Immersive Worlds for Metalearning: Revolutionizing Scientific Understanding in the Metaverse

Sana Jamshaid

doi:10.5772/intechopen.1012652

Abstract

This chapter explores the transformative potential of incorporating the metaverse, artificial intelligence (AI), and metaintelligence into science education. Traditional educational approaches, such as textbooks, lectures, and static visual aids, do not always adequately explain complex concepts such as atomic structure, quantum physics, and space–time theory. Animation and film have piqued people’s interest, but new technology allows us to experience things firsthand rather than just explain them. The immersive, interactive, and adaptive virtual environments in the metaverse allow students to experience scientific phenomena very closely, as students can walk through atomic structures, observe quantum interactions, and manipulate dynamic simulations. The AI-powered personalization and metaintelligence tailor lesson content to the learning style of the student, improving comprehension and retention of material. This chapter also explores case studies, theoretical foundations, practical frameworks, and ethical issues related to the implementation of metaverse education, emphasizing the possible use of immersive technologies to bridge the gap between conceptual scientific ideas and concrete interpretations.

Keywords

virtual reality (VR) in classrooms
metaintelligence
future of science education
cognitive learning
metaversal revolution

Author Information

Show +

Sana Jamshaid *
- Department of Chemistry, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, South Korea

*Address all correspondence to: sanajamshaid41@gmail.com

1. Introduction

I remember staring at diagrams of atoms in my textbooks as a student. Little circles, arrows, and labels showed the movement of particles. But honestly, most of the time, it just looked like a bunch of lines on a page. And this has been a long-standing challenge in science education: How do we make something visible that we cannot see?

We are living in an era of unprecedented technological change, and with every advancement, our learning tools and educational expectations continue to change. Instead of reading about cells, the metaverse can immerse us in science, allowing us to walk through cells instead of imagining them. Instead of simply memorizing diagrams of atoms, we can stand on the edge of an unimaginable black hole in real time and watch atoms spin. Therefore, I believe science learning will move from memorization and listening to actual real-time experiences with the help of the metaverse, AI, and metaintelligence. This chapter explores how science learning is moving from passive listening to active discovery, from memorizing diagrams to experiencing phenomena. These technologies are not only improving the quality of education but are also fundamentally reshaping what it means to truly experience science.

2. Theoretical foundations

For decades, educational researchers and cognitive scientists have developed important theories that explain how knowledge is acquired, processed, and retained (Figure 1). Three foundational theories, such as constructivist learning theory, cognitive load theory, and embodied cognition, provide a roadmap for building learning environments that enable active and meaningful engagement rather than passive reception. Each of these theories offers a different perspective on how humans truly absorb and retain knowledge [1–3].

Figure 1.
Theoretical foundations of learning.

The constructivist perspective, developed through the work of Jean Piaget (1970) and Lev Vygotsky (1978), asserts that knowledge is not passively received but actively constructed through interaction and collaboration [4]. In a traditional classroom, students might read about ecosystems with pictures or watch documentaries, but the metaverse can provide an opportunity for students to immerse themselves in the ecosystems, measure water pH in a simulated rainforest stream, observe predator–prey interactions, and discuss intervention strategies with their peers in real time. Dalgarno and Lee (2010) found that 3D virtual environments significantly improve spatial knowledge, engagement, and conceptual understanding by enabling authentic and interactive tasks [5]. However, a challenge explained by cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988) is that enriching interactions alone are not enough if they overly drain our cognitive resources [6]. Sweller distinguishes between three types of mental load:

Intrinsic load: The inherent complexity of the material [7].

Extraneous load: Mental effort wasted on poor instructional design [8].

Germane load: Effort invested in building and refining mental models [9].

Traditional methods often overburden students with irrelevant demands, such as interpreting static diagrams of quantum entanglement [10]. In contrast, the metaverse directly visualizes these phenomena, allowing learners to see entangled particles react instantaneously across space [11]. By reducing extraneous load and increasing relevant load, immersive 3D models help learners focus on meaning-making rather than decoding, which is consistent with Makransky and Petersen’s [12] findings that VR-based science simulations improve learning efficiency and motivation [12].

Finally, embodied cognition [13] emphasizes that thinking is deeply connected to physical movement and sensory experience [13]. In immersive environments, students can walk through a DNA double helix, bend the grid lines of a simulated space–time structure, or assemble molecular chains with their virtual hands. These kinesthetic interactions anchor abstract scientific concepts in physical experience. This connection is supported by research by Lindgren and Johnson-Glenberg [14], who showed that physical interaction in learning environments improves conceptual understanding and recall [14].

Constructivism, cognitive load theory, and embodied cognition theory collectively help to explain why immersive technologies such as the metaverse are not only visually striking but also educationally transformative [15–17]. These technologies shift science education from observing space to inhabiting it, making learning not only more engaging but also more deeply rooted in the way humans naturally construct knowledge (see Figure 2).

Figure 2.
Theoretical foundations of immersive science learning in the metaverse. This image was generated using OpenAI (2025, ChatGPT (DALL·E) (image generated on 11 August 2025), using the prompt “The metaverse: Transforming science learning from passive observation to active, embodied experience.”

3. Challenges in traditional science education

We learn basic science concepts that form the foundation of science, such as the fact that matter is made up of tiny particles called atoms and that energy, like light and sound, travels in waves, simply by thinking about them every day. But when we move beyond these foundations and delve into topics such as atomic structure, quantum physics, and space–time, things become much more complex, and this is where many students begin to struggle. In many traditional classrooms, these difficult topics are often taught in ways that make understanding even more challenging. Here are a few examples to illustrate the challenges we face in traditional science teaching.

3.1 Atomic structure

It is often introduced using the Bohr model, in which electrons orbit the nucleus in perfect circles, like planets orbiting the sun. However, electrons are not fixed particles and behave more like waves in a natural cloud. Therefore, it is difficult to distinguish between the apparent orbital model and the actual behavior of electrons for many students.

3.2 Quantum physics

It introduces phenomena that challenge what we think we know about how the world works. Particles at the atomic nucleus level exhibit behaviors that oppose conventional thinking, such as the ability to pass through boundaries (quantum tunneling) and exist in multiple states simultaneously (superposition). These concepts are typically taught in schools using complex theories and theoretical algebra, which confuses students and leaves them disconnected from the phenomena.

3.3 Space–time

It is a concept that blends the three dimensions of space (length, width, and height) with time to create a fourth-dimensional “fabric” that can be bent, stretched, and distorted. This concept is fundamental to understanding gravity and the structure of the universe in Einstein’s theory of relativity. These concepts are typically taught in schools using complex theories and theoretical algebra, which confuse students and leave them disconnected from the phenomena.

In these fields, a noticeable trend arises: Conventional pedagogical approaches excessively depend on static representations, imposing a significant cognitive load on students while failing to provide experience-based foundational knowledge. This typically leads to shallow memorization instead of deep understanding, which makes people less curious and causes science to seem like a collection of random data rather than a cohesive investigation of the cosmos.

4. Metaverse: Unlocking a new dimension for scientific discovery and learning

The metaverse represents a revolutionary shift in how science is taught and experienced: Instead of passively reading textbooks and watching videos, students can enter immersive, interactive, three-dimensional worlds and actively explore complex scientific phenomena (Figure 3) [18–21]. Through these hands-on interactions, complex concepts are transformed into vivid, concrete experiences, making difficult concepts easier to understand and learning more enjoyable.

Figure 3.
Traditional teaching often relies on static images and passive learning, while the metaverse enables immersive, interactive experiences that bring abstract scientific concepts to life. This image was generated using OpenAI (2025, ChatGPT (DALL·E)) (image generated on 11 August 2025), using the prompt “Traditional vs. metaverse science learning: Passive reading vs. immersive exploration.”

Here is how the metaverse directly tackles the challenges that traditional science education struggles with:

4.1 Exploring the invisible subatomic world

Suno and Ohno [22] presented “Virtual Hydrogen,” a virtual reality (VR) learning tool designed to promote understanding of atomic and quantum phenomena in physical chemistry education. Their study demonstrates that VR allows learners to immerse themselves in a three-dimensional representation of the hydrogen atom, going beyond the two-dimensional illustrations of traditional textbooks. In a virtual environment, students can visualize and explore the spatial distribution of electron clouds and observe quantum mechanical effects, such as tunneling, in an interactive and intuitive manner. By translating complex theoretical concepts into experiential, manipulable phenomena, Virtual Hydrogen provides an educational bridge between formal quantum theory and student understanding, highlighting the value of VR as a tool for deepening conceptual understanding in science education [22].

4.2 Performing simulated experiments beyond the classroom

According to Saphira et al. [23], the metaverse represents a paradigm shift in STEM education by enabling science learning experiences in an immersive virtual environment, where learners can safely engage in molecular- and atomic-level experiments, such as manipulating particles and combining elements, and receive instant feedback from the system. Additionally, the metaverse enables the visualization of complex scientific principles that are inaccessible in physical environments. For example, the theory of relativity phenomena, such as time dilation and space contraction, can be experienced by simulating travel at near the speed of light in an immersive environment. In this way, complex mathematical concepts can be transformed into visual, interactive experiences for deeper conceptual understanding and increased learner engagement in science education [23].

4.3 Experiencing time dilation and relativity

The visualization study by Creagh et al. (2009) and the virtual relativity studies by Boffi et al. [24] demonstrated that VR environments can simulate relativistic distortions of space–time, allowing learners to directly perceive phenomena such as time dilation and length contraction. In this interactive environment, students observe how clocks slow down and distances shrink as they approach relativistic speeds, helping them intuitively understand principles that are usually conveyed through complex mathematical formulas [24].

Furthermore, VR-based modules can extend to quantum phenomena; the modification of one particle instantaneously influences its entangled partner across virtual space (Figure 4), referred to by Einstein as “spooky action at a distance.” Such immersive demonstrations transform theoretical abstractions into observable and manipulable experiences, fostering both conceptual comprehension and critical inquiry.

Figure 4.
Quantum entanglement: Entangled particles instantly mirror each other changes. This image was generated using OpenAI (2025, ChatGPT (DALL·E)) (image generated on 11 August 2025), using the prompt “Quantum entanglement conceptual illustration.”

5. AI and metaintelligence: Personalized learning

Education has long followed a “one-size-fits-all” model: Students sit in the same classrooms, read the same textbooks, and take the same tests. But the reality is that not all students learn the same way. Some understand quickly; others take longer. Some prefer visual cues, others respond to stories, and still others learn best through hands-on experience. However, our traditional education systems are largely unable to adapt to these differences, which is where artificial intelligence (AI) and metaintelligence come in. The metaverse provides the stage for immersive learning, and AI and metaintelligence are the brains and heart that bring this stage to life [25].

Artificial intelligence acts as your personal tutor, observing your learning pace, weaknesses, and interests, and adapting the material to help you understand it better. For example, if you are faced with a problem that requires you to select a concept, AI will become your assistant and explain everything to you at your level of understanding. If it is deemed too easy, it will increase the difficulty level to maintain your interest. AI gives precise, personalized feedback tailored to your strengths and weaknesses. It even adapts to your learning style, providing visuals if you understand better with pictures, narration if you understand better with audio, and simulations if you prefer an interactive learning style [26, 27]. Numerous AI platforms we are already familiar with, such as ChatGPT and Google Socratic (which provide instant explanations in different styles based on user questions), Grammarly (which provides personalized writing improvement suggestions), Duolingo (which adapts language lessons based on user mistakes), and Consensus (which instantly extracts insights from thousands of scientific papers), demonstrate how AI can personalize both learning and innovation.

Metaintelligence is a revolutionary approach that goes beyond traditional teaching methods. It considers student mood, interaction, and motivation to detect when learners are struggling, losing attention, making more mistakes, or becoming frustrated. This system creates a more engaging learning environment for challenging subjects by slowing down lessons, changing the way material is presented, and providing supportive feedback rather than continuing unadjusted. It also enhances collaboration by pairing students and turning group activities into opportunities for joint discovery. Platforms such as Classcraft and Minecraft can turn lessons into challenges for students and reward them for attentiveness and persistence, which keeps them engaged. Research shows that AI-driven platforms such as DreamBox, Smart Sparrow, Classcraft, Minecraft, and CogBooks effectively adapt learning, improving student performance and engagement [28–31].

Artificial intelligence and metaintelligence are working together to make learning dynamic and personalized, evolving from rote learning to an experience that is tailored to each student’s cognitive style, learning pace, and emotional state. The future of education may favor guided learning experiences over traditional classroom learning, allowing each student to pursue their own unique learning journey. AI provides smart adaptation, while metaintelligence provides emotional connection, and together they transform learning into an experience of discovery.

6. Case studies from the frontlines of the metaverse classroom

Case studies provide insightful information about how customized AI tools and immersive learning environments are transforming the way education is taught. Table 1 details the problems, solutions, findings, and limitations of each study and demonstrates improved learning outcomes while highlighting the remaining challenges and gaps. Comparing these innovations side by side helps us understand their potential and the conditions for success (or failure).

Theme	Cross-case insights	Gaps/limitations	Future directions
Engagement vs. mastery	All studies reported increased curiosity, motivation, and short-term retention.	Not long-term mastery or transfer.	Conduct longitudinal studies to track sustained knowledge and real-world application.
Integration with practice	Virtual laboratories and simulations reduce risk and allow repetition.	May displace essential hands-on skills, narrowing authentic laboratory experiences.	Use blended models that combine immersive tools with physical experiments.
Assessment and curriculum fit	Tools encourage responsibility, systems thinking, and creativity.	Outcomes are often attitudinal, with weak alignment to standardized assessments or curricular goals.	Align immersive learning with curricula and formal testing frameworks.

Table 1.

Comparative synthesis of case studies.

6.1 ATOM: VR for learning atomic structure

In [32], Bhowmick et al. developed ATOM, a head-mounted VR learning interface designed to teach ninth-grade students about atomic structure, chemical bonding, and important historical experiments in atomic theory. In preliminary testing with 10 students, ATOM significantly increased students' interest, motivation, and playfulness. However, students also noted some usability issues with the interface [32].

6.2 Virtual environments in high school biology

Páez-Andrade et al. [33] conducted a case study in an Ecuadorian secondary school to evaluate the impact of a virtual environment on high school biology learning. Using a quantitative and descriptive approach with two different measurement instruments, they found that educators perceived technology-assisted learning positively. Furthermore, their findings suggest that the virtual environment supported improved academic performance and increased students’ interest, attention, and motivation in biology classes [33].

6.3 Gamified virtual chemistry laboratories

In [34], Tauber et al. created two gamified virtual chemistry experiments in 2022, using interactive videos and 360-degree virtual tours. These served as a complete replacement for distance learning students and as an additional learning resource for in-person students. These virtual experiments allowed students to learn theory at their own pace while engaging in an immersive environment. When asked about this method, both groups of students were positive about it. All stated that the virtual laboratory was a great way to learn and that they valued understanding concepts over rushing to get things done. There was clear potential for this delivery method to allow educators to adapt to the Open University and distance learning paradigm [34].

6.4 Robotics and physics

Hornung et al. developed three immersive and interactive robotic learning platforms in 2023: TOURINGS, RoLe4D, and Robot Hub Academy. These platforms are aimed at manufacturing professionals, remote university students, and school-age boys and girls. Students benefit from interactive video lessons and XR environments, operate collaborative robots in virtual training, gain more hands-on experience in remote laboratories, and engage with STEM education. These projects demonstrate that robotics education is becoming more accessible and widespread, that the classroom is becoming more closely connected to the real world of work, and that people of all ages and learning levels are becoming increasingly interested in and actively participating in robotics [35].

6.5 Space exploration

In [36], Lee et al. designed an immersive virtual reality system (IVRS) that allowed students to “fly around” a scientifically accurate solar system constructed from NASA photographs. By changing perspectives, calculating distances, and dynamically moving through space, students explored planetary orbits, Earth–Moon interactions, seasonal variations, and more. Over 80% of the 22 undergraduate science education students who took the test said that IVRS significantly deepened their understanding of astronomy and increased their immersion in learning, proving that immersive virtual reality (VR) can transform abstract space science into an accessible and engaging experience [36].

6.6 Challenges in marine biology

The Marine Biology VR Learning Support System, developed by Akaike et al. in [37], immerses students in a virtual underwater world, allowing them to observe and experience realistic simulations of fish swimming. This technology aims to deepen students’ understanding of the field of marine biology by providing a fun and interactive experience. VR systems allow students to explore aquatic ecosystems, observe fish behavior, and learn about marine life dynamics in a safe virtual environment. The immersive learning resource has been proven to increase understanding and engagement with complex scientific topics [37].

These studies, conducted at various levels of science education, demonstrate how emerging technologies such as the metaverse, AI, and metaintelligence are transforming traditional teaching and learning. However, their true value will depend on how well they are integrated into more equitable and inclusive educational institutions that balance innovation, rigor, accessibility, and long-term impact (Table 1).

7. Implementation framework: Building the future of science learning

To realize the vision of incorporating metalearning into science education, educational institutions need more than just enthusiasm; they need a clear, strategic roadmap for transforming traditional classrooms into metaverse classrooms, where students can gain hands-on experience with theoretical scientific concepts in an immersive environment. Here is how this journey unfolds:

7.1 Laying the groundwork

To provide students with an immersive experience, classrooms need to be equipped with a strong network that transports learners into immersive worlds, a stable Internet that ensures a smooth, real-time experience, haptic controllers that allow them to “feel” molecules, and spatial audio systems that create realistic soundscapes.

7.2 Crafting the experience

Developing effective metaverse technology requires collaboration between educators who understand curriculum objectives, designers who create engaging virtual worlds, and AI experts who personalize learning paths. This collaboration enables the creation of modular lessons that fit into existing science curricula for both teachers and learners and are accessible across a variety of devices, from sophisticated VR equipment to everyday smartphones.

7.3 Empowering the teachers

To navigate this new educational landscape, educators need training on how to leverage technology and new teaching methods to harness the unique possibilities of the metaverse and confidently engage students in immersive learning. Workshops on implementing immersive pedagogies and building vibrant communities of practice allow educators to share tips, solve challenges, and continue to hone their skills together.

7.4 Ethical considerations

Before, immersive technologies raised complex ethical considerations that are fundamental to educational effectiveness and learning outcomes. Case studies have shown that immersive technologies can improve engagement and short-term retention, but the impact varies depending on inclusivity, cognitive load, governance, and equitable access. Motivational tools that are effective in one setting may have limited effectiveness in another, where structural supports are weaker or underlying inequalities inhibit meaningful engagement. These characteristics, outlined in Table 2, overlap with the realities of the educational setting. Therefore, to create lasting and meaningful learning outcomes, ethical application must be incorporated as a fundamental element.

Dimension	Critical issue	Implications	Proposed solutions
Equity and access	Expensive VR/AI tools; lack of teacher support.	Risk of wider achievement gaps and dual-level education.	Public–private collaborations, small-scale designs, grants, and teacher preparation.
Data governance and privacy	Collection of biometric, behavioral, and performance data.	Potential surveillance, misuse, and lack of informed consent.	Transparency, voluntary agreement, privacy, and unbiased supervision.
Bias and inclusivity	Narrow datasets reinforcing stereotypes.	Minority students are excluded, and adaptive feedback is unfair.	Inclusive data collection, algorithmic transparency, participatory design.
Well-being and cognitive load	Overstimulation, VR-induced discomfort, cognitive overload.	Frustration, mental fatigue, developmental risks.	Developmental boundaries, structured experiences, and hybrid learning models.
Ethical integration	Lack of systemic frameworks.	Inconsistent hiring: Ethical risks remain.	Cross-sector collaboration, standards, policy guidance, teacher ethical literacy.

Table 2.

Ethical considerations.

The success of immersive learning depends on developing strategies that align technological innovation with teacher development, organizational support, and curriculum design. Cross-disciplinary collaboration can proactively address potential gaps, from unequal access to unintended cognitive and social consequences. Immersive technologies implemented with ethical foresight can create classrooms that are engaging, inclusive, and foster deep conceptual understanding. Conversely, neglecting these considerations risks undermining both educational effectiveness and equity.

By synthesizing evidence from case studies and ethical analysis, a core principle emerges: The transformative potential of immersive science education relies not only on innovative tools but also on ethical and systemic integration. Future research, policy, and practice must focus on sustainable, accountable, and equitable approaches that support sustained learning, foster trust, and expand access.

By combining robust infrastructure, engaging content, well-prepared educators, and ethical guardrails, our institutions can successfully take metaverse science education from a futuristic concept to an everyday classroom reality, connecting students with the wonder of science.

The fusion of AI, metaintelligence, and the metaverse promises to dramatically transform science education. By incorporating these cutting-edge tools, we can unlock the full potential of science education, fostering curiosity, expanding knowledge, and nurturing the success of the next generation. Imagine a future where classrooms are connected not by walls or borders but by continents, and students from all over the world come together in the same virtual environment (Figure 5). This distributed learning environment removes geographical limitations, making high-quality science education accessible to everyone, anywhere, and anytime.

Figure 5.
Global learners united through AI-powered immersive education. This image was generated using OpenAI (2025, ChatGPT (DALL·E)) (image generated on 11 August 2025), using the prompt “AI-assisted global digital learning environment.”

8. Conclusion

The combination of AI, metaintelligence, and the metaverse represents a paradigm shift in science education, where using these tools can transform theoretical concepts into immersive, interactive experiences, moving from memorization to true conceptual understanding. In a metaverse classroom, students can actively explore scientific reality by observing electron orbitals, walking through atoms, and interacting directly with the dynamics of physical and quantum systems. This shift from explanation to experience creates new possibilities for customizable, flexible learning paths that meet the needs of diverse learners. However, careful assessment of infrastructure, accessibility, and ethical implications is essential for successful implementation. The ability to reimagine the teaching and learning of complex scientific concepts through immersive education holds the potential to ultimately improve understanding, retention, and impact for future generations.

Acknowledgments

The author is thankful to Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, South Korea, for facilitating the completion of this chapter.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

1. Ausubel DP. The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Springer Science & Business Media Dordrecht, Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000, eBook Published in 2012; DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7.
2. Ausubel DP. Preview of basic concepts of meaningful reception learning and retention. In: The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Dordrecht: Springer, Netherlands; 2000: 38–66. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7_3.
3. Kim JW, Ritter FE, Koubek RJ. An integrated theory for improved skill acquisition and retention in the three stages of learning. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2013;14(1):22–37. DOI: 10.1080/1464536X.2011.573008.
4. Oeberst A, Halatchliyski I, Kimmerle J, Cress U. Knowledge construction in Wikipedia: A systemic-constructivist analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2014;23(2):149–176. DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2014.888352.
5. Lee MJ, Dalgarno B. Scaffolding discovery learning in 3D virtual environments: Challenges and considerations for instructional design. In: Virtual Immersive and 3D Learning Spaces: Emerging Technologies and Trends Edited by Shalin Hai-Jew. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2011. p. 138–169. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-825-4.ch008.
6. Абдукаххорова М, Хазраткулова Э. Cognitive load theory and its application for learning. Инновации В Современной Лингвистике И Преподавании Языков. 2025;1(1):143–145. DOI: 10.47689/ZTTCTOI-vol1-iss1-pp143-145.
7. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction. 1994;4(4):295–312. DOI: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5.
8. Van Merriënboer JJG, Ayres P. Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2005;53(3):5–13. DOI: 10.1007/BF02504793.
9. Leppink J, van Gog T, Paas F, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory: Researching and planning teaching to maximise learning. In: Cleland, Jennifer, J. Durning, Steven. Researching Medical Education. Wiley-Blackwell; 2015. p. 207–218. DOI: 10.1002/9781118838983.ch18..
10. Ruan S, Yuan R, Guan Q, Lin Y, Mao Y, Jiang W, et al. Venus: A geometrical representation for quantum state visualization. Computer Graphics Forum. 2023;42(3):247–258. DOI: 10.1111/cgf.14827.
11. Fickler R, Krenn M, Lapkiewicz R, Ramelow S, Zeilinger A. Real-time imaging of quantum entanglement. Scientific Reports. 2013;3(1):1914. DOI: 10.1038/srep01914.
12. Makransky G, Petersen GB. The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review. 2021;33(3):937–958. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2.
13. Wilson M. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2002;9(4):625–636. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196322.
14. Lindgren R, Johnson-Glenberg M. Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educational Researcher. 2013;42(8):445–452. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X13511661.
15. Kye B, Han N, Kim E, Park Y, Jo S. Educational applications of metaverse: Possibilities and limitations. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions. 2021;18:32. DOI: 10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.32.
16. Onu P, Pradhan A, Mbohwa C. Potential to use metaverse for future teaching and learning. Education and Information Technologies. 2024;29(7):8893–8924. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-023-12167-9.
17. Chamola V, Peelam MS, Mittal U, Hassija V, Singh A, Pareek R, et al. Metaverse for education: Developments, challenges, and future direction. Computer Applications in Engineering Education. 2025;33(3):e70018. DOI: 10.1002/cae.70018.
18. Matovu H, Ungu DAK, Won M, Tsai CC, Treagust DF, Mocerino M, Tasker R. Immersive virtual reality for science learning: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Studies in Science Education. 2023;59(2):205–244. DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2022.2082680.
19. Cooper G, Thong LP, Tang KS. Transforming science education with virtual reality: An immersive representations model. Educational Media International. 2024;61(3):229–251. DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2024.2389348.
20. Kuhail MA, ElSayary A, Farooq S, Alghamdi A. Exploring immersive learning experiences: A survey. Informatics. 2022;9(4):75. DOI: 10.3390/informatics9040075.
21. Tene T, Guevara M, Moreano G, Vera J, Vacacela Gomez C. The role of immersive virtual realities: Enhancing science learning in higher education. Emerging Science Journal. 2024;8:88–102. DOI: 10.28991/ESJ-2024-SIED1-06.
22. Suno H, Ohno N. Virtual Hydrogen, a virtual reality education tool in physics and chemistry. Procedia Computer Science. 2023;25:2283–2291. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2023.10.219.
23. Saphira HV, Prahani BK, Hariyono E, Marianus M. Metaverse: A paradigm shift in STEM education for science learning beyond the review. E3S Web of Conferences. 2024;482:04004. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202448204004.
24. Boffi A, Puppin E, Contran M. 20 July. Virtual relativity: An interactive simulation of the special theory of relativity in virtual reality. arXiv. 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.01442.
25. Almeman K, EL Ayeb F, Berrima M, Issaoui B, Morsy H. The integration of AI and metaverse in education: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences. 2025;15(2):863. DOI: 10.3390/app15020863.
26. Chen L, Chen P, Lin Z. Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access. 2020;8:75264–75278. DOI. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.
27. Holmes W, Tuomi I. State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of Education. 2022;57(4):542–570. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12530.
28. Putra A, Gram D, Stefanou C, Santoro D. The use of adaptive learning technology to enhance learning in clinical veterinary dermatology. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education. 2022;9(1):118–125. DOI: 10.3138/jvme-2020-0069.
29. Foster ME. Evaluating the impact of supplemental computer-assisted math instruction in elementary school: A conceptual replication. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2024;17(1):94–118. DOI: 10.1080/19345747.2023.2174919.
30. Barbieri CA, Rodrigues J, Dyson N, Jordan NC. Improving fraction understanding in sixth graders with mathematics difficulties: Effects of a number line approach combined with cognitive learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2020;112(3):628–643. DOI: 10.1037/edu0000383.
31. Slattery EJ, Butler D, O’Leary M, Marshall K. Teachers’ experiences of using Minecraft Education in primary school: An Irish perspective. Irish Educational Studies. 2023;43(4):965–984. DOI: 10.1080/03323315.2023.2185276.
32. Bhowmick S, Kaushik A, Bhatia R, Sorathia K. ATOM: HMD-VR interface to learn atomic structure, bonding and historical research experiments. Proceedings of the 26th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. 2020;pp1–2. DOI: 10.1145/3385956.3422120.
33. Páez-Andrade M, Pazos-Espinoza K, Pérez-Silva P, Galarza CR. Virtual environments in learning the biology of high school students. intelligent human systems integration (IHSI 2022). Integrating People and Intelligent Systems. 2022;22(22). DOI: 10.54941/ahfe100977.
34. Tauber AL, Levonis SM, Schweiker SS. Gamified virtual laboratory experience for in-person and distance students. Journal of Chemical Education. 2022;99(3):1183–1189. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00642.
35. Hornung L, Puljiz D, Augenstein P, Gonzalez C, Wurll C, Bellalouna F. Fostering robotics education through immersive and interactive learning content. in edulearn23 proceedings. IATED. 2023:6425–6433. DOI: 10.21125/edulearn.2023.1708.
36. Lee H, Park ST, Kim HS, Lee H Students’ understanding of astronomical concepts enhanced by an immersive Virtual Reality system (IVRS). In: 3rd International Conference on Multimedia and Information and Communication Technologies in Education. Available from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=666be0141d6df58d8b7de56729fa27eefe3f3125 [Accessed: 2005-June].
37. Akaike M, Takishita Y, Wenjun L, Hoshino J. Nicograph International (NICOInt), Tokyo, Japan, 2021; 2021:86–89. DOI: 10.1109/NICOINT52941.2021.00023.

[1] 1. Ausubel DP. The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Springer Science & Business Media Dordrecht, Originally published by Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000, eBook Published in 2012; DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7.

[2] 2. Ausubel DP. Preview of basic concepts of meaningful reception learning and retention. In: The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View. Dordrecht: Springer, Netherlands; 2000: 38–66. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7_3.

[3] 3. Kim JW, Ritter FE, Koubek RJ. An integrated theory for improved skill acquisition and retention in the three stages of learning. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. 2013;14(1):22–37. DOI: 10.1080/1464536X.2011.573008.

[4] 4. Oeberst A, Halatchliyski I, Kimmerle J, Cress U. Knowledge construction in Wikipedia: A systemic-constructivist analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2014;23(2):149–176. DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2014.888352.

[5] 5. Lee MJ, Dalgarno B. Scaffolding discovery learning in 3D virtual environments: Challenges and considerations for instructional design. In: Virtual Immersive and 3D Learning Spaces: Emerging Technologies and Trends Edited by Shalin Hai-Jew. Hershey, PA: IGI Global Scientific Publishing; 2011. p. 138–169. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61692-825-4.ch008.

[6] 6. Абдукаххорова М, Хазраткулова Э. Cognitive load theory and its application for learning. Инновации В Современной Лингвистике И Преподавании Языков. 2025;1(1):143–145. DOI: 10.47689/ZTTCTOI-vol1-iss1-pp143-145.

[7] 7. Sweller J. Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and Instruction. 1994;4(4):295–312. DOI: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5.

[8] 8. Van Merriënboer JJG, Ayres P. Research on cognitive load theory and its design implications for e-learning. Educational Technology Research and Development. 2005;53(3):5–13. DOI: 10.1007/BF02504793.

[9] 9. Leppink J, van Gog T, Paas F, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory: Researching and planning teaching to maximise learning. In: Cleland, Jennifer, J. Durning, Steven. Researching Medical Education. Wiley-Blackwell; 2015. p. 207–218. DOI: 10.1002/9781118838983.ch18..

[10] 10. Ruan S, Yuan R, Guan Q, Lin Y, Mao Y, Jiang W, et al. Venus: A geometrical representation for quantum state visualization. Computer Graphics Forum. 2023;42(3):247–258. DOI: 10.1111/cgf.14827.

[11] 11. Fickler R, Krenn M, Lapkiewicz R, Ramelow S, Zeilinger A. Real-time imaging of quantum entanglement. Scientific Reports. 2013;3(1):1914. DOI: 10.1038/srep01914.

[12] 12. Makransky G, Petersen GB. The cognitive affective model of immersive learning (CAMIL): A theoretical research-based model of learning in immersive virtual reality. Educational Psychology Review. 2021;33(3):937–958. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-020-09586-2.

[13] 13. Wilson M. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 2002;9(4):625–636. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196322.

[14] 14. Lindgren R, Johnson-Glenberg M. Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educational Researcher. 2013;42(8):445–452. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X13511661.

[15] 15. Kye B, Han N, Kim E, Park Y, Jo S. Educational applications of metaverse: Possibilities and limitations. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions. 2021;18:32. DOI: 10.3352/jeehp.2021.18.32.

[16] 16. Onu P, Pradhan A, Mbohwa C. Potential to use metaverse for future teaching and learning. Education and Information Technologies. 2024;29(7):8893–8924. DOI: 10.1007/s10639-023-12167-9.

[17] 17. Chamola V, Peelam MS, Mittal U, Hassija V, Singh A, Pareek R, et al. Metaverse for education: Developments, challenges, and future direction. Computer Applications in Engineering Education. 2025;33(3):e70018. DOI: 10.1002/cae.70018.

[18] 18. Matovu H, Ungu DAK, Won M, Tsai CC, Treagust DF, Mocerino M, Tasker R. Immersive virtual reality for science learning: Design, implementation, and evaluation. Studies in Science Education. 2023;59(2):205–244. DOI: 10.1080/03057267.2022.2082680.

[19] 19. Cooper G, Thong LP, Tang KS. Transforming science education with virtual reality: An immersive representations model. Educational Media International. 2024;61(3):229–251. DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2024.2389348.

[20] 20. Kuhail MA, ElSayary A, Farooq S, Alghamdi A. Exploring immersive learning experiences: A survey. Informatics. 2022;9(4):75. DOI: 10.3390/informatics9040075.

[21] 21. Tene T, Guevara M, Moreano G, Vera J, Vacacela Gomez C. The role of immersive virtual realities: Enhancing science learning in higher education. Emerging Science Journal. 2024;8:88–102. DOI: 10.28991/ESJ-2024-SIED1-06.

[22] 22. Suno H, Ohno N. Virtual Hydrogen, a virtual reality education tool in physics and chemistry. Procedia Computer Science. 2023;25:2283–2291. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2023.10.219.

[23] 23. Saphira HV, Prahani BK, Hariyono E, Marianus M. Metaverse: A paradigm shift in STEM education for science learning beyond the review. E3S Web of Conferences. 2024;482:04004. DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202448204004.

[24] 24. Boffi A, Puppin E, Contran M. 20 July. Virtual relativity: An interactive simulation of the special theory of relativity in virtual reality. arXiv. 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2408.01442.

[25] 25. Almeman K, EL Ayeb F, Berrima M, Issaoui B, Morsy H. The integration of AI and metaverse in education: A systematic literature review. Applied Sciences. 2025;15(2):863. DOI: 10.3390/app15020863.

[26] 26. Chen L, Chen P, Lin Z. Artificial intelligence in education: A review. IEEE Access. 2020;8:75264–75278. DOI. 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2988510.

[27] 27. Holmes W, Tuomi I. State of the art and practice in AI in education. European Journal of Education. 2022;57(4):542–570. DOI: 10.1111/ejed.12530.

[28] 28. Putra A, Gram D, Stefanou C, Santoro D. The use of adaptive learning technology to enhance learning in clinical veterinary dermatology. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education. 2022;9(1):118–125. DOI: 10.3138/jvme-2020-0069.

[29] 29. Foster ME. Evaluating the impact of supplemental computer-assisted math instruction in elementary school: A conceptual replication. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2024;17(1):94–118. DOI: 10.1080/19345747.2023.2174919.

[30] 30. Barbieri CA, Rodrigues J, Dyson N, Jordan NC. Improving fraction understanding in sixth graders with mathematics difficulties: Effects of a number line approach combined with cognitive learning strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2020;112(3):628–643. DOI: 10.1037/edu0000383.

[31] 31. Slattery EJ, Butler D, O’Leary M, Marshall K. Teachers’ experiences of using Minecraft Education in primary school: An Irish perspective. Irish Educational Studies. 2023;43(4):965–984. DOI: 10.1080/03323315.2023.2185276.

[32] 32. Bhowmick S, Kaushik A, Bhatia R, Sorathia K. ATOM: HMD-VR interface to learn atomic structure, bonding and historical research experiments. Proceedings of the 26th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. 2020;pp1–2. DOI: 10.1145/3385956.3422120.

[33] 33. Páez-Andrade M, Pazos-Espinoza K, Pérez-Silva P, Galarza CR. Virtual environments in learning the biology of high school students. intelligent human systems integration (IHSI 2022). Integrating People and Intelligent Systems. 2022;22(22). DOI: 10.54941/ahfe100977.

[34] 34. Tauber AL, Levonis SM, Schweiker SS. Gamified virtual laboratory experience for in-person and distance students. Journal of Chemical Education. 2022;99(3):1183–1189. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.1c00642.

[35] 35. Hornung L, Puljiz D, Augenstein P, Gonzalez C, Wurll C, Bellalouna F. Fostering robotics education through immersive and interactive learning content. in edulearn23 proceedings. IATED. 2023:6425–6433. DOI: 10.21125/edulearn.2023.1708.

[36] 36. Lee H, Park ST, Kim HS, Lee H Students’ understanding of astronomical concepts enhanced by an immersive Virtual Reality system (IVRS). In: 3rd International Conference on Multimedia and Information and Communication Technologies in Education. Available from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&type=pdf&doi=666be0141d6df58d8b7de56729fa27eefe3f3125 [Accessed: 2005-June].

[37] 37. Akaike M, Takishita Y, Wenjun L, Hoshino J. Nicograph International (NICOInt), Tokyo, Japan, 2021; 2021:86–89. DOI: 10.1109/NICOINT52941.2021.00023.