The 'potential' for VR to impact learning is not just potential - it's happening.
The technology
For some time, tech evangelists and virtual reality (VR) enthusiasts have been pitching the variety of benefits and use cases for VR. Some of these are still limited by the existing hardware capability, but we know that some are very real, right now.
Recent research has shown that VR can be an effective tool in applied therapeutic and scientific fields, and as a tool for delivering training. For example, VR is being used as a method for exposure therapy and to develop social and emotional skills. Unfortunately there is mixed information about how this can best be used in training, learning and development (L&D). This may be partly due to the massive variety in types of training and teaching methods that can (but not always should) be presented in VR, and partly a lack of design standards for VR software (more on that issue another time).
Despite some mixed results in recent research, more and more people are testing and implementing VR in businesses and schools to enhance existing training programs, and start teaching in ways not previously possible. We’ve seen some really promising results from these early adoptions of VR, including teaching people how to build and maintain jet engines, and taking students on field trips anywhere in the world, right from their classroom. This is fantastic progress, so is the learning and development industry catching on?
The L&D industry
There is a shift occurring (albeit fairly slowly) away from traditional classroom, elearning and didactic learning methods to more personalised, social, kinesthetic, and dialectic learning. The reason behind this is not a recent revelation, in fact it’s informed by decades-old principles of adult learning called andragogy - facilitated, internally motivated adult learning focused on problem solving and performing tasks. The reality is that this style of training is typically more involved and expensive, and therefore can look less appealing to businesses hoping to train large numbers of people quickly and efficiently. This may be efficient, but not necessarily effective. Businesses that take the typical, easier option will likely neither see the desired learning outcomes and engagement, nor a culture of learning as a result.
This is why we centre our VR training, learning and development applications around the learners and their collective experience. Why limit the learners to reading about something when they can experience it for themselves? One mistake we see over and over in this space is the attempt to take e-learning and display it on a VR headset ‘as-is’. Be it a video presentation, a slideshow, or just a wall of text. Unsurprisingly, these methods aren’t great for learning outcomes and engagement, and simply present the same content or media with fewer distractions but increased cognitive load (and likely frustration).
We believe that well-designed, immersive, simulated or game-based learning in VR can provide huge benefits over traditional learning, and so far our experience (and our research) suggests we’re on the right track. With the potential addition of social ‘multiplayer’ learning environments, we can achieve best-practice learning and development supported by cutting edge technology. What this means is learning by doing, learning through failure and meaningful feedback, learning from others, and leveraging the experience and internal drive of the audience to create real change.
References/further reading
Adery, L. H., Ichinose, M., Torregrossa, L. J., Wade, J., Nichols, H., Bekele, E., . . . Park, S. (2018). The acceptability and feasibility of a novel virtual reality based social skills training game for schizophrenia: Preliminary findings. Psychiatry Research, 270, 496-502. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.10.014
Maghool, S., Moeini, S., & Arefazar, Y. (2018). An Educational Application Based on Virtual Reality Technology for Learning Architectural Details: Challenges and Benefits. International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 12(3), 246-272. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.26687/archnet-ijar.v12i3.1719