The usage of virtual reality in engineering education

Abstract

The state of virtual reality (VR) development is mature enough to be explored for application in various fields including higher education teaching, research, and training including engineering education. Traditionally, engineering education relied on diagrams and images to describe various systems and objects, sometimes accompanied by laboratory experiments involving existing systems for hands-on practice. However, these traditional approaches have limited capability. Visualization for effective illustration using the traditional approaches is challenging for topics such as electromagnetic which discusses abstract concepts of electric and magnetic fields. VR is a promising solution. It offers a more engaging and immersive visualization experience, leading to a greater understanding of the subject matter. The immersiveness of VR eliminates distracting external stimuli, and allows better user engagement with the lesson. Therefore, this study explores the application of VR in engineering education. An in-house developed VR laboratory named Merlin’s Playground is incorporated as part of assignment activities for a group of first-year students taking bachelor degree in electronics engineering. The students’ perspectives and attitudes towards the VR activities are studied. The student population finds this approach to be an appealing technology. The VR activity achieved the course aims by allowing the topic’s conception more successfully. The VR approach boosted the students’ understanding and problem-solving skills. This is demonstrated by the cohort of students achieving higher average marks on end-of-topic assessments compared to their seniors when VR activities were not employed.

Keywords:

• Virtual reality
• engineering
• learning
• teaching

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Nadaraj Govender, School of education, University of Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa

SUBJECTS:

• Computer Graphics & Visualization
• Information & Communication Technology (ICT)
• Higher Education

1. Introduction

Virtual Reality (VR) is a computer-simulated environment that allows users to engage with and transform their perception due to a combination of sensory data supplied to the human brain. The technology has progressed dramatically over the years, and while its appeal on gaming platforms is well-established, it is also gaining traction in the realms of education, training, and healthcare. It is the culmination of decades of technology and microprocessor developments that made high-level computation available at affordable price.

VR technology has recently made inroads into the fields of education and training where teachers and researchers are exploring the opportunities and potentials of modern technologies for teaching and learning (Heinemann et al., 2023). The interactive and immersive VR activities can have a significant impact towards achieving the expected learning outcomes (Abulrub et al., 2011; Porumb et al., 2013; Valdez et al., 2013). The sensation of being transported to a virtual realm and losing connection with the physical world simulates students’ interest towards the content (Soliman et al., 2021). The students are more involved in learning, resulting in a transition from a passive to an active learning state which improves practical problem-solving abilities, which are particularly vital for engineering students (Soliman et al., 2021).

Additionally, in this age of computerization and artificial intelligence, the new generation of higher education students enters with extensive computing skills and with greater expectations that academic institutions are adopting state of the art advanced technologies in education rather than sticking to the traditional approaches. Usage of VR in education satisfies the students expectation.

In engineering education there are many abstract concepts and principles that are challenging for the students. Subject like field theory that introduce students to the concept of electrostatic, magnetostatic, electrical field and magnetic field, is known to be a challenging subject as the students are required to understand abstract concepts that can’t be visualized and seen in physical world. Thus, this type of subject is known to be perceived as hard and students’ motivation towards the subject is low (Tuli et al., 2022). Engineering educators can leverage from the visualization capability of VR to enhance the students understanding of the abstract concepts. Therefore, this study applies a VR laboratory known as Merlin’s Playground as part of assignment laboratory to a cohort of first year electronics engineering students. The VR experiment covering the concept of magnetostatic is incorporated to the field theory subject. The students’ attitude towards the application of VR is studied and the impact of VR adoption is studied by comparing the performance of the students with another cohort of student who enrolled for the same subject in the previous year. The findings show positive feedback from the students and it is observed that the VR adopted group of students has better performance than the group that did not used VR.

The next part examines previous studies that focus on the integration of virtual reality and engineering education. In Section 3, the methodology and experiment setting are discussed. Section 4 reports the findings and followed with the discussion in Section 5. In Section 6, the summary of the research is presented.

2. Related works

VR can be used for simulation-based education, in which students and learners can practice new skills in a simulated environment that allows for repetition, correction, and non-dangerous failure while also providing access to interaction with traditionally inaccessible or remote environments (Jensen, 2017). According to the famously learning pyramid of National Training Laboratories, students retain more information when it is taught interactively through simulation (75%) as opposed to traditional lecturing (5%) (Davis, 2015). The learning pyramid is depicted in Figure 1. This concept is popularly adopted in several disciplines of study including engineering (Letrud & Hernes, 2018). According to Laseinde et al. (2016), VR is adopted to provide simulation-based education for engineering student and the findings show that the simulation is able to increase the students’ retention of the concept studied via the simulation. Several other VR for engineering education have been reported.

Figure 1. Learning pyramid (re-created based on national training laboratories).

The VR software Multigen creator was created by Zhao & Meng (2010) as a platform to digitalize education Specifically, the content of Multigen is developed for mining engineering education. To create a three-dimensional model, Vega was created using a scene drive tool, and Visual C++ as a platform mining tool. In terms of texture mapping, LOD, instances, crash detect technologies, and other factors, a virtual emulation system was designed. The system is a successful example of VR employed for education.

In a study by Singh et al. (2020), VR movies are proposed as a promising technique for enhancing biomedical engineering (BME) students’ and providing immersion experiences in simulated clinical scenarios. Despite the limited availability of the desired VR videos, the expertise required for developing the selected videos, and the costs associated with VR cameras and glasses, this study demonstrates that the investment of time and money to create VR videos and acquiring the VR resources, enhanced the learning experience for BME students.

The work by Halabi (2020) proposed using VR with project-based learning (PBL). The module is developed as a self-directed way to create and build a product using 3D software and using the Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE) display to evaluate the design. The findings showed that employing VR had a substantial impact on raising the overall project grade, particularly for the project’s implementation component. It also improved these students’ involvement and motivation, which led to better achievement of the course objectives. This strategy becomes quite appealing, especially for students, because it may be used without prior knowledge. In addition, this will add to the expanding area of research on the effective integration of VR into Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) curriculum, particularly considering the availability of VR headsets at low prices.

Häfner et al. (2013), presented the instructional methodology for a virtual reality practical course for graduate and undergraduate students. The course focuses on learning about virtual reality by simulating multidisciplinary industrial projects and how it can develop skills such as practical engineering problems solving, teamwork, working in multidisciplinary groups, and time management. Due to the intercultural and interdisciplinary nature of the VR practical course groups, the students are reported to be able to gain an understanding of the perspectives of other disciplines and cultures. They can experiment and learn from their mistakes to be better prepared for their professional lives during the endeavor.

Meanwhile, Kim et al. (2023) created a VR course for STEM that consists of three steps: VR-related theory, TA-led content production training, and team projects and exhibitions. A semester-long study with nine students was done to validate the suggested method. After learning the technological basis and courses of VR, students are able to improve their abilities to design applications that apply to their research disciplines. The students are then given an in-depth interview and asked to response to a questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale consisting of nine items. Considering the feedback, several stages were added to enhance the educational impact on students. In another study (Jessica et al., 2023), it is reported that the most important part of using VR is understanding how it works, additionally how the VR is developed and designed determines how well it works in teaching and learning.

Furthermore, VR has also been used in treatment of various mental health disorders (Baghaei et al., 2021). VR has been adopted for exposure-based therapy, allowing people to experience tough circumstances or scenarios in a safe and controlled environment, all within the limits of a clinical setting (Bell et al., 2020). The effectiveness of VR exposure therapy has been established across a wide range of mental health issues.

A comprehensive VR learning material for mechanical engineering course had been developed and tested in Clemson University, USA (Syed et al., 2019). The study reported that outside assistance is required for the integration process because it entails using cutting-edge technologies that the instructor may or may not be familiar with. The same observation is reported by Elmqaddem (2019), where the authors reported the adoption of VR as well as augmented reality (AR) is education requires skills improvement not only by the developers but also the educators. AR is a similar technology, but unlike VR where the user is fully immersed in the virtual world, the AR user is able to observed virtual objects that are augmented to real world. There are several studies that implements AR for educational application. Tuli et al. (2022) developed an AR based learning experience to educate students about electronics engineering concepts and to evaluate the impact of AR intervention on students’ academic achievement levels, learning attitudes towards the subject, and individual attitudes towards AR technology. According to the experimental results, the AR group outperformed the control group in the post-test and received higher academic scores. The AR intervention has a significant beneficial effect on students’ learning attitudes. The study also discovered the AR adoption has a significant favourable correlation towards students’ learning and also their academic success. According to a study by Anuar et al. (2021), the use of AR learning materials has a beneficial impact on student motivation, as evidenced by the significant difference test results with increment of 42.99% for motivational level. Additionally, the percentage value of each motivational component experienced an increase. In support, Enzai et al. (2021) also shows that 57.1% of the engineering students involved in their study agree that AR improve interest and motivation compared to traditional method. The incorporation of visual representations of intricate structures and mechanisms has the capacity to enhance online learning environments through hands-on engagement with visual models (Zainal et al., 2022). Students are more interested in learning when VR or AR are used in the classroom because the adoption creates more realistic situations. This changes the students’ state of learning from silent to active. This kind of student-centred method makes it easier to solve problems in the real world, which is especially important for engineering students (Soliman et al., 2021). In addition, the technology aids in visualising the various parables that educators typically struggle to explain. Better visualization improved understanding and ability to remember the information learnt (Kuna et al., 2023).

Therefore, this study’s primary objective is to determine how effectively engineering students are using VR to aid in their education especially involving abstract concepts.

3. Methodology

This study employs a VR laboratory named, Merlin’s Playground (see Figure 2). The virtual laboratory is developed by a group of Multimedia University’s researchers (Neo et al., 2022b; Neo et al., 2022a). The Merlin’s Playground Research Programme consisted of 6 related research projects including this VR module. The objectives of the developed VR module are to provide better visualization and interaction on the subject matter of electromagnetism. Figure 1 shows the lobby of the laboratory, which is the starting point for any users using the VR. The robot seen in the figure is the guide of the laboratory; it provides audio instructions of the activities to the visitor. One of the room in the laboratory is called Ampere’s Lab (Figure 3). There are five activities in the Ampere’s Lab. The activities are based on the concept of magnetostatic, ex: Faraday’s experiment. The activities are developed in collaboration of subject matter expert who was teaching first year electronics engineering subject, ECT1026 Field Theory.

Figure 2. Merlin’s playground’s lobby.

Figure 3. Ampere’s Lab (a) entrance (b) Faraday’s experiment station and (c) other workstations.

The study involved two groups of Bachelor of electronics engineering students with total of 19 students who were taking the Field Theory subject. The students’ demographic distribution is shown in Figure 4. Three out of the 19 students are female and 16 are male students. The age range of the students are from 19 to 21 years old, with majority of them are 20 years old.

Figure 4. Participants’ demographic distribution (a) gender (b) age.

The VR activities is incorporated into the assignment of the subject which is mapped to its third learning outcome. The magnetostatic chapter was taught in the classroom prior to the VR sessions. The students were asked to form group consisting of 2-3 members. In total, 9 groups were formed. Each of the group was given 2 hours to conduct the virtual experiment. One VR goggles with a set of joystick was available at the VR station. The group members took turn to use the VR goggles and joystick, while a member is using the set, the other team members were able to observe what the student was experiencing via the monitor. Figure 5 shows one of the students doing the VR experiment and the monitor is displaying what is seen by the student via the VR goggles.

Figure 5. A student experiencing the VR activities.

There are quizzes given in the virtual laboratory. The quizzes are based on the activities done virtually and the theoretical knowledge learnt in class. After completion of the VR activities the students were asked to submit observation reports based on the activities conducted together with the solution of the given quizzes. They were given two weeks to submit the assignment report. During the submission, every student was asked to complete a survey consisting of 7 questions related to the VR activities. The list of questions is tabulated in Table 1. The first question aims to determine students’ familiarity with the technology, specifically whether they had prior experience as VR users. The students’ response for all other questions were measured using 5 scale Likert scale of; 5 strongly agree, 4 agree, 3 neutral, 2 disagree and 1 is strongly disagree. The reports submitted were graded to measure the students’ understanding of the concept behind the VR activities.

Table 1. Survey questions.

SQ1: I'm a VR user prior to this

SQ2: I was excited to try the VR activities

SQ3: The VR activities are exciting

SQ4: The VR activities help to enhance my understanding

SQ5: The VR activities motivate me to keep studying this subject

SQ6: I would like to have VR session for other topics or subjects

SQ7: I would recommend usage of modern and trending technologies in teaching and learning to be continued

4. Results

This section presented the results of the students’ response to the survey questions.

Based on the students’ response for question 1, it is found that out of the 19 students only 7 which is equivalent to 36.84% are VR users and familiar with the technology. Meanwhile, the rest had never experienced VR. This is illustrated in Figure 6. However, despite lacking experience handling the VR technology, most of the students only need basic guidance to operate the devices and able to complete the activities within the allocated time slot. None of the group required additional hours to complete the activities. This show that this generation of students are ready to adopt the VR technology. The gaming culture among the youngster contributed to better adoption of this sophisticated and complex technology (Lee et al., 2019). Two out of the three female students are VR users while 5 out of the 16 male students are VR users. The feedback from instructor regarding the technology adoption shows that unlike the young students, the instructor is facing some difficulties with the VR. This observation is similar to what is reported by other researchers as discussed in Section 2.

Figure 6. Percentage of VR users (SQ1).

Even though most students have never experienced VR, the positive anticipation to try the VR laboratory activities are impressive. Figure 7 proves that most of the students are excited to try VR. From the graphs, it can be seen that 9 (=47.4%) are strongly agree that they are excited to try the VR activities, followed by 6 (=31.6%) who agree that they are excited and the rest are neutral. None of the students give a negative response towards trying the VR activities. This shows that the VR technology usage in education excites the students and has the potential to increase their interest.

Figure 7. Response for SQ2.

Figure 8. Responses for SQ3.

Figure 9. Responses for SQ4.

Figure 8 illustrates the students’ responses for the third survey question. More than half of the students (=11) are strongly agreed that after trying the VR activities, the activities are indeed exciting. Three agree that the activities are exciting. Only 5 reported neutral response after trying the activities. None of the students reported negative feedback toward the VR activities. This observation is aligned with the response for SQ2.

Figure 9 presents an overview of the VR activities contribution toward the student understanding. Based on the findings, 47.37% (=9) strongly agree that VR improves their grasp of this topic, 31.6% (=6) agree and the rest have neutral opinion towards the contribution of VR in improving the understanding. Therefore, in can be conclude that VR help students to comprehend the fundamental knowledge of the abstract concept of magnetostatic being taught in class.

The effect of the VR activities towards improving students motivation and attitude towards the subject are illustrated in Figure 10. Overall majority of the students agree (8 agree and 6 strongly agree) that the VR experince motivate them towards studying the subject. There is common agreement among the students that VR could serve as a motivator to learn these topics. Despite the complexity of the technology and lack of experience of handling the technology by majority of the students, none reported that VR adoption as part of the assignment is demotivating them.

Figure 10. Responses for SQ5.

Figure 11 illustrates the students’ responses for implementation of VR for another subjects. Similar to the response for the previous survey question, the students are positively opened towards the idea of VR usage in other subject. None gave negative response towards this idea. Similarly, Figure 12 shows the students responded positively towards usage of modern and trending technologies generally.

Figure 11. Responses for SQ6.

Figure 12. Responses for SQ7.

The average scores for the magnetostatic topic received by the students of this batch is compared in Figure 13 with the previous batch where no VR activities were adopted. The overall average for the previous batch is 67.95%, while the overall average for the batch involve in this study is 83.03%. The fact that the percentage improved by 15.08% demonstrates that virtual reality is able to improve in learning process and assist the student in understanding the material.

Figure 13. Average marks percentage.

Based on the positive attitude of the students towards VR as observed via their responses on the survey questions and the proven better performance of the batch involved in the study, it can be concluded that the adoption of VR in engineering course has positive impact. It is recommended that higher learning institutions to incorporate VR in improving students learning experience especially in subjects with abstract concepts and challenging to visualized physically.

5. Discussion & future direction

It is clear from the findings that VR has the potential to provide students with a more engaging and immersive learning experience, leading to a better understanding of the subject matter. The findings are also supported by other research studies. For example, a study by Savage et al. (2010) at the Australian National University and at the University of Queensland found that students who used VR to learn about physics concepts performed better on exams than students who did not use VR. Oje et al. (2023) reviewed 51 works on VR-assisted engineering education and recognized the increasing trend is motivated by the ability to deliver immersive and interactive learning experiences. According to Campos et al. (2022) usage of virtual reality in education has enabled the possibility of representing abstract concepts and virtually manipulating them, providing a suitable platform for understanding mathematical concepts and their relation with the physical world. Furthermore, Halabi (2020) hypothesized that the integration of VR with a project-based learning approach not only facilitates the achievement of desirable goals in engineering design projects but also enhances course learning outcomes and fosters effective communication.

This study contributes to the expanding body of research recognizing the advantages of VR in engineering education. The findings, in particular, highlight its effectiveness for abstract concepts or topics like electromagnetics, which are challenging to visualize through traditional methods. VR allows students to interact with electromagnetic fields in a real-time, immersive environment. This can help students to develop a deeper understanding of these complex concepts.

This study has yielded valuable insights into how VR can enhance engineering education. Lessons learned suggest three specific ways in which VR can be effectively utilized; l) Visualization: VR can be employed to create intricate visualizations of complex engineering systems and concepts, surpassing the limitations of traditional methods. For instance, it can visualize the airflow around an airplane wing or the heat transfer in a heat exchanger or in this study the magnetic field. ll) Hands-on Learning: VR offers students hands-on learning experiences that would be too hazardous or costly to provide in real-world settings. It can be used to train students in operating industrial equipment or conducting intricate technical procedures. lll) Collaboration: VR can facilitate seamless collaboration between students and instructors. Virtual classrooms can be established, enabling students to collaborate on projects and attend lectures delivered by experts from across the globe.

When considering the use of VR for teaching engineering concepts, there are a number of important considerations. Firstly, cost is a key factor. VR headsets and other equipment can be expensive. Additionally, VR requires high specification computing platform. Hence, it is important to consider the budget available when making a decision about whether or not to use VR in the classroom. It might also be difficult to implement via remote learning. Specifically, not all students have access to VR headsets, and it is important to ensure that all students have an equal opportunity to participate in all learning activities. Next, technical expertise is also an important factor. VR systems can be complex to set up and use, and it is important to have staff with the necessary technical expertise to support the use of VR in the classroom. This study benefited from the assistance from the team that created Merlin’s Playground.

VR can be a powerful tool for teaching engineering concepts, but it is important to use it effectively. It is important to take pedagogical considerations (Oje et al., 2023) and design VR-based activities that are well-aligned with the learning objectives as well as provide students with opportunities for active learning and engagement. Additionally, another important aspect to be taken into consideration before adopting VR in education is the health and safety issues. Several works had reported this aspect of VR (Hurter et al., 2021; Nichols & Patel, 2002; Palmisano et al., 2017). The most notable issue is the cybersickness, caused by conflicting visual and vestibular sensory where visually the brain is detecting motion but the vestibular senses is not detecting the motion (Nichols & Patel, 2002). For future research, the health effect of VR need to be taken into consideration. Some precautionary protocol can be considered, among which is limiting and breaking the VR duration to shorter sessions (Rebenitsch & Owen, 2021). Studies also show different head mounted device (HMD) have different cybersickness effect to the wearer (Garrido et al., 2022; Hurter et al., 2021). Therefore, selection of HMD need to be done by considering both the financial and health aspects. Lastly, bigger number of participants is to be considered in future study. This would allow application of more advanced statistical analysis tools that provide a better insight.

6. Conclusions

VR is an emerging technology with boundless potential in the realm of engineering education. In this study, VR laboratory activities were seamlessly integrated into an engineering course designed for first-year electronics students through assignments. Specifically, these VR activities centered on the subject of magnetostatics within the field theory curriculum. It’s noteworthy that the majority of the students had little to no prior familiarity with VR technology. Nevertheless, their successful completion of these activities and their positive response to this innovative approach were remarkable. The introduction of VR activities yielded significantly better results, with the current batch of students outperforming their counterparts from the previous batch, who did not have the advantage of VR-enhanced learning. In conclusion, it is evident that VR holds immense promise as a valuable strategy in engineering education. In their recent study, Idris et al. (2023) underscored the alarming decline in student engagement with STEM education in Malaysia, a trend that carries potentially adverse, long-term repercussions for the nation’s development. This study anticipates that its implementation of technologies such as VR in teaching and learning activities will not only benefit engineering students by expanding their knowledge but could also stimulate students’ interest towards STEM courses in general.

Authors’ contributions

AKG and NAAA contributed to experimental design, analysis writing and editing. NTK and KAA contributed in validation, review, visualization and investigation. The project administration is prepared by NAAA. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Public interest statement

This study explores the domain of Virtual Reality (VR) and its innovative applications in engineering education. The revolutionary impact of virtual reality (VR) in transforming the learning and practical application of engineering skills among students. Our research improves practical training by including students in realistic simulations, enabling them to experiment in a safer and more dynamic manner. Virtual Reality (VR) serves as a means to connect theoretical knowledge with practical application, allowing for the analysis of intricate mechanical systems and the simulation of construction projects. This study highlights the way in which virtual reality (VR) excites and motivates the students. Furthermore, the captivating realm of VR-enhanced engineering education combines innovation with pedagogy to cultivate a future generation of proficient and empowered engineers.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge and thank the VR project members (Prof Dr. Angela Amphawan, Mr. Dzulhafidz Dzulkifli, Mr. Michael Seye Ekerin, Mr. Muhammad Tamim Faruq Bin Khairul 'Azmi, Mr. Sin Kai Soon, Mr. Md Waziullah Apu, Ms. Khadija Hamidani) and others for their hard work and contributions to the Merlin’s Playground research programme. Also, we would like to thank other Project leaders in the research programme (Prof. Dr. Neo Mai, Dr. Heidi Tan Yeen Ju, Dr. Roopesh A/L Sitharan, Mr. Khairi Shazwan Bin Dollmat and Mr. Muhammad Syahmi Bin Abd Aziz) for their support and effort in making the programme a success. We would also like to thank members of the TM R&D Grant (RDTC/231106) for their continuing effort, contribution and support to research the use of VR in student learning. We would like to thank the funder for their support and contribution to the success of this programme.

Disclosure statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Funding

The Merlin’s Playground Research Programme was funded by TM R&D Sdn. Bhd. (Malaysia) (RDTC/231106).

Notes on contributors

Anith Khairunnisa Ghazali

Anith Khairunnisa Ghazali is a postdoctoral researcher whose research focus on computational sciences and also control system engineering. She graduated with a PhD from Universiti Putra Malaysia in 2022. She has six years of experience in research and development through multiple collaboration with other universities and institutions. She desires to be a leading expert in the education sector, with the ultimate goal of contributing to the growth of education development through her enthusiasm for learning, innovative ideas, and dedication to building inclusive and accessible learning environments.

Nor Azlina Ab. Aziz

Nor Azlina Ab. Aziz is an associate professor at the Faculty of Engineering & Technology, Multimedia University. Her main research interest is in the field of computatonal intelligence including, artificial intelligence and soft computing. She is also interested in research involving technology advancement for education.

Kamarulzaman Ab. Aziz

Kamarulzaman Ab. Aziz is currently a professor at the Faculty of Business, Multimedia University. His research interest includes Cluster Development, Technology and Innovation Management, Entrepreneurship and Commercialization.

Neo Tse Kian

Prof. Dr. Neo Tse Kian is a Professor at the Faculty of Creative Multimedia, specialising in Multimedia Technology in Education and Constructivist Learning Environment. He is currently a member of the CAMELOT Research Centre. He is an MBOT Professional Technologist member as well as a panel member for the Creatibe Industries domain. He is also currenty an assessor of several government grants including FRGS, and PRGS and international journals.