Review syntheses: VR/AR most often improved academic achievement and motivation, but sometimes performed no better than conventional technologies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesis r2 · q2 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across reviewed studies, the largest advantage category was academic achievement (60 studies), followed by motivation (27 studies), cognitive-load reduction (17 studies) and self-efficacy (14 studies), though some studies found no advantage over digital video. → Haozhe Jiang 2025 q2 i3 At least one reviewed study reported a large attention effect of AR-based science learning (d = 1.28), while others found no significant cognitive-load differences versus non-AR conditions. → Haozhe Jiang 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Haozhe Jiang 2025¶

Haozhe Jiang, Deqi Zhu, Ritesh Chugh, Darren Turnbull, Wu Jin. (2025). Virtual reality and augmented reality-supported K-12 STEM learning: trends, advantages and challenges. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13210-z

q2 · i? · review · r2

The review's synthesis of advantages (RQ2, Table 1) counts 60 studies reporting achievement gains, 27 motivation, 17 cognitive-load reduction, and 14 self-efficacy. It notes Chang et al. (2016) "found no significant difference between the learning achievement of students who learn with AR and with digital video".

"First of all, the largest number of studies (60 studies) showed that VR/AR could help improve academic achievement. For instance, Tsai et al. ( 2021) conducted a quasi-experiment and found that the test scores of students who learned in an AR-supported laboratory environment were significantly higher than those of students who learned in a traditional classroom."

Haozhe Jiang 2025 (2)¶

Haozhe Jiang, Deqi Zhu, Ritesh Chugh, Darren Turnbull, Wu Jin. (2025). Virtual reality and augmented reality-supported K-12 STEM learning: trends, advantages and challenges. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-13210-z

q2 · i3 · quant-synthesis · r2

Within the same advantages synthesis, the review cites one reviewed study reporting a large attention effect (d = 1.28) but also inconsistent conclusions: one reviewed study found no significant cognitive-load differences for mobile AR versus no AR, and another found mental-effort but not mental-load differences.

"Lai et al. (2019) claimed that the AR-based science learning approach exerted a large effect on students' attention to learning materials with d = 1.28 (d > 0.80)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Non-immersive devices, especially smartphone/tablet-based AR, dominated VR/AR-supported K-12 STEM studies; immersive AR was rarely used — related
• Increased perceptual fidelity fails to reliably improve serious game learning outcomes (the fidelity fallacy) — related
• Immersive technologies such as virtual reality should reinforce, not substitute, the original educational action — related
• Immersive technologies are rarely adopted in robotics GBL/gamification but studies using them report heightened engagement, improved spatial reasoning, and enhanced perceived realism — related
• Most VR/AR-supported K-12 STEM studies targeted elementary students and used quantitative methods, with most samples under 100 participants — related
• VR/AR-supported K-12 STEM research is unevenly distributed across subjects: science dominates, engineering has no studies — related
• No significant differences between VR-based and conventional training in operational understanding, technical skills, or system usability — related
• Situated, task-based and game-based learning were the most used strategies in VR/AR-supported K-12 STEM learning
• Immersive VR simulation increased self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation more than a conventional safety manual in laboratory safety training — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Reported limitations of AR enhanced analytics include cognitive overload from immersive environments, technological constraints, usability challenges, and inconsistent measurement approaches — related
• VR improved movement-based transfer test performance versus reading in security training, while learning in VR without the possibility to act was detrimental — a narrower finding that bears on this claim