MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407232597 · doi:10.5267/j.msl.2024.9.001

Virtual reality platforms for K-12 STEM education

2025· article· en· W4407232597 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tyler Ward, Jorge Ortega-Moody, Sam Khoury, Mykelti Wheatley, Kouroush Jenab

Bibliographic record

VenueManagement Science Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityComputer scienceBusinessHuman–computer interactionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Providing K-12 students with proper science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education is important to ensuring an innovative and prosperous economy. A highly skilled STEM workforce can lead to increased productivity and competitiveness, which can lead to a host of new ideas being researched and developed. STEM workers make added-value products, build bridges and roads, and conduct lifesaving medical research, among other important activities. The use of virtual reality (VR) technology for both education and workforce training has grown in recent years. VR technology can accelerate these processes at maximum efficacy and minimum costs and can have a significant impact on productivity gains, earnings, new jobs, innovation through research and development, and high-growth industries. This paper presents the development of a series of VR modules using the Unity game engine, the HTC VIVE Pro VR headset, and the Hi5 VR glove for the purposes of K-12 STEM education. Specifically, these developed modules have been designed to instruct K-12 students on topics related to motion and heat, with future goals to expand the modules to cover topics related to light, magnetism, electricity, radioactivity, sound, and waves. This paper will cover the methodology and design considerations that went into developing these modules, with a focus on how these modules relate to various learning strategies as well as with existing research on the use of VR in K-12 education.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManagement Science LettersSame topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207