Only a minority of VRL studies assess collaboration quality or learning, but most studies that measure learning report positive impact¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? 31% of reviewed publications (n = 19) included a study evaluating collaboration among users; most relied exclusively on qualitative data. → Kurtz 2025 q2 i? Among 26 studies evaluating learning outcomes, 84% (n = 22) reported a positive impact of the VRL on learning. → Kurtz 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Kurtz 2025¶

Kurtz, M., Benabbou, A., Pons, C., & Broisin, J. (2025). Collaboration in virtual and remote laboratories for education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-025-09454-7

q2 · i? · review · r2

Review coding of evaluation practices across the 62 publications: "31% of publications (n = 19) included a study to evaluate collaboration among users"; 10 used qualitative data only, 7 quantitative only, 2 mixed methods.

"It has to be noted that 31% of publications (n = 19) included a study to evaluate collaboration among users (see Fig.11a) and among these studies, 53% (n = 10) relied exclusively on qualitative data, while 37% (n = 7) used only quantitative data."

Kurtz 2025 (2)¶

Kurtz, M., Benabbou, A., Pons, C., & Broisin, J. (2025). Collaboration in virtual and remote laboratories for education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-025-09454-7

q2 · i? · review · r3

Review synthesis of the 26 studies assessing learning outcomes of collaborative VRLs: "84% (n = 22) have a positive impact on learning". Indicators include questionnaires, tests, grades and task completion metrics; all studies reporting student level involve higher education.

"Among these laboratories, 84% (n = 22) have a positive impact on learning (see Fig. 11c)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• In one reviewed study, students who first collaborate and then complete an activity individually in the VRL are more successful than students who complete an individual task first and then collaborate
• Group awareness tools showing peer presence, peer activities, or multiple artifacts are integrated in many educational VRLs, but performance and teacher-presence indicators are never standalone
• Guidance tools supporting collaboration are relatively uncommon in educational VRLs, integrated in only 13 of 62 reviewed systems
• Regulation tools for collaboration are very rare in educational VRLs, identified in only 8 laboratories, mostly supporting regulation by teachers
• Synchronous communication is the most common collaboration support integrated in educational VRLs, and few labs offer none
• Collaborative VRLs are predominantly STEM-focused, virtual, non co-located, synchronous, and 2D
• A systematic review found literature reviews on collaborative learning in VR use very broad VR definitions, with few included papers using HMDs — related