A review on cultivating effective learning: synthesizing educational theories and virtual reality for enhanced educational experiences
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immersive technology, especially virtual reality (VR), transforms education. It offers immersive and interactive learning experiences. This study presents a systematic review focusing on VR's integration with educational theories in higher education. The review evaluates the literature on VR applications combined with pedagogical frameworks. It aims to identify effective strategies for enhancing educational experiences through VR. The process involved analyzing studies about VR and educational theories, focusing on methodologies, outcomes, and effectiveness. Findings show that VR improves learning outcomes when aligned with theories such as constructivism, experiential learning, and collaborative learning. These integrations offer personalized, immersive, and interactive learning experiences. The study highlights the importance of incorporating educational principles into VR application development. It suggests a promising direction for future research and implementation in education. This approach aims to maximize VR's pedagogical value, enhancing learning outcomes across educational settings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it