Virtual reality against Zoom fatigue? A field study on the teaching and learning experience in interactive video and VR conferencing.

Aim: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the absence of in-person teaching was partially compensated for through videoconferencing. However, lecturers complain that students do not participate actively in video-based online seminars. One reason cited for this is Zoom fatigue. Conferences in virtual reality (VR), accessible with and without head-mounted display, represent one potential remedy to this issue. The research to date does not shed any light on the (1.) teaching experience, (2.) student demand, (3.) learning experience (including participation and social presence), and (4.) learning performance (declarative and spatial) associated with VR conferences. The present work will compare these aspects for videoconferencing, independent study, and - in the case of teaching experience - with in-person teaching. Methods: A compulsory seminar in General Physiology was offered during the 2020/21 winter semester and the 2021 summer semester as part of the Human Medicine program at the Faculty of Medicine at Ulm University. The seminars were offered in three different formats with identical content: (a) VR conference, (b) video conference, and (c) independent study, with students selecting the format of their choice. In the VR conferences, the lecturer taught using a head-mounted display while students participated via PC, laptop, or tablet. The learning experience and learning performance were assessed using questionnaires and a knowledge test. A semi-structured interview was conducted to assess the VR teaching experience. Results: The lecturer's teaching experience in the VR conferences was similar to in-person teaching. Students predominantly chose independent study and videoconferencing. The latter resulted in worse outcomes with regard to learning experience (including participation and social presence) and spatial learning performance than the VR conferences. Declarative learning performance differed only slightly between teaching formats. Conclusions: VR conferencing offers lecturers new didactic opportunities and a teaching experience similar to that of in-person teaching. Students prefer time-efficient videoconferencing and independent study, but rate participation and social presence, among other things, higher in VR conferencing. If faculty and students are open to the technology, VR conferencing can promote interactive exchange in online seminars. This subjective assessment is not associated with better declarative learning performance.

Did video kill the XR star? Digital trends in medical education before and after the COVID-19 outbreak from the perspective of students and lecturers from the faculty of medicine at the University of Ulm.

Aim: Using a comparison of digital teaching in medicine before and after the COVID-19 outbreak, the aim of the study was to examine how ad hoc digitization has changed (1) the design of digital teaching, (2) the attitudes toward and the capabilities of digital teaching and learning and (3) the future importance of individual digital teaching elements. Methods: Students and lecturers from the Medical Faculty of Ulm were asked to voluntarily participate in online surveys during the summer semesters of 2019 and 2020. The data was subsequently analyzed from a longitudinal and cross-sectional view descriptively as well as by using t-tests and Chi2-tests. In addition, using regression analyses, the results were controlled for associations with age, study progress, and media affinity. Results: In the summer semester 2019, 163 students (6.1% response rate) and 56 lecturers (11.5%) participated in the surveys. In the following year, the participation increased to 285 students (10.4%) and 64 lecturers (12.8%). Video-based teaching elements such as videoconferencing and lecture recordings were increasingly used after the COVID-19 outbreak and considered more significant for future teaching. In contrast, virtual reality, augmented reality and 360°-videos, grouped under the term extended reality (XR), are descriptively becoming less important. Most lecturers would like to teach more digitally even after the pandemic but fear a decrease in learning effectiveness and contact with students, who tend to prefer asynchronous learning opportunities. Conclusion: Video-based teaching elements proved to be a low-threshold and time-efficient solution during the lockdown and were also recommended for future use. The XR technology has been put on the back burner for the time being, but in view of the increased digital teaching motivation and capabilities, it can be assumed that lecturers will recognize and use the potential of XR as soon as they have the freedom to design innovative teaching again.