Chemistry Education. Frevert and Di Fuccia concluded that the learning environments provided by VR and other related technologies would help to motivate students to learn better, and that students benefitted from these technologies by enhancing their understanding of the content taught (Frevert & Di Fuccia, 2020).

3.2 Anxiety in using technology can be mitigated

Despite the increased adoption of SR in teaching as well as studies that showed the potential of SR in helping students to learn better, many teachers were still feeling nervous about the technology and are thus reluctant to adopt SR to supplement their curriculum. In 2024, Zhong et al. characterized this apprehension as VR teaching anxiety, a variant of teaching anxiety described by Thomas as the feelings that hinder educators from initiating, sustaining, or completing instructional activities (Gorospe, 2022; Thomas, 2006; Zhong et al., 2024). Zhong and team proposed that there are two types of factors that could affect teaching VR anxiety – individual teaching factors, and external environmental factors. Individual teaching factors include technical proficiency, and self-efficacy, while external environmental factors include school support (Zhong et al., 2024). Although not articulated specifically, school support, in the views of the authors, covers professional development, resources and facilities, recognition and the existence of a collaborative environment (Zhong et al., 2024). According to Zhong, both school support and self-efficacy can influence teachers’ technical proficiency. Teachers with low self-efficacy would be less likely to adopt VR technology in their lesson as they may not be confident with their technical proficiency and expected themselves to fail should they incorporate them during class (Hsieh & Schallert, 2008). In addition, given that VR in education is a relatively new phenomenon, teachers have to learn new technical skills and this process may require time (Myers et al., 2017), depending on the complexity of VR tools used. All these factors could cause teachers to experience “technostress” – stress caused by incorporating Information and communication technology (ICT) into teaching and learning (Li & Wang, 2021; Wang & Zhao, 2023), further reducing the acceptance of VR.

The authors believe that SL can facilitate in providing Meaningful Chemistry Education by incorporating some of the tenets of MCE. Herein, they describe some of their experiences in using SL tools for teaching chemistry, how they applied aspects of MCE into SL, as well as offering their recommended approaches for SL for readers who wish to incorporate SP tools into their curriculum. It is hoped that by doing so, this can allay the potential worries that educators may have regarding the technology, as well as showing that using such technologies is not intimidating, and could benefit both the educators as well as their students.

5.1 VR crime scene trial and students’ receptivity

37 undergraduate students minoring in Forensic Science took part in the VR crime scene trial as part of their online assignment (Kader et al., 2020). After going through the VR crime scene and submitting their online report, they were asked to complete an online questionnaire to gather their receptivity towards VR crime scene. The results of the online questionnaire indicated that more than half of the students (79 %) had a positive experience with VR overall. From the qualitative comments provided by the students, many indicated that the crime scene was well-planned. However, some of the students felt that they had difficulty navigating the surrounding, while others brought up the issue of poor image quality in the VR crime scene (Kader et al., 2020).

5.2 VR excursion students’ trial and receptivity

VR excursion was trialed with a group of junior and senior years undergraduate students reading the elective Environmental Chemistry course (Fung et al., 2019). The excursion was conducted during lecture session over the span of two lessons. During the excursion, students either wore a VR headset, or a pair of VR goggles affixed to their smartphone’s screen (see Figure 4), and they were guided by the lecturer to various points of interests.

Figure 4:

Students immerse themselves in the VR excursion.

Afterwards, the students were free to roam and explore the surroundings. Each lesson lasted about 1.5 h. After the VR excursion, students completed an online survey questionnaire to ascertain their perception towards the VR excursion. Based on the survey results, 64 % of the students had positive experience with the VR excursion. For the open-ended question, students mentioned that some aspects of the VR elements could not be discerned clearly and that having a zoom feature would be good. Other students also mentioned a feeling of disorientation and motion sickness, a phenomenon that is well documented in various literatures (Broyer et al., 2021; Park & Lee, 2020; Roettl & Terlutter, 2018).

All three VR projects mentioned previously possess the tenets (1) and (3) of MCE. For (1), all three VR experiences contextualize the concepts that were taught in class. For instance, in the VR water sampling, students were given a glimpse of how air and water quality around the university’s campus were sampled using the techniques that they had learnt in class. For VR crime scene, students get to apply the skills of analyzing and collecting of evidence based on the situations given in the virtual crime scene. Finally, for VR excursion, students get to explore and experience the intricate relationship that human activities have on the environment and vice versa of a real location virtually.

For (3), the teaching team partnered with former students of each of the three courses in which the respective VR projects were implemented and listened to the challenges which they faced while learning the course. The formation of this partnership is called Students as Partners (Cook-Sather, 2016; Cook-Sather et al., 2014). Their perspective helped to shape the way the VR experience was designed.

6.1 MyVirtualLab

MyVirtualLab (MVL) is a virtual laboratory aimed towards chemistry undergraduate and postgraduate students, with the plan to expand to other students studying in other STEM fields. Created with metaverse in mind (Ritterbusch & Teichmann, 2023), MVL provides a virtualized environment for students to learn about laboratory safety protocols as well as train themselves in various experimental techniques such as column chromatography. By simulating various scenarios that can occur while working in the laboratory, MVL enables students to be familiarized with safety protocols and experimental techniques without putting the users in danger. Figure 5 shows the interface of MVL as seen by the users.

Figure 5:

Sample interface of MVL. Prompts are included in MVL to provide hints to users on what to do when dealing with laboratory emergencies.

By wearing an Oculus Quest 3 VR headset, users can interact with MVL’s virtual environment and elements using their hands. Furthermore, as MVL is hosted on the Photon Unity PUN server (Photon, n.d.), multiple users can login to MVL simultaneously and interact with one another using their custom avatars.

6.2 Conceptualizing of MVL – interdisciplinary approach

The interdisciplinary MVL team, with members comprised of chemistry faculty, biochemistry faculty, and software engineers, storyboard artists, and product experience designers. While the faculty provided domain expertise and ensured the accuracy of experimental techniques and safety protocols, the non-academic staff focused on drafting the storyboard, user interface, and implementing educational content within MVL, based on the input and expertise from the faculty.

Given the team’s diverse backgrounds, open communication was crucial. To overcome potential language barriers and ensure clarity on scientific terminology and experimental techniques, regular online meetings were held to address questions and provide project updates. Additionally, the MVL team utilized Miro, a digital collaborative whiteboard, to facilitate brainstorming, idea visualization, and task tracking, ensuring all team members were aligned on project goals and deadlines (Miro, n.d.; Ng et al., 2022).

6.3 Understanding the laboratory environment

The nature of teaching laboratories is those of an active learning environment (Seery et al., 2024), and the laboratory sessions at the National University of Singapore is no exception. Discussions among the students and their peers on the experimental procedures are encouraged, and laboratory instructors also took part in promoting the active learning environment by providing feedback to students on their experimental procedures as well as clarifying questions students have. Thus, it is essential for MVL to provide the functionality for students to collaborate and interact with one another to promote an active learning environment. To gain a deeper understanding of the laboratory environment and student experiences, the technical team conducted in-person observations of laboratory sessions facilitated by the scientific team. By witnessing first-hand the daily interactions and challenges students encounter, the team was able to gather valuable insights for accurately simulating these experiences within the MVL platform. Additionally, interviews with students provided further perspectives on their laboratory workflows, challenges, and expectations for MVL.

6.4 User interface design considerations

To inform the design of interactive mechanics within MVL, the team has members to develop a comprehensive plan encompassing object manipulation, such as grabbing and pouring liquids between vessels, and movement mechanics upon consultation with the faculty who are the domain expert. This planning was informed by a thorough research process involving the selection of popular VR games from the Oculus Store that featured similar mechanics and the recruitment of students to test these games. The faculty played a key role in recruiting various students, from undergraduates to post-graduates.

During the testing of the popular VR games from Oculus Store, the team members carefully observed participant interactions with the VR environment, noting any difficulties they encountered and gathering their perceptions on the effectiveness of the game mechanics, interfaces, and tutorials.

Some of the difficulties that the participants encountered when playing the games were:

1. Hitting the surrounding real-life objects surrounding them when playing and moving in the virtual world.

2. Unintuitive interface and unhelpful tutorials.

3. Participants failed to notice certain visual cues in the game.

Taking the students’ account into consideration, the team created a UI/UX for MVL that combined both visual and audio elements to enhance the immersivity of the VR experience. These elements include both onscreen and verbal cues to guide the users on how to interact with the VR elements, as well as instructions on how to complete an activity in MVL. Furthermore, to minimize users from hitting their surroundings, the product experience designers chose the use of finger gesture instead of moving around the VR surroundings.

6.5 Laboratory skills covered in MVL

Currently, MVL covers laboratory safety protocols as the laboratory teaching felt that this is the most important skill to acquire before students can work in the laboratory (Gallion et al., 2015). Some of the topics covered regarding laboratory safety include but not limited to:

1. Dealing with fires in the laboratory

2. Chemical decontamination (safety showers and eye shower operation)

3. Global Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals

4. Importance of Personal Protective Equipment

6.6 Contextualizing laboratory safety

To help contextualize laboratory safety in MVL, the team collaborated to design the storyboard of various laboratory emergencies commonly encountered while working in the laboratory. Some of the scenarios include laboratory evacuation in case of fire, as well as preventing electrical hazards. Furthermore, MVL also added some realism into the scenario to simulate the time sensitivity when dealing with such emergencies. For instance, the team created an experience where MVL users must identify the electrical hazards present while working in the laboratory. In another scenario, users were taught how to use the eye shower to flush chemicals from their eyes, and what to do when there is a fire occurring in the laboratory. The screenshot of each of these scenarios are illustrated in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6:

Examples of various emergencies encountered in the laboratory. Clockwise from top left: identifying and removal of electrical hazards, using eye showers to flush out chemicals in the eyes, and dealing with fire in the laboratory.

6.7 MVL trial on postgraduate students

MVL was studied with 16 postgraduate students taking a laboratory course as part of the core curriculum for their Master of Science in Industrial Chemistry program. The study received ethics board approval (Departmental Ethics Review Committee (DERC), reference ID “Psych-DERC reference code: 2024-March-03”) prior to the start of the research., Before the start of the first laboratory session, students were tasked to complete a pre-lab baseline quiz consisting of 20 multiple-choice questions (MCQ) to assess their knowledge of laboratory safety protocol. After completing the pre-lab baseline quiz, the laboratory instructor uploaded the text-only laboratory safety protocol used by the university onto the Learning Management System for the students’ references.

During the first laboratory session, the laboratory instructor highlighted the importance of understanding laboratory safety, and that they will be learning about this using MVL. They were also informed that participation in the MVL activity is voluntary and contributes 5 % of their overall grade for the course. Should they choose to decline participation in MVL, the student will be offered an alternative method to earn the participation score by writing an essay on laboratory safety. All 16 students agreed to partake in the MVL activity. During the activity, the technical team was also present to guide the students on how to wear the headset and to render assistance should the students encounter any difficulty. Upon completion of the MVL activity which lasted about half an hour, the students filled up an anonymized survey to understand their perception and receptivity of MVL.

The survey questionnaire – based on Holden and Rada (2011) – consists of 12 questions, 8 of the questions are Likert based questions where students were tasked to rank their level of agreement for each of the eight statements using a seven-point scale where 1 being the most negative, and 7 being the most positive. The remaining four questions are open-ended questions to enable students to elaborate on the reasoning behind ranking some of the Likert statements. Table 3 shows the survey questions that were asked to the students, as well as their question type.

After the laboratory session, the students completed the post-lab quiz – consisting of the same sets of 20 MCQ found in the pre-lab quiz – to assess if MVL helped the students to have a better understanding of laboratory safety protocol. Figure 7 summarizes the overall study procedure for the trial.

Figure 7:

Summary of the procedure of the study for the research participants.

6.8 Students’ performance on both pre- and post-lab quizzes

Table 4 summarizes the mean scores students obtained for their pre- and post-lab quizzes.

A Shapiro-Wilk test was conducted to ascertain the normality of the students’ data. It was found that the students’ scores do not fit the normal distribution (p-value = 0.069 (>0.05)). Following which, a one-tailed Mann-Whitney U Test was conducted at 5 % level of significance to measure if there was a significant improvement in the post-lab quiz compared with the pre-lab quiz score. The result indicated that there was a statistically significant improvement in students’ knowledge in laboratory safety protocol after using MVL (p-value = 0.048 (<0.05)).

6.9 Students’ receptivity of MVL

ptIn general, MVL was positively received by students (N = 16) as shown in Figure 8. More than 50 % of the students felt that MVL was easy to use (Q1), and that it did not require a lot of mental effort to interact with the VR elements (Q2). Furthermore, the majority of the students surveyed also agree that performing the tasks in MVL was easy (Q3), and that MVL was intuitive to use (Q4). All the students surveyed agreed that MVL helped to enhance their understanding of laboratory safety (Q5). 15 students also felt that MVL was useful in learning laboratory safety (Q6).

Figure 8:

Students’ reception towards MVL. The number on each segment of the bars indicates the number of students who have given a particular response to a given statement.

Almost all students also agreed that they find it easy to get MVL to perform what they want to do (Q7), and that the majority of the students had no problem with the learning materials in MVL (Q8).

For qualitative comments, some areas of improvement provided by students were that while in general MVL was accurate in detecting students’ hand gestures, the accuracy can still be finetuned for gestures that required finer motor controls such as pinching and hand rotations. Other common issues students faced include the weight of the VR headset, as well as the students not being able to see clearly if they are also wearing glasses underneath the VR headset.

6.10 Results discussion

As shown in Table 4, there is a statistically significant improvement in students’ understanding of laboratory safety protocol after using MVL. Students’ perception on their understanding also supported this as all students agreed that MVL helped in enhancing their understanding of laboratory safety (Q5 as shown in Figure 8). The authors hypothesized that the use of conceptualization of laboratory safety protocol as well as the problem solving with contextualization could help in scaffolding of concepts (Broman et al., 2018). This hypothesis is supported by some of the qualitative comments provided by students. For instance, one student commented that MVL provided various simulations on laboratory emergencies, this helped them to understand the concept better than merely reading the text-based safety protocol. In addition, the introduction of the laboratory safety protocol as a need-to-know approach also helped students in understanding the utility in learning them. This is supported by the qualitative comments from students where they mentioned that without the training from MVL, they will not be able to respond to real laboratory emergencies calmly.

Although most of the students have positive perception of MVL, three students surveyed felt that MVL requires a lot of mental effort as seen in Q2 of Figure 8. The authors believed that these students could have experienced both visual fatigue and cognitive overload while using MVL. Visual fatigue could occur due to the vergence-accommodation conflict (VAC) where there is a mismatch in the perception of perceived depth and virtual depth while perceiving the 3D environment through the HMDs (Hua, 2017). The symptoms of visual fatigue includes eye strain, and double vision (Iskander et al., 2018). High cognitive load can occur when the students have to do complex hand gestures in MVL that may be difficult for the HMD to detect such as pouring and grabbing of virtual items, as well as having to interact with many of the virtual items in MVL (Frederiksen et al., 2020). Some of the qualitative feedback provided by students did reflect that they found some of the hand gestures used in MVL to be complicated, while others felt that the hand detection system in MVL required some refinement. In addition, as all of the students were new to MVL, higher cognitive load was needed for visuomotor adaptation to occur (Juliano et al., 2022). Thus, the authors hypothesized that the combination of visual fatigue, and cognitive overload, could induce some students to feel that more mental effort was required to operate MVL.