Regulation tools for collaboration are very rare in educational VRLs, identified in only 8 laboratories, mostly supporting regulation by teachers¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2030: baselines and conditions change
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? Only 8 of the 62 reviewed laboratories contain tools enhancing regulation for collaboration; 5 support regulation by teachers and 3 by learners. → Kurtz 2025
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 · r3
Descriptive coding of collaboration regulation tools across the 62 reviewed publications. The review states "a total of 8 laboratories have been identified as containing such tools", with teacher regulation in 5 labs and learner regulation in 3.
"According to Table 7, tools enhancing regulation for collaboration are very rare in VRLs. Indeed a total of 8 laboratories have been identified as containing such tools."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- 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
- Only a minority of VRL studies assess collaboration quality or learning, but most studies that measure learning report positive impact
- Guidance tools supporting collaboration are relatively uncommon in educational VRLs, integrated in only 13 of 62 reviewed systems
- With a scripted collaboration designed to elicit metacognition, deep-level metacognitive regulation stays rare and students mostly accept rather than co-construct or share regulation
- A systematic review found literature reviews on collaborative learning in VR use very broad VR definitions, with few included papers using HMDs — related
- Comparison and integration of different types of group awareness information is a research gap despite firmly established positive tool effects — related
- Collaborative VRLs are predominantly STEM-focused, virtual, non co-located, synchronous, and 2D — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
regulation-tools-very-rare-vrls |
title |
Regulation tools for collaboration are very rare in educational VRLs, identified in only 8 laboratories, mostly supporting regulation by teachers |
description |
Regulation tools for collaboration are very rare in educational VRLs, identified in only 8 laboratories, mostly supporting regulation by teachers |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2025 |
recheck_by |
2030 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-18 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — kurtz-2025 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.