IMMERSIVE TECHNOLOGIES IN EDUCATION: THE POTENTIAL OF VIRTUAL, AUGMENTED, AND MIXED REALITY

This article presents the results of an empirical study examining the potential of immersive technologies—Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR)—in the professional training of future teachers within the context of the digital transformation of education. The study aims to identify pedagogical competencies developed through the use of immersive educational environments and to analyze the advantages and limitations associated with implementing VR/AR/MR technologies in educational practice. The methodological framework is based on J.C. Flanagan’s Critical Incident Technique and the Behaviorally Anchored Rating Scales (BARS) developed by P.C. Smith and L.M. Kendall, adapted for the analysis of teachers’ digital competencies. The study involved 186 engineering students enrolled in teacher training programs. The findings indicate that participants primarily associate the use of VR/AR/MR technologies with the development of communicative, informational, and technological competencies, while also perceiving immersive environments as a means of enhancing interactivity and the practical orientation of learning. At the same time, several factors limiting technology implementation were identified, including insufficient digital preparedness of educators, infrastructural constraints, and organizational barriers. The findings suggest that, according to the participants’ perceptions, the effectiveness of immersive technologies may be associated not only with the technological availability of solutions but also with teachers’ level of digital competence and the quality of technology integration into the educational environment.

1. Ferrington G., Loge K. Virtual Reality in Education // Educational Technology. – 2015. – Vol. 32(3). – P. 30–35.

2. Makransky G., Petersen G.B. The Cognitive Affective Model of Immersive Learning (CAMIL): A Theoretical Research-Based Model of Learning in Immersive Virtual Reality // Educational Psychology Review. – 2021. – Vol. 33. – P. 937–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2

3. Jaziar Radianti, Tim A. Majchrzak, Jennifer Fromm, Isabell Wohlgenannt, A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda, Computers & Education, Volume 147, 2020,103778. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103778

4. J. Motejlek and E. Alpay, "Taxonomy of Virtual and Augmented Reality Applications in Education," in IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 415-429, 1 June 2021, doi: 10.1109/TLT.2021.3092964

5. Hamilton, D., McKechnie, J., Edgerton, E. et al. Immersive virtual reality as a pedagogical tool in education: a systematic literature review of quantitative learning outcomes and experimental design. J. Comput. Educ. 8, 1–32 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-020-00169-2

6. Gallagher A.G., McClure N., McGuigan J., Crothers I., Browning J. Simulation–based Surgical Training Using AR // Surgical Endoscopy. – 2010. – Vol. 13(4). – P. 451–455.

7. Vidak A., Movre Šapić I., Mešić V., Gomzi V. Augmented Reality Technology in Teaching: A Systematic Review of Opportunities and Challenges // Education Sciences. – 2023. – Vol. 13(11). – Article 1150. doi:10.1088/1361-6404/ad0e84

8. Schmidt A., Stewart T. Second Life for Medical and Educational Training // Journal of Virtual Worlds Research. – 2009. – Vol. 2(1).

9. Koumpouros, Y. Revealing the true potential and prospects of augmented reality in education. Smart Learn. Environ. 11, 2 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00288-0

10. Bekteshi, L. Education in the Era of AI and Immersive Technologies: A Systematic Review. Journal of Research in Engineering and Computer Sciences (JRECS), Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 1–14 (2025). https://doi.org/10.63002/jrecs.31.779

11. Cabero-Almenara, J., Gutiérrez-Castillo, JJ., Barroso-Osuna, J. et al. Digital Teaching Competence According to the DigCompEdu Framework. Comparative Study in Different Latin American Universities. J. New Approaches Educ. Res. 12, 276–291 (2023). https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2023.7.1452

12. Okoye, K., Hussein, H., Arrona-Palacios, A. et al. Impact of digital technologies upon teaching and learning in higher education in Latin America: an outlook on the reach, barriers, and bottlenecks. Educ Inf Technol 28, 2291–2360 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11214-1

13. Aimicheva, G.; Shaikhanova, A.; Iklassova, K.; Tazabekova, P.; Nazyrova, A.; Kadyr, Y. Fostering Teachers’ Digital Competence in AI-Supported Learning Environments: Implications for Interactive Teaching and Student Achievement. Appl. Sci.- 2025. – Vol. 15 (12597). https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312597.

14. Flanagan J.C. The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological Bulletin. 1954. Vol. 51(4). P. 327–358. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061470

15. Smith, P. C., & Kendall, L. Retranslation of expectations: An approach to the construction of unambiguous anchors for rating scales. Journal of Applied Psychology. -1963. - 47(2), 149–155. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0047060

16. Wang, D., & Huang, X. Transforming education through artificial intelligence and immersive technologies: enhancing learning experiences. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(7), 4546–4565 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2025.2465451.