1 Introduction

In 1994, the National Council for Social Studies (NCSS) embraced a “vision of powerful social studies teaching and learning” which promotes “meaningful, integrative, value-based, challenging, and active learning,” (NCSS, 1994, p. 162). According to the NCSS, a successful learning environment incorporates technology to improve social studies classroom learning. With the use of appropriate technology, students may engage with one another, share information, and become educated citizens (Alazmi, 2022; Caballero, 2023). However, per NCSS regulations, any such devices must “demonstrate the technology’s power as a tool for learning,” (NCSS, 2006, para. 7). Today, digital technology is becoming more sophisticated at a seemingly ever faster rate; for many, it is already present in most facets of their daily lives (Kaddoura & Al Husseiny, 2023). Therefore, mastering the many affordances which technology can provide is becoming more and more important. With respect to the educational field, the academic literature asserts that the emergence of new, technology-assisted learning tools, such as smart boards, tablets, mobile and virtual reality devices, has brought positive change to schools (Haleem et al., 2022). Identifying the most effective tools for supporting learning objectives and improving student achievement can prove challenging, however (Schlosser et al., 2022). Regarding this issue, Martín-Gutiérrez et al. (2017) argued that virtual technologies have great potential for supporting student learning, achievement, and motivation.

Virtual Reality (VR) technology has garnered significant interest in recent years due to its potential for increasing teaching and learning effectiveness (Boulton et al., 2018). Indeed, VR technology adoption is expanding dramatically because of its relatively intuitive use, rising affordability, and ease of installation across a broad range of platforms, with software tailored to popular operating systems like Apple iOS and Google Android (Georgiou et al., 2021). In general, VR can be broadly classified into two categories: (1) non-immersive VR, and (2) immersive VR (IVR). It is the latter category which offers the most powerful tools. To immerse oneself fully in a virtual reality experience, a user needs to enter a virtual world on their media platform via a dedicated VR Head-Mounted Display (HMD) and a digitally-created scene with which to interact. The HMD’s internal, high-definition video displays present users with an immersive, visual environment. Typically, these devices incorporate motion-tracking, so users can explore a scene by simply facing towards what they wish to observe. This technology can even enable users to traverse a scene by moving physically within it or using a controller. VR’s present availability and affordability has fueled its spread into the education sector, its use growing in numerous disciplines, including social studies (Kusuma et al., 2017). The dynamic user experiences which VR can offer in comparison to every previous learning technology justify its importance.

Research investigating how IVR supports student learning and achievement is on the rise (Papanastasiou et al., 2018). Many studies have employed IVR environments and computer simulations to help students understand subject matter related to specific topics (Laine et al., 2023). For example, Akman and Çakır (2023) used quasi-experimental methods to examine the effects of IVR game use on student achievement and engagement with mathematics; results indicating positive effects in both areas. Similarly, Liu et al. (2022) used a mixed-methods approach to investigate the impact of IVR on student achievement, motivation, and cognitive load; results revealed increased student achievement and motivation, coupled with decreased cognitive loading. Additionally, Cheng and Tsai (2019) concluded that IVR learning activities could increase student self-efficacy in science learning. Moreover, Tai and Chen (2021) used a mixed-methods approach to investigate the impact of IVR use on English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learner listening comprehension. The results showed that EFL students perceived IVR experiences as both interactive and stimulating. Furthermore, the IVR platform was found to provide an authentic learning experience, effectively activating student prior knowledge.

However, from our search of the literature, few studies have so far investigated the impact of using IVR with HMDs in social studies classrooms (Parong & Mayer, 2021). Using IVR holds great potential for transforming the teaching of social studies by enabling students to ‘virtually witness’ historically significant events, cultural settings, or even simulated social scenarios. For instance, from the perspective of history, students can ‘travel back in time’ virtually, to immerse themselves in historical events and develop a more vivid and contextualized understanding of the past (Zantua, 2017). Whereas within a geography context, IVR can enhance spatial visualization skills; students can explore geographical landscapes in a three-dimensional, immersive environment which promotes spatial understanding.

To investigate the potential for using IVR in social studies education, this study aimed to integrate IVR with HMDs in a classroom to explore its effects on student achievement, sense of presence, and cognitive load in social studies subjects. In parallel with this study’s purpose, we considered the following research questions:

RQ1

Do students obtain higher academic achievement with IVR-based social studies lessons than with traditional teaching methods?

RQ2

Do students demonstrate lower cognitive loading with IVR-based social studies lessons than with traditional teaching methods?

RQ3

What is the degree of a student’s sense of presence while learning via IVR-based social studies lessons?

2 Literature review

2.1 VR technology

An VR environment can convince users that they are completely immersed within the artificially-generated setting. The computer-created, three-dimensional (3D) ‘world’ presents scenes and objects which appear to be real, viewable across 360 degrees (Steuer et al., 1995). Typically, fully-immersive VR technology requires users wear a VR headset (with an optional hand sensor depending upon design requirements); a computer serves as gatekeeper to the virtual world, closely replicating authentic sensory details for users including sight, sound, and (potentially) touch. The availability of content, and the requisite computational power to generate and interact with it, are the only constraints to a successful VR experience (Natale et al., 2020). Presently, the entertainment industry provides the most popular VR technology applications, which include video games, 3D movies, amusement park rides, and even social worlds. The video game industry first introduced consumer-grade VR headsets in the early1990s, but the technology and its sophistication have advanced rapidly since then.

Currently, VR is categorized as being either non-immersive, semi-immersive, or fully-immersive. Non-immersive VR simply requires a computer/gaming console, monitor, and input tools (e.g. a keyboard, mouse, or controller). Due to its ubiquity, non-immersive VR is sometimes disregarded as a distinct subtype; while it places users in virtual environments they remain aware of - and control - their actual surroundings (Lee & Wong, 2014).

A semi-immersive virtual experience could involve watching a compelling video on a large television. Viewers may perceive being in another world, but remain cognizant of their surroundings. Virtual Reality Depth, a term describing 3D graphics quality in semi-immersive technology, controls the level of realism; more detailed visuals produce a more immersive experience. This VR variant is frequently used for instructional purposes; it uses high-resolution screens, computers with powerful graphics processors, projectors, or hand simulators, which partially mimic the look and feel of real-world mechanics.

However, fully-immersive simulations, encompassing both sight and sound, provide the most realistic virtual experiences (Makransky et al., 2019). This requires users wear VR glasses or HMD. Such devices can offer stereoscopic, high-definition, wide-field-of-view video simulating how humans actually perceive their physical world. With input tracking - so a scene’s visuals react precisely to user movements - a convincing, immersive experience is possible. Fully immersive VR first evolved from the gaming/entertainment industry, but other fields, particularly manufacturing and education, are rapidly adopting the technology (Burdea & Coiffet, 2003).

2.2 VR in social studies education

The educational field regularly evaluates new information delivery systems, looking to enhance the teaching/learning experience (Agbo et al., 2022; Rajabpour & Fathi, 2022). VR technology enriches course content and can immerse learners in engaging, memorable and effective lessons - students can explore content by actually sensing it! (Southgate et al., 2019). Research demonstrates that classroom use of VR technology improves student interpersonal skills like empathy, collaboration, and social interaction (Herrero & Lorenzo, 2020; Laine et al., 2023; Natale et al., 2020). It can also improve student virtual presence, motivation (Cheng & Tsai, 2019; Parong & Mayer, 2021; Makransky & Lilleholt, 2018; Han, 2020), interest, engagement, and academic achievement (Liu et al., 2020). Moreover, other research shows that IVR-based instruction engages students via their interaction and sense of presence, aspects which can lower cognitive load and boost academic achievement (Albus et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2022).

Research examining how IVR-based instruction affects student academic performance is beginning to expand (Ragan et al., 2015; Georgiou et al., 2021). Liu et al. (2020) used a quasi-experimental approach to evaluate the technology’s educational value in a middle-school science class. They split 90 students between an experimental group, which received IVR-assisted lessons, and a control group covering identical content traditionally. Results showed that the IVR group achieved higher scores in technology acceptance, engagement, and academic achievement. Similarly, Liu et al. (2022) used mixed-methods to measure IVR’s effects on student learning; results showed boosts in interest levels, motivation and academic achievement, coupled with decreased cognitive loading. Moreover, Akman and Çakır (2023) used quasi-experimental methods to examine the effects of IVR game use on student achievement and engagement with mathematics; results indicating positive effects in both areas.

Regarding K-12 social studies, VR technology offers potentially significant benefits for topics where students can experience a spatial environment within which historical events come alive interactively (Alazmi & Alemtairy, 2024). Zantua (2017) indicated that IVR’s affordances allowing students to ‘visit’ ancient cities, events, or museums demonstrate its potent potential as a social sciences educational tool. Researchers have revealed some of these affordances, albeit sometimes omitting key details. For example, Kusuma et al. (2017) used Google Cardboard to develop a Majapahit historical kingdom to increase student interest for learning history. However, while the researchers outlined the system’s design process and measured its effectiveness, they provided no information about how students used it nor its scholastic impact. Sweeney et al. (2018) created a 3D environment for historical sites allowing students to focus on details and gain understanding for temporal changes in the space. Putra et al. (2023) developed Geosite interactive virtual technology (GeoVirtex) utilizing the ASSURE development model based on constructivist principles in physical geography classroom. The results indicate that GeoVirtex media was valid and suitable for use based on comments provided by expert reviewers. Furthermore, GeoVirtex has been demonstrated to facilitate active and independent learning. While these researchers explained how an IVR environment could be integrated into the learning process to boost student interest in history and geography, they did not implement it in a classroom to examine how it affected student learning. Furthermore, the aforementioned studies lacked an empirical component, suggesting the need for one to examine methods for integrating IVR into social studies classrooms and its impact upon student learning.

More recently, a few empirical studies emerged comparing IVR-based classroom learning to its purely conventional equivalent. Villena Taranilla et al. (2022) integrated IVR into an elementary school history class, allowing students a virtual excursion around a Roman archeological site. Control group students explored identical content via traditional tools (PowerPoint presentations and videos). Results revealed that students using IVR experienced higher motivation and academic achievement. However, Riner et al.‘s (2022) mixed-methods study examining the learning impact of IVR-based instruction in a 9th grade social studies classroom showed indistinct benefits. The researchers split students evenly between a group using fully-immersive VR, and another using non-immersive VR. Results revealed no statistically significant difference in knowledge development or engagement between groups, however the qualitative study showed improved historical empathy in students using IVR. Similarly, Parong and Mayer (2021) examined IVR’s impact upon student learning for a history class. The authors split students between a group using IVR and another covering the same material via 3D interactive video. Interestingly, students using 3D video did better academically, but those using IVR achieved higher emotional arousal scores.

While numerous studies assert the potential benefits of using IVR in a general K-12 classroom (and social studies specifically), the actual investigation into how to integrate IVR in a social studies classroom or how that may affect academic performance is presently under-explored. Radianti et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review of IVR educational applications, finding that, despite the technology’s promise, it is rarely deployed as a learning tool and that this must change. More research is clearly needed to explore the effects of educational IVR to examine the factors which may help students better understand course content.

3 Methods

3.1 Study Design

We adopted a quasi-experimental approach, examining the effects of an IVR-based field trip upon student social studies learning performance. One class (n = 24) became the experimental group, while another (n = 24) served as the control group. Students completed a pre-test to ascertain that each group had equal prior knowledge levels for content they would explore. The experimental group received lessons within an IVR environment, while the control group covered identical material traditionally. Following their lessons, participants completed questionnaires and a post-course examination.

3.2 Participants

This study occurred in a private school within Kuwait’s Hawalli Governorate. Initially, forty-nine 12 and 13 year old (M = 12.5) seventh-grade students were to participate, but one child withdrew for health reasons. The remainder agreed to take part, each child’s parents signing formal consent. Participants were male (most Kuwaiti schools segregate by gender) and came from two different classrooms. The same female social studies teacher (8 years’ experience) taught each class, having previously completed a two week course learning how to embed IVR within instructional practices. The researchers provided the teacher with an IVR field trip for instructional guidance, plus step-by-step instructions for integrating it into a lesson plan. No student had prior IVR classroom experience, nor had they covered lesson content.

3.3 Development of the IVR experiment

3.3.1 Classroom structure

A software engineer helped set up the IVR system and manage technical issues during the project. Figure 1a depicts the IVR instructional system layout with the following modules: (1) ‘play’ - IVR lessons, (2) ‘content preview’ - lesson IVR content, (3) ‘functional’ - revise and manage lessons, and (4) ‘status detection’ - student IVR device network connection monitoring. The IVR classroom, roughly 14 × 8 m in size, featured a high speed internet connection network, each student had an HMD and two controllers Quest 2 (see Fig. 1b). The teacher used a tablet device to navigate student IVR work in real time (via the Unity App). The app helped her monitor student progress/performance within the virtual environment and controlled scene entry. She primarily acted as coach and facilitator during class, guiding/encouraging students through the virtual environment and answering questions.

Fig. 1
figure 1

(a) Teaching system’s structure and modules (b) Classroom (c) Learning process

Full size image

Both classes were divided into four groups of six, sitting around a circular table. IVR students had ample space to safely walk/interact during their field trip, needing only 8 to 12 steps to explore the civilization featured in each lesson. Two assistants aided this task, hel** students safely navigate their IVR environments, mitigating potential disorientation or collision.

3.3.2 IVR social studies field trip: content

The IVR lessons featured a virtual field trip (comprising six, 45-minute class periods) where students engaged with a dynamic, 3D environment to explore ancient Egypt’s civilization (AEC). This topic, chosen for its unfamiliarity with students, became visible to them via the virtual experience. IVR field trips provide inclusive learning experiences, especially if students cannot actually visit the places involved. Participants can traverse physical and temporal boundaries simultaneously and interact with otherwise alien cultures. The collaborative exploration process helps develop student social and emotional skills, allowing closer reflection upon personal experience.

The researchers designed five IVR social studies lessons using the Unity platform; the objective being to develop student learning, cognitive load, and sense of presence. Unity offers a powerful suite of tools and resources to create VR applications and 3D experiences for computers, smart phones, and other devices. The researchers constructed lessons using an approved social studies textbook, adhering closely to the objectives and curricula of Kuwait’s Ministry of Education. The lessons were: (1) Ancient Egyptian Civilization - explore AEC’s appearance and location; (2) Economic Life - how AEC people lived and what they needed to survive; (3) Culture and Religion - AEC religious beliefs and culture, (4) Science and Invention - Ancient Egyptian methods for mummification, medicine, agriculture, engineering, etc.; (5) 3D Model Creation - students build a 3D model, develo** conceptual understanding for AEC. Each lesson immerses students in a 3D AEC environment which features an ‘intelligent robot’ hel** students navigate their journey. Each student travels with a virtual tablet which provides relevant information about their discoveries. At the end of each lesson, students answer questions (e.g. classify images, describe locations, etc.), and receive timely feedback.

Before their trip, students create an account and select one of six available avatars (Fig. 2) - a student’s name hovers above their avatar so classmates can identify them as they explore the IVR landscape; students collaborate virtually and in person throughout the trip.

Fig. 2
figure 2

The interface of setup profile and avatar before starting class

Full size image

Due to the significant cost of creating an entire trip for multiple players, the researchers focused their energy on designing the first and last scenes. The first scene features a virtual classroom where students gather with peers. An intelligent robot briefly describes the field trip, informing students about how they will learn and what their objectives are. Students receive a virtual tablet, which they use to write notes, answer questions, take pictures and display information about objects they discover. The robot then reveals the classroom’s four ‘magic doors.’ Each door (one entered per lesson) leads to a virtual space depicting aspects of AEC life (see Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The interface of virtual class in IVR trip

Full size image

When students open the first door, they find themselves in Ancient Egypt. The intelligent robot provides a brief description of what they see and then presents a map featuring three important AEC locations which they explore during this lesson - students click on these sites, visiting each in succession. The first site portrays an urban environment for students to roam (with assistance from their virtual robot guide). The second setting lies within a pyramid, where visitors peruse prominent paintings depicting AEC history. At the third location, students wander outside the pyramids, gaining insight for the ancient civilization which created these regal tombs (see Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

The interface of the Introduction of AEC lesson in IVR teaching system

Full size image

Students spend roughly 15 min examining these virtual spaces, gathering information about the pyramids via knowledge items, learning details such as the name, date of construction, location, and other relevant information. Students then re-enter their virtual classroom, where the robot presents multiple-choice questions on their tablet, like: “What is the famous river which flows through AEC?” Students answer these questions, receiving immediate feedback and correct answers, if needed (Fig. 5). The teacher concludes the lesson with a guided, group discussion where students describe what they learned and answer questions. Students in the traditional classroom cover the same course material conventionally, and answer identical discussion questions afterwards.

Fig. 5
figure 5

The interface of question at the end of lesson in IVR teaching system

Full size image

Figure 6 describes what lies behind the second ‘magic’ door: AEC economic life. Students explore a pyramid-strewn 3D landscape. They study these structures, scrutinizing features and virtually manipulating any 3D objects they discover. The robot provides instructions and guides students on their voyage, explaining any relevant details. Students analyze paintings to learn how Ancient Egyptian’s lived and dressed, and what economic life involved in that era. The paintings, also reveal how Ancient Egyptians hunted and fished, what animals they sought (see Fig. 6) and the crops they grew. Students click on knowledge items as they walk, gaining further insight into AEC economic life; they query the robot for additional details. Following their return to the virtual classroom, the robot asks students multiple choice questions: (e.g. “What are the most popular hunting tools which ancient Egyptians used?”), providing timely feedback in return.

Fig. 6
figure 6

The interface of economic life in AEC lesson in IVR teaching system

Full size image

Figure 7 shows the final lesson sample. In this final lesson, the social studies teacher asked students complete two activities. In first activity, teacher asked students to classify the 3D paintings which they found on the IVR field trip. The virtual classroom features a table displaying four group titles: (1) religion, (2) culture, (3) invention and (4) science and economic life. The table also holds a selection of 3D paintings (mummies, boats, fish, the AEC calendar, medicine, wigs, makeup, etc.) which students collaboratively classify into the aforementioned groups, interacting via IVR audio affordances during this process (see Fig. 7a). In the second activity, the teacher asked the students to create a 3D modeling environment similar to what she had seen during the IVR trip (see Fig. 7b). After completing this task, each group of students makes a 10-minute presentation to show both how and why they classified each object, and explained their 3d environment. Following this effort, the teacher and classroom peers provide feedback about student work. In the traditional classroom, the students work collaboratively on a similar task, having to classify the objects visually on a poster paper instead of doing so virtually. Those students then present their poster to the class and explain their understanding for why each item belongs in each specific category/group. To ensure instructional quality, the same teacher instructed both groups. Additionally, both the VR group and the traditional teaching group followed a standardized curriculum, and instructor underwent training to ensure consistency in content delivery.

Fig. 7
figure 7

The interface of last activity (A: classification activity, (B) 3D modelling activity) in IVR teaching system

Full size image

3.4 Measurement tools

We used academic achievement tests and questionnaires (cognitive-load and multimodal presence) to measure IVR effects on student learning. The following sections reveal the measurement tools:

3.4.1 Academic achievement test

The researchers, working with the social studies teacher, developed pre- and post-learning examinations for the students. The pre-test included 15 multiple choice and 10 true/false questions, a perfect score being 25. A sample pre-test, true/false question read: “All ancient civilizations grew along rivers.” The pre-test assessed student baseline knowledge for social studies content covered in the class textbook; it helped identify their level of general social studies knowledge prior to project commencement.

The post-test assessed student memory and understanding for AEC content covered during the project. It contained 50 questions (20 multiple-choice, 15 true-or-false, 10 fill-in-the-blank, and 5 open-ended), a perfect score being 50. A sample open-ended question read: “Interpret and describe inventions and scientific knowledge in ancient Egypt.”

3.4.1.1 Academic achievement test validity and reliability

We conducted a pilot study with 32 students (who had received identical social studies lessons) to measure the reliability and validity of the pre- and post-tests. Results revealed mean Cronbach’s alphas of 0.86 for pre-test and 0.82 for post-test; each greater than 0.80, thus indicating good internal consistency. However, some individual items (one per test) recorded values slightly below 0.8; we revised those items to ensure high reliability. Two different social studies teachers taught the same material, while two social studies education professors reviewed the tests to ensure content validity; two revisions resulted from reviewer comments/suggestions.

3.4.2 Cognitive-load questionnaire

A questionnaire developed by Hwang et al. (2013) was used to compare the cognitive-loading each group experienced during the post-test. The 8 item questionnaire asked students to indicate their agreement with each statement via a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The questionnaire involved two dimensions: (1) Mental Load − 5 items (e.g. “The content in this learning activity was difficult.”), and (2) Mental Effort − 3 items (e.g. “The learning activity’s instructional approach was difficult to follow and understand.”). We calculated the questionnaire’s Cronbach’s alpha values, recording scores of 0.81 and 0.82 for Mental Load and Mental Effort respectively, indicating good reliability. Moreover, three experts reviewed instrument to ensure their alignment with the experimental design and suitability for the Kuwaiti context.

3.4.3 Multimodal presence questionnaire

The multimodal presence scale, developed by Makransky et al. (2017), fielded 15 items assessed using a 5-point Likert scale (1 completely disagree, 2 disagree, 3 neither disagree nor agree, 4 agree, 5 strongly agree). Three dimensions were involved: (1) Physical Presence - five items (e.g. “The virtual environment seemed real to me.”), (2) Social Presence - five items (e.g. “I felt like I was in the presence of another person in the virtual environment.”), and Self-Presence - five items (e.g. “I felt like my virtual embodiment was an extension of my real body within the virtual environment.”). Cronbach’s alpha for the overall multimodal presence scale equaled 0.87, while the three sub-scale values each exceeded 0.8, indicating good reliability. Moreover, three experts reviewed instrument to ensure their alignment with the experimental design and suitability for the Kuwaiti context.

3.5 Data analysis

We used IBM SPSS Statistics V23 to analyze the descriptive quantitative data collected from the measurement tools. To ensure academic achievement test scores used the same scale, we normalized perfect scores for both the pre- and post-tests using Min-Max Normalization during data analysis. We also employed an independent-sample t-test to compare pre-test scores and inter-group differences in academic achievement and cognitive-load. We then applied covariance analysis (ANCOVA) to investigate inter-group differences in the content-based academic achievement post-tests. Moreover, we used descriptive quantitative analysis (comparing mean and standard deviations for both groups) for all measurement tools.

3.6 Experimental procedure

3.6.1 Ethical issues

Participating students, and their parents/legal guardians, received a written description of what the study entailed, along with the data security protocol and safety guidelines involved. Before any student could join the study, their parents/legal guardian also had to sign a permission form. To preserve anonymity, each participant received a pseudonym, with all potential identifiers being scrubbed from any data collected. Furthermore, each student created their own VR account using a personally generated password. Each student also received a set of clear guidelines in how to employ the VR equipment safely and sensibly, with suitably trained instructors assisting them while they used it. And finally, the VR environment itself was carefully crafted to minimize any potential risks to participants as they maneuvered within it.

3.6.2 Experiment

Before initiating the experiment, the social studies teacher and researchers prepared the classroom environment, testing the IVR lessons and devices (i.e. laptops, HMDs, and internet connection) for optimal performance. The experiment began in January 2023 and involved three, 45-minute classes per week over a six week period. Each participant completed the pre-test during Week One. The experimental group also received two 45-minute training sessions covering the IVR technology and classroom setting. This mitigated the setup’s novelty impact, allowing students to focus their attention on learning during the actual IVR field trip without the distraction of familiarizing themselves with new technology as well (see Fig. 8a).

Fig. 8
figure 8

(a) IVR unit procedure (b) A timeline for 45-min IVR activity

Full size image

During Week Two, and running through Week Five, the social studies teacher delivered six, 45-minute IVR social studies field trip lessons (Fig. 8b represents a typical example). The experimental group began each lesson with ten minutes of preparation. For example, before starting the “Intro to AEC” lesson, the teacher briefly described the content involved and what students should learn. She then provided guidelines and a requirements sheet, asking students to read and follow them carefully. Students then navigated the lesson’s virtual scenes gaining social studies knowledge. The class was divided into four groups of six students. Each student received an IVR device and sufficient physical space to move and interact with class activities. They spent roughly 10 min exploring an IVR scene before activating the chat icon to discuss discoveries with their peers. During the final 10 min of class, students collaborated on a think-together activity worksheet.

Meanwhile the control group (also split into four groups of six) covered the same content as the experimental group, but in a regular classroom setting using traditional instructional methods and tools (e.g. PowerPoint presentations, pictures, video clips, maps, etc.). Students read their social studies textbook and engaged with images and video clips to learn about AEC. They also completed the supplied worksheets collaboratively, discussing class content with fellow group members to answer the questions; the teacher provided feedback on their performance. The duration of instruction and collaborative activities per lesson were similar for each class, with the obvious difference being the experimental group’s time in the IVR environment.

During Week Six, each student completed post-test and cognitive-load evaluations, while those in the experimental group also completed a multimodal presence questionnaire.

4 Results

4.1 Academic achievement

Pre-test scores registered mean and standard deviation scores of (M = 18.37, SD = 1.03) and (M = 18.25, SD = 1.24) for the experimental and control groups respectively (see Table 1). The pre-test scores showed that both experimental and control groups had similar levels of knowledge before the study began. Moreover, resulting t-test scores (t=-0.379, p = 0.47 > 0.05) showed no significant differences between the two groups, indicating equivalent student knowledge levels prior to study commencement.

Table 1 T-test results for pre-test scores
Full size table

After students completed their learning activities, we used ANCOVA (covariance analysis) to measure differences in student learning between the two groups (pre-test scores being a covariate and post-test scores a dependent variable) (see Table 2). The homogeneity test (p = 0.785 > 0.05) showed that post-test scores were homogeneous for each group, meaning that ANCOVA could be applied. Post-test scores recorded (M = 39.0, SD = 1.4) and (M = 33.1, SD = 1.2) for the experimental and control groups respectively. The notable difference between the two groups (p = 0.001 < 0.05) implies that students using the IVR approach received significant positive academic achievement benefits.

Table 2 Descriptive data and post-test score ANCOVA analysis
Full size table

4.2 Student cognitive load

Table 3 reveals the differences in cognitive load, with descriptive data scoring (M = 1.31, SD = 0.46) and (M = 1.91, SD = 0.77) for the experimental and control groups respectively. T-test results registered a statistically significant difference between the two groups (t = 3.54, p = 0.032 < 0.05), indicating that students learning via IVR experienced lower cognitive loading than those in the conventional classroom.

Table 3 Independent t-test analysis for cognitive-load
Full size table

Delving into of dimensions cognitive-load (Mental Load and Mental Effort) reveals further detail. Regarding Mental Load, Table 3 shows mean and standard deviation scores (M = 1.33, SD = 0.48) and (M = 1.87, SD = 0.79) for the experimental and control groups respectively. As for Mental Effort, values of (M = 1.29, SD = 0.46) and (M = 1.94, SD = 0.80) were recorded for the experimental and control groups respectively. T-test results showed that the experimental group had significantly lower levels of both Mental Load (t = 2.849, p 0.029 < 0.05) and Mental Effort (t = 3.51, p = 0.036 < 0.05) than the control group.

4.3 Multimodal presence

Table 4 shows that the experimental group’s students registered significant overall multimodal presence (M = 4.36, SD = 0.51). Regarding the three dimensions of multimodal presence, the experimental group achieved (M = 4.46, SD = 0.52) in physical presence, (M = 3.87, SD = 0.54) in social presence, and (M = 4.75, SD = 0.47) in self-presence. These high levels of multimodal presence signify that the experimental group’s students likely felt as if they were actually inside the IVR locations they explored, while also sensing each other’s presence.

Table 4 Descriptive data-experimental group multimodal presence (N = 24)
Full size table

5 Discussion

We developed an interactive IVR field trip comprising systematic social studies lessons for delivery to 7th grade students virtually via HMDs Quest 2. To examine this instructional approach, we conducted a quasi-experimental study to determine its effect on student learning. Results revealed that students learning via IVR attained significantly higher academic achievement, with lower cognitive loading, than those studying the same content via traditional methods. Moreover, students who engaged with IVR demonstrated high multimodal presence scores in all dimensions (i.e. physical, social, and self-presence).

Regarding the academic performance test, results confirmed that IVR-based instruction can have a positive impact upon student achievement, consistent with findings reported in similar studies uncovered during the literature review (Liu et al., 2020, 2022; Villena Taranilla et al., 2022). Students who use IVR have a deeper comprehension of social studies material. It improves their capacity to replicate historical occurrences, topographies, and cultural settings. Students may investigate complex social studies concepts in a visually realistic way using IVR, in sharp contrast to conventional techniques. For instance, a virtual recreation of ancient Egyptian culture allowed students to engage with those times and events, leading to their greater understanding of contextual events. However, this result contrasts with Riner et al. (2022) whose study recorded no significant difference in student knowledge development between an IVR-based instruction group and its conventionally taught counterpart. However, we determined specific reasons why students in our study’s IVR-based group scored better academically than those in the control group. For one, IVR offers multiple positive features (e.g. 3D objects, authentic environment, interaction/communication via chat box/discussion, and assessment with immediate feedback). In our systematic IVR field trip, students could also view visual descriptions via knowledge items and interact with an intelligent robot - opportunities which may improve student understanding and knowledge. Liu et al. (2020) indicated that development of creative IVR experiences with positive features should increase student performance. Moreover, Ragan et al. (2015) argued that an IVR experience with efficient communication/interaction features could engage students more effectively with the process of learning itself, precipitating enhanced academic achievement. As previous studies indicated, within an IVR environment, students usually interact face-to-face with their peers in combination with their other interactive activities; such collaboration provides rich learning experiences (Liu et al., 2020).

Furthermore, our questionnaire results showed that experimental group students experienced lower cognitive loading than those covering the same educational content traditionally, a finding consistent with other studies (Dan & Reiner, 2017; Liu et al., 2022). Cognitive loading refers to the mental efforts required to understand the content. In the context of learning, students who experienced lower cognitive loading find it easier to understand and comprehend information. Research has demonstrated that higher cognitive loading can diminish learner interest, hindering academic achievement (Albus et al., 2021). In our study, IVR improved educational quality while reducing cognitive load. IVR implementation can decrease student cognitive load via several mechanisms, such as the technology’s ability to provide engaging, interactive learning environments, multi-sensory stimulation, and active learning. Furthermore, IVR can provide auditory, tactile, and visual feedback simultaneously, an affordance which may help students process, understand and retain new information more easily. In the current study, students explored 3D objects, with social studies content displayed visually and audibly, as they moved through a rich, virtual learning environment, features which helped diminish cognitive loading.

Our study also showed that the experimental group’s students achieved high scores in each multimodal presence dimension (i.e. physical, social, and self-presence). This indicated that students recorded strong feeling of being physically present within VR learning environment, experiencing a sense of social engagement with others, and feeling personally connected in VR learning experience. Students experienced their IVR environment as if it were real and their bodies physically within it; a sensation encouraging social interaction. As already noted, an IVR environment features sensorimotor feedback, which can involve a combination of auditory, tactile, and visual forms. Such feedback fosters a greater sense of presence in learners by offering personal agency within the virtual learning setting (Parong & Mayer, 2021). IVR also provides opportunities for students to connect with classmates in the virtual learning setting, bolstering their sense of presence through shared experiences and social interaction.

6 Conclusion

6.1 Contributions

So far, only a small number of research studies have investigated the consequences of using IVR in a social studies classroom. Our quasi-experimental study, which examined the academic efficacy of IVR in a social studies classroom, helps to fill this gap in the literature and offers a substantial addition to this area of education research. Furthermore, our study’s unique methodology also contributes to the body of literature. Using intelligent robots, physical motion, knowledge items, and communications tools, educators created methodical, interactive video lessons which both immersed students in a real-world, three-dimensional setting and aided their learning and comprehension of the subject matter. In this activity, the instructor took on the roles of both coach and facilitator of learning, engaging with the class while monitoring its students and overseeing their progress. This example, therefore, serves as a useful guide for other instructors who want to employ IVR-based education. By using comparable IVR affordances, tools, and activities, teachers may build more engaging learning experiences for their students than previously possible.

This study expands upon other research examining the possibilities which IVR offers the classroom. Its findings support empirical research which suggests that integrating IVR with HMDs might enhance student performance (Liu et al., 2020, 2022). These encouraging results should motivate teachers and other stakeholders to include IVR instruction in social studies programs. As such, these results add to the body of knowledge about how well IVR supports student social studies learning. Additionally, it provides insightful information regarding both the advantages and difficulties of using IVR in educational settings.

Furthermore, this research tackles the issues and resource limitations related to IVR deployment, offering a thorough overview of the opportunities and difficulties of incorporating cutting-edge technologies into the classroom. This understanding is essential for educators, legislators, and technology developers who hope to promote a more technologically connected learning environment. Our work contributes to the corpus of data demonstrating the beneficial effects of IVR on learning outcomes and student engagement. The implications are presented for organizations which want to use immersive technology for teaching, as well as VR developers and educators.

6.2 Limitations

There are a number of important constraints to acknowledge. Although, this research significantly advances our understanding for how IVR affects social studies education, the small sample size of our research cohort (48 students) may have limited result applicability with respect to a larger demographic. Larger and more varied student populations could be included in future studies to improve the validity of our research. Moreover, the relatively brief window of our research period meant that only the short-term impact of IVR could be explored. In order to ascertain whether IVR advantages persist over time, therefore, future research could involve a lengthier investigation. In addition, as IVR field excursions were created and implemented for the social studies curriculum, outcomes may vary depending upon the subject matter covered. In order to improve IVR research, future studies could evaluate subject-specific effects.

Furthermore, since our research relies on self-reported measures like presence and cognitive load, there is a chance that individuals would underestimate their cognitive load or simply provide what they perceive to be socially acceptable answers. Therefore, in order to obtain additional insight, future studies might also include worksheet analysis, interviews, and observations. Finally, the degree of training and familiarity which instructors have with IVR technology and how it may impact its adoption is not disclosed in our research. Future studies might examine the connection between the effectiveness of employing IVR and the training and confidence levels of the instructors involved.

6.3 Practical implications

Primarily, we need to raise awareness amongst Kuwait’s educational stakeholders about the potential advantages which IVR technology may bring to student accomplishment. Empirical data in this research validated the success of our IVR technique, which helped students to learn clearly and concisely. Furthermore, in order to use IVR in the classroom, instructors need to acquire the requisite knowledge and abilities. This requirement could be met by providing professional IVR technology training to pre- and in-service instructors. Since extended reality technology is presently not in extensive use within Kuwait, it is necessary, therefore, to both support teacher professional development in this area and to include these technologies in national standards to make its classroom integration easier.

IVR offers a rich opportunity to rethink the past and spark discussion about what really constitutes “the past.” This makes the technology a potentially powerful tool for enhancing social studies instruction. Even so, our investigation does anticipate potential difficulties which may need resolving. IVR deployment in Kuwait is limited, as some schools have insufficient financial means and/or lack the technological infrastructure to implement it (Natale et al., 2020). To reduce these barriers, schools should receive the resources they need to employ IVR and other compatible technologies. This will require sufficient investment to fund equipment acquisition, the creation of IVR instruction courses for teachers (both pre- and inservice), and the creation of sufficiently robust IVR content which both meets social studies curriculum standards and boosts student engagement and knowledge retention.