Florentine Hickethier
Alexander Gröschner
Mathias Dehne
Engin Ader
Tova Michalsky- 1Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Institute of Educational Science, Chair for Research on Teaching and Learning, Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Jena, Germany
- 2Department of Mathematics and Science Education and Learning Sciences Program, Boğaziçi University, Istanbul, Türkiye
- 3Faculty of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Virtual reality (VR) as a form of simulation-based learning can lead to better understanding of learners and increase motivation. Recent evidence shows effectiveness in teacher education in terms of skill growth for student teachers. In this regard, the perceived usefulness of a novel technology is a key factor affecting behavioral intention to use it. Therefore, this mixed-method study investigates the perception of the usefulness of a VR environment from the perspective of student teachers and explores to what extent the change in perception affects the intention to use it in later professional practice. To answer the questions, N = 57 student teachers from four countries assessed a VR environment designed for teaching mathematics. The VR environment deals with the spread of infectious diseases to address the mathematical issue of exponential growth. To assess its usefulness as well as its general potential, students filled in a questionnaire before and after the VR simulation and participated in an interview afterwards. The findings show a significant positive change in usefulness beliefs. Furthermore, perceived usefulness predicted intention to use the VR technology. Results from the interviews show the potential of the new technology in transcending certain boundaries of everyday teaching and emphasize on the affective component of a VR experience in schools. But also limitations for every day life and use of VR, for instance, with regard to specific age groups were mentioned. A main implication of this study is that an early experience of VR in teacher education underlines the willingness to use this technology in later professional life.
1 Introduction
UNESCO’s sustainable development goal in education calls for a minimum level of qualification for teachers also in Information and Communications Technologies (UNESCO, 2018). However, teachers in professional practice often feel inadequately prepared and challenged to incorporate Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) in their lessons (e.g., Nandan and Sahana, 2022; Sang et al., 2010; Zhang et al., 2023b). To date, the technical equipment in schools alone often is a problem in creating the best conditions to use technology in their lessons (e.g., Spector, 2010). Sometimes, however, it can also be due to teachers not recognizing the potential or the possibilities that new technologies offer to make certain teaching contents more tangible and practice-oriented for students. Paraskeva et al. (2008) and Zhang et al. (2023b) showed that perceptions and attitudes toward technology influence effective use of teacher candidates.
As a novel medium, Virtual Reality (VR) provides an opportunity for students to gain immersive and interactive experiences in various teaching disciplines, such as the natural sciences and foreign languages (Boyles, 2017). Immersing students in a virtual world has a positive impact on learning and interest (Markowitz et al., 2018). Ample evidence exists on the effectiveness of VR for student learning. However, more research has yet to explore the extent to which teachers find VR useful for teaching and the extent to which they are willing to use the technology in their classrooms. The current study, therefore, aims to investigate the influence of an increased perceived usefulness of VR on the willingness to use VR in later professional life and explores future teachers’ perceived values, costs and limitations.
In order to pursue this desideratum, student teachers were examined at the beginning of their professional careers. The VR environment, used in the study, basically enables students immersively to solve a mathematical problem regarding exponential growth. Using an everyday problem such as the spread of a virus, which is modeled in a corresponding VR environment, the topic becomes tangible for learners. This way, they gain a realistic understanding of the quantities behind a equation. In this study student teachers were asked to experience the VR environment themselves and solve the task provided in the VR environment. We investigated to what extent the general perception of the new medium changed through their own experience of the VR environment and how this affects the willingness to use this technology later on.
1.1 Simulation-based learning with virtual reality
Simulation-based learning (SBL) is defined by Koppenberg et al. (2014) as an experiential form of knowledge gain through which concrete tasks can be presented in different realities and tested by learners. Pan et al. (2006) emphasized that virtual environments can lead to better understanding and motivate the learner. The authors describe VR as a combination of computer graphics systems with various display devices that enable immersion in an interactive 3D environment. Two main characteristics shape and influence learning with VR—immersion and presence (Lei et al., 2022). A sense of immersion is conveyed in VR systems by engaging visual, auditory, and kinesthetic senses, thus reducing awareness of information in the external world (Huang et al., 2023). Presence, on the other hand, can be characterized as the response to a certain degree of immersion (Slater, 2003). Various behaviors in the VR environment are signs of presence, which arises from a combination of human perception and immersion (Slater, 2003).
A distinction can be made between non-immersive, semi-immersive, or fully immersive VR systems. While non-immersive VR systems use ordinary devices, such as a desktop monitor, on which the user experiences the virtual environment and is not shielded from the external environment, the user of a fully immersive environment is surrounded by it (Huang et al., 2023; Jensen and Konradsen, 2018). This visual blanking of the external world is achieved through a head-mounted display (HMD) (Jensen and Konradsen, 2018; Rauschnabel et al., 2022). To create a higher level of immersion, wall-mounted screens and motion tracking devices are required for semi-immersive VR systems (Huang et al., 2023). For student teachers’ video-based learning, Dehne and Gröschner (2023) characterized immersion as a key affective-motivational characteristic but also emphasized its limitations. For example, reflecting on own—potentially unpleasant —classroom sequences might evoke feelings of shame (Chang et al., 2018).
Research on the motivation for using VR in education highlights the potential of VR in making various situations experiential and tangible which would, for example, not be feasible in ordinary classroom instruction (Freina and Ott, 2015). In terms of learning success, studies from the medical research field have shown that the learning gain for medical students is higher in fully immersive VR environments than in semi-immersive VR systems (Gutierrez et al., 2007) or in video and text-based learning formats (Sattar et al., 2019). In a study on self-regulated learning (SRL) behavior, various behaviors of learners could also be observed when passing through a VR environment, which contributed to the completion of the learning task (Ader et al., 2025). In the context of the current study, a systematic review by Cevikbas et al. (2023) reveals positive effects of implementing VR in mathematics teaching on cognitive and metacognitive aspects of learning. As the review found that geometry is the most studied area in connection with VR (Cevikbas et al., 2023), the present study deals with exponential growth and thus contributes to the research field with another topic. So far, insights into learning gains provide evidence that VR is relevant to the school setting and enriches the classroom. Yet, the question is how (student) teachers assess the benefits of VR and to what extent do they feel prepared to use these new technologies in their own teaching? This study contributes to this lack of knowledge.
1.2 Virtual reality in teacher education
Research on VR in teacher education shows that VR-based training programs start with student teachers and recreate various typical teaching scenarios in which the teacher is supposed to carry out instructions (Huang et al., 2023). The interactivity of VR environments is often “still a weak point,” as virtual students are usually controlled by pre-programmed scripts and thus can hardly respond to teacher behavior (Huang et al., 2023).
In addition, most applications are one-time experiences with program durations ranging from 10 min to 2 h. Furthermore, Huang et al. (2023) found that VR is mostly used to train procedural knowledge. The studies considered largely reported positive outcomes captured by teachers’ self-reports (Huang et al., 2023). For instance, Huang et al. (2022) showed higher increases in interest and self-efficacy related to classroom management using a VR simulation compared to an instructional video. An advantage of 360-degree videos viewed through a VR headset over traditional videos was also found around noticing (Kosko et al., 2021). Here, student teachers paid attention to more student actions than student teachers in the control group. In addition, an investigation using a virtual classroom found an improvement in the visual attention of student teachers in connection with adaptive feedback (Huang et al., 2025). The state-of-the-art in research shows that using VR in teacher education mainly aims to promote teacher knowledge and behavior (Stavroulia and Lanitis, 2017). So far, the use of VR for future practice in the profession has hardly been addressed in empirical research.
1.3 Technology acceptance and usefulness beliefs
According to the Theory of Reasoned Action (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980), a person’s beliefs and attitudes influence behavioral intention. The Technology Acceptance Model (Davis et al., 1989, TAM) is based on this assumption and generally addresses the factors influencing the acceptance of certain technologies (Figure 1). More specifically, perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use influence attitudes toward the use of technology, which in turn affect behavioral intentions to use the technology in question (Davis et al., 1989; Teo, 2009). If (student) teachers perceive a novel technology, such as VR, as useful and easy to use, they will develop a positive attitude toward its use (Davis, 1989; Teo et al., 2007). Thus, in terms of perceived usefulness, it is assumed that teachers need first to be convinced that the use of VR will improve their own teaching. Ferdinand et al. (2024) showed that even brief priming about the usefulness of VR can trigger cognitive processing and have a positive effect on learning achievement.
Figure 1. Technology acceptance model (Davis et al., 1989).
In turn, perceived usefulness can be influenced by factors such as interactive learning environments, self-efficacy, and perceived satisfaction (Liaw and Huang, 2013). In addition to variables such as perceived usefulness, attitudes toward use, and perceived ease of use, previous research has considered further influential factors that impact teachers’ technology acceptance. Teo (2009) reported a direct effect of computer self-efficacy on technology acceptance, as well as indirect effects of technological complexity and enabling conditions. Enabling conditions, such as good technical or personal support for better use, have a direct effect on perceived ease of use (Teo, 2009). Technological complexity circumscribes the degree of difficulty in understanding a particular application (Teo, 2015; Teo et al., 2016; Thompson et al., 1991).
According to the TAM model, behavioral intention directly determines actual usage behavior. As previous studies with student teachers showed, behavioral intention is directly influenced by the perceived usefulness of computer technology (Ma et al., 2005). Moreover, attitude exerts a direct effect on intention (Davis et al., 1989). With regard to attitude, Liaw and Huang (2003) demonstrated a relationship between the perception of a technology and the attitude toward its usefulness. A study conducted with teachers in the school context also confirmed these relationships when examining attitudes toward the use of new technologies as tools (Nair and Das, 2012). The results indicated an influence of perceived ease of use on perceived usefulness and on the attitude toward usefulness. More specifically, the better teachers were trained in the professional use of new tools, the more useful they perceived these tools to be, and the more positive their attitude became toward integrating them into classroom instruction (Nair and Das, 2012).
This study contributes to the field of research on teacher professionalization by investigating the extent to which student teachers perceive VR as useful for teaching. In reference to the TAM (Davis et al., 1989), the aim is to examine the extent to which the development of perceived usefulness through their own experience of VR changes their willingness to use this technology in future professional practice. Studies such as those by Yi and Hwang (2003) have shown that the intention to use has a direct influence on the actual usage of a web-based environment. Since the TAM model has both a direct and indirect influence on perceived usefulness and intention to use, the current study decided to focus on these two variables in order to investigate the direct influence on willingness to use in one’s own professional practice. Interventions in the field of immersive media have demonstrated that utility values are constructs sensitive to change (Dehne and Gröschner, 2023; Nickl et al., 2023).
2 Research questions
The aim of this study is to investigate how student teachers perceive and evaluate a virtual learning environment designed for learning mathematics and science. This VR scenario is intended to serve as an example of a potential application in the classroom. The following research questions are addressed:
1. To what extent does the perception of the usefulness of a VR tool designed for teaching change during the experience of the VR environment?
2. To what extent is the intention to use VR in subsequent teaching practice influenced by the change in perceived usefulness?
It is assumed that perceived usefulness changes after the first experience with VR (Hypothesis 1) and has a direct influence on the intention to use it (Hypothesis 2). As both research questions and hypotheses are investigated quantitatively over time, the qualitative part of the study explores both questions in more detail.
3 Methods
3.1 Sample
As part of an international collaboration in the Learning To Teach Lab: Science (LTL:S) (Gröschner et al., 2024), a total of N = 57 student teachers from four countries (Finland, Germany, Israel, and Turkey) participated in the VR experience during the summer 2021 (age: M = 26.18 years, Mdn = 24.50 years, SD = 4.65 years; gender: 36.8% female, 57.9% male, 5.3% not specified). About 90% of students indicated that English was not their first language. Nevertheless, 61.4% rated their level of English as good and another 22.8% as excellent. English language proficiency was relevant because the language of the VR environment was English. The student teachers who agreed to participate in the experiment were studying mathematics (29.8%), English (15.8%), biology (10.5%), other languages (7.1%), or other subjects (36.8%) as their primary subject. As teacher education programs at different universities are structured differently, participants of our study pursue different university degrees: Bachelor (28.1%), Master (17.5%), state examination (26.3%) or other degrees (28.1%). More importantly, 38.6% had never experienced a VR environment before.
3.2 Data collection
Student teachers were asked to complete an online questionnaire before and after completing the VR environment individually to assess the perceived usefulness and the intention to use. The processing of the individual questionnaires took approximately 10 min on average.
Student teachers generally took about 60–90 min to complete the VR environment. The VR environment could be navigated using the Meta Oculus Quest 2 (Oculus VR). Interaction with the VR was possible through movement in a predefined space and using two controllers held in the hands. To accompany the student teachers during their navigation and provide support if necessary, the VR was transferred to a connected laptop and streamed (Figure 2).
Figure 2. Left: Participant during the run with the VR environment. Middle/right: Recordings of the VR Pandemic by Prisms, Prisms of Reality Inc.; Mathematical task to calculate the infection rate over several weeks (middle). Visual representation of the spread of a virus in the population to explain exponential growth (right).
The VR environment generally deals with the spread of a virus (Figure 2). Using this frame story, the participant’s role in the VR is to conduct investigations to prevent further spread. Within these investigations, mathematical problems related to exponential growth are to be solved. The VR is divided into two sections. The first section serves as an introduction to the topic. In the second section, the participant is in a laboratory. There, the participant is confronted with tasks such as, for example, determining the growth factor or the new cases of disease per week by calculation and entering them in a table. In addition, a function equation is to be created with the aid of a coordinate system and individual multiple-choice questions are to be answered in the meantime to check understanding. Before the individual subtasks, individual explanatory videos appear in each case, which are to prepare the solution of the task accordingly. Also, the model representation of the spread per week right at the beginning of the section is meant to contribute to the understanding about exponential growth via a practical reference.
In particular, the model-based representation of the spread of the virus provides a much more tangible visualization than conventional methods of teaching exponential growth. Interacting with the model and transferring it into formulas and coordinate systems makes it easier for learners to relate theory and practice. The playful component, which comes from embedding it in a storyline and giving learners an overarching task to save humanity from the virus, can also have a positive effect on their motivation to solve the task (Ader et al., 2025).
After going through the VR and completing the post-survey, the student teachers participated in a guided and structured interview. Each interview took about 10–15 min on average. The interview data of N = 41 student teachers from Germany, Israel and Turkey were used for the qualitative analysis in this reported study. The focus of the study with Finnish students teachers were rather on think-aloud data (Sobocinski et al., 2024), so the interviews did not cover aspects in relation to the present study. In addition to questions about general perceptions and how they handled the tasks in the VR environment, the focus was on what contribution VR could make to teaching. In addition, the student teachers were asked to express their thoughts on what hurdles and limitations they see in the use of VR in schools and classrooms.
The VR tool was in English for all participants. In addition, the Israeli research team conducted the questionnaires and interviews in English. The other teams switched to their native languages for this purpose. This subsequent quantitative-qualitative mixed-methods approach enables the collected questionnaire data to be linked and enriched with arguments from the interviews to obtain explanatory approaches for the quantitative results.
3.3 Instruments
To assess Perceived Usefulness the scale from Teo (2009) was adapted (Table 1). The three items, which had to be rated on a 5-point Likert scale (ranging from 1 = “Strongly disagree” to 5 = “Strongly agree”), reflect the prospective teachers’ perceptions of the extent to which VR can contribute to improving their own work (α = 0.80). This scale was also used in the posttest to detect change (α = 0.82). In addition, the Intention to Use scale by Teo (2009) was added to the posttest (α = 0.76). Intention to Use consists of two items that had to be rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = “Strongly disagree”; 5 = “Strongly agree”).
Table 1. Instruments.
For the interviews, a structured guideline was developed with two main sections. The first section included questions on the perception of the VR environment and the handling of the task. The second section dealt with more general questions about the use of VR in schools and lessons. This part included specific questions on the current relevance for teaching, the contribution that VR can make to pupils’ learning and specific possible ways of using the technology in lessons. In addition, the student teachers were asked about the potential hurdles and limitations of VR for use in the classroom. In more details, the relevant questions for the present study were:
• In your opinion, how important is the use of innovative learning technologies in the classroom?
• How important is teaching and learning with VR? What contribution could VR make in your future career?
• What (general) barriers do you anticipate for the use of VR in schools and classrooms?
3.4 Data analyses
In order to examine the change in students’ usefulness beliefs from the pretest to the posttest, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was calculated (Siegel, 1988). This test can be used to investigate whether the median difference between the pretest and posttest is significantly different from zero. The requirements for this non-parametric procedure are that the measurements are dependent, the independent variable has two expressions, and the dependent variable is at least ordinally scaled (McCrum-Gardner, 2008). In addition to these basic requirements, the distribution of the differences should be approximately symmetrical. For the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, the correlation coefficient r is calculated as an effect size measure. According to Cohen (1988), a weak correlation exists for an r = 0.1, a moderate correlation exists for an r = 0.3, and a strong correlation exists for an r = 0.5.
To investigate the second research question, a multiple regression model was calculated in which Intention to Use was the criteria and the change in Perceived Usefulness was the predictor. In addition, age and gender were included as covariates. Multiple determination coefficient R2 is given to determine model fit. With an R2 = 0.02, weak variance clarification is present, with R2 = 0.13, moderate variance clarification is present, and with R2 = 0.26, strong variance clarification is present (Cohen, 1988). As prerequisites for the procedure, it is first necessary to check that there is a linear relationship between the variables, no outliers, and no multicollinearity. Second, it is necessary that the residuals are independent and normally distributed and that they exhibit homoscedasticity (equality of variance). The calculations were performed using the statistical software SPSS 27 (IBM SPSS Statistics, 2020).
The interview data were transcribed and translated into English. For the development of a common coding scheme, first an open coding of three interviews from different countries was conducted, based on which suggestions for codes were generated. This preliminary coding scheme was developed in accordance to previous research by Gaspard et al. (2015). The definitions of the codes for the main categories and subcategories were agreed on in the international research team and steadily adjusted in three coding rounds. With the final scheme, one example interview was coded by three coders and an acceptable interrater reliability was reached between all pairs of coders (0.68 < Cohen’s κ < 0.77). For the analysis of the qualitative data, summed values were calculated from the codes of the individual participants for the respective main and subcategories. Regarding the second research question, the categories Value (N = 284 codings) and Costs and Limitations (N = 248 codings) (see Supplementary material) are examined in more detail in the results section in which example statements of the students can be found. The category Value encompassed participants’ ideas regarding the benefits, importance, and integration of VR into education and students’ lives. Value as category is intended to emphasize the aspects of usefulness within the current evaluation. The category Costs and Limitations, on the other hand, captures codes with perceived possible negative effects or negative associations with VR (Gaspard et al., 2015).
4 Results
4.1 Student teachers perceived usefulness and intentions for use in practice
For answering research question 1, the requirements of a Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed an acceptable fit. Based on the visual examination of the histogram of the differences, a symmetrical distribution of the values could be demonstrated. There was a statistically significant change in perception of Usefulness (Mdn = 0.17) from the pretest (Mdn = 3.33) to the posttest (Mdn = 3.67), z = 2.14, p = 0.032, r = 0.29.
The second research question addressed the influence of the change in perceived usefulness on the intention or willingness to use VR in future professional practice. Requirements for the multiple regressions models were first controlled for in the quantitative data. A linear relationship between the variables was given and based on the studentized excluded residuals, there are no outliers in the data set. The Durbin-Watson statistic had a value of 1.90, according to which there was no autocorrelation in the residuals. No multicollinearity between the predictors was found. After visual inspection, the conditions of homoscedasticity and normal distribution of the residuals were also controlled. The model shows a (moderate to) high goodness of fit with an R2 = 0.26 (corrected R2 = 0.21) according to Cohen (1988). The predictors Change in Perceived Usefulness, age, and gender predict the criteria Intention to Use statistically significantly [F(3, 48) = 5.59, p = 0.002]. Interpretation of the regression coefficients shows that the predictor Change in Perceived Usefulness is significant, B = 0.60, p < 0.001 (Table 2). Thus, a linear relationship is assumed. The coefficients age and gender are not significant. Consequently, these variables have little associations on Intention to Use.
Table 2. Regression analysis for the prediction of intention to use.
4.2 Student teachers’ perceptions on values, possible costs and limitations
In the interviews from the three countries, the majority of the statements for Value (Table 3) was assigned to the subcategory Utility for education and teaching profession, which addresses the teaching-related aspects of usefulness (n = 210 coding). Herein, for example, interview participants stated that the use of VR in the classroom can make certain content tangible, create a change from conventional teaching formats, and ensure easy access to the teaching topic. In addition, the new technology is perceived to offer great potential to transcend certain boundaries of everyday teaching. One participant commented: “Especially with the topics or things that you cannot necessarily do with the students in the real laboratory, because they might be too dangerous, or because it would simply be too expensive or would not work out in terms of time if you were to do it with everyone there.” (EFG03S07, 90).
Table 3. Number of codings.
The subcategory Utility in general comprises the aspects of utility that are not related to learning and teaching (n = 41 coding). When considering the general usefulness of VR, an advantage may be the simulation and hands-on practice of theoretical content realizable by using technology. The statement “It’s just that some things, like abstract things, − and they are increasing, so in our society we have to think more and more abstractly [and] the students also have to be able to remember that, because the VR glasses are almost indispensable” (EFG03S03, 105) underlines the perceived growing importance today.
A positive “motivation for learning,” “fun in testing” and a certain “surprise effect” as affective components are aspects that were mentioned by the participants and have individual impact on the intrinsic value of VR (n = 25 codings). Related to this subcategory, one participant stated: “I do think that it triggers motivation, simply because it’s a new technology, gadget, that everyone thinks is totally great. I was also excited and thought it was exciting to take a look at it.” (EFG03S12, 106). A few statements were assigned to the subcategories Importance for achievement (n = 6 codings) and Personal importance (n = 2 codings), where the latter subcategory views mastering the VR task as part of one’s own identity. Importance for achievement refers to improving one’s own performance, as one student described: “And you [can] play through that over and over again and improve through that.” (EFG03S01, 108).
Within the Costs and Limitations category, the subcategory Limitations appeared most frequently with n = 123 codings in the interviews. Limitations in applicability and usefulness, which also have an influence on the intention to use it in later professional practice, are considered primarily in the different effect on the adolescents, the lack of realism and the currently still limited possibilities. “I would not give it to young students because I do not think the abstraction is there yet.” (EFG03S03, 142). This statement indicates that an age limit for use in the classroom is perceived as relevant, because the different effects of the technology on children should be considered when use in school is planned or discussed.
In terms of Costs, a distinction was made between personal costs (n = 68 codings) and opportunity costs (n = 57 codings). The subcategory of personal costs implies the associated energy investment and negatively associated emotions. Statements that can be assigned to the other subcategory often included financial and time aspects, such as: “So, there is also a bit of a lack of time for the teachers to simply try things out.” (EFG03S11, 229). In addition, the lack of adaptability of a VR environment to teaching is criticized. A student teacher said: “The potential is very high, but it has to fit in with what I would like to achieve as a teacher, and also with how my students are. If I now have students who are – I do not know – mathematically super talented, then I certainly need a different environment that also runs faster.” (EFG03S11, 132). This statement also shows a challenge that the contents or tasks of the VR environment are not individually adapted to the needs and the performance level of the individual students. It requires a great deal of content embedding and support from the teacher. “It could be that sometimes you get lost too much in the technical gadgetry, um, if it’s not very strongly guided” (EFG03S15, 61).
5 Discussion
The mixed method study investigated how student teachers perceive a VR tool for learning and to what extent the change in perceived usefulness affects the intention to use it in subsequent professional practice. The results show that a VR environment is perceived as more useful by student teachers after they have had a chance to try it out themselves. This change also significantly predicted the willingness to use the technology in future teaching, independent from gender and age of the participants. Consequently, an increase in usefulness beliefs positively affected behavioral intention to use VR as a new technology in one’s own classroom. Accordingly, the assumptions that perceived usefulness changes after an initial VR experience (Hypothesis 1) and that this change directly influences the intention to use (Hypothesis 2) were confirmed. This finding is consistent with the assumptions of the TAM (Davis et al., 1989; Teo, 2009). Previous research underlines that teachers’ perceptions and attitudes toward a technology had an impact on effective use of the technology (Paraskeva et al., 2008). Thus, a change in usefulness beliefs during the professionalization phase of teachers may be a cornerstone for successfully using VR in later professional practice or for successful teaching.
In the interviews conducted after the experiment with the VR environment, the participants critically reflected on the potential and limitations of the novel technology for use in the classroom. The student teachers mentioned problems that may arise for the use in schools and lessons, but mainly in the context of organizational (financial) issues of acquisition and regular technical updating or maintenance the technology. For the teacher, the use of the VR technology requires more time for preparation and for the lesson itself, which in turn can conflict with the requirements of the curriculum. Regarding the students, obstacles are seen above all in the simultaneous involvement of all students as well as in responding to their individual needs by using the VR. The students could get lost in handling the VR if they are not accompanied and guided by the teacher. In addition, the playful character of VR tools can cause frustration among the students, which is also evident in findings from gamification research (e.g., Codish and Ravid, 2014; Lim et al., 2013).
In contrast, advantages of the new technology are seen in the simulation of teaching content, which may appear too abstract and not very tangible for students in conventional lessons. The application represents a new experience for the adolescents, through which motivation can be increased, attention can be focused on the subject matter, and fun can be experienced with the content to be taught (Graeske and Sjöberg, 2021; Zhang et al., 2023a).
Studies investigating the factors influencing technology acceptance according to the TAM model (Davis et al., 1989) have already shown that teachers tend to have a more positive attitude toward a new tool and perceive it more favorably when they feel well prepared to integrate it professionally into their teaching (Nair and Das, 2012). Also, research with student teachers has found that the perceived usefulness of computer technologies influences their intention to use them (Ma et al., 2005). The student teachers in the present study also reported various challenges, such as a lack of time to experiment with new technologies, suggesting a greater willingness to adopt these tools when the conditions for implementing new technologies are improved. In the context of teacher education, this highlights the call for more learning opportunities to become familiar with new digital tools and technologies such as VR.
By implementing a mixed-method study, the present research overcame several limitations of previous research. Some limitations of the present study are addressed as follows: With regard to the TAM model, further developments, such as the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model (Venkatesh et al., 2003), were not in the focus of the study, as the authors consider expectations (such as performance or effort expectancy) as influencing factors on usage intention. In a broader and more general perspective, the students in our study were asked to approach the VR experience with an open mind, without specifically assessing whether the VR environment used was suitable for teaching, which could potentially have a negative impact on their general intention to use it.
Furthermore, teacher education programs in the four surveyed countries Germany, Finland, Israel and Turkey are structured differently and different degrees are obtained. A further limitation was that student teachers were all at different stages of professionalization. Therefore, no country comparisons was applicable. Regarding the qualitative data, the interviews from the individual survey sites varied vastly in length. Some of the interviews were conducted in English and some were conducted in the respective native language, which consequently had an impact on the length of the statements. As we were interested in an overall perception of the VR, the information obtained from the interview data in this study aimed to illustrate general individual perceptions and arguments of the student teachers.
The study also focused on a VR environment developed for mathematics and science. The perception of usefulness is therefore difficult to transfer to other subjects. So far, it remains unclear whether VR environments would lead to different perceptions and intentions of use for other subjects. Furthermore, it is open whether the increase in perceived usefulness can be attributed solely to experiencing the VR environment. In this case, a control group design would be relevant and allow to compare the VR with a group that do not experience VR.
Finally, it should be noted that there is a limitation in terms of the predictive power with regard to actual usage intentions. In the interviews, the student teachers make statements about their willingness to use the VR in a more or less distant future, thus, a direct transfer is not expected.
For future research dealing with the impact of the perceived usefulness of VR on willingness to use it in teaching, it is advisable to include control groups and/or teaching performance in schools. For instance, in a current follow up study, student teacher learning in a VR environment versus real-life simulations dealing with classroom disruptions is investigated. Thus, we attempt to include more direct school-related experiences (e.g., during a teaching practicum).
Despite the limitations, the current study offers large potential, as there is currently little evidence on the acceptance of a VR environment for teaching in an intervention study with student teachers (cf. Sagnier et al., 2020). The quantitative as well as qualitative results of this mixed method approach speak for an early experience of VR in teacher education, since positive attitudes toward the perceived usefulness and user-friendliness can already be formed in the phase of professionalization. A positive attitude toward new technologies can thus have a lasting influence on the willingness of others to use them. For future research, it is of interest to what extent simulation-based settings can be applied in teacher education to prepare teachers in university for teaching practice in schools (Howard et al., 2021).
In recent years, the demands placed on teachers regarding the use of new technologies have changed substantially. By implementing VR in the classroom, the teacher’s role shifts toward a more supportive agent of teaching and learning (Hauk and Gröschner, 2022). Hereby, learner-control and students’ self-regulation is requested as a key feature of learning (Ader et al., 2025).
The new possibilities offered by the advancing digitalization of teaching also increasingly present teachers with the challenge of meaningfully and effectively integrating the technologies into the classroom. However, this requires further learning opportunities for student teachers and continuing professional development. The perceived usefulness of VR examined in this study can be seen as a key factor in teachers’ engagement with technology and their willingness to use it in the classroom.
6 Conclusion
To conclude, the current study expands our knowledge of the extent to which student teachers are prepared to use new technologies such as virtual reality in their future teaching. This study showed that experiencing VR in teacher education is relevant to perceive new technologies (such as VR) in professional practice. Thus, further research in the context of simulation-based trainings in teacher education might be interested in exploring the applicability of tools and technologies in schools and lessons as relevant practice-related outreach. The use of VR for teaching raises the question of the extent to which VR-based trainings can be further developed, for example, to address the challenges of adaptivity in teaching and different performance levels of students. As teaching is always a field of change, technology enhanced tools and methods may be useful to shape (real-life) experiences and student learning. This requirement points to the important step that teachers need to experience such tools before and best in teacher education.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by the Boğaziçi University Social Sciences Human Research Ethics Committee (Document no: SBINAREK - 13857), a formal consent was accessed by the participants at each university. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
FH: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology. AG: Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing, Project administration, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Supervision. MD: Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Formal analysis. EA: Formal analysis, Project administration, Methodology, Supervision, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Conceptualization, Funding acquisition. TM: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Conceptualization, Investigation.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. The research project was funded by the European Association of Research in Learning and Instruction (EARLI) as part of the Emerging Field Group “STEM Teachers’ Capacity to Teach Self-Regulated Learning: Effectiveness of Extended Reality.”
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2025.1635518/full#supplementary-material
References
Ader, E., Paksoy, I., Michalsky, T., Gröschner, A., Dehne, M., Jassin, Z., et al. (2025). Self-regulated learning in immersive virtual reality: a case study on a pre-service teacher’s behavior and perceptions. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. 20:100873. doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100873
Ajzen, I., and Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Boyles, B. (2017). Virtual reality and augmented reality in education. West Point, NY: Center For Teaching Excellence, United States Military Academy.
Cevikbas, M., Bulut, N., and Kaiser, G. (2023). Exploring the benefits and drawbacks of AR and VR technologies for learners of mathematics: recent developments. Systems 11:244. doi: 10.3390/systems11050244
Chang, C.-F., Gröschner, A., Hall, N. C., Alles, M., and Seidel, T. (2018). Exploring teachers‘emotions via nonverbal behavior during video-based teacher professional development. AERA Open 4, 1–15. doi: 10.1177/2332858418819851
Codish, D., and Ravid, G. (2014). “Personality based gamification-educational gamification for extroverts and introverts” in Proceedings of the 9th CHAIS conference for the study of innovation and learning technologies: Learning in the technological era. eds. N. Geri, Y. Yair, and A. Caspi (Ra'anana: The Open University of Israel), 36–44.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hoboken, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Q. 13, 319–340. doi: 10.2307/249008
Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., and Warshaw, P. R. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35, 982–1003. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.35.8.982,
Dehne, M., and Gröschner, A. (2023). Utility-value change and the role of emotional cost in video-based learning: a matter of student teachers’ interpretation of experience. Front. Psychol. 14:1166921. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1166921,
Ferdinand, J., Gao, H., Stark, P., Bozkir, E., Hahn, J. U., Kasneci, E., et al. (2024). The impact of a usefulness intervention on students’ learning achievement in a virtual biology lesson: an eye-tracking-based approach. Learn. Instr. 90:101867. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101867
Freina, L., and Ott, M. (2015). A literature review on immersive virtual reality in education: state of the art and perspectives. Int. Sci. Conf. Elearning Software Educ. 1, 10–1007.
Gaspard, H., Dicke, A. L., Flunger, B., Brisson, B. M., Häfner, I., Nagengast, B., et al. (2015). Fostering adolescents’ value beliefs for mathematics with a relevance intervention in the classroom. Dev. Psychol. 51:1226. doi: 10.1037/dev0000028,
Graeske, C., and Sjöberg, S. A. (2021). Vr-technology in teaching: opportunities and challenges. Int. Educ. Stud. 14, 76–83. doi: 10.5539/ies.v14n8p76
Gröschner, A., Klaß, S., and Calcagni, E. (2024). “Productive classroom talk as a Core practice: promoting evidence-based practices in teacher-student interaction in preservice teacher education” in Core practices from a global perspective. eds. P. Grossman and U. Fraefel (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press), 101–116.
Gutierrez, F., Pierce, J., Vergara, V. M., Coulter, R., Saland, L., Caudell, T. P., et al. (2007). The effect of degree of immersion upon learning performance in virtual reality simulations for medical education. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
Haluck, R. S., Hoffman, H. M., Mogel, G. T., Phillips, R., and Robb, R. A. (2025). Medicine meets virtual reality 15: In vivo, in vitro, in silico: Designing the next in medicine. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 155–160.
Hauk, D., and Gröschner, A. (2022). How effective is learner-controlled instruction under classroom conditions? A systematic review. Learn. Motiv. 80:101850. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101850
Howard, M. C., Gutworth, M. B., and Jacobs, R. R. (2021). A meta-analysis of virtual reality training programs. Comput. Hum. Behav. 121:106808. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106808
Huang, Y., Hansen, M., Richter, E., Kleickmann, T., Scheiter, K., and Richter, D. (2025). Enhancing preservice teachers’ noticing via adaptive feedback in a virtual reality classroom. Learn. Instr. 95:102053. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2024.102053
Huang, Y., Richter, E., Kleickmann, T., and Richter, D. (2022). Comparing video and virtual reality as tools for fostering interest and self-efficacy in classroom management: results of a pre registered experiment. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 54, 467–488. doi: 10.1111/bjet.13254
Huang, Y., Richter, E., Kleickmann, T., and Richter, D. (2023). “Virtual reality in teacher education from 2010 to 2020” in Bildung für eine digitale Zukunft. Edition ZfE 15. eds. K. Scheiter and I. Gogolin (Cham: Springer VS), 399–441.
Jensen, L., and Konradsen, F. (2018). A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Educ. Inf. Technol. 23, 1515–1529. doi: 10.1007/s10639-017-9676-0
Koppenberg, J., Henninger, M., Gausmann, P., and Bucher, M. (2014). Simulator-based trainings for improvement of patient safety. Notfall+Rettungsmedizin 17, 373–378. doi: 10.1007/s10049-013-1802-y
Kosko, K. W., Ferdig, R. E., and Zolfaghari, M. (2021). Preservice teachers’ professional noticing when viewing standard and 360 video. J. Teach. Educ. 72, 284–297. doi: 10.1177/0022487120939544
Lei, X., Chen, H. H., Rau, P. L. P., Dong, L., and Liu, X. (2022). Learning in virtual reality: effects of instruction type and emotional arousal on learning performance. Learn. Motiv. 80:101846. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101846
Liaw, S. S., and Huang, H. M. (2003). An investigation of user attitudes toward search engines as an information retrieval tool. Comput. Hum. Behav. 19, 751–765. doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(03)00009-8
Liaw, S. S., and Huang, H. M. (2013). Perceived satisfaction, perceived usefulness and interactive learning environments as predictors to self-regulation in e-learning environments. Comput. Educ. 60, 14–24. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.015
Lim, C. P., Zhao, Y., Tondeur, J., Chai, C. S., and Tsai, C. C. (2013). Bridging the gap: technology trends and use of technology in schools. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 16, 59–68.
Ma, W. W. K., Andersson, R., and Streith, K. O. (2005). Examining user acceptance of computer technology: an empirical study of student teachers. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 21, 387–395. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00145.x
Markowitz, D. M., Laha, R., Perone, B. P., Pea, R. D., and Bailenson, J. N. (2018). Immersive virtual reality field trips facilitate learning about climate change. Front. Psychol. 9:2364. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02364
McCrum-Gardner, E. (2008). Which is the correct statistical test to use? Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 46, 38–41. doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2007.09.002,
Nair, I., and Das, V. M. (2012). Using technology acceptance model to assess teachers’ attitude towards use of technology as teaching tool: a SEM approach. Int. J. Computer Appl 42, 1–6. doi: 10.5120/5661-7691
Nandan, P. A., and Sahana, M. (2022). “A tale of two teacher trajectories: Analysing change in teachers’ beliefs on technology integration during the COVID-19 pandemic” in Proceedings of the 16th international conference of the learning sciences - ICLS 2022. eds. C. Chinn, E. Tan, C. Chan, and Y. Kali (New York, NY: International Society of the Learning Sciences), 535–542. doi: 10.22318/icls2022.535
Nickl, M., Sommerhoff, D., Böheim, R., Ufer, S., and Seidel, T. (2023). Fostering pre-service teachers’ assessment skills in a video simulation. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie. 38, 27–34. doi: 10.1024/1010-0652/a000362
Pan, Z., Cheok, A. D., Yang, H., Zhu, J., and Shi, J. (2006). Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Comput. Graph. 30, 20–28. doi: 10.1016/j.cag.2005.10.004
Paraskeva, F., Bouta, H., and Papagianni, A. (2008). Individual characteristics and computer self efficacy in secondary education teachers to integrate technology in educational practice. Comput. Educ. 50, 1084–1091. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2006.10.006
Rauschnabel, P. A., Felix, R., Hinsch, C., Shahab, H., and Alt, F. (2022). What is XR? Towards a framework for augmented and virtual reality. Comput. Hum. Behav. 133:107289. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2022.107289
Sagnier, C., Loup-Escande, E., Lourdeaux, D., Thouvenin, I., and Valléry, G. (2020). User acceptance of virtual reality: an extended technology acceptance model. Int. J. Hum. Computer Int. 36, 993–1007. doi: 10.1080/10447318.2019.1708612
Sang, G., Valcke, M., van Braak, J., and Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes and ICT integration: predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational technology. Comput. Educ. 54, 103–112. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.07.010
Sattar, M. U., Palaniappan, S., Lokman, A., Hassan, A., Shah, N., and Riaz, Z. (2019). Effects of virtual reality training on medical students’ learning motivation and competency. J. Med. Sci. 35, 852–857. doi: 10.12669/pjms.35.3.44,
Sobocinski, M., Dever, D., Wiedbusch, M., Mubarak, F., Azevedo, R., and Järvelä, S. (2024). Capturing self-regulated learning processes in virtual reality: causal sequencing of multimodal data. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 55, 1486–1506. doi: 10.1111/bjet.13393
Spector, J. M. (2010). An overview of progress and problems in educational technology. Int. Educ. Multimedia 1, 27–37.
Stavroulia, K. E., and Lanitis, A. (2017). “On the potential of using virtual reality for teacher education” in Learning and collaboration technologies. Novel learning ecosystems. ed. J. Zaphiris (Cham: Springer International Publishing), 173–186.
Teo, T. (2009). Modelling technology acceptance in education: a study of pre-service teachers. Comput. Educ. 52, 302–312. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.08.006
Teo, T. (2015). Comparing pre-service and in-service teachers' acceptance of technology: assessment of measurement invariance and latent mean differences. Comput. Educ. 83, 22–31. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2014.11.015
Teo, T., Lee, C. B., and Chai, C. S. (2007). Understanding pre-service teachers' computer attitudes: applying and extending the technology acceptance model. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 24, 128–143. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00247.x
Teo, T., Milutinović, V., and Zhou, M. (2016). Modelling Serbian pre-service teachers' attitudes towards computer use: a SEM and MIMIC approach. Comput. Educ. 94, 77–88. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2015.10.022
Thompson, R. L., Higgins, C. A., and Howell, J. M. (1991). Personal computing: toward a conceptual model of utilization. MIS Q. 22, 125–143. doi: 10.2307/249443
UNESCO (2018). ICT competency framework for teachers (version 3). Paris: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., and Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Q. 27, 425–478. doi: 10.2307/30036540
Yi, M. Y., and Hwang, Y. (2003). Predicting the use of web-based information systems: self-efficacy, enjoyment, learning goal orientation, and the technology acceptance model. Int. J. Human-Comput. Stu. 59, 431–449. doi: 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00114-9
Zhang, H., Yu, L., Ji, M., Cui, Y., Liu, D., Li, Y., et al. (2023a). “Investigating high school students' perceptions and presences under VR learning environment” in Cross reality (XR) and immersive learning environments (ILEs) in education. eds. M. Wang, J. Ryoo, and K. Winkelmann (London: Routledge), 97–117.
Keywords: virtual reality, simulation-based learning, teacher education, usefulness, technology acceptance
Citation: Hickethier F, Gröschner A, Dehne M, Ader E and Michalsky T (2026) How useful is virtual reality? A mixed-method study on student teachers’ perceptions. Front. Educ. 10:1635518. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1635518
Edited by:
Michael Rochnia, University of Wuppertal, GermanyReviewed by:
Niclas Schaper, University of Paderborn, GermanySarah Depenbusch, University of Paderborn, Germany
Copyright © 2026 Hickethier, Gröschner, Dehne, Ader and Michalsky. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Florentine Hickethier, ZmxvcmVudGluZS5oaWNrZXRoaWVyQHVuaS1qZW5hLmRl
†ORCID: Florentine Hickethie, orcid.org/0000-0003-4537-3882
Alexander Gröschner, orcid.org/0000-0001-7286-7445
Mathias Dehne, orcid.org/0000-0002-6059-3608
Engin Ader, orcid.org/0000-0002-4454-4216
Tova Michalsky, orcid.org/0000-0003-1055-9222