MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7121093321 · doi:10.51357/jei.v6i2.367

Immersive Learning Through 360° Classroom Videos: Enhancing Teacher Education and Professional Development

2025· article· W7121093321 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Alexander

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Educational Informatics · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeacher educationProfessional developmentFluencyReflection (computer programming)Virtual realityEducational technologyVideo recordingQualitative researchTeaching method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional classroom videos have long been recognized as valuable tools for teacher training, enabling educators to analyze pedagogy, classroom management, and assessment strategies. However, recent advancements in 360° video recording and virtual reality (VR) technologies present exciting opportunities to further enhance teacher preparation by providing immersive, interactive experiences of classroom lessons. Accordingly, this study explores the use of 360° classroom videos in Lesson Study to enhance teacher education through immersive technologies. A modified four-stage model was implemented: (1) a 360° video lesson was recorded; (2) participants observed the lesson using VR headsets and reflected in real-time; (3) group discussions produced annotated videos with instructional insights; and (4) educators reviewed annotations to refine teaching practices. Using qualitative methods, data were collected from 48 VR think-aloud sessions, 16 interviews, and 2 group discussions. Key findings show that participants found the immersive experience highly engaging, promoting reflection on pedagogy, classroom setup, and student behaviour. Group dialogue supported collaborative learning and consensus-building, although various technical challenges were also noted. As such, this research highlights the potential of immersive video to support critical reflection and pedagogical development, while also addressing the need for infrastructure, accessibility, and digital fluency to fully integrate these tools into teacher training programs.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.315 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Educational InformaticsSame topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207